The traditional account of how the written Qur'an has been preserved tells us that today's 1924 Cairo edition of the Qur'an is word by word the same as the ones revealed to the prophet of Islam. This account tells us basically that the following steps occurred:
1. The prophet of Islam received the messages from the angel Gabriel. Each word is purely the words coming from God.
2. The revelations came through 2 decades. Muhammad would have at least one scribe to write the revelation. This was done in parchments, stones and other means. This revelations came in 7 different readings to allow people with different dialect pronouncing them.
3. The scripts were not compiled in Muhammad's time into a single codex, because the revelations kept coming till not too long before his passing.
4. During the first Caliphate, Abu Bakr ordered to compile the writings into a single codex. This was because even though there were multiple companions who had memorized the revelations, many of them were dying during the wars.
5. The third Caliph, Uthman, sent official copies of the Qur'an to different provinces.
6. Of those copies, two of them are available today. One in Turkey and one in Uzbekistan. The traditional Muslim view exerts that anyone could look at them and see that these old manuscripts are the same as the Cairo 1924 certified copy from Al-Azhar.
I should clarify that my intention is not finding a straw man argument to which beat on. I would like to point out some facts that have made me thought about the traditional apologetic argument in more detail.
First, the hadith reports that during the 3rd Caliphate there were disputes between the U'mmah from different regions as to what was the right reading of the Qur'an. In specific, an account of a dispute between Iraki troop members and Syrian troop members arose. This occurred because they noticed that each other had different versions of the Qur'an. So the Caliph Uthman ordered the destruction of any Qur'an copies which differed from the copy that Hafsa (one of the widows of the prophet) had. It is assumed that after this decree from Uthman, all copies of the Qur'an were standardized to the Qureshi dialect. Since then is widely assumed as well, that all copies are the same and faithful to Hafsa's copy. Please also note that the third Caliphate period was between 644 and 656 CE. Therefore any copies from any latter period should not have variants, if the measures taken by Uthman had been effective.
Second, the Arab empire extended from today's Tunisia to Pakistan and from part of Turkey to Yemen. There is no historical evidence that guarantees that absolutely all defective copies were really collected. The official copies from Uthman, according to the traditional view, were sent only to few main cities: Meca, Kufa, Basra, Damascus and Medina. No details are recorded on how the other provinces and, at the end, every muslim community received the Uthmanic version of the Qur'an.
Third, it is argued that oral tradition was a strong benchmarker to verify and correct improper readings or versions until today. The fact is that since the beginning existed disputes about the correct structure of the Qur'an between those companions who memorized it. Even among those companions whom the prophet of Islam recommended to consult in case of dispute, because they had memorized it perfectly. (1). From those companions, Ibn Masud disagreed with Uthman. Ibn Masud was convinced his version of the Qur'an was the right one, and not Uthman's. That's why Ibn Masud and his students did not follow Uthman's requisition to give their Qur'an copies; they in rebellion concealed their copies.
Fourth, it's commonly said that "two of the copies of the Qur'an which were originally prepared in the time of Caliph Uthman, are still available to us today and their text and arrangement can be compared, by anyone who cares to do, with any other copy of the Quran, be it in print or handwritten, from any place or period of time. They will be found identical'". (2). I know this is not said by all muslims, but it's the most common view. Two major issues appear with this view are:
1. The Samarkand manuscript in Takshent Uzbekistan is dated from between 750 to 800 CE. The Topkapi manuscript in Turkey is dated from 700 to 725 CE. And the Manuscripts from Sana'a Yemen are dated from 710-715 CE onwards (based on Caligraphic analyses). (3) These are the oldest manuscripts today, and all are from the Umayyad period, at least 50 years after Uthman's life and almost 75 years after the death of the prophet of Islam. Therefore these are not Uthmanic copies.
2. Textual criticism of these and other younger manuscripts show discrepancies with the current Al Azhar Cairo edition of the Qur'an. The following is the abstract of a doctorate thesis from Rice university:
Abstract:
This dissertation examines intentional changes in ten early Qur'ans and a group of early Qur'an fragments. With some exceptions, scholars of the Qur'an’s history have given priority to Muslim traditional accounts of its early transmission and establishment. These sources acknowledge a certain degree of flexibility in the text. Manuscripts have been accepted as proof of early origin but generally treated as a secondary witness to that origin. Divergence from today’s standard has been variously credited to flexibility of readings (a'ruf), developing orthography of the Arabic language, downplayed as owing to inferior copies, or considered unimportant because secondary to a universally acknowledged and known oral tradition preserved in the hearts of the believers. However, the earliest Muslim historical traditions concerning Islam and Qur'anic origins were not first written until the second half of the 8th century AD. I therefore methodologically assert priority of the manuscripts, the earliest extant dating to the latter years of the 7th century AD, as witness to the written Qur'an’s early history. The manuscripts, I find, indicate that the text of the Qur'an was not immediately established in every detail, nor was oral tradition strong enough or unanimous enough to prevent written variants in the form of alternate spellings, alternate words or phrases, omissions, or inclusions that precipitated later revisions or standardization of the pages themselves but that in some cases remain. (4)
Note: emphasis mine.
