Instigator / Con
9
1485
rating
92
debates
45.65%
won
Topic
#3844
The Quran we recite today is, verbatim, the Quran recited by Prophet Muhammed
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
9
Better sources
6
6
Better legibility
3
3
Better conduct
0
3
After 3 votes and with 12 points ahead, the winner is...
Yassine
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Pro
21
1516
rating
3
debates
100.0%
won
Description
Please do not accept this debate unless you are a Muslim debater.
-- TOPIC --
The Quran we recite today is, verbatim, the Quran recited by Prophet Muhammed
-- STRUCTURE --
1. Opening
2-4. Rebuttals
5. Closing
-- RULES --
1. No forfeits
2. Citations must be provided in the text of the debate
3. No new arguments in the final speeches
4. Observe good sportsmanship and maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. No trolling
6. No "kritiks" of the topic (challenging assumptions in the resolution)
7. For all resolutional terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the logical context of the resolution and this debate
8. The BOP is equally shared
9. Rebuttals of new points raised in an adversary's immediately preceding speech may be permissible at the judges' discretion even in the final round (debaters may debate their appropriateness)
11. Violation of any of these rules merits a loss.
Round 1
Con
#1
Introduction
Thank you for accepting this debate. I'm looking forward to a great debate.
I. A Brief History of the Quran
It's important to note two things: (1) The prophet Muhammad was illiterate. Because he was illiterate, he used scribes to write down his revelations. (2) The Quran was originally meant to be memorized and recited. If you know anything about memory, you will know that it is fallible and memorizing things is one of the worst ways to preserve it.
After Muhammad's death, copies of the Quranic manuscripts were compiled together. These manuscripts contained variant readings and contained significant differences between them. Things were so bad that Uthman had ordered copies of the Quran that disagreed with his copy to be burned. However, not everyone liked the Uthman manuscripts. Let's look at Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3104 [1]:
From Anas who said: "Hudhaifah bin Al-Yaman came to 'Uthman, at the time when the people of Ash-Sham and the people of Al-'Iraq were waging war to conquer Arminiyah and Adharbijan. Hudhaifah saw their (the people of Ash-Sham and Al-'Iraq) different forms of recitation of the Qur'an. So he said to 'Uthman: 'O Commander of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book as the Jews and the Christians did before them.'
In other words, Muslims were panicking that the differences in the Quran would be as great as the differences in the Torah and New Testament!! But it gets worse from here
So he ('Uthman) sent a message to Hafsah (saying): 'Send us the manuscripts so that we may copy them in the Musahif (plural of Mushaf: a written copy of the Qur'an) then we shall return it to you.' So Hafsah sent the manuscripts to 'Uthman bin 'Affan. 'Uthman then sent order for Zaid bin Thabit, Sa'eed bin Al-'As, 'Abdur-Rahman bin Al-Harith bin Hisham, and 'Abdullah bin Az-Zubair to copy the manuscripts in the Musahif. 'Uthman said to the three Quraish men: 'In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the (recitation dialect of the) Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish for it was in their tongue.'
Huh? What about perfect preservation? If the Quran was perfectly preserved why are there any disagreements at all!! But it just keep getting worse...
So when they had copied the manuscripts, 'Uthman sent one Mushaf from those Musahif that they had copied to every province." Az-Zuhri said: "Kharijah bin Zaid [bin Thabit] narrated to me that Zaid bin Thabit said: 'I missed an Ayah of Surat Al-Ahzab that I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) reciting: Among the believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah, of them some have fulfilled their obligations, and some of them are still waiting (33:23) - so I searched for it and found it with Khuzaimah bin Thabit, or Abu Khuzaimah, so I put it in its Surah.'" Az-Zuhri said: "They differed then with At-Tabut and At-Tabuh. The Quraish said: At-Tabut while Zaid said: At-Tabuh. Their disagreement was brought to 'Uthman, so he said: 'Write it as At-Tabut, for it was revealed in the tongue of the Quraish.'" Az-Zuhri said: "'Ubaidullah bin 'Abdullah bin 'Utbah informed me that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud disliked Zaid bin Thabit copying the Musahif, and he said: 'O you Muslim people! I am removed from recording the transcription of the Mushaf and it is overseen by a man, by Allah, when I accepted Islam he was but in the loins of a disbelieving man' - meaning Zaid bin Thabit - and it was regarding this that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud said: 'O people of Al-'Iraq! Keep the Musahif that are with you, and conceal them. For indeed Allah said: And whoever conceals something, he shall come with what he concealed on the Day of Judgement (3:161). So meet Allah with the Musahif.'" Az-Zuhri said: "It was conveyed to me that some men amongst the most virtuous of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) disliked that view of Ibn Mas'ud."
