Hope you've read my previous post carol.....waiting for your reply.
In line with the previous post, here are some more infromation...
Why did 'Uthman feel the need to destroy other copies of the Qur'an, unless they contained variants?
'Uthman ibn 'Affan was elected as the third Caliph by a Council called the Shura. As the elected leader of the Muslim Ummah (Brotherhood), it was his privilege and prerogative to appoint a Commission to collect all the available verses of the Qur'an from the 'Ummah and undertake the task of preparing a definitive compiled copy of the Qur'an. The Commission established a criteria for this specific purpose. When this Commission, headed by Zayd ibn Thabit - a reputable scribe and personal secretary to the Prophet, came up with a finally compiled copy of the Qur'an, it was approved by 'Uthman for circulation. The Caliph also supervised that the faithful copies of it were made and circulated to various provinces and Islamic countries. Having accomplished that, the next obvious question before him was; how to preserve this canonized text from being tainted at a later date? There were thousands of collected verses from which this final canonized copy was prepared. The majority of this collected verses met the criteria established by the Commission and there were a few that did not. They all were now superfluous. One of the criteria established by the Commission was that any verse that did not have the collaboration from another source, should be rejected. To keep such rejected verses within circulation would be to defeat the ultimate aim and purpose of this
and it's efforts. Hence, 'Uthman felt the need to destroy these superfluous copies of the verses and preserve the approved text from being tainted. A true Believer would say, within these Revelations, Allah had undertaken to preserve His Final Scripture. The third Caliph was just an instrument of Allah to do what Allah had intended to do.
Lo! those who disbelieve in the Reminder when it cometh unto them (are guilty), for lo! it is an unassailable Scripture. Falsehood cannot come at it from before it or behind it. (It is) a revelation from the Wise, the Owner of Praise.
(Glorious Qur'an 41:41/42)
'Uthman needs to be complimented by every upright scholar for his wise decision. More than ever so, by the Christian scholars, after having seen what has come to pass and is happening even today with the unceasing publications and circulation of their re-revised and newly rerevised Versions of the biblical texts.
There is no evidence to show that the appointed Commission had disapproved or rejected the verses that DID MEET the established criteria. Nor, there is evidence to show that the Commission DID belong or adhere to a particular SECT of Islam and was biased in preparing the final copy. The history records that the Prophet (pbuh) died in 632 and twelve years later, 'Uthman was elected Caliph in 644. It was after 'Uthman's death, there arose differences within the 'Ummah. The divisions and the Religious Sects within Islam came into being after his death and not before. The critic's remark "unless they contained variants" is a speculative guess. Unfortunately, the Critic fails to see and appreciate the obvious and essential need for such an action. Hence, this rebuttal.
Why did Ibn Ma'sud refuse to hand over his copy for destruction?
The appropriate question should have been; Why did Ibn Ma'sud initially refuse to hand over his copy for destruction?
A brief bio-data of this early companion of the Prophet (s.a.s.) would help us to understand the entire situation. His name was Abdullah. He was son of Ma'sud. During his childhood he was also called "ibn Umm Abd" (the son of the mother of a slave). At an early age he joined the Prophet in his mission and stayed very close to him. He received the training in the household of the Prophet and had learnt the Qirat of the Qur'an (the accepted method of the recitation of the Qur'an) from the Prophet himself. He was a leading reputable Qari (reciter of the Qur'an) and used to recite loudly and clearly. Ibn Ma'sud was recommended by the Prophet to those who wished to learn the Qirat . He was very knowledgeable on the Shariah and followed the Sunnah of the Prophet closely. When he was sent to Kufa in Iraq, the people of Kufa highly respected him. They not only used to learn from ibn Ma'sud the verses of the Qur'an but also used to consult him on the subject.
When Uthman sent out the order that all codices of the Qur'an other than the codex of Zaid ibn Thabit should be destroyed, Abdullah ibn Mas'ud refused to hand over his copy. Desai openly speaks of "Hadhrat Ibn Mas'ud's initial refusal to hand over the compilation" (The Quraan Unimpeachable, p.44)
Please note the quoted text from page 44 speaks of Hadhrat Ibn Mas'ud's "initial" refusal. The critic has in his opening sentence very conveniently ignored this important fact about this initial reaction by Abdullah Ibn Mas'ud. Here is the reason for this initial or early reaction. Abdullah Ibn Mas'ud had with him a personal copy of the Qur'an (Musaf) which was his precious personal possession. We also learn from the said chapter-3 that Ibn Ma'sud had made some notes on his copy. It is quite understandable that any religious teacher or missionary would develop a kind of sentiment for his personal copy of the Divine Scripture which he has been using over a period of time and more so, if there were his personal notes on that copy. Such early reactions are but normal under the most normal circumstances. The Critic questions the issue of "personal notes" on the ground that no documentary evidence has been provided. The critic had better ask himself a question; "Does my own personal copy of the Holy Bible, which I have been using over a period of time, has any personal notes or underlined text?" It is inconceivable that any Bible scholar/teacher would have a copy of his personal Bible without his/her personal notes.
THE VARIANT READINGS IN IBN MAS'UD'S CODEX.
The Critic writes in the opening paragraph to the above:
One of the anomalies recorded in respect of Ibn Mas'ud's text is that it is said to have omitted the Suratul-Fatihah, the opening surah, and the mu'awwithatayni, the two short surahs with which the Qur'an ends (Surahs 113 and 114). The form of these surahs has some significance - the first is purely in the form of a prayer to Allah and the last two are "charm" surahs, being recommended incantations of refuge with Allah which Muslims should recite as protection against sinister forces and practices. One tradition states that Ubayy ibn Ka'b was at one time challenged with the suggestion that Ibn Mas'ud had made certain negative statements about these surahs and he replied that he had asked Muhammad about them and was informed that they were a part of the revelation of the Qur'an and should be recited as such (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 6, p.472).
There are two parts to the above allegation. The first part relates to the "Suratul-Fatihah, the opening surah,".
In Sura 15 verse 87, it is Revealed: "And We have bestowed upon thee the Seven Oft-Repeated (verses) and the Grand Qur'an."
1. Almost everyone is in agreement that "the Seven Oft-Repeated (verses)" is the other name for Suratul-Fatihah. This opening Surat of the Qur'an consists of the Seven Verses. These Seven Verses form the integral part of the Ritual Prayers for every Muslim. A person praying five times a day repeats these Seven Verses at least seventeen times.
2. No one has argued or proved that the above quoted verse 15: 87 was NOT written by Abdullah ibn Mas'ud in his Musaf (lit. any thing between the two covers - a book). In other words, the above quoted text was known to ibn Mas'ud as the text "Revealed by Allah". Hence, it is inconceivable that anyone after having recited the above quoted verse would doubt the Revelation of the Suratul-Fatihah from Allah (swt).
3. The above quoted verse of the Qur'an conclusively demonstrates, from within the "Revealed Verses" of the Qur'an itself , that the Seven Oft-Repeated (verses) i. e. Suratul-Fatihah was indeed "BESTOWED" upon Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) by Allah. Everything that was REVEALED to the Prophet and faithfully RECITED word for word by the Prophet did qualify as the undeniable part of the "Recitation" the synonym for "al-Qur'an". To say that the existence of Suratul-Fatihah within the compilation of the Qur'an done by the Commission appointed by Uthman and headed by ibn Thabit is a "textual variant of the Qur'an" is thus absolutely unfounded and a false allegation.
4. The above quoted verse of the Qur'an speaks of the Qur'an "and"
the Seven Oft Repeated (verse). Based upon this connecting word "and" one may have at one time argued that this word separates the two. Although, the later being Revealed by Allah alike the Verses of the Qur'an and Bestowed upon Prophet Muhammad, technically or legally, they are two separate "groups" of Revelations and as such be kept separate. The acceptance or adherence to this kind of understanding does not lower or alter the rank and the eminence of the "Seven Oft Repeated Verses". Even from this point of view, the compilation of the so advocated "two groups" of the Revelations into "a single group" does not qualify as "textual variant of the Qur'an".
Let us now deal with the second part of the Critic's allegation
One of the anomalies recorded in respect of Ibn Mas'ud's text is that it is said to have omitted the Suratul-Fatihah, the opening surah, and the mu'awwithatayni, the two short surahs with which the Qur'an ends (Surahs 113 and 114). The form of these surahs has some significance - the first is purely in the form of a prayer to Allah and the last two are "charm" surahs, being recommended incantations of refuge with Allah which Muslims should recite as protection against sinister forces and practices.
The allegation for "Mu'awwithatayni" (Surahs 113 and 114), being omitted by Abdullah Ibn Mas'ud is a rehashed allegation made earlier by the enemies of Islam, based upon the reported traditions. These charges have already been responded by Muslim scholars of the past like Imam Nawawi, Imam Ibn Hazm and Imam Fakhr-uddin Razi. For details please read the Introductions to these two Surahs by Muslim scholars like Mawlana Maududi or visit the Islamic site mentioned at the beginning of this article. There are reports that negate such unfounded claims. Reproduced below is one from the earlier quote:
One tradition states that Ubayy ibn Ka'b was at one time challenged with the suggestion that Ibn Mas'ud had made certain negative statements about these surahs and he replied that he had asked Muhammad about them and was informed that they were a part of the revelation of the Qur'an and should be recited as such (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 6, p.472).
The most important question is; Were these Surahs "Revealed" by Allah to Prophet Muhammad or were they simply "charm" Surahs that were traditionally recommended to Muslims for the incantations?
The answer is to be found in the OPENING WORDS of both these Surahs. The opening word in Arabic is "Qul" meaning "Say (O' Muhammad)". There are nearly 300 or so verses within the Quran that begin with this word "Qul". This Command "Say O' Muhammad (to the reciter)" by itself clearly denotes that these two Surahs, alike the rest of the "Qul Surahs" (e.g. verses 6:161 and 162), were Revealed by Allah to the prophet for mankind. As for the earlier presented arguments regarding the grouping of these two so called "charm" Surahs into "one single group", please read the item No. 4 above.
There may be a difference of opinion as to the word "Qul". Was this word "Qul" to be repeated by a reciter while the recitation of the verse or not? As long as the rest of the text is recited in full with a complete understanding that the text recited was indeed Revealed from Allah to Prophet Muhammad and the Message conveyed is understood by the Reciter, it does not qualify as "textual variant of the Qur'an".
EXAMPLES OF VARIANT READINGS IN IBN MAS'UD'S CODEX.
The Critic writes:
When we come to the rest of the Qur'an, however, we find that there were numerous differences of reading between the texts of Zaid and Ibn Mas'ud.
The Critic claims to have found numerous differences of reading. He then quotes six specific examples. Obviously, these selected examples must be from the ones having the most significant differences. In any event, after examining the cited examples one can easily visualize how qualified or otherwise are the so called "textual variants" in the Quran.
The Critic has used the phrase "the texts of Zaid" which is a misnomer. He is in fact comparing the texts that were approved by the Commission appointed by Uthman. It is also essential to note that the Critic has used the phrase "differences of reading". This could include the differences due to the placing of the "diacritical marks" upon the constants. These diacritical marks, which were later introduced to the texts, denote the vowels that the constants would take for the correct reading. Such variations may in some cases change the tense of a verb or the gender.
Before one examines the cited examples below one has to note the essential fact that the Critic is comparing the Commission's compiled texts with the texts to be found within the personal copy Musaf (book) of Abdullah Ibn Mas'ud. As mentioned earlier Ibn Mas'ud had made notes in his own Musaf for his personal references. One will certainly notice that the Message conveyed by both the texts essentially remains unchanged. There is no lack of correspondence between the two readings. For a better understanding let us examine the six examples:
1. Surah 2.275
The Commission approved text would translate;
...those who devour usury will not stand except like the standing of a person touched by Satan.
Ibn Mas'ud's personal text would translate;
...those who devour usury will not be able to stand on the "Day of Resurrection" except like the standing of a person touched by Satan.
2. Surah 5.91
The Commission approved text would translate;
...fast for three days.
Ibn Mas'ud's personal text would translate;
...fast for three "successive" days.
3. Surah 6.153
The Commission approved text would translate;
"Verily this is my path".
Ibn Mas'ud's personal text would translate;
This is the path of Your Lord.
4. Surah 33.6
The Commission approved text would translate;
...and his (Prophet's) wives are their mothers
Ibn Mas'ud's personal text would translate;
...and his (Prophet's) wives are their mothers and he is their father.
5. Surah 3.127 (This verse is numbered 3:133 in Yusuf Ali & Pickthall)
The Commission approved text would translate;
Be quick in the race for forgiveness from your Lord...
Ibn Mas'ud's personal text would translate;
"Be ahead" in the race for forgiveness from your Lord...
6. Surah 6.16
The Commission approved text would translate;
On that day if the penalty is averted from any,
it is due to Allah's Mercy;
Ibn Mas'ud's personal text would translate;
On that day if the penalty is averted "by Allah" from any,
it is due to Allah's Mercy;
Waiting for your reply.....carol.....I like your way of discussion, it shows how respectful you are