debate p2

 . First: The response to Al-Munsir regarding his evidence based on the disagreement among scholars regarding the number of Uthmanic copies of the Quran that Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, sent to the provinces .

Al-Munsir used the disagreement among scholars regarding the number of copies of the Quran that Uthman bin Affan, may Allah be pleased with him, sent to challenge the Uthmanic script. This is the height of ignorance!!! The difference in the number of copies of the Qur’an does not mean that we did not receive the content of the drawing of those copies of the Qur’an.

The content of those copies of the Qur’an has reached us.

As for their content in terms of reading, it has reached us through the chains of transmission of the ten readings that documented the oral transmission :

The chain of transmission of Ibn Kathir’s reading

. We read in Al-Nashr fi Al-Qira’at Al-‘Ashr, Part One, Page 120

: “Al-Qist also read, and Ma’ruf and Shibl read to the Sheikh of Mecca and its Imam in reading, Abu Ma’bad Abdullah bin Kathir bin Amr bin Abdullah bin Zadhan bin Fayrouzan bin Hormuz Al-Dari Al-Makki.” This is the completion of seventy-three paths from Ibn Kathir.

Ibn Kathir read on the authority of Abu al-Sa’ib Abdullah ibn al-Sa’ib ibn Abi al-Sa’ib al-Makhzumi, on the authority of Abu al-Hajjaj Mujahid ibn Jabr al-Makki, and on Dirbas, the freed slave of Ibn Abbas. Abdullah ibn al-Sa’ib read on Ubayy ibn Ka’b and Umar ibn al-Khattab - may Allah be pleased with them both. - And Mujahid read to Abdullah bin Al-Sa’ib, and Dirbas read to his client Ibn Abbas, and Ibn Abbas read to Ubayy bin Ka’b and Zayd bin Thabit, and Ubayy, Zayd and Umar - may Allah be pleased with them - read to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.))

The chain of transmission of Abu Amr’s reading ,

and we read in Al-Nashr in the Ten Readings, Part One, page 133

((And Al-Susi and Al-Duri read on Abu Muhammad Yahya bin Al-Mubarak bin Al-Mughirah Al-Yazidi, and Al-Yazidi read on the Imam of Basra and its reciter Abu Amr Ziyad bin Al-Ala bin Ammar Al-Urayyan bin Abdullah bin Al-Hussain bin Al-Harith Al-Mazini Al-Basri, so that is one hundred and fifty-four paths on Abu Amr, and Abu Amr read to Abu Jaafar Yazid bin Al-Qaqa’, Yazid bin Ruman, Shaiba bin Nasah, Abdullah bin Katheer, Mujahid bin Jabr, Al-Hasan Al-Basri, Abu Al-Aliyah Rafi’ bin Mihran Al-Riyahi, Humayd bin Qais Al-A’raj Al-Makki, Abdullah bin Abi Ishaq Al-Hadrami, and Ata’ bin Abi Rabah, Ikrimah ibn Khalid, Ikrimah the freed slave of Ibn Abbas, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhaysin, Asim ibn Abi al-Najud, Nasr ibn Asim, and Yahya ibn Ya`mur. The chain of transmission of Abu Ja`far will come, and the chain of transmission of Yazid ibn Ruman and Shaybah was presented in the recitation of Nafi`. The chain of transmission of Mujahid was presented in the recitation of Ibn Kathir. Al-Hasan recited On the authority of Hattan bin Abdullah Al-Raqashi and Abu Al-Aaliyah Al-Riyahi, and Hattan read on Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari, and Abu Al-Aaliyah read on Omar bin Al-Khattab, Ubayy bin Ka’b, Zaid bin Thabit, and Ibn Abbas, and Humayd read on Mujahid, and its chain of transmission was presented, and Abdullah bin Abi Ishaq read on Yahya bin Ya’mur and Nasr bin Asim, and Ata’ read on Abu Hurayrah, and his chain of transmission was presented, and Ikrimah ibn Khalid read on the companions of Ibn Abbas, and his chain of transmission was presented, and Ikrimah, the freed slave of Ibn Abbas, read on Ibn Abbas, and Ibn Muhaysin read on Mujahid and Dirbas, and their chain of transmission was presented, and the chain of transmission of Asim will come, and Nasr ibn Asim and Yahya ibn Ya’mur read on Abu Al-Aswad, and Abu Al-Aswad read to Uthman and Ali - may Allah be pleased with them - and Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari, Umar ibn Al-Khattab, Ubayy ibn Ka'b, Zayd ibn Thabit, Uthman and Ali - may Allah be pleased with them - read to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.))

The chain of transmission of the reading of Hamza Al-Zayyat

, and we read in Al-Nashr in the Ten Readings, Part One, page 165

((And Hamzah read to Abu Muhammad Sulayman ibn Mihran al-A’mash in a recital, and it was said: the letters only, and Hamzah also read to Abu Hamzah Humran ibn A’yan, and to Abu Ishaq Amr ibn Abdullah al-Sabi’i, and to Muhammad ibn Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla, and to Abu Muhammad Talhah ibn Musarrif al-Yami, and to Abu Abdullah Jaafar al-Sadiq ibn Muhammad al-Baqir ibn Zayn al-Abidin Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn Ali ibn Abi Talib al-Hashemi, and al-A’mash and Talhah read on Abu Muhammad Yahya ibn Waththab al-Asadi, and Yahya read on Abu Shibl Alqamah ibn Qays, and on his nephew al-Aswad ibn Yazid ibn Qays, and on Zirr ibn Hubaysh, and on Zayd ibn Wahb, and on Ubaydah ibn Amr al-Salmani, and on Masruq ibn al-Ajda’, and Humran read on Abu al-Aswad al-Daylami, and his chain of transmission was presented, and on Ubayd ibn Nadlah, and Ubayd read on Alqamah, and Humran also read on al-Baqir, and Abu Ishaq read on Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami, and on Zirr ibn Hubaysh, and their chain of transmission was presented, and on Asim ibn Damrah, and on Al-Harith ibn Abdullah Al-Hamadhani, and Asim and Al-Harith read on Ali, and Ibn Abi Laila read on Al-Minhal ibn Amr and others, and Al-Minhal read on Saeed ibn Jubayr, and its chain of transmission was presented, and Alqamah, Al-Aswad, Ibn Wahb, Masruq, and Asim ibn Damrah read And Al-Harith also read on Abdullah bin Masoud, and Jaafar Al-Sadiq read on his father Muhammad Al-Baqir, and Al-Baqir read on Zain Al-Abidin, and Zain Al-Abidin read on his father, the master of the youth of the people of Paradise, Al-Husayn, and Al-Husayn read on his father Ali bin Abi Talib, and Ali and Ibn Masoud - may Allah be pleased with them - read on the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him.))

The chain of transmission of Asim’s recitation is mentioned

in Al-Nashr in the Ten Readings, Part One, Page 155.

((Hafs and Abu Bakr read on the Imam of Kufa and its reciter Abu Bakr Asim bin Abi Al-Najoud bin Bahdalah Al-Asadi, their client from Kufa. That is one hundred and twenty-eight paths for Asim. Asim read on Abu Abd Al-Rahman Abdullah bin Habib bin Rabi’ah Al-Sulami Al-Dareer and on Abu Maryam Zirr bin Hubaysh ibn Habasha al-Asadi and Abu Amr Sa`d ibn Ilyas al-Shaybani. These three read on `Abdullah ibn Mas`ud, may Allah be pleased with him. As-Sulami and Zirr also read on `Uthman ibn `Affan and `Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with them both. As-Sulami also read on Ubayy ibn Ka`b and Zayd ibn Thabit, may Allah be pleased with them both. (May Allah be pleased with them both) - and Ibn Mas`ud, Uthman, Ali, Ubayy and Zayd recited to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.))

