The Sanaa Manuscript: Was the Quran Preserved Accurately? | Dr. Shabir Ally

The Sanaa #Manuscript has two layers of Quranic writing. The lower layer was scraped off and an upper layer written over it. The lower text varies slightly from the modern #Quran. Why do these variations exist? Was the Quran preserved accurately, or was it changed?
► DONATE: www.quranspeaks.com/
► SUBSCRIBE: kzbin.info_...
COMMENT, LIKE and SHARE
Facebook: / letthequranspeak
Instagram: / quranspeaks.tv

[@QuranSpeaks]

Dear viewers, please consider supporting Let the Quran Speak during these last few days of Ramadan. You can visit www.quranspeaks.com/ to donate. May God bless you and your loved ones always.

[@truthhurts6655]

When will you debate with David, Jay or Sam again?

[@onlineteacher9171]

@@truthhurts6655 u should not come here if u r filled with so much ignorance n dont want to get enlightened...no one inviting u here.......

[@hallelujahize]

@@onlineteacher9171 what is wrong in asking if Dr. Ally will debate these guys again?

[@SliceySlicer]

online teacher David wood is not ignorant about Islam.

[@soufianedam3947]

Salam alaikom poeple that have weak eman will be affected in bad way by this subject.

[@crazyeyes8584]

Literally the most relatable Muslim guy on KZbin No hysterical loud nonsense and mostly unbiased and clear in his explanations I’m not Muslim but find listening to this guy very interesting

[@moozy6908]

Me too . I get the idea where before the invention of Mike , speakers and stuff leaders had to speak louder. But in present scenario i dont get the idea of usthads , and preachers shouting in the mike . I mean the sole purpose of the product is to make sound louder right.

[@silencer74]

No where in the video he said that, and the apostles of the prophet who memorised the quran wrote it rught and burnt the ines that had wording errors

[@mansoorkaghaz9669]

He is not telling the truth on this matter dr shady has done a research and we only have a code of Quran not the Quran

[@christiangadfly24]

I'm a Christian, but I wanted to stop by and say you always come across as a man of dignity, respect, and intelligence. If I were a Muslim, I would want to be just like you.

[@mahazsadiq9812]

💓Accent or dialect of Holy QURAN 💓 First of all we should know the difference between different Versions and Translations. For different versions of Scriptures mean that you have some words or Verses different from each other or some words are added or some are omitted. But in Translations, it is the matter of choice of words depending upon the understanding of people of different languages but the meaning remain same. Holy Quran has also different Translations for Different people but Not Different Versions, As Bible has different versions having some verses added in one version and some are omitted in One version, some have 66 books some have 73 books like these etc etc.. 👉As well as Arabic Scriptures of Holy QURAN are concerned they are all same in every corner of the world, same words and same verses. However the way of pronunciation is somehow different for some people. Holy Quran has seven accent or you may call it dialect but only small group of people recite it in these dialect and majority of Muslims Ummah recite it in the Lughat ul Qureesh (Dialect or Accent of Quresh). Furthermore, The Third Caliph of ISLAM settled for us the one Way of Reciting i.e He gathered us on the Lughat ul Qureesh (Accent of Quresh) Moreover, It is further proved by the one of the tradition of Prophet Muhammad PBUH that this QURAN is revealed in seven accent (Arabic:Sab'a Ahruf) . Hence words are same, but different people recite or pronounce it in different way. Read it👇👇 Narrated `Umar bin Al-Khattab: I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat Al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited in several different ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. I was about to jump over him during his prayer, but I controlled my temper, and when he had completed his prayer, I put his upper garment around his neck and seized him by it and said, Who taught you this Sura which I heard you reciting? He replied, Allah's Apostle taught it to me. I said, You have told a lie, for Allah's Apostle has taught it to me in a different way from yours. So I dragged him to Allah's Apostle and said (to Allah's Apostle), I heard this person reciting Surat Al-Furqan in a way which you haven't taught me! On that Allah's Apostle said, Release him, (O `Umar!) Recite, O Hisham! Then he recited in the same way as I heard him reciting. Then Allah's Apostle said, It was revealed in this way, and added, Recite, O `Umar! I recited it as he had taught me. Allah's Apostle then said, It was revealed in this way. This Qur'an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever (way) is easier for you (or read as much of it as may be easy for you). (Sahih Bukhari 4992) So, Now majority of Muslims recite QURAN in the Lughat ul Qureesh (Accent of Quresh) and accent or dialect can't change meaning rather words change meaning. Furthermore, For English language we have different accent like American, British, Australian , Spanish etc etc..

[@YourMoonGodALLAH]

Satan is deceitful . He masquarades as a Angel of light. Shabir is a tool of Satan.

[@kasimhasan7623]

@@YourMoonGodALLAH did satan tell you that or your God?

[@yushabinnun8354]

Sure you are Al-Furqan Al-Haqq

[@darjay9143]

This ma is deceitful

[@akbarmirza4217]

i dont understand why people are taking this video as quran exposed when he literally says the quran is preserved see 9:00 onward.

[@Eesalitepill99]

Exactly

[@heathersoares186]

Because it isn't please could you also explain why Allah used spelling from two different dialects in the same chapter with different pronouncation Maybe he should have spellchecked his work? ☺ quran.com/37/123 Elijah is spelt and pronounced Elias اِلۡيَاسَ quran.com/37/130 Elijah is spelt and pronounced El-ya-sin اِلۡ يَاسِيۡنَ‏

[@akbarmirza4217]

@@heathersoares186 well from my understanding ( I'm no expert ) Arabic has different dialects n names changed to English will sound different as Arabic as different alphabet like kaa and qaf, an English person would pronounce the Ks sometimes the same as Cs. For example Keen and Close use same K sound but different letter. Either way to spell elias, it don't matter you know its about elias lol. My opinion is these nitty gritty details, you're looking too close to find errors n they ain't there try to read the quran again to extract benefit :)

[@heathersoares186]

@@akbarmirza4217 I understand your point but I am talking about the Arabic dialect differences. I believe my point is still valid because each copy of the Qur'an should be in a set dialect according to tradition. the tafsir state - regarding 37:130 (Salam (peace!) be upon Ilyasin!) Similarly, one might say for Isma`il, Isma`in. This is the language (dialect) of *Bani Asad* ; they say Mikal, Mika'il, and Mika'in. They say Ibrahim and Ibraham; Isra'il, Isra'in; Tur Sina', Tur Sinin. All of that is fine. www.recitequran.com/tafsir/en.ibn-kathir/37:130 The rest of the Qur'an is generally agreed on is in the dialect of Mohammad Qureshi so two dialects in one chapter

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@ihsannuruliman4005]

okay I'm looking forward for your next segment, Shabir, outlining the differences

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@The_Old_Sword]

Alhamdulillah Dr shabir you explained in a phenomenal way I've seen lots of enemies of Muslims try to portray you like you agree that quran has changed but they never shows this clip or the full lecture

[@aaronshete9746]

listen to what he said again , he agrees it is changed ,its not preserved word for word letter for letter like you Muslims where saying .

[@BloodyErwin]

I have never heard about the part about "Sahaba would sometimes narrate without highlighting on the exact wording", so would someone please provide a source for that?

[@Muslim_Lady]

He is probably talking about some relating only the interpreation/tafsir of the verse and not the verse itself, so there was no changing of the words of the verse, for it's Allah Words. Some sahabah included tafsir/explanation of some of the words in the verses in their books where they recorded the Quran, that is why it was needed to collect the Quran all in one book by collecting all that was written and verifying which parts of those writings were the Quran and which were tafsir or other things.

[@zeeshanansari2297]

recently a manuscript has been discovered from sinai in yemen and its referred to as the sana manuscript that manuscript has two layers quranic writing the lower layer has been scaped off and the upper layer has the quranic text written over, now the upper layer text quite closely corresponds to what muslims are reading in the world today as the text of the quran. the lower text that has been scaped off has some variation from what muslims are reading today's text, but those variations are not of any great significant degree that affects what muslims believe, or that affects muslim practice in any significant way, so how do we explain this differece and why was that quranic manuscript scraped off? now it turn out that ij muslim classical literature, muslim scholars have detailed that some companion of the prophet Mohammed at home BPS recited the Qur'an in a way that varies from commenly came to be recited by muslims worldwide why this sort of difference? it seems to me and putting all of the information and facts together, that the following transpired, when the prophet Mohammed peace be upon him received the revelation initially, the main impetus at the moment was fir people to absorb the message and to know the instructions and put them into practice, it did not matter at that stage so much that the exact words of the Qur'an had be relayed from one person to another, so one person could tell his neighbour, you know what " I was with the prophet mohammad peace be upon him today, " and the new piece of revelation came down. and basically it says that we are to do A or B or do C or these are the instructions. the instructions do not have to be conveyed in the praecise wording, in order for the instructions to be understood and for them to be carried out, And so we van well understand, that's the initial message delivered by the prophet muhammad peace be upon him might have been rephrased bye some of his companions as they transmitted that information from one person to another, Eventually, scholars would become interested in knowing the precise wording, especially after the muhammad peace be upon him, had passed away and therefore we can see that attempt were being made to compile the Qur'an with exact wording especially in writing. so omar bin al khattab suggested to the first calif of islam abubakar, that he should commission a writting to be done one of the close companions of the prophet peace be upon him zaid bin thabit, who himself had memorized the entire Qur'an was now given instructions to go around to all of the companions of the prophet peace be upon him who had written pieces of the revelation on a wide variety of materials to collect all of those pieces to transcribe them onto a sheet so that we could have a complete copy and that copy was kept with the khalifa abubakar, and the eventually, the khalifa Osman, the third khalifa of islam and this is within 14 to 25 years after death of our prophet Muhammad PBUH he recalled that copy, he had further copies transcribed from it, and sent to various parts of the muslim empire after a day checking effort was done by a committee not only zaid bin thabit the one who initially educated this search and find and compilation, but also by other persons and the committee. three other persons. then tbose copies having been made aere sent to the various parts of the muslim empire so that we have a standard copy which was then copies further and and used and which was then copied further and used and disseminated so how do we get then a palimpsests 4 that's what it is called a copy of the Qur'an that hasbeen erasted so that another copy is written over it well it's precisely because it is mentioned that 100 yellow han commissioned new copies of Qur'an to be made he instructed that if anyone had copies that varied from this official version then those copies should be erased washed off or scraped off or sometimes the narratives they even burned that was in order to preserve the official copy which was done not by one individual but by a committee of persons who lived with and walked with the prophet muhammad peace be upon him who knew exactly what the revelation was however nowdays when non muslims hear that oh you guys either destroyed some academic scholars on the one hamd are quite curious for their own reasons they want to know the nitty-gritty down to the very letter was every word pronounced what are the implications of those wordsbdid it mean something different they want to trace the history and irigins of things did the prophet Mohammed peace be upon him trach a different religion and sis that religion will evolve over time as for example with the relegion of other Preachers and heroes and founders of religions did islam become something different from what the prophet Muhammad PBUH on whom be peay envisioned is islam different from the Qur'an as is was first promugated it's the current quran exactly the same as it was first promugated ao that's the academic interest in this the muslim follower is also very interested because the Muslim follower has been told that the Qur'an is we have it now letter for letter dot for dot is exactly as read by the prophet Mohammed PBUH and there is no other about this one and non muslim looking at this the average non muslim not one of the academics is wondering you know is it possible that some changes occured or something like fishy going here why did this creep off what did he erase the quran so the simple explanation for all of this bringing me right right back to where we began by saying that in the initial phase the prophet muhammad peace be upon him did not insist that his companions should each and every one is just repeat exactly the words of the Qur'an as he delivered it to them he knew that there is a wide variety of persons around him some are more scholarly inclined tbose will try to get the precise wording right and memorize it precisely from the mouth of the prophet muhammad peace be upon him some will write down those who are literate they were able to write and others will just get it by word of mouth some will hear it roughly and but they will know the instruction and that's enough for them to carry out the instruction without necessarily knowing the precise awarding and it was left to a later decade for muslim scholarship to rise this task of saying look people bare going around reciting the Qur'an in the variety of wording and we cannot attest to the validity of all of those wordings let's compile a copy of the Qur'an that will be checked and verified by the community at large one to whose warning we can attest and verify that yes this is a valid representation of the authentic revelation that was given to the prophet muhammad peace be upon him and once we have that authentic revelation now we know that we can safely discard of the other and not only can safely discard of the others but we should discard of the discard the other so that they do not continue to remain in circulation and confuse the person who's trying to get the genuine revelation so trying to get the genuine revelation so once that copy which is known to be a genuine revelation has been prepared it was necessary then to erase the other's nowdays of course of something like this happen we would keep the old copies museums and we are trying to recover those old copies and study them but that was not the impetus at the people din not were on thinking okey let's have a museum of artifacts of old copies of the Qur'an their main concern at the time was to make sure that they have a genuine and authentic copy of the Qur'an that was verified by the companions of the prophet muhammad peace be upon him that they could copy and circulate to all concern of the globe and in order to make sure that is the one that is known and circulated they had to be emphasized the others to the extent of ever erasing some and learning some not what would not have any bad intention not for any fishy purpose but only for the purpose of preserving the geniune one and so were thankful to god that the genuine one has been preserved and passed on to all generations ao that now we have this qurann that is recited in a variety of recitation and with slight variations and in very smal particles of the Arabic language that do not change the meaning of the Qur'an un any significant way so that the matters of muslim belief are not affected by these variations and muslim practice is also not affected any significant degree.

[@asar-ul-allah7514]

what are u trying to saying?😅

[@umaryusuf537]

Interesting so you would say the Quran has been preserved but not exactly word by word but overall it’s been preserved with some changes in the way to say the same thing?

[@muhammad-burhanmustafa4429]

@@umaryusuf537 thats exactly what he is saying after much research I've actually come to the same conclusion as him.

[@batimbap1886]

what was the point of this

[@sussyanya3568]

Bro reached beyond the word limit 😀

[@MrLosches]

Which sources say that Uthman ordered manuscripts with varients to be washed off, scraped or erased? What I know is that Uthman ordered the manuscripts to be burned. Shabir acts as if the burning of manuscripts was just another method, he puts the burning method at the end with word sometimes. 5:00

[@husnainkhalil2554]

It's obvious that this copy was not collected up, so perhaps the owner scraped it after recieving news if the change. Parchment was still quite expensive in those days, it's not that controversial of a point. Perhaps Shabbir's treating if it is just his attempt to rationalise it but either way, it makes not much difference.

[@aminboumerdassi2334]

Because burning the Quran has a very different connotation to what the western mind would suppose. It is actually preferred that if you have old and torn copies of the Quran that the best way to dispose of them is to burn them as opposed to throwing them away. There is no implication of malice towards the quran when this is done, rather it is simply the preferred method of disposal. At the same time, there are alternative methods as well like the ones dr shabbir mentioned

[@MrLosches]

@@aminboumerdassi2334 Old or torn copies? Was that the reason Uthman ordered the manuscripts to be burned?

[@liberator275]

it looks like not everything was burned since other copies have prevailed to this day. whoever was burning korans didn't do a good job.

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@rajivesamuel7301]

I am intereested to know why the one who has memorized the Quran had to go around and collected the records of the other fragments in order to have a complete Quran?

