Wednesday, June 11, 2008

The Quran Corrupted From The Beginning by Caliph Uthman

Quran is proven not from a divine source as there are over 70 discrepancies to support the assertion that Gabriel never revealed it.

Members of Islam love to falsely claim that the inspired word of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, and Jacob, creator of all there is, has been corrupted and that the Quran has not, but this is a LIE.

From earliest of times many versions were in circulation that did NOT agree with each other. Caliph Uthman wanted to eliminate this situation, but the way he did ensured the permanent corruption of the Quran by eliminating all checks and balances. He made an "official" version, and burned all others to prevent cross checking for errors and corruption; whereas, with the inspired word of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, and Jacob, creator of all there is, the Bible, there are over 30,000 ancient Manuscripts, Codex's, fragments, and scrolls that permit checking for errors and corruption's and which make possible the correction of any corruption.

This article will go in-depth with regard to the impossibility that the Quran is without corruption and highlight why it must be corrupt beyond any possibility of repair.


Islam's 'history' claims that in 30 AH, some 18 years after Muhammad's death, during Caliph 'Uthman's reign, there was much contention amongst certain followers of Islam concerning the recitation of the Qur'an [[Mention has not been made of the first collection of the Qur'an, generally said to have been made under the first Caliph Abu Bakr, passed to the second Caliph `Umar, and left at his death to his daughter Hafsah, one of Muhammad's wives. Part of the text of Bukhari, Vol. 6, #509, reads:

"Narrated Zaid bin Thabit; Abu Bakr as-Saddiq sent for me when the people of Yamama had been killed... (I went to him) and found `Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me); "Umar has come to me and said; "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra of the Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Qur'an by heart) ...and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place... whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to `Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Messenger did not do?"... "Umar kept urging me until Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realise the good idea which `Umar had realised."... "then Abu Bakr said (to me).'...So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it (in one book)."...So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it... Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with `Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of `Umar."]].

It is recorded that he commanded copies to be made of one consonantal symbol text, and sent these to the centres of the Islamic empire with the command that all texts that varied from those copies were to be burnt. [[/ The Hizb ut-Tahrir state almost the same thing:
"Abu Bakr instructed Zaid bin Thabit to collect the Qur'an... The compiled Qur'an was kept by Abu Bakr (ra) until he died, then by Umar bin Khattab, and when he died it was given to his daughter Hafsa (ra).... During the time of Uthman (ra) differences in reading the Qur'an became obvious and after consultation with the companions, Uthman had a standard copy made for [edit.- from] the Suhuf (pages) of Abu Bakr (ra) that were with Hafsa (ra). the copy was prepared by Zaid bin Thabit, Abdullah..., Said..., and Abdur-Rahman Harith bin Hisham. Copies were made and distributed, 2 of these copies can today be found in the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul and in Tashkent." (What is The Qur'an?, Al Khalifah Publications)]].

"During the time of 'Uthman differences in reading the Qur'an became obvious, and after consultation with the Companions, 'Uthman had a standard copy prepared from the suhuf of Abu Bakr kept with Hafsa at that time.

The following is the report transmitted in Sahih Bukhari:
"Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to 'Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, 'O chief of the Believers! Set this people right before they differ about the Book (Qur'an), as the Jews and the Christians did before'. Then 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, 'Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may copy the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you. Hafsah sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, Abdullah bin az-Zubair, Sa'id bin Al-'As and Abdur Rahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, 'In case you disagree with Zayd bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of the Quraish, as the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue'. They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsah. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt...."" [Reference - Sahih Bukhari, Vol.6, #510, p. 479).(Ulum, p.52f)].


Caliph Uthman came up with a "solution" with regard to these differences that rendered any future checking of corruption of the Qur'an impossible. He burnt all other copies to prevent cross checking for corruption. One Encyclopedia says, <<<" There is no proof of purity - yes, the Qur'an has remained unchanged since the time of Uthman but prior to him various versions of the Qur'an existed. This is a fact.

The reason for the existence of the various versions was that Mohammed's saying were NOT written but commited to memory alone. It is only since Islamic scholars "harmonised" the various verions of the Qur'an as ordered by Uthman that the Qur'an has remained unchanged.

perhaps; but there is no shame in that. And your faith in man's ability to memorise is misplaced.

As said above - the Qur'an when commited to the memory of men was subject to change and variation. It was due to this fact that the Caliph Uthman decreed that the various records be harmonised and written. And all the prior text were destroyed by fire. So just be honest - and

If EVERY Qur'an on the earth were to be destroyed - and if the Qur'an were to be transmitted by memorisation alone - in 100 years there would be 100's, if not 1,000's, of variations in the text.

