1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Very short introduction to the history of the modern copy of the Qur'an

Reader comment on item: What Do Jihadis Want? The Caliphate
in response to reader comment: about Atatürk's approach regarding the Caliphate issue, and the naivety of some US Islamologists:

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Mar 26, 2017 at 09:46

Dr Pipes

Very interesting

Most readers would be surprised to know that today's Qur'an in Arabic comes in two very recent forms

1. The 1923-1924 Cairo edition of the Qur'an This copy of the Qur'an follows the transmission of Hafs from Asim and is supposed to go back to the so called Othman's copy or Mushaf Othman And no we don't have a copy of the Othman's Codex It does not exist The Samarkand Qur'an is late and it is written in Kufic a script that was invented in Mesopotamia and borrowed from Syriac alphabet
The Hijazi fragments written in Hijazi script of the Qur'an are much earlier than Samarkand

Prior to 1923 Egyptians used a Turkish edition of the Qur'an Most interesting is that the editors in Egypt preserved the Rasm or the basic layer of the Qur'an but edited the rest of the text in no specific order

2. The 1969 Tunisian Qur'an which follows the transmission of Warsh from Nafi

https://archive.org/details/QuranWarshAndBoldMoroccanEditionTunisianHouseMediumQualityWww.Quranpdf.blogspot.

And as would be expected the two Qurans can be very different as an example in Surat al-Fatiha the Rasm of the word ملك becomes:

1. In the Cairo Qur'an: it is edited as مَالِكِ Or Maaliki or the owner of Notice that the Rasm was edited by adding an Alif following the letter Meem and a Fatha or the vowel "a" above the letter Meem and Kasra or the vowel "i" below the letters Lam and Kaf

2. In the Tunisian Qur'an: it is edited as مَلِكِ or Maliki or the King of (very different meaning but same Rasm) and as you can see a Fatha was added to the letter Meem and Kasra added to the letters Lam and Kaf

This raises doubts about the veracity that we only have one Qur'an and invalidates the other claim that the Qur'an we orally transmitted

The Qur'an and in the words of Peters is text with no context What the early Mufasereen had was a text written in Rasm form with no short or long vowels and no Shadda (double consonant) or Hamza (the glottal sound)

No doubt that al-Tabari (whose Quranic Tafsir) is the earliest and complete Tafsir of the Qur'an This means:

1. He was dealing with a complete copy of the Qur'an in only Rasm form

2. There were no names yet for the individual Suras (eg: al-Tabari called Q105: Surat al-Lam Tara Now it is called Surat al-Feel)

3. His Tafsir is Masoritic or he was explaining and correcting spelling, grammar and syntax in the basic Rasm in other wors al-Tabari was Allah's and his Qur'an Editor in-Chief

4. There is very compelling evidence when reading his Tafsir that there was no parallel oral transmission

In other words the Qur'an is a text that has been evolving for the past 1400 years and a cautionary tale to those in the industry I call "Quranic Translations" that they should make it clear that they are translating a copy of the 1923-1924 Cairo Quran and not the non existent so called Mushaf Othman

One final point: For those of you that can read Arabic the Indian Qur'an in Arabic used by Yusuf Ali is very interesting but again Yusuf Ali was not interested in what the text is all about He was more interested in introducing Islam to the British and the West as best as he can and the end result is a total disaster His translation is disgraceful


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submitting....

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (20) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
1about Atatürk's approach regarding the Caliphate issue, and the naivety of some US Islamologists: [205 words]Tarık GunerselMar 25, 2017 03:16237884
2Very short introduction to the history of the modern copy of the Qur'an [576 words]dhimmi no moreMar 26, 2017 09:46237884
2Thanking Tarık Gunersel [97 words]PrashantApr 1, 2017 18:40237884
3ISIS VICTORY: Islamist Colonization of the West [332 words]RobertMar 20, 2017 14:13237787
1Punish these seditious traitors. [105 words]KenekMar 19, 2017 16:43237740
modern crusades [51 words]Rick KaminerMar 19, 2017 06:19237718
They Want Us Dead [279 words]David RyanMar 19, 2017 04:22237717
Geographical areas of Challenge [101 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Peter Baum ( Board of Deputies British Jews and Board Member Fair Reporting )Mar 19, 2017 03:35237716
2Allow me to make a prophesy about the Islamic caliphates [564 words]PrashantMar 18, 2017 23:36237709
Choosing and Electing the Caliph [199 words]Mike RamirezMar 20, 2017 08:33237709
OK, how does that jive with Erdoğan plans? [154 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
DrRJPMar 27, 2017 12:55237709
1The Caliphate's "Islamic Constitution" [296 words]Mike RamirezMar 18, 2017 22:26237708
Caliphate [85 words]Jargon KingMar 18, 2017 21:06237705
1Something that isn't fake [744 words]Michael SMar 18, 2017 18:35237703
What Jihad Hides Versus What the Holy Bible Reveals [361 words]M ToveyMar 22, 2017 13:35237703
2My greatest fear [78 words]Arni FurmanMar 18, 2017 13:44237702
It is always money and ego. [57 words]Donnie MarxMar 18, 2017 13:08237700
Previous Comment [1 words]Martin SchaffelMar 18, 2017 12:40237699
Education [36 words]Martin SchaffelMar 18, 2017 12:38237698
Indian riots following Versailles Treaty [26 words]Dick LindzenMar 18, 2017 12:24237697

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Very short introduction to the history of the modern copy of the Qur'an by dhimmi no more

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

ADVERTISEMENTS

eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2018 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes