Re: First copy of the Qur’an
PCG: those are two of the very beautiful verses of Quran and there is no way they were added falsely… Allah:swt: Himself declares that He:swt: will never let anyone edit the Quran then to think of such a thing is like not Believing in Allah:swt:
15:9 We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).
Re: First copy of the Qur’an
Anyone who thinks otherwise do not believe in the true prophethood of Sarkaar-e-Dau Aalam, Khatam-ur-Rusul, Sarwar-e-Kaainaat, Daanaa-e-kul, Ahmed-e-Mujtaba, Hadhrat Muhammad Mustafa Bin Abdullah :saw:
Re: First copy of the Qur’an
beta jee, it is universally agreed upon that Quran has been unchanged since its revelation… not only muslims, but non-muslim research has also led to the same conclusion…
There are some major differences between the type of proof one can provide for the Gospel being the words of Jesus p and the Quran being the words of Mohammad p. For example, Mohammad p and his disciples r, Abu Bakr, Umer, Uthman and Ali etc were not just religious figures. They were well known military and political figures that conquered and ruled vast empires, as well as propogators of the religion. Large number of Jews, Christians and Persians fought them and were subjects in their vast empire. Hence, the existence and relationship between the Prophet p and his disciples r is a part of secular history that was common knowledge in the public domain. When preservation of the Quran is attributed to these disciples it brings with it secular weight of a known people, with the financial and political means to preserve their text. The next and more important question is, why would you think these are not the word of Mohammad p? What great information is contained in the Quran that makes you doubt it was authored when and how the followers of Islam claim it was authored? In the case of the scribes of the NT, they claim to record the words of Jesus, a man who walked on water, healed lepers and raised dead to life. His very existence is hard to swallow compared to a man who merely claimed to be a prophet, wrote a book and was a military and political leader of the Arabs. Next is the question about the disciples of Jesus. Remember these are men who claim to follow a man who walks on water and raised people from the dead. Who were they and where did they live? What secular evidence do we have of their existence? How were they related to the scribes of the NT? Do you see how it becomes harder and harder to believe that the NT contains the word of someone known as Jesus compared to the Quran?
Thus, it depends on what type of evidence you require to believe a book hasnt changed since Mohammad p transmitted it. If you are extremely suspicious, perhaps nothing will convince you short of you being there to see it. However, reasonable people look for reasonable secular evidence.
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
AQ: That's silly. The issue of fallibility/infallibility first of all is a debate for another thread - don't derail a thread. Secondly, its an issue that is of massive debate within scholarly circles. Many don't believe the Prophet was infallible. Do you know what the meaning of infallible is? There is only one such being, and that is God. The Prophet, like many other Prophets only came close to this characteristic of God. So yes, in comparison to us humans, relatively speaking, he is a real role model. But you can't equate him with God.
AQ and others: Why would the first copy be destroyed then? What is your answer to this question?
Re: First copy of the Qur’an
I so should be doing other things today, but this topic has be excited. Here’s another interpretation.
http://www.themodernreligion.com/basic/KNOW.htm#caliph
The essay basically says that the empire was expanding, and people of different cultures were reciting the Quran and they all had different accents. So the new Quran that uthman compiled had accent marks to standardize the Quran. The old copies were burnt, including the original compilation, because they didn’t want the trend of different pronunciations growing and being used all over the place - to avoid confusion, essentially.
Re: First copy of the Qur’an
PCG: There were 7 different type of recitations of Quran due to 7 different dialects of the language and hence the way certain words were written were different…
During the time of Hadhrat Usman:razi:, he had it organised in one dialect which Prophet:saw: sued to speak and due to the fact that Islam was reaching to Non-Arabic speaking people, he:razi: made sure that all muslims are on the same dialect for any future misunderstandings…
to understand that, you need to know the history… If you can understand urdu, May THIS help you..
:jazak:
PS:
kee Muhammad:saw: say wafa Tu nay tau Hum teraY haiN
Yeh JahaaN cheez hai kiyaa, Loh-o-Qalam teray haiN
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
to make up lies about and bad mouth the rasul's beloved companion hazrat uthman (ra) is a crime all by it's self
but to say that the Quran was edited by him is a huge sin because as ALLAH has said
[quote]
We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption). {15:9}
[/quote]
also I clicked on your link... and now it all makes perfect sense
the site is by followers of Rashad Khalifa... the self proclaimed messenger and what you read was written by him
so do some research on Rashad Khalifa
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
AQ stick to facts, not shairee.
Yes, I've come across the same explanation of the 7 dialects. From some website that even went so far as to explicitly show which words were written down differently - its the same words, but different dialect.
The only two verses of debate are the ones I posted. I dont know why they are of debate really. I do know that when the verses were being compiled, the earliest companions were very careful so that the words of the Prophet were not mixed in with Quranic verses.
The two verses of debate are, by some sources, said to be hadith material rather than Quranic. I don't know. I'm just telling you what some of the debates are out there.
Like I said, it makes no difference to me. Those verses are harmless.
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
Shiaim
The Qur'an is incomplete and distorted. The original Qur'an had 17,000 verses. Hence 2/3 of the Qur'an is missing. The original Qur'an, compiled by Hadhrat Ali (Radhiallaahu Anhu) would be brought back by Imaam Mahdi.
Can any shias here confirm if this is true in their belief system?
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
and when I mean research I don't mean that you should just read his follower's lie-filled site
Re: First copy of the Qur’an
^ The internet is so filled with Bakhwaas its unbelievable. I came across one that said the Quran was written by the Prophet’s own hand.
He didn’t know how to write!
Awww, man. You know what I think it is? I think there is some conspiracy by some early meccans or medinians or SOMEONE that tried to do some early masti.
Its hard to trace it back though, because its covered up with so much bull!
Re: First copy of the Qur’an
Reason why Hazrat Uthman had to recompile the Quran was based on Islams growth into territories with different dialects. Centers of excellence or power bases were Hijaz, Damascus and Kufa. All tree had differing dialects, thus the problem occurred where ppl started to differ and complaints were made. Thus the decision to reorganize and standardize.
It is said that the Quraish dialect was supposed to be the chosen version where disputes arose. Reason, Prophet was from the Ahle-e-Quraish who had their own peculiar dialect compared to the arab speaking ppl from Kufa and Damascus.
Reason why it is considered to be taboo has been substantiated by my erstwhile colleagues who hv referenced the Quran for their dictum.
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
Reason why it is considered to be taboo has been substantiated by my erstwhile colleagues who hv referenced the Quran for their dictum.
Come again?
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
yea that last part made no sense
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
also pcg if you were wondering why rashad khalifa would say that the verses were made up... it's because it did not fit in with his theory of the number 19
he had this theory that proved that the Quran was the word of god..some mathematical jumbo I don't know too much about.. but later on he recalculated and his calculation proved to be wrong so he went on to claim that quran had verses put in by men... which ALLAH said wouldn't happen
also the zabar zair that we see now in the quran were added so non arabs could pronounce the letters and words.. it is not an addition that changes the QURAN because the meaning remains the same
Re: First copy of the Qur’an
PCG: that shaairee had a meaning.. clever that you ignored the audio link 
anyway, thanks Khatmal for pointing out that it was from the cursed Rashad Khalifa..
He was among one of the imposters (dajjal) for which Prophet:saw: foretold us.
As for believing in what he said about two verses of Surah At Taubah conversly means that one does not have faith and believ in 15:9 the words of God..
Re: First copy of the Qur’an
let me quote what you wrote in the same topic:
BTW, heres another question. Why Usman ordered to burn all copies of Quran other then he compiled?
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
okay, thanks for clearing that up, Khatmal. Like I said when I first looked that essay over - it doesn't make much sense for me why its such a big deal - those verses are harmless.
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
zer01 - I'm trying to find answers. So, yes, I'm asking the shias here who should know enough about their own faith to clear up what I'm finding on the matter. :)
I dont know why he burnt that original copy. I'd like to know too. Both the shia and the sunni answers seem wishy washy to me. Sunnis say so that there would be no confusion and no future fights over the issue. If that was the case, he shouldn't have destroyed it. He should have preserved it so that everyone could see that the only thing changed was that the dialect was standardized. So that no one could make any claims that verses were added/deleted changed.
The shias say because there were important verses on how Ali and his progeny would have full authority to rule in the line of the prophet. But that borders on a monarchy basically, and that was pretty much what the Prophet fought against in his life. He didn't want one tribe to rule all. His system was more of an equality-based political system. So, the shia claims don't fit in well at all.
What puzzles me most is that its never really been clear in the history as to who was doing what after the Prophet's death. My hunch is that there were a few people who were not real muslims at heart who did quite a bit of gharbar in the initial days.
Well, not surprising really. There's always someone trying to ruin something good.
Re: First copy of the Qur'an
PCG if u listen to shiaas u will end up learning that the actual copy of the Quran was burried with Ali (ra) and all this time the stupid muslims have been following some adulterated version of it and Allah has not been able to fulfill His promise to keep the Quran free from alterations....
also u will end up concluding that Quran had been revealed only for Ali (ra) and his family and when they went, they took it with them and when the hidden imam wakes up from his hibernation he will bring it back with him....
imagine what ppl wud call him for bringing a new (unknown) Quran!!!!