The chain of transmission of Ibn `Amir’s recitation:

We read in An-Nashr fi al-Qira`at al-`Ashr, Part One, Page 144

: ((And Ad-Dhimari recited to the Imam of the people of Ash-Sham, Abu `Imran `Abdullah ibn `Amir ibn Yazid ibn Tamim ibn Rabi`ah Al-Yahsabi, so that is one hundred and thirty paths for Ibn `Amir.

Ibn Amir read to Abu Hashim al-Mughirah ibn Abi Shihab Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-Mughirah al-Makhzumi without disagreement among the scholars, and to Abu al-Darda’ Uwaimir ibn Zayd ibn Qays, according to what al-Hafiz Abu Amr and al-Dani have confirmed, and it is authentic to us from him. Al-Mughirah read to Uthman ibn Affan - may God be pleased with him. - And Uthman and Abu Darda’ read to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.))

The chain of transmission of Nafi’s reading .

We read in An-Nashr in the Ten Readings, Part One

: ((And Nafi’ read to seventy of the Tabi’een, among them Abu Ja’far, Abd al-Rahman ibn Hurmuz al-A’raj, Muslim ibn Jundub, Muhammad ibn Muslim ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, Salih ibn Khawwat, Shaybah ibn Nasah, and Yazid ibn Roman. As for Abu Ja`far, he will come to those who read in his reading, and Al-A`raj read on the authority of Abdullah bin Abbas, Abu Hurairah, and Abdullah bin Ayyash bin Abi Rabia Al-Makhzumi, and Muslim, Shaybah, and Ibn Roman also read on the authority of Abdullah bin Ayyash bin Abi Rabia, and Shaybah heard the reading from Umar bin Al-Khattab, and Salih read on Abu Hurairah, and Al-Zuhri read on Saeed bin Al-Musayyab, and Saeed read on Ibn Abbas and Abu Hurairah, and Ibn Abbas, Abu Hurairah and Ibn Ayyash read on Ubayy bin Ka’b, and Ibn Abbas also read on Zaid bin Thabit, and Ubayy, Zaid and Umar - may Allah be pleased with them - read on the Messenger of Allah May God bless him and grant him peace.

The chain of transmission of the reading of Ya`qub al-Hadrami:

We read in al-Nashr fi al-Qira`at al-`Ashr, Part One, 186:

And Ya`qub read on the authority of Abu al-Mundhir Sallam ibn Sulayman al-Muzani, their mawla al-Tawil, and on the authority of Shihab ibn Sharifah, and on the authority of Abu Yahya Mahdi ibn Maymun al-Ma`wali, and on the authority of Abu al-Ashhab Ja`far ibn Hayyan al-`Attaridi, and it was said that he read on the authority of Abu `Amr himself, and Sallam read on the authority of `Asim. Al-Kufi, and on Abu Amr, and their chain of transmission was presented, and Sallam also read on Abu al-Mujshir Asim ibn al-Ajaj al-Jahdari al-Basri, and on Abu Abdullah Yunus ibn Ubayd ibn Dinar al-Abqasi, their client from Basra, and they read on al-Hasan ibn Abi al-Hasan al-Basri, and his chain of transmission was presented, and al-Jahdari also read on Sulayman ibn Qatah al-Tamimi, their client from Basra, read on Abdullah ibn Abbas, and Shihab read on Abu Abdullah Harun ibn Musa al-Ataki al-A’war the grammarian, and on al-Mu’alla ibn Isa, and Harun read on Asim al-Jahdari and Abu Amr with their chain of transmission, and Harun also read on Abdullah ibn Abi Ishaq al-Hadrami, and he is Abu Jad Yaqub, and he read on Yahya bin Ya`mar and Nasr bin `Asim with their previously mentioned chain of transmission, and Al-Mu`alla read on `Asim Al-Jahdari with his chain of transmission, and Mahdi read on Shu`ayb bin Al-Hijab, and he read on Abu Al-`Aliyah Al-Riyahi, and his chain of transmission was previously mentioned, and Abu Al-Ashhab read on Abu Raja `Imran bin Milhan Al-`Attaridi, and Abu Raja on Abu Musa al-Ash'ari, and Abu Musa read on the Messenger of Allah - may Allah's prayers and peace be upon him and his family - and this is a chain of transmission that is extremely sound and high.

As for writing, the task of controlling the Uthmanic script and transmitting it across generations was undertaken by imams who preserved that for us and composed books on that from which they transmitted the method and style of the Uthmanic script found in the copies of the Qur'an that Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, distributed to the provinces .

We read from the book Al-Muqni` fi Rasm Masahif Al-Amsar by Abu Amr Al-Dani, may God have mercy on him:
(( In this book, I mention, God willing, what I heard from my sheikhs and narrated from my imams regarding the drawing of the lines of the mushafs of the people of the cities: Medina, Mecca, Kufa, Basra, Ash-Sham, and the rest of Iraq, which was agreed upon in the past, different from the imam’s mushaf of Uthman bin Affan, may God be pleased with him, and from the rest of the copies that were copied from it and directed to Kufa, Basra, and Ash-Sham. I make all of that into chapters , and I classify it into sections, I leave it without explaining the reasons and the meanings in order to make it easy to memorize, and to make it easy for those who seek to know it from those seeking to read and those who write the mushafs and others like them who have neglected explaining that and stopped narrating it, and have been satisfied with it for a long time with their assumptions and knowledge. I have seen that I should open this book of mine by mentioning some of the news and traditions that have reached me regarding the people of the mushafs and the collection of the Qur’an in them, since mentioning that in it is indispensable first, and I seek help from God and His inspiration for the truth. I trust in Him, and He is sufficient for me and He is the best Disposer of affairs.))

And from the same source we read an example of how they adjusted the Ottoman script:
((Ahmad bin Omar bin Muhammad bin Amr Al-Jizi told us, reading from me to him, he said Muhammad bin Ahmed bin Abdul Aziz Al-Imam told us, he said Abdullah bin Issa Al-Madani told us, he said Issa bin Qaloon told us on the authority of Nafi bin Abi Naim Al-Qari, he said the Alif is not written, meaning in the copies of the Qur’an in His saying in Al-Baqarah: “And they do not deceive” and “And when We promised” and “And We promised Moses” and “And We promised you” wherever they occurred and “The thunderbolt took you” and “It resembled us” and “With him his sin” and “You appear” and “Prisoners” and “They ransomed them” and “Or whenever they promised” and “Tasrif Al-Rih” and “Ta’am Miskin” and “Fidhifah” and “Yad’if” and “Mudd’ifah” wherever they occurred and “And if it were not for the defense of Allah” wherever it occurred and in “Farahna Maqbudha”.

And in Al-Imran: “From them, Taqwa” is written with a Ya’, “Fayakan Tayr” wherever it occurred and “And they were killed, they were killed”.

And in An-Nisa’: “And a third” And a quarter of "and" and "double offspring" and "Allah has decreed upon you" and "and those with whom you have made a covenant" and "a good deed that He doubles" and "or you touched women". And the same is in Al-Ma'idah "they killed you" and "much forced".

And in Al-Ma'idah: "paths of peace" and "his message was not conveyed" and "he reached the Ka'bah, food for the poor" and "a guardian for the people".

In short, the difference in the number of the Qur'ans does not mean what this Al-Juwail intended of the loss of content, since the content of the Qur'ans in terms of reading and writing remained in circulation and preserved by the nation.

We read from the book “The Drawing of the Mushaf and its Control between the Stopping and Modern Terms” by Shaaban Muhammad Ismail, Chapter on Copying the Mushafs during the Time of Uthman ibn Affan, may God be pleased with him, its Causes and Nature:
((The Number of Mushafs:

The narrations differed regarding the number of Mushafs that were copied and sent to the different regions:

Al-Sijistani mentioned - in one of the two narrations - that they were seven, one of which was sent to Mecca, another to the Levant, a third to Yemen, a fourth to Bahrain, a fifth to Basra, a sixth to Kufa, and one was kept in Medina, which is what Uthman - may God be pleased with him - kept for himself. He used to call this copy: the Imam’s Mushaf, considering that the Caliph is the reference for all Muslims, so it is more like the original copy that is in the possession of the state. 2.

In the narration of Al-Qurtubi: Uthman - may God be pleased with him - sent to Iraq and the Levant with mothers3. He did not clarify that number.

While Abu Amr Al-Dani states that the Mushafs were sent to: Medina, Mecca, Kufa, Basra, the Levant, and the rest of Iraq1.

He mentioned Al-Suyuti said that there were five copies, sent to: Mecca, Syria, Kufa, Basra, and Medina, in addition to the copy that Uthman - may God be pleased with him - kept for himself, which was known as the Imam’s Mushaf. 2

Uthman - may God be pleased with him - did not limit himself to sending the copies of the Mushaf to the provinces, but rather he sent with each copy one of the Companions to read to those to whom he sent the Mushaf, and often the reading of this Companion was in agreement with what was written in the Mushaf, due to the existence of some differences between these copies of the Mushaf - as will come. So

he ordered Zaid bin Thabit to read from the Madinan Mushaf, and he sent Abdullah bin Al-Saib with the Makkan, Al-Mughirah bin Shihab with the Shami, Abu Abdul Rahman Al-Sulami with the Kufi, and Aamer bin Abdul Qais with the Basri. 3

This supports the story that states that there were five copies of the Qur’an.

Whatever the difference in the number of copies, what is certain is that these copies of the Qur’an remained in circulation, and people copied from them, until printing houses appeared, and printed copies of the Qur’an appeared in their various forms and sizes, and they were called: “Uthmanic copies of the Qur’an” in reference to “Uthman ibn Affan” - may God be pleased with him - not because he copied them in a way that differed from the way they were written during the era of the Messenger - may God bless him and grant him peace - and the era of Abu Bakr - may God be pleased with him - but rather because he was the one who copied these copies of the Qur’an and sent them to the regions, so these copies of the Qur’an became widespread and became known, and Muslims received them in the East and West of the earth. Otherwise, our master “Uthman” - may God be pleased with him - did not invent a new style for writing the Qur’an, but rather followed the same style in which the Qur’an was written before))

Second: The response to his claim of the contradiction of Imam al-Dani - may God have mercy on him - regarding the dots .

Al-Munsir claimed that Ibn al-Dani’s statement that the Companions did not use dots during the copying of the Qur’an during the time of Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) contradicts his statement later that the Arabs did not know dots at that time.

The response to this is: dots were present in very small quantities during the pre-Islamic era, as most of the pre-Islamic Arabic inscriptions that exist today are without dots. So Ibn al-Jazari’s statement that the Arabs did not know dots was only reporting the prevailing reality among the Arabs, especially since even that small quantity of dots was not disciplined until Abu al-Aswad came along.

We read from Al-Mufassal fi Tarikh Al-Arab by Jawad Ali, Chapter 121:
((It was reported that some researchers of ancient Islamic writings found traces of dots in some ancient documents. Dr. Grohmann mentioned that he found dotted letters in a papyrus document written in Arabic and Greek dating back to the year 22 AH. If this dotting is true and proven, it indicates the existence of dots in this era. GC Miles also mentioned that he found dotted letters in a writing found near Taif dating back to the year 58 AH . If it is true that these dots are as old as writing, this means that writing on stone also knew dots in this era and before it, as it is not reasonable that the first writing on stone used dots.))

Al-Munsir does not know the simplest information about Arab history!!!

Third: Explaining Al-Munsir’s contradiction and his blatant ignorance of the books of the differences in the Qur’an .

Al-Munsir criticized us for the differences in some places in the readings and the differences in the drawing sometimes. He cited as evidence some sources that mention the differences in the copies of the Qur’an.

I say: Every disease has a cure except for foolishness, which has eluded those who treat it.

The ten readings and the areas of difference in them were all recited by the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace. What I said is not new, rather it is known to those seeking knowledge of readings. What I did here is just foolishness because it is known and known to everyone, and it does not indicate distortion, which is a known and well-known matter that the Companions, may God be pleased with them, had. This is indicated by the hadiths of the seven letters.
He read from Sahih Al-Bukhari, Book of the Virtues of the Qur’an, Chapter on the Revelation of the Qur’an in Seven Letters

4706 Saeed bin Ufair told us, Al-Layth told me, Aqil told me, on the authority of Ibn Shihab, who said, Urwah bin Al-Zubayr told me that Al-Miswar bin Makhramah and Abd Al-Rahman bin Abd Al-Qari told him that they heard Umar bin Al-Khattab say, I heard Hisham bin Hakim bin Hizam reciting Surat Al-Furqan during the life of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, so I listened to his recitation.Then he recited with many letters that the Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) had not taught me. I almost wrestled with him during the prayer, but I was patient until he finished. Then I embraced him with my cloak and said: Who taught you this surah that I heard you recite? He said: The Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) taught it to me. I said: You lied, for the Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) taught it to me in a different way than I had recited it. So I went with him and led him to the Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) and said: I heard this man reciting Surat Al-Furqan with letters that you did not teach me. The Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) said: Send him. Recite, Hisham. So he recited to him the recitation that I heard him recite. The Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) said: This is how it was revealed. Then he said: Recite, Umar. So I recited the recitation that I had taught him. The Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) said: This is how it was revealed. This Qur'an was revealed with seven letters, so recite whatever is easy for you

. Of course, Al-Mansir, because he knows that this hadith is a backbreaker - since it destroys all doubts about the differences in recitations, because he attributes the differences to revelation, not to error - patched it up with a sentence that does not fatten or He sang from hunger when he said something to the effect of: Why didn’t he say from the beginning that the Quran was revealed in seven letters and why did he say that after they differed?

And I say: His words are just to throw dust in the eyes to try to weaken the matter of the hadith which was a real obstacle for him. The truth is that the lack of knowledge of some of the companions of the seven letters until the difference occurred does not negate the knowledge of some of the others. What

is even funnier is that Al-Mansir cited books that mention the differences in the places of reading and writing in the copies of the Qur’an of the regions. If this indicates anything, it destroys what he cited previously, as he argued with us about the differences in the opinions of scholars about the number of copies of the Qur’an of the regions to make the reader think that it is impossible to know the Uthmanic writing in them. And here he is citing books that mention the places of difference in writing between these copies of the Qur’an!!

We read, for example, from the book Al-Muqni` by Al-Dani, the chapter on what the copies of the Qur’an of the people of Hijaz, Iraq, and Syria that were copied by the Imam differed in, with additions and subtractions.