[@stephengriffin4612]

Hello, I have seen Dr. Ally on many occasions defending his faith. He has always appeared to be a good and honest man and his most recent explanation of the problems associated with the textual history of the Qur'an demonstrates that he is also a man of integrity and courage. While his observations may appear to many to contradict his previous position- and they do - one should not gloat or take pleasure from the pain that others may feel upon hearing about his change of heart. Imagine if you yourself believed firmly in some thing or some one all your life and then were told that you were mistaken. Love your neighbor.

[@itiswritten9423]

Are you saying Dr. Shabir Ally was also deceived into believing the myth of perfect preservation?

[@boakyeyiadomphillip7876]

Am shocked by the revelation, Shabby Ali, thanks for accepting that Quran is after all not a preserved sacred book

[@syedmasroor6146]

He still and we still believe the perfect preservation of quran. What are you saying? He is not backing down from his previous belief.

[@ibrahimparkar6900]

Someone tell this chritians that what shabir said has been taught from the time of the prophet pbuh. Its not something that shabir discovered. And yet Quran has been preserved word for word.

[@itiswritten9423]

​@@ibrahimparkar6900 Yes, the product of poor plagiarization of pre-Islamic text has been perfectly preserved. Does it make it the Word of the true God? NOOOO But it is the product of the god of Islam, Allah.

[@tigresalas3574]

The best scholars we have! Glad he makes these type of videos to expand more detail about the history

[@DavidBrowne-wx7cm]

I feel sorry for Shabir. I also applaud him for the step he has taken. While I do not altogether agree with what he has said I acknowledge that he admits that the Qurans may have slight differences. I would hope he would have gone further as there is disparity between the Quran of Uthman and those which appeared approx 2 centuries later ie the ones which finally had the vowels included. The problem I have is where did all this information come from if Uthman actually burnt all the artefacts and other Qurans. Also, how did the Sana'a manuscript survive? The more I look at it, and the more I find what happened in the 8th and 9th centuries, not only with the Quran but also with the hadiths, the more I have doubts about the authenticity of any of it as a true reflection of the times. But I digress. Once again well done Shabir, to you the message may still be the same but to others this may not be the case. Still, the first step is always the hardest. So well done.

[@jsingh265]

@Akmal Ahmad and islam is copied from earlier tests. Fact.

[@syedshah7510]

Qur'an is completely preserved as it has been verified by the holy family of the prophet (pbuh), who are the guardians of the religion. Only difference happening here is in your IQ, which drops each time after your fraudulent christianity is proven to be a sham.

[@CircumcisedUnicorn]

Jag Singh It’s clear you’ve not even read any of the scriptures if you think that’s the case.

[@DavidBrowne-wx7cm]

@Green Road What you are saying could well be true BUT it is not the Christians who claim that their book has been perfectly preserved. It is Islam which says that and what we are seeing is that it is apparently not the case. I know it is not the case, simply as an historian, but some Muslims are finally admitting there are "holes in the narrative" and that is a very big step indeed.

[@DavidBrowne-wx7cm]

@@syedshah7510 Sorry Syed that is not the case at all. You have been told that is the case all through your life and your parents etc but you have been fed the golden lie. Now some of your sheikhs are coming out and are admitting this is the case. Shabir has inferred it. Yasir Qadhi has come straight out and admitted, "that if you take a deep dive, there are holes in the narrative." Syed do you know what "holes in the narrative" means?

[@lovemamahouse]

Thank you Dr. Shabur Ali. Alhamdulillah

[@obheng]

For decades, Shabir Ally was saying letter by letter, word by word perfect preservation....

[@derekosgood3230]

@tigerarmyrule False. Obviously it won't be letter for letter or word for word with different translations of languages dialects. But as he said different wording with the exact same meaning does not change the quran in any significant way. So he is still correct.

[@zakariaujang8492]

western scholars are now debating the origins of islam (e.g. Dan Gibson on the position of qiblat pointing toward petra) and muslims are dismissing his findings just like they have done on findings of quran variants (Dr Brubaker & Dr Bernie Power)....in a few years' time, this will be another bombshell if findings are proven to be historically correct...... his opponent on this subject is David King

[@memyselfandi2506]

I remember people saying dot for dot

[@memyselfandi2506]

@Anas Siddiqui FOR YEARS i heard 1) "not a single DOT has changed from the ORIGINAL to the koran we have today"...muslims spread this lie for centuries. then the internet came and anyone who can read basic arabic can see the early manuscripts never had diacritical marks

[@memyselfandi2506]

@Anas Siddiqui 2) then u said "not a word has changed" but when non muslims showed you verses u didnt like you said "the translations are wrong, u much learn arabic. allah chose arabic because there is only one koranic arabic language".... so this changed to...

[@khaleefax9553]

*What's the biggie here? We already know that different Arab tribes spoke in different dialects. This is a very common fact that still happens in almost ANY country in the world.* *So some Arab tribes wrote some very minor words of Quranic text that suited their verbal dialects. It was then made standardize by Uthman* *Muslims have got the message of guidance from Quran and it's MORE THAN SUFFICIENT to live a peaceful morally cautious life under this guidance of Quran. AND THAT'S THE KEY.* *We are not worried about some Arabic dialects of some tribe writing some Quranic words to suit their verbal pronunciation. It doesn't make a difference to Our emaan. Quran is the same and it will remain the same.*

[@heathersoares186]

please could you also explain why Allah used spelling from two different dialects in the same chapter with different pronouncation Maybe he should have spellchecked his work? ☺ quran.com/37/123 Elijah is spelt and pronounced Elias اِلۡيَاسَ quran.com/37/130 Elijah is spelt and pronounced El-ya-sin اِلۡ يَاسِيۡنَ‏

[@Saint0-]

Wow look. Mia X khalifa speaking We want more, please come back to the industry

[@khaleefax9553]

@@Saint0- Aren't we surprised now? Mia Khaleefa is a Christian. hehehhee

[@heathersoares186]

@@khaleefax9553 still wondering why there are two different spellings in my example? Could you help please?

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@hishammansari]

جزاك الله خير I would love to talk to you brother Shabir Do you have any communication platform?

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@hydrocarbon13]

@A Proud Believer Why dont you refute them

[@glen6494]

Please give the reference to where it was instructed to erase the original copy. As far as I know the only thing that was instructed was to burn the variant copies.

[@Kabooshnoury]

You will definitely not get a response from the muslims.😂😂😂

[@hydrocarbon13]

Where did he say the original copy was erased

[@glen6494]

@@hydrocarbon13 1:15, 4:35, 6:44, 8:36, 9:22

[@hydrocarbon13]

@@glen6494 He was asking about the Original manuscript of the quran, Mushaf E Hafsa, the one that zaid compiled

[@glen6494]

@@hydrocarbon13 Duh, The video is about the Sanaa manuscript. So my comment is about the original first layer written on the sanaa manuscript. This is the one he is talking about being erased.

[@quintuslentulus6183]

Good job dr. Shabir Ally! Finally someone of reputation is coming out and saying that there are variances in the texts of the Quran. So much for believing in a myth that everything was perfectly preserved to the letter. Those variations don't affect the core Muslim beliefs, which is exactly what Christians claim regarding the Bible. There are some textual variations but no core doctrine has ever been changed. This is a good step in the right direction.

[@OmarOsman98]

Any educated Muslim knows that there are were variants in the Quranic corpus. This is a historical fact attested to in Islamic historical sources. However, Uthman had these erased to preserve the one we still have today. Remember, variations does not necessarily mean that we don't have the preserved one with us.

[@umarmujaahid1065]

@Adi Sonara Islam never need to be reform, but people are in to be reform.

[@zoltannosparatu5788]

Abu Faisal tut tut tut. No one believes Muslims. They’ve always lied throughout history, nothing is going to change now.

[@OmarOsman98]

@@zoltannosparatu5788 If that's your perogative then that is fine. However, to say all Muslims are liars is a logical fallacy.

[@quintuslentulus6183]

@@OmarOsman98 Yes, but you have a problem when you don't know which ones were erased or taken out and based on what methodology? If Allah promises to Guard the Quran ( Surah 15:9) then how can some verses just be taken out? And some verses were even eaten by a goat (Bukhari 1944). It is obviously clear that we cannot know with certainty that Quran has been preserved accurately, even when some minor variances are taken into consideration.

[@gleasonparker1684]

Thanks for allowing comments I do not even look at websites generally are I guess they are now cite own KZbin. But I like to read the comments and occasionally read the comments so please keep them coming. I know this is a risk but it is the risk of full disclosure and information and just remember I don't even read ones that don't allow comments and I'm sure there's thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people who feel the same way I do about that so thanks again.

[@QuranSpeaks]

You are most welcome here! Thank you for joining us :)

[@lunkus1]

It is mentioned in al-Bukhari that the quran was revealed in 7 ahruf (styles, wordings), and that each of these were legitimate. Uthman had these standardized, but even then still tried to accommodate some of these ahruf by allowing for a certain level of ambiguity in spelling, which is why even today we have certain different readings of the quran that are also considered legitimate and usable in prayer. These readings had shared meaning, and would substitute words like king for owner at certain points throughout, as you can see, not a massive difference or one that in any way would affect the message of the quran. This was eventually standardized under the order of Uthman, and that is why there are certain variations in quranic manuscripts. I am unsure why Dr. Shabir did not mention this. I hope this cleared some doubts that this video may have caused.

[@OrdoMallius]

And yet 7 became 1 and then 2 more existed that rejected Uthman's Quran and then it became 3. Which one is the OG Quran? And where did the other 4 come from that make the new 7? And why are there 30+ today?

[@gasserhegazy1267]

non of what you said makes any sense. What are you yapping about.@@OrdoMallius

[@aliasad8342]

with respectfully, I have doubt in the story you're making up. Because I'd like to know where was the original copy of the Quran to whom based we Muslims destroyed or tempered the old manuscript over the time. we should have the original copy of the Quran preserved from the Khalifa Osman's time, right?? where can I find it in today's time? thank you

[@eddiegyt5978]

imo, so in prophet era, revelation is spread word by word, so it can be differs per words but in meaning they are same, like command to pray and gift to poor (zakat) it can be some people recite it go pray and make a gift to poor, and other recite go make a gift to poor and go pray, but it same meaning. so to make a same concept of mushaf caliphate has ordered to make one book that we have today, and still Allah keep his promise to make it eternal until judgement day by making it easy to memorize per dot or comma in every hafidz in the world Wallahualam

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@aliasad8342]

@@inquisitivemind007 Wow.. this is the secret muslim hides from the world using myth of the perfect preservation quran.

[@inquisitivemind007]

@@aliasad8342 If you go to the drop down blog underneath this video, there is a link where you can download it for free in pdf.

[@aliasad8342]

@@inquisitivemind007 thank you

[@shahkha4529]

What I dont understand is this yeah. People argued before that Uttman RA had old copies destroyed due to the fact of inconsistencies and fear the message would be warped to each persons understanding. Now they dont take that into consideration because his reason for doing so is made absolute solid. It's funny how people believe one older copy is correct but the one comprised by scholars and actual companions of the quran is wrong. Would Christians dispute that if there was a bible written by the actual apostles of Jesus PBUH would not be correct compared to what they have now? Which would be more reliable?

[@fidelcatsro6948]

Takbeeer!!!

[@lolloler4555]

@Bill Wakefield Bill, this is the field to wake up, not to watch the video while sleeping, my friend :) And yes, waking up during quarantine isn't forbidden!

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@thechallenge293]

Allahu akbra!

[@OmarAbdulMalikDHEdMPASPACPAPro]

I appreciate this Interesting explanation. Thank you for sharing this.🙄❤☝🏾️📖🕋

[@muhammedbilal9355]

Hey doctor😍💖

[@OmarAbdulMalikDHEdMPASPACPAPro]

@@muhammedbilal9355 AsSalama'laikum dear brother!☺👋🏾👨🏾‍⚕️

[@bbccnn8836]

I would love a discussion between Jay Smith and shabir ali in the light of all new research about quran and Bible

[@OfficialDananthony]

I'm a follower of Christ, and I've watched Dr Shabir Ally's debates with David wood and Nabeel Qureshi. Though I don't agree with his arguments, he is very respectful, and seems to be a good man. I think his coming out to boldly speak this truth is applaudable. Good Muslims will take this in good faith, others wouldn't, Christians might have an addition to their arguments, but yeh, from what I see as a person he is admirable.

[@ayamallak2807]

He isn’t respectful nor a good man in the slightest, he constantly uses Charlie hebdo cartoons to depict Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)

[@catpantsfriday8423]

wait i thought there was only one preserved Quran?

[@mohammedahmad8039]

It actually is correct. There is only one preserved Quran. So Please allow me to explain. What Dr Shabir is saying is common knowledge taught in islamic education, and has been taught by Muslim scholars for more than 1000 years. The volume of books written in Arabic about this subject over the past millennium are too many to list. Muslims who didn’t receive a shallow religious education know this already. The entire text in all readings is the same, some phrases are identical except for a single word, and those variants are prepositions that do not alter anything or single words that are synonyms or similar in meaning. (so nothing is drastic) It was recognized and recorded in the early centuries, and the differences were authenticated and the process is documented and also reasons and analysis was given all in the first centuries and those same recitations of the Quran that were authenticated in first centuries have not been altered since and are still used. ALL manuscripts or palimpsests that were recently carbon dated and found to be early centuries manuscripts CONFIRM the Muslim historical story.

[@mohammedahmad8039]

The Quran variants are substantially less significant to those found in the New Testament. I will first outline the General difference between the Quran and the New Testament, then specifically address the textual variants. General difference between the Quran and the New Testament First difference: * There are different New Testament canons * There is only ONE Quran canon (Agreed by all denominations with no exceptions) Second difference: * There are different New Testament books in each of the canons * There is only ONE book in the Quran canon (Agreed by all denominations with no exceptions) Third difference: * There are different manuscripts from different centuries that show different variants of each of the books in New Testament canons * There are variants in the Quran that are recognized, documented, catalogued and explained by early Muslims with established links to the prophet. Fourth difference: * The variants in the New Testament change the meaning significantly and affect core beliefs * The variants in the Quran do not significantly affect the meaning and do not affect core beliefs Fifth difference: * There are early copies of the New Testament that are considered apocryphal * There are no early apocryphal Qurans Sixth difference: * There are different text types nowadays used to produce different editions of the New Testament * The Qurans recitation are the exact same as text as the early centuries Please read on for further details

[@mohammedahmad8039]

Explanation of issues related to Quran variants In all of the accepted readings (Qira’at): 1. IF VERY FEW WORDS ARE DIFFERENT BETWEEN READINGS THE REST OF THE ENTIRE TEXT OF THE QURAN IN ALL READINGS AND ALL COPIES OF THE READINGS IS IDENTICAL. 2. EVEN IF FEW WORDS ARE DIFFERENT THE MEANING AND MESSAGE IS THE SAME. In all of the accepted readings (Qira’at): 1. The Quran variants tend to be either prepositions that do not alter or even cast doubt on the meaning of the verse, or 2. First case of the Quran variant being a different world, the usual case is the word is a synonym and all other words in the verse are identical. It still doesn’t alter or even cast doubt on the meaning of the verse 3. Second case of the Quran variant being a different world, the entire text of the verse is identical, and the difference is in a single word that carry a very closely related meaning. It does not alter or even cast doubt on the general meaning of the verse. 4. All the readings have the same text, and preserve the same meaning of the message the text is carrying.

