Seeking Clarity on the Quran's Preservation Over Centuries

[good logic]

Peace Fusion.

Put your mind at peace. Seek a way to your Lord and only worry about the relationship with GOD Alone.
Every other creation will answer to GOD Alone like you.

Whoever thinks they have the right interpretation and the truth it is for their own self, we are not accountable to them  nor are they responsible for us.

GOD guides or otherwise.
GOD gave the freedom of choice to every individual to believe or otherwise.
GOD has not made any person our wakil nor asked anyone to force people to follow them.

Are those who think they have the truth going to force people to their truth?
Is GOD Alone not sufficient for His servants?
Enjoy the conversation with others and only take GOD seriously for your salvation.
GOD bless you.
Peace brother.

[Euphoric]

Thank you for sharing your perspective. I appreciate how you've articulated your thoughts in a manner that resonates with my own views, rather than using strong, imposing statements....
It's refreshing to engage in a discussion where ideas are expressed thoughtfully without personal attacks. I agree that faith plays a significant role in our interpretations and beliefs, and it's important to recognize that as we continue to discuss and learn from each other in this forum.

Basing ideas strictly on manuscripts, than the oldest one we know of is the Birmingham Quran manuscript which is a single parchment having Surah 19 to Surah 20. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Quran_manuscript. And guess what? This manuscript is not in the same qirat (reading) that is most popular today, the reading of Hafs. 

There is not enough of the Birmingham manuscript to determine which reading it might be in, but it is safe to say from the 10 canonized readings, it does not represent 9 of them, which includes the most popular reading today (Hafs).

How do we know it does not represent 9/10th of the readers? Due to one verse: 18.26 - it's written as TUSHRIK and not YUSHRIK like 9 out of the 10 readers recite it.

We disqualified it being from 9 people just by a single letter change: Ta.

But we don't have enough to know if it is in the 10th person. It could be a totally different reading that has not been canonized. Imagine that?

Most early manuscripts are not in Hafs reading. They are either in Warsh or Abu Amr. Hafs was not popular in the early days.

[Bajram Hoxhaj]

Basing ideas strictly on manuscripts, than the oldest one we know of is the Birmingham Quran manuscript which is a single parchment having Surah 19 to Surah 20. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Quran_manuscript. And guess what? This manuscript is not in the same qirat (reading) that is most popular today, the reading of Hafs. 

There is not enough of the Birmingham manuscript to determine which reading it might be in, but it is safe to say from the 10 canonized readings, it does not represent 9 of them, which includes the most popular reading today (Hafs).

How do we know it does not represent 9/10th of the readers? Due to one verse: 18.26 - it's written as TUSHRIK and not YUSHRIK like 9 out of the 10 readers recite it.

We disqualified it being from 9 people just by a single letter change: Ta.

But we don't have enough to know if it is in the 10th person. It could be a totally different reading that has not been canonized. Imagine that?

Most early manuscripts are not in Hafs reading. They are either in Warsh or Abu Amr. Hafs was not popular in the early days.

Salaam

Hafs died in 796 CE and Warsh died in 812 CE. It doesn't appear to be the oldest (perhaps the skins were washed anew and reused years later); the writing is too fresh; colored chapter separations added, and earliest scribes seldom used 'alif' in the middle of words, and few errors are easily detected; these are part of the same manuscript.

18:17-31 and 19:91 to 20:40
https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/2278/page/1r?sura=20&verse=1

10:35 to 11:110 and 20:112 to 23:27
https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/158/page/82v?sura=22&verse=1

21:109 توعدون tū`adūna (thou promise being) (2nd wa is missing توعدن)
21:103 توعدون tū`adūna correct in prior page see 5th line from bottom last word
https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/158/page/82r?sura=22&verse=1#manuscript_page

Also in many older manuscripts (no issue)
22:2 سكرىا drunkenness (with alif sukārán)
22:2 بسكرىا in drunkenness (with alif bisukārán)

Likewise, easily identified scribal errors (see context).

22:3-4 and among the people who argued in (concerning) Allah in other than knowledge and followed every devil (denotes evil person) rebellious written (decreed) upon him that he من (man/who) (word missing?) befriends him so indeed he misguided him and guided him to punishment the blaze

Even so, there are many old manuscripts that we can piece together.

Ms. or. fol. 4313 and qāf 47 are same and likely oldest 602-654 CE 95.4% probability.

https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/73/page/13r?sura=4&verse=12

https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/15/page/2r?sura=4&verse=176

Some words or letters are critical, e.g., an extra 'meem,' or else the math falls apart.

4:12 and for you half ما mā/what left spouses yours
4:12 and for them the fourth مما mimmā/from what left you

4:176 so for her half ما mā/what left
4:176 so to them dual the third twice (1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3) مما mimmā/from what left

[Euphoric]

As I said, Birmingham manuscript is neither Hafs or Warsh. It is undetermined.