In other words, the people of Al-'Iraq were told to conceal their copies to prevent them from being burned.
Now that we have an introductory understanding of how the Quran was compiled, let's look at some Sunnahs that show that verses were lost and forgotten.
2. Missing Parts of the Quran
A. Valley of Gold
Sahih Muslim 1050 [2]
"You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:" If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:" Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise" (lxi 2.) and" that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13)."
Surah Bara'at has 129 verses. According to the Sunnah at minimum 129 verses were lost just from this forgotten Surah. Ask yourself: If the best of reciters forgotten verses and Surahs then how much more of the Quran was lost?
B. Verses of Stoning/Breastfeeding
Sunan Ibn Majah 1944 [3]
It was narrated that 'Aishah said: “The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.”
It's important to have an understanding of what is going on here. There was a question about what should happen if an unmarried man and an unmarried woman have to be alone together for sometime. To prevent sexual immorality between the two Muhammad ordered the woman to breastfeed the male 10 times. This was later abrogated to 5 times.
This leads me to my final point
3. Differences Among Manuscripts
If the above is true, then we should find evidence of this when we compare the existing Quran manuscripts. Unfortunately since Uthman burned the Quran manuscripts he didn't like, it's impossible to say how significant of a problem textual variants are. That said, we do have some old surviving manuscripts and they do show some differences.
A. Sanaa Manuscript
The Sanaa manuscript is one of the oldest Quran manuscripts. Although it is not complete, the parts that survive can be compared to the text we have today. Scholars have noted that this manuscript was apparently erased and had another text written above it. The upper text is Uthmanic, but the lower text has significant variants. Here are just a two examples [4]:
In Q 2.196, C-1 has fa-in kāna aḥadun instead of the standard fa-man kāna (If any of you be sick vs. Should one of you be sick)
In Q 63.7, C-1 has min ḥawlihi after yanfaḍḍū. (They are the ones whosay, “Do not spend(alms) on those who arewith the Messenger ofGod in order that theymay disperse.” vs They are the ones whosay, “Do not spend(alms) on those who arewith the Messenger ofGod in order that theymay disperse fromaround him.”)
Conclusion
The evidence speaks for itself. The Quran is not perfectly preserved.
Sources
4. Ṣan‘ā’ 1 and the Origins of the Qur’ān Behnam Sadeghi and Mohsen Goudarzi 1Stanford University / Harvard University https://bible-quran.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Sadeghi-Goudarzi-sana-Origins-of-the-Quran.pdf
Pro
#2
I thank Con for instigating this debate.
I Introduction
Pro must show that the Present Quran recited today is, verbatim, the Past Quran spoken by the beloved Prophet (pbuh) –that the present record is identical in content to the historical record: data has been accurately preserved.
II Chain of Transmission in Information Theory
Any data transmission from source A to destination B is done through a chain of intermediate nodes across transitional channels. To achieve accurate data transfer it is necessary that: the chain of transmission is unbroken from source to destination, lest data is lost, & that all nodes & all channels preserve data lest it gets corrupted (ref. chart).
As to the nodes. Absent data removed from us in time or place (such as historical records or distant events) are known reportatively, through Testimony. We know data storage is required to allow for data transfer through time. In fact, Testimony is a form of storage node where the received data is stored & then later redistributed. An accurate testimony, therefore, is such that acquired data is accurately retained & accurately relayed. A reliable witness, ergo, must accurately retain the facts (raw data) & accurately relay them.
As to the channels. To preserve raw data in its original format (visual, oral, textual) adequate mediums are required. The output (received data) must be identical to the input (transmitted data): image to image, sound to sound, & text to text.
In the real world, data transfer & storage involve physical transformations which are prone to error. Hence, backup chains of transmission are used to avert such risks; or corroborating independent testimonies in our case.
III Chain of Transmission (Isnad) in the Islamic Tradition
Islamic scholars require 3 standards on Isnad to determine perfect accuracy of transmission: Talaqi (lossless reception), Sihha (soundness), Tawatur (divergent propagation).
Talaqi (lossless reception) postulates that: Vocal records must be communicated aurally (when oral data is received through hearing from the source -Samaa), or orally (when oral data is confirmed by the source -Iqra) ; Written records must be transmitted through replication (facsimile copying -Naskh) or entrustment (transfer of possession of written record -Munawala). In other words, communication channels must conserve raw source data.
Sihha (soundness) postulates that: a historical record is deemed sound when it is: transmitted through an unbroken chain of witnesses all of whom adept to accurately retain facts & truthfully relay them, precisely corroborated by other chains by cross-examination, & free from any reasonable doubt. – From what we have demonstrated earlier, we can naturally infer that this standard is already adequate to establish accurate preservation. Though, possibility of human error is not naught.
