Announcement

Collapse

Islam Guidelines

Theists only.

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to Islam. This forum is generally for theists only, and is not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theist may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.



Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Simple Question

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Simple Question

    First let's start with the premise that appears to be universally accepted by devout Muslims, namely that the Qur'an is exactly the same in every detail as it was when Muhammad first related it some 1400 years ago.

    The description and explanation of this belief that I provided below can be found on several Islamic websites[1]

    The Qur’an is a record of the exact words revealed by God through the Angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad. It was memorized by Muhammad and then dictated to his Companions, and written down by scribes, who cross-checked it during his lifetime.

    Not one word of its 114 chapters, Suras, has been changed over the centuries, so that the Qur’an is in every detail the unique and miraculous text which was revealed to Muhammad fourteen centuries ago.


    So the qu'ran we have today is believed to be a perfect copy of what is called Umm al-Kitabhe or "Heavenly Qu'ran" and that a copy was sent down to earth (see ayat/verse 105 of surah/chapter 17 -- known as Al-Isra, "The Night Ride") and which Muslims believe is a flawless copy of the heavenly qu'ran.

    It, as seen the description of what the qu'ran is provided above, "is a record of the exact words revealed by God through the Angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad" and with "not one word ... changed over the centuries."


    So my question is, if the qu'ran is a perfect, unchanging copy of the Umm al-Kitabhe, then why did Uthman ibn Affan, both son-in-law of and notable companion (Sahabai) of Muhammad, as well as the third of the Rashidun, or "Rightly Guided Caliphs," feel compelled to make an official standardized copy of the qu'ran (referred to as the Uthmanic recension) and destroy all earlier versions? The only logical reason why he would have ordered the destruction of all earlier copies of the qur’an would be due to their differing in some way in comparison to his final, revised text. But if they differed then the idea that "not one word" has changed cannot possibly be correct.

    Then there is incontrovertible proof that the earliest qu'rans contained significant differences as can be seen from the Sana'a Palimpset[2], which escaped Uthman's bonfires, as well as the later codex Parisino-petropolitanus, one of the oldest extant qur'anic manuscripts which, according to François Déroche, Chair in History of the Qur'an at the Collège de France, include
    substantive variants and even some non-canonical variants.

    And I posted this a few years back:

    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Coins with Quranic writings on them dating from 685 AD (minted during the reign of Abd al-Malik), as well as inscriptions within the Dome of the Rock sanctuary (built in Jerusalem in 691 AD by Abd al-Malik), strongly indicate that the Qur'an has been subject to textual revisions. The quotations on the coins and especially in the Dome of the Rock, differ in detail from that which is found in the Qur'an today.

    Moreover, the evidence shows that a considerable portion of the Qur'an was lost and much of what is left has been substantially altered. The testimonies of Muhammad's trusted friends and family (among them Ibn Umar, A'isha, Ubay ibn Ka'b and 'Ali Ibn Abi Talib) attest to this fact.

    Abdullah ibn Umar, a.k.a. 'Ibn Umar al-Khattab, explicitly states that a large part of the Qur'an was missing: "Let no one of you say that he has acquired the entire Qur'an for how does he know that it is all? Much of the Qur'an has been lost, thus let him say, 'I have acquired of what is available'."

    A'isha, Muhammad's last wife and some times referred to as the "Mother of the Believers," corroborated this adding: "During the time of the prophet, the chapter or sura of the Parties used to be two hundred verses when read. When Uthman edited the copies of the Koran, only the current (verses) were recorded" (73 verses).

    The same statement was made by Ubay ibn Ka'b, one of the greatest of Muhammad's companions and highly regarded in the early Muslim community, as recorded in the Al-Itqān fi 'Ulum Al-Qur'an (Itqan for brevity's sake), by Suyuti: "This famous companion asked one of the Muslims, 'How many verses in the sura of the parties?' He said, 'Seventy-two or seventy-three verses.' He (Ubay) told him, 'It used to be almost equal to the csura the cow (about 286 verses) and included the verse of the stoning.' The man asked, 'What is the verse of the stoning?' He said, 'If an old man or woman committed adultery, stone them to death'."[1]

    'Ali Ibn Abi Talib the Fourth Caliph of the Muslims and Muhammad's cousin and later the son-in-law, also confirmed that dozens of verses from the "Chapter of the Parties" were lost.

