Origins of the Koran

[abu afak]

Muslims like to Claim that while other Holy Books are written by man, the Koran is 'perfect' and 'as delivered' by God.
That, of course, is Ludicrous for various reasons. Not least of which the book is cobbled together from various dubious sources. Much of it lost and certainly not the word of any god in any case.
And there is strong evidence, the earliest known Korans, the "Sana'a Hoard", are 'Palimpsests', written over old and altered text.

From: The Origins of the Koran,
Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book
Ed. Ibn Warraq. Prometheus Books
The Origins of the Koran Ed. Ibn Warraq. Prometheus Books

I. Introduction

"....While modern Muslims may be committed to an Impossibly conservative position, Muslim scholars of the early years of Islam were far more flexible, Realizing that parts of the Koran were Lost, Perverted, and that there were many Thousand variants which made it impossible to talk of Koran.

For example, As-Suyuti (died 1505), one of the most famous and revered of the commentators of the Koran, quotes Ibn Umar al Khattab as saying:
"Let No one of you say that he has acquired the entire Quran, for how does he know that it is all. Much of the Quran has been Lost, thus let him say, "I have acquired of it what is available" -Suyuti, Itqan, part 3, page 72).

Aisha the favorite wife of the Prophet, says, also according to a tradition recounted by as-Suynti,
"During the time of the Prophet, the chapter of the Parties used to be Two Hundred verses when read. When Uthman edited the copies of the Quran, only the current (verses) were recorded" (73).

As-Suyuti also tells this story about Uba ibn Ka'b, one of the great companions of Muhammad:
"This famous companion asked one of the Muslims,
"How many verses in the chapter of the Parties?" He said,
"Seventy-three verses." He (Uba) told him, "It used to be almost equal to the chapter of the Cow (about 286 verses) and included the verse of the stoning". The man asked, "What is the verse of the Stoning?" He (Uba) said, "If an old man or woman committed adultery, stone them to death."

As noted earlier, since there was No single document collecting all the revelations, after Muhammad's death in 632 C.E., many of his followers tried to gather all the known revelations and write them down in codex form.
Soon we had the codices of several scholars....."

".....The problem was aggravated by the fact that the consonantal text was unpointed, that is to say, the dots that distinguish, for example, a "b" from a "t" or a "th" were missing. Several other letters (f and q; j, h, and kh; s and d; r and z; s and sh; d and dh, t and z) were indistinguishable.
In other words, the Koran was written in a scripta defectiva.
As a result, a great many variant readings were possible according to the way the text was pointed (had the dots added).

Vowels presented an even Worse problem. Originally, the Arabs had no signs for the short vowels: the Arab script is consonantal. ....using different vowels, of course, rendered different readings. The scripta plena, which allowed a fully voweled and pointed text, was not perfected until the late 9th century....

The problems posed by the scripta defectiva inevitably led to the growth of different centers with their own variant traditions of how the texts should be pointed or vowelized. Despite Uthman's order to destroy all texts other than his own, it is evident that the Older codices survived...."

EDIT: Note the 'Sunni Man' TROLLING Below. (now THRICE)
This is a very Valid String topic for this section and I prefaced the aricle with Why it is[/u].
"AND..." is a NOT a valid response, merely a Juvenile Wisecrack because he doesn't like the content.
Pretend you're an adult and Post ON TOPIC please.
`

 

[Sunni Man]

And?? .....

 

[Ancient lion]

Most Christians believe that, while the Bible is holy scripture, it was written by various prophets and disciples. To Muslims, the Koran is different.

"For Muslims, the Koran is the literal word of god," says Dagli. "They don't consider Muhammad to be the author of the Koran. It came straight down from heaven, and you won't find a Muslim who would say otherwise. That's non-negotiable."
- See more at: IslamiCity.com - The Origins of a Holy Book

The Origin of the Quran

 

[abu afak]

So what we have are TWO Muslims CANNOT respond coherently; cannot discuss their own book, the Unholy/quite Mundane and Kwazy Koran.
The Same Koran that's ordered by Chapter Size (Long to Short) instead of Chronologically.

Wiki:
The chapters are Arranged roughly in order of Descending Size therefore the arrangement of the Qur'an is Neither Chronological nor Thematic.

What the Hell is that?
Ostensibly revealed in perfection/Complete form to Big Mo, yet obviously just cobbled together.
Very possibly 'arranged' by someone who was illiterate, who could just see the Amount of text.
`

 

[Luddly Neddite]

**shrug**

All religion is human-made.

All religions' user manuals/how-to's/bibles were written by humans.

What does it really matter?

 

[Shaarona]

Muslims like to Claim that while other Holy Books are written by man, the Koran is 'perfect' and 'as delivered' by God.
That, of course, is Ludicrous for various reasons. Not least of which the book is cobbled together from various dubious sources. Much of it lost and certainly not the word of any god in any case.
And there is strong evidence, the earliest known Korans, the "Sana'a Hoard", are 'Palimpsests', written over old and altered text.

From: The Origins of the Koran,
Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book
Ed. Ibn Warraq. Prometheus Books
The Origins of the Koran Ed. Ibn Warraq. Prometheus Books

I. Introduction

"....While modern Muslims may be committed to an Impossibly conservative position, Muslim scholars of the early years of Islam were far more flexible, Realizing that parts of the Koran were Lost, Perverted, and that there were many Thousand variants which made it impossible to talk of Koran.

For example, As-Suyuti (died 1505), one of the most famous and revered of the commentators of the Koran, quotes Ibn Umar al Khattab as saying:
"Let No one of you say that he has acquired the entire Quran, for how does he know that it is all. Much of the Quran has been Lost, thus let him say, "I have acquired of it what is available" -Suyuti, Itqan, part 3, page 72).

Aisha the favorite wife of the Prophet, says, also according to a tradition recounted by as-Suynti,
"During the time of the Prophet, the chapter of the Parties used to be Two Hundred verses when read. When Uthman edited the copies of the Quran, only the current (verses) were recorded" (73).

As-Suyuti also tells this story about Uba ibn Ka'b, one of the great companions of Muhammad:
"This famous companion asked one of the Muslims,
"How many verses in the chapter of the Parties?" He said,
"Seventy-three verses." He (Uba) told him, "It used to be almost equal to the chapter of the Cow (about 286 verses) and included the verse of the stoning". The man asked, "What is the verse of the Stoning?" He (Uba) said, "If an old man or woman committed adultery, stone them to death."

As noted earlier, since there was No single document collecting all the revelations, after Muhammad's death in 632 C.E., many of his followers tried to gather all the known revelations and write them down in codex form.
Soon we had the codices of several scholars....."

".....The problem was aggravated by the fact that the consonantal text was unpointed, that is to say, the dots that distinguish, for example, a "b" from a "t" or a "th" were missing. Several other letters (f and q; j, h, and kh; s and d; r and z; s and sh; d and dh, t and z) were indistinguishable.
In other words, the Koran was written in a scripta defectiva.
As a result, a great many variant readings were possible according to the way the text was pointed (had the dots added).

Vowels presented an even Worse problem. Originally, the Arabs had no signs for the short vowels: the Arab script is consonantal. ....using different vowels, of course, rendered different readings. The scripta plena, which allowed a fully voweled and pointed text, was not perfected until the late 9th century....

The problems posed by the scripta defectiva inevitably led to the growth of different centers with their own variant traditions of how the texts should be pointed or vowelized. Despite Uthman's order to destroy all texts other than his own, it is evident that the Older codices survived...."

EDIT: Note the 'Sunni Man' TROLLING Below.
This is a very Valid String topic for this section "And..." I prefaced it with Why.
"AND..." is a NOT a valid response, merely a Juvenile Wisecrack because he doesn't like the content.
Pretend you're an adult and Post ON TOPIC please.
`

Ibn Warrag is a total fake.. Check his bio....

I have no issues with your opinions.. but I would ask that you check your sources.

 

[Desperado]

Interesting read on the Koran

An Objective Look at the Qu'ran/Koran by a former Muslim
Objective Quran Study

 

[abu afak]

Muslims like to Claim that while other Holy Books are written by man, the Koran is 'perfect' and 'as delivered' by God.
That, of course, is Ludicrous for various reasons. Not least of which the book is cobbled together from various dubious sources. Much of it lost and certainly not the word of any god in any case.
And there is strong evidence, the earliest known Korans, the "Sana'a Hoard", are 'Palimpsests', written over old and altered text.

From: The Origins of the Koran,
Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book
Ed. Ibn Warraq. Prometheus Books
The Origins of the Koran Ed. Ibn Warraq. Prometheus Books

I. Introduction

"....While modern Muslims may be committed to an Impossibly conservative position, Muslim scholars of the early years of Islam were far more flexible, Realizing that parts of the Koran were Lost, Perverted, and that there were many Thousand variants which made it impossible to talk of Koran.

For example, As-Suyuti (died 1505), one of the most famous and revered of the commentators of the Koran, quotes Ibn Umar al Khattab as saying:
"Let No one of you say that he has acquired the entire Quran, for how does he know that it is all. Much of the Quran has been Lost, thus let him say, "I have acquired of it what is available" -Suyuti, Itqan, part 3, page 72).

Aisha the favorite wife of the Prophet, says, also according to a tradition recounted by as-Suynti,
"During the time of the Prophet, the chapter of the Parties used to be Two Hundred verses when read. When Uthman edited the copies of the Quran, only the current (verses) were recorded" (73).

As-Suyuti also tells this story about Uba ibn Ka'b, one of the great companions of Muhammad:
"This famous companion asked one of the Muslims,
"How many verses in the chapter of the Parties?" He said,
"Seventy-three verses." He (Uba) told him, "It used to be almost equal to the chapter of the Cow (about 286 verses) and included the verse of the stoning". The man asked, "What is the verse of the Stoning?" He (Uba) said, "If an old man or woman committed adultery, stone them to death."

As noted earlier, since there was No single document collecting all the revelations, after Muhammad's death in 632 C.E., many of his followers tried to gather all the known revelations and write them down in codex form.
Soon we had the codices of several scholars....."

".....The problem was aggravated by the fact that the consonantal text was unpointed, that is to say, the dots that distinguish, for example, a "b" from a "t" or a "th" were missing. Several other letters (f and q; j, h, and kh; s and d; r and z; s and sh; d and dh, t and z) were indistinguishable.
In other words, the Koran was written in a scripta defectiva.
As a result, a great many variant readings were possible according to the way the text was pointed (had the dots added).

Vowels presented an even Worse problem. Originally, the Arabs had no signs for the short vowels: the Arab script is consonantal. ....using different vowels, of course, rendered different readings. The scripta plena, which allowed a fully voweled and pointed text, was not perfected until the late 9th century....

The problems posed by the scripta defectiva inevitably led to the growth of different centers with their own variant traditions of how the texts should be pointed or vowelized. Despite Uthman's order to destroy all texts other than his own, it is evident that the Older codices survived...."

EDIT: Note the 'Sunni Man' TROLLING Below.
This is a very Valid String topic for this section "And..." I prefaced it with Why.
"AND..." is a NOT a valid response, merely a Juvenile Wisecrack because he doesn't like the content.
Pretend you're an adult and Post ON TOPIC please.
`

Ibn Warrag is a total fake.. Check his bio....

I have no issues with your opinions.. but I would ask that you check your sources.

I know his Bio and I consider him Excellent.
YOU, OTOH, are a Fraud.
Perhaps you'd like to take Specific Issue with anything he's said in that post... or anything I said in the Next?

I didn't think so.

`

 

[HenryBHough]

If Obama is as personally close to the King of Saudi Arabia as he appears then this thread could get us all stoned....at the very least.

 

[Sunni Man]

I know his Bio and I consider him Excellent.
Perhaps you'd like to take specific issue with anything he's said in that post or anything I said in the Next?

Ibn Warrag, (his fake pen name) is an Islamophobic idiot and a fraud.

And that is being polite.........

 

[Hollie]

Most Christians believe that, while the Bible is holy scripture, it was written by various prophets and disciples. To Muslims, the Koran is different.

"For Muslims, the Koran is the literal word of god," says Dagli. "They don't consider Muhammad to be the author of the Koran. It came straight down from heaven, and you won't find a Muslim who would say otherwise. That's non-negotiable."
- See more at: IslamiCity.com - The Origins of a Holy Book

The Origin of the Quran

That link is pretty much standard fare and recites a lot of boilerplate propaganda.

 

[Hollie]

I know his Bio and I consider him Excellent.
Perhaps you'd like to take specific issue with anything he's said in that post or anything I said in the Next?

Ibn Warrag, (his fake pen name) is an Islamophobic idiot and a fraud.

And that is being polite.........

You're too befuddled to be able to comment coherently.

Otherwise, Ibn Warrag is a different historical character.

Lordy, but you're a moron. .........

 

[Sunni Man]

I know his Bio and I consider him Excellent.
Perhaps you'd like to take specific issue with anything he's said in that post or anything I said in the Next?

Ibn Warrag, (his fake pen name) is an Islamophobic idiot and a fraud.

And that is being polite.........

You're too befuddled to be able to comment coherently.

Otherwise, Ibn Warrag is a different historical character.

Please try to keep up with the discussion Poindexter. .....

The Ibn Warrag referred to in post #8 is the Islamophobic loon; not the historical figure.

Geeeze you are stupid.......

 

[Hollie]

Ibn Warrag, (his fake pen name) is an Islamophobic idiot and a fraud.

And that is being polite.........

You're too befuddled to be able to comment coherently.

Otherwise, Ibn Warrag is a different historical character.

Please try to keep up with the discussion Poindexter. .....

