The Quran and Hadith, which is more authentic?

yeah ..picture this...it is like a driver's manual...you can't drive ur new car without going through its manual..right?

The koran is the only documented relgiious scam in all history.

Its language is hodge podge.

Its grammar is hocus pocus.

Its theme is a scam.

Its objective was just the achievement of women, wealth and power for MAD MO.

No wonder then, that in these enlightned times, it has no relevance. No wonder that beleif in it is enforced, and not voluntary.

Excellent article Mr Mumin Salih.

This undeniably shattered the authencity and preservation argument of Quran propounded by Muslim apologists.

Humanity is but one family. :)

Long story short islam is a GIG LIE, the greatest lie the world ever known, preserved by people who have weak and corrupted mind, with no integrity of thinking.

What the difference with other fairy tales beliefs? the purpouse of islam is to create empire on earth (arabia peninsula) in the name of some diety for the catch, with all earthly pleasure as reward for the founder.

At least some hadiths have some truth in them, as they've been told by lot of people.If you believe god creates all the beauty and wonders on the earth, im sure he can do much better than whats written in quran.

if you say your allah (as if) talking about forgiveness and mercy through the quran, than why the hell, he order you to KILL PEOPLE if they ATTACKED YOU,

didn't your allah is forgiver, most merciful, most wise (as you seen many of these in quran)

you ask tribal warlord in afghan, "what should we do, we just get ambushed?", wouldn't they gonna tell you to plan retaliate ambush?,
so your god has the same level of wisdom like warlord?? so the warlord can be said most wise as well??

you're buying mohamed cheap promise of 72 virgin

i tell you what, if i got lot of money i can get more than 72 virgin on earth from young and stupid chick, why would make reward for hereafter that achiveable even on this earth, so god is not fair, if some rich man can have a bit of taste of paradise??

wake up muslim, you been fooled!

The Quran grandly claims that its original copy is preserved in the Islamic heaven on eternal golden tablets.

There exists many versions of Arabic script both ancient and modern such as Naskh, Nasta’liq, Shahmuchi, Ruq’ah, Thuluth, Kufic, Sini and Hijaji. Now my simple question to Muslim scholars is in which non-confusing version of Arabic script is this heavenly Quran written?

Orthodox Muslims claim that the Quran is eternal and uncreated, just like their Allah is. This was the subject of bitter debate centuries ago in ancient Baghdad between the orthodox Hanbalis who claimed that the Quran was uncreated and the rationalist Mutazalites who claimed that it was created. The orthodox Hanbalis prevailed. Therefore it follows that the uncreated Quran in heaven wrote itself in some original script.

This incidentally also means of course that Allah, just like his chosen favorite prophet Muhammad, could only speak and understand Arabic but not write it. After all isn’t this why prayers to this all-knowing Allah must only be in Arabic?

Would it not have saved all this confusion among Islamic scholars, as highlighted in this excellent article by Mumin Salih, if Angel Gabriel had simply taught Muhammad this original heavenly script when he thrice commanded him to read the revealed Quran in the cave at Hira outside Mecca? This is an especially strange oversight because the Quran itself claims that Allah has taught mankind by use of the pen. Why would all-knowing Allah overlook this vital fact unless he wanted to trick his future followers just as the Quran itself says “Would ye guide those whom Allah has led astray?”

Naturally we ex-Muslims and non-Muslims alike are not deceived. We know that the Quran was a sly and devious device invented by Muhammad to deceive and control his naive followers, even from his grave. The one exception was smart little baby Ayesha who saw through the whole cunning charade when she, with the precocious wisdom of many children, saw the truth when she said to the old lecher “I see your Allah is very quick to fulfill your desires” Out of the mouth of babes there comes much truth.

i will say hadith more authentic than quran, as hadith came from people who told most of similar story, at least we know its true, it happened some of it.

learn from christianity, god presence (in whatever form) being witness by disciples, or closed people, thats why they sacrifice their lifes to be prosecuted for what they witness.

where quran is simply mad ham mo deepest secret who knows??

Qrand and the hadith are two faces of the same EVIL Islam.
No difference.I had a mild discussion and said to one of the believers, bhagvat gita is on platinum tablets ad qrand is on gold and bible is on silver plate.Initially the moslems thought thta platinum is a bit like esteel and was happy! He was furious a little later adnd now he says qrand is preserved on platinum plates.Actually qrand is preserved on toilet tissues after usage

Although Quran is a criminal generating book, but unfortunately considered holy by some 20 % of people. This should give shudders to other 80 %.
There are 3 types of muslims:
1. Ignorant, they simply prays and hardly have studied it fully and become furious when questioned about islam.
2. Cultural jihadists, they dont want to use physical force for Islam. They want to curtail any discussion of Islam, want more muslim immigration, more demographic boom of muslims, want more mosques so that the muslim network in west becomes strong. They want conversion from non-muslims, finance well known writers to sugar coat islam, write apologistic societies.
Its only for them that charles martel is not much famous as Saladin. Why there is no film on him??? These cultural muslims want to create a framework that if they are not stopped then within 30 -50 years islam will prevail over all other humanistic society like freedom, liberty, secular thoughts etc.
3. True muslims, they belong to so called terrorist group. They have make us known us what Islam means. They speak clearly what a normal muslim wants. They have shown what actual sharia is by practical exam in Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan (SWAT), Somalia. In places like somalia movies are banned, modern medical treatment banned, vaccination is considered as tool to reduce muslim population. In afghalistan just having a VCR and a CD is enough for a person to get killed.

All non-muslims should come together and help to suffogate this menace.
Request christian missionaries to stop targeting non-muslims like buddhists, hindus, jews, confusians, animists of tribal places.
Please target only Islam.

The Quran and Hadith, which is more insulting to human intellegence?

Beautiful Reading! Thank you brother Salih

"Ignorant, they simply prays and hardly have studied it fully and become furious when questioned about islam."

I won't call them ignorant. They're selfish fools who only care about them self. They never care about the victims of islam because their eyes are looking straight to islamic heaven without thinking anything else.

"True muslims, they belong to so called terrorist group. They have make us known us what Islam means. They speak clearly what a normal muslim wants. They have shown what actual sharia is by practical exam in Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan (SWAT), Somalia. In places like somalia movies are banned, modern medical treatment banned, vaccination is considered as tool to reduce muslim population. In afghalistan just having a VCR and a CD is enough for a person to get killed."

I agree with this, but you forgot about the source of it all (Saudi Barbaria). Never forget this place because this is where the prophet of barbarian was born. They are the representatives of other muslim who is too lazy to do their duty. Muslim do the talking, true muslim do the action.

Actually, I think this article is groundbreaking. I never thought of comparing the Qur'an and Hadith and setting both against similar standards. What a great article. The conclusions of the analysis are valid, regardless of whether Muslims like it or not. Muslims will always deny or reject what we say.

":The Quran is considered like the backbone of Islam although the bulk of the religion is made from the sunna, or Mohammed’s traditions, which is based on his hadiths or sayings and considered second to the Quran in its importance. Practicing Islam is impossible without sunna because the Quran doesn’t explain anything about the Islamic rituals or sharia and refers Muslims to take Mohammed’s example which only comes through his hadiths (Q.59:7)."