[@mohammedahmad8039]

Explanation of issues related to New Testament variants I personally do not care at all about the different copying or spelling mistakes. It’s a normal part of the historical context before the advent of printing. But that’s not the only thing showing up in the New Testament manuscripts. Even by leaving out all copies of the New Testaments that are based on the different available and used text types, and if we only take into consideration only the copies based on the Textus Receipus, within the manuscripts that are used for this text type you can note the following observations: 1. There are differences in the details of the stories between each of the four Gospels. 2. In each of the Gospels, There are cases where entire PHRASES are different between different manuscripts of the same gospel. 3. There are cases where new PHRASES appear in later manuscripts of the same gospel that do not appear in earlier manuscripts. 4. There are cases where a new STORY appear in later manuscripts of the same gospel that do not appear in earlier manuscripts. Non of those issues have been observed in the Quran manuscripts. The text of all the manuscripts discovered and carbon dated to early periods, are the same as the records left by early Muslims. This is why Muslims say: THE TEXT IS PERFECTLY INTACT AND WELL PRESERVED COMPARED TO THE BIBLE I am clarifying because I see people posting comments who do not understand what they are saying and also either too lazy or not intelligent enough to bother doing any research or actually learning before posting those comments.

[@richnewport9549]

@@mohammedahmad8039 VARIANT: definition, noun a form or version of something that differs in some respect from other forms of the same thing or from a standard. If this is the argument that muslims use for perfect preservation, then that means the bible must also be perfectly preserved. Very interesting to see muslim scholars back peddling and in damage control now that the truth is out, and all the less educated muslims fleeing to find something to stand on.

[@yfridge]

@2:30 did he just say that the words of Allah do not matter? So the actual wording of what was sent down does not matter but the message they convey. Interesting.

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@mustafauyghur162]

Nooo omg

[@yfridge]

@@acesin-et7pp sorry but do you really think that make sense. Prayer is prayer. You seem to disconnect on what prayer is and made it all confusing. Think, if prayer is compulsory and Muhammad lead it for 10yrs before he died then how and why did the follow recite it wrong? They had 10yrs to learn it so their shouldn't be a mistake once he died. Your only trying to defend this because it is clear there is more than one (30 now) Arabic Qu'ran that do not all match in certain suras

[@yfridge]

@@acesin-et7pp The Hadiths were written years (in the hundreds) after Muhammad died so how can it be a message from Muhammad when he didn't even write it or told his followers to recite it for him. It is a fact Burkhari left out thousands of sayings from Muhammad... Thousands! Bruh!!!

[@yfridge]

What did the variations say? Who is the judge to determine whether it will effect major doctrines?

[@itiswritten9423]

I agree. We should be the judge to decide if the changes are material or not.

[@rohsnaoks1587]

it doesn't change much, actually the meaning is the same, but in early times Arabs used to have different dialects hence they would recite Quran in their native dialect. Uthman had introduced a standardized Arabic written language, grammar and speech, in order to unify the dialect in which the Quran is recited and unify the writing system in which the Quran in recorded.

[@SSP700]

David Wood and Jay Smith on Preservation of Quran : Live!! : kzbin.info/www/bejne/gpfKh2yZg8tkrMU

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@omarmirza9957]

Dr. Shabbir said, at around 6:57 of the video, that "at the initial phase, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, did not insist that his Companions -- each one, each and every one -- should just repeat exactly the words of the Quran as he delivered it to them". This is just wrong; it is very sad to hear a prominent Muslim apologist say something as damaging to the image of prophethood as this. The Prophet, peace be upon him, had no choice but to recite the exact words that he had heard from the angel, and he had no choice but to correct anyone who recited it differently. He had to insist that others "repeat exactly the words of the Quran as he delivered it to them"; for the revelation consisted of a. sequence of words and letters, and he could not authorise the recitation of any words and letters which had not been revealed. This is the whole point of the revelation of the Quran in "seven ahruf": in response to the prayer of the Prophet, peace be upon him, there were places in the text at each of which the angel revealed to him a finite list of specific options for recitation -- each such option constituting an equally valid, divinely revealed sequence of words and letters -- so that people who had difficulty pronouncing or memorizing one of the options could be granted some relief from their difficulties by being taught another such revealed recitational options. Why would having such specific, revealed options for recitation be necessary at all if the Prophet had been willing to allow people to deviate from repeating "exactly the words of the Quran as he delivered it to them"? Now, when Allah answers a prayer, he gives more than that which was originally requested; in this case, the finitely many, revealed recitational options that were divinely made available -- for certain brief stretches of the text -- went beyond merely those that facilitated someone's pronunciation, and came to include those that conveyed new meanings as well. In all this, there was never any question of the Prophet, peace be upon him, allowing *anyone* to deviate from the exact words of the Quran he had delivered to them.

[@davidtheophillus9832]

And Allah knows best, eh?

[@ExtraEcclesiamNullaSalus]

There's not 7 recitations today...but 31 different arabic qurans.

[@skinblink6497]

I don’t mean to be rude but Sometimes I wonder if facts point to your arguments above. Dr S Ali shared your position until recently and had to come up with this new position because of information/data that definitely debased the old position. If you don’t know, Dr S Ali, now accept that for a fact Jesus died on the cross some 2000+yrs ago. To be honest there is no hiding place for “made up” classical history of Islam, research has gone far to cross the T and dot the I, Dr S Ali will soon change position to something you will find more ludicrous but true. Check works of Jay Smith, David Wood, CIRA and Arabian Prophet. God bless you

[@ahmadmuzakkir6792]

@@skinblink6497 you actually telling us to believe David wood? are you right in your head? go away you evildoers..jesus will abandon you..you prayed to the wrong human...jesus was not a god..you'll be in hell with satan

[@derrickstills1265]

Very true and I was just wondering why Dr ally didn't mention anything about seven huruf and didn't quote any ayah or hadiths about it.

[@Sasuki774]

What's so funny is that I've read what's in Sanaa's version and the "differences". There is literally no difference in meaning between the two. Compare that to the Bible, which is laughable. Not to mention, for anyone that's read the Quran.... it is very easy to memorize. I myself, have a good portion memorized. During the Prophet's time, people relied on memorization and that's how it was preserved. It's a fact that if multiple people, from different areas, recite the same thing, the odds of them all being wrong is near impossible. This is why compiling of the Quran is so reliable. It was verified and checked by multiple people that had the Quran memorized.

[@joshuakim3973]

hi mr mOslem why do u feel the need to make a fake account with a western name?

[@Sasuki774]

@@joshuakim3973 Because it's the internet, not a good idea to use real name. Also this isn't a fake account, I've used it for years.

[@irbiska]

When someone is brainwashed by Islam, there are no differences even when rhis guy says that there are differences...

[@Sasuki774]

​@@irbiska Calling someone "brainwashed" without actually proving a counterargument makes you look brainwashed :D

[@elvinuo]

@@irbiska to be brainwashed at least you have to have brains. And good news is you are preserved of being brainwashed

[@fahadusmani2184]

Very well explained......

[@ZaikaNaik]

Very well explained that it wasn’t preserved by allah

[@mrweirdguy5249]

So many people not even understanding what he is saying and just jumping to conclusions and reading into their own prejudices.

[@mrweirdguy5249]

@Mr X I have watched all of those interviews in full. The guy who compiled this takes them out of context and cuts them in half to push an agenda. Watch the full interviews. You just proved my point.

[@mrweirdguy5249]

@Mr X I did. Dr Yasir Qadhi later even addressed the preservation of Quran on Facebook and how people are taking his word out of context to push an agenda. Yes, a serious debate is needed because a lot of Anti-Islamics are throwing false information around, but this is something they have always done.

[@mrweirdguy5249]

@Mr X Take it up to Hijab he is the one who cut it, not Yasir Qadhi. Why he cut it though. Probably because he is part of this whole refuting culture and religion vs religion/atheist culture that is common here on KZbin. Before Yasir Qadhi clarified his views on Facebook, Hijab was going around saying he was going to "refute" him. That's probably why I think. Everyone who is a part of this back and forth between religion vs religion/atheist thing in youtube has a habit of obscuring facts. Christians, Muslims, Atheists and everyone really. I don't agree with him cutting the video though. I don't agree with Hijab on a alot of things especially his approach to debates.

[@hisham7150]

Issues like this are what anti islamic preachers love the most. They'll make mountain out of a seed. They ignore the established facts and focus on the what ifs. They create doubts in the mind and heart of Muslims and eventually fish them. Good job brother Shabir. Your explanation makes a lot of sense. May Allah reward you for all your efforts.

[@mohammedahmad8039]

Bill Wakefield Allow me to explain my perspective, because I can sense you are either misunderstanding this or misinformed about it. When people talk about different Bibles as opposed to a single Quran, the reference is to what collection of books goes into what a particular church accepts as the complete New Testament. For example the biblical canon in the Roman Catholic Church in comparison to the Eastern Orthodox Church in comparison to the Coptic church or the Ethiopian church....et and also don’t forget the existence of what was decided as apocryphal manuscripts. If you go to the second layer of this understanding, If you even look at the different manuscripts for any one of the books in common, you can find significant variants in manuscripts and palimpsests of each of the books. So let’s say you want to study Christianity by conducting the authentication exercise for all the books of all the different churches there will be a substantial academic work to be conducted. There is already a lively scholarly discussion about the Codex Vaticanus or the Codex Sinaiticus and the syriac Peshitta ...etc Also, Many Christians I encountered make assumptions and argue points Based on their interpretations of the New Testament version based on the Textus Receptus for example. They do not take into consideration that the Textus Receptus didn’t even exist before the 16th century.

[@mohammedahmad8039]

Bill Wakefield This is not the case for the Quran. It’s a single book that everyone agree on. The case is different for Hadith books but Hadith is not scripture, it’s tradition, and only the Quran is scripture. Add to this that the early Muslims documented and provided explanations for the Quran variants in a scholarly way. There are different recognized authentic Quran recitations (called Qira’at). Everyone who studied Islam properly or is familiar with Quranic sciences would have learned about them. This is what Shabir is explaining in those videos, it’s not a recent admission or a new discovery by any stretch of imagination. Dr Shabir is doing what he normally does, which is explaining common knowledge scholarly information in everyday language. There is only one Quran, nothing in the Quran variants is surprising new knowledge or even remotely challenging to Muslims beliefs. If anything the more manuscripts we discover, the more evidence we have to confirm the Muslim narrative. It also proves the text is intact, which provides further support for the authenticity of the Quran.

[@vbandz2645]

Bill Wakefield if he had more minutes he would explained, the 7 different Arabic dialects at the time and there was no internet, so people were not reciting the Quran properly and Changing the meaning by accident, also the 7 different dialects differ across the peninsula and instead Uthman gave them the standard Fusha Arabic copy which was one of the 7 dialects to all the nations so it could stop disputes

[@vbandz2645]

Bill Wakefield search up the Topkapi manuscript, 99.9% accurate with today’s Mushaf, that’s preservation, plus it was memorised, it’s impossible to change it in 1 place because the whole Islamic world knows other wise

[@josephgodson2834]

@@mohammedahmad8039 please don't compare Bible with Quran. Quran is one book Bible collections of books

[@melikercn]

Mashallah very good explanation

[@titiafri1582]

Now you believed 37 books of Quran

[@kas12324]

No, we don't.

[@TheRockeyAllen]

Lol, China has their own version, that in no way means the Qur'an wasn't preserved. There are so many manuscripts that are accurate, the orientalists would obviously focus on the few that differ as it suits their narrative.

[@jumatron2060]

SubhanAllah they critique the Quran dot by dot, by the way the Arabic language didn't have dots till after the Quran, to preserve the Quran. Yet the Bible, it has clear contradictions, they blindly obey.

[@bobbie1831]

JUMATRON 20 these are claim made by Muslims and the Quran the Quran is allah word and preserved to the very letters..so even if there a word or variance in the Quran that 1 variance debunks the claim that the Quran is preserved. However there are over 9500 variances. As well How can Muslims think that Quran is complete if Aysha said (in Abu Ubaid's Kitab Fada'il al Quran) that Sura 33 had 200 verses but now there are only 73 verses?

[@bobbie1831]

The few that differ so you admit that the Quran is not preserved. Can’t deny the truth anymore lol

[@bobbie1831]

The false religion of Islam is coming to an end

[@TheRockeyAllen]

@Arcana Imperii lol. There's a new video by Let the Quran Speak, about the Tübingen manuscript. A equally old manuscript that is exactly the same as today's Quran. So it basically throws all these arguments into the bin.

[@davidtheophillus9832]

I thought that it was Allah's responsibility to preserve the Quran, not Uthman's?

[@najban2922]

David Theophillus, Allah did preserve, that’s why so many people could memorise from the time of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) till today. If all the words in all the books in this world disappears then only Quran can appear again.

[@saarasalerto761]

@@najban2922 did you know, that as many men who had memorized parts of Quran died in wars, Abu Bakr got scared that they may have lost parts. So Zaid wrote the Quran, and after finishig it Uthman ordered all other versions of Qurans to be burned.

[@ibrahimparkar6900]

@@saarasalerto761 yes many died not ALL!!

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@aliceyuniaty3213]

veey interesting..。。 thanks for being honest about the textual variations...

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@memyselfandi2506]

😂but for years they lied. This is now coming out because the have no choice🤣

[@Motercycelgy222]

@@memyselfandi2506 Stop acting like this is something that we just found out we have none this for years 🤦🏾

[@mustafauyghur162]

It’s different readings don’t be cool god revealed different readings they all are word of god

[@insearchofexcellence2337]

Al hamdulillah, Allah is greatest.

[@benjimcnairscott7988]

Well done Shabir for being open about the textual variant. I hope others in influential positions follow suit. Nevertheless, from what Dr Daniel Bruback has been showing by his painstaking research on the earliest manuscripts is that it does affect meanings in various places.

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@kimutaiboit8516]

True. However not in a very significant way.

[@rodneyhowarth8236]

so do the tablets in heaven show that the Egyptian quran is the true quran or the ones that were scraped of were

[@jeremiahpillay6219]

Haha, one of life's great mysteries... (Noooooot! )

[@rpdsouza1957]

Poor guy who printed the quran in 1924, it finally fell upon him to print the perfectly preserved quran . Guess what happened to all the versions of Uthman's quran ???

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@stevenv6463]

@@rpdsouza1957 The 1924 "version" standardises the placement of verses and chapters similar to if Bibles always had Exodus start on page 50 and John 1:1 was always on the middle of the 500th page. Also not every Quran is a 1924 printing although it is popular since it can help people memorize the Quran in a more standard way. Also the 1924 printing always has Uthmani mushaf written on it in the back.

[@rodneyhowarth8236]

@@jellyfishi_ ok going ahead with my life

[@frankmatthews2451]

So y do they have different ones that's being read today?

[@lalthangHungyos]

Learn Quran deeply and you'll understand otherwise no way!

[@frankmatthews2451]

@@lalthangHungyos u learn it

[@lalthangHungyos]

@@frankmatthews2451 Proverbs 5:18-19 - May your fountain be blessed, and may you rejoice in the wife of your youth. A loving doe, a graceful deer, may her breasts satisfy you always, may you ever be intoxicated with her love. Learn bible first. Don't you get satisfied?

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@shahzaibsiddiqi6469]

When he says "rephrase" he doesn't mean the meaning has been changed I even recall looking at some of the text of the Sanaa manuscripts one actual example of rephrasing was one where it showed the word "jahannam" being replaced with the word "naar" which means fire the meaning is still in tact. During the prophet's time their were many tribes and groups of people so not all of them had the same dialect therefore they were allowed to rephrase to their comfort but they could never change the meaning even if they wanted as the Quran was primarily and still is an oral tradition. So any contradictions would be easy to catch so even if you tried altering the Qur'an on paper you couldn't get away with it. The Quran we know today is in the Quraishi dialect. It was compiled in this dialect because this is how it was initially revealed so Uthman and his committee figured it would make things a lot simpler if they just had it in one dialect for future benefit. This is not the only example of the Qur'an's evolution even the dots and tashkil we see in our books today didn't exist back then they were later added to make reciting the Quran easier for foreign readers which weren't as familiar with it as the arabs. That as well did NOT change the meaning bet benefited the rest of the ummah just like the idea of simplifying the narrative to one singular dialect.

[@josephgodson2834]

Don't forget uthman burnt all other copies and rewrote it in quarash dialect.

[@davidtheophillus9832]

And Allah knows best, does he?

[@shahzaibsiddiqi6469]

@@josephgodson2834 okay and what's wrong with that?🤣 All he did was burn the copies that were fragments, drafts or in other dialects. The whole point was to preserve it in the quraishi dialect from there on out. It would have made no difference because the Quran had already been memorized in the hearts of the prophet's companions. Zaid ibn thabit was put in charge of gathering written compilations of the text and he was a Hafiz who had memorized the entire Quran himself. There is actually a famous Hadith that shows him reciting many chapters in front of the Prophet pbuh from memory and there was not a single instant where the prophet needed to correct him. He was also one of the prophets scribes and spent time with him on a regular basis. Not just him but many of the people in the committee had walked and talked with the prophet when he was alive. Abu Bakr was the prophet's best friend who had known him for 50+ years up until the prophet's death. Another person in the committee was Omar ibn Al khatab who our beloved prophet himself is famously quoted with saying " Had their been another prophet to come after me it would have been Omar". These are just a few examples of the kind of people that were given the responsibility to deliver the message. As Muslims we know they were the best examples to follow after Muhammad (pbuh) and we know that they successfully carried out the mission. Alhamdulillah.

[@justinwall5249]

So what he’s saying at the end there, is we really don’t know what the exact original recitation was, as today there are variations in wording that produce differences of meaning. Nothing that would produce a different core doctrine, of course, but still, that’s an implicit admission that the Quran has not been perfectly preserved if even today there is still variation. Uthman’s recension is human standardization of the text. This is not miraculous preservation if you have to try to destroy variants and put forward what you THINK is the original. Remember, Ubayy ibn Ka’b DISAGREED with Zaid’s version, and he even had two more surahs than Zaid’s version. Ibn Masud had three fewer surahs than Zaid’s version. This is so much disagreement very early on. If even the top teachers of the Quran disagreed with each other on what was original, how can we trust Uthman and Zaid? And this doesn’t even begin to address the issue of the Hadith saying much of the Quran was lost, particularly because hundreds of huffaz died at the battle of Yamama. It’s obvious the Quran was not perfectly memorized early on, and it was even worse after hundreds of huffaz died in battle. And Muslim leaders were trying the best they could to preserve what they could, but it’s abundantly clear it has not been perfectly preserved. Ubay, the best of the reciters, would recite more ayat than everyone else. Even in individual ayat, he would recite more words. For example, in surah 33:6 he adds extra words in his recitation. It seems muslims have to put an awful lot of trust in Uthman and Zaid and ignore the actual top teachers of the Quran that Muhammad designated to learn the Quran from, who disagreed with the official version put forward. Why didn’t muhammad and Allah make sure the Quran would ACTUALLY be perfectly preserved, without any variation or differences in meaning or parts being lost or his top teachers disagreeing? Why didn’t muhammad put forward an official version? Why is it Uthman, who is not a prophet, standardizing what is supposed to be Allah’s eternal word? There shouldn’t have ever had to be an Uthman Quran burning. There is just too much to overlook here. I can’t believe the Quran is miraculously preserved.

[@jq8473]

Peace, Although I believe the Quran is from God, you are raising totally valid points. {{Uthman’s recension is human standardization of the text. This is not miraculous preservation if you have to try to destroy variants and put forward what you THINK is the original. Remember, Ubayy ibn Ka’b DISAGREED with Zaid’s version, and he even had two more surahs than Zaid’s version. Ibn Masud had three fewer surahs than Zaid’s version. This is so much disagreement very early on. If even the top teachers of the Quran disagreed with each other on what was original, how can we trust Uthman and Zaid? }} I agree. However, the whole premise is based on the hadith literature which I think no reasonable man should accept as historically accurate source. I personally don't accept hadith literature at all. We actually don't know if Uthman did any standardization of the text. {{Ubay, the best of the reciters, would recite more ayat than everyone else. Even in individual ayat, he would recite more words. For example, in surah 33:6 he adds extra words in his recitation. }} Could you provide the source of this information? I suspect it is a hadtih, but I'm just curious what exactly it says. {{ It seems muslims have to put an awful lot of trust in Uthman and Zaid and ignore the actual top teachers of the Quran that Muhammad designated to learn the Quran from, who disagreed with the official version put forward. Why didn’t muhammad and Allah make sure the Quran would ACTUALLY be perfectly preserved, without any variation or differences in meaning or parts being lost or his top teachers disagreeing? Why didn’t muhammad put forward an official version? Why is it Uthman, who is not a prophet, standardizing what is supposed to be Allah’s eternal word? There shouldn’t have ever had to be an Uthman Quran burning.}} I don't think Uthman did any standardization of the Quranic text because that would imply that the prophet left task of delivering the message unfinished. I believe the Quran was compiled and collected during the life of prophet Muhammad. And his companions inherited that text. // I don't get why some western scholars bought the official muslim story which is based on hadith only.// However, the consonantal text allowed for some ambiguity if a reader did not know very well the Quran or forgot some words because at that written arabic lacked some or all diacritical dots to differentiate similar letters. And according to dr Keith Small, written text mostly served as an additional tool for people who already knew the text orally. Otherwise it is very hard to understand it. When the prophet was alive, it was ok because people could just ask him if they got something wrong. But some time after his death, people started to make mistakes or change the text intentionally or unintentionally which is an objective process especially evident among people who were not in a close proximity of Muhammad. People could have been retelling the text in their own words to deliver the message. This fact probably raised alarms among the prophet's companions and they must have taken some actions. For example, Sanaa manuscript has upper and lower texts which differ from each other by one or several words. Upper text seems more like "Uthmanic" while the lower is not. The fact that lower text was washed off, not completely burned, indicates that there was no intent to destroy it, but rather to correct mistakes or variations from the original text. And I don't buy the story that the prophet approved several varying readings of the text. This is absurd to me and was clearly made up to justify variations in recitation. You also wrote: {{It’s obvious the Quran was not perfectly memorized early on, and it was even worse after hundreds of huffaz died in battle. And Muslim leaders were trying the best they could to preserve what they could, but it’s abundantly clear it has not been perfectly preserved. }} I do believe the whole Quran was memorized very well at least by several closest companions, some of the Quran by many more people. This is reasonable since it is difficult to memorize it all and majority of people would have learnt a couple or a few suras enough for ritual prayers. However, as you said many companions who knew the whole text or most of it died in battles and this very likely caused problems later for muslims. The meanings of rarely known or heard suras could have been lost. So, muslims having only the consonantal text had to restore the meanings of lost suras or verses. In this restoration process they had a confirmation bias due to their religious backgrounds or popular widely accepted beliefs at that time. Some of them were former christians or jews. I think this might the reason why so many Quranic stories seem oddly similar to jewish and/or christian stories. Peace and God bless you

[@rohsnaoks1587]

It doesnt change the meaning much at all, it's differences in dialect, and the person who wrote it down might have made mistakes too. Even the handwriting of the manuscript found was messy and makes it clear that it was written by a non- professional.

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@semiot8305]

9:49 An embarrassed Dr Shabir Ally destroys the myth of the perfect preservation of the Quran. 😮

[@paragsonalkar]

Thanks for the explanation. If the words were memorised there is a chance that there might be some change. I would say that the meaning is more important than the words. If all religious books gave the meaning it is better as there would not be any headqche on interpretation

[@BrutusAlbion]

Well hot damn this is incredibly damning to many Muslims beliefs about the Quran but I am glad to see someone actually speak honest about it for once. I am not a fan of Shabir Ally but by god ... maybe he is redeemable because this was an amazing part of honesty and truth on his side which I rarely see with a lot of muslims. I've found myself often disagreeing and thinking that Shabir Ally was duplicitous and hypocritical but for once ... I find myself in agreement and respect for this man. Kudos to Mr. Shabir Ally.

[@muhdweb1]

Nothing new in this video. Every scholar will tell u the same. The few memorizers after the death of the prophet put down in writing the Koran we have today. We still have memorizers in every Muslim community till date.

[@Muslim_Convert_Stories]

Verily, We Ourselves have sent down this Exhortation, and most surely We will be its Guardian, (Al-Hijr, 15:10) This verse of the Holy Quran promises that its text has been safe-guarded in its original form by a divine plan for all times to come. Commentary: This verse furnishes a powerful proof of the truth of the Quran and of its divine origin. In fact, the promise about the preservation of the Quran made in this verse has been remarkably fulfilled that even if there had been no other proof of the truth of Islam, this alone would have sufficed to establish its divine origin. Verse 8 of this Sura, contains the demand, mockingly made by disbelievers that if the Quran were really as grand a book as it was claimed to be, it ought to have descended under the guardianship of angels. This ridicule of disbelievers has been answered in the present verse, which emphatically says that the Quran is indeed a sublime book and that God Himself has undertaken to act as its Guardian and that He will always protect it against every kind of corruption and interference. And in order that this promise about the protection of the Quran may gain still more force, particles expressive of special emphasis, such as ‘Anna’ (verily We) and ‘Nahnou’ (Ourselves) and again ‘Anna’ followed by ‘Lam’ (most surely) have been used in this verse. Thus the claim has been made in the most emphatic and forceful language. The statement that God Himself is the Guardian of the Quran does not mean that angels do not guard it. They also do so, for when the master himself is guarding a thing, the servants must also be necessarily engaged in that service. By saying, most surely We will be its Guardian, God, however, points to the fact that there are certain peculiarities of the Quran which it is beyond the power of angels to guard and therefore, God Himself has undertaken to do that work. The means adopted to safeguard the purity of the text of the Quran have been briefly referred to in verse 2 in the memorable words ‘Al-kitab’ (the written Book) and ‘Quran e Mubeen’ (the illuminating Recital) signifying: (a) That every verse of the Quran was committed to writing as soon as it was revealed and this writing was most tenaciously preserved. (b) That it was committed to memory as soon as revealed by a number of Muslims. And this pious practice has increasingly continued so much so that in the past centuries hundreds of thousands of Muslims have had the entire Quran literally on the tips of their tongues. Add to this the fact that from the very beginning of Islam the recital of parts of the Quran in the five daily Prayers was made obligatory.

[@BrutusAlbion]

​@@Muslim_Convert_Stories Saying that something is preserved and proving that something is preserved are two entirely different things. How do you know that entire verse wasn't added AFTER they compiled it and a standardization by the caliphs was made? That entire verse is very very suspect. Just like when a person says ''I do not lie'' you should doubly distrust them because only liars will tell you that they don't lie, after all they had to say that to convince you of something they want you to believe and not something that is necessarily true. So when the Quran says ''the book is incorruptible'' it is actually quite likely that it was just corrupted and the writer added that line to shut everyone else up about its corruption ... The problem is that there is no complete Quran as you claim to have been made. There is no mention of it in the historical records, in fact, even the muslim historical records are quite contradictory to this claim and clearly show that the Quran was only later compiled by the Caliphs in order to safeguard its message. Your idea that it was revealed and bound in one single book is purely fictional and has absolutely no scientific historical or archaeological evidence. If there really was a perfect complete version written down by the personal scribe of Muhammad then there would be plenty of evidence of it in the records but alas, there is absolutely none. Your idea therefore that it is incorruptible because it says it is so makes absolutely no sense from a scientific point of view and is proven to be a common tactic employed by fraudulent people. Finally ... why does Allah sometimes use ''We'', other times it is revealed as if he is speaking direct from the ''I'' form and again other times it is revealed as if he is spoken about in third person? Does your God not know how to stay in proper perspective in his own book? Are we really to believe that Gabriel transmitted such a strange and inconsistent story everytime to Muhammad? Why is he plural at times when he is supposed to be ''One''?. And more damning ... why does Muhammad speak in the name of Allah as if he IS Allah himself when he is just a messenger? Surely that is incredibly suspicious that a person can't keep a record straight ... The Bible is perfectly preserved in its entirety and is incorruptible because the lord and the angels safeguards it. To say that it is corrupted is to say that God cannot protect his own message and we know that God would not allow such a thing to happen. We know the bible has been perfectly preserved and is at odds and contradicts with the Quran and we have proofs that the Quran plagiarized false stories of false christian sects and passed it off as Pure Islam. Therefore we can prove that the Quran is a forgery because it has stories which we can show have been falsified and made up such as the story of Mary giving birth to Jesus in the Quran. It's a false story made up by Syrian Christians but Muhammad incorporated it into the Quran as if it was a true revelation but its been proven that this story was a forgery and made up by false christian sects. It's sad to say but it seems the message your prophet got was corrupted from the start. That is why it makes false claims and contains false stories which are proven to be falsified and forgeries.