Tawatur (divergent propagation) postulates that: perfect preservation is achieved by: congruence of direct sensory testimonies by a great number of independent witnesses, such that it is inconceivable they could have all conspired to tell the same lie, at each & every level of the Isnad all the way back to the source. – This condition is conclusive regardless of the reliability of witnesses; ergo effectively eliminating all chances of human error or whims. This is how we know for a fact Australia exists & Winston Churchill existed without having witnessed them.
When all 3 standards are satisfied the Isnad is deemed Mutawatir; all nodes & channels in the unbroken chain of transmission preserve data. Accurate transmission, therefore, guaranteed.
IV The Quran
The Quran (literally The Recitation) is the spoken words recited by the beloved Prophet (pbuh) in formal prayer & revised in the Last Recitation (the year of his death). Particularly, he recited it to his companions for memorization, who recited it back to him for confirmation (Oral Quran); & also dictated it to the scribes among them to be written down, who then read it back to him for confirmation –as he was illiterate (Textual Quran). The histories of the Oral Quran & Textual Quran evolved independently.
Islamic scholars identify 5 data types which constitute the Quran: word sequences (Ayat), phonetic sounds (Huruf), dialectical pronunciations (Lughat), vocal performances (Qiraat), & dictated inscriptions (Rasm). The language in which the Quran was spoken is the dialects of 7th century Arabs, aka Classical Arabic. Consequently, the words with which it was conveyed were expressed in different dialects known as “the Seven Letter (Ahruf)” –albeit primarily in the Qurashi dialect (the Prophet’s mother tongue). Hence, the recurrent variants in the aforementioned data types.
V Oral history of the Quran
The Oral Quran was memorized by the companions during the 23 years of its revelation. Some of whom completed the Last Recitation (the final version of the Quran), namely: Abu Bakr, Uthman, Zayd… & many others. Who then spread across the Islamic world & taught the Quran to their disciples (like: Ibn Amir, Abu Jaafar…), who also taught it to others (like: Nafi, Asim…) & so on. These are referred to as Reciter (Qari).
Each Reciter had his own preferential variants according to which he recited the Quran. A Recitation is a preferential way of reciting the Quran. For example: Nafi recites verse 1:4 “Maliki yawmi deen” (Master of Judgement Day), while Asim recites it “Maaliki yawmi deen” (Sovereign of Judgement Day).
Islamic scholars require Mutawatir Isnad for a Recitation to be valid: oral & aural lossless reception, sound transmission & Tawatur. From what we have established in III it follows that a valid Recitation does, in fact, accurately preserve the Oral Quran: its words, sounds, pronunciations, & performances.
VI Textual history of the Quran
The Textual Quran (Kitab) was recored onto leaves, bones, rocks, goatskin & parchments. After the beloved Prophet’s death, his successor Abu Bakr commissioned Zayd to collect all these records into a single codex. Record submissions from scribes thenceforth were all required to have two witnesses to the fact that they were indeed transcribed in the presence of the beloved Prophet (pbuh). Zayd was among the companions who completed the Last Recitation. The issuing compiled complete Quran is know as the Bakri Codex. It was passed down to Abu Bakr’s successor Umar & then to his daughter Hafsa (the Prophet’s wife).
Umar’s successor Uthman opted to standardize the written Quran into a unified Letter (dialect). He commissioned a team of companions together with Zayd to replicate the Bakri Codex while prioritizing the Qurashi Letter in textual variation, granted consensus among the companions is reached. Several copies were made of the new codex & sent out to different centers of the Islamic world. These are referred to as the Uthmanic Codex. – The expansion of the Islamic empire led to a huge influx of new converts beyond the Arabian peninsula who did not speak the language. This led to dispute among them over the right way to recite the Quran, & along that the propagation of nonuniform copies of the Quran. Hence, Uthman’s efforts of standardization. All non-standardized copies of the Quran were then ordered to be burned or erased.
The Quranic inscriptions dictated by the Prophet (pbuh) were compiled into the Bakri Codex by entrustment, & later into the Uthmanic Codex by replication, all while satisfying the Sihha (sound transmission) & Tawatur (through consensus) conditions. Therefore, the Uthmanic Codex does, in fact, accurately preserve the Textual Quran. Since, all copies of the Quran originate therefrom following the same methods. In fact, the extant Quran manuscripts reported to be copies of the Uthamnic Codex (namely: Topkap, Tashkent, & Huseini codexes) are “perfectly preserved except for few obvious scribal errors” Dr. Altikulac.
VII Preservation of the Quran
Islamic scholars designate the Present Quran (the Quran recited by Muslims) as a Recitation such that it must fulfill all the following conditions:
1 Mutawatir Isnad.
2 Perfect conformity to the Uthmanic Codex.
3 Perfect conformity to the Arab Tongue in any of its Letters (dialects).
Among the 60 Recitations extant today, 10 sufficiently fulfill 1 but also all 3. These are called the Ten Recitations (or the Ten), which effectively constitute the Present Quran. We have already shown that condition 1 is sufficient to establish accurate data transmission. Without further examination we can already assert that the Present Quran is accurately preserved; ergo, verbatim, the Past Quran. To reinforce Pro’s case, we shall go further.
The Ten & the Uthmanic Codex are completely independent mediums of data transfer. The mere fact of congruence between the two is ample reason to infer their accuracy. Imagine you acquired an audio recording & a script of the same lecture from independent sources, if these are in agreement, then you immediately gain confidence in their accuracy. Conversely, if these are accurate, then they must be in perfect agreement. Likewise, the Ten & the Uthmanic Codex are demonstrably accurate records of the Past Quran. It follows that they must also be in perfect agreement. In fact, they are, just as expected. This further confirms that the accuracy of the Ten & of the Uthmanic Codex must, therefore, be True. The Present Quran is, verbatim, the Past Quran.
C Conclusion
We have established that today’s Quran is accurate in many ways, all of which, expectedly, in perfect agreement. A Muslim reciting the Quran according to the Ten is, indeed, uttering the same Quran recited by the beloved Prophet (pbuh). The Oral Quran & Textual Quran have been accurately preserved in the Ten & the Uthmanic Codex respectively. The Quran recited today is, verbatim, the Quran recited by Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).
Vote Pro.
Round 2
Con
#3
Thank you, Yassine, for your impressive opening arguments. I believe this is going to be the best Islam debate on DART! Let's begin.
I. Introduction
I believe most of my opponent's arguments were refuted in my opening arguments. To recap my opening: The Sunnahs attest that much of the Quran was lost and forgotten even in the times of the Prophet Muhammad. In fact, even the Sunnahs record that even the Prophet Muhammad forgot verses:
Narrated 'Aishah:
A man got up at night and recited the Qur'an in a loud voice. When the dawn came, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: May Allah have mercy on so-and-so who reminded me many verses that I had nearly forgotten.
Abu Dawud said: Harun al-Nahwi transmitted from Hammad b. Salamah the Quranic verse of Surah Al-'Imran: "How many of the prophet fought (in Allah's way)" (3:146)
So with that brief summary out of the way, let's dive deeper into my opponent's arguments.
2. Chain of Transmission Information Theory & 3 Chain of Transmission (Isnad) in the Islamic Tradition
I'll address both two and three here
The key phrase in my opponent's argument is this: Any data transmission from source A to destination B is done through a chain of intermediate nodes across transitional channels. To achieve accurate data transfer it is necessary that: the chain of transmission is unbroken from source to destination, lest data is lost, & that all nodes & all channels preserve data lest it gets corrupted (ref. chart).
The problem is when it comes to the Qur'an, there is a broken chain of transmission. We know that from the sources that I have posted. It is clear that there were several editions of the Quran and that there is wide disagreement between the early manuscripts.
IV. The Quran & V. Oral History of the Quran
See my opening arguments where I showed how big parts of the Quran were lost and forgotten even in the times of Muhammad.
VI Textual history of the Quran
My opponent pretty much proves my point entirely. Let's look at the Hadith that my opponent cited:
Anas b. Mālik told of Hudhaifa b. al-Yamān coming to ‘Uthmān after having led the Syrians along with the ‘Irāqīs at the conquest of Armenia and Azerbaijan:
Being alarmed at their difference in reading the Qur’ān he said to ‘Uthmān, “Commander of the faithful, set this people right before they disagree about the Book in the manner of the Jews and the Christians.” ‘Uthmān therefore sent a message to Hafsa asking her to send the sheets to him so that they might make copies of them, after which he would return them to her. Hafsa sent them to ‘Uthmān and he commanded Zaid b. Thābit, ‘Abdallāh b. az-Zubair, Sa'īd b. al-‘Ās and ‘Abdallāh b. al-Hārith b. Hishām who made copies of them. ‘Uthmān gave instructions to the three members of Quraish that when they and Zaid b. Thābit disagreed about anything in the Qur’ān they were to write in the dialect of Quraish, for it came down only in their dialect. They did so, and when they had made several copies of the sheets ‘Uthmān returned the sheets to Hafsa. He then sent a copy of those which they had transcribed to every region, giving orders that every sheet or volume which contained a part of the Qur’ān in different form should be burned. Ibn Shihāb said he was told by Khārija b. Zaid b. Thābit that he heard Zaid b. Thābit say that when they transcribed the Qur’ān he failed to find a verse in al-Ahzāb which he had heard God’s messenger reciting. He therefore sought it and found it with Khuzaima b. Thābit al-Ansārī, “Among the believers are men who have been true to the covenant they made with God” (Qur’ān, 33:23). They then added it to its sūra in the copy of the Qur’ān
A few important things to note in here:
(1) Early Muslims were alarmed at how many differences were in the Quran and the way that the Quran was recited
(2) Uthman ordered copies of the Quran to be collected and written down
(3) Verses of the Quran were missing from the vast majority of manuscripts
(4) Uthamn burned all the pre-existing copies of the Quran
Ask yourself: If the Quran was perfectly preserved, why would Uthman need to burn copies of the Quran he didn't like? How do we know that Uthman's manuscripts were correct? Why didn't Allah protect the early Muslims from these differences? If the Quran was not perfectly preserved in the days of the early Muslims, how can we be certain that the Quran is perfectly preserved today?