I say:

I believe the reason why the Quran does not explain the Islamic rituals is because these rituals were already in practice among the meccans and therefore no explanation was needed at the time.

I don’t agree with the contents of the write up of Mumin Salih as given above by him. He has not, in my opinion, understood the correct significance of the Islamic sources of guidance and how did they come to existence.

I would give a brief note on the Islamic sources of guidance to dispel the wrong notions as mentioned by Mumin Salih:

The Muslims have three sources for establishing themselves on Islamic guidance.

First, the Holy Quran which is the Book of God than which we have no more conclusive and certain statement. It is the Word of God and is free from all doubt and speculation.

Secondly, the practice of the Holy Prophet, which is called Sunnah. We do not regard hadeeth and sunnah as one. They are distinct, hadeeth is one thing and sunnah is another. By sunnah we mean the practice of the Holy Prophet, to which he adhered and which appeared along with the Holy Quran and will accompany it. In other words, the Holy Quran is the Word of God Almighty and the sunnah is the action of the Holy Prophet, peace be on him.

It has ever been the way of God that the Prophets bring the Word of God for the guidance of people and illustrate it in practice with their conduct so that no doubt should remain in the minds of people with regard to the Divine Word. They act upon it and urge others to do the same.

The third source of guidance is hadeeth, by which we mean those traditions which were compiled from the statements of diverse narrators a century and a half after the Holy Prophet. The distinction between sunnah and hadeeth is that sunnah is a continuous practice which was started by the Holy Prophet. It is only next to the Holy Quran in its certainty.

As the Holy Prophet was commissioned for the propagation of the Quran, he was also commissioned for establishing the sunnah. As the Holy Quran is certain so is the continuous sunnah. Both these tasks were performed by the Holy Prophet as his duty. For instance, when the Prayer services were made obligatory, the Holy Prophet illustrated by his action how many rakaas were to be performed in each Prayer service. In the same way, he illustrated the performance of the pilgrimage. He thus established thousands of his companions on his practice.

The practical illustration which has been continuous among the Muslims is the sunnah. On the other hand, the Holy Prophet did not have the hadeeth recorded in his presence nor did he make any arrangement for its compilation. Hazrat Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, had collected some ahadeeth and then had them burnt out of greater caution as he himself had not heard them from the Holy Prophet and did not know their reality.

When the time of the companions of the Holy Prophet had passed some of their successors thought of compiling the ahadeeth and they were compiled. There is no doubt that most of the compilers of hadeeth were very pious and righteous. They tested the accuracy of ahadeeth as far as it was possible and tried to steer clear of such of them as in their opinion were manufactured, and they rejected every hadeeth any narrator of which was of doubtful veracity. As all this activity was ex post factum, it was no more than conjecture; yet it would be most unfair to say that all ahadeeth are vain and useless and false. So much care was taken in compiling the ahadeeth, and such research and criticism were employed in the task, that they cannot be matched in any other religion.

The Jews also had compilations of hadeeth and Jesus was opposed by that sect of the Jews who followed the ahadeeth, but it is not proved that the Jewish compilers of hadeeth had exercised that care in compiling their collections as the Muslim compilers of hadeeth did.

Nevertheless, it would be a mistake to imagine that till the ahadeeth were compiled, the Muslims were unaware of the details of Prayer services or did not know the proper way of performing the pilgrimage. The practical illustrations of the sunnah had taught them all the limits and obligations laid down by Islam. It is true, therefore, that even if the ahadeeth, which were collected after a long time, had not been compiled this would not have affected the real teaching of Islam for the Holy Quran and practice had fulfilled this need.

The ahadeeth only added to that light and Islam became light upon light and the ahadeeth became testimonies for the Quran and sunnah. Of the many sects that subsequently appeared in Islam, the true one derived great benefit from the true ahadeeth. The correct way, therefore, is neither to treat the ahadeeth as having greater authority than the Quran, as do the Ahl-i-hadeeth of this age, and not to prefer the statements in the ahadeeth which are contradictory of the Quran to the Quran itself; nor to regard the ahadeeth as vain and false as is the belief of Maulvi Abdullah Chakralvi.

The Quran and sunnah should judge the ahadeeth and those that are not opposed to them should by all means be accepted. This is the straight path and blessed are those who follow it. Most unfortunate and foolish is the person who rejects the ahadeeth altogether without regard to the test that we have proposed. It should be the duty of the members of our community that a hadeeth which is not opposed to the Quran and sunnah, should be accepted and followed, however weak might be its authority, and it should be preferred to the rules framed by jurists Review on the Debate Between Batalwi and Chakrhalvi ((Qadian, 1902) Now printed in Ruhani Khazain, Vol.19 page 3-5).

http://www.alislam.org/books/essence/chap3/chap3.html

I think that the true concept of Islamic sources of guidance would have been now clear to our friends in this forum.

Love for all; hatred for none.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

[...] The Holy Quran is the Word of God Almighty and the Sunnah is the action of the Holy Prophet By paarsurrey http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/06/30/the-quran-and-hadith-which-is-mor...... [...]

Dear Paarsurrey, Hello brother
I feel for you and the abuse Ahmadis get in the Asian Islamic countries. In Pakistan many "Asians" attack your homes and places of worship all the time. I don't know why "Asians" behave like that. Could it be that the are "Muslims"?
I do appreciate Ahmadis and their peaceful way of life.
Now, I would like to ask you something: When you look at how the Qur'an was collected, and compare it to how the Hadith was collected, the conclusion that Mr. Mumin Salih reaches is valid. Hadith is more reliable than the Qur'an. Now, you may say we have to have "Faith", which is fine. I believe in having "Faith". But one has to have some reason to take a step of faith. When you look at Muhammad's life, he was no more than a street gangster. In fact, I daresay, he was much worse than that. He massacred between 600 and 900 Jews in one day (Bani Qurayza). That prophet, Muhammad, was a criminal. If he lived nowadays, he wouldn't see the light of day out of prison. And you are trying to defend him and Islam. That is a shame. I'd like to see Ahmadis come true and wash their hands from that evil person, Muhammad. You had your own decent religious leaders. Follow all the good they say. Ignore all that they say about Mr. Muhammad of barbaric 7th century Arabia. We need some Ahmadi to pull out of that rubble and create some decency of beliefs. This can only be done if you forget about some rapist who lived in Arabia and called himself a prophet of the almighty.

paarsurrey:

The Jews also had compilations of hadeeth and Jesus was opposed by that sect of the Jews who followed the ahadeeth, but it is not proved that the Jewish compilers of hadeeth had exercised that care in compiling their collections as the Muslim compilers of hadeeth did.

I say:

The Jews did not have compiliations of Hadith. Your statement makes no sense.

Hi paarsurrey,

Nice to know that you are ahmedi muslim, infact I appreciate the improvements you brought to Islam as it is a intolerant religion to mankind. Infact Ahmedi and Bahai movement is a step of reformation in islam, but the best is complete apostasy from Islam.
Also Unfortunate to know that you are very badly treated in pakistan. Its still dangerous to openly do apostasy in middle east and pakistan, but to tone down the effect of islam really helps.
Hope even if the muslims dont do apostasy, they atleast fully question and eliminate the hateful verses which are some 70 % of the quran.

Q U R A N explains itself.

Q uestionable
U tterings of a
R abid
A rab
N utcase.

When the chips are down as in dealing with Kaffirs or promoting this violent and death dealing cult the Ahamadias are no better than the Wahabis.

We Kaffir has nothing to choose between the two.

Hatred to all and peace for none is the motto of pisslam.
I was enjoying my cuppa in my garden.All the flowers of pleasing colours have bloomed and the caressing wind is soothing. I thought for myself.If this garden is not looked after and nurtured carefully, the weeds will over take and nothing will be left of it.
It stuck me that I must get some weeds removed.
Civilisation is like a tender garden.The islamic weed will over take the garden and will lay it waste any garden it grows in.Look what has happened in afghanisthan and porkisthan and other islamic whore houses. We need weed killers to remove islam.The pisslam is an obnoxious weed and needs to be removed again and again.Knowledge and awareness are the weed killers for isslam.Ignorance and illiteracy are the supporters of weed islam.
Ahmediyas are slaughtered by moslems in porkisthan and this chappy has not learnt any lesson.Please announce in market place in lahore or karachi that you are an ahmedi and feel and enjoy the peace of islam from the porki pigs

Hello, paarsurrey.

Who are you doing? I hope you're well. Because in my country ahmadi is persecuted by other sects. They are treated with violence unless they join the dominating sects. I hope your peaceful interpretation not because you're in minorities.

Dear Paarsurrey,

Would you be kind enough to explain the holy activities of the holy prophet that was inspired by the holy Allah through his holy messenger Gabriel, such as:

Holy thighing Aisha since she was 6 years old until she became 9 when he penetrated.
Holy prophet's holy intention to thigh a crawing child!
The holy killing of 700-900 people in one go at battle of Badr.
The holy screwing of Safya after killing, sorry, after sending her male relatives to jannat!
The holy screwing of the maid of His wife
The holy screwing of son-in-law's wife
The holy screwing of countless right hand possessions
The holy...action of sending all his foes/opponents to jannat

Please dont feel offended. I recently uttered the shahada and since then there is an uncontrollable urge in me and am looking for small girls under 9 years of age to emulate our beloved holy prophet. He was 51 that time I am also of the same age. Thanks.

‎15. Ibn Kammuna Says:
June 30th, 2009 at 11:01 pm ‎
‎
I do appreciate Ahmadis and their peaceful way of life.

Now, I would like to ask you something: When you look at how the Qur’an was ‎collected, and compare it to how the Hadith was collected, the conclusion that Mr. ‎Mumin Salih reaches is valid. Hadith is more reliable than the Qur’an.

Paarsurrey says:
‎
Hi friend Ibn Kammuna

I appreciate your words of sympathy for Ahmadis, who are being persecuted by ‎Traditional Muslims for nothing. May God Allah YHWH bless you!
‎
Quran is Word of God revealed/descended on the heart of Muhammad under a ‎remarkable natural system, which no other “Book” in this world has ever had; and that ‎also proves that it is not authored by Muhammad; but it is from God Allah YHWH.
‎
I don’t agree with the information given by Mumin Saleh about the collection of Quran in ‎his write up in the beginning of this discussion. I would like to mention the way the ‎Quran was revealed and that would also dispel any doubts in the mind of viewers of this ‎discussion about Quran:‎

The text of none of the sacred Scriptures, claimed to‎
have been revealed before the Quran, has been preserved intact.‎
They have all been interfered with to such an extent that an
earnest seeker after truth finds it impossible to adopt any of
them as a practical guide for right conduct. In contrast with
this, the text of the Quran has been preserved intact and every
word of it has come down to us as free from interference and
interpolation as when it was revealed to the Holy Prophet
one thousand four hundred years ago.‎

The Quran began to be revealed at the outset of the Mission
of the Holy Prophet. The first revelation, comprising only a
few verses, was received by him in the Hira Cave. Thereafter
the revelation continued till his death. Thus the total period
during which the entire Quran was revealed extended to
twenty-three years. ‎

We know, on the basis of the testimony of
his contemporaries, that in the beginning revelation came to the
Prophet at intervals and in small bits, but as time passed it
grew both in volume and in frequency till in the last years
of his life it swelled into an almost continuous stream. ‎

One reason for this, among others, was that the teachings contained
in this revelation were altogether novel and it was not easy
for people to grasp their full significance. Therefore the Quran
was revealed in small portions in the beginning. But after
the basic principles of Islam had been fully grasped and it
became comparatively easy for people to understand the teachings
and the topics dealt with in the Quran, the revelation began‎
to arrive faster and in larger volume. ‎

The object was that all
Muslims should be enabled fully to grasp the teachings of the
Quran. Another reason was that the number of Muslims was
very small in the beginning and, as God intended that the text
of the Quran should be scrupulously preserved and that it‎
should not become the subject of any doubt, only small portions
were revealed at a time in the beginning and there was always
an interval, sometimes extending to several months, between
the revelation of one group of verses and the next. ‎

In this manner the few Muslims were enabled to commit the whole
revelation to memory, so as to place the matter of the preservation
of the text beyond doubt. When the number of Muslims
began to increase and the safe-guarding and preservation of the
text of the Quran became easier, the revelation began to arrive
faster. ‎

Towards the close of the Holy Prophet's life the number
of Muslims exceeded a hundred thousand and the memorizing
of the Quran became very easy. At that time the revelation
came faster still. By this divine plan the purity of the text of‎
the Quran was placed beyond doubt.‎

During the Caliphate of 'Uthman seven copies of the Quran
were despatched to different parts of the Muslim world and they
in turn became the standard texts from which other copies were‎
made and thereafter in each generation hundreds of thousands
of people have been in the habit of committing the entire text
of the Quran to memory. ‎

Even the bitterest enemies of Islam
do not allege that any interference with the text of the Quran has‎
taken place since the time of 'Uthman. Those who seek to
raise doubts regarding the purity of the text of the Quran direct
their criticism to the period between the death of the Holy
Prophet and the Caliphate of 'Uthman.‎

Whenever any portion of the Quran was revealed to the Holy‎
Prophet, he used to commit it to memory and, as he continuously
recited the Quran from one end to the other, he always
carried the whole of the revealed Quran at all times in his
memory. In addition to this the following devices were‎
adopted for safe-guarding and preserving intact the text of
the Quran :‎

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Introduction-Study-Holy-Quran.pdf

I think it reasonably explains that the text of the Quran as spoken by God Allah YHWH ‎to Muhammad is secure without any doubt.
‎
Love for all; hatred for none.
‎
Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Hatred for all and love only mohammad
Sex with one and all
Kill all and spare the virgins
Ill feeling towards one and all
From infant to woman in grave sex is the only thing she can give and a moslem man can think of
That in short are the principles of islam the evil

"Quran is Word of God revealed/descended on the heart of Muhammad under a ‎remarkable natural system, which no other “Book” in this world has ever had; and that ‎also proves that it is not authored by Muhammad; but it is from God Allah YHWH."

Slow down, man. first explain this "remarkable natural system" before you conlude that as a prove.

# 21. That's the beautiful thing from islam (for man of course). You can do almost anything you like.

- If you want to marry a child/baby/old/young woman: you can
- If you want to possess slaves and sex slaves: you can
- If you want prostitutes: you can, marry 4 wives max, and if you bored, divorce them and marry another. You can also perform temporary marriage anytime you want. And if you die, you get 72 whores.
- If you dislike your wive (because there is no relationship before marriage and muslimah always in burqa, so you can't see anything even her face): you can look whatever excuse you can think of and admonish her and set them aparts and beat her, after that 3 talak. WOW, isn't that cool.
- If you are in bad mood: you can start cursing jews, christian, hindu and the most recent, the west for whatever reason you can think of. That's a holy curse.
- If you want to rape a woman: you can, just be sure noone's looking and you can escape witness requirement in sharia court. Guess who'll get punished, the victim.

kalaan,
don't forget holy screwing the brain of 1.5 unholy billion to make them believe sun sets in muddy water.

paarsurrey
if you follow ahmadis peacefull way of life, you cannot compete with your other holy muslim brother, you should start to get a bit more violence in you.

""remarkable natural system", is that like a day dreaming being put into reality?, if you believe and persist than you can achive?

not surprising, we believe mad ham mo start with a small bits of lie, after few people believe of what he said, then he continued with more divine words, after lot more people being fooled and believe him, he start with more like war commanding verse, when he realise most people have grasp his nonesens, then the verses just comming in the bulk and any time, even after riding maryam in his own wife's house, allah the most flexible.

so ahmadis, if you not start putting violence into part of your practice, you better join us, because sooner or latter you will feel the blessed from your other holy muslim brothers.

I have a few more advantages of islam and pimp allah for you.
1.If you dont like your neighbour and he has a pretty wife, just throw a few burnt pieces of qrand paper in his compound and instigate moronic moslems to kill the fellow even if he is a moslem and screw his wife.If he is a kafir, of course, just mount on his wife.A kafir has no rights in the land of momeens.
2.If you owe money to the bank and they are charging hefty interest, just declare sharia law and stop paying interest!
3.If you have a very pretty daughter in law and want to mount her, just ask your son to go away for a few days!
4.If your wife is not allowing you to suckle the maids breast, just utter the word talaq thrice!
5.You want to have a one night stand, just have mutta marriage.
7.You dont want to work hard, go and bang your head and bonk your madi during working hours.
8.The head moslem is getting on your nerves? No problem.Just say he was cursing mohammad and bingo all oslems are with you!
All the above tricks are true and have been and are being practiced by scum bag moslems in moslem majority countries.

Proud Kaffir and Kaalan:
Do you really think that your later comments add anything constructive to the discussion?

PaarSurrey:
May I also add my condolences on the fact of your sect's (doubtless lethal) oppression by orthodox Muslims.
May I also thank you for your reply.
What you say makes sense - right up to the point that the Sahih Hadith about the collection of the Koran are introduced.
The problem that I see is that here we have pious, devote, learned Islamic scholars of the highest integrity who include as "true" (sahih) in their collections Hadith that tell us how "parts of the Koran were being lost" (because of the casulaties Muslims were taking in their wars), that it was written on leaves and bone, (some leaves eaten by goats), that Uthman ordered the destruction of all earlier recensions (including that of Abu Bakr no less) and that one 'scribe' admitted falsifying words of the Koran, without your prophet noticing.

Now, none of that neccessarily invalidates the "accuracy" of the Koran by itself, but it does contradict it. That fact entitles one to ask what proof there is for the textual purity and integrity of the Koran.
For instance: are there many ancient manuscripts, written in different places, (or parts thereof) that agree? No, there aren't - because all "official" Korans are decended from Uthman's original 7 copies.
Further, given that M was dead before the Koran was compiled, he could not check its "correctness", so even if M had the whole Koran down pat - that is irrelevant.
The question that sticks with me is why Uthman ordered all other recensions destroyed. If 100,000 muslims all knew the Koran by heart, if its text was absolutely guaranteed (as you say paarSurrey) then , by definition, all collections would be identical and so Uthman wouldn't have had to order their destruction.
But he did. The only conclusion that explains this is that the different recensions dis-agreed with each other.
If that is so, then the Koran's purity isn't certain (was Abu Bakr any less well versed in the Koran than the [young] scribe appointed by Uthman?).
That is a totally unacceptable conclusions to (most) Muslims since the Koran tells you it is pure and uncorrupt(able), thus the apologetic gymnastics.

On another point:
The Hadith often record M's actions, if the Sunnah was so well known, why was this?
It seems logical to me that Hadith and Sunna actually grew up together - each supporting the other. Thus variant Hadith for the same 'action' of your prophet.

Constructive When you are dissecting a filth called islam, it's like wading through crap and do you expect any one to come out clean smelling? I think not.You have not read what I wrote at the bottom.All things I wrote did happen to one or the other during my stay in sodi barbaria

‎24. Moooo Says
:
July 2nd, 2009 at 8:47 am ‎

‎“Quran is Word of God revealed/descended on the heart of Muhammad under a ‎‎remarkable natural system, which no other “Book” in this world has ever had; and that ‎‎also proves that it is not authored by Muhammad; but it is from God Allah YHWH.”
‎
Slow down, man. First explain this “remarkable natural system” before you conlude that ‎as a proof.
‎
Paarsurrey says:
‎
Hi frined Moooo

I think my opinion on the remarkable natural system of Quran, which no other ‘Book’ ‎has, would be off-topic here. I am new here, I don’t know how a new thread is started in ‎this forum.Kindly guide me in this connection, and I would start a new thread for that.
‎
Please note that Quran as the word means is a revelation which is most often read from ‎the memory of the heart or mind or brain; it does not necessarily mean to read from a ‎written and bound Book.Quran/Islam/Muhammad never claimed that it was a book that ‎descended from the heaven. Since, the revelation is under a unique system so, in my ‎opinion, it is primarily for this reason that it was also called a book; not that it was ‎necessarily to be written on any cloth, leather piece or leave of a tree or on the paper .
‎
The non-believers asked Muhammad of a miralce, as is mentioned in Quran, that they ‎were ready to believe in Muhammad as a Messenger/Prophet of God Allah YHWH, if he ‎ascended to the heaven or the sky before their very eyes and brought a book from the ‎heaven or sky for their reading. Muhammad was reavealed and guded by God Allah ‎YHWH to answer them, that he was only a human being he could not do that.
‎
The Revelation from the memory of human beings, of their heart and mind and brain has ‎reached us intact from the time of Muhammad to date. It has never eaten by any goat ‎whatsoever, or burnt by anybody, or corrupted by anyone. The system is remarkable and ‎most secure, I think.
‎
Love for all; hatred for none

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

If one belive the Quran was 'revealed' by Allah, it is OK but then its content 'reveals' the identify of Allah as anything but holy/divine. Then who is Allah? He must be anti-divine, all powerful, omnipresent, omniscient, benevolent God. It is not suitable for ordinary human beings but certainly suitable for Muslims and that distinguish them from the rest of the world!

paarsurrey,
try to stay in the topic, but after all islam relating disscusion is one big topic, LIES.

ahmadi sounds like the sects which indulging magic mushroom in part of their ritual.

thats what happend, because mad ham mo didn't have good memory the biblical story in have different contrast than story in quran, quran is corrupted because human memory lilmited, two wrong and one right doesn't mean its true

love for all; hatred for none,
why allah hate unbeliever

‎28. jonc Says:
July 2nd, 2009 at 11:36 pm ‎
‎
What you say makes sense – right up to the point that the Sahih Hadith about the ‎collection of the Koran are introduced.

‎
Paarsurrey says:
‎
Hi friend jonc
‎
As I have mentioned in the earlier post, Quran as the word means was the revelation ‎descended on the heart of Muhammad from God Allah YHWH and he was guaranteed ‎from Him that he need not worry about making strenuous effort to remember the ‎Revelation; he would remember it naturally and he would not forget it. From Muhammad ‎his companions learnt it by heart or committed it to their memory.Writing the revelation ‎was only an auxiliary measure adopted by Muhammad.

‎
It was not made incumbent on Muhammad, in my opinion, by any clear verse in Quran to ‎commit it to writing; I don’t see any such verse in Quran. Muhammad and his ‎companions loved Quran and exactly as the word Quran meant they recited Quran very ‎often, in the prayers and even without it; this is not an unusual thing, upto our times this ‎practice continues among Muslims. The text of Quran was compiled already in the ‎memory of Muhammad and his companions in the same form as it is found in our times ‎without any change. It needed no further compilation or collection.

‎
One could go to any Muslim Mosque in any part of the world; there one could find ‎persons who remember Quran by heart. One may take a copy of Quran with one and ‎request them to recite Quran from their memory. One would find that there is no ‎difference in the written and the recited Quran from the heart.‎
There are so many verses in Quran from God Allah YHWH which say that He had made ‎it very easy to learn Quran and to commit it to memory. The Creator has made the human ‎mind and memory aligned and attuned to remember Quran with ease and convenience. I ‎don’t think there is any other Book in the world of the size of Quran which is committend ‎to memory with love as the Muslims do with Quran, only because it is a natural ‎Revelation from God Allah YHWH and He has taken it on Himself that it would remain ‎secure and protected in all times to come.

‎
The written Quran was and is but a reflection of the loving heart of Muhammad, his ‎companions and the faithful believers in the whole world. Nobody could scratch it out of ‎their hearts; howsoever one tries. Uthman only made it very convenient to understand for ‎those who were not familiar with it , due to the spread of Islam in other parts of the ‎world; his effort are undoubtedly laudable.‎
It is remarkable indeed.

‎
Love for all; hatred for none. Humans are but a family.

‎
Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

[...] – the remarkable Revelation from God Allah YHWH ‎ By paarsurrey http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/06/30/the-quran-and-hadith-which-is-mor...... [...]

33. paarsurrey Says: "From Muhammad ‎his companions learnt it by heart or committed it to their memory.Writing the revelation ‎was only an auxiliary measure adopted by Muhammad. It was not made incumbent on Muhammad, in my opinion, by any clear verse in Quran to ‎commit it to writing; I don’t see any such verse in Quran."

Have you read Sura 96 - The Clot? This was the very first Muhammad is supposed to have received in the cave at Hira outside Mecca where he used to go to meditate.

1."Read: In the name of thy Lord who createth,
2. Createth man from a clot.
3. Read: And thy Lord is the Most Bounteous
4. Who teacheth by the Pen,
5. Teacheth man that which he knew not."

These verses clearly and unequivocally state that Muhammad was instructed to use "the pen" to record and teach the Quran to his followers. End of discussion!

Hi friend Shafee al-Zindiq

Thank you for quoting five verses from Quran; I would like to quote some more verses to make them in all eleven verses for the usual short context:

‏[96:1] بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمـٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ ‏
‎[96:1] In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. ‎
‏[96:1] اللہ کے نام کے ساتھ جو بے انتہا رحم کرنے والا، بِن مانگے دینے والا (اور) بار بار ‏رحم کرنے والا ہے۔ ‏

‏[96:2] اقْرَاْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ الَّذِىْ خَلَقَ‌ۚ‏ ‏
‎[96:2] Convey thou in the name of thy Lord Who created, ‎
‏[96:2] پڑھ اپنے ربّ کے نام کے ساتھ جس نے پیدا کیا۔ ‏

‏[96:3] خَلَقَ الْاِنْسَانَ مِنْ عَلَقٍ‌ۚ‏ ‏
‎[96:3] Created man from a clot of blood. ‎
‏[96:3] اُس نے انسان کو ایک چمٹ جانے والے لوتھڑے سے پیدا کیا۔ ‏

‏[96:4] اقْرَاْ وَرَبُّكَ الْاَكْرَمُۙ‏ ‏
‎[96:4] Convey! And thy Lord is Most Generous, ‎
‏[96:4] پڑھ، اور تیرا ربّ سب سے زیادہ معزز ہے۔ ‏

‏[96:5] الَّذِىْ عَلَّمَ بِالْقَلَمِۙ‏ ‏
‎[96:5] Who taught man by the pen, ‎
‏[96:5] جس نے قلم کے ذریعہ سکھایا۔ ‏

‏[96:6] عَلَّمَ الْاِنْسَانَ مَا لَمْ يَعْلَمْؕ‏ ‏
‎[96:6] Taught man what he knew not. ‎
‏[96:6] انسان کو وہ کچھ سکھایا جو وہ نہیں جانتا تھا۔ ‏

‏[96:7] كَلَّاۤ اِنَّ الْاِنْسَانَ لَيَطْغٰٓىۙ‏ ‏
‎[96:7] Nay! man does indeed transgress, ‎
‏[96:7] خبردار! انسان یقیناً سرکشی کرتا ہے۔ ‏

‏[96:8] اَنْ رَّاٰهُ اسْتَغْنٰىؕ‏ ‏
‎[96:8] Because he thinks himself to be independent. ‎
‏[96:8] (اس لئے) کہ اس نے اپنے آپ کو بے نیاز سمجھا۔ ‏

‏[96:9] اِنَّ اِلٰى رَبِّكَ الرُّجْعٰىؕ‏ ‏
‎[96:9] Surely, unto thy Lord is the return. ‎
‏[96:9] یقیناً تیرے ربّ ہی کی طرف لَوٹ کر جانا ہے۔ ‏

‏[96:10] اَرَءَيْتَ الَّذِىْ يَنْهٰىؕ‏ ‏
‎[96:10] Hast thou seen him who forbids ‎
‏[96:10] کیا تُو نے اُس شخص پر غور کیا جو روکتا ہے؟ ‏

‏[96:11] عَبْدًا اِذَا صَلّٰىؕ‏ ‏
‎[96:11] A servant of Ours when he prays? ‎
‏[96:11] ایک عظیم بندے کو جب وہ نماز پڑھتا ہے۔ ‏

http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=96&verse=10

I agree that there is mention of pen in the above verses; nevertheless there are no instruction contained therein for Muhammad to read a written text or to commit the revelation to writing. The instruction are generally given as a commandment or as doing something or not doing a thing. There is no instruction here to write, or to read from a writing, in my opinion.

All human beings are but a family; love for all, hatred for none.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

[...] Convey! And thy Lord is Most Generous, ‎ By paarsurrey http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/06/30/the-quran-and-hadith-which-is-mor...... [...]

proudkaffir,

Your words alienate, they do not persuade.