    This same story and same dialogue is also recorded by Abū Muḥammad ʿAlī ibn Aḥmad ibn Saʿīd ibn Ḥazm (or just Ibn Hazm) in volume 8 of his Al-Muhalla (a.k.a. "The Sweetened" or "The Adorned Treatise"), to which he added the following note: 'Ali Ibn Abi Talib said this was a reliable chain of authority and the Zamakh-sharif also cited it in his book al-Kash-Shaf.

    The Itqan by Suyuti also relates in its first part that other portions of the Qur'an were lost stating Malik says that several verses of Sura 9 (Sura of Repentance) have been dropped from the beginning. Among them is "In the name of God, the passionate, the merciful because it was proven that the length of the Sura of Repentance was equal to the length of the Sura of the Cow." This means that this chapter has lost approximately 157 verses!

    The Itqan also states, as have other scholars, that that the copy of the Qur'an owned by Ubay and another of Muhammad's companions, Abdulla Ibn Mas'ud, included two suras called "The Hafad" and "The Khal" -- both of which are located after the sura of "The Asr". Also, the Quranic copy of Ibn Mas'ud does not contain the suras of "The Hamd" and "The Mu'withatan" (Sura 113, 114).

    So what exactly happened to some of the missing parts? Would you believe the "my dog ate it," or a similar schoolboy excuse has been presented? In volume 8 of the Al-Muhalla Ibn Hazm clearly states: "The verses of stoning and breast feeding were in the possession of A'isha in a (Quranic) copy. When Muhammad died and people became busy in the burial preparations, a domesticated animal entered in and ate it." Mustafa Husayn, who edited and reorganized the book Al-Kashshaaf by Al-Zamakhshari, confirms this claiming that the tradition came directly from both Abdulla Ibn Abi Bakr and A'isha. This same incident is mentioned by Dar-al-Qutni, al-Bazzar and al-Tabarani, on the authority of Muhammad Ibn Ishaq, who heard it from Abdulla who had himself heard it from Aisha. So I guess, "my goat ate" it would probably be more correct.









    1. The same source also notes that, "During the collection of the Kora, people used to come to Zayd ibn Thabit (with verses they memorized). He shunned recording any verse unless two witness attested to it. The last verse of the chapter of Repentance was found only with Khuzayma Ibn Thabit. Zayd said, 'Record it because the apostle of God made the testimony of Khuzayma equal to the testimony of two men.' Umar came with the verse of the stoning but it was not recorded because he was the only witness to it. Umar would later say 'If it were not that the people would say Umar has added to the book of God, I would have recorded the verse of the stoning'."




    I should add that variations of the text can be found in the Bible, but in sharp contrast with what is believed by followers of Islam, neither Christians or Jews claim that it is a uncreated, eternal Bible up in heaven sitting on a table made of jade and that the earthly versions are flawless copies in which not one word has changed since it was first recorded. So let's put that excuse to bed as entirely irrelevant.









    1. For instance, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE

    2. discovered in Yemen during a 1972 restoration of the ancient Great Mosque of Sanaa -- construction of which is thought to have begun during Muhammad's life time

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  • #2
    We are using the English language to communicate---so bear with me---some words/concepts need definition.
    Muslims accept that the Bible has been changed---this is because it is understood as "inspiration" rather than "revelation"---what Muslims refer to when speaking about "revelation" (of Quran) is that the (Arabic) words came from God through angel Gabriel,---and Prophet Muhammed simply vocalized what was given to him. In this way---the Quran is a direct message from God to the individual as well as collective human/humanity. The Prophet did not add or subtract from this message (except as God willed---as stated in the Quran itself)

    Therefore, when Muslims speak of the "Quran" as "God's message" then it has not "changed" ---- means that the message is the same as was given to the Prophet.
    The written Quran has had "changes"---such as writing styles, titles, numbers, some disputes over verse endings and pronounciation...etc. These changes do not effect the "message"/Revelation itself.

    Mother of the Book---or essence of the Quran. This can have various meanings. One of the meanings is that of a Heavenly tablet. The Quran does not go into details of the heavenly/preserved tablet. However, one can speculate that whatever it is, it might exist outside of "space-time"....?.....In any case, from the Muslim perspective, the message of the Quran is not "new"---that is, the core of the Quran is encouragement towards Tawheed (Unity) and discouragement from Shirk (Division), It is the same message taught to Prophet Adam (who was muslim = one who submits to God) and to all the Wisdom Teachers and Prophets that have come since upto Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).