The Ibn Warrag referred to in post #8 is the Islamophobic loon; not the historical figure.

Geeeze you are stupid.......

Well, geeeeeze, moron. Obviously you're too thick to understand there was no mention of Ibn Warrag.


You're in a perpetual coma, goofy convert.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

If Obama is as personally close to the King of Saudi Arabia as he appears then this thread could get us all stoned....at the very least.

bin Laden money bankrolled the Bushes but that's okay with you.

There is no evidence that President Obama is "personally close to the King of Saudi Arabia" but you lie about it.

You people are just plain nuts and making it up as you go along.

 

[Hollie]

Most Christians believe that, while the Bible is holy scripture, it was written by various prophets and disciples. To Muslims, the Koran is different.

"For Muslims, the Koran is the literal word of god," says Dagli. "They don't consider Muhammad to be the author of the Koran. It came straight down from heaven, and you won't find a Muslim who would say otherwise. That's non-negotiable."
- See more at: IslamiCity.com - The Origins of a Holy Book

The Origin of the Quran

From your link: Preservation of the Quran
The Quran has been preserved for over 1400 years through parallel memorization and writings.
"We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly Guard it (from corruption)." [Quran 15:9]

The “preservation” of the koran is purely and simply hearsay Moslem tradition, not a statement of obvious truth. It cannot actually be supported by the documentary evidence.

In fact (and this is one of the most amusing examples of the Moslem ability to ignore Islam’s internal contradictions) the history of the compilation of the koran after Muhammad’s (swish) death as recorded by the ahadith and Moslem historians is inexplicable were such perfect “memories” real.

Without going into too much detail, rather than “numerous” sahabahs with perfect recollections of the koran, there is compelling evidence that these earliest sahabahs had different and differentially complete memories. How else is one to make sense of the ahadith (repeated in one form or another at least seven times) concerning the last verse being found in the memory of only a single man; Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari? Doesn’t that require the understanding that every other sahabah had an incomplete memory?

How does one further account for the conflicts among those sahabahs that required the Uthmanic rescension?

In fact, how does one account for Uthman’s rescension at all?

It is pretty clear, even from moslem records, that the “perfect preservation” of the koran did not commence until after the rescension. And even then, we could get into a wonderful discussion of the multiple readings, but why bother. The point is made.

No, mere Moslem tradition does not provide a basis for ignoring the obligation of historians to be comprehensive and unprejudiced.

 

[editec]

Shocking news!

Manmade religions create manmade propaganda.​

Update at judgement day


​

 

[hobelim]

Shocking news!

Manmade religions create manmade propaganda.​

Update at judgement day


​

According to the holy propaganda, how much does it cost to enter the kingdom of heaven and where can I send the check?

 

[Hollie]

Most Christians believe that, while the Bible is holy scripture, it was written by various prophets and disciples. To Muslims, the Koran is different.

"For Muslims, the Koran is the literal word of god," says Dagli. "They don't consider Muhammad to be the author of the Koran. It came straight down from heaven, and you won't find a Muslim who would say otherwise. That's non-negotiable."
- See more at: IslamiCity.com - The Origins of a Holy Book

The Origin of the Quran

Who Wrote the Quran

Muslims believe that the Quran is the Speech of God and not a book written by Muhammad (pbuh) himself. The information above provides evidence for the preservation of the Qur'an, but what suggests that it was actually the word of God?
Historical accounts document, and the Quran openly declares, that Muhammad (pbuh) was unlettered.

Here also, there are a lot of falsehoods and irrationality.

First, religions, (and the inventors of those religions), portray themselves, or are often are portrayed as having illiterate founders; it connects both to the huge masses of people who are by and large un- or undereducated, and it makes the religion seem "greater", that here a simple person has some connection to a supreme being. But as history (recent and otherwise) has shown us, these "messiahs" and "prophets" are not illiterate at all.

One cannot lull huge populations into complacent superstition without being pretty clever.

The man who invented Islam was “illiterate”. Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, was also "illiterate". Jesus was an uneducated peasant. Abraham was a sheep tender, and so on. See a pattern here?

There were so many Korans that Uhman had to cobble together bits and pieces from many Korans to make the one he eventually authored. Even with that mis-matching, there were still parts of the Koran that never made Uthman’s final edit.

What a shame that a goat apparently ate a portion of Uthman’ s Koran.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I've always been of the opinion that if you wish to study a religious text or religion, don't use 3rd party books to do so. Go to the source and read the actual holy book. Attend a service. Talk with active followers. You're never going to learn anything relying on 'ex' members and 3rd party commentary. When I was on walk-about, I attended many religious services from California to Florida and learned quite a bit.