Textual corruption of the Qur'an?

format_quote Originally Posted by Serinity

The Qur'an is in classical Arabic, and in today's time, grammar rules are changing in modern arabic etc. So you can't really apply the grammar rules of today to the Quran. So lets say, in the Quran, the Quran used gramma rule x.. But in today's time, it is not x... rather the language has become corrupt and now, what should have been x is now y... Audhu billah. So you can't really apply it like that.

The Quran uses pure classical Arabic, if I am not mistaken.

May Allah forgive me if I said anything wrong.

Allahu alam.

Salam,

Yes you are right and this is very true for the past even only 300 years ago even in well known and well documented languages as English had changes in grammar and even meanings (why 300 only before 30 years words like screw , the Four letter filthy words -F--- have started having new meanings today and even used by the educated ) , so how about those semitic languages ?? Even Jews were poor in Hebrew so they used Greek to document their OT first ,says Biblica in its own below words ( sorry am not allowed to post links)

''......................The fact is that many Jews could not even read Hebrew anymore around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC.Gradually this Greek translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint, was widely accepted and was even used in many synagogues.......................''


Since we are speaking about Arabic who were so undevelped where we did not have even an academic calender year untill the 3rd Caliph Umar (RA) discussed (mashoora) and started it (AH calender year ) making the Islamic Medina Emigration as the count of the first year there are all possibilities of such errors since about just 1 % of Arabs were literates .

But even taking these Errors still the Noble Quran is THE BEST GUARDED BOOK IN THE HISTORY OF THIS GLOBE since we have to memorize it any how as we are not allowed hold our THE Noble Quran in our Hands in our 5 times daily prayer as the Jews and Christians do so we Muslims were bound and obliged to Memorize from the very early days of its revelations

So Muslims are in the right track untill they follow the Noble Quran aided with the noble hadith and also its incidents since actions of Prophet and his companions Since actions speak more than words .

About the abrogated verses nothing is abrogated except with a strong hadith as a proof for its abrogation or substitution as per Imaam Al Suyuti (rah) which i had discussed in the ummah Forum and we have seen how Allah helped his slaves from sins by his 'The All wise''s hikmah of abrogation .

EDIT : To add to the above post


Another reason for such claims is also due the conservation of exact words and text of the Noble Quran as it is from the day one of revelation before 1400 years untill this modern era where as other books have been changed as per their ages to make the common masses understand easier while Muslims never do that and barred to do that.

format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000

For those who are less aware of the events and the fact that some Quran is lost, know that even the Prophet pbuh was not immune from forgetting:

Narrated `Aisha:The Prophet (ﷺ) heard a man (reciting Qur'an) in the Mosque, and he said, "May Allah bestow His Mercy upon him. No doubt, he made me remember such-and such Verses of such-and-such Sura which I dropped (from my memory).
Narrated Aisha: The Prophet (ﷺ) performed the Tahajjud prayer in my house, and then he heard the voice of `Abbad who was praying in the Mosque, and said, "O `Aisha! Is this `Abbad's voice?"
I said, "Yes."
He said, "O Allah! Be merciful to `Abbad!"

The fact that the Prophet himself was made to forget the abrogated verses is right. Allah says:

We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent? [Al-Baqarah: 106]

But this does not mean that any part of the Qur'an is lost. Because whatever was abrogated for recitation during the lifetime of the Prophet , it does not remain part of the Qur'an anymore. To preserve the complete Qur'an, Jibra'eel used to recite the Qur'an to the Prophet every year during Ramadhan.

Narrated Abu-Huraira

Gabriel used to repeat the recitation of the Qur'an with the Prophet once a year, but he repeated it twice with him in the year he died. The Prophet used to stay in I'tikaf for ten days every year (in the month of Ramadan), but in the year of his death, he stayed in I'tikaf for twenty days. [Bukhari]

As we can see from the above Hadith, the Qur'an was completely finalized as we have it now during the last year of the Prophet . Since then, there has been no additions or subtractions.


If anyone wants to read more about the abrogation in detail, please see this thread: [Uloom Al-Qur'an] Naskh (Abrogation)

You will also find useful threads and posts linked here: Index of useful threads

format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000

It seems that you need to avoid pushing silly labels and flying untrue accusations.

I have no reason to believe that the Quran contains errors.
if there did ever turn out to be any scribal errors, it would mean that the verse meant something deeper than a shallow pen slide.
Prophets are also guarded but some have been killed, they did however fulfil what was required in their task.
The Prophet pbuh was also attacked and guarded during battles so the verse promising him protection was deeper than physical attack.
It also appears that "not one jot nor tittle shall be changed till all be fulfilled" was referring to more than just text during the previous scenario.
i keep an open mind, and if anything new ever does come forward, i shan't be of the type who once said: the final messenger must be a jew otherwise we reject him, or the Messiah must be from jerusalem and of david and not Galilee so we reject him because this sinner has no father.
or oh here's undeniable proof that there was an error but i'll be like the pope at vatican city and excommunicate all heretics who believe in God but claim that there's more to the story - thereby losing my own faith before God - instead of saying: O Allah, you know best.

My sincere advice is that you must improve your faith and akhlaq before death overtakes you, and then there will be no way to escape.


For those who are less aware of the events and the fact that some Quran is lost, know that even the Prophet pbuh was not immune from forgetting:

Narrated `Aisha:The Prophet (ﷺ) heard a man (reciting Qur'an) in the Mosque, and he said, "May Allah bestow His Mercy upon him. No doubt, he made me remember such-and such Verses of such-and-such Sura which I dropped (from my memory).
Narrated Aisha: The Prophet (ﷺ) performed the Tahajjud prayer in my house, and then he heard the voice of `Abbad who was praying in the Mosque, and said, "O `Aisha! Is this `Abbad's voice?"
I said, "Yes."
He said, "O Allah! Be merciful to `Abbad!"

http://quranx.com/hadith/bukhari/Book-52/Hadith-19/

Other referencesIn-book reference
Book 52, Hadith 19
Reference
Sahih al-Bukhari 2655USC-MSA web (English) reference
Vol. 3, Book 48, Hadith 823*Related Quran verses

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عُبَيْدِ بْنِ مَيْمُونٍ، أَخْبَرَنَا عِيسَى بْنُ يُونُسَ، عَنْ هِشَامٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ عَائِشَةَ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ قَالَتْ سَمِعَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم رَجُلاً يَقْرَأُ فِي الْمَسْجِدِ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ، لَقَدْ أَذْكَرَنِي كَذَا وَكَذَا آيَةً، أَسْقَطْتُهُنَّ مِنْ سُورَةِ كَذَا وَكَذَا ‏"‏‏.‏ وَزَادَ عَبَّادُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَنْ عَائِشَةَ تَهَجَّدَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِي بَيْتِي فَسَمِعَ صَوْتَ عَبَّادٍ يُصَلِّي فِي الْمَسْجِدِ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ يَا عَائِشَةُ، أَصَوْتُ عَبَّادٍ هَذَا ‏"‏‏.‏ قُلْتُ نَعَمْ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏"‏ اللَّهُمَّ ارْحَمْ عَبَّادًا ‏"‏‏.‏

I don't have the principle to fight against the attacks on my character. I trust Allah and do believe that honor and insult is only in Allah's Hands.


You are blaming Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wasllam again and again with the forgetting of surahs or verses. You are actually attacking Allah's power to preserve the Quraan. I cannot keep quiet on such attacks. I am not falsely accusing you. Your own writings are the proof to every reader. Remember, once you had accused Muhammad salla Allaho alaihi wasllam of having snoring habit. I have never read such rude words about Him salla Allaho alaihi wasllam from any Muslim except you. I cannot forget those rude words.

Again when I advised you, it was not to attack your honor. Again I repeat that giving honor or humiliation is only in Allah's Hands. But as a sincere Muslim sister I tried to remind you your mistakes which shall certainly harm you in the Here-After.

The ahaadeeth that you are bringing with the name of Ayishah rAa are not true. these are going against Allah's power and also against Allah's Promises in the Holy Quraan.

format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000

Still good to research and find answers since i wouldn't want to get red faced and angry if someone asked such a natural question, i would prefer to give a knowledgeable answer if the question is put forward in sincerety.
We must also bear in mind that some huffadh sahabah's knew much more Quran than we presently have, sometimes they were avoided due to the amount of abrogated verses they would recite.
So it wouldn't knock my faith one bit if i found that there were a few scribal errors, the truth of the Quran and Prophethood of Muhammad pbuh is self evident to any with an inquisitive mind.