Not all manuscripts are written based on qirat, that's why there are differences in wording.

There is no math involved.

Salaam

Hafs died in 796 CE and Warsh died in 812 CE. It doesn't appear to be the oldest (perhaps the skins were washed anew and reused years later); the writing is too fresh; colored chapter separations added, and earliest scribes seldom used 'alif' in the middle of words, and few errors are easily detected; these are part of the same manuscript.

18:17-31 and 19:91 to 20:40
https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/2278/page/1r?sura=20&verse=1

10:35 to 11:110 and 20:112 to 23:27
https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/158/page/82v?sura=22&verse=1

21:109 توعدون tū`adūna (thou promise being) (2nd wa is missing توعدن)
21:103 توعدون tū`adūna correct in prior page see 5th line from bottom last word
https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/158/page/82r?sura=22&verse=1#manuscript_page

Also in many older manuscripts (no issue)
22:2 سكرىا drunkenness (with alif sukārán)
22:2 بسكرىا in drunkenness (with alif bisukārán)

Likewise, easily identified scribal errors (see context).

22:3-4 and among the people who argued in (concerning) Allah in other than knowledge and followed every devil (denotes evil person) rebellious written (decreed) upon him that he من (man/who) (word missing?) befriends him so indeed he misguided him and guided him to punishment the blaze

Even so, there are many old manuscripts that we can piece together.

Ms. or. fol. 4313 and qāf 47 are same and likely oldest 602-654 CE 95.4% probability.

https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/73/page/13r?sura=4&verse=12

https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/15/page/2r?sura=4&verse=176

Some words or letters are critical, e.g., an extra 'meem,' or else the math falls apart.

4:12 and for you half ما mā/what left spouses yours
4:12 and for them the fourth مما mimmā/from what left you

4:176 so for her half ما mā/what left
4:176 so to them dual the third twice (1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3) مما mimmā/from what left

[Bajram Hoxhaj]

As I said, Birmingham manuscript is neither Hafs or Warsh. It is undetermined.

Not all manuscripts are written based on qirat, that's why there are differences in wording.

There is no math involved.

Sure, there is math involved in inheritance. Misplacing a meem throws the math off, which you can't qirat your way out of.

[Fusion]

Basing ideas strictly on manuscripts, than the oldest one we know of is the Birmingham Quran manuscript which is a single parchment having Surah 19 to Surah 20. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Quran_manuscript. And guess what? This manuscript is not in the same qirat (reading) that is most popular today, the reading of Hafs. 

There is not enough of the Birmingham manuscript to determine which reading it might be in, but it is safe to say from the 10 canonized readings, it does not represent 9 of them, which includes the most popular reading today (Hafs).

How do we know it does not represent 9/10th of the readers? Due to one verse: 18.26 - it's written as TUSHRIK and not YUSHRIK like 9 out of the 10 readers recite it.

We disqualified it being from 9 people just by a single letter change: Ta.

But we don't have enough to know if it is in the 10th person. It could be a totally different reading that has not been canonized. Imagine that?

Most early manuscripts are not in Hafs reading. They are either in Warsh or Abu Amr. Hafs was not popular in the early days.

Dear Euphoric,

You raise several intriguing points about the Birmingham Quran manuscript. Indeed, this manuscript, while not a complete copy of the Quran, contains only parts of Surahs 18 to 20. Despite this, its importance cannot be understated, particularly because the radiocarbon dating suggests that it could have been written during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad or shortly thereafter, within the period of the Caliphs.

This timeframe is particularly significant as it supports historical accounts that the Quran was being compiled and written down in textual form during this early period. Such findings lend credence to the theory that the process may have been overseen or even initiated by the Prophet himself, reinforcing traditional Islamic narratives about the Quran's preservation.

As for the manuscript's differences in qirat, these do not suggest any forgery or corruption of the text. Instead, they highlight the richness of the Quranic tradition and the existence of various readings (qirat), which were eventually canonized. These variations are a testament to the meticulous care with which the Quran was transmitted and preserved, reflecting both divine oversight and human dedication.

I believe the historical destruction of variant Quranic texts to standardize the Quran under the Caliph Uthman is well-documented and illustrates a critical moment in Islamic history. This act was aimed at preserving unity and preventing sectarian disputes, ensuring that one standardized text was used for all Muslims.

Furthermore, I believe that divine providence in the preservation of the Quran through human history are thought-provoking. This manuscript not only enriches our understanding of Islamic history but also enhances our appreciation for the profound and divinely guided efforts of those who preserved the Quran through the centuries. It's fascinating to consider both the historical and the spiritual dimensions of the Quran's preservation and the role it plays in the faith of millions today.

