Answers to the claims of the Western Orientalists about the preserved Qur’an

Answers to the claims of the Western Orientalists about the preserved Qur'an
The Western Arab experts who had studied the Quran Mushaf, belonging to the first period, had on the basis of a number of typographical errors in the spelling and the calligraphy which they studied the Mushaf, trying to convince that the text has been unchanged until today is not so or they came up with some ideas to weaken it.

By spelling and typing errors of Sanaa and the other mushafs is the claim that the Qur’an was later changed surely far from honesty, and we believe that we have to answer these claims so that other people will be understand it.

The Qur’an has untill today not undergo any change.

Attempting from the Mushaf as we have outlined previously they are trying to draw attention to spelling errors and so to claim that the Quran has been changed. When we examine the details we see that these absurd statements are simply wrong prejudices of the claims of the owners. ”

We see this attack on the preserved unharmed of the Qur’an not as a genuine scientific criticism, without any arguments based on truth. As the cartoon crisis that had arisen in Europe the Muslims should against this movement, which is seen as a new riot, the Koran better try to understand, and with the mushafs of the first period to give technical answers to these assertions.

Let us now give a few examples of such assertions answer …

SanaaQuoranDoubleVersions11) The claims of Dr.Gerd R. Puin and Bothmer and responses to them

Dr. Puin who is a member of the faculty in the German Saarland University is known for his research on the Koran. He has in the mushafs that were found in the mosque in Sanaa in the basement and later in the attic researched and improved. During this work he saw on the sheet in connection with the spelling of some words and of the examples of the different fragments written, he thought that the Quran has undergone a change as with the other holy books.

Let us first look at the claims of Gerd Puin and then the claims of H.C.G. Bothmer and K. H. Ohling with examples.

a) According to Gerd Puin is in Surah Maryam (19/62) in verse the word (يسمعون yesmeune) which was written on an old sheet Mushaf first singular, which according to dr. Puin that the original one was later changed and was written with plural. But when this was done, the points from ta ‘remained intact. This shows that we until today don’t know the enumeration of that time. So the words of the Mushaf from today يسمعون which are transforming in this way, is the reading method from then remained unknown, and it shows that the change of the form in the text of the Qur’an with the time changes occur.

However the same sheet is also by Dr. Tayyar Altikulac examined. According to him, there is no error in the determination of Puin. There is actually spelled to the word on that sheet and corrected. But it is not possible to agree with his assessment and the result he wants to achieve. The most important answer to this example is that the Quran has changed with time, and this can be used as evidence. For be able to say this, one must believe that the calligrapher the handwritten text has not written any text flawless. The claim that every Mushaf without spelling mistakes is ridiculous.

It is very common in the mushafs written by calligraphers and other handwritten texts to find this kind of error. When mushafs were written verses, or even by the glassy look of the eye, lines were skipped. These types of errors will of course occur during the hand writing and copying of such long texts.

In the above example the calligrapher had written by mistake with singular. Someone else who had noticed or he self had later corrected this mistake, but had forgotten to highlight the ‘ta’.

It is very humbling on the basis of one incorrectly written word an attempt is made to obtain this kind of dishonest results.

If this error not repeated in the other mushafs and blades, is the error that can be seen at this Mushaf an exceptional mistake of the Calligrapher himself.

b) Another claim by dr. Puin is in the verse in Surah Saba (34.49) قل جاء الحق Kavli kerim the word KAF- lam should be actually kaf-ye-lam. The word that has changed over time, we see in the mushafs from today as kaf-lam. According to the research of Puin is this word written as kaf-ye-lam on an old parchment.

However, this sheet is also examined by Dr. Altikulac. According by Altikulac is the reality as follows; Puin is not talking about this, but while writing the calligrapher has

forgotten to write the word and later he or someone else has put this word between them. However, the sign that is displayed as the end of the verse and all the dot-like signs which later was written were not covered, and dr. Puin had identified the points as kaf-ye-lam. When the word is expanded and carefully determined, we see that there is no sign between kaf and lam from the letter ye which prolongs the letter.

Even if the word is so how it by Dr. Puin is claimed, it is not sincere to this misspelling to assume that there has been a change in the Koran which is far from science. And like the other Abrahamic texts it is a prejudice to claim that in the Koran a change has occurred.

c) other examples of the arguments of Dr. Gerd Puin he gave is that the blades are written in different formations belonging to the mushafs. According to this example, ended the 26th surah and on the same page is the 37. Surah right after 19. Suras on the same page 22. Surah, and after 72 Sura begins the 51. Sura.

As is known, there were among the companions who made their own Mushaf’s or there were people who did not have complete mushafs but which made Mushaf’s from the suras that were available.

The calligrapher or the editor who wrote the Mushaf or juz by different orders for its own specific purpose is, therefore, not genuinely to take advantage of this situation about the maintained remain of the Koran.

There is no scientific explanation of the claim of Dr. Puin which he used the blades and the examples of the juz as evidence. It is important here that in these suras and verses are any changes or not. When the samples are examined we see clearly that the Qur’an has not undergone any change.

powers_david2) The claims and answers from Dr. David S. Powers

Dr. Powers is known for his work in Islamic studies and Islamic law at the University of Cornell in America. The last few years there are various claims put forward of the word ” kelaleten ” which the meaning is inheritor and appears twice in Surah Nisa (4.12 – 176)

According to this statement is the word that was actually kellaten was changed. So it is claimed that the Qur’an has been distorted. Proof is the Mushaf called Paris that by Tayyar Altikulac the copy was proclaimed and went on to this word.

If we open a little the issue Dr. Power thinks actually that behind this so-called change a political reason is. Because the word significance a female thus has kellaten,

would allows might be the daughter of the Prophet Fatima. The Umayyad supporters have tried in order to change the words so to deprive at that way Mohammed’s legacy.

And does Dr. Power has seen another proof in the Paris Mushaf after the correction of these words? The answer is NO. If a word does not prove that the Koran has changed which was played by the calligrapher, is the political reason that Dr. Power is looking for meaningless. There are years passed after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. Why there should suddenly needed such a political reason for a change?

It is scientifically not sincere to claim that there has been a change in the Koran from the mushafs belonging to the earlier periods with errors by the calligraphers. Exclusive the copy of Paris are the same and the mushafs of the earlier periods the word as now written with two lam.

As we see, has the critics on the maintain of the Koran no scientific facts. These are the weak claims of the dishonest Western orientalists. Especially the mushafs from Sana and Cairo that we have in our hands prevents them to continuing their nonsense ..