Perseverance of the Quran

[Dimi95]

Brother. I didn't ask for some link.Since you are making a claim, you should have some epistemic responsibility.

Stop with the lecturing.
I was outside doing whatever i was doing and could not answer right away.

We are not at NASA , take it easy.

Provide the manuscript tag number

Codex Ṣanʿāʾ I
Manuscript tag number: DAM 01-27.1
folios number 20A

, give the exact verse you are comparing with Birmingham and the Sanaa palimpsest

Surah 9 verse 74

, and then it will show that you have done your research.If you cannot, just leave it. Admit that you cannot and you have not done the research. No one knows you personally here so you will never lose anything.

Cheers.

This is irrelevant.

 

[firedragon]

Codex Ṣanʿāʾ I
Manuscript tag number: DAM 01-27.1
folios number 20A

Which verse? And what's the variant in comparison to Birmingham manuscript?

 

[firedragon]

Surah 9 verse 74

Doesn't exist in Dam 1.27.1 or Birmingham. So how do you compare a verse that does not exist in both manuscripts you referenced?

 

[Dimi95]

Doesn't exist in Dam 1.27.1

Yes, i double checked it and you are correct , it is not in Dam 1.27.1

I have to re-check and find it.

But i am not lying , i know i have seen it months ago.

 

[firedragon]

Yes, i double checked it and you are correct , it is not in Dam 1.27.1

I have to re-check and find it.

But i am not lying , i know i have seen it months ago.

View attachment 99620

Great. So what's the exact verse, the exact variant, the folio in the Sanaa and your comparison of Birmingham manuscript? I am asking about your exact claim so that we could analyze it. I have asked I don't know how many times now. Your image above and your highlight is absolutely irrelevant. Thanks.

 

[Dimi95]

Great. So what's the exact verse, the exact variant, the folio in the Sanaa and your comparison of Birmingham manuscript? I am asking about your exact claim so that we could analyze it. I have asked I don't know how many times now. Your image above and your highlight is absolutely irrelevant. Thanks.

Ok , i'm back.

I was correct about the manuscript number , but wrong about the number of the folio.

It is 16r

So at first i want to give you the source so you can see them for yourself.

The end of the Quran as Muslims know it

I don't agree with the name of this article , just to let you know.

Most oftenly people at the end include Christian 'things' , but i am not taught to discuss like that in any way , shape or form.

I would just stick to
point 1 - evidence
point 2 - examples
If you agree,ofc.

Has anyone from Islamic scholarship studied this or answered this in any way?
I would like to see an answer if it is there however.
You can give your opinion as well.
I don't mind discussing.
I despise accusing however.
I misinterpret it and i apologized.
Do you think that making mistakes is the basis for being right or wrong?

The point IS that the Birminghan Quran does not have Surah 9:74.

So it makes sense that we should find Surah 9:74(without the Sanaa manuscript) , correct?

I don't know what is the earliest evidence of surah 9:74 except the Sana manuscript , so if you don't mind helping out?

I mentioned Surah 9:74 because i have seen the study of Dr. Puig about the Sana manuscripts.

What made me look into this is the absent bismillah in Surah 9.

I know the explenation given by Imam Ar-Razi, which is
'Muhhamad himself did not dictate it at the beginning of the surah'.

So if the Hereafter is added , it may be the crucial 'theological' thing that made Islam today as big as it is.

Is this a reliable Islamic source?

A response to one who claims that Allah loves to punish and torment people - Islam Question & Answer

www.google.com

Does not that word alone contradict many of the interpretations of the Quran?
What if 'The Hereafter' was never there?
Does it make variations and if , how many?
Can a word like this one,change the Quran theologically?

 

[firedragon]

It is 16r

But this folio does not correspond with Birmingham which you claimed you were comparing with. You made that claim.

 

[Dimi95]

But this folio does not correspond with Birmingham which you claimed you were comparing with. You made that claim.

Yes , that was the point , there is no Surah 9:74 in Birmingham Quran , so the Sanaa manuscript is the earliest source regarding this Surah.
Correct me if i am wrong.
This just says that variations exist - nothing less,nothing more.

 

[firedragon]

Yes , that was the point , there is no Surah 9:74 in Birmingham Quran

Then how in the world can you compare with it? Why would you even make that claim? You made that claim. Were you mistaken? Admit that and you could move on in peace.

 

[Dimi95]

Then how in the world can you compare with it? Why would you even make that claim? You made that claim. Were you mistaken? Admit that and you could move on in peace.

My first answer was in post #5:

"We can see the evidence in the
-Birmingham Quran manuscript
-The Sanaa palimsest ,found in Yemen.

The Sanaa palimsest is very important since it is the only manuscript that can be traced by tradition to Muhhamad because of the lower texts.

We know that the upper layer is the standard text.
The lower text isn't!

It is the only single non-Uthmanic Qur'an.
Probably it's a so-called Companion Codex, otherwise lost and known through citations of later Muslim authors.
I recommend - "The Codex of a Companion of the Prophet and the Qur'ān of the Prophet" from Behnam Sadeghi and Uwe Bergmann.

There are almost certainly more than 60 differences, but it should be also noted that only a subset of the pages has been subjected to rigorous study. The folios discovered in the Eastern Library make up almost half the text, but have barely been studied.

This is yet to be studied.

The Sanaa manuscript show two different versions of the Quran.

I have been told that this is a 'typo'.

This is a rather big typo and 38 pages are 'erased'.
It is not just spelling mistakes, there are words missing, words added, and words changed.

For example,

Sahih International translation:
'… (if) they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And there will not be for them on earth (any protector or helper.)

Sana'a manuscript translation:
'… (if) they turn away, Allah will punish them in this world. And there will not be for them on earth (any protector or helper.)'.

The 38 folios have around 1500 verses.
And there are more then 60 differences (as it is told by most scholars)"

That was the point the whole time and i made it plainly clear to you , but you just attacked me with 'pick and choose' and now it comes back.

Please read what i write next time.
It was a good chat , thank you for letting me know that i did a mistake , and that made me re-check all of it.
I will probably never do this mistake again.

 

[Dimi95]

Then how in the world can you compare with it?

You can actually , the first has Surah 9:74 - the second does not.
And you can get conclusion out of that.

Why would you even make that claim?

Actually , i can , since that's the earliest source and i can compare it however i find it fit.
What is wrong with my analogy?

You made that claim.

Ofc that i made it, did i hide it maybe?

Were you mistaken?

Yes , ofc.

Admit that and you could move on in peace.

Yes , i admit that i did a mistake with the folio number and i misinterpret it.
I corrected myself however , does that count also , or not?

 

[firedragon]

"We can see the evidence in the
-Birmingham Quran manuscript
-The Sanaa palimsest ,found in Yemen.

The verse or verses you gave DOES NOT EXIST IN BURMINGHAM.

 

[firedragon]

You can actually

Haha. Okay. So pull up the Birmingham manuscript, highlight the verse. Let's see how miraculous you could be. Thanks.

 

[Dimi95]

Haha. Okay. So pull up the Birmingham manuscript, highlight the verse. Let's see how miraculous you could be. Thanks.

No , i know that it does not exist.
I mentioned 'Birmingham Quran' and Sanaa palimpsest so we can compare the two earliest copies.
One does have it , one does not.
So which Quran has it?

You seem to not realize why is the point more important then our claims.

 

[Dimi95]

The verse or verses you gave DOES NOT EXIST IN BURMINGHAM.

So there goes Birmingham Quran in deep water by what you say.
Which Quran has the Surah 9:74 today as it is?
How Surah 9:74 came to be with the 'Hereafter'?
Are you able to understand what i am trying to say?
You tell me which Quran is relevant so we can analyse it.

 

[Dimi95]

@firedragon

Don't forget post #25
You said:
"Great. So what's the exact verse, the exact variant, the folio in the Sanaa and your comparison of Birmingham manuscript? I am asking about your exact claim so that we could analyze it. I have asked I don't know how many times now. Your image above and your highlight is absolutely irrelevant. Thanks."

Instead of discussing claims , we should analyse the evidence , don't you agree?

 

[firedragon]

No , i know that it does not exist.
I mentioned 'Birmingham Quran' and Sanaa palimpsest so we can compare the two earliest copies.
One does have it , one does not.
So which Quran has it?

Haha. Mate. Is this the method anyone in the field uses?

Anyway, you claimed you are comparing the same verse between both manuscripts and found a variant which is an absolutely bogus claim. Now you making a completely different claim about two absolutely cloven folios.

I am gonna end this conversation at this point. Cheers.

 

[Dimi95]

Haha. Mate. Is this the method anyone in the field uses?

Friend , we do this by experimentation which is different in the field of social science.
It is the systematic procedures and steps followed in a research study to gather data and analyze conclusions. It aims to provide a detailed description that allows other researchers to replicate the study and evaluate its validity

Anyway, you claimed you are comparing the same verse between both manuscripts and found a variant which is an absolutely bogus claim.

Explaining the variant is evidence in textual criticism.

Claim is a state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.

I did provide it.

Evidence is ground for proof.

Now the red herring comes back to you.

Now you making a completely different claim about two absolutely cloven folios.

This discussion is about the Preservance of the Quran , not about claims.
You can however also analyse the evidence and say something more about it rsthen then discussing just claims.

I am gonna end this conversation at this point. Cheers.

Ok , np.
.

 

[firedragon]

Friend , we do this by experimentation which is different in the field of social science.
It is the systematic procedures and steps followed in a research study to gather data and analyze conclusions. It aims to provide a detailed description that allows other researchers to replicate the study and evaluate its validity


Explaining the variant is evidence in textual criticism.

Claim is a state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.

I did provide it.

Evidence is ground for proof.

Now the red herring comes back to you.


This discussion is about the Preservance of the Quran , not about claims.
You can however also analyse the evidence and say something more about it rsthen then discussing just claims.


Ok , np.
.

Cheers.

 

[Truthseeker]

Haha. Okay. So pull up the Birmingham manuscript, highlight the verse. Let's see how miraculous you could be. Thanks.

Just watching this exchange wearies me out. How is it for you guys? But then it is late at night for me.