((We heard this chapter from more than one of our sheikhs, including in Surat Al-Baqarah in the copies of the people of Syria: “They said, ‘Allah has taken a son’” without a waw before “they said,” and in all the other copies of the Qur’an: “They said” with a waw, and in the copies of the Qur’an of the people of Medina and Syria: “And he recommended it” with an alif between the two waws. Abu Ubaid said: And I saw it in the Imam’s copy of Uthman ibn Affan, may God be pleased with him, and in all the copies of the Qur’an: “And he recommended” without a waw before the seen, and in all the copies of the Qur’an: “And they hastened” with a waw, and in it in the copies of the Qur’an of the people of Syria: “And with the books” with an addition of a ba’ in both words. This is how Khalaf ibn Ibrahim narrated it to me, on the authority of Ahmad ibn Muhammad, on the authority of Ali Abu Ubaid Hisham ibn Ammar, on the authority of Ayyub ibn Tamim, on the authority of Yahya ibn Al-Harith, on the authority of Ibn Amir, and on the authority of Hisham, on the authority of Suwaid ibn Abd Al-Aziz, on the authority of Al-Hasan ibn Imran, on the authority of Atiyah bin Qais, on the authority of Umm al-Darda’, on the authority of Abu al-Darda’, on the Mushafs of the people of Ash-Sham. And likewise, Aw Hatim narrated that they are written with the letter Ba’ in the Mushaf of the people of Homs that Uthman sent to Ash-Sham. And Harun bin Musa al-Akhfash al-Dimashqi said that the letter Ba’ was added to the Imam, meaning the one who was sent to Ash-Sham, in “and with the scriptures” alone. And al-Kisa’i narrated on the authority of Abu Haywah Shuraih bin Yazid that it is like that in the Mushaf that Uthman sent to Ash-Sham. And the first has a higher chain of transmission, and they are in all the other Mushafs without the letter Ba’.

So al-Munsir, out of his ignorance, does not know that the differences in the places of the readings are due to the

Fourth: Clarification of the weakness of the hadith of Abd al-Uzza bin Khatal, which he cited as evidence .

Al-Munsir cited what al-Salihi al-Shami mentioned in his book Subul al-Huda wa al-Rashad:
((He used to write in front of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace. When Ghafoor Raheem was revealed, he would write: Raheem Ghafor, and when Samee’ Al-Aleem was revealed, he would write: Al-Aleem, Al-Hearer. So the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said to him one day: Show me what I used to dictate to you. So when he showed it to him, the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said to him: Is this how I dictated to you? Ghafoor Raheem and Raheem Ghafor are one? And Al-Hearer, Al-Aleem, and Al-Aleem, Al-Hearer are one? So Ibn Khatal said: If it was Muhammad, I would only write for him what I wanted! Then he disbelieved and went to Mecca. So the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: Whoever kills Ibn Khatal is in Paradise! So he was killed on the day of the conquest of Mecca?))

First: What Al-Salihi Al-Shami mentioned is strange and contradictory, since this story in the sources of the predecessors and the biographers is not attributed to Abd Al-Uzza Ibn Khatal, but rather it is attributed to Abdullah Ibn Saad Ibn Abi Sarh, may God be pleased with him .

We read in the interpretation of Al-Tabari, may God have mercy on him, of Surat Al-An’am:
((13555 - Al-Qasim told us, he said, Al-Husayn told us, he said, Hajjaj told me, on the authority of Ibn Jurayj, on the authority of Ikrimah, his statement: “And who is more unjust than he who invents a lie against God or says, ‘It has been revealed to me,’ while nothing has been revealed to him,” he said: It was revealed about Musaylimah, the brother of Banu Adi ibn Hanifah, regarding what he used to recite and divination with, “And whoever says, ‘I will send down the like of what God has sent down,’” it was revealed about Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh, the brother of Banu Amir ibn Lu’ay, who had written for the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, (31) and among what he dictated was, “Mighty, Wise,” so he would write, “Forgiving, Merciful,” and he would change it, then he would read to him, “such and such,” when he changed it, and he would say, “Yes, it is the same.” So he turned away from Islam and joined the Quraysh and said to them: “Mighty, Wise” had been revealed to him. (32) And he said: “Yes, it is the same!” Then he returned to Islam before the conquest of Mecca, when the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, settled in Marr.

Despite that, the narration is weak for three reasons:

1. Al-Hajjaj bin Artah is a mudallis, and we have mentioned

in Tahdhib al-Kamal by al-Mizzi, may God have mercy on him, part two

: Abu Talib said, on the authority of Ahmad bin Hanbal: He was one of the preservers of hadith. It was said: Why is he not that good among the people? He said: Because in his hadith there is an addition to the hadith of the people. He hardly has a hadith without an addition. Abu Bakr bin Abi Khaithama said, on the authority of Yahya bin Ma’in: He is truthful, but not strong. He conceals, on the authority of Muhammad bin Ubayd Allah al-Arzami, on the authority of Amr bin Shu’ayb. 1 Ali bin Al-Madini said, on the authority of Yahya bin Saeed: Al-Hajjaj bin Artah

and Muhammad bin Ishaq are the same to me, and I left Al-Hajjaj intentionally, and I never wrote down a hadith from him.

Abu Zur’ah said: He is a truthful narrator who conceals narrations .

Abu Hatim said: He is a truthful narrator who conceals narrations from weak narrators. His hadith is written down, but if he says: He narrated to us, then he is trustworthy and there is no doubt about his truthfulness and memory, if he makes clear that he heard it, his hadith is not used as evidence. He did not hear from Al-Zuhri, nor from Hisham bin Urwah, nor from Ikrimah. ))

2. The narration of Ibn Jurayj, who is a mudallis,

we read in his biography in Siyar A’lam al-Nubala’ by Imam al-Dhahabi, may God have mercy on him, sixth grade, fifth class:

((And al-Athram narrated, on the authority of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who said: If Ibn Jurayj says: So-and-so said, and so-and-so said, and I was informed, he came with strange things. And if he said: I was informed and I heard, then that is enough for you. And al-Maymuni narrated on the authority of Ahmad: If Ibn Jurayj says: “He said,” then beware of him. And if he says: “I heard or I asked,” he came with something that was not in the mind. He was one of the vessels of knowledge.

Uthman bin Saeed, on the authority of Ibn Ma’een, said: Ibn Jurayj is nothing regarding Az-Zuhri. Abu Zur’ah Ad-Dimashqi said, on the authority of Ahmad bin Hanbal, who said: Ibn Jurayj narrated from six old women of the Sacred Mosque, and he was a man of knowledge. Ja’far bin Abdul Wahid said, on the authority of Yahya bin Saeed, who said : Ibn Jurayj was truthful. So when he said: “He told me,” then it is a hearing, and when he said: “He informed us,” or: “He informed me,” then it is a reading, and when he said: “He said,” then it is like a wind.

I said : The man is trustworthy in himself, a memorizer, but he conceals the words “on the authority of” and “He said.” He was a man of worship and night prayer, and he continued to seek knowledge until he grew old and decrepit. Whoever claimed that he exceeded one hundred years of age, rather he did not exceed eighty, was mistaken, and he was a young man during the days of his close association with Ata’.

