scholars into the inerrancy of the Quran. Some of their findings are
discussed in an Atlantic Monthly article entitled "What Is the Koran?"
written by Toby Lester, published in the January 1999 issue of that
magazine. The gist of theirresearch is that some very old fragments of
the Quran found in a mosque in Yemen show small but significant
aberrations from the standard Quranic texts. In some cases, the
writing on the fragments found had been washed off and different
writing substituted overtop. The article tries to cast doubt on the
Muslim view of the Quran as being absolutely reliable, and tries to
show instead that it is a literary text that has been subject to
change just like any other.
I am not a Muslim, but I know that the Quran holdsa position in Islam
that is similar to that of Christ in Christianity. In view of this,
sir, how would you respond to these attemptsto dispute the absolute
inerrancy of the Quran? In your view, do these scholars have false
motives that render their findings untrustworthy? Or do you have
another response to these attacks on the verity of the Quran?.
Praise be to Allaah.
1 – The proof that the copies of the Holy Qur'aan that we have before
us is not just one or two pieces of evidence, rather it is proven by a
vast amount of evidence that no fair-minded person can study without
becoming convinced that it is exactlyas Allaah revealed it to Muhammad
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
2 – There have been generations coming one after another, reciting the
Book of Allaah and studying it, memorizing it and writing it down.
They have not omitted a single letter, and no one can change even the
vowel point of a single letter. Writing is just one means of
preserving it; basically itis preserved in their hearts.
3 – The Qur'aan has not come down to us on its own, such that the
so-called alterations could be made. Rather the interpretation of its
verses,the meanings of its words,the reasons for its revelation, the
grammar of its words and the commentary on its rulings have all been
transmitted. When such care has been given to this Book, how could
sinful hands find a way to distort even one letter of it, or add a
word, or take away a verse?
4 – The Qur'aan speaks of matters of the unseen, in the future, which
Allaah revealed to His Messenger Muhammad (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him) to show him that they came from Allaah. If a human
being wants to write a book, he can describe an event or express a
point of view, but if any human being were to speak about matters of
the unseen, in this field he can only base that on speculation and
lies. But the Qur'aan told of the defeat of the Romans by the
Persians, atthe time when there was no means of communication to
inform the Arabs of this event. The same verses also foretold that
they (the Persians) would be defeated after a certain number of years.
If what the Qur'aan said was not accurate, then the kaafirs would have
had a great opportunity to criticize theQur'aan.
5 – If you read any verse of the Qur'aan, then you go to America or
Asia or the jungles of Africa, or to the deserts of Arabia or any
place where there are Muslims, you will find that all of them have the
exact same verse, memorized byheart or in their books; not a single
letter of it willhave been altered.
So what is the importance of this unknown manuscript in Yemen which we
have not seen, and in which some ignorant may have altered, in recent
times, one verse or one word?
Does this argument carry any weight when properlyresearched and
discussed? Especially when the people claim to be fair-minded and
objective in their research.
What would be their response if we went to one of their most trusted
books by a well-known author, a book of which there are many copies in
the world, all of them exactly the same, and we claimed that there was
a copy of this book in some country or other in which there was extra
material and alterations, and it wasdifferent from what is in their
copies? Would they pay any attention?
Their answer would be thesame as ours.
6 – The manuscript copies which are in the Muslims' possession cannot
be proven to be authentic in this simplistic manner, for we have
experts who know the history of calligraphy and we have principles and
guidelines through which we may determine whether a manuscript is
genuine, such as the names and signatures of the people who heard it
and read it.
We do not think that these features are present in this so-called copy
of the Qur'aan in Yemen or inothers.
--
- - - - - - -