Unfortunately because Uthman burned the manuscripts he didn't like, we will never know how many textual differences and variants there really were in the Quran.
Thank you please vote con
Pro
#4
Thank you Con for the enjoyable debate.
Before we proceed, we must define the perimeter of our subject: what precisely is the raw source data that if ascertained to be preserved, then Pro wins, else Con wins.
I Source Data
The source data -Quran- is the verses recited by the beloved Prophet (pbuh) such that they are: recited in Salat (formal prayer) and also in the Final Recitation (before the Prophet’s death), i.e. they are designated as revelation and also non-abrogated. – Therefore, only non-abrogated revealed verses are part of the Quran, else not.
A Recitation & the Quran are equivalent. In effect, reciting the Quran in any of its 7 Letters is sufficient -by the statement of its author, & also necessary -for no other recitation beyond the 7 Letters is recited by its author. – Therefore, the preservation of a Recitation in one or more of the 7 Letters (not necessarily all 7) is equivalent to the preservation of the Quran.
The source data is, thus, the body of non-abrogated revealed verses recited according to any one (or more) of the 7 Letters.
II Con’s Fallacies
Con’s ‘There is a broken chain’ is a negation of ‘all chains are unbroken’, not of ‘there is a chain'. To negate the latter. Con must instead prove that ‘all chains are broken’.
Before we proceed, we must define the perimeter of our subject: what precisely is the raw source data that if ascertained to be preserved, then Pro wins, else Con wins.
I Source Data
The source data -Quran- is the verses recited by the beloved Prophet (pbuh) such that they are: recited in Salat (formal prayer) and also in the Final Recitation (before the Prophet’s death), i.e. they are designated as revelation and also non-abrogated. – Therefore, only non-abrogated revealed verses are part of the Quran, else not.
A Recitation & the Quran are equivalent. In effect, reciting the Quran in any of its 7 Letters is sufficient -by the statement of its author, & also necessary -for no other recitation beyond the 7 Letters is recited by its author. – Therefore, the preservation of a Recitation in one or more of the 7 Letters (not necessarily all 7) is equivalent to the preservation of the Quran.
The source data is, thus, the body of non-abrogated revealed verses recited according to any one (or more) of the 7 Letters.
II Con’s Fallacies
Con’s ‘There is a broken chain’ is a negation of ‘all chains are unbroken’, not of ‘there is a chain'. To negate the latter. Con must instead prove that ‘all chains are broken’.
Con’s ’There are variants in the Quran’ is a negation of ‘there are no variants in the Quran’, which is False. Con must show that these variants are not original, otherwise the statement has no added value.
Con’s ‘there is disagreement, therefore it’s Untrue’ is a fallacy. Disagreement has no bearing on Truth or accuracy. There is a disagreement on whether the Earth is round, therefore the Earth is flat! The point is in examining each claim on its own merit.
Con dismisses the demonstrably certain preservation of the Quran in favor of dubious anecdotes. We do not dismiss the existence of gravity the moment we see a ballon going up. What is uncertain must be understood in light of what is certain, not the contrary. This is equivalent to believing your dead grandma came back to life when someone tells you “I saw your grandma”, rather than understanding they may have meant in a dream or visited her grave, in light of the fact that she is dead.
Con takes for granted the reports in the Sunnah & disregards the Mutawatir Recitations. He must show us what exactly is his criteria for accepting these & not those, otherwise we are compelled to believe he is just making unfounded assertions.
III Manuscripts
In the Islamic Tradition, 8 categories of data transfer of historical records are recognized (e.g: aural reception, oral confirmation, replication, & entrustment). The lowest two are: will (records transferred by inheritance -Wasiya) & finding (found records -Wijada), both of which are categorically inadmissible in scriptural records (Quran & Hadith) in the Sunni Tradition (as opposed to the Shia Tradition).
In case of findings (material records in modern terminology) not only is there no possibility of recourse as is the case for will, no data transfer occurs either. Sunni scholars admit found written records (save of Quran & Hadith) only in two cases:
1 Handwriting, when recognizable to belong to the author.
2 Writing style, when literary style, script, stroke, ink, paper… indicate provenance.
With the advent of computers & modern technics of carbon dating, paleography… the ways & the degree by which manuscripts are verified has significantly improved. Unsurprisingly, modern Muslim scholars have increased confidence in the value of Quranic manuscripts, as compared to their predecessors. But how much exactly can manuscripts tell us?
We do not have the beloved Prophet’s handwriting -as he was illiterate. Nor do we know the handwritings of his scribes, except probably Muawiya -but with no surviving Quranic text in his handwriting. Hence, we are left the only option of examining the Writing style of the manuscript to infer its providence. In such case that a Quranic manuscript is accurate, it must, therefore, conform to all the other established Quranic facts through sound chains of transmission, including the Ten & the Uthamic Codex.
In fact, the extant manuscripts said to be of Uthmanic origin today are all virtually conform to the standard Uthmanic script. E.g. Topkapi Codex, dated to the 1st century after the Prophet’s death. It has exactly 2270 variations from the modern text almost all are in script, mainly in the letter ‘alif’ (like the difference: a & ɑ), except in 8 instances which are clearly scribal errors (e.g. وولا =&& no). This is also true for the upper-text of the Sanaa Codex. In fact, the under-text of the Sanaa Codex is, so far, the only non-Uthmanic Quran manuscript in existence. Before I respond to Con’s objections, Con must prove why this Codex is relevant to begin with.
IV Rebuttals
memorizing things is one of the worst ways to preserve it
& yet millions of Muslims memorize the Quran by heart. Actually, billions of people around the world memorize song lyrics several times the size of the Quran!
saw different forms of recitation of the Qur’an
Although disagreement does not entail falsehood to begin with, disagreement among Muslims somewhere is wholly irrelevant to transmission of the Quran, for they did not take their information from the source, the Prophet (pbuh).
We used to recite a surah… I have, however, forgotten it…
As stated, having been once revealed does not necessarily imply it’s part of the Quran. Con must show first that these Surahs are in fact non-abrogated for this story to be of any relevance.
The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding …a tame sheep came in and ate it.
First, this account is weak, for it is transmitted though a broken chain including unreliable narrators. Second, assuming its truth, loss of a single written record does not imply loss of all written & oral records. Third, Con must again show that these are non-abrogated for any discussion to take place. Fourth, Con’s misunderstanding of the text is sufficient reason to reject his claims. Breastfeeding here means offering breast milk in a cup or such as a drink, to establish milk motherhood. It is absurd that a man be prohibited from looking at a woman’s entire body or being with her in a private space, be allowed to not only look at her private parts but also suck her breasts just so he is allowed to look at her face!!
…reminded me many verses that I had nearly forgotten.
One, momentarily forgetting things does nothing to impact data storage. Data loss comes only with permanent forgetfulness. Two, this story proves further my point, having a multitude of sources eliminates human error. If one forgets, another remembers. Three, this whole thing is completely irrelevant to our resolution. The Prophet (pbuh) is himself the source, the content creator. Our concern is the preservation that occurs after the source, not at the source. Four, even if we ignore all this, the relevant verses are those pertaining to the Last Recitation, anything that happened before this is extraneous. Finally, to have his objection Con must first show that verses from the Last Recitation were later forgotten by everyone.
'I missed an Ayah of Surat Al-Ahzab that I heard the Messenger of Allah reciting… so I searched for it and found it with Khuzaimah… so I put it in its Surah.