Added:
I just realized the reply from Bajram about  Birmingham Quran manuscript's age due to the fresh appearance of the script and the use of colored chapter separators. Your suggestion that the parchment might have been washed and reused is a compelling one, however you did mention older manuscripts like Ms. or. fol. 4313 and qāf 47, which are thought to date back to the early 7th century.

[Fusion]

Interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hb8PMx34iY

https://ibb.co/KrF5Typ

So if I understand correctly, The copies of the Quran that Caliph Uthman ordered to be burned were not related to the ten Qira'at styles we know today. Instead, those copies represented variations in the text itself, potentially including differences in word choice, arrangement, and dialect that were more pronounced and significant than the variations found in the Qira'at.

I found the following narrative:
The story of Caliph Uthman ibn Affan burning copies of the Quran is a significant event in Islamic history, tied to the standardization of the Quranic text during his caliphate (644-656 AD). This episode is directly linked to the efforts to maintain the purity and consistency of the Quran as Islam expanded across diverse linguistic and cultural regions.

Background and Motivation
After the death of Prophet Muhammad, Islam spread rapidly across vast territories, encompassing many different linguistic groups. This rapid expansion brought about variations in the recitation and transcription of the Quran, as converts began to recite and copy the Quranic text in their own dialects. To address the emerging discrepancies and to prevent any doctrinal splits, a standardized version of the Quran became necessary.

Uthman's Standardization Effort
Uthman, the third Caliph of Islam, observed that these dialectal differences were leading to disputes among Muslims about the correct recitation of the Quran. To preserve the unity of the Muslim Ummah (community) and to ensure the authenticity of the Quranic text, Uthman commissioned a committee, led by Zaid ibn Thabit—who had also been part of an earlier compilation project under the first Caliph, Abu Bakr—to compile a standard text of the Quran. This committee was instructed to prepare the text in the Quraishi dialect, the dialect of the Prophet Muhammad and considered the most authoritative.

The Burning of Other Copies
Once the standardized copies were prepared and approved, Uthman ordered that all other Quranic manuscripts and materials that differed from this standardized version be collected and burned. This drastic measure was taken to eliminate conflicting versions of the Quran that could lead to division and misinterpretation among Muslims. The decision to burn these other copies was aimed solely at ensuring doctrinal consistency, not suppressing legitimate variations in recitation styles.

Impact and Legacy
Uthman's actions were crucial in preserving a single, unified text of the Quran. The burning of the non-standard manuscripts is viewed within Islamic tradition as a necessary act to maintain the integrity and authenticity of the Quranic text across the expanding Islamic empire. The standardized text from Uthman's time forms the basis for the Quran as it is known today, and all traditional Qira'at (canonical recitations) are derived from this text. These Qira'at allow for slight variations in pronunciation and recitation but do not alter the text itself.

For reference, you can look into traditional Islamic historical sources like "The History of the Quranic Text from Revelation to Compilation" by Muhammad Mustafa Al-A'zami, which provides detailed insights into the events surrounding the compilation and standardization of the Quran. Additionally, Ibn Sa'd's "Tabaqat al-Kubra" and al-Tabari's "History of the Prophets and Kings" also discuss these events and their significance. These texts are widely respected and used as primary references for the historical study of the early Islamic period.

[Wakas]

peace Fusion, all,

Let us try a thought experiment:

Let's say you are actually living at the time of prophet Muhammad and you are in the audience when the prophet himself is reciting to you Al Quran.

How do you know what is being said is Al Quran or how are you going to determine what this man is reciting before you is actually revelation from God?

[good logic]

Peace Fusion.
Narratives are plenty and can differ like for example, quote:

Nineteen years after the Prophet Muhammad's death, during the reign of Khalifa `Uthman, a committee of scribes was appointed to make several copies of the Quran to be dispatched to the new Muslim lands. The copies were to be made from the original Quran which was written by Muhammad's hand.

This committee was supervised by `Uthman Ibn `Affaan, `Ali Ibn Abi Taaleb, Zeid Ibn Thaabet, Ubayy Ibn Ka`ab, `Abdullah Ibn Al-Zubair, Sa`eed Ibn Al-`Aas, and `Abdul Rahman Ibn Al-Haareth Ibn Heshaam. The Prophet, of course, had written the Quran in its chronological order of revelation , together with the necessary instructions to place every piece in its proper position. The last sura revealed in Medina was Sura 9. Only Sura 110, a very short sura, was revealed after Sura 9, in Mina.

The committee of scribes finally came to Sura 9, and put it in its proper place. One of the scribes suggested adding a couple of verses to honor the Prophet. The majority of scribes agreed. `Ali was outraged. He vehemently maintained that the word of God, written down by the hand of His final prophet, must never be altered.

Ali's protest is documented in many references, but I cite and reproduce here the classic reference AL ITQAAN FEE 'ULUM AL QURAN by Jalaluddin Al-Suyuty, Al-Azhareyyah Press, Cairo, Egypt, 1318 AH, Page 59 [see Insert 1].


Translation: `Ali was asked: "Why are you staying home?" He said, "Something has been added to the Quran, and I have pledged never to put on my street clothes, except for the prayer, until the Quran is restored." [ Insert 1 ]

The horrendous dimensions of this crime can be realized once we look at the consequences:

`Uthman was assassinated, and `Ali was installed as the fourth Khalifa.
A 50-year war erupted between the new Khalifa and his supporters on one side, and the Mohammedan distorters of the Quran on the other side.
`Ali was martyred, and eventually his family, the prophet Muhammad's family, except for some women and children, were killed.
The disaster culminated in the infamous Battle of Karbala, where `Ali's son, Hussein, and his family were massacred.
The Muslims were deprived of the pure, unaltered, Quran for 1400 years.
The distorters of the Quran finally won the war, and the "official" history that came to us represented the victors' point of view. This apparent victory for God's enemies was, of course, in accordance with God's will. In just two decades after the Prophet's death, the idol worshipers who were defeated by the Prophet in the conquest of Mecca (632 AD) reverted to idolatry. Ironically, this time around their idol was the Prophet himself. Such idol worshipers obviously did not deserve to possess the pure Quran. Hence the blessed martyrdom of the true believers who tried to restore the Quran, and the apparent victory for the distorters of God's word.

The first peace time ruler after this lengthy and disastrous war was Marwan Ibn Al Hakam (died 65 AH/684 AD). One of the first duties he performed was to destroy the original Quran, the one that was so scrupulously written by the Prophet's own hand, "fearing it might become the cause of NEW disputes" [see `ULUM AL-QURAN, by Ahmad von Denffer, Islamic Foundation, Leicester, United Kingdom, 1983, Page 56.]. The question an intelligent person must ask is: "If the original Quran were identical to the Quran in circulation at that time, why did Marwan Ibn Al-Hakam have to destroy it?!"

Of course narratives remain just that and can only be confirmed as fact by evidence.
However there are many questions we can ask regarding the spread of false Islam:
1- God s deen was not to be forced on people   Why spread GOD s religion by the sword?
2- why was Qoran and hadiths not mixed up? Was this a coincidence? Was this a mistake by the rulers or was this in GOD s plan ?
3-What happened to the Muslims in history and does it fit with GOD s religion and its aim?
4- GOD s words about what the prophet will say: " My Lord ,my people have abandoned Qoran" is this a true prediction ?

It seems they preserved their nemesis and demise by leaving the Qoran well alone as if they had no idea that their fabrications and crimes were clearly written and prophesised in it.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

[Fusion]

That's an excellent question, Wakas. I believe Good Logic has already provided an answer in his response on April 14, 2024. Subsequent discussions have primarily focused on the historical preservation aspects related to human agency.

Personally, I think that if I were to truly believe, I would consider several factors that don't typically apply to my current context. For instance, my cultural and spiritual surroundings would be significant. Furthermore, the message itself, which addresses social issues, justice, and ethical monotheism, would potentially ignite my curiosity and urge to discover the truth—motivating my belief that this Man and his message are indeed touched by divine intervention. However, more crucial than the message itself would be my personal observations of this man's life. Witnessing his day-to-day integrity, honesty, and how he conducts himself consistently would serve as one of the most compelling reasons to heed his words.

Similarly, when figures like Rashad Khalifa and Ghulam Ahmed Qadiyani were arguably portrayed as carrying forward God's message, it illustrates how people's reactions can vary based on their personal views and the historical context they find themselves in.

However, for my acceptance of the divine message to happen, I believe that one must inherently possess a certain goodness, as I think that God grants guidance (hidaya) to those who are deserving, those who already have a spark within them. I'm not sure how I would have been if I were born back then. I previously mentioned or commented somewhere that I believe it's more commendable for someone in modern times to believe in the message and stories of the Quran compared to someone who was present during the Prophet's time, for several reasons. Today, we have access to the complete, compiled text of the Quran, allowing us to study and analyze it thoroughly from various perspectives. Additionally, we can compare it with other religious texts, which adds more complexity to our understanding. Moreover, in today's world, we don't witness miracles or direct divine punishments like those described in ancient times, which seemingly wicked people escaping consequences, as GL explained in another post, now we are in a grace period until the Day of Judgement. Thus, believing in our times is more difficult and challenging than it would have been for those who lived during the Prophet's time. This is purely my own viewpoint.

Or as my good friend JKhan, who seems increasingly exasperated with me, often reminds me of my shortcomings :-)

وَٱعْبُدْ رَبَّكَ حَتَّىٰ يَأْتِيَكَ ٱلْيَقِينُ

I think the intent here is death but i wish to read it like I will continue to search and search until I have the absolute faith about God and his message.