[@Muslim_Convert_Stories]

@@BrutusAlbion 10 Christian Holidays and Beliefs Steeped in Pagan Traditions Pagan traditions and celebrations preceded the onset of Christianity. Arising spontaneously in the ancient world, holidays and feasts developed in Syria and Egypt, Persia and Mesopotamia, in Gaul and the dark woods of present day Germany, and in the Roman Empire. The Norse of Scandinavia, the Druids in England and Ireland, the indigenous peoples of the Americas, all celebrated holidays throughout the year. Despite the lack of communications all of these celebrations shared something in common. They all followed the sun. Festivals, feasts, and celebrations, centered round the winter and summer solstices, appeared in all pagan civilizations centuries before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth, and continued for centuries after. Originally the Christian Church frowned upon these pagan rituals, but when traditions were too difficult to overcome the Church absorbed them, creating the ecclesiastical calendar around there existence. Scholars doubt that Jesus was born in December, even the Biblical account of shepherds watching over their flocks in the fields - which would not have happened in winter - make a winter birth unlikely. But celebrating Jesus birth’ during the time of the existing pagan celebration of the solstice was convenient and the Church usurped the holiday. Here are some Christian holidays, beliefs, and rituals which are based upon pagan celebrations and beliefs, in both their timing and their traditions. New Year’s Day As early as 2000 BCE the Mesopotamians celebrated the New Year, but the timing of the celebration was centered on the vernal equinox, in March. The first calendar of the Romans, which contained only ten months in a solar year, placed the start of the year as March 1. The last four months of today’s calendar reflect their position in the year through their names; September contains Septem, Latin for seven, October, Octo meaning eight, and so on. The exact time of the appearance of the months January and February is uncertain, but they were originally placed at the end of the year, rather than at the beginning. The Roman celebration of Saturnalia, which centered on the winter solstice, spread with the growth of the empire. Exactly when the celebration of the New Year came to be placed at the first of January is disputed, but by 153 BCE much of the Roman Empire was using that date to salute the beginning of a new solar year. This continued through the first five centuries following the birth of Christianity, and in 567 CE the Council of Tours officially banned January 1 as the start of the New Year. Instead, the date of the New Year floated throughout medieval Europe, dependent on the calendar used in differing regions, some using December 25, some March 1, and some other dates, all of which were selected for their astrological significance. The Gregorian calendar, which appeared in 1582, corrected errors in the Julian calendar and returned the start of the year to January 1. It also made January 1 the date on which Roman Catholics celebrated the Feast of the Circumcision. January 1 was thus established as the eighth day of the Christmas season in the Roman Catholic calendar. While Catholic nations adopted the Gregorian calendar immediately, as demanded by a Papal Bull, most protestant nations did not. Great Britain (and its American colonies) did not adopt the Gregorian calendar until 1752. Until that time New Year’s Day remained in March in the British Empire. In selecting January 1 as the New Year and a feast of the Christmas season, the Gregorian calendar marked a date which was already a day of celebration among the Christian community, absorbed by them from pagan rituals which celebrated the restoration of the sun. The winter solstice is the shortest day of the year in the Northern Hemisphere, immediately following it the days begin to grow longer in terms of hours of sunlight, and it was this which had been celebrated in the ancient world. The Gregorian designation of the date as a religious feast did little to impair the celebration of the return of the sun, or the traditions it established. Under the Gregorian calendar New Year’s Day remains the octave of Christmas, but many other cultures and religions celebrate other days as the New Year, including China, Southeast Asia, India, and in Islam (which uses a lunar, rather than solar, calendar causing New Year’s Day to float). Although officially a solemn religious holiday in the eyes of several Christian Churches, the celebration of New Year’s Day and Eve are more given over to hedonistic pursuits, as it was before the date was selected to be a major feast day of the Roman Catholic and Christian calendar. Valentine’s Day February 14 is commemorated as Valentine’s Day, or St. Valentine’s Day in the calendar of the Anglican and Lutheran Churches, although in the Roman Catholic Church it was relegated to local status in Calendar of Saints, removed as a feast day, “since, apart from his name, nothing is known of Saint Valentine except that he was buried on the Via Flaminia on February 14.” Though there were several early Christian martyrs named Valentinus or Valentine, little is known of any of them beyond legend. In 496 CE, Pope Galesius added Valentine of Rome to the Calendar of Saints, with a Feast Day of February 14, citing his martyrdom in Rome in 269 CE. February 14 coincided with the Roman celebration of the Lupercalia, which took place February 13-15, and was officially condemned by the same Pope Galesius. Lupercalia was as old, or older, as Rome itself, with links to Ancient Greeks, who celebrated the god Pan. The Romans worshiped a similar god named Lupercus. Both civilizations used symbols for gods based on wolves. Lupercalia as a festival was limited to Rome, and rituals connected with the festival used the Lupercal, the cave where Romulus and Remus were nursed by a she-wolf name Lupa, the Palatine Hill, and the Forum, sites associated with Rome’s founding.

[@kingmessiahir]

@@Muslim_Convert_Stories ha ha ha, you didn't answer him and just changed the topic!

[@theziggyh]

The University Of Birmingham has around 2 chapters of Quranic test, which was carbon dated by the University of Cambridge to the time of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. They say that it is word for, character for character exactly the same as todays text. I rest my case

[@alankulchecki3160]

so you stake the entire book is the same as 2 chapters, yet you have no proof, and no proof yet has been found to establish that the entire quran is as written 1400 years ago yet you "rest your case"?

[@itiswritten9423]

Which text is it exactly the same as? The HAF's Quran or the other different Qurans. How did the Quran that is dated to the time of Mohammed get to Birmingham? Where was it excavated from? The last time I checked, the Quran was not written in the lifetime of Mohammed. How come the one in Birmingham is dated to the time of the prophet? What happened to the verse of stoning and adult breastfeeding that the sheep ate?

[@Princess-sk6kc]

That’s pretty impossible considering it would have been written in a different dialect and without the vowels of today 😅 you’re going to need to list a source

[@beyondheartmindsoul3443]

@@itiswritten9423 Well duh, It arrived in birmimgham from Andalusia. The Muslim Spain hard diplomacy and wars with Britain as well as Franks, Pope and as far as byzantines. I am sure they demanded Quran to be sent to them.

[@irbiska]

Carbon daring says about the age of the "paper" not when it was written.

[@eddiejcarmichael]

So the Qumran does have variations?

[@mystaree]

@Rafael that is a lie because the evidence shows different words like "fought" and "killed" 😂😂😂

[@mohammedahmad8039]

myss_taree It’s still insignificant compared to the variants in the Bible. The Bible variants cast doubt on the divinity of Jesus Christ. That’s the very essence of Christianity. I will post lectures about the ancient manuscripts, but to get a taste for now take an example from the contemporary translation, so for example look up 1 john 5:7. The King James Version says: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. On the surface that’s proof for the trinity. But guess what? the New International Version translation says this verse is not found in any Greek manuscript before the fourteenth century. On the other hand, I bet you don’t speak Arabic, because the example you gave from the Quran variants, the entire verse is entact, and the world doesn’t change the meaning significantly. as follows: 1st variant: And how many a prophet [fought and] with him fought many religious scholars. But they never lost assurance due to what afflicted them in the cause of Allah, nor did they weaken or submit. And Allah loves the steadfast. 2nd variant: And how many a prophet [fought and] with him many religious scholars were killed. But they never lost assurance due to what afflicted them in the cause of Allah, nor did they weaken or submit. And Allah loves the steadfast. God is still one, and mohammed is still his messenger. Nothing changes. I have researched the variance in both the Quran and the New Testament and all the historical manuscripts that were recently carbon dated confirm the text of Quran is solidly preserved especially compared to the Bible. You can try to blow things out of proportion. But evidence show the Quran doesn’t have different phrases or even at times entire new stories popping up in later manuscripts like the case of the Bible. The following lectures give evidence and further explanation : kzbin.info/www/bejne/bXqzcn6pfMekmck kzbin.info/www/bejne/oZOvnpKOntacnpo kzbin.info/www/bejne/iZW2mpisfdeln9Wd

[@mohammedahmad8039]

Love Christ I ask of you please conduct proper research from credible reputable sources before you go regurgitating falsified information by people on the internet and KZbin who potentially get to make money because of people like you who are loyal patrons or emotional Muslims trying to defend their beliefs and end up regularly watching their channels. All because people never bother to do actual research. So allow me to explain

[@mohammedahmad8039]

Love Christ Allow me to explain my perspective, because I can sense you are either misunderstanding this or misinformed about it. When people talk about different Bibles as opposed to a single Quran, the reference is to what collection of books goes into what a particular church accepts as the complete New Testament. For example the biblical canon in the Roman Catholic Church in comparison to the Eastern Orthodox Church in comparison to the Coptic church or the Ethiopian church....et and also don’t forget the existence of what was decided as apocryphal manuscripts. If you go to the second layer of this understanding, If you even look at the different manuscripts for any one of the books in common, you can find significant variants in manuscripts and palimpsests of each of the books. So let’s say you want to study Christianity by conducting the authentication exercise for all the books of all the different churches there will be a substantial academic work to be conducted. There is already a lively scholarly discussion about the Codex Vaticanus or the Codex Sinaiticus and the syriac Peshitta ...etc Also, Many Christians I encountered make assumptions and argue points Based on their interpretations of the New Testament version based on the Textus Receptus for example. They do not take into consideration that the Textus Receptus didn’t even exist before the 16th century.

[@mohammedahmad8039]

Love Christ This is not the case for the Quran. It’s a single book that everyone agree on. The case is different for Hadith books but Hadith is not scripture, it’s tradition, and only the Quran is scripture. Add to this that the early Muslims documented and provided explanations for the Quran variants in a scholarly way. There are different recognized authentic Quran recitations (called Qira’at). Everyone who studied Islam properly or is familiar with Quranic sciences would have learned about them. This is what Shabir is explaining in those videos, it’s not a recent admission or a new discovery by any stretch of imagination. Dr Shabir is doing what he normally does, which is explaining common knowledge scholarly information in everyday language. There is only one Quran, nothing in the Quran variants is surprising new knowledge or even remotely challenging to Muslims beliefs. If anything the more manuscripts we discover, the more evidence we have to confirm the Muslim narrative. It also proves the text is intact, which provides further support for the authenticity of the Quran.

[@damminers49]

Oh how the argument had changed. The tables have surely turned.

[@abbas4604]

Nope, the Sanaa Manuscript doesn't at all change the way how muslims express their faith today, the changes found were minuscule. For example, 'you' was changed for 'they'. etc. These changes doesn't at all change the meaning of the Quran. For more information watch this. kzbin.info/www/bejne/gWfJco1trbxoabs

[@damminers49]

Abbas see how you conveniently said it doesn’t change how they express faith not that there aren’t different versions of the Quran. That is a major contending point that Muslims have been preaching and debating and claiming that the Quran has been perfectly preserved. The fact that it hasn’t been and is now being admitted for once, this does change how people express their faith. There are more variants found here: www.answering-islam.org/Green/seven.htm.

[@abbas4604]

@@damminers49 i'm just going to link this vid to you because it will give you better understanding on how a physical quran was created and how different dialects affected it. it'll do a better job than me explaining it to you. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pGObYo2vrtyspJY

[@damminers49]

Abbas I’ve heard the argument and listened to debates on the issue. The point is, it’s now being admitted but reworded conveniently. “These are not different versions, it’s dialects.” Some Muslim scholars admit that some ancient texts have words added or erased. The argument for the preservation was an all or nothing argument, now it’s changing.

[@zaydg.1361]

@@damminers49 it is perfectly preserved though

[@tranki885]

Quran has been preserved to the last word to the last dot. I guess you can’t say that statement anymore Muslims 😂😂

[@jarioman3463]

If Zayb Thabit memorized the entire Quran like Dr. Ally says then why does he have to collect Qurans from different Sources??? Didn’t he memorize the Whole Quran???? PLEASE ANSWER THIS?????????

[@kingsakoura6241]

Because you don't construct a whole book yourself when thousands of people memorized it.

[@bilalkhares9337]

I think it's so that he has evidence that it's genuine without people having to take his word for it.

[@One-rr8um]

@@cloudgil1862 Have you heard any research being done alone and not peer reviewed but accepted? Even if one memorizes Quran, he has to be 100% sure about his memory and to do so he consults other people who memorized it. Have you seen any doctor giving his final opinion a surgery without consulting other doctors? It's not because he is incorrect or incompetent. Come on. Grow some brain cells. Learn about methodology before commenting instead of believing in conspiracy theories. All it takes sincerity, honesty and maturity.

[@therealtheist28]

@@cloudgil1862 so he wouldn't made mistakes in writing it down he would wrote the verse down then read it and ask companions did they memorize it the same way as he wrote it saana manuscript were just mistakes made by writer for example we have Qurans in time of saana manuscript being wrote the same as today's hafs

[@kas12324]

@@One-rr8um Good analogy.

[@towbiyah998]

In the New Testament Luke 12:2 it says “Everything that is hidden will be shown, and everything that is secret will be made known. What you say in the dark will be told in the light. And what you whisper in a private room will be shouted from the top of the house.”” ‭‭Luke‬ ‭12:2-3‬ ‭ERV‬‬ - Jesus here is basically saying that every lie that has been told will eventually come to light - all secrets will be known . This is what we are seeing coming to light our Messiah only speaks truth.

[@mohammedahmad8039]

I am not sure which sources you obtain your information from, but this stuff is in Wikipedia for crying out loud. What Dr Shabir is saying is common knowledge taught in islamic education, and has been taught by Muslim scholars for more than 1000 years. The volume of books written in Arabic about this subject over the past millennium are too many to list. If it’s new information for you, it doesn’t mean it’s a new admission, it only means you didn’t know about it, but now you do. 1. The Quran is still one single book. 2. The entire text in all readings is the same, some phrases are identical except for a single word, and those variants are prepositions that do not alter anything or single words that are synonyms or similar in meaning. (so nothing is drastic) 3. It was recognized and recorded in the early centuries, and the differences were authenticated and the process is documented and also reasons and analysis was given all in the first centuries and those same recitations of the Quran that were authenticated in first centuries have not been altered since and are still used. 4. ALL manuscripts or palimpsests that were recently carbon dated and found to be early centuries manuscripts CONFIRM the Muslim historical story. This is a link to an English article from one of the many institutes that teach about it yaqeeninstitute.org/nazir-khan/the-origins-of-the-variant-readings-of-the-quran/ This is the Wikipedia link en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qira%27at

[@towbiyah998]

@@mohammedahmad8039 - The Ariticles you provided were written just recently. The Wikipeia artical was last edited 5 days ago. This just shows that Muslins are so desperate to protect their book that that it went from The Quran is the perfect book that has never been changed , from yes there are different variances and different Qurans but it doesnt change the message of the Quran. You could say that the one thing that the Quran did have and that Muslims would hold onto was the fact that they could say the Quran has never changed or that there is only 1 Quran and its the same in every other country. Knowingly that the Christians Bible had differences or different interpretations..But Christians from the start have never denied this or try to hide this cause the Word of God is actually not the bible but the Messiah (Yeshua) who became flesh. What now can Muslims hold onto you have a book that contradicts the OT and NT of the bible, if God was with the Muslims then why did israel claim back its land in 1948 where israel defeated 5 Arab (muslim) nation. Then the Christian countries gave Israel its independence. Muslim can be spread by force because what Muslim preach to what is actually in the Quran contridicts itself. You cant claim that islam is a peaceful religion where Allah , claims to kill the unbelievers, kill the Jews and the Christians. Pray that you dont end up like them.

[@kingsakoura6241]

@@towbiyah998 It's wikipidia, articles change everyday. ALso you really think there gonnachange a whole wikipidia page because of 1 video ? the modification was of tippo, not information.

[@rohsnaoks1587]

@@towbiyah998 Qira has been always known, since the times of the Comapnions, it's valid to have different Qirat, but the Quran is always one

[@daughter_of_the_king]

@@mohammedahmad8039 kzbin.info/www/bejne/aKDRo4KhgbFmn6M

[@GarudaAlfa]

Takbiiirr!!!

[@sikandarnor6052]

Ma shaa Allah well explained 👏

[@ZaikaNaik]

Well explained that it wasn’t preserved by allah. First copy manuscript was erased. WTF!!

[@isaiahbakombo8603]

@@ZaikaNaik ✝

[@moozy6908]

@@ZaikaNaik Quran is message , its preserved . ♦️

[@ZaikaNaik]

@@moozy6908 get out of your cave . This book is not preserved. It’s proven you have at 26 different quran different words and different meanings. Yasar Qhadi knows this

[@moozy6908]

@@ZaikaNaik No it isnt .

[@TheJiminiflix]

Older books are better preserved than the Quran. Preservation though doesn't prove its divine.

[@raditz4583]

The most sensible comment

[@100zuhaibriyaz5]

Please do a video on the differences found in modern day Mushafs.

[@Mulberry2000]

that is what he was talking about duh.

[@guyhero]

Yes, Jay Smith and his team has already raised this discrepancies donkey years ago. Only the muslims ignore this. kzbin.info?search_query=pfander+films

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@Imran-jc2ir]

I have a question that still bothering me. It is said that the earliest Quran is written without dots or called diacritical marks just like the current Quran we have today. 1. Is it permissible to add dots or diacritical marks in the Quran because Muslim know that Quran is the words of Allah and should be keep the way it is reveal? 2. Did adding diacritical marks and dots into the Quran consider change the words of God and make Quran not the only religious scripture that has not been change? I am a muslim and this are the question that i have keep on asking to myself.

[@lukesusilo2112]

you should be asking what kind of protection Allah gave to Quran? cause it's clear human added the dots or diacritical marks to the text. if Allah's protection didn't include protection from addition of diacritical mark.........well then you can conclude it yourself I believe.

[@Berliin9]

dots are there to make it easier for people to read the arabic. It does not change the meaning of the verses at all. they are just for ease of read. there are even different dialects or written contradistinctions. However the meaning of each verse is the same as then. hence the preservation. people claim that this verse is written differently from another. that doesnt make it any less true. Quran was revealed orally, and written by companions. hence Follow the Quran. just because caliph Usman R.A burned the variations (in order and written dialect) doesnt mean the quran was different from what it is. it remains the same. and those accusing Usman R.A of changing Quran. know that their faith is far greater then us and the very thought of changing, usman would sooner die then change the word of Allah. they had real emaan. so dont make baseless assumptions.

[@lukesusilo2112]

@@Berliin9 thanks for confirming that the FORM has been changed. Remember, there were no dots, but now there are. You can say that the meaning is the same, but you've admitted it yourself that the form has been changed. So now the question is, what kind of preservation that Allah provides for the Quran? It's definitely not "form preservation" since nowadays Quran has diacritical marks.

[@Berliin9]

@@lukesusilo2112 we already know since we were kids that dots were added later on. That aint anything new.

[@Berliin9]

When Allah says he guards the Quran. Meaning is exact same. And Allah has made sure that message reaches us (however its written) And it has. Say what you want. Quran is the same till Qayammat.

[@TresnoYesus]

Best way to say shabir explanation that wouldn't hurt anyone or anything is this the quran is preserved by allah swt through man"s hand

[@abdulmuminisule1786]

so there are variations?

[@thepsalms2806]

Yep lol

[@Nightstar3242]

@@thepsalms2806 lol did you watch video at all? No variations at all.

[@jarioman3463]

nice try!! but i am sure that this explanation will not be shared by your contemporaries. it has become fact that the Quran is not preserved accurately. but nice try!

[@Dana-eo4qq]

😂

[@brucesims3228]

Since it is impossible to place ourselves in the Consciousness of the Messenger of God (pbuh) we can never ever know the perfect Word of God as revealed to the Prophet, only what he spoke and later what his Companions declared that he spoke. We must content ourselves with knowing the revelations of the Prophet as God guides us to know His Word. It is only Humans, confounded by Shafain and our own failings, that make such inconsistencies stumbling blocks. Perhaps I need to work on my Faith more.

[@hasamat38]

Keep a open mind and read what the quran has to say objectively, dont make explanations, it say in the quran that it is made clear for you to understand

[@gleasonparker1684]

FF Bruce was a Hebrew and also a Greek scholar and he translated the New Testament from his own study of the Greek and he says in John 1:18 that the correct translation is the only begotten God in relation to Jesus. So that would seem to say that he is God come in the flash or Emmanuelle which is translated God With Us so this seems that there are at least two people in the godhead. I'm not sure about the Holy Spirit but it would seem that all three are manifestations of the one true God but I'm also studying the Koran and what it says about Allah but it is somewhat a bit hard to understand so I'm still studying and I appreciate your channel and what explanations you can give so be blessed.

[@Hana-xj1tv]

How everything goes well for you ❤️

[@JamesMoore-dg9rf]

If the Quran is perfectly preserved,then how could a goat eat a part of the quran.

[@marvelmcu9748]

Yeah and so?😂🤦‍♂️ paper was rated but quran was memoraized and only one quran was eated

[@saarasalerto761]

@@marvelmcu9748 Did you know that parts of the quran were lost as the men who had memorized the parts died in war? After that the book was written down, so no more parts would be lost.

[@peterfirmandi1172]

What if in that part of Quran that got eaten by goat, Muhammad said Jesus is the Son of God

[@marvelmcu9748]

@@peterfirmandi1172 kzbin.info/www/bejne/pHbKpqioZZenhsk

[@lukerose9806]

Marvel MCU prove it. The qurans army preserved bro

[@philipanselmomixtv217]

Masha'Allah...thank you Dr. Shabir for the extensive explanation about the authenticity of Quran.Ramadan Al Mubarrak

[@truthhurts6655]

You should say thank you for making up excuses for the failings of the quran

[@fidelcatsro6948]

Eid Mubarak amigo!

[@onlineteacher9171]

@@truthhurts6655 No one asking u...please don't vomit .....

[@sinstarkol7973]

@@truthhurts6655 Falings of quran ? Everybody in the word reads the same quran in his orginal language. Millions of people know the quran by memory. In the same time 99,99 percent of Christians have never seen the bible in orginal language. And they are may versions of the bible. They are even not sure which is the correct one. Some time ago verses were deleted because bible scholars find out that these verses cant found in old manuscriptues. No christian knows the bible by memory although its Gods word for them. And they talking about failures of quran :D

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@Gabriel-qp5tn]

If they did destroy the old writing, they'd be confused?

[@Islam-and-boxing]

In all respect; what do you mean by the genuine one? The Qur'an was revealed is 7 different ways, as that was how it was revealed to Rasool Allah SAW-are you saying one of these are genuine and the others aren't? Also, if we have an ijaazah system, that goes all the way back to Rasool Allah SAW, and we find a very old Qur'an with different wording, shouldn't that suggest that the old, found "Qur'an" contains changes and mistakes. It's a misconception to think because it's older it's closer to original. I We've always had the original 7 riwayaat. If we find an ancient book with similar text to Qur'an, but not exactly, then it's not the Qur'an.

[@stivberman]

If the Quran was preserved accurately, why the story of Abraham meeting Melchizedek king of Salem was removed?

[@ibrahimparkar6900]

Proof?

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@wankhairulanuar1784]

What is melchizedek called in Quran?

[@believeme7704]

Don’t forget the ones that were eating by a sheep

[@wankhairulanuar1784]

@@believeme7704 even if all the goats eating all Quran in this world don't forget the Quran recited and memorized by million muslim from China in the east to afrika in the west

[@alhassandeen7012]

Masha Allah

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@mayukhsen8195]

In this day and age, Dr. Shabir Ally is the only person who has retained my love and respect for Islam and Muslims. Until and unless even one muslim of this temperament and benevolence exists, I shall, as a Hindu, will keep fighting against people who misbehave with Muslims on the base of religious grounds. And the fact is, such muslim people will always exist, so it is my request to mankind, do not ever deprive any muslim of your love and respect, because not all of them are going to be as famous as Dr. Shabir Ally, there will always be those whom you have never heard of, so never hurt their religious sentiments because of your resentment towards radical muslims.

[@kestane123chesmo]

well said

[@liberator275]

so Allah's words are no longer perfectly preserved. what shabir is saying is what Christian position on the Bible has been all along.

[@TheRockeyAllen]

Lol, China has their own version, that in no way means the Qur'an wasn't preserved. There are so many manuscripts that are accurate, the orientalists would obviously focus on the few that differ as it suits their narrative.

[@therealtheist28]

@@TheRockeyAllen no that doesnt mean quran is not perfectly preserved perfectly preserved quran is hafs wich we use today saana manuscript were mistakes by writer wich he admited why would we change text when we have companions of prophet pbuh who recited today's hafs version so why would we use anonymous saana manuscript we are not Christians we dont take quran from an unknown sources

[@TheRockeyAllen]

@tigerarmyrule admit what exactly? That people in the past made mistakes? Oh wow, what a great discovery. When you bring a hundreds of people from different places to write the same thing, a few who human beings who would make mistakes would have their errors pointed out. You need to understand how the quran was compiled by the later Rashiduns, and the methods they used to ensure its accuracy. I'll give you an example. Let's say there are 114 mathematical problems to which you wish to attain absolute correct answers. You bring in a few hundred mathematicians, and ask them all to solve each of those 114 problems. Depending on their skills, most would get most of the answers correct. Unquestionably, some of them may make a mistake or two. But when all these hundreds are working together, the end result that they publish would obviously be correct. Now if you decide to pick three people of those hundreds, and say, "yeah all those hundreds of people were correct but these three were wrong hence the end solution is incorrect", then we could easily say your analogy is flawed.

[@UnlimitlesslyFunnyDude]

@@TheRockeyAllen so that means Quran is not perfect. Yes or No

[@Guest-vz1dj]

Give me a quran, an exact copy(word for word, letter for letter,dot for dot,verse for verse, even same chronology) which is in eternal tablet.

[@verygood12]

U can buy one online

[@Guest-vz1dj]

which quran... they have 36 type of qurans

[@zakariaujang8492]

@@verygood12 ok...there are 37 of them....i just bought 5

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@OmarOsman98]

Dr.Ally is not arguing that the Quran is corrupted. Rather, he is showing a variant Quranic text that coincides and is sensible with Islamic historical sources. Islamic historical sources acknowledge the fact that many Arab tribes had different dialects and wrote Quranic documents in their choice of vocabulary that did not alter the meaning of the verses. Despite this, Uthman Ibn Affan had these verses erased or burned to prevent confusion surrounding the dialects. This actually strengthens Islam's claim because it shows that even a text with the same meaning but different words is still not accepted. The requirement of absolute preservation of word for word still stands.

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@UnlimitlesslyFunnyDude]

he is making fool of himself : 1)he is showing a variant Quranic text that coincides and is sensible with Islamic historical sources 2)even a text with the same meaning but different words is still not accepted.

[@chrisballen7851]

Narrated Umar bin Al-Khattab: I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat Al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle and I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited in several different ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. I was about to jump over him during his prayer, but I controlled my temper and when he had completed his prayer, I put his upper garment around his neck and seized him by it and said, "Who taught you this Surat which I heard you reciting ?" He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me". I said, "You have told a lie, for Allah's Apostle taught it to me in a different way from yours". So I dragged him to Allah's Apostle and said, "I heard this person reciting Surat Al-Furqan in a way which you haven't taught me!" On that Allah's Apostle said, "Release him (Umar) recite, O Hisham!" Then he recited in the same way I heard him reciting. Then Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed in this way", and added, "Recite, O Umar", I recited it as he had taught me. Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed in this way. This Qur'an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever is easier for you." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 514)

[@naseehatogurabaa9515]

Yes! There are 7 Qirats, we all muslims know that. But it has nothing to do with the meaning neither changes the text in any way.

[@byip2415]

Why rely on a written Quran when the prophets companions had committed it to memory? If memorizing the Quran was not a reliable practice, why is it continued today? Why didn't the companions of the prophet write down his recitations while he was still living or immediately after his death? Why didn't the prophets secretary write down all his recitations as new revelations and abrogations were being revealed? Why were ANY manuscripts of the Quran destroyed or burned in order to create an canonized book? Could not all the destroyed Quranic manuscripts have been a vital source for verifying todays Quran? It does not make sense why these historic documents had to be destroyed even though they may have had writing variations. I am not aware of any Jewish or Christian biblical manuscripts having to be burned or destroyed in such a manner as the Quran . Why didn't Allah instruct the prophet to have his recitations written as the Jews and Christians did? Jews and Christians seem to know the author of almost each book in the bible and have thousands of manuscripts to verify the same. Where are the standard copies that Dr. Shabir states which were sent throughout the muslim world? Are these Qurans identical to each other and verify todays Quran? We do not seem to have any historic evidence or consensus on who actually wrote todays Quran! Does the Quran actually instruct believers to refer to the bible and the people of the book, Christans and Jews to clarify the writings within the Quran?

[@rohsnaoks1587]

The companions of the Prophet did write the verses down, they had a lot of personal copies. And even the Prophet himself instructed them to do so. The differences in dialects in Arab tribes were very well known at that time and throughout the Islamic history. Hence, different tribes will recite the same verses in their dialects. these differences are negligible, and produce same meaning. After Arabic language was standardized, people stopped using their own dialects, and instead recited the Quran in the standard Arabic.

[@formalminds1461]

Learn to format your posts please

[@sayfrunner]

lol all the gospels in the New Testament have UNKNOWN authors according to Christian scholars. What are you babling on about?

[@ahmadmuzakkir6792]

Nahh...in your dream...the early church father did NOT Know who the real authors of those 4 gospels....why do we muslims need to refer to that corrupted unholy bible??

[@miguelsramon4702]

Wow so he admitted that quran has been changed

[@Mulberry2000]

No he did not say that he said some one wrote a quran and and got stuff wrong. It does not mean the person who wrote THAT QURAN WAS RIGHT. Ally was saying the older text was compared to the other text, or mistakes was made and it was cleaned off. People do this all the time, THEY MAKE MISTAKES. It is well known that monks used old vellum to right do their work on it, when they made a mistake they just cleaned i. Same with oil paints et al. The point is writting materials were expensive esp vellum et al.

[@mohammedahmad8039]

I am not sure which sources you obtain your information from, but this stuff is in Wikipedia for crying out loud. What Dr Shabir is saying is common knowledge taught in islamic education, and has been taught by Muslim scholars for more than 1000 years. The volume of books written in Arabic about this subject over the past millennium are too many to list. If it’s new information for you, it doesn’t mean it’s a new admission, it only means you didn’t know about it, but now you do. 1. The Quran is still one single book. 2. The entire text in all readings is the same, some phrases are identical except for a single word, and those variants are prepositions that do not alter anything or single words that are synonyms or similar in meaning. (so nothing is drastic) 3. It was recognized and recorded in the early centuries, and the differences were authenticated and the process is documented and also reasons and analysis was given all in the first centuries and those same recitations of the Quran that were authenticated in first centuries have not been altered since and are still used. 4. ALL manuscripts or palimpsests that were recently carbon dated and found to be early centuries manuscripts CONFIRM the Muslim historical story. This is a link to an English article from one of the many institutes that teach about it yaqeeninstitute.org/nazir-khan/the-origins-of-the-variant-readings-of-the-quran/ This is the Wikipedia link en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qira%27at

[@liberator275]

so who put together the current version? and how is it known that this indeed is the right one if there were other versions that were not right? who made these decisions?

[@liberator275]

which of the early versions is authentic? any of them? where is the original authentic version then?

[@SSP700]

@@Mulberry2000 David Wood and Jay Smith on Preservation of Quran : Live!! : kzbin.info/www/bejne/gpfKh2yZg8tkrMU

[@InfinitelyManic]

If Allah commanded that the Qur'an be recited in seven dialects then why did Uthman command a standardized Qu'ran in the Qurayshi dialect?

[@bf6724]

The manuscript of Sanaa was only an educational draft for children to train in, written with disorganized oblique lines, filled with erasing and rewriting multiple times.

[@killerpie5981]

It’s not a paper that can be disposed off

[@killerpie5981]

Pivos Pivepic the Lower text of the Sana’a manuscript is only written in a different accent of Arabic to accommodate the other Arab tribes The meaning is the same no variants or changing when caliph uthman decided to canonise the Quran to the Qurayshi Hejaz style then the Sana’a manuscript was scribbled then replaced and since it was it was expensive parchment they used the same one. There is a reason why it is called the companion manuscript

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@isay6757]

Training was done on sand, mud, clay, or papyrus; not on expensive vellum!

[@bf6724]

@@isay6757 I am not the one who said that. Researcher Dr. Asma Hilali studied this manuscript and she is the one who concluded that.

[@ajahmed1793]

First people's we're blessed As near one,s,Allaha set gave them best memery to hear n record as exact as a foto copy of today.. masshalla.

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@bomb1232]

I saw a beer ad on this video. This should be enough for the admin of the channel.

[@MrMShake]

KZbin uses targetted advertising, so it isn't the channel's fault, possibly the system is faulty or your browsing activity triggered the beer ad.

[@fidelcatsro6948]

probably non alcoholic...

[@Mr_Battlefield]

You might want to check your ad settings. Your search history follows you. The annoying ad I'm seeing right now allot on KZbin is a solar panel batter bank for USB devices to charge up. Might want to check your settings. 🤦🏼‍♂️

[@bomb1232]

@@fidelcatsro6948 ceartainly not since I know the product

[@bomb1232]

@@Mr_Battlefield Ads system algorithm is a mystery.

[@imbatman5882]

So the quran wasn't perfectly preserved letter for letter, dot for dot.

[@invaderopbr]

It was It looks like you didnt watch the video 😂

[@blackoctopus5182]

That wording is not correct for the preservation of quran. Since quran didn't come as a scribe but as an oral speech. Also the arabic language, the alphabets and was different back then. Arabic alphabets back then had no dots and markings on then. Only later that has been added to the arabic alphabet. So saying letter to letter dot to dot, is not a right term to be used for quran. That's where muslims are at fault when they say dot to dot. But still the speech are the same words.

[@MC-to3ry]

What I don’t understand is: If the Quranic manuscripts differed only in wording and spelling, but the message of the Quran remained intact, what was the point of burning, washing old Quranic manuscripts? I mean, if I have a book written in English, Spanish, French, using different wordings, spelling, but communicating the same message, why would I standardize it into one official book alone? Why would I get rid of the other books which also contain the same message in different dialects, languages? To burn, wash out older Quranic Manuscripts and standardized it into one official book, is a clear indication that the variations did somehow altered some of the message. So, why are we going to criticize the Bible Manuscripts? It has been proven by many scholars that the variations in Bible Manuscripts are wording, spelling. Also, the verses that do differ from one Manuscript to another Manuscript are verses that have nothing to do with the Message of the Bible. What is corrupted or altered is the interpretation that some “Christians” have of certain Bible passages. And if one criticizes the Bible based on spurious additions found in King James Version, such as 1st John 5:7, even with that addition the message it’s not changed. That verse does not say “the father, the word and the holy spirit; these three are one God”. Rather, it says “these three are one”, and it ends there. In what sense? In the sense that they share the same goal or purpose. You may compare this to John 17:11, 20-23. I sincerely hope sincere truth seeker Muslims start considering studying the Holy Scriptures (Bible).

[@MC-to3ry]

​@Abu taj md mahbub Ul alam Thank you for your respectful reply. I will look into it and get back to you in the near future. However, the point I am trying to make is: Dear Muslims should not automatically discredit the Bible based on the historical fact of variations in wording, spelling and some additions (such as the one found in King James Version; 1st John 5:7) made to the text. Why not? Because the Quran has also suffered the same issues as seen in the video. Gladly, for the Bible and Quran, none of the variations have corrupted or altered the message of each book. Sadly, what has corrupted or altered the text of the Bible, is the misinterpretation or misunderstanding of some verses, made by “Christians” belonging to Christendom. Perhaps, this is why Dr. Ehrman became agnostic? Moreover, to discredit the Bible based on the opinion of man and ignore the opinion of Almighty God himself, it would be a very dangerous position to take. What do I mean? The Bible confirms that the word of God will endure forever (Isaiah 40:8). Hence, if a man’s opinion has more authority than the authority of Almighty God himself, we should revalue our beliefs and thinking to ensure we are not falling in blasphemy and disloyalty towards our Creator. P.S: Why would Almighty God reveal to prophet Muhammad that the Quran confirms the previous original Scriptures, if they no longer existed or if their copies had been corrupted or altered? Please let’s meditate on that. Thank you.

[@johnpeter3626]

Yoh, so there's no original Koran on earth, exactly like one in heaven, word for word.

[@Eesalitepill99]

There is a original

[@fittja1453]

Isa Ngo Where? Give me the source... there is no original quran. Its just copies

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@isaiahbakombo8603]

@@jellyfishi_ ✝ thank Jesus for all He is done, thank you Father for sending your Word

[@ahmadmuzakkir6792]

@@isaiahbakombo8603 you prayed to the wrong god..hell is with you

[@xrisc131]

Thank you Dr. Ally. I have listened to many of your podcasts and I believe you are a trustworthy scholar. This is not a criticism, it is an observation. So the Sanaa palimpsest is a minor variation on the accepted Quran. I get it. Totally legitimate. But how now can Muslims still claim the Quran is perfect and incorruptible (as demonstrated by the lack of variant readings) yet also teach that Gospels and the Tora are are corrupted and therefore compromised because variant readings exist?

[@IsaDawah]

The Qur'an is the recitation as it has been recited by Muhammad (saw). It is in the hearts and minds of all Muslims. The text is not what's important. Thanks.

[@xrisc131]

@@IsaDawah Thank you Isa Dawah for your reply.

[@muhammad-burhanmustafa4429]

It's important to know that the variations that do exist Are in large part a result of orthography (the rules of spelling) and pronunciation of different Arabic dialects. This sometimes may have an affect on meaning. Imagine I spell the word sonne and son . The former is old English and the latter is new English both have the same meaning. This is an example of orthography in a nutshell.

[@christiyomajarju2803]

Please Dr. If one person had memorized the whole Quran, then why did he needs to collect other writings ✍ of the Quran by other Muslims?

[@da.ni.e.l]

This is a good question, how ever he did not answer...

[@MatthewMcknight]

Thank you for discussing this sensitive topic Dr Shabir! I know this would make certain people feel uncomfortable who grew up being taught there was only one written down version of the Quran. However, I see this as normal human behavior. Slight variations in what a person writes down for a sacred book does not somehow therefore negate the value of content of that book. All inspiration from God is filtered through human beings. And human beings can make mistakes. While this doesn’t sound great to dogmatic belief, it is a pragmatic approach to us seeking the divine and the divine giving us light and knowledge.

[@petersayers4843]

Explained in a manner even a child should be able to understand... but not explained well enough for the mentally insane. We have to leave those to stew in their own juices.

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@UnlimitlesslyFunnyDude]

people like this just utter philosophical answer rubbish .... no clear-cut scientific answer....because this type of people are not even scientist what can we expect more from them?

[@MrTruthing]

Thank you, Dr. Shabir Ally, for your honest and frank talk! I pray that your videos on that topic of how the Quran came into being will not be taken down. The reason for that could be that questions like the following will be hard to answer: 1. Your main point is that in the beginning Mohammad was concerned with the preservation of the meaning of the Quran. The message was important, not the words. While I agree with you, how do you explain Surah 6:115 that seems to talk about the word of Allah that cannot be changed, not the meaning: “And the word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can alter His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.” Surah 18:27 is even clearer: “And recite, [O Muhammad], what has been revealed to you of the Book of your Lord. There is no changer of His words, and never will you find in other than Him a refuge.” While Christians agree that the word of God found in the Bible has not changed either, they freely admit this refers to the original manuscripts only. In order to get to the original meaning of the Bible all manuscripts have been preserved, unlike with the Quran, were many manuscripts were burnt or washed as is the case with the Saana manuscripts. This brings me to the next question: 2. You are saying around 8:40 minutes that, “… Once that copy which is known to be a genuine revelation had been prepared, it was necessary then to erase the others. Nowadays, of course, if something like this would happen, we would keep the old copies in museums and would be trying to recover those old copies and study them. But that was not the impetus of the time. People would not go around and say, “let’s have a museum of artefacts, of old copies of the Quran.” Why would they not do that if they were convinced to have received the very words of Allah? This question has to be asked in light of the fact that the great Museum at Alexandria, was founded already by Ptolemy I Soter early in the 3rd century bce. Yes, they served a variety of purposes, “yet, they are bound by a common goal: the preservation and interpretation of some material aspect of society’s cultural consciousness.” ( www.britannica.com/topic/museum-cultural-institution ) 3. Muslims are trusting the hadith for an explanation of how the Quran came into being, etc. What if they have been tampered with by people who had various agendas? It is a fact that the main hadiths have been collected more than 200 years after the actual events.

[@muhdweb1]

This is already everywhere nothing new

[@Muslim_Convert_Stories]

Chapter Psalm 91 clearly and indisputably confirms that Jesus never got crucified! Before I list the entire short chapter of Psalm 91, let us first look at the following Verses from the Noble Quran and the Bible: Let us look at the following Noble Verse from the Noble Quran (The Muslims Holy Scripture): "That they rejected Faith; That they uttered against Mary A grave false charge; That they said (in boast): 'We killed Christ Jesus The son of Mary, The Messenger of Allah.' But they killed him not, Nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not. Nay, Allah raised him up Unto Himself; and Allah Is Exalted in Power, Wise. And there is none of the people of the book (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (Jesus) Before his death; And on the Day of Judgment He (Jesus) will be a witness Against them. (The Noble Quran, 4:156-159)" Now compare the Noble Verses to Isaiah 52:13 "...he will be raised and lifted up....". Notice that Isaiah 52:13 did not say "....he will be RESURRECTED and lifted up...." Not even once, did the Old Testament predict for the foretold Servant (Jesus) to be raised to GOD Almighty after death. There absolutely no mention of any sort of resurrection in the Bible's Old Testament what so ever. Here are few more translations of Isaiah 52:13: "Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. (From the King James Version Bible, Isaiah 52:13)" "Lo, My servant doth act wisely, He is high, and hath been lifted up, And hath been very high. (From Young's Literal Translation Bible, Isaiah 52:13)" "Behold, my servant shall act wisely; he shall be high and lifted up, and shall be exalted. (From the English Standard Version Bible, Isaiah 52:13)" "Behold, my servant shall deal prudently; he shall be exalted and be lifted up, and be very high. (From Darby Translation Bible, Isaiah 52:13)" The text in all of the translations above clearly suggests that Jesus will be honored and lifted up from crucifixion. He will not be humiliated and crucified. Also, "...he will be raised and lifted up...." seems to suggest that Jesus will be picked up right from the cross, or saved right from the cross by Allah Almighty. "raised and lifted" clearly suggests that Jesus will not die, nor get crucified, but rather be raised and lifted by GOD Almighty to Heavens. It just seems odd to see both words "raised" and "lifted", and not just one of them, in Isaiah 52:13, and yet think that they agree with the fabricated crucifixion story about Jesus in the NT. Why did GOD Almighty choose to say "raised" and "lifted" in Isaiah And what about the bones? The Verses that reference the Bones: "A righteous man may have many troubles, but the LORD delivers him from them all; he protects all his bones, not one of them will be broken. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 34:19-20)" As these verses don't even seem to be talking about the Messiah or any crucifixion, but assuming that they did, notice how Psalm 34:20 says that GOD Almighty will protect "all his bones". So, not even an inch from his bones will be damaged according to the Scriptures - again assuming that the verses are even talking about the Messiah!! This is exactly what the Noble Quran and Isaiah 52:13 say! Also, notice how Psalm 34:19 says that the LORD delivers him from "ALL OF THE troubles, which clearly goes against the crucifixion lie. But anyway despite the John 19:36 verse, I still proved, by Allah Almighty's Mercy, Grace and Will, that the Psalm verses actually further proved the Noble Quran's claims along with Isaiah 52:13, and Jesus' Disciples' and the Early Christians original writings that were found in Palestine and Egypt about Jesus never got crucified! Again, I clearly see the Noble Quran's Claim about Jesus being saved from crucifixion being confirmed in Psalm 34:20! Let us now take a look at Psalm 91: Psalm 91 There is no question! There is no question that the emphasized parts above, especially in Psalm 91:12, clearly and indisputably agree with the Noble Quran's and Isaiah 52:13 above! Jesus was neither crucified nor resurrected, and he was protected and lifted by GOD Almighty. Psalm 22 and 88 confirm Islam's claim about Jesus never got crucified: To put everything in the proper perspective, please first visit: Did Isaiah 53 really prophesies about the crucifixion of Jesus? to see all of the Old Testament's verses that clearly confirmed Islam's Divine Claims about Jesus never got crucified. Having said that, let us now look at Psalm 22 and 88: Psalm 22 (Young's Literal Translation) 1 To the Overseer, on `The Hind of the Morning.' -- A Psalm of David. My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me? Far from my salvation, The words of my roaring? 2 My God, I call by day, and Thou answerest not, And by night, and there is no silence to me. 3 And Thou [art] holy, Sitting -- the Praise of Israel. 4 In Thee did our fathers trust -- they trusted, And Thou dost deliver them. 5 Unto Thee they cried, and were delivered, In Thee they trusted, and were not ashamed. 6 And I [am] a worm, and no man, A reproach of man, and despised of the people. 7 All beholding me do mock at me, They make free with the lip -- shake the head, 8 `Roll unto Jehovah, He doth deliver him, He doth deliver him, for he delighted in him.' 9 For thou [art] He bringing me forth from the womb, Causing me to trust, On the breasts of my mother. 10 On Thee I have been cast from the womb, From the belly of my mother Thou [art] my God. 11 Be not far from me, For adversity is near, for there is no helper. 12 Many bulls have surrounded me, Mighty ones of Bashan have compassed me, 13 They have opened against me their mouth, A lion tearing and roaring. 14 As waters I have been poured out, And separated themselves have all my bones, My heart hath been like wax, It is melted in the midst of my bowels. 15 Dried up as an earthen vessel is my power, And my tongue is cleaving to my jaws. 16 And to the dust of death (some translations don't have "death" in the verse. See below for proofs) thou appointest me, For surrounded me have dogs, A company of evil doers have compassed me, Piercing my hands and my feet. 17 I count all my bones -- they look expectingly, They look upon me, 18 They apportion my garments to themselves, And for my clothing they cause a lot to fall. 19 And Thou, O Jehovah, be not far off, O my strength, to help me haste. 20 Deliver from the sword my soul, From the paw of a dog mine only one. 21 Save me from the mouth of a lion: -- And -- from the horns of the high places Thou hast answered me! 22 I declare Thy name to my brethren, In the midst of the assembly I praise Thee. 23 Ye who fear Jehovah, praise ye Him, All the seed of Jacob, honour

[@Muslim_Convert_Stories]

1500 YEARS BIBLE SAYS JESUS( PBUH) IS NOT CRUCIFIED. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jnuxZYirrLB9b6M

[@Muslim_Convert_Stories]

Gerald Dirks( Harward University Bible Professor,PHD in christianity,Embraced Islam),Idris Tawfik ( Ex Catholic Priest,Embraced Islam) Dr Laurence Brown( Top American Surgeon,Embraced Islam),Joshua Ewans( south Carolina, Biblical study Embraced Islam), Abdurraheem Green( Biblical studies UK, embraced Islam) Daniel Hernandez( Embraced Islam),Samuel Earle Shropshire( American Pastor Embraced Islam) Yusuf Estes from Texas expriest( embraced Islam)List goes on,Many priests and Pastors,Nuns Embraced to Islam,when they found Authentic Information in Holy Quran. 4:157] And [for] their saying, “Indeed, we have killed the Messiah,, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah .” And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.

