: Aug 02, 2015

Comment about Birmingham Quran Manuscript…

Featured, General : 0 Comments

Comment about Birmingham Quran Manuscript

By Shaykh Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi

Correction of the message of Dr. Suwayd
The Holy Qur’an is proven authenticate by verbal narration of group of narrators who took it from the mouth of Prophet Salla Allah-u ‘alayhi wasallam, and memorised it, not by writing and leaves.
Writing it down in the seven copies during the time of our master Uthman ibn ‘Affān in seven copies was not for authentication, because authentication relied on memorisation, and mutawaatir, i.e. large group narration was the proof of its validity.
Some Sahabahs’ Mus’hafs (and they are all trustworthy) had extra words which were rejected by consensus of the Sahaba and considered Tafsir, i.e. commentary, not Qur’an.
Therefore, we do not have any consideration for any leaves or parchments discovered from the first century even if written by a companion of the Prophet, if they have different or extra words. So, the question posed in Dr. Ayman’s comment about “who wrote it” is irrelevant and has no impact on the authentication of the Holy Qur’an, even no matter who the writer is; because the Holy Qur’an was proven via mutawātir oral narration. So is the other question which he posed about, “Where did the writer copied it from”; it is irrelevant to the authenticity of the Holy Qur’an. SO, when the good doctor says, “Our System (rather he meant, our method, is based on who wrote and where from” is wrong. Our method for the authenticity of the Qur’an was based on Mutawātir oral narration.
It is upon this tawātur i.e. large group narration, the seven copies, which were ordered to be copied by Sayyiduna Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, relied.
The seven copies were later on narrated by Mutawātir way and were considered source of the authentication of the various Qirā’āt, ie.e readings, of the Holy Qur’an. So, the condition of Mutawatir narration to prove any was later on replaced by finding the verse in one of the seven copies.
Finally, narration from books and papers is the weakest method of narration, it is called amongst the scholars of the methodology of hadith “Wijādah وجادة”. It is not prove any Qur’an nor the soundness of any hadith.
There is a lot more to say but we tried to be brief in these remarks as it is important to draw the attention of Muslims around the world the main method of the authentication fo the Qur’an which Allah guaranteed is “Memorisation and oral narration” Not “Writing”.

تعقيب على التنبيه
من الشيخ محمد اليعقوبي
ثبوت القرآن الكريم إنما كان بالنقل المتواتر بطريق المشافهة والتلقي والحفظ لا بواسطة الخط والكتابة والأوراق.
ولم تكن الكتابة في المصاحف السبعة زمن عثمان (وهو الجمع الثاني) من أجل التوثيق، لأن الاعتماد في التوثيق إنما كان على الحفظ والرواية، وقد كانت في مصاحف بعض الصحابة – وهم ثقات – زيادات ردها جمهور الصحابة بالإجماع، وعُدت تفسيرا لا قرآنا.
ولذلك فلا اعتبار لأي رقوق مكتشفة من القرن الأول، ولو كانت بخط أحد الصحابة الكرام، فالسؤال: من كتبها غير وارد ولا تأثير له في ثبوت نص القرآن الكريم، لأن القرآن ثبت بالرواية الشفهية المتواترة.
كما أن السؤال: “من أين نسخها” لا اعتبار له في ثبوت القرآن الكريم اليوم.
فقول الدكتور الفاضل: “ومنهجنا يقوم على من كتب ومن أين كتب” في ثبوت القرآن الكريم خطأ، والصواب: “منهجنا في ثبوت القرآن الكريم يقوم على الرواية الشفهية المتواترة” وعلى هذا التواتر اعتمدت المصاحف السبعة التي نسخت بأمر سيدنا عثمان رضي الله عنه.
وقد حل اشتراط موافقة رسم أحد المصاحف العثمانية محل اشتراط التواتر لتواتر رواية رسم هذه المصاحف.
وأخيرا فإن الرواية من الكتب والأوراق هي أضعف وجوه الرواية، وتسمى عند أهل الحديث “الوِجادة” ولا يثبت بها قرآن ولا يصح بها حديث.
وفي الكلام بقية تركناها خوف التطويل.



Add a Comment