IS only one version of the Qur'an. But that fact is there WERE many versions. If there were not then the Caliph Uthman would never have gathered a council of Islamic scholars to harmonise the differing version to come up with a standard.

And the fact that it is in Arabic is neither here nor there. God can speak any language. Nothing special bout Arabic or any other language for that matter.

"Please show us the different versions you have insinuated". This is no "insinuation" but a fact that is well known to Imams and Islamic scholars. The fact of the matter is that the Caliph Uthman ordered the burning of ALL pre-existant Qur'an - an order which was carried out - again a fact know to Islamic scholars.

"I await the different versions"...... stupidity. As you very well know they were all destroyed by the command of Caliph Uthman. And what happens if a Christian or some other poor soul happens to deface or destroy the Qur'an ? they get executed!! Was Caliph Utham executed for the same? NO!! So were is Islamic justice??[Source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]>>>.

So given this course of events, it can be seen there is no possibility that the Qur'an can be "pure." In fact many writers have presented proof with respect two missing Suras that were in the original. Let's look at some of the sources for this statement and facts on other missing items.

Muslims attack the Bible on the grounds that it sometimes has conflicting wording from different manuscripts. Yet this is exactly the case with the text of the Quran. There are many conflicting readings on the text of the Quran as Arthur Jeffery has demonstrated in his book, Material for the History of the Text of the Quran (New York, Russell F. Moore, 1952).[source – Material for the History of the Text of the Quran, by Arthur Jeffery, New York, published by Russell F. Moore, 1952].

At one point Jeffery gives 90 pages of variant readings on the text. For example, in Sura 2 there are over 140 conflicting and variant readings on the text of the Quran. ).[source – Material for the History of the Text of the Quran, by Arthur Jeffery, New York, published by Russell F. Moore, 1952].

All Western and Muslim scholars admit the presence of variant readings in the text of the Quran [Sources - Dashti, 23 Years, p. 28; Mandudi, Meaning of the Quran, pp. 17-18; McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia, V152)].

Guillaume points out that the Quran at first "had a large number of variants, not always trifling in significance" [Source - Islam, by Professor Guillaume, p. 189].

"It is interesting to note that in scholarly Muslim journals, there is beginning to be a grudging acknowledgment of the fact that there are variant and conflicting readings on the text of the Quran" [Reference - One example would be Saleh al-Wahaihu, "A Study of Seven Quranic Variants," International Journal of Islamic and Arabic Studies, Vol. V (1989), #2, pp. 1-57)].

According to Professor Guillaume in his book, Islam, (pp. 191ff.), some of the original verses of the Quran were lost. [Source - Islam, by Professor Guillaume, pp. 191ff.]

For example, one Sura originally had 200 verses in the days of Ayesha. But by the time Uthman standardized the text of the Quran, it had only 73 verses! A total of 127 verses had been lost, and they have never been recovered.[source - The Islamic Invasion," by Dr. Robert Morey; Harvest Home Publishers, 1992. ISBN 0-89081-983-1].

The Shiite Muslims claim that Uthman left out 25 percent of the original verses in the Quran for political reasons [McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia, V:152)].

That there are verses which got left out of Uthman's version of the Quran is universally recognized [References - Shorter Encyclopedia off Islam, pp. 278-282; Guillaume, Islam, p. 191; Wherry, A Comprehensive Commentary on the Quran, pp. 110-111)].

[Other References - John Burton's book, The Collection of the Quran, which was published by Cambridge University, documents how such verses were lost (London University Press, 1977, pp. 117ff. See also Arthur Jeffery, Islam: Muhammad and His Religion, New York; Liberal Arts Press, 1958, pp. 66-68)].

Burton states concerning the Muslim claim that the Quran is perfect:

"The Muslin accounts of the history of the Quran texts are a mass of confusion, contradiction and inconsistencies" [Source, The Collection of the Quran, by John Burton, published by Cambridge University, page. 231].

In fact Caliph Ultman had verses added to the Qur'an, let's look at that:

Not only have parts of the Quran been lost, but entire verses and chapters have been added to it.

For example, Ubai had several Suras in his manuscript of the Quran which Uthman omitted from his standardized text.

Thus there were Qurans in circulation before Uthman's text which had additional revelations from Muhammad that Uthman did not find or approve of, and thus he failed to place them in his text.

Also, there are No Originals:
As to the claim that the original manuscript of the Quran is still in existence, we have already pointed out there was no single "manuscript" of the Quran.

Caesar Farah in his book on Islam, states:

"When Muhammad died there existed no singular codex of the sacred text" [source - Caesar Farah, Islam: Beliefs and Observations, New York; Barrons, 1987, p. 28)].

"One thing only is certain and is openly recognized by tradition, namely, that there was not in existence any collection of revelations in the final form, because, as long as he was alive, new revelations were being added to the earlier ones" [source - The Shorter Encyclopedia off Islam comments: (p. 271)].


