Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Interfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: earliest quran over 100 years after muham Post Reply Post New Topic
Page  of 2 Next >>
Author Message
tawhid
 
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 28 March 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Quote tawhid Replybullet Topic: earliest quran over 100 years after muham
    Posted: 30 March 2005 at 4:38pm

work done by John Gilchrist

 

The earliest complete Koran manuscript in existence in museums today are hundreds of years after Muhammad died:

The Muslim false claim:

"In other words: two of the copies of the Qur’an which were originally prepared in the time of Caliph `Uthman, are still available to us today and their texts and arrangement can be compared, by anyone who cares to, with any other copy of the Qur’an, be it in print or handwriting, from any place or period of time. They will be found to be identical." (Von Denffer, Ulum al-Qur’an, p 64)

The truth:

Although Muslims proclaim they have a Koran that dates to the time of Muhammad, the Reality is different.

Two ancient copies of Koran that are in existence are the Samarqand MSS is in Tashkent, and the MSS housed in the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul. What many Muslim's do not know, is that because these two manuscripts were written in a script style called "Kufic", practicing Muslim scholars generally date these manuscripts no earlier than 200 years after Muhammad died. Had these two manuscripts been compiled any earlier, they would have been written in either the Ma'il or Mashq script style. John Gilchrist, in his book, "Jam' Al-Qur'an" came to this same conclusion. (John Gilchrist, Jam' Al-Qur'an, Jesus to the Muslims, 1989)

Now we do have one ancient copy of the Koran written in the Ma'il style of script, that is housed in the British Museum in London (Lings & Safadi 1976:17,20; Gilchrist 1989:16,144). But scholar Martin Lings, who was not only a practicing Muslim, but also a former curator for the manuscripts of the British Museum, dates this manuscript at 790 AD, making it the earliest. On the other hand Yasir Qadhi notes one Islamic Masters/PhD scholar who believes the Samarqand MSS is the ‘most likely candidate for the original’.

It is unknown, even by Muslims that authorities will not release photographs of the ancient Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul and so there are no known studies on it. This is why the Muslim apologist, M. Saifullah had to state "Concerning the Topkapi manuscript we are not aware of studies done it." (Who's Afraid Of Textual Criticism?, M. S. M. Saifullah, 'Abd ar-Rahman Squires & Muhammad Ghoniem) What is in this manuscript that Muslims are afraid to let the world see? After all in Qur'an 2:111 it says "Produce your proof if you are truthful."

Even the earliest fragmentary manuscripts of the Koran are all dated no earlier than 100 years after Muhammad died.

Add to this the fact that there is no archeological evidence dated at the time when Muhammad was alive, by way of artifact, manuscript or inscription has ever been found were Muhammad is actually referred to as "a prophet".

If you don’t believe me, listen to faithful Muslim, Ahmad Von Denffer, in his book, Ulum al Quran, in a chapter called, Old Manuscripts Of The Qur'an, "Most of the early original Qur'an manuscripts, complete or in sizeable fragments, that are still available to us now, are not earlier than the second century after the Hijra. [or 800 AD] The earliest copy, which was exhibited in the British Museum during the 1976 World of Islam Festival, dated from the late second century.' However, there are also a number of odd fragments of Qur'anic papyri available, which date from the first century." (Grohmann, A.: Die Entstehung des Koran und die altesten Koran- Handschriften', in: Bustan, 1961, pp. 33-8)

 

IP IP Logged
Angel
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2001
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6639
Quote Angel Replybullet Posted: 30 March 2005 at 6:42pm

Interesting

It is unknown, even by Muslims that authorities will not release photographs of the ancient Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul and so there are no known studies on it. This is why the Muslim apologist, M. Saifullah had to state "Concerning the Topkapi manuscript we are not aware of studies done it." (Who's Afraid Of Textual Criticism?, M. S. M. Saifullah, 'Abd ar-Rahman Squires & Muhammad Ghoniem) What is in this manuscript that Muslims are afraid to let the world see? After all in Qur'an 2:111 it says "Produce your proof if you are truthful."

It may not be so much about being afraid, although I don't rule it out, the book could be very delicate for handling, some ancient books are very sensitive to the open environment and even if you try to reproduce a new copy in digital format and this would be the most likely way these days, it is a very slow and also a delicate process done in a controled environment.

But then again, maybe its paronia on the authorities

~ Our feet are earthbound, but our hearts and our minds have wings ~
IP IP Logged
tawhid
 
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 28 March 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Quote tawhid Replybullet Posted: 30 March 2005 at 7:10pm
Originally posted by Angel

Interesting

It is unknown, even by Muslims that authorities will not release photographs of the ancient Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul and so there are no known studies on it. This is why the Muslim apologist, M. Saifullah had to state "Concerning the Topkapi manuscript we are not aware of studies done it." (Who's Afraid Of Textual Criticism?, M. S. M. Saifullah, 'Abd ar-Rahman Squires & Muhammad Ghoniem) What is in this manuscript that Muslims are afraid to let the world see? After all in Qur'an 2:111 it says "Produce your proof if you are truthful."

It may not be so much about being afraid, although I don't rule it out, the book could be very delicate for handling, some ancient books are very sensitive to the open environment and even if you try to reproduce a new copy in digital format and this would be the most likely way these days, it is a very slow and also a delicate process done in a controled environment.

But then again, maybe its paronia on the authorities

wasalaam

ok if thats the case...the the quran is not Gods word...

how can it be that if it asks any doubters to produce a sura better...and the original quran is too delicate to read...

how can there be a challange to prove the veracity of the quran ?

in other words...there is not a challenge to begin with...because "god's word" is too fragile to handle in order to somehow try to "prove" that there is some writing made better- no?

even so...such a claim is relative

tawhid



Edited by tawhid
IP IP Logged
tawhid
 
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 28 March 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Quote tawhid Replybullet Posted: 31 March 2005 at 8:37am
no objections?
IP IP Logged
tawhid
 
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 28 March 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 62
Quote tawhid Replybullet Posted: 31 March 2005 at 7:52pm
bump up
IP IP Logged
Angel
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2001
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6639
Quote Angel Replybullet Posted: 31 March 2005 at 8:09pm

hey I do have others things to do besides here  and there is the time difference to

for the time being:

in other words...there is not a challenge to begin with...because "god's word" is too fragile to handle in order to somehow try to "prove" that there is some writing made better- no?

What is fragile is the paper not the words.

You're saying just because something is fragile to handle cannot be, in this case God's word (or maybe not God's word) 

ok if thats the case...the the quran is not Gods word...

Where do you get that from my statement ?

I never said that because its fragile to reproduce is not God's word. 

~ Our feet are earthbound, but our hearts and our minds have wings ~
IP IP Logged
yesha`
 
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 26 March 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12
Quote yesha` Replybullet Posted: 31 March 2005 at 9:08pm
Originally posted by tawhid

no objections?


I agree completely.  But's what's really late is the adhadith, which seems to me to be the source of most muslim beliefs.
IP IP Logged
Angel
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2001
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6639
Quote Angel Replybullet Posted: 01 April 2005 at 5:22am
yesha, tawhid was speaking to me as I hadn't replied
~ Our feet are earthbound, but our hearts and our minds have wings ~
IP IP Logged
Page  of 2 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com