> Preservation of the Qur'an

[Al Habeshi]

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem

as-Salaamu 'Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh.

I hope all is well, I had these thoughts after viewing the debate between Bassam and Nabeel, basically that the debate was a clean win, although Nabeel tried to make it out as thought the Bible is in the same arena.

Quick Coments on Bassam and Nabeel Debate

I was amazed at the debate. Well to be honest, I don’t think much could have been said, for when one truly discusses a topic with a decent amount of time, and manages to keep both sides on topic then the outcome is clear.
Nonetheless I was not surprised to find Nabeel attempting to confuse the matter, whether knowingly or unknowingly. His continual ascertation that the situation with the Qur’anic preservation is the same as any other text is amazingly flawed.

He ascerted that the same way we have variants, I personally oppose using this term with regards to the Qir’aat or Ahruf, in Islam, then we have the same for other texts like the Bible – this could not be further from the truth.
Bassam made the point clear, I don’t know how much more clear it would have to be for Nabeel to stop making such claims.

The Qur’an was revealed in a variety of ways, all tracing back to the prophet Muhammad, sallaAllahu alayhi wa salam, thus these ‘variants’ all originate from the Prophet. In contrast, the variants we often hear about with regards to other texts, for example the New Testament, are not variants which originate from the original authors, i.e. no one accepts that the author of mark wrote his Gospel in three different ways – all inspired – and that these had variantions in it, such that in one he wrote ‘The Begging of the Gospel of Jesus the Christ’ and in another he wrote ‘The Begging of the Gospel of Jesus the Christ Son of God’ (and so forth with all variants)
This is the crucial difference!

Now for example, if one was to say that the Lords’ Prayer in Matthew and Luke are different because they were spoken by Jesus in different ways to make it easier for the audiences then this would not be a normal variant. It would be one that originates from Jesus and thus acceptable. But there is no indication that this is the case, moreover all the evidences indicate that this was not the case.

Variants when used in the context of the Qur’an normally mean ‘Differences which originate from the Prophet Muhammad and are transmitted reliably and accurately’

Variants when used in the context of the New Testament normally mean ‘Mistakes and interpolations which a textual critic seeks to remove in order to get back to the original text’

Br.Jesus

[Assad]

:

When we say differences in variants of Quran, are these differences in recitations or differences in text?

[salman]

there are different ways to recite the Qur'an known as the Qir'at. And they are 7 different reading/textual variants, for lack of better word, known the ahruf. You cannot really call them variants since 1) they are all the different ways to recite/read the Qur'an and 2) they go back to the original source, Allah Azz wa Jal. The variants would be something like outside of these different ways because that would not be part of the original Qur'an. The Qur'an was revealed in different Qir'at and Ahruf and as long as those are preserved then it is really nonsensical to claim that the Qur'an has 'variants' when the supposedly variants are the Qur'an.

and Allah knows best

[Al Habeshi]

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem,

as-Salaamu 'Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah.

Brother Acid I don't understand what you mean - may Allah grant us understanding of the religion. Since the text is a guide to the recitation.

When we say variant, it is something that varies. The problem is that something can vary due to different reasons.

One could be that the Author of the message has provided it in different ways, such the all such differences are original, i.e. from the Author.

Two could be that the Author of the message has provided one way, and people later in copying have knowingly or unknowingly introduced variations into this message, this is not original since the author did not provide this, rather this is curroption.

Now, in the study of the Bible the word variant has come to represent the second meaning, why? Because they have no concept of the first, i.e. they have not claimed, generally, that their variants are due to the author having written different copies in different ways.

So when we move to interfaith dialogue and from the realms of biblical research to Qur'anic research people use the term variant with this Biblical background, i.e. meaning two, when in fact the Islamic History testifies to the fact that the Qur'an was revealed in different, varied, ways.


So when one speaks of variant one needs to explain what he means, i.e. a variant originally provided by the author (i.e. not a curroption) or a variant introduced by other than the author, knowingly or not, (i.e. a curroption)

If one is honest in his research he will understand the disction and appriciate it.

Tell me if it makes sense?

And with Allah is the sucess.

Br.al-Habeshi

[Al Habeshi]

Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem,

as- Salaamu 'Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah,

Though you guys might be interested in the words of Mustapha Al Azami,

The term 'variants' is one that I dislike using in such cases because a variant results, by definition, from uncertainty. If the origional author pens a sentence one way, and the sentence is then corrupted due to scribal errors, then we have introduced a principle of uncertainty; a subsequent editor who is unable to distinguish the correct wording from the incorrect wording will place what he believes to be the correct version in the text, whilst citing the other in margins. Such is the variant reading. But the Qur'an's case differs distinctly because the Prophet Muhammad, Allah's sole vicegerent for the wahy's reception and transmission, himself taught certain verses in multiple ways. There is no principle of doubt here, no fog or confusion, and the word 'variant' fails to convey this. Multiple is far more accurate description, and so in that spirit I will refer to them here as multiple readings.

The History of the Qur'anic Text p.154-5


Br.al-Habeshi