Further to my post #22, in this thread, I would like to add further :‎

Whenever any portion of the Quran was revealed to the Holy
Prophet, he used to commit it to memory and, as he continuously
recited the Quran from one end to the other, he always
carried the whole of the revealed Quran at all times in his
memory. In addition to this the following devices were
adopted for safe-guarding and preserving intact the text of
the Quran (in writing also) :‎

‎(I) As soon as a revelation was received by the Holy Prophet‎
it was recorded in writing from his dictation. A number of
persons are known to have been employed by the Holy Prophet
for this purpose. Of these the names of the following fifteen
have been mentioned in the traditions (Fath al-Bari, Vol. 9,‎
p. 19) :‎

I. Zaid bin Thabit.‎
‎2. Ubayy ibn Ka'b.‎
‎3. 'Abdullah bin Sa'd bin Abi Sarh.‎
‎4. Zubair bin al-'Awwam.‎
‎5. Khalid bin Sa'id bin al-'As.‎
‎6. Aban bin Sa'id bin al-'As.‎
‎7. Hanzala bin al-Rabi' al-Asadi.‎
‎8. Mu'aiqib bin Abi Fatima.‎
‎9. 'Abdullah bin Arqam al-Zuhri.‎
‎10. Shurahbil bin Hasana.‎
‎1 I. 'Abdullah bin Rawaha.‎
‎12. Abu Bakr.‎
‎13. 'Umar.‎
‎14. 'Uthman.‎
‎15. 'Ali.‎
Whenever the Holy Prophet received a revelation, he would
send for one of these persons and dictate to him the text of the
revelation he had received.‎

‎(2) As is well known, the five daily congregational prayers are‎
obligatory upon every Muslim and a portion of the Quran must
be recited in each of them so that every Muslim knows some
portion of the Quran by heart. If every hundred out of the
Prophet's Companions who numbered more than one hundred
thousand had between them learnt the whole of the Quran
by heart the entire Quran must have been preserved in the
memory of his Companions a thousand times over.‎

‎(3) The whole of the Law, doctrine, philosophy, moral
precepts and other teachings of Islam are contained in the
Quran. The building up and the fostering of a nation require
the aid of all these. The Holy Prophet used to train Muslims
for the discharge of the multifarious duties and functions
involved in the building up and direction of a civilized and
cultured community. For instance, there were needed judges,‎
jurists, expounders of doctrine and those who explained the
legal and moral injunctions of Islam and these people could not
adequately discharge their functions unless they had learnt the
Quran by heart. All such people, therefore, were under the
necessity of committing the entire Quran to memory.‎

‎(4) The Holy Prophet used always to stress the meritoriousness‎
of committing the Quran to memory, so much so that he is
reported as having said that if a person commits the Quran to
memory he would be saved from the torment of Hell. God
had blessed the Holy Prophet with Companions who were
always eager to acquire merit in every way so that when he made
this announcement very large numbers from among them began
to commit the Quran to memory, including those whose enunciation
was not very clear and who were not men of any learning
at all. Imam Ahmad Hanbal has related on the authority of
‎'Abdullah bin 'Umar that a man came to the Holy Prophet‎
and said to him : "0 Messenger of Allah ! I memorize the
Quran but my mind does not grasp its full meaning." ‎

This shows that not only men of learning but even the common
people were in the habit of committing the Quran to memory.‎
Another tradition, related by Iman Ahmad Hanbal on the
same authority, states that a man brought his son to the Holy‎
Prophet and said : "0 Messenger of Allah ! this son of mine
goes on reciting the Quran the whole day and spends his night
in sleep." The Holy Prophet observed : "Then where is the
occasion for you to worry ? Your son spends the day in the
remembrance of God and instead of committing any transgression
at night spends it in restful sleep." This shows that
even the common people living at a distance from the Holy
Prophet had started the practice of committing the Quran to
memory.‎

‎(5) As the eagerness of the people for memorizing the Quran‎
increased, the Holy Prophet appointed four principal teachers
of the Quran who used to memorize it under the supervision of
the Holy Prophet and then taught other people to commit it to
memory. These four in turn trained a number of other
people who became competent to teach the Quran. These four
were :‎

I. 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud.‎
‎2. Salim Maula Abi Hudhaifa.‎
‎3. Mu'adh bin Jabal.‎
‎4. Ubayy ibn Ka'b.‎

The first two of these were Meccans who had migrated to
Medina and the last two were Ansaris. 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud
used to occupy himself as a labourer, Salim was a freed slave,‎
and Mu'adh and Ubayy were two of the leading men of Medina.‎
Thus the Holy Prophet appointed teachers of the Quran from
among different sections so that nobody should have any
difficulty in approaching them and learning from them. The
Holy Prophet used to say : "Those of you who wish to learn‎
the Quran should learn it from 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud, Salim
Maula Abi Hudhaifa, Mu'adh bin Jabal or Ubayy ibn Ka'b"‎
‎(Muslim). ‎

These four had learnt the whole of the Quran
under the supervision of the Holy Prophet. But many other
Companions of the Holy Prophet had also learnt portions of it
directly from him. It is related that on one occasion when‎
‎'Abdullah bin Mas'ud was reciting the Quran 'Umar pointed
out that a certain word should be pronounced in a particular
way. 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud protested that he had been
taught by the Holy Prophet to pronounce it in the manner in
which he had pronounced it. 'Umar took him to the Holy
Prophet and complained that he did not recite the Quran
correctly. The Holy Prophet asked him to recite the portion
concerning which there was a difference of opinion between the
two and when he recited it the Prophet said he was quite right.‎
Thereupon 'Umar submitted that he had been taught by the
Prophet to pronounce the word differently. The Prophet then
asked him to recite the verse and when he did so, told him that
that was also correct.‎

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Introduction-Study-Holy-Quran.pdf

The written Quran is, therefore, only a reflection of what Muhammad and his companions had committed to their memory originally .

Humans are but a famil; love for all, hatred for none.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

PaarSurrey:
You will recall my comment (in another thread) about the standard of evidence to which I would hold you.
Well then:

Looking at your post above (#37) I note you write: "The written Quran is, therefore, only a reflection of what Muhammad and his companions had committed to their memory originally ."
Now a reflection is a virtual (non-real in other words) image of an object and reflections are usually distorted (no surface is perfectly planar) to some degree.
Are you saying that the Koran is a "non-real image" of what Muhammed and his companions committed to memory?
That is, are you saying that the written Koran is not what Muhammed et al memorised - which seems to concede the debate!

I have actually downloaded and read most of the document found at:
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Introduction-Study-Holy-Quran.pdf

If all its scholarship is as poor as its use of the Bible then it can't be considered in any way as a satisfactory source.
to give just one example of this book's poor scholarship (there are plenty):
The Author uses the Gospel story of the "Woman of Canaan" to imply that Jesus was only interested in the Jews.
It does so by only quoting the a few verses from the middle of the story and omitting the rest. This has the effect of inverting the story's meaning.
(Author quotes Mat.15:24-26, the story is Mat.15:21-28)
(btw was it you who stated that one should quote "the usual 5 verses before and after" to give context?)

Back to the Koran itself:
All the 'stories' about the compilation and memorization of the Koran are either speculative (in the case of the book you so often quote) or dependant on Hadith that were not compiled until ~200+ years after Mo's death.
Let me state that I quite accept that, due to the multiplicity of (essentially) identical Hadith with DIFFERENT Isnads, the authority of the Hadith is quite well established, for the "Sahih" hadith at any rate.