[@Muslim_Convert_Stories]

Have You Heard of the Red Letter Bible? By Shaikh Khalid Yasin (this is a transcript of a talk given by Shaikh Khalid Yasin) The five Gospels is a 550 page book containing translations of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. 550 pages of 4 people who we don’t know what their last names were. Matthew who ? Mark who ? Luke who ? and John who ? Secondly, 82% of those 550 pages, yes , eighty-two percent are not the words of Jesus Christ at all. I don’t say that, it’s the Christian scholars of 364 denominations say that 82% of the five hundred fifty pages of the Gospels are not the words of Jesus Christ at all. And the way they have determined that to show that to you and I is that in the New Testament they have done something called the ‘red letter’ bible. How many of you have seen the ‘red letter’ Bibles ? Those are the Bibles that whatever Jesus said himself is in red letters. You will find for yourself, that only 20% of what is in the New Testament is written in red. That 20% is what allegedly Jesus Christ said. Biblical scholars and theologians alike have learned to distinguish the Jesus of history from the Christ of faith. It has been a painful lesson for both the church and scholarship. The distinction between the two figures is the difference between a historical person who lived in a particular time and place and a figure who has been assigned a mythical role in which he descends from heaven to rescue humankind and of course eventually returns back to heaven. We want to continue to review the words of Jesus Christ himself. Jesus Christ said : “and this is the life eternal that they may know You the only true God and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” John 17:3 “that ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God” (Romans 15:6) and Jesus Christ said to a woman : “I ascend unto my Father and your Father and to my God and your God” (John 20:17) So by Jesus Christ’s words, he was a prophet of Nazareth. He’s a prophet of God. He’s a man that eats and drinks. He’s a man sent by God. He is the Son of man. Man meaning human, he’s the son of a woman, Mary, who was pure and untouched, chosen by God to have a son through a phenomenal birth. Now we want to examine a totally different view of Jesus as taught and represented by St. Paul, the father of the modern Church. In doing so we will talk about the new covenant, the New Testament and what has inevitably become a new religion built around a new Christ and a new Jesus. Let’s make reference to Paul himself. By his own admission, Paul said : “that I was on my way traveling on the road to Damascus” What was he doing ? He said : “i was on a mission to capture or to kill or trap Christians” because Paul or, at that time his name was Saul of Tarsus, was a bounty hunter. What was his hunt ? What was his prey ? It was Christians. Paul used to trap them, bind, hold and arrest them and deliver them to the Romans to be jailed and killed for a price. Now on one of those excursions, Paul said that he was on the road to Damascus and he was riding on a horse along with some other people and he said he heard a voice but the other people didn’t hear it. He said he saw a light but the others didn’t see it and he fell off his horse but the others didn’t fall off their horse . Paul said that in a vision he saw Jesus Christ and Christ revealed to him : “Paul Paul why do you persecute the Church. Paul I have selected you to be an apostle to the Gentiles” Now that is the only time that Paul said he saw and talked to Christ but those that were with him, they didn’t see Christ, didn’t see the light, they didn’t hear the voice and didn’t fall off their horses. But at best Paul saw something. We cannot deny that Paul saw something but isn’t it strange that after that one vision Paul straightaway understood that he was now the 12th apostle of Jesus Christ to replace Judas. A good replacement. Judas of course had already betrayed. Jesus Christ had already been lifted and now there were only 11 genuine disciples, and Paul said he had been appointed to fill that gap. He now became the 12th apostle by his own appointment. Isn’t it strange that of the 27 books of the New Testament, 15 of those books are absolutely written by Paul himself. The church fathers are of the opinion that the first five books were also written by Paul or under the influence of Paul. Why is that ? Because, Paul wrote his books between 50 and 60 years after Jesus Christ left. The other books, the four Gospels and Acts were written between 90 and a 110 years after, therefore whoever wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Acts were influenced by Paul who wrote first. Most Christians don’t know that. If you get the majority of the books written by Paul, who never saw Jesus physically, and you got another five books of four Gospel writers, who also never saw Jesus, never ate with Jesus, never talked to Jesus, never sat with Jesus and never heard directly from Jesus then you have got at least 20 books written by human beings who had no direct connection with Jesus Christ. Also all of these books were written without the authorization, without the assistance, without the witnessing, without the documentation, without the collaboration of the other twelve apostles who were living. Where were they living ? In Antioch or Jerusalem or Galilee. One would ask why didn’t they write themselves, and why were they passed up , why were they not collaborated with those that allegedly wrote the 20 books ? Shaikh Khalid Yasin (born in 1946) (also known as Abu Muhammad and Abu Muhammad Khalid Yasin ) is an American revert from Christianity to Islam who lectures in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. b) The Original Bible: The original manuscripts of the Bible are lost and no living person has ever seen them. Thus, the Bible educators talk about ‘inspiration of scriptures`. That means the compilers of the Bible claim to have been inspired about the scriptures after the original texts have been lost. c) The Language and the earliest Bible: To this date there is no confirmation about the actual language of the Bible and the earliest Bible. We have been told that the Bible was originally written in Greek and Hebrew. However, no one can actually prove that they were so written. The reason being that there is no original text of the Bible. The first five books could have been written in Egyptian, the language in which Moses was educated and the country wherein the Israelites had lived for many years. Conversations in the gospel were certainly not spoken in Greek even though the oldest manuscripts of the Bible are in Greek or Aramaic. There is an ongoing debate as to whether the earliest Gospels were written in Aramaic or Greek. Some scholars have proposed that they were written in Aramaic. But then again, no one has ever seen an Aramaic Gospel predating the fourth century which had to be translated from Greek to Aramaic. To this date scholars are still debating as to what language that Jesus spoke? For many years it was believed and still there are many adherers to that, that the language of Jesus was Aramaic. But recently, the majority of the scholars tend more to believe that it was Hebrew. However, the oldest texts of the Gospels available to us today are in Greek. Thus our Christian brethren do not even know the language in which their lord spoke. The oldest Bible was compiled six years after the Council of Nicea in the year 331AD. Constantine the Great, a pagan solar worshipper who was the first Roman Emperor who converted to Christianity destroyed all earlier copies of the Gospels and the fifty copies of the Gospels they produced are the basis for all Christian belief today. Ironically these fifty copies are considered ‘originals`. The Old Testament and most of its contents were gradually written within the nine centuries which is a long time after Prophet Moses. Thus the Bible both the Old and New Testaments is by no means a unified book in terms of authorship, date composition or literary type. d) Different Versions of the Bible. The Bible of Judaism and the Bible of Christianity are different. The version of the Old Testament used by the Roman Catholic is the Bible of Judaism plus seven other books and additions to books. The version of the Old Testament however used by Protestants is limited to the 39 books of the Jewish Bible. Not to mention the various versions of the Bible, Jehovah Witness, Mormons and many, many others claim to be the original.

[@nejadnejad2342]

Love from Bangladesh.

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@davidwarren4414]

“Let none of you say, ‘I have learned the whole of the Quran,’ for how does he know what the whole of it is, when much of it has disappeared? Let him rather say, ‘I have learned what remains thereof.’”

[@bigelowtech]

But the text in these manuscripts differ, and even you said the upper text in this Yemen manuscript was only almost the same as today's Quran. Can you please talk about this? We always learn it's word by word the same as Muhammad pbuh spoke, but we now know it's not true. For me it doesn't shake my faith, and God is more important than anything else, but brothers and sisters should know the Quran is changed, but it doesn't matter. No?

[@vbandz2645]

No brother, word for word it was true, it’s just that in different Arabic dialects the words were pronounced differently and since there wasn’t many copies about people accidentally didn’t read the Quran properly and a lot of mistakes was made and many nations argued about it, so Uthman gave them one of the 7 different dialect Qurans with Fusha Arabic(Standard Arabic) and told them to discard the others to avoid confusion, Dr Ally could of explained it a bit better but he didn’t have enough time, search up Toprak manuscript which 99.9% accurate of today’s Quran

[@bigelowtech]

@@vbandz2645 but that is not as old as Muhammad pbuh. I'm not talking dialects. Manuscripts from 500, 600 and 900 showed us a difference in words and meaning. Also additional lines from surahs that are not in the current Quran.🤷🏻‍♂️ To me it's not important that the book is preserved or not, but it is important that people follow God, are good, and care for the world. We must also stand together. Muslims today are fighting more than ever, and it will break the faith of coming generations. Remember, we are nothing, God is everything...

[@bamantioindrahidayat1165]

@@bigelowtech no Cause many memorize it and if did it change the entire Muslim will know but it the same as the 1400 years ago The Qur'an have two different way to keep by Muslim The memorize and written

[@bigelowtech]

@@bamantioindrahidayat1165 you don't know any history. Where is the book or texts from 1400 years ago? There are none, because Uthman ibn 'Affan burned them all and put together his own. The first 400 years of Islam saw many changes to the Quran. That's proven by the oldest known qurans in turkey, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, UK. All these were very different. What you read now is a neo-Islamic standardization.

[@bamantioindrahidayat1165]

@@bigelowtech i don't say the Qur'an is written 1400 years ago but memorized 1400 years ago The first Khalifah that order first Qur'an book to be made was Abu Bakar Ash-Shiddiq cause the many muslim died due war of False prophet Mussailamah Al-Kazab and in that war Abu Bakar Ash-Shiddiq fear that the Qur'an gonna gone so they wrote it down and the command team is Zaid In Usman bin Affan due to expand need to use Qur'an they're began to copy and send to various place but the copy came along with people are memorized it so they can guide how to read Quran Later the claim that Qur'an is change or not it doesn't there only slight difference because of how the accent of different region but the Qur'an today is the same that Qur'an told by Prophet Muhammad Shalallahu alaihi wassalam 1400 years ago

[@glof2553]

Compare the New Testament to the Quran from a historicity standpoint

[@ibrahimparkar6900]

Watch ef dawah they have been at it and the Christians there are saying " bible is not a historical book its a spiritual book".

[@inquisitivemind007]

Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrJfn9pea50rbs

[@obamatime1634]

WOAH! I DID! I found out that the New Testament is completely preserved! Isn't that crazy? I also found out the Quran isn't preserved! EVEN CRAZIER!!!

[@isaiahbakombo8603]

@@obamatime1634 ✝

[@ahmadmuzakkir6792]

the bible? hahah your bible is NO way has the same standard as to we muslim compiled about the quran....in fact...no one really knows the real authors of those 4 gospels....

[@gleasonparker1684]

I appreciate that you're voice and temp remote comes across as a humble person. I think Allah Our God does give us all a spirit of discernment where we can measure what a person says it's being more important then what he teaches or believes even because out of the heart the mouth speaks is what Jesus said I think. Sadly many of the Muslim site so KZbin are mostly combative and rude and so I just don't want you so your site may be the only hope for the Muslims to reach out to Christians in the United States so I hope you take this as a compliment and how it is helped me and worked on me or as it would not if you were rude or mean as many are. I must say also many Christians are the same way.

[@QuranSpeaks]

Thank you, Gleason! That's a really nice thing to say. We are touched.

[@pamassiesso2159]

Question. Did they all agreed on that quran

[@rc6289]

No.

[@abdullahdaone]

Lol look at these fools trying to twist his words. he clearly said there are perhaps very small particles in the Quran that might be different from the exact words that Muhammad used, for example in English, instead of using the word “big” we use “large” that’s it. he never once said that the message itself has been altered in anyway

[@davidtheophillus9832]

Let's agree about something: He said that there are differences, which he will explain in details later. 'Big' and 'large' seems too small a difference to explain later, don't you agree?

[@rpdsouza1957]

So do you mean the golden quran preserved in heaven is now textually different from its earthly version ?? Why ?? Hasn't allah sent down quran in very clear verses ?

[@mpmh3]

watch the video...its about this topic...God bless..kzbin.info/www/bejne/hH3agp6mYseUec0

[@mpmh3]

here is another video peace to you...kzbin.info/www/bejne/fGfEmISjpJqCisU

[@harrykalos8540]

Do not be mistaken, this is damage control. Shabir's aim here is to downplay the differences. Perfectly preserved means exactly that, and exactly that is not what it is.

[@CaptainPlanet337]

Now that the myth of perfect preservation is out of the window, I wonder how the muslims are gonna defend Allah " The worst protector of books"

[@OmarOsman98]

Its really not. You have to pay attention to what he is saying.

[@CaptainPlanet337]

@@OmarOsman98 Well if you have understood it please explain

[@OmarOsman98]

From Islamic historical sources, we already know that variations in Quranic manuscripts existed due to dialect which results in different word usage. That being said, we know that Uthman Ibn Affan and the memorizers of the Quran who were closest to the Prophet created a council in which they could discern the dialectic vocabulary changes. Ultimately, this resulted in the elimination of these texts despite the fact that the message didn't change. The Sanaa manuscript actually strengthens the Islamic perspective because it shows that despite having the same meaning, Uthman and the memorizers ensured that accuracy was only measured on a word by word basis.

[@OmarOsman98]

@@CaptainPlanet337 Secondly with respect to your comment, the nature of the alleged revelations of the Torah, Gospel and the Quran are significantly different. According to the Torah, God demands that the priests are the ultimate authority on the Law. They holding this covenant were expected to uphold the Law regardless of anything. The Gospel was not preserved at all and was largely distorted by Paul. Today's Christianity is based on Paul's teachings largely. The nature of the Quran is that it must be preserved in that it is the final revelation to mankind. Although preservation does not equal out to God's truth, it certainly is necessary that God's truth must be preserved.

[@Butters203]

We have the entire Quran memorize by heart....

[@mahboobkhan3570]

May Allah bless and reward you for service to Islam. When we stand with the wahee revelations of Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ela Allah then stand with us. I wish I had funds to send you. Mahboob Khan Islamabad Pakistan