Salam,

could you kindly point them with Sahih hadiths references ? jzk

format_quote Originally Posted by Abz2000

Wa'alaikum as Salam brother (i hope),

Kindly refer to the hadith i posted in post #11 of page one, it references the reasoning behind preserving what was possible, and also the early tendency to discard abrogated verses,

Bro, Jzk for your reply . Imho tendency and doubts does not mean the same. I am quoting your hadith ref in question below which was just a doubt and such doubts were even raised by well known sahabas like Abdullah Ibn Masud (ra) NOT AS A TENDENCY BUT AS A DOUBT THAT TEND TO OCCUR DUE TO THEIR HIGHEST TAKWA OR PRECAUTION NOT TO MEDDLE WITH THE NOBLE QURAN and inshallah WE will understand when we contemplate on that hadiths pasted below from your post # 11

Al Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 53:
Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair:
I said to 'Uthman bin 'Affan (while he was collecting the Qur'an) regarding the Verse:-- "Those of you who die and leave wives ..." (2.240)
"This Verse was abrogated by an other Verse. So'' why '' should you write it? (Or leave it in the Qur'an)?" 'Uthman said. "O son of my brother! I will not shift anything of it from its place."

Note: Az Zubair (ra) did not say to leave it but asked what's was the reason instead ?When Caliph Uthman (ra) AFFIRMS during his1st & Final Affirmation to be untill the last days of the world ( NOT a 2nd compilation as non muslims think and Apologetics try to portray we should be careful about their hijacking our comments ) that he will not change anything that was written under the first Caliph Abu Backr (ra) that was available with Hafsa (ra) which was given back to her after this reaffirmation (not burnt) and this hadith is also a EXPLICIT PROOF that abrogated verses were never left out of the noble Quran unless which Allah caused it to be forgotten. .

Another such example was from Abdullah ibn Masud (ra) whom the Prophet has guaranteed. Ibn Masud did have a doubt whether to include sura 1,sura fatiha inside the noble Quran though the proof about its inclusion was already available from the Noble Quran itself by the verse 15:87 . Such great vigilance is a very welcome able factor and clear proof about the great precision that the esteemed Sahabas utilised in Uthman (ra)'s first & final reaffirming of the Noble Quran . The reason for his doubt , Ibn Masud (ra) says himself like that its because he did not hear its inclusion DIRECTLY EXPLICITLY from Prophet as a hadith ( from Al Itiqan ) only PROVES The Noble quran was affirmed very systematically and with the ever highest precision ever used in the history of the world in a reaffirmation of any book from its 1st source before 1400 years. So There is nothing that should make us to have even the slightest doubt about the guarded book of Allah.

format_quote Originally Posted by talibilm

Hi

We know from the day of Prophet Muhammad there have been several attempts to prove by the Pagans, and the people of the book to prove that the noble quran in copied or learnt from some one very learnt but for the past 1400 years it stands unaltered in its wordings and text since its triple guarded through

1) Memory (even a Kid becoming Hafiz and i do remember my rhymes that i sang when i was a 8 year old though I never practised it for the past 4 decades)

2) Written live by scribes (not after half a century from non witnessess)

3) Read everyday 5 times a day in our Obligatory daily 5 times prayers and taught everyday to even 5 years olds and 7 years old becoming Hafiz is only UNIQUE to the noble Quran which has been from the day 1 of its revelations.

So these are just another attempt by the enviers of the Noble quran (nothing New ) just to make the Noble Quran equal to other scriptures of the people of the book since those presently available books could never even stand close to our EVEN weak hadiths when compared to the stringent RULES about Chain of Narrators and their credibility untill our Prophet that are applied to validate even the weak hadith. So people with reason of any Religion will accept what i say if they sincerely learn how Hadiths are evolved and protected and why talk about the Noble Quran then ?

In the segment on Hatab versus Hasab, Bellamy references, "However, Ubayy read hatab instead of hasab, as did Ali and Aishah."

How do you understand this clash in tradition since some companions read it as hatab and not hasab?

format_quote Originally Posted by Sojourn

Greetings,

I understand that from a theological perspective these propositions are impossible, but I am curious from an a linguistic perspective whether these propositions have any merit.

I managed to piece together another segment, again if anyone is familiar with Arabic I would like to know just how sound these propositions are:

===QUOTE===

4. SIJILL : WRITER OF A DOCUMENT

In 21:104 God describes how He is going to proceed on the last day: yawma natwi l-sama a ka-tayyi l-sijilli lil-kutubi, "The day on which we shall fold up the heavens as the sijill folds up the writings."