These Hadith (taken as a whole) present a very confusing and contradictory version of events and validity.
1) They give several different companions as being the first to compile the Koran.
2) Claim that at least some of the collections were made for fear that parts of the Koran would be lost due to deaths in the wars of Abu Bakr (et al).
3) Claim that the collections (especially Uthamsn's) were made because of an upsurge in "varient readings" (= different meanings) of Ayats within the Umma.
4) Vary as to how many recensions there were.
5) Do not agree as to which recension was the "best".
6) Demonstrate that not all the companions accepted Uthman's "textus receptus" as correct.
7) State that the Koran was subject to a yearly review - at which bits were added and others removed.
8) Record complaints that Suras had become shorter (ie parts omitted).

I could continue.

Thus there is no clarity as to how, when (or where) the Koran was collected.
There is no clear evidence in Hadith or Sunna that supports the idea that the Koran is exactly as Mohammed originally recited it.

Now I will accept that the Uthmanic Koran is the best that Uthman (through the efforts of Zaid) could do. (Even then, Uthman criticised parts of Zaid's Koran). But I suggest that the Koran, as we have it today, is just that - Zaid's version as 'authorised' by Uthman and so cannot really be Allah's (literal) word.

The only thing 'holy' about the koran is that it is holey.

But! It is important to know it because if one knows it then one will know the intent against them. It would have helped many politicians and others to have read Hitler's Mein Kampf (that was better written) and they might have been able to avoid WWII. Becauae Hitler stated exactly his intent.

As does Islam state its intent in the koran, and hadiths.

So the quran only depends on memory (what if the person lied). That is not very convincing. Even mad mo had forgotten certain verses.

‎38. jonc Says:
July 8th, 2009 at 4:42 pm

Back to the Koran itself:

All the ’stories’ about the compilation and memorization of the Koran are either ‎speculative (in the case of the book you so often quote) or dependant on Hadith that ‎were not compiled until ~200+ years after Mo’s death.‎

Paarsurrey says:‎

I don’t agree with you. Quran is not dependant on Hadith. I give here verses from ‎Quran describing the form Quran was to be descended and protected:‎

‏5:17] لَا تُحَرِّكْ بِهٖ لِسَانَكَ لِتَعْجَلَ بِهٖؕ‏ ‏
‎[75:17] Move not thy tongue with this revelation that thou mayest hasten to preserve ‎it. ‎
‏[75:17] تُو اس کی قراءت کے وقت اپنی زبان کو اس لئے تیز حرکت نہ دے کہ تُو اسے جلد جلد یاد ‏کرے۔ ‏

‏[75:18] اِنَّ عَلَيْنَا جَمْعَهٗ وَقُرْاٰنَهٗۚ ۖ‏ ‏
‎[75:18] Surely upon Us rests its collection and its recital. ‎
‏[75:18] یقیناً اس کا جمع کرنا اور اس کی تلاوت ہماری ذمہ داری ہے۔ ‏

‏[75:19] فَاِذَا قَرَاْنٰهُ فَاتَّبِعْ قُرْاٰنَهٗ‌ۚ‏ ‏
‎[75:19] So when We recite it, then follow thou its recital. ‎
‏[75:19] پس جب ہم اُسے پڑھ چکیں تو تُو اس کی قراءت کی پیروی کر۔ ‏

‏[75:20] ثُمَّ اِنَّ عَلَيْنَا بَيَانَهٗؕ‏ ‏
‎[75:20] Then upon Us rests the expounding thereof. ‎
‏[75:20] پھر یقیناً اُس کا واضح بیان بھی ہمارے ہی ذمہ ہے۔ ‏

http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=75&verse=20‎

It is evident from the above verses that the Creator God Allah YHWH that Muhammad ‎was not even allowed to make a non-natural effort to memorize Quran. It was to be very ‎naturally revealed on Muhammad and it was to be secured by the Creator God Allah ‎YHWH in the form He best designed for its verbal text and also for its meaning; as God ‎Allah YHWH was its author, and not Muhammad.
‎
Muslim had been and are very sensitive on the issue of the verbal text of Quran; so ‎nobody could ever alter it, not even a Caliph or whatever the status of such a person; ‎from amongst the Muslims or the non-Muslims. Muslims the world over always rejected ‎such moves in the past and would always reject such moves even now and the future.
‎
One part of Quran supports and explains other parts of the Quran; and hence it enjoys an ‎inbuilt system, which cannot be disturbed by anybody; not even a Hadith could change ‎the text of Quran; such a Hadith would be interpreted for meanings that support Quran or ‎such a Hadith would be rejected altogether.‎
Quran is the first and the foremost source of guidance for the Muslims and would remain ‎as such.
‎
All humans are but a family; love for all, hatred for none.
‎
Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

YHWH is the Tetragrammaton of Jews, and Admadi is no Jew. YHWH means Jehovah. Jews thought god's name was too holy to pronounce so they used initials.

Ahmadi stop playing. Sura 3:106 said black face is cursed in your books or NOI. All of you serve allah the Devil, the greatest liar, deceiver, schemer and planner to lie deceive and scheme. Sura 3:54.

Raisin head:
You are right in saying YHWH is the tetragrammation.
YHWH is probably pronounced "Yah-way".
"Jehovah" comes from combining this tetragrammaton with the vowel pointing for "Adonai".
Put the two together and you can see it: JaHoWaiH. (w = v here).
To be fair, this isn't universally accepted, but most scholars believe that "Jehovah" is a 'compound form'.

Paarsurrey:
With respect, I think you misread what I wrote.
I said "all the STORIES ..." I was not referring to Koranic verses.
With regard to the Koranic verses:
1. Can we have the 5 verses before and after you tell the rest of us to quote, please? (Otherwise, this smacks of double-standards.)
2. My Koran (Khan-Hilali version) has the verses you quoted 1 lower in number (not un-typical of the non-standard versification of the Koran).
Looking at the context of the preceeding verses, the first verse you quoted, when stripped of interpolations becomes "Move not your tongue concerning [it] to make haste therewith". This seems to refer to the previous verse about making excuses for bad deeds, rather than the Koran itself, but I accept that that is a matter of interpretation. It just depends where the context switches.
3. The rest of the quote I will agree with. However, the Koran saying that the Mohammed will be able to recite it actually says nothing about the accuracy of the "collections" made after the death of Mohammed. Indeed, verse 17(KH) or 18 (your quote) could be taken to mean that only Allah may collect the Koran - so what Abu Bakr, Uthman etc did in "collecting" it was wrong!
This would clearly make their actions human rather than 'inspired' and thus prone to error.
Thus it seems to me that either:
a) these verses do not refer to the Koran as we have it today, or
b) that Muslims should never have written it down at all.

I will also re-state a previous point:
the Hadith clearly show that there was considerable dis-agreement as to the "verbal text" (as you put it) of the Koran with various Muslims arguing for the supremacy of their collections against Uthman's 'official' redaction.
So Muslim sensitivity to the text was not one of unanimity in the earliest days.
Granted, today, Muslims will defend the text 'to the death' as it were.
This, it seems to me, is because Muslims have hung so much authority on the Koran being the LITERAL word of God that no textual criticism can be tolerated.
Such criticism is anathema since, if allowed, the fear is that it would undermine this absolute position and so 'reduce' the authority of the Koran to be on a par with other religious texts (in the eyes of said Muslims).
In turn, this would inevitably result in Muslims questioning a lot of the other materials - Hadith, Sharia etc.
Personally, I think that many Muslims are terrified that scholarly criticism of their texts would cause the collapse of the whole edifice of Islam as they know it. Hence the stridency - and often violence - with which they 'defend' it.