    Caliph Uthman---The first to consider a written preservation of the Quran is the first Caliph---Caliph Abu Baker. The reason for considering the written preservation of the Quran is because the original community of the Prophet memorized the Quran exactly as it was meant to be recited. However, this original community was dwindling, Therefore it was wise to preserve the Quran both orally (traditonal way) and also have a textual backup. During the time of Caliph Abu Baker, Caliph Umar as well as Uthman, there was rapid expansion of territories and many non-Arabic speakers became part of the "Ummah" (Muslim comminity)... this meant that it was essential that an accurate written text be sent to them so as to avoid disputes and to ensure that all Muslims had the correct Quran. The Quran as given to Prophet Muhammed was never "destroyed"---the texts that were destroyed were those that deviated from the Quran of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh). The reason that it is called the Uthmani codex is because Western historians have found texts that are original to, or copies of ---this codex. They have not yet found the Quranic text of the first compilation by Caliph Abu Bakr or the ones dictated by the Prophet Muhamad.

    Sanaa pampliset---During the time of Prophet Muhammed...the Arab tribes used several dialects. In order for everyone to understand the message properly, the Quran in these dialects was approved by the Prophet. Some written texts of these efforts survive. These are part of the history of Islam and important because it shows that what is really important is that the message be understood properly because it is the message that is important---not the details of grammer, spelling...etc. The Quranic message was for everyone...not just the Quraish tribe (the Prophet was from this tribe) It reflects the nature of God---most compassionate, most merciful who bestows his grace on all humanity, not just a select few.

    The purpose of the Quran is to teach/guide humanity towards One God (Tawheed). Once Islam became global---it was no longer of any use to preserve all the dialects---One Arabic Quran was enough. This is because the Quran would be translated to be understood. (Tafsir). Thus, the Arabic Quran we have today is the "Uthmani codex" which is actually the Quran given to Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) and preserved since then to today. The authentication process was thorough so there is no doubt.

    Comment


    • #3
      [QUOTE=siam;n1205661Mother of the Book---or essence of the Quran. This can have various meanings. One of the meanings is that of a Heavenly tablet. The Quran does not go into details of the heavenly/preserved tablet. However, one can speculate that whatever it is, it might exist outside of "space-time"....?.....In any case, from the Muslim perspective, the message of the Quran is not "new"---that is, the core of the Quran is encouragement towards Tawheed (Unity) and discouragement from Shirk (Division), It is the same message taught to Prophet Adam (who was muslim = one who submits to God) and to all the Wisdom Teachers and Prophets that have come since upto Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).[/QUOTE]

      Where did this word Tawheed come from? Care to tell us??

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by siam View Post
        We are using the English language to communicate---so bear with me---some words/concepts need definition.
        Muslims accept that the Bible has been changed---this is because it is understood as "inspiration" rather than "revelation"---what Muslims refer to when speaking about "revelation" (of Quran) is that the (Arabic) words came from God through angel Gabriel,---and Prophet Muhammed simply vocalized what was given to him. In this way---the Quran is a direct message from God to the individual as well as collective human/humanity. The Prophet did not add or subtract from this message (except as God willed---as stated in the Quran itself)

        Therefore, when Muslims speak of the "Quran" as "God's message" then it has not "changed" ---- means that the message is the same as was given to the Prophet.
        The written Quran has had "changes"---such as writing styles, titles, numbers, some disputes over verse endings and pronounciation...etc. These changes do not effect the "message"/Revelation itself.
        This simply flies directly in the face of the oft repeated claim made by Muslims (for which I supplied multiple examples) that

        Not one word of its 114 chapters, Suras, has been changed over the centuries, so that the Qur’an is in every detail the unique and miraculous text which was revealed to Muhammad fourteen centuries ago.


        Originally posted by siam View Post
        Mother of the Book---or essence of the Quran. This can have various meanings. One of the meanings is that of a Heavenly tablet. The Quran does not go into details of the heavenly/preserved tablet. However, one can speculate that whatever it is, it might exist outside of "space-time"....?.....In any case, from the Muslim perspective, the message of the Quran is not "new"---that is, the core of the Quran is encouragement towards Tawheed (Unity) and discouragement from Shirk (Division), It is the same message taught to Prophet Adam (who was muslim = one who submits to God) and to all the Wisdom Teachers and Prophets that have come since upto Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).
        All well and good and useful for context but has nothing to do with the belief that the qur'ans on earth are perfect copies of the Umm al-Kitabhe.