As for how Con reaches his conclusions we will never know, but the report states the following: Zayd already knew the verse he was looking for by heart, hence he is looking for it in written format. Only one verse he could find with but one person, implying all other verses in the Quran were found written from multiple sources. He deemed Khuzaima equal to two witnesses, implying all other verses indeed had multiple witnesses…
V Argument
P1 Data is accurately preserved from absent source to present destination, if therebetween is an unbroken chain of intermediate storage nodes which accurately store data & accurately redistribute it, & transitional channels which conserve raw source data, & also backup chains. [as per Information Theory]
P2 Historical records are deemed Mutawatir from source to present, if therebetween is multiple chains of witnesses adept to accurately retain facts & to accurately relay them, perfectly corroborated by a great number of other independent witnesses (by cross-examination) such that it is inconceivable they could’ve all lied to tell the same untruth, at each & every level of the chain –while conserving raw source data (oral records through oral mediums & written records through written mediums). [as per the Islamic Tradition]
P3 Therefore, Mutawatir (perfectly preserved) historical records are accurately preserved. [follows from P1+P2]
P4 The Ten Recitations (or the Ten) are determined Mutawatir oral record. [as per fulfilling P2]
P5 The Uthmanic Codex is determined Mutawatir written record. [as per fulfilling P2]
P6 Therefore, the Ten are an accurate record of the Oral Quran; & the Uthmanic Codex is an accurate record of the Textual Quran. [follows from P3+P4+P5]
P7 The Ten perfectly conform to the Uthmanic Codex. [by design]
C1 Therefore, the Present Quran -identified with the Ten- is a perfectly preserved record of the Past Quran. [follows from P6+P7]
P8 The Ten & the Uthmanic Codex are, independently, in perfect agreement. [fact]
C2 Therefore, 'the Quran recited today is, verbatim, the Quran recited by the beloved Prophet (pbuh)’ is True. Hence, Pro’s case. [follows from P8+P9]
VI Conclusion
To refute my case Con must show either that the above syllogism is Unsound, Or that any of its premises is False. In case Con fails to prove either propositions, Con necessarily loses the case, for my argument stands & so do its conclusions. In case Con attempts to argue against other than the Argument, this would constitute, by definition, a straw-man fallacy, warranting Con’s loss –as per the rules.
Vote Pro.
Round 3
Round 4
Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
"by the choice of one side to miss at least 40% of the debate, the requirement [to consider arguments] ceases."
Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
Forfeiture.
Hopefully they'll do a rematch some time to finish off those rounds.
Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
Rule 1 is 'no forfeits' in the description. Con violated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIbnUMqLQ78
- Thank you for the vote. I will get to our debate within a couple of days.
I kept screwing up my vote as I rethought the points allocation and said 'pro violated' but you are Pro, very confusing
- Challenge sent.
"If you dont want to debate this topic, say what topic about islam you want to debate."
- I will send you the challenge shortly. I am fine with debating any topic on Islam, law, history, theology, politics, or the beloved Prophet (pbuh). I am also open to any Islam vs West/East or whatever debate. The more difficult for me the better.
"Quran produces violence"
- The wording is weird, but I can debate it. Maybe something like 'The Quran Promotes Violence'.
"Quran causes muslims to hate atheists"
- Weird way of wording it again. 'The Quran Promotes Hate Against Atheists'?
"God of Quran is evil"
- Might have to define the terms precisely to avoid semantics, but works for me.
"Islam is a religion of hate"
- 'Islam Promotes Hate'. Sure.
"Any of these work for me."
- I can debate all of them at the same time. But you're free to chose.
If you dont want to debate this topic, say what topic about islam you want to debate.
I am open to debating:
"Quran produces violence"
"Quran causes muslims to hate atheists"
"God of Quran is evil"
"Islam is a religion of hate"
Any of these work for me.
"Islam does not encourage authoritarianism"
With me being placed as Con.
With authoritarianism being defined as "blind obedience to authority".
- Alright. Do you have a resolution in mind?
Okay, make a debate or challenge me.
The topic I want to debate is about authoritarianism of islam.
Make the argument time 2 weeks.
- You are half way through your first round with all that. You seem to have a lot to say about this. Why don't we have a debate on the subject & you can show us how Islam is authoritarian & how Muslims take over & all that.
"If people are not willing to accept your authoritarian system to fight off Islam by virtue of it being authoritarian, they wouldn't accept Islam either for being supposedly authoritarian"
Thats not a contradiction. First, you are assuming that my system = islam, and that the only variable for acceptance is authoritarianism.
It seems that I will have to feed you the facts because your muslim brain wont comprehend how it works.
1) There is a non-authoritarian society.
2) Muslims multiply and become majority.
3) Muslims take over and introduce authoritarian society.
There is no choice here involved for non-muslims who oppose to authoritarian regimes, since they become minority.
They cant reject or accept.
The very fact that they were opposed to all authoritarian regimes is what allowed muslims to multiply and preach their authoritarianism.
Non-authoritarian regimes literally cant reject islam without themselves becoming a different form of authoritarianism.
Your muslim brain doesnt want to comprehend this.
Muslims multiply through high birth rates, and through lies to make people convert. People who convert to islam start justifying authoritarianism.
So the ratio of non-authoritarians and authoritarians slowly changes.
Muslims preach authoritarianism and convert many to it.
When still minority, muslims pretend to be in favor of religious freedom.
This tricks many, and many become muslims.
When majority, muslims start justifying authoritarianism to their members.
First, you assumed that an average person can recognize authoritarianism every time, or not be seduced by islam into accepting authoritarianism.
I clearly said that my system is authoritarian and people didnt want to accept it because they believe in allowing religion to exist. My system does not have the charms of islam.
They fail to recognize that islamic religion is authoritarian.
So when muslims become a majority, they will abolish non-authoritarian society and establish muslim authoritarianism.