The meaning of sijill, a well-known word in Arabic, is "document," consequently the "document" could not do any folding or rolling up of other documents. This problem has been approached from two directions.

Yes, there are some subjects in the noble Quran which even Allah calls them as mutashabihaath in verse 3:7 . So are the verses about the Martyrs being provided sustenace after their death, life after death , seas burning on the day of judgement which will be of 50,000 years , angels etc

We can only speculate from our imaginations or explain them if a relevant hadith is available about them but should console ourselves as Believers and not to think too much about them as said in verse 3:7 . But My conscience says In spite of our 10,000 folds of scientific advancement we are still unable to sole the mystery of our Human soul itself with which we are always living TOGETHER every day and that confirms the Authenticity of the Noble Quran which says that we (humans ) have been given by Allah only little knowledge about the soul (17:85)

We also know that the Noble Quran calls stars as great stars (25:61) while calling the Sun as just a lamp and even Prophet referred this Earth 's value in the sight of Allah as just not even equal to a Fly's single wing, Which are all true and are accepted by all of us . So its better for us to give the benefit of our doubt ( though I do not doubt about them ) to our Creator Allah in what ever he had said and in those matters that we do not understand we leave it to his incomparable MIGHT and only ponder on those things where he has given us the knowledge to ponder and such things are much abundant than things we do not understand.

I am not familiar with the other issue you had asked and i try to avoid that knowledge that does not serve much purpose of Islam .

In terms of Arabic script, are Hatab and Hasab similarly written? Likewise, can al-sijjil and al-musjil be the results of spelling errors?

In some cases the argument involves a developing Arabic writing method, but I'm curious if these are possible even in contemporary Arabic writing.

Sojourn, what you have quoted is based on the false assumption that the written textual Qur'an is the only original preserved Qur'an, whereas we Muslims believe that Qur'an is preserved by memorization and its recitations, not merely written. That is why anyone who memorizes the Qur'an is known as a Hafiz, which means, the one who saved (as in saving a file in computer terms). It also means the one who preserved or memorized.

Throughout Muslim history, there have been several hundreds of thousands of Huffaz (plural of Hafiz) at any point of time. The Huffaz studied under their teachers, who in turn studied under teachers. There has always been a continuous chain of teachers all the way up to the Prophet . The written text is only used as an aid while memorizing. The Huffaz recite the Qur'an by heart to their teachers several times throughout their study, the same way as the Prophet used to recite it to angel Jibreel .

Therefore, it is a fallacy to assume the scribes have made a mistake or their pens leaked. Even if that was the case, the Huffaz of that time would have immediately objected and the mistake would have been duly corrected.

format_quote Originally Posted by ibn-Adam

Therefore, it is a fallacy to assume the scribes have made a mistake or their pens leaked. Even if that was the case, the Huffaz of that time would have immediately objected and the mistake would have been duly corrected.

Your line of thinking is correct, assuming the Islamic tradition is correct even if there had been textual corruption of the mushaf we would expect the oral narration to preserve and correct it. An important implication of Bellamy's emendations is that it challenges the idea of a strong oral tradition. If his emendations are correct, it would mean there was not a strong chain of huffaz going back to the Prophet but instead at some early point, the text had priority or at least strong weight in shaping the way the Qur'an was recited orally. This though is going very deep into all the implications of his arguments. Right now I'm just looking for thoughtful opinions the strength of his arguments themselves. They seem reasonable from an outsider's perspective but I don't have a strong grasp of Arabic to judge how well they work linguistically.

It is one of the miracles of the Qur'an. Written scriptures can be tampered with, as have happened with all previous scriptures. But Allah preserved the Qur'an by a unique method, memorization and oral recitation. I had posted this in another thread earlier:

format_quote Originally Posted by ibn-Adam

Allah SubHanahu wa Ta'ala says:

وَإِنَّهُ لَتَنزِيلُ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ ﴿١٩٢﴾ نَزَلَ بِهِ الرُّوحُ الْأَمِينُ ﴿١٩٣﴾ عَلَىٰ قَلْبِكَ لِتَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُنذِرِينَ ﴿١٩٤﴾ بِلِسَانٍ عَرَبِيٍّ مُّبِينٍ ﴿١٩٥﴾ـ

And indeed, the Qur'an is the revelation of the Lord of the worlds.
The Trustworthy Spirit has brought it down
Upon your heart, [O Muhammad] - that you may be of the warners -
In a clear Arabic language. [26:192-195]