        Originally posted by siam View Post
        Caliph Uthman---The first to consider a written preservation of the Quran is the first Caliph---Caliph Abu Baker. The reason for considering the written preservation of the Quran is because the original community of the Prophet memorized the Quran exactly as it was meant to be recited. However, this original community was dwindling, Therefore it was wise to preserve the Quran both orally (traditonal way) and also have a textual backup. During the time of Caliph Abu Baker, Caliph Umar as well as Uthman, there was rapid expansion of territories and many non-Arabic speakers became part of the "Ummah" (Muslim comminity)... this meant that it was essential that an accurate written text be sent to them so as to avoid disputes and to ensure that all Muslims had the correct Quran. The Quran as given to Prophet Muhammed was never "destroyed"---the texts that were destroyed were those that deviated from the Quran of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh). The reason that it is called the Uthmani codex is because Western historians have found texts that are original to, or copies of ---this codex. They have not yet found the Quranic text of the first compilation by Caliph Abu Bakr or the ones dictated by the Prophet Muhamad.
        That does not explain why the the personal versions of qur’an owned by Muhammad's companions (Sahabah) needed to be destroyed since it was from them that Uthmanic version came from. The fact is that these versions were just as legitimate because they represented what Muhammad’s scribes had written. And, aside from IIRC those versions being endorsed by Muhammad, according to Muslim belief, they all should have been perfect copies of the the Umm al-Kitabhe up in heaven.

        But Uthman took it upon himself to "correct" that mistake, placing his version above all others and thus, in effect, proclaiming that the earlier versions, compiled by the Sahabah were non-quranic.

        Originally posted by siam View Post
        Sanaa pampliset---During the time of Prophet Muhammed...the Arab tribes used several dialects. In order for everyone to understand the message properly, the Quran in these dialects was approved by the Prophet. Some written texts of these efforts survive. These are part of the history of Islam and important because it shows that what is really important is that the message be understood properly because it is the message that is important---not the details of grammer, spelling...etc. The Quranic message was for everyone...not just the Quraish tribe (the Prophet was from this tribe) It reflects the nature of God---most compassionate, most merciful who bestows his grace on all humanity, not just a select few.
        So you are saying that the Islamic claim that the qur'an on earth reflects a flawless copy of the Umm al-Kitabhe is a load of hogwash. I would agree but I wonder if your local imam would agree with you or castigate you as a heretic or apostate.

        Originally posted by siam View Post
        The purpose of the Quran is to teach/guide humanity towards One God (Tawheed). Once Islam became global---it was no longer of any use to preserve all the dialects---One Arabic Quran was enough. This is because the Quran would be translated to be understood. (Tafsir). Thus, the Arabic Quran we have today is the "Uthmani codex" which is actually the Quran given to Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) and preserved since then to today. The authentication process was thorough so there is no doubt.
        You have effectively argued that the Islamic belief that the qur'ans on earth are not perfect representations of the heavenly qur'an which does not appear to be an orthodox teaching and my even be heresy.



        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #5
          reply to post #4

          The Quran has not changed---this is true. One can trace back today's Quran to the Uthmani codex (with evidence) and though there is no physical evidence yet---the Quran (Uthmani codex) can be (reliably) traced back to the Prophet (pbuh).
          As I explained---the term "revelation" has a specific meaning/definition for Muslims that is not reflected in the English term.

          Change and variation has different connotations. --- Muslim history has acknowledged variations of dialect---which were discontinued with the (written) Uthmani codex. However, variations in (oral) reading of the Uthamni codex are still preserved.
          In the written Quran of today, there is a numbering system---This system is not part of "revelation"/Quran. Decorations, or other user-friendly changes in the "book" do not reflect a "corruption" of the original Quran/Revelation.

          Mother of the Book---there are different understanding and usage of this term. The Quran does not specify---and what it does not specify can fall into the category of speculation. Muslims can speculate a variety of things. As science advances, there are times when the Quranic verses become more clear and Muslims are free to make associations between the verses and new scientific knowledge. Some theories for example, posit a holographic universe made up of information bits. God may create with the "Word" or some process of "cosmic information" and the "preserved tablet" might have something to do with how "creation"/"Word" is preserved.....all of this is my speculation.