Free speech will not be tolerated. We will not be able to say that allah is a pig without going to prison or worse. Muslims will bully atheists all the time.
Your freedom to believe in allah will be tolerated. My freedom to believe that allah is a pig and that muhammad was a homosexual and that quran is written by satan - these will not be tolerated.
Muslims have done this in every country they took over.
Freedom of religion is a delusion. Atheists will lose unless they realise it.
"This is basically a truism. We can't be reading the same bible by Prophet Muhammed if the language didn't exist back then."
- Whatever this means, we can have a formal debate on the subject where you can show everyone the truism nature of the statement.
- You're contradicting yourself. If people are not willing to accept your authoritarian system to fight off Islam by virtue of it being authoritarian, they wouldn't accept Islam either for being supposedly authoritarian -according to you- either. If Islam is taking over for whatever reasons, then not being authoritarian is probably one of them.
This is basically a truism. We can't be reading the same bible by Prophet Muhammed if the language didn't exist back then.
I am not confident in it at all. It has nothing that can attract people.
People are not ready to introduce authoritarian system to fight off islam.
Islam will take over and introduce its own authoritarian system on them.
It sucks that people only realize it when its too late.
"I did propose introducing a North Korean system to help fight off islam, but sadly the world prefers islam and that is what the world is going to get."
- Maybe you are not confident enough on the substance of your system?
Contrary to the popular belief, I am not here to debate anyone.
You are a muslim. You think that islam is right. That is a sad story, but not something I can change. Islam spreads throughout the world. It will take over most of the world.
I did propose introducing a North Korean system to help fight off islam, but sadly the world prefers islam and that is what the world is going to get.
Plenty of good news for muslims.
Plenty of bad news for atheists.
"That is impossible. The fact that the Quran has been translated into multiple languages automatically prevents the title from being true."
- Perfect! I assume you wanna defend that in a debate?
"It's too bad the opponent forfeited."
- You can always pick up the baton & defend the topic yourself.
"Now someone might think that Quran is right."
- Winning a resolution has no bearing on its Truth. It may have something to do with the skill of the debater & the bias of the audience.
"We already have enough problems with Christians thinking their God exists."
- I don't disagree.
"Theoretically, we could let muslims and christians fight over who is more right."
- No fight needed. Muslims are.
"Naturally, atheists like to make fun of theism. But the fact is that theists keep producing new arguments for existence of God."
- I assume you're ready to prove otherwise in a debate?
"I even heard one muslim say that even if islam is proven false, it is still good because it benefits society."
- Which is what the False Atheism pretends.
"This is why atheism is at a disadvantage. It is not just that its impossible to prove that God doesnt exist. Its very hard to prove that religion is not beneficial for society. Theists play the game "I assume, you must disprove". Such game gives them advantage."
- Wanna give it a shot?
"North Korea managed to surpress religion, which is a great thing for everyone. Still, there are some religious people in North Korea.
I guess religion is a disease that cannot be simply removed."
- This sounds like a good resolution for a debate.
- Cool video...
Very happy Muslims dancing along to Haram music. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVDIXqILqSM
Haram why? Has rhythm, melody that isn't solely vocal and can put the dancer in a trance, in this case a 'happy' one.
Its too bad the opponent forfeited.
Now someone might think that Quran is right.
We already have enough problems with Christians thinking their God exists.
Theoretically, we could let muslims and christians fight over who is more right.
But that doesnt benefit atheists like me. Whoever wins at that fight will ultimately come out more powerful, and atheism will be further surpressed.
Naturally, atheists like to make fun of theism. But the fact is that theists keep producing new arguments for existence of God.
I even heard one muslim say that even if islam is proven false, it is still good because it benefits society.
So yes, we atheists face a lot of problems due to massive number of theists compared to atheists.
Unlike atheism, theism is a world view with set goals for society.
This is why atheism is at a disadvantage. It is not just that its impossible to prove that God doesnt exist. Its very hard to prove that religion is not beneficial for society. Theists play the game "I assume, you must disprove". Such game gives them advantage.
North Korea managed to surpress religion, which is a great thing for everyone. Still, there are some religious people in North Korea.
I guess religion is a disease that cannot be simply removed.
That is impossible. The fact that the Quran has been translated into multiple languages automatically prevents the title from being true.
"Islam is a lie"
- Do you wish to debate that topic too?
thanks for the clarification. i am enjoying this debate
Note:
- Typo in this passage: "Con’s ‘There is a broken chain’ is a negation of ‘all chains are unbroken’, not of ‘there is a chain'. To negate the latter. Con must instead prove that ‘all chains are broken'" => instead of 'there is a chain' , it should be 'there is an unbroken chain'.
Some people burn their Qurans because they think Allah is the general wrongdoer.