The emphasis on the "purity", "incorruptability" and literality of the Koran backs Muslims into a corner from which there is no rational escape. Muslims have made the literality of the truth of the Koran the primary pillar (not to be confused with the "five pillars" btw) of their faith.
This reminds me of the ryhmn:
"Here lies a fallen god. His fall was not a small one. We did but build his pedestal - a narrow and a tall one."
The trajedy here is that it the proponents, rather than the opponents, that have done the pedestal building.

(BTW - if the Koran is all Muslims claim it to be there should be no fear of scholarly textual criticism, such criticism would support the claims.)

Paar Surrey wrote:
" not even a Hadith could change ‎the text of Quran;"
Here we agree.
Though I am reminded of the "stoning verse" which the Hadith says was in the Koran at one point, but which the Koran does not have.
Granted, the hadith on this has not changed the "text of the Quran".
What it has done is arguably worse - it has "abrogated" a verse in the Koran.
(This is demonstable given the number of stonings for adultery that are seen, which is supported by Sharia Law.)
This begs the questions:
1. Which is the higher authority, Koran or Hadith?
2. If the Koran is what Muslims claim, how can 'Allah's literal word' be abrogated by mere humans (no matter how worthy)?

Hi friend jonc

Quran is the primary source of guidance of Islam, whatever the denomination. No ‎verse of Quran is abrogated; I think you might have misunderstood something. ‎Hadith is only to be accepted if it supports Quran and the Acts of Muhammad; for ‎which there was an instruction in Quran, and which needed demonstration from ‎Muhammad, it is called Sunnah. If there was no commandment, there won't be any ‎Sunnah.‎

Quran is an amazing book; it explains everything concerning guidance itself and does ‎not need anything extaneous.‎

Quran is the higher authority; and Hadith only a servant of Quran.‎

Thaks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Hi ‎

I think my friend here in this forum need to know more about the compilation and ‎collection of Quran; so I continue from my previous posts on this subject: ‎

This shows that in addition to the four Companions whom
the Holy Prophet used to teach the whole of the Quran there
were others who used to learn portions of it from him. 'Umar's
submission that he had been taught to pronounce a certain
word in a particular way shows that he, too, used to learn
portions of the Quran from the Holy Prophet himself.‎

The difference that arose between 'Umar and 'Abdullah bin
Mas'fid had no reference to any variation in the text of the
Quran. It related only to a vowel point. Vowel points are
a peculiarity of the Arabic language and in the case of certain
verbs a variation in respect of vowel points is permissible and
does not affect the meaning. ‎

For instance, in some cases
a reading both with an 'a' and with an 'i' is permissible either
as a general alternative reading or as a tribal or family practice.‎
But the meaning in each case is the same. The Holy Prophet,‎
recognizing such practices, gave permission under divine
dispensation for the adoption of alternative enunciations, as
this had not the effect of altering the meaning or sense of the
words. ‎

As non-Arabic-speaking peoples are not familiar with
this peculiarity of the Arabic language, they are apt to fall into
the misconception that such alternative enunciations amounted
to variations in the text and that the Holy Prophet was in the
habit of teaching certain verses of the Quran in one way to one
person and in a different way to another. In fact nothing of
the kind ever took place. ‎

The variations which have become
the subject-matter of discussion were not variations either of the
text of a verse or even variations of a word. They were all
cases of enunciation of vowel points which did not in any way
alter the meaning or significance of a word. The only difference‎
was that some tribes or families, being accustomed to pronounce
certain verbs in particular declensions in a certain manner, were
permitted to do so.‎

In addition to the four principal teachers of the Quran who‎
had been trained by the Holy Prophet himself there were certain
other well-known reciters who had committed the whole of
the Quran to memory. ‎

Among these were :‎
‎(I) Zaid bin Thabit, who was also one of the recorders of‎
the revelation.‎
‎(2) Abu Zaid Qais bin Al-Sakan, an Ansari, who belonged
to the Banu Najjar, which was the tribe of the
Prophet's mother (Fath al-Bari, Vol. 9, p. 49).‎
‎(3) Abu al-Darda' Ansari (Bukhari).‎
‎(4) Abu Bakr, concerning whom also it is related that from‎
the very beginning he was in the habit of committing
the Quran to memory.‎
‎(5) 'Ali not only knew the Quran by heart but shortly after‎
the Holy Prophet's death undertook to arrange the
Quran in the order in which it had been revealed.‎

‎(6) Nasa'i relates that 'Abdullah bin 'Umar also knew the‎
Quran by heart and used to recite the whole of it
in the course of one night. When the Holy Prophet
got to know of this he told him to complete the
recitation in the course of a month and not to
attempt to recite the whole of the Quran in one
night as this might prove burdensome for him.‎

‎(7) Abu 'Ubaid relates that out of the Muhajirin the
following had committed the Quran to memory :‎
Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman, 'Ali, Talha, Sa'd, Ibn
Mas'ud, Hudhaifa, Salim, Abu Huraira, 'Abdullah
‎'bin Sa'ib, 'Abdullah bin 'Umar and 'Abdullah‎
bin 'Abbas.‎

And out of the women :‎
‎'A'isha, Hafsa and Umm Salma.‎
Most of these had committed the Quran to memory during the
Prophet's lifetime and some of them after his death. Ibn
Abi Dawud relates in his book, the Al-Shari'ah, that Tamim
bin Aus al-Dari and 'Uqba bin 'Amir from among the Muhajirin
had also committed the Quran to memory. Other
historians include in this list 'Amr bin al-'As and Abu Musa
Ash'ari.‎

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Introduction-Study-Holy-Quran.pdf

All human beings are just like a family and must all be loved and not hated.‎

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim ‎

paarsurrey wrote, 'May God Allah YHWH bless you'

Please show us where your allah is named either Yahweh, or YHWH. YOu can use the koran, hadith or sira.

No where is allah referred to with such a name.

But, I do know you from a different forum, CAF. And you know the arguments about your allah not being the same God of Israel, and YHWH being brought up. So, my first guess is that you are now trying to tie allah to YHWH with people who are not discussing the differences between Judaism, Christianity and islam.

The one problem I have with this is the pipe dream you, and those like you, have in wishing that allah was the same as the God of Israel - even some of our own would just rather accept muslim's wishes than do the research themselves to find that it just is not true - is that you cannot ignore the atrocities that mohammed said and did. Maybe one day you will realize the violence directed at Ahamdis are exactly what mohammed and his allah were all about - anyone who disagreed with them were called either unbelivers, or hypocrites, and therefore due the 'fires of hell', and muslims doing whatever they want to you until you believe as they do or die.

So the taqiyya you do, believing in mohammed and his allah, and trying to tell us that the texts are the opposite of what they do indeed say doesn't serve you well. Since anyone who is truly peaceful wouldn't believe in such an evil doer as mohammed, nor defend such an indefensible position.

[...] http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/06/30/the-quran-and-hadith-which-is-mor... [...]