Conclusion
The traditional view of Qur'anic preservation is challenged by historical records. Two main implications I find, which should make all of us think about the paradigm of perfect preservation:
1. I don't find sufficient information to say the Qur'an has been poorly preserved, nor that the original version of the Qur'an cannot be found. I would need to read more about the extent of the variants in the texts. But the facts show the preservation is not perfect, contradicting the traditional muslim apologetic view. The historical data does not provide sufficient records to support that today's Al Azhar copy of the Qur'an is word by word the same words transmitted by the prophet of Islam. Perhaps, the main message of the Qur'an has been preserved, but the data does not provide proof of perfect preservation.
2. The muslim believe of perfect preservation comes from verses within the Qur'an itself: 'We (Allah) have, without doubt, send down the Message; and We will assuredly Guard it (from corruption)' (Quran - Chapter 15, Verse 9). This poses a challenge, for the proof is only internal and not external. The Belfast Islamic Centre website dedicated to the Preservation of The Qur'an (2) says the following statement:Compare this divine and historical preservation of the Quran with any literature, be it religious or secular and it becomes evident that none possess similar miraculous protection. And as states earlier, a belief is as authentic as the authenticity of its scripture. And if any scripture is not preserved, how can we be certain that the belief arising out of this scripture is divine or man made, and if we are not sure about the belief itself, then our salvation in the hereafter would be jeopardized.
In response to this argument one has to rationally say that historical data does not support the claim of superiority. And in specific, it should be concluded that the textual criticism of Qur'an manuscripts is starting to find similar manuscript differences as those found in the Bible manuscripts. The problem for muslim apologists is that for years they have argumented that the Qur'an never had issues with textual variants as occurred with the Bible. And those textual variants in the Bible were used to sustain a claim of corruption and tampering of the Bible books beyond recognition from the original message. Now the analysis of the Umayyad manuscripts show that the field has been leveled between the Bible and The Qur'an, and both should be weighed in the same balance. Muslims should recognize that in the way they trust today's copy of the Qur'an, they should also see today's Bible as trustworthy.
For me, I'm invited to look at logically reasoning about what the Qur'an claims. It claims to be a revelation confirming the Torah and The Injil. These books have been preserved in similar fashion as the Qur'an has been. However the Qur'an's contents widely differ from the contents of the Torah and the Injil.
____________________________
Footnotes
(1) Sahih Muslim: bk. 31, no. 6022; also Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 52
(2) http://www.iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm
(3) all dates taken from http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Quran#Oldest_surviving_copies
(4) http://humanities.rice.edu/events.aspx?EventRecord=22419
Link to other apologist articles
http://www.answering-islam.net/Green/uthman.htm
Additional info
Narrated Umar bin Al-Khattab: I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat Al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited in several different ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. I was about to jump over him during his prayer, but I controlled my temper and when he had completed his prayer, I put his upper garment around his neck and seized him by it and said, "Who taught you this Surat which I heard you reciting ?" He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me". I said, "You have told a lie, for Allah's Apostle taught it to me in a different way from yours". So I dragged him to Allah's Apostle and said, "I heard this person reciting Surat Al-Furqan in a way which you haven't taught me!". On that Allah's Apostle said, "Release him (Umar) recite, O Hisham!" Then he recited in the same way I heard him reciting. Then Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed in this way", and added, "Recite, O Umar", I recited it as he had taught me. Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed in this way this Qur'an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever is easier for you." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 514)
Narrated Ibn Mas'ud: I heard a person reciting a (Quranic) verse in a certain way, and I had heard the Prophet reciting the same verse in a different way. So I took him to the Prophet and informed him of that but I noticed the sign of disapproval on his face, and then he said, "Both of you are correct, so don't differ, for the nations before you differed, so they were destroyed." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 4, bk. 56, no. 682)
Narrated Ibrahim: The companions of 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) came to Abu Darda', (and before they arrived at his home), he looked for them and found them. Then he asked them,: "Who among you can recite (Qur'an) as 'Abdullah recites it?" They replied, "All of us." He asked, "Who among you knows it by heart?" They pointed at 'Alqama. Then he asked Alqama. "How did you hear 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud reciting Surat Al-Lail (The Night)?“ Alqama recited:
“By the male and the female.” (Qur’an 92:3)
Abu Darda said, "I testify that I heard the Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want me to recite it:
“And by Him Who created male and female.” (Qur’an 92:3)
But by Allah, I will not follow them." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 60, no. 468; also Sahih Muslim: bk. 4, no. 1799-1802)
'Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported that he said to his companions to conceal their copies of the Qur'an and further said: He who conceals anything he shall have to bring that which he had concealed on the Day of Judgment, and then said: After whose mode of recitation do you command me to recite? I in fact recited before Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) more than seventy chapters of the Qur'an and the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) know it that I have better understanding of the Book of Allah (than they do), and if I were to know that someone had better understanding than I, I would have gone to him. Shaqiq said: I sat in the company of the Companions of Muhammad (may peace be upon him) but I did not hear anyone having rejected that (that is, his recitation) or finding fault with it. (Sahih Muslim: bk. 31, no. 6022; also Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 522)
Az-Zuhri also narrated that Abdullah Ibn Mas’oud became upset because he was not chosen to copy the Qur’an. He said, “Oh you Muslims, how can I not be chosen ... Ibn Mas’oud also said, “Oh people of Iraq! Hide your Qurans in your homes (from Uthman).” (Sunan Al-Tirmithi, Dar Al-Kotob Al-ilmiyah, 2008, vol. 4, no. 3105, p. 134; also Ibn Sa'd, Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, vol. 2 p. 444)
Comments
Post a Comment