          For further info:---
          https://www.encyclopedia.com/religio...s/umm-al-kitab
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umm_al-Kitab
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavenly_Quran



          Sunni position:-

          https://seekersguidance.org/answers/.../umm-al-kitab/

          Assalam alaykum wa rahmat Allah wa barakatuh.

          I hope this finds you in the best health.

          My question is about the Umm al-Kitab which is mentioned three times in the Holy Qur’an. What is the Umm al-Kitab? Is it the same as the Lawh al-Mahfuz? Is it true that the Holy Qur’an we posses is a portion of the Umm al-Kitab which is a part of the pre-eternal speech of Allah?

          Thank You.
          Answer:


          Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmat Allah wa barakatuh.

          I pray you are well.
          Umm al-Kitab


          The term Umm al-Kitab is mentioned a few times in the Qurʾan. The first time it is used, in Sura Aal Imran 3:7. It refers to the verses of the Qurʾan which are absolutely clear and decisive. It would be apt to translate this usage as “The Foundation of the Book.” This means that those verses – such as those which state that Allah is unlike anything else (Sura al-Ikhlas 112:4) – are the lens through which other verses are to be understood if one wants an accurate understanding of the meanings and message of the Qurʾan.

          Other verses refer to the Protected Tablet (al-Lawh al-Mazfuz) as Umm al-Kitab, such as Sura al-Ra‘d 13:39. This is a creation in which knowledge of all of the events from the beginning of time to the Day of Judgement are recorded.

          The Qurʾan is written in the Protected Tablet, and it was from there that it descended to the heart of the Noble Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace.

          Allah’s attribute of Speech expresses the infinite knowledge He has in an unfathomable way. There is no beginning, no end, no letters, no words, etc. The Qur’an, which is written in the Preserved Tablet, points to some of what the attribute of Speech expresses, not all of it. (Alusi, Ruh al Maʿani; Sawi, Sharh Jawhara al-Tawhid; Fawda, al-Sharh al-Kabir ʿ ala Aqida al-Tahawiyya).

          I hope this clarifies matters for you. May Allah benefit us through His blessed words in the life and the next. Amin.

          Abdul-Rahim

          Checked and approved by Shaykh Faraz Rabbani.

          Comment


          • #6
            Umm-Al Kitab
            Here is another position from Professor Reza Aslan
            https://iqsaweb.wordpress.com/tag/umm-al-kitab/

            The Qur’an repeatedly claims to be not a new scripture but the “confirmation of previous scriptures” (12:111). In fact, the Qur’an proposes the remarkable idea that all revealed scriptures are derived from a single divine source called umm al-kitab, “Mother of Books” (13:39). That means that as far as Muhammad understood, the Torah, the Gospels, and the Qur’an must be read as a single cohesive narrative about humanity’s relationship to God, in which the prophetic consciousness of one prophet is passed spiritually to the next: from Adam to Muhammad. For this reason, the Qur’an advises Muslims to say to the Jews and Christians: “We believe in God, and in that which has been revealed to us, which is that which was revealed to Abraham and Ismail and Jacob and the tribes [of Israel], as well as that which the Lord revealed to Moses and to Jesus and to all the other Prophets. We make no distinction between any of them; we submit ourselves to God” (3:84).


            -------------------------
            God is Most compassionate, Most Merciful to ALL of his creation...that is what Unity/Tawheed implies---particularly the Sufi understanding which is very tolerant and pluralistic.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by siam View Post
              The Qur’an repeatedly claims to be not a new scripture but the “confirmation of previous scriptures” (12:111). In fact, the Qur’
              Oh yeah ..... one more of Muhammad's many claims. [Assuming Muhammad did indeed say it!!]

              Originally posted by siam View Post
              an proposes the remarkable idea that all revealed scriptures are derived from a single divine source called umm al-kitab, “Mother of Books” (13:39)
              [1] Far too many contradictions to have been revealed by one divine source, sir.

              [2] So there is eternal existence apart from Allah???


              Originally posted by siam View Post
              . That means that as far as Muhammad understood, the Torah, the Gospels, and the Qur’an must be read as a single cohesive narrative about humanity’s relationship to God, in which the prophetic consciousness of one prophet is passed spiritually to the next: from Adam to Muhammad.
              Oh really?? So show us the Torah and the Gospels that read as you claim Muhammad understood them!

              Originally posted by siam View Post
              For this reason, the Qur’an advises Muslims to say to the Jews and Christians: “We believe in God, and in that which has been revealed to us, which is that which was revealed to Abraham and Ismail and Jacob and the tribes [of Israel], as well as that which the Lord revealed to Moses and to Jesus and to all the other Prophets.
              Muslims believe, or at least are mandated to believe in Allah as revealed in and by one man .... Muhammad .... your SUPREME EXEMPLAR for all time!!!!.

              Originally posted by siam View Post
              We make no distinction between any of them; we submit ourselves to God” (3:84).
              [1] But Muhammad did make distinctions and Islam does make distinctions!!

              [2] As a Muslim you are mandated to submit yourself to Muhammad's Allah and no other god.


              Originally posted by siam View Post
              God is Most compassionate, Most Merciful to ALL of his creation...
              So why then was Muhammad, once he gained the necessary power, so intolerant to all who disagreed with his rantings????? Think the "dead poet society" for example!!!]

              Originally posted by siam View Post
              ... that is what Unity/Tawheed implies---particularly the Sufi understanding which is very tolerant and pluralistic.
              What is the source of this "tawhed" or any of that word's various spellings??? Tell us sir!!

              Comment


              • #8
                It looks like siam is a practitioner of Taqiya

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #9
                  Reply to post # 7

                  Those are opinions of Prof Reza Aslan...who says he is a Sufi.
                  I included his opinion on the subject to add diversity of views.

                  I have already explained Tawheed is the first part of the Shahada.
                  If u are looking for etymology it is expalined here:-
                  "According to Edward Lane's Lexicon on classical Arabic, tawhid is an infinite noun that means "He asserted, or declared, God to be one; he asserted, declared, or preferred belief in the unity of God" and is derived from the Arabic verb wahhada, which means "He made it one; or called it one"
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawhid...%20it%20one%22.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    It looks like siam is a practitioner of Taqiya
                    U give up too quickly....
                    Concept of "preserved tablet" gave rise to a host of questions within Islamic history---such as, Kalam Allah (God's speech/Word) and the question---Does God have "language"?....etc.....

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by siam View Post

                      U give up too quickly....
                      Concept of "preserved tablet" gave rise to a host of questions within Islamic history---such as, Kalam Allah (God's speech/Word) and the question---Does God have "language"?....etc.....
                      Muslims are taught that

                      Not one word of its 114 chapters, Suras, has been changed over the centuries, so that the Qur’an is in every detail the unique and miraculous text which was revealed to Muhammad fourteen centuries ago.


                      I provided multiple sources attesting to this.

                      So they are taught that "Not one word of its 114 chapters, Suras, has been changed over the centuries" since it was "revealed to Muhammad fourteen centuries ago."

                      Did you catch any of that? Not one word has changed over the past 14 centuries.

                      And yet you declare that is not the case (which I agree with as the evidence to the contrary is indisputable).

                      This puts you in stark opposition to a pretty basic Islamic belief here.

                      So you are either a heretic or as I suspect engaged in idtirar or taqqiya

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by siam View Post
                        Reply to post # 7
                        Originally posted by Trucker View Post
                        ]Oh yeah ..... one more of Muhammad's many claims. [Assuming Muhammad did indeed say it!!]



                        [1] Far too many contradictions to have been revealed by one divine source, sir.

                        [2] So there is eternal existence apart from Allah???



                        Oh really?? So show us the Torah and the Gospels that read as you claim Muhammad understood them![/COLOR]


                        Muslims believe, or at least are mandated to believe in Allah as revealed in and by one man .... Muhammad .... your SUPREME EXEMPLAR for all time!!!!.



                        [1] But Muhammad did make distinctions and Islam does make distinctions!!

                        [2] As a Muslim you are mandated to submit yourself to Muhammad's Allah and no other god.



                        So why then was Muhammad, once he gained the necessary power, so intolerant to all who disagreed with his rantings????? Think the "dead poet society" for example!!!]




                        What is the source of this "tawhed" or any of that word's various spellings??? Tell us sir!!
                        Those are opinions of Prof Reza Aslan...who says he is a Sufi.
                        I included his opinion on the subject to add diversity of views.
                        In post #7.I quoted and addressed his opinions as presented by you. You have not addressed my comments, sir. Instead, you divert. .

                        Originally posted by siam View Post
                        I have already explained Tawheed is the first part of the Shahada.
                        If u are looking for etymology it is expalined here:-
                        "According to Edward Lane's Lexicon on classical Arabic, tawhid is an infinite noun that means "He asserted, or declared, God to be one; he asserted, declared, or preferred belief in the unity of God" and is derived from the Arabic verb wahhada, which means "He made it one; or called it one"
                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawhid...%20it%20one%22.
                        Where dies the word tawheed appear in the Qur'an? It doesn't ... right? Fact is the Islamic scholars iinvented the word to identify a concept .... right or wrong? Tell us sir.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          ...

                          So they are taught that "Not one word of its 114 chapters, Suras, has been changed over the centuries" since it was "revealed to Muhammad fourteen centuries ago."

                          Did you catch any of that? Not one word has changed over the past 14 centuries.

                          ....
                          If u re-read my response---you will find that I agree with that statement. That the Uthamni codex has not changed, IS verifiable (with evidence) and Non-Muslim scholars also assent...The Uthmani codex reflects the Quran as revealed to the Prophet is the Muslim position...and this claim can be traced.
                          However---how we understand/define the term "revelation" is particular. The Quran we have today is the one revealed to the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by siam View Post

                            If u re-read my response---you will find that I agree with that statement. That the Uthamni codex has not changed, IS verifiable (with evidence) and Non-Muslim scholars also assent...The Uthmani codex reflects the Quran as revealed to the Prophet is the Muslim position...and this claim can be traced.
                            However---how we understand/define the term "revelation" is particular. The Quran we have today is the one revealed to the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).
                            How can it be verifiable given that the oldest fully intact and fully complete qur'an dates to 1203 A.D. -- nearly 550 years after Uthmans time?

                            Moreover the Samarkand/Tashkent Manuscript, said to have been Uthman's personal copy but actually dates from the 8th or 9th century, contains numerous instances from what we can read in modern qur'ans including various omissions and additions of the text.

                            Likewise, the Topaki manuscript, which dates to the mid 8th cent., which is nearly as complete as the one from the early 13th cent., is said to contain over 2200 variations, including a lot of obvious copyist mistakes, from what is seen in modern qur'ans

                            So it clearly is NOT "verifiable (with evidence)" that the text has remained exactly the same since the compilation of the Uthmani version.

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The preservation of a sacred text is not an unusual matter---other religions such as Judaism(Torah) and Hinduism(Vedas) have also done a remarkable job of preserving their sacred texts. Buddhism has not---because in Buddhism---a "Wisdom teaching" (sacred text) is supposed to evolve/expand.
                              In the case of Islam---what is important to Muslims is that the (sacred) "Word"---the one given by God to all humanity---be available, uncorrupted, to all humanity. The preservation of the Quran in its oral and written form has to do with this purpose. Has this purpose been accomplished?---the answer is Yes.
                              The Quran we have today is the one that God sent down to humanity. When Muslims speak of the Quran as "revelation"/"Word" we are not referring to particulars of a written text---since the Quran was not "revealed" as a written text---(it was orally transmitted by the Prophet)
                              That is why the standardization into the written Uthmani codex is considered as preservation of the Quran as is the oral transmission of the Quran from the time of the Prophet to today.

                              With the Sanaa and Birmingham manuscripts---the whole issue of the "traditional Muslim accounts" has been broadly accepted and this matter has been laid to rest. Quranic scholars have moved on to exploring other aspects of the Quran.
                              However, this (acceptance of traditional Muslim account) was only an issue with revisionist scholars of Islam and not with average Muslims. For us, the Isnad (chain of transmission accounts) as well as the internal literary structure of the Quran are enough to give reliability to the claim that the Quran today is as God intended it to be....the "revelation" has not been corrupted. Therefore---acceptance of the "traditional account" by Western Academia did not alter anything for the average Muslim. User-friendly additions such as dots, diacritical marks ,....etc are not considered a corruption of the revealed word---rather as preservation from corruption.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by lee_merrill, 03-19-2021, 05:13 PM
                              17 responses
                              136 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Dan Zebiri  
                              Working...
                              X