Previous scriptures were in written from yet they were corrupted. The miracle of the Qur'an is that it is revealed on the heart of our Prophet and it passes on from a heart to millions of hearts until Allah wills for it to be lifted near the last Day.

format_quote Originally Posted by ibn-Adam

It is one of the miracles of the Qur'an. Written scriptures can be tampered with, as have happened with all previous scriptures. But Allah preserved the Qur'an by a unique method, memorization and oral recitation. I had posted this in another thread earlier:

I know theologically it's impossible from a faith perspective, but looking at the two emendations I quoted above, what do you make of the arguments themselves? On the appearance of things Hasab and al-musjill being the original words make a lot of sense, and the explanation of a simple scribal error seem rather convincing from an outsider point of view.

format_quote Originally Posted by Sojourn

I know theologically it's impossible from a faith perspective, but looking at the two emendations I quoted above, what do you make of the arguments themselves? On the appearance of things Hasab and al-musjill being the original words make a lot of sense, and the explanation of a simple scribal error seem rather convincing from an outsider point of view.

Linguistically and grammatically, Hasab and Sijill are perfect in their placement. Nobody can argue that.

Your question should actually be regarding the context. How is Hasab and Sijill contextually suitable?


In the first Ayah, Allah says,

(98) إِنَّكُمْ وَمَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ حَصَبُ جَهَنَّمَ أَنتُمْ لَهَا وَارِدُونَ

Indeed, you [disbelievers] and what you worship other than Allah are the firewood of Hell. You will be coming to [enter] it. [Al-Anbiyaa: 98]

The translators have translated Hasab as firewood or fuel based on its Tafseer, but as you have indicated, it also means gravel or pebbles. Contextually, there is nothing wrong with using pebbles because Allah says at other places:

And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah , if you should be truthful.
But if you do not - and you will never be able to - then fear the Fire, whose fuel is men and stones, prepared for the disbelievers. [Al-Baqarah: 23-24]

O you who have believed, protect yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is people and stones, over which are [appointed] angels, harsh and severe; they do not disobey Allah in what He commands them but do what they are commanded. [At-Tahreem: 6]

format_quote Originally Posted by Sojourn

The basic meaning of the verb hasaba is "to pelt with pebbles" or "to scatter pebbles." From this sense the lexicographers redefine it to mean "to throw pebbles (i.e., fuel) on a fire"; others limit it to fuel which is thrown into an oven, or used as kindling...

The author is wrong in assuming Hasabu Jahannama is a verb. In Arabic, Hasabu is noun and Hasaba is a verb. Hasabu Jahannama means pebbles of Hell.

As we can see above, the idols that they worship besides Allah will be the stones or pebbles of Hell. It perfectly fits the context.





Regarding the second Ayah, in which Allah says,

(104) يَوْمَ نَطْوِي السَّمَاءَ كَطَيِّ السِّجِلِّ لِلْكُتُبِ ۚ كَمَا بَدَأْنَا أَوَّلَ خَلْقٍ نُّعِيدُهُ ۚ وَعْدًا عَلَيْنَا ۚ إِنَّا كُنَّا فَاعِلِينَ

The Day when We will fold the heaven like the folding of a [written] sheet for the records. As We began the first creation, We will repeat it. [That is] a promise binding upon Us. Indeed, We will do it. [Al-Anbiyaa: 104]

I am not sure why is he even raising a doubt here. I have underlined the translation of the words Katayyis-Sijilli-lilkutub. Contextually, grammatically or linguistically, it is perfect in every sense.

format_quote Originally Posted by Sojourn

In 21:104 God describes how He is going to proceed on the last day: yawma natwi l-sama a ka-tayyi l-sijilli lil-kutubi, "The day on which we shall fold up the heavens as the sijill folds up the writings."

The meaning of sijill, a well-known word in Arabic, is "document," consequently the "document" could not do any folding or rolling up of other documents.

Again, the author, being an outsider to Arabic language, has made a mistake in assuming the meaning to be "as the sijill folds up the writings".

Katayyis-Sijill lilkutub means exactly as underlined above, like the folding of a written sheet for the records. It does not mean "as the sijill folds up the writing". You can see other translations that say:
(Muhsin Khan) like a scroll rolled up for books
(Yusuf Ali) like a scroll rolled up for books
(Shakir) like the rolling up of the scroll for writings

Personally, I feel Shakir's translation translates this part of the Ayah in a more better sense than others.

And Allah knows best.