Hello everyone, I am back. I have been quite busy for the last months, but even if I did not participate, I was visiting here once in a while to read your posts. I saw the long overdue reply that rayaan sent me yesterday. 
Dude, as always, you are full of shit
Most of your counter arguments were not addressing the article which you claim to refute to.
Here, some explanations to your so called refutation:
That is not the point wich the article raised. The point is why would they needed to burn them at all? If I were the one who collected and compiled the quran, I wouldn’t burnt them, instead I would strictly preserve them in order to avoid any missunderstandings. And It would be safer to preserve them in case if my copy got lost. Burning the original scripts, is the most suspecious thing to do, I’ll tell you that...
And check this hadith ;
Mervan Ibn Hakem
“I did it because those that were written in it were already conveyed into the official copy (Mushaf) and kept as they were. I was afraid that after a long time passed, sceptic ones would have doubts about the official copy.” (See Dr. Subhi e's_Salih, Mebahis fi Ulumi'l-Kuran, p.83. Ref: Ibn Ebi Davud, Kitabu'l-Mesahif, p.24.)
As its said, the ones who memorized quran was rare. And again, why would you burn them instead of preserving if you have nothing to hide?
That is not a lie nor misinformation. Because as I recall, I have shown you that palaeographic studies indicates that those scripts which are claimed to be uthman’s are actually from late 8th century It's certainly, way after Uthman’s death..
That is a funny thing to say, because if I remember correctly, Bukhari is the most trusted hadith collector among islam world. And lets say its right, and What Anas(he was with the prophet since he was 10 btw) said might not be correct. Is there any hadith that will indicate there were several people who memorized quran? If not, than you’ll have to accept that; nevertheless, there were few people who memorized quran.
Yea that was the real reason why there was only few people who knew quran by hearth. Dude you are not refuting the article but yourself... It was one of the points which turan dursun raised. Most of them died therefore few people who memorized quran remained...
Dude, I can go on like this, but it will be pointless. Thank you for your good and naive intentions, but the article of Turan dursun is pretty solid, and well researched. Turan Dursun had never used any source that can be controversial. All of his sources was from the most trusted hadith collectors of islamic world. And none of the other scholars of his time ever tried to refute those researches, they only shouted and cursed, said he was a satan incarnate, just as they did to Salman Rushdi, and finally they killed him in cold blood. These facts alone is enough to realize people you depend on, are complete and utter ignorant barbarians.
Dude, as always, you are full of shit Most of your counter arguments were not addressing the article which you claim to refute to. Here, some explanations to your so called refutation:
Quote:Yes, the verses were being written on scraps of leather and similar things. But also know that the Quran was being transmitted in an oral process and through memorization, not only through writing. After the death of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), Abu Bakr, the first caliph of Islam, ordered for the Quran to be copied from the various different materials on to a common material which was in the shape of sheets and tied with strings.
The statement that "all of them were burnt" does not prove or indicate that the Quran has been changed. Why? Because they were destroyed after he completed the official manuscript of the Quran. There was no need to keep the loose materials anymore since all the verses of the Quran were safely gathered by Abu Bakr [/i]before[/i] the burning took place. That's why, it doesn't matter if the earlier copies of the Quran were burned or not.
That is not the point wich the article raised. The point is why would they needed to burn them at all? If I were the one who collected and compiled the quran, I wouldn’t burnt them, instead I would strictly preserve them in order to avoid any missunderstandings. And It would be safer to preserve them in case if my copy got lost. Burning the original scripts, is the most suspecious thing to do, I’ll tell you that...
And check this hadith ;
Mervan Ibn Hakem
“I did it because those that were written in it were already conveyed into the official copy (Mushaf) and kept as they were. I was afraid that after a long time passed, sceptic ones would have doubts about the official copy.” (See Dr. Subhi e's_Salih, Mebahis fi Ulumi'l-Kuran, p.83. Ref: Ibn Ebi Davud, Kitabu'l-Mesahif, p.24.)
Quote:I never heard about that before, but if this is true, then again, that's not a problem because Abu Bakr didn't write the Quran, he only compiled it, from various other manuscripts. After doing that, Uthman began the job of putting it together into a complete Quran by consulting with Qaris (those who memorized the Quran). That's why it doesn't matter if the compilation was burned or not. If Uthman faithfully copied from Abu Bakr's compilation, then it's more reasonable to think that the Muslims would certainly not burn the original one unless if there was a way to reproduce it.(yes second one was burnt too. Read turan dursun article to see the hadiths)
As its said, the ones who memorized quran was rare. And again, why would you burn them instead of preserving if you have nothing to hide?
Quote:That is either a lie or a misinformation because the manuscripts during the time of Uthman do exist which you can see in the link in my first post in this thread. There were other personal collections of the portions of the Quran that people had with them. So, Uthman appealed to the people to destroy all these copies which did not match the original manuscript of the Quran in order to preserve the original text of the Quran (or the actual revealed words)
That is not a lie nor misinformation. Because as I recall, I have shown you that palaeographic studies indicates that those scripts which are claimed to be uthman’s are actually from late 8th century It's certainly, way after Uthman’s death..
Quote:There is a context to that hadith which needs to be clarified and here is the explanation from the same book that the author used (Al-Ittiqan).
"The saying of Anas (RA) does not prove that except these four no other companion had memorized the whole of Quran and that his saying is the ultimate truth because here his words merely imply that Anas (RA) did not know anyone except these four to have memorized the whole of the Quran. And while the companions had spread in different cities, how could it have been possible for Anas (RA) to know (about each one of them)? It would be possible only if Anas (RA) had met each of them individually and asked him if he had collected the whole of Quran during the Prophet's (PBUH) lifetime and if each of them had replied in negative. This is obviously out of question and if this statement is taken only to be according to the knowledge of Anas (RA) then it does not mean that his statement is actually true." - Al-Ittiqan 1/170, Section 20
That is a funny thing to say, because if I remember correctly, Bukhari is the most trusted hadith collector among islam world. And lets say its right, and What Anas(he was with the prophet since he was 10 btw) said might not be correct. Is there any hadith that will indicate there were several people who memorized quran? If not, than you’ll have to accept that; nevertheless, there were few people who memorized quran.
Quote:Again, that is not true because memorization of the Quran was a widespread phenomenon during that time, as well as today. Many of the memorizers were also being killed in battlefields.
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit Al-Ansari: "Abu Bakr sent for me after the (heavy) casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said, Umar has come to me and said, The people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle of) Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be more casualties among the Qurra (those who know the Quran by heart) at other battle-fields, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost, unless you collect it. And I am of the opinion that you should collect the Quran" (Sahih Bukhari, 4603).
Yea that was the real reason why there was only few people who knew quran by hearth. Dude you are not refuting the article but yourself... It was one of the points which turan dursun raised. Most of them died therefore few people who memorized quran remained...
Quote:Firstly, that's not an acceptable claim. It was necessary to make new copies to strengthen the authenticity of the original one by drawing from a larger pool of sources.First of all, it may not be acceptable but, this was not a baseless claim, it was according to what your trusted hadiths said, and why did they burnt the older copy? And the most importantly, Why the hell did they burnt the original scripts at all?!?!?!
Dude, I can go on like this, but it will be pointless. Thank you for your good and naive intentions, but the article of Turan dursun is pretty solid, and well researched. Turan Dursun had never used any source that can be controversial. All of his sources was from the most trusted hadith collectors of islamic world. And none of the other scholars of his time ever tried to refute those researches, they only shouted and cursed, said he was a satan incarnate, just as they did to Salman Rushdi, and finally they killed him in cold blood. These facts alone is enough to realize people you depend on, are complete and utter ignorant barbarians.
Quote:Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise cannot see all ends.
Gandalf The Gray.