3. The transmission is from Ikrimah, may Allah have mercy on him .

As for the apostasy of Abdul-Uzza bin Khatal, it is as Ibn Kathir, may God have mercy on him, mentioned in Al-Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah, Part Three, quoting from the biography of Ibn Ishaq:
((I said: It is said that his name was Abdul-Uzza bin Khatal, and it is possible that he was like that. Then when he converted to Islam, he was called Abdullah. When he converted to Islam,

the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, sent him as a tax collector, and he sent with him a man from the Ansar, and he had a freed slave of his, so he became angry with him and killed him. Then he apostatized as a polytheist, and he had two female slaves, one of whom fled to me and her companion, and they used to sing satirizing the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, and the Muslims. For this reason, his blood and the blood of his two female slaves were forfeited. He was killed while he was clinging to the curtains of the Kaaba. Abu Barzah Al-Aslami and Saeed bin Harith Al-Makhzumi participated in his killing, and one of his female slaves was killed, and the other was given protection.))

Second: The correct and established fact is that this story happened to a Christian who used to write for the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and a sign of the Prophet’s signs, may God bless him and grant him peace, appeared after his apostasy and death, as the earth threw him out more than once .

We read from Sahih Al-Bukhari, Book of Virtues, Chapter on Signs of Prophethood in Islam
((3617 - Abu Ma`mar narrated to us, `Abd Al-Warith narrated to us, `Abd Al-`Aziz narrated to us, on the authority of Anas, may Allah be pleased with him, who said: There was a man who was a Christian and then he became a Muslim, and he read Al-Baqarah and Al-`Imran, and he used to write for the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, then he became a Christian again, and he used to say: Muhammad does not know anything except what I wrote for him, and Allah caused him to die. So they buried him, and in the morning the earth had thrown him out. They said: This is what Muhammad and his companions did when he fled from them. They dug for our companion and threw him out. They dug for him and dug deep for him. In the morning the earth had thrown him out. They said: This is what Muhammad and his companions did. They dug for him and dug deep for him in the earth. They could not do anything, but the earth had thrown him out in the morning. They knew that he was not one of the people, so they threw him out. There

is no problem with what is in the narration, since the Prophet’s approval, may God bless him and grant him peace, of his writing “All-Hearing, All-Knowing” and “All-Knowing, All-Hearing” is only because the two phrases are from the seven letters, so it is permissible for the writer to write with any of them, since they are all from the revelation

. We read from Al-Tabari’s interpretation, may God have mercy on him, of Surat An-Nahl:
((Yunus told me, he said: Ibn Wahb told us, he said: Yunus told me, on the authority of Ibn Shihab, he said: Saeed bin Al-Musayyab told me: The one who mentioned Allah is only taught by a human being. He was only tempted because he was writing the revelation, so the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would dictate to him: All-Hearing, All-Knowing or All-Mighty, All-Wise and other endings of the verses. Then the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would be distracted from him while he was receiving the revelation, so the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would ask him, saying: All-Mighty, All-Wise, or All-Hearing, All-Knowing, or All-Mighty, All-Knowing? The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would say: Whichever of these you wrote, it is like that. This tempted him, so he said: Muhammad entrusts that to me, so write whatever you want . This is what was mentioned about Saeed bin Al-Musayyab from the seven letters .))

Fifth: Al-Munsir’s impudent and filthy severing of the words of Imam Al-Dani, may Allah have mercy on him .

The fraudulent Al-Mansir arrogantly cut off the words of Imam Al-Dani, may God have mercy on him, to make people believe that the Imams of the Qira’at distorted the Uthmanic script of the Uthmanic copies of the Qur’an so that it would conform to the script of the Egyptian Qira’at that they follow!!!

This is the most false lie, and as the saying goes, if you have no shame, do whatever you want.

The truth is that Imam Al-Dani, may God have mercy on him, accused some of those who claim to recite the Qur’an of that, then he followed his words by saying that the origin of the script is to be taken from a transmitted report and a correct narration from the scholars who specialize in it. Then Al-Dani stated that all the differences in the script and recitation are due to Uthman, may God be pleased with him, collecting the letters that he confirmed were revealed by God Almighty and that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, recited them .

We read from the book Al-Muqni` by Imam Al-Dani, may God have mercy on him, the chapter on what the copies of the Qur’an of the people of Hijaz, Iraq and Syria that were copied by the Imam differed in, with additions and omissions

((Ibn Kathir in Al-Baqarah “or we may forget it” with a silent hamza between the sin and the ha’ and its form is an alif and it is not like that in the copies of the Qur’an of the people of Mecca or in others, and likewise the reading of Ibn Amir and Asim from the narration of Hafs bin Sulayman in Az-Zukhruf “He said, ‘If I come to you’” with an alif and we do not have any news that this is like that written in the copies of the Qur’an of the people of Syria or others, and likewise also the reading of Asim from the aforementioned path in Al-Anbiya “He said, ‘My Lord, judge with truth’” with an alif and we do not have any news that this is like that written in any of the Qur’an in many similar examples that are reported from the Imams of recitation, unlike the written form of their Qur’an. I only explained this section and drew attention to it because I saw some of those who referred to collecting some of the spelling of the Qur’an from the people of our time who claim to recite the Qur’an intended this meaning and made it a basis, so he added with that what each one of the Imams read with of additions and omissions in the preceding letters and others to The copies of the Qur’an of his country. This is an error that leads to neglect of narration, excessive stupidity, and lack of education, as it is not permissible to be certain about how that is done except by a report transmitted from the previous imams and a correct narration from the scholars who specialize in the knowledge of that and are trustworthy in transmitting and presenting it for the evidence we have explained. And success is from God.

Abu Amr said :

If he asks about the reason for the difference in the spelling of these additional letters in the copies of the Qur’an, I say that the reason for that according to us is that when the Commander of the Faithful, Uthman ibn Affan, may God be pleased with him, collected the Qur’an in the copies of the Qur’an and copied them in one form, he preferred the language of Quraysh to write it instead of any other, which is not correct or proven in view of the nation and as a precaution for the people of the religion, and it was proven to him that these letters were from God Almighty in this way, and were heard from the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, and he knew that collecting them in one copy of the Qur’an in this way was not possible except by repeating the word twice, and in writing that there is also confusion and change in the written form, which is not hidden, so he divided them in the copies of the Qur’an for this reason, so they came confirmed in some of them and deleted in some of them so that the nation would preserve them as they were revealed from God Almighty and as they were heard from the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace. This is the reason for the difference in their spelling in the copies of the Qur’an of the people of the regions. Did

you see the scientific betrayal practiced by this missionary!!!!

Lie so that the glory of the Lord may increase.

Sixth: The stupidity of the missionary in his argument against us that the reading contradicts the script found in the Qur’ans .

The ignorant missionary (in every sense of the word) argued against us that the Qur’ans contained some script that contradicts the reading, and he gave an example of that in the Almighty’s saying: “So the emergence of your Lord.” Ibn Amir, may God have mercy on him, read it with the alif fixed, even though the Qur’ans of the people of the Levant do not contain the extended alif. Such ignorance is natural to come from the mouth of a missionary like this, since he thinks that the transmission and memorization of the Qur’an was done by reading the Qur’an!!!

First: Al-Mansir’s argument is unsuccessful because the transmission and recitation of the Qur’an does not depend on the pages, but rather the basis for its transmission is memorization through the chests, where the student receives the recitation from his teacher with a continuous chain of transmission, as Ali, Zaid bin Thabit, Ubayy bin Ka’b, and Uthman bin Afar, may God be pleased with them, recited Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Salami, may God have mercy on him, and Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Salami, may God have mercy on him, recited Asim, may God have mercy on him, and Asim recited Hafs, may God have mercy on him, and thus the Qur’an was transmitted, since recitation is a followed Sunnah .
In the Great Classes of Ibn Saad, Part Six,
Hafs ibn Umar al-Hawdhi informed us, he said: Hammad ibn Zayd informed us, he said: Ata ibn al-Sa’ib informed us, that Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami said: “We took this Qur’an from a people, they informed us that when they learned ten verses, they would not go on to the other ten until they knew what was in them , so we were… ” We learn the Qur’an and act upon it, and after us, the Qur’an will be inherited by a people who will drink it as they drink water, but it will not go beyond their collarbones, rather it will not go beyond here, and he placed his hand on his throat.

Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of the Virtues of the Qur’an,
Chapter: The best among you is the one who learns the Qur’an and teaches it.
4739 Hajjaj ibn Munhal narrated to us, Shu’bah narrated to us, Alqamah ibn Marthad narrated to me, I heard Sa’d ibn Ubaydah, on the authority of Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami, on the authority of Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, on the authority of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who said: The best among you is the one who learns the Qur’an and teaches it. Abu Abd al-Rahman recited during the reign of Uthman until Hajjaj came. He said: That is what has made me sit in this seat.

In the virtues of the Qur’an by Abu Ubaid al-Qasim ibn Salam, there is a chapter on the reciters of the Qur’an and those from whom the recitation was taken from among the Companions and the Followers: “Abbad ibn Abbad narrated to us, saying: Yunus ibn Ubaid narrated to us, on the authority of al-Hasan, saying: ‘Amir ibn Abd Qais used to pray the dawn prayer in the mosque, and he would stand in a corner of it and say: Who should I recite? So people would come to him and he would recite the Qur’an to them until the sun rose and it was possible to pray, and he would stand up.” Then he prays until he prays the noon prayer , then he prays until the afternoon prayer is prayed, then he goes to his seat in the mosque and says: Who should I teach? People come to him and he teaches them the Qur’an until he gets up for the sunset prayer, then he prays until the evening prayer is prayed, then he goes back to his house, takes one of his two loaves from his basket, eats it, and drinks. On it, then he would put his head down and sleep a light sleep, then he would get up for his prayer. When it was the last part of the night, he would take his other loaf of bread and eat and drink, then he would go out to the mosque.

It was narrated in the Virtues of the Qur’an by Abu Ubaid al-Qasim ibn Salam, in the chapter on the virtue of the Qur’an, learning it and teaching it to people
: Abu Ubaid narrated to us, he said: Umar ibn Abd al-Rahman al-Abbar narrated to us, on the authority of al-A’mash, he said: An Arab passed by Abdullah ibn Mas`ud, while he was teaching some people the Qur’an, or he said: and there were people with him who were learning the Qur’an , so he said: What are these people doing? Ibn Mas`ud said: “They divide the inheritance of Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace.”

We read in the book “The Virtues of the Qur’an” by Al-Qasim Abu Ubaid bin Salam, Part One
: “Abu Mu`awiyah told us, on the authority of Al-A`mash, on the authority of Abu Wa’il, on the authority of Abdullah, who said: I heard the recitation and found them to be close together, so recite as you have learned, and beware of disagreement and extremism, for it is like one of you saying: Come and come))
and Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, included it in his Musnad and Shu`ayb al-Arna’ut authenticated it in his Takhreej of the Musnad and said: (( Its chain of transmission is authentic ))

and we also read in the virtues of the Qur’an by Abu Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Salam, chapter on the reciters’ presentation of the Qur’an and what is recommended for them to take it from the people of recitation, and following the predecessors in it and adhering to what they learned from them
((Hisham ibn `Ammar told me, he said: Abu al-Dahhak `Irak ibn Khalid ibn Salih ibn Subaih al-Murri told me, he said: I heard Yahya ibn al-Harith al-Dhimari say: I had completed the Qur’an with `Abdullah Ibn Amir Al-Yahsabi, and Abdullah Ibn Amir read it to Al-Mughira Ibn Abi Shihab Al-Makhzumi, and Al-Mughira read it to Uthman Ibn Affan, and there was no one between him and him
...

Abu Nu`aym narrated to us, on the authority of Shibl Ibn `Abbad, on the authority of Ibn Abi Najeh, on the authority of Mujahid, who said:I presented the Qur’an to Ibn Abbas three times . Second: It is known that the script sometimes contradicts the reading, but both of them were received with a chain of transmission and a correct narration, so it is not correct to change the first or the

second. This is what Imam al-Dani, may God have mercy on him, said in the same context of the speech that we mentioned above - which was cut off by the lying al-Munsir - as he stressed that the script may come with something that contradicts the reading, but it is not correct to change the script, because the script has been transmitted by continuous transmission among those who specialize in its accuracy.

We read from the previous source the saying of Al-Dani, may God have mercy on him:
((Abu Amr said : This is all that has reached us in the narrations of the differences between the copies of the Qur’an of the people of the regions, and many letters of that have passed in the previous chapters, and the certainty with us about how that is in the copies of the Qur’an of the people of the regions on the reading of their imams is not permissible except by a correct narration from their copies of the Qur’an regarding that, since their reading in much of that may not be according to the script of their Qur’an. Do you not see that Abu Amr read “O my servants, there is no fear upon you” in Az-Zukhruf with a ya’, and in the Qur’an of the people of Basra without a ya’? So he was asked about that, and he said, I saw it in the copies of the Qur’an of the people of Madinah with a ya’, so he left what is in the Qur’an of the people of his country and followed in that the copies of the Qur’an of the people of Madinah. And likewise his reading in Al-Hujurat “La ya’altum min a’malkum shay’an” with the hamza that is represented by an alif, and that is scripted in all the copies of the Qur’an without an alif, and likewise his reading also in Al-Munafiqun “Wa akoun min as-Salihin” with a waw and the nasb, and that is in all the copies of the Qur’an without a waw with the jazm. Abu Ubaid said: And I saw it in the Imam, and he said: And I agreed on that. The Mushafs, and also his reading in Al-Mursalat, “And when the messengers are appointed,” with the waw of time, and that is in Al-Imam, and in all the Mushafs with the alif, and likewise his reading and the reading of Ibn Kathir in Al-Baqarah, “Or we will delay it,” with a silent hamza between the seen and the ha’, and its form is an alif, and it is not like that in the Mushafs of the people of Mecca or in others, and likewise the reading of Ibn Amir and Asim from the narration of Hafs bin Sulayman in Az-Zukhruf, “He said, ‘If I come to you,’” with the alif, and we do not have any news that this is like that, written in the Mushafs of the people of Ash-Sham or others, and also likewise the reading of Asim from the aforementioned path in Al-Anbiya, “He said, ‘My Lord, judge with truth,’” with the alif, and we do not have any narration that this is like that, written in any of the Mushafs, in many similar instances that are reported from the Imams of recitation, unlike the written in their Mushaf. I only explained this section and drew attention to it because I saw some of those who referred to collecting something from the spelling of the Mushafs from the people of our time who claim to recite from among the people of our time intended this meaning and made it a basis, so he added with that what each one of the Imams read with of the additions and subtractions in the advanced letters and others to the Mushafs of the people of his country, and that is It is a mistake that leads to neglecting the narration, excessive stupidity and lack of education, as it is not permissible to be certain about how that is except by a report transmitted from the previous imams and a correct narration from the scholars specialized in the knowledge of that who are trusted to transmit it and present it for what we have explained of the evidence, and success is from Allah. ))

Have you now realized the extent of this Al-Munsir’s ignorance, as he delved into what he does not know? The problem is that the source that he quoted mentions this statement on page 14

https://ia801505.us.archive.org/3/it...quran09266.pdf

Then he spoke about Imam Al-Sakhawi, may Allah have mercy on him, who found an old Shami Mushaf that did not have an Alif, then he accused Imam Al-Sakhawi, may Allah have mercy on him, of lying!!!