First, let's delve a little deeper in into the true state of the Qur'an after Caliph Uthman.

Restrain this people before they differ in the book, as do the Jews and the Christians." [Source - Tafsir, vol. 1, p. 20: cited from W. Campbell, The Qur'an and the Bible in Light of History and Science, p.110f]

Ibn Mas`ud and Ubai were sent by the 2nd Caliph `Umar as the Islamic governors and teachers of their respective provinces. They were not rebels who went out to spread error! They were teaching their particular 'version' (Islam's own word for differing Arabic texts) of the Qur'an which they both claimed adamantly came from Muhammad.

Yet, Ahmed Von Denffer who already admitted graphic differences in the Companion readings has the gall to misstate the facts as:
"Later on, with Muslims settling in many parts of the world, the Qur'an was recited in a variety of ways, some of which were not in accordance with the accepted text, and the transmitted readings of the Prophet and the Companions. This necessitated a thorough screening and distinction between what is sahih (sound) and what is shadh (exceptional)." [Source - Ulum al Qur'an, by Ahmed Von Denffer, P. 119].

Although many claim that the codices of the Companions were different simply because they were 'personal notebooks', the differences Tabari mentions were those actually recited by their pupils, the citizens of Iraq and Syria, as 'Qur'an' from these men. These were not 'notebooks', and Sahih Muslim (Vol. 2, p. 393f., #1797-1801) records examples of the differences taught to the followers.[Source – Shih Muslim, Vol. 2, p. 393, #1797-1801].

For this reason Ibn Mas'ud is known to have refused to hand over his text to `Uthman's agents declaring that he received his from Muhammad and he was not willing to accept what young Zaid ibn Thabit recited. And, Sahih Muslim #6022 (Vol. 4, p. 1312; English version) records his admission that he told his followers to likewise withhold their copies! [Reference – Shih Muslim #6022, Vol. 4, p. 1312].

The equally problematic choice faced by those who falsely claim that 6 out of 7 Forms of the Qur'an were simply withdrawn that there are admitted variations in writing. This is clearly shown since no Sunni would accept this; thus they are forced by their beliefs to falsely claim that the variants were simply "notebooks" which is an outright lie.

However, many in Islam have the nerve to make claims with respect the "purity" of the Bible. But their own "house" is far out of order as shown by "Abu Amr who states that he received the following revelation from Katada as-Sadusi:
"When the first copy of the Qur'an was written out and presented to [the khalif] Othman Ibn Affan, he said: 'There are faults of language in it, and let the Arabs of the desert rectify them with their tongues." [Source - Biographical Dictionary, Ibn Khallikan, p. 401].

Even in this first copy corruption had occurred which was readily visible to Caliph Uthman, but he cared not as he wanted a uniform text oven an accurate test.

Inspite of the terrible corruption of the text of the Qur'an, Members of Islam
Repeat that the Bible has been corrupted which is patently absurd given the true state of affairs with regard the Qur'an. This is especially so given that <<<" In the English language, the alphabet has both consonants and vowels, but at that time the Arabic alphabet had only consonants. The consonants were represented by only seventeen symbols so that the symbol for one consonant could stand for one of two or more letters. And there was no way of indicating vowels."[source - Language, Dialect and Interpretation of the Koran, by Manfred Davidmann]>>>.


"The 'hamza', the 'alif' indicating 'long-a', the other vowels, and particularly the diacritical points which were added later and which fixed the underlying consonantal text, had by this time all been added to the Koran's text. Luxenberg considers that these changes to the original text by themselves resulted in the text of the Koran in many places being misread and distorted. In his thorough analysis {4} he makes the point that linguists (scholars) who inserted the diacritical and vowel points assumed that the particular 'reading' they were fixing was reliable and concludes that their assumption was now in doubt.[Refernece - Die syro-aramaeische Lesart des Koran; Ein Beitrag zur Entschl├╝sselung der Qur'ansprache. Berlin, Germany: Das Arabische Buch, First Edition, 2000. Pp. ix + 306, Vol. 6, No. 1, January 2003].

Now one should ask why Islam must hide the truth with respect the Qur'an. Of course the reason is obvious – they could not openly attack the inspired word of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, and Jacob, creator of all there is, the Bible, and it many manuscripts all delineating one text, and every one of them able to be compared with each other as a safeguard against error if they admitted the truth about the Qur'an, so they must live a lie.

Thus it is essential for Islam's survival to avoid the truth about the early details with regard to the Qur'an. To admit the facts would "blow" their cover-up with respect the none purity and the many variant versions of the Qur'an which once existed and all the other problems with regard the Qur'an.