RE: Was the original quran not the same as the quran today
November 15, 2013 at 6:49 am
(This post was last modified: November 15, 2013 at 6:53 am by Rayaan.)
Unlike New Testament manuscript traditions, things here are different when it comes to the Quranic manuscript tradition. That is because, thanks to the parallel oral transmission, the variations which come about at the secondary copying stage are limited and restricted to specific manuscripts. They are easily identifiable and do not spread like wild fire once a manuscript is copied and recopied. In sharp contrast, due to a lack of a rigid oral transmission tradition, mistakes in NT manuscript spread rapidly from one to another, with new mistakes coming about in the copying stage. In the case of the Quran, however, that is less likely to happen because of the widespread memorization of the Quran.
One has to remember that written manuscripts are over-rated. There is a book called "Misquoting Jesus" and it addresses the issue of common misconceptions about old manuscripts, which are: (1) Just because a manuscript is older, does not mean that it is more authentic and (2) if there is a variation, then it there is no way to tell which is more authentic.
So, the main problem with manuscripts is that they are written by a single person or two. It will always be susceptible to error in writing and error in reading (in addition to the potential for forging). So, it is in this light that the Muslim system of preservation of knowledge shines. It never depended on written documents only and always depended on the dual system of both writing and mass memorization. In the case of hadiths, there was also writing and memorization as well, but not on the mass scale.
The Prophet encouraged his companions to learn each verse that was revealed and transmit it to others. The Quran was also required to be recited regularly as an act of worship, especially during the five daily prayers (salah). Through these means, many repeatedly heard passages from the revelation recited to them, memorized them and used them in prayer. Not only were the words of the Quran memorized, but also their pronunciation, later which formed into a science in itself called "Tajweed." This science meticulously elucidates how each letter is to be pronounced, as well as the word as a whole, both in context of other letters and words. Today, we can find people of all different languages able to recite the Quran as if they are Arabs themselves living during the time of the Prophet (pbuh).
Another reason why memorization of the Quran was widespread is because the Quran was being revealed over a period of 23 years, each verse supporting each other, and by the death of the Prophet, Islam engulfed the Arabian peninsula with Muslims reciting the Quran five times a day in the mosque all throughout these areas, and then within a few short years later Islam engulfed Persia, the Roman Empire, and North Africa with Muslims reciting the Quran five times a day in their prayers.
See this: Preservation of the Quran (part 1 of 2): Memorization
Also, here are segments from a lecture where the speaker, Jamal Badawi, goes through the 3 main stages of the Quran's compilation (i.e. from the Prophet's time, to Abu Bakr, and then to Uthman), while at the same time using some of the internal and external evidences in respect to the Quran and also by using authentic historical proofs to support them.
There have been many revisionist scholars and Christian scholars (like the ones mentioned in Min's post, where the article that he linked to refers to several Christian scholars such as Puin, Luxemberg, Crone, Michael Cook, and all that) who cunningly tried to attack the preservation of the Quran under the guise of objective analysis, and yet most of their work has been widely discredited even by the by the academic community. For example, as Gerhard Bowering, a professor of Islamic Studies at Yale University, writes: "Reviewing these recent studies on the Qur'an mainly published during the last decade, it is clear that, despite the clamor in the press, no major breakthrough in constructing the Qur'an has been achieved. The ambitious projects of Lüling and Luxenberg lack decisive evidence and can reach no further than the realm of possibility and plausibility." (Recent Research on the Construction of the Quran p 81, in The Quran in its Historical Context)
One has to remember that written manuscripts are over-rated. There is a book called "Misquoting Jesus" and it addresses the issue of common misconceptions about old manuscripts, which are: (1) Just because a manuscript is older, does not mean that it is more authentic and (2) if there is a variation, then it there is no way to tell which is more authentic.
So, the main problem with manuscripts is that they are written by a single person or two. It will always be susceptible to error in writing and error in reading (in addition to the potential for forging). So, it is in this light that the Muslim system of preservation of knowledge shines. It never depended on written documents only and always depended on the dual system of both writing and mass memorization. In the case of hadiths, there was also writing and memorization as well, but not on the mass scale.
The Prophet encouraged his companions to learn each verse that was revealed and transmit it to others. The Quran was also required to be recited regularly as an act of worship, especially during the five daily prayers (salah). Through these means, many repeatedly heard passages from the revelation recited to them, memorized them and used them in prayer. Not only were the words of the Quran memorized, but also their pronunciation, later which formed into a science in itself called "Tajweed." This science meticulously elucidates how each letter is to be pronounced, as well as the word as a whole, both in context of other letters and words. Today, we can find people of all different languages able to recite the Quran as if they are Arabs themselves living during the time of the Prophet (pbuh).
Another reason why memorization of the Quran was widespread is because the Quran was being revealed over a period of 23 years, each verse supporting each other, and by the death of the Prophet, Islam engulfed the Arabian peninsula with Muslims reciting the Quran five times a day in the mosque all throughout these areas, and then within a few short years later Islam engulfed Persia, the Roman Empire, and North Africa with Muslims reciting the Quran five times a day in their prayers.
See this: Preservation of the Quran (part 1 of 2): Memorization
Also, here are segments from a lecture where the speaker, Jamal Badawi, goes through the 3 main stages of the Quran's compilation (i.e. from the Prophet's time, to Abu Bakr, and then to Uthman), while at the same time using some of the internal and external evidences in respect to the Quran and also by using authentic historical proofs to support them.
There have been many revisionist scholars and Christian scholars (like the ones mentioned in Min's post, where the article that he linked to refers to several Christian scholars such as Puin, Luxemberg, Crone, Michael Cook, and all that) who cunningly tried to attack the preservation of the Quran under the guise of objective analysis, and yet most of their work has been widely discredited even by the by the academic community. For example, as Gerhard Bowering, a professor of Islamic Studies at Yale University, writes: "Reviewing these recent studies on the Qur'an mainly published during the last decade, it is clear that, despite the clamor in the press, no major breakthrough in constructing the Qur'an has been achieved. The ambitious projects of Lüling and Luxenberg lack decisive evidence and can reach no further than the realm of possibility and plausibility." (Recent Research on the Construction of the Quran p 81, in The Quran in its Historical Context)