I say that this agnostic accused Imam Al-Sakhawi (may Allah have mercy on him) without evidence. What made him do this was his belief that the transmission of the Quran was done through the pages. When he saw a reading that differed from the script of Ibn Amir, he made the reader believe - based on his terrible ignorance - that the reading had been distorted and that Ibn Amir’s chain of transmission was worthless at that time. Based on this, he said that Al-Sakhawi (may Allah have mercy on him) was lying in order to - as he put it - lift the accusation of distortion from the Quran. This agnostic does not even know that the transmission and recitation of the Quran was done through oral transmission!!!

Every disease has a cure that can be used to treat it, except for stupidity, which has exhausted its treatment!!!

So how would it be if the missionary reads the phrase “prayer” in the Mushaf, when it is sometimes written “prayer.”

Seventh: Deception against Imam Shu’bah bin Ayyash, the reciter .

The following is quoted from the book of the Seven Readings by Ibn Mujahid:
((27 - They differed in

the accusative and kasra of the Ha’ in His statement {Hajj al-Bayt} 97 Hamzah, al-Kisa’i, and Hafs from Asim read {Hajj al-Bayt} with a kasra on the Ha’. Hafs said

from Asim that Hajj is the noun and Hajj is the verb.

Abu Bakr said: This is a mistake. Rather, Hajj is the verb with the fatha and Hajj is the noun with the kasra.

Ibn Kathir, Nafi’, Abu Amr, and Abu Bakr read from Asim and Ibn Amir {Hajj} {The house} with the opening of the ha’)) The liar

wanted to make us believe that Abu Bakr’s statement “and this is wrong” is a misreading of the reading, but in reality it is a misreading of those who said that Hajj with the kasra is a verb and that Hajj with the fatha is a noun, since Abu Bakr, may God have mercy on him, had an opposing grammatical opinion, as he saw that Hajj with the fatha is a verb and with the kasra is a noun. So

look at how he borrows something and deliberately changes its meaning!!!

Eighth: The response to Al-Tabari’s, may God have mercy on him, denial of the reading “Fight with him, two rabbiyun .

” I will say briefly: Al-Tabari’s statement, may God have mercy on him, is rejected, and the reason for his denial is due to his lack of knowledge and awareness that the reading “Fight with him, two rabbiyun” is transmitted mutawatir and correct, and the reason for his lack of knowledge is to undermine the reason we mentioned in the first part about Al-Nawawi, may God have mercy on him, and others not knowing the three readings above the seven.

We read from the collection of fatwas, the book of interpretation, the chapter on the seven letters that do not include a contradiction in meaning:
((And for this reason, the inclusion of this in one letter of the seven letters upon which the Qur’an was revealed is more appropriate than that in which the wording or meaning varies, even if it agrees with the script of the Mushaf, which is that in which the dots or the shape differ.Therefore, the followed Islamic scholars from the Salaf and Imams did not dispute that it is not necessary to recite these specific recitations in all Muslim countries. Rather, whoever has established the recitation of Al-A’mash, the Sheikh of Hamza, or the recitation of Ya’qub ibn Ishaq Al-Hadrami and the like, just as he has established the recitation of Hamza and Al-Kisa’i, then he may recite it without dispute among the respected scholars who are counted among the people of consensus and disagreement. Rather, most of the scholars and imams who knew the recitation of Hamza, such as Sufyan ibn Uyaynah, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Bishr ibn al-Harith and others, prefer the recitation of Abu Ja`far ibn al-Qa`qa` and Shaybah ibn Nasah, the two Madanis, and the recitation of the Basrans, such as the sheikhs of Ya`qub ibn Ishaq and others, over the recitation of Hamza and al-Kisa`i. The scholars and imams have a statement on this matter that is well-known among the scholars. That is why the imams of the people of Iraq, who have established the ten or eleven readings, like these seven, collect them in books and recite them in prayer and outside of prayer. This is agreed upon by the scholars and none of them has denied it. As for what was mentioned by Judge Iyad and those who quoted his words of denunciation of Ibn Shanbudh who used to recite the anomalous readings in prayer during the fourth century, and a famous story happened to him, this was only in the anomalous readings that were outside the Mushaf, as we will explain. None of the scholars denied the ten readings, but whoever is not knowledgeable about them or they are not proven to him, such as someone who is in a country of the Islamic countries in the Maghreb or elsewhere and some of these readings are not connected to him, then he is not allowed to read what he does not know, because the reading, as Zayd ibn Thabit said, is a Sunnah that the latter takes from The first is that what has been proven from the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, regarding the types of opening supplications in prayer, the types of description of the call to prayer and the call to prayer, the description of the prayer of fear, and other than that, all of it is good and it is prescribed to act upon it for whoever knows it. As for whoever knows a type and does not know anything else, he does not have the right to change from what he knows to what he does not know, and he does not have the right to denounce whoever knows what he does. He did not know anything about that, nor did he disobey him, as the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: “Do not differ, for those who came before you differed and were destroyed.”As for the anomalous reading that deviates from the script of the Uthmanic Mushaf, such as the reading of Ibn Mas`ud and Abu al-Darda`, may God be pleased with them both, “By the night when it covers and by the day when it appears and by the male and the female,” as has been proven in the two Sahihs. And like the reading of Abdullah (then fasting three consecutive days) and like his reading: (It was only one water-skin) and the like of that))
and the consensus was established on taking the seven from among the transmitted readings, so no attention should be paid to those who denied a reading from their readings :
Ibn al-Jazari, may Allah have mercy on him, said in al-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-‘Ashr, Part One, Introduction:
((Then the readers after those mentioned increased in number and dispersed in the lands and spread out and after them came nations after nations, their classes were known, and their characteristics differed, so among them were those who mastered recitation and were famous for narration and knowledge, and among them were those who limited themselves to one of these descriptions, and because of that the differences increased among them, and accuracy decreased, and the breach widened, and falsehood almost became confused with the truth, so the great scholars of the nation and the leaders of the nation arose The Imams, so they exaggerated in their ijtihad and clarified the intended truth, and they collected the letters and readings, and attributed the aspects and narrations, and distinguished between the well-known and the anomalous, and the correct and the unique, with the principles they established, and the pillars they separated, and here we are pointing to them and relying on them as they relied on them , so we say:
Every reading that agrees with Arabic even in one aspect, and agrees with one of the Uthmanic copies of the Qur’an even if it is a possibility and its chain of transmission is sound, then it is the correct reading that it is not permissible to reject and it is not permissible to deny it, rather it is from the seven letters in which the Qur’an was revealed and it is obligatory for people to accept it, whether it was from the seven Imams, or from the ten, or from other accepted Imams, and whenever one of these three pillars is missing, it is called weak or anomalous or invalid, whether it was from the seven or from someone greater than them, this is what is correct according to the Imams of investigation from the predecessors and successors, Imam Al-Hafiz Abu Amr Uthman bin Saeed Al-Dani stated this, and Imam Abu Muhammad Makki bin Abi Talib stated it in more than one place, as did Imam Abu Al-Abbas Ahmad bin Ammar Al-Mahdawi, It was verified by Imam Al-Hafiz Abu Al-Qasim Abdul Rahman bin Ismail, known as Abu Shama, and it is the doctrine of the Salaf, and no one is known to have disagreed with it. ))

And we read from Al-Burhan fi Ulum Al-Quran by Al-Zarkashi, Part One, Type Twenty-Two:
((And know that the Qur’an and the readings are two different truths. The Qur’an is the revelation sent down to Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, for clarification and miracle, and the readings are the difference in the words of the aforementioned revelation in the writing of the letters or their manner of lightening and heavyening and other than them. Then here are matters:
One of them: That the seven readings are mutawatir according to the majority, and it was said that they are well-known, and that al-Mubarrad’s denial of Hamza’s reading is not to be taken into account .

We read from al-Murshid al-Wajeez by Abu Shamah, may God have mercy on him, Part One, Chapter Five:
“ And know that the correct, reliable, and agreed-upon readings have ended with the seven readers mentioned above, and their transmission from them has become well-known due to their commitment to that and the people’s consensus on them , so they have become well-known for it, just as imams who are followed and relied upon in every science of hadith, jurisprudence, and Arabic have become well-known.”

Ninth: Al-Munsir’s ignorance of the difference between citing an anomalous reading and reading it with it.
Al-Munsir cited the anomalous reading of Ibn Mas’ud (may Allah be pleased with him), “Then fasting for three consecutive days.” I have responded to this anomalous reading here:
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...00009144010733

https://mohammedsunni.blogspot.com/2...B9%D8%A7%D8%AA

And I have explained, as you will read, God willing, that this reading is not authentic in its chain of transmission. So

there is a difference between citing a reading as evidence and considering it as part of the Quran.

Tenth: She accused me of her disease and slipped away !!!

First, the difference in readings between the Hebrew, Septuagint, and Samaritan texts of the Old Testament :

We read from the Samaritan Torah, with a comparison to the Hebrew Torah, page 347:

((The first chapter,

in the second verse in Samaritan: ((And the winds of God blew over the face of the waters)) and in the Protestant translation of 1970 in Egypt and the translation of the Jesuit Fathers (Catholics) in 1968 in Beirut, thus ((The Spirit of God))))

and from the same source we read on page 348

((The third chapter

(2) in the fifth verse in Hebrew ((You will be like God, knowing good and evil)) and in Samaritan ((You will become like angels, knowing good and evil))

and from the same source we read on page 349

((The fifth chapter,

the eighteenth verse and what follows in Hebrew, Jared lived one hundred and sixty-two years and begot Enoch, and Jared lived after he begot Enoch eight hundred years and begot sons and daughters And all the days of Jared were nine hundred and sixty-two years, and he died.

And in the Samaritan: “And Jared lived sixty-two years, and begat Enoch. And Jared lived after begat Enoch eighty-five years, and begat sons and daughters. And all the days of Jared were forty-seven years, and eight hundred years, and he died.”

And from the same source we read on page 392:

“Chapter twenty-seven

(1) the fourth verse in Hebrew: “When you cross the Jordan, you shall set up these stones, which I command you today, on Mount Ebal, and you shall whitewash them with whitewash.” And in the Samaritan: “When you cross the Jordan, you shall set up these stones, which I command you today, on Mount Gerizim, and whitewash them with whitewash.”







And we give an example of the difference between the Septuagint and the Hebrew text.

We read from the Hebrew version of Genesis, chapter 47:

“31 And he said, ‘Swear to me.’ And he swore to him. And Israel bowed down at the head of the bed.))

While the Septuagint does not say the head of the bed but the head of the staff!!!

We read from Adam Clarke’s commentary on Genesis, Chapter 47:

((This seems to be the simple meaning, which the text unconnected with any religious system or prejudice, naturally proposes. But because שחה shachah, signifies not only to bow but to worship, because acts of religious worship were performed by bowing or prostration, and because מטה mittah, a bed, by the change of the points, only becomes matteh, a staff, in which sense the Septuagint took it, translating the original words thus: And Israel worshiped upon the top of his staff, which is the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Heb 11:21, quotes literatim; therefore some have supposed that Jacob certainly had a carved image on the head or top of his staff, to which he paid a species of adoration; or that he bowed himself to the staff or scepter of Joseph, thus fulfilling the prophetic import of his son's dreams! The sense of the Hebrew text is given above. If the reader prefers the sense of the Septuagint and the Epistle to the Hebrews, the meaning is, that Jacob, through feebleness, supported himself with a staff , and that, when he got the requisite assurance from Joseph that his dead body should be carried to Canaan, leaning on his staff be bowed his head in adoration to God, who had supported him all his life long, and hitherto fulfilled all his promises .))

The reason for this difference is the great similarity between the two terms “bed” and “stick” in Hebrew. The only difference between them is the dotting during reading. When the Masoretes dotted the Torah in the seventh and eighth centuries, they dotted it on the basis that it was a bed, while the older reading supports the reading of the Septuagint.

Evidence of this is that the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews quoted the text as follows:

We read from the Epistle to the Hebrews, Chapter 11:

((21 By faith Jacob, when he was dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, and bowed himself on the head of his staff.))




Second: The scandal of Augustine’s incorrect quotation!! !!

We read from Augustine’s commentary on the First Epistle of John:
(( let the cicatrice succeed to the leech’s knife. He is such an Healer, that the cicatrices do not even appear: only do you put thyself under His hand. For if you be without fear, thou canst not be justified. It is a sentence pronounced by the Scriptures; “ For he that is without fear, cannot be justified .”2458 ))

https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf107...f_iv.xii -p26.1

Some have tried to say that the text is the same as that in Sirach, chapter 1, verse 28, and Augustine is supposed to be quoting from the Vulgate, but where did the Vulgate get this translation in this way??? The book of Sirach is from the second canonical book, and it is supposed that The Vulgate took it from the Septuagint, but did the Septuagint really mention this verse in this form?? The answer is no!!!

We take the text in the Septuagint translation directly from the Codex Sinaiticus
μη απιϲτηϲηϲ · φοβω κυ ·

και μη προϲελθηϲ αυτω. εν

καρδια διϲϲη





https://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/m...8&zoomSlider=0

Translation of the Septuagint according to Brenton's English Translation of the Septuagint
A furious man cannot be justified; for the sway of his fury shall be his destruction .

https://www.biblindex.org/en/bible-c...rollTop%5D=817

Have you seen the difference

between the translation of the Vulgate text:
For he that is without fear, cannot be justified

Translation of the Septuagint text:
A furious man cannot be justified .

I say: This is a great disaster and the difference between heaven and earth between the two!!!
The Septuagint text talks about anger while the Vulgate text talks about the one who has no fear!!!!

The greater disaster is that the Vulgate is supposed to be a translation of the Septuagint text!!!
We read from the Old Testament as known to the Church of Alexandria, page 88:
((Jerome began his work, keeping the order of the books as it is in the Septuagint, but he replaced the text that he had in his possession from the New Caesarea Library, which was the text that Origen had corrected in the fifth column of the Hexapla, and he translated instead the Hebrew text that was present with the Jewish rabbis in Palestine. As for what he did not find with them, he translated it from the fifth column of the Hexapla and placed marks on it, stating that he had taken it from the Septuagint. Jerome also mentions that he translated the Book of Tobit (as he called it in the Vulgate) from an Aramaic original that does not exist today!!
Despite Saint Jerome’s reservations about the books that he did not find, the Catholic Church accepted his translation and gave it the name Vulgate, meaning popular.... Therefore, the Arabic Catholic translation of the Vulgate came to us translated from the Hebrew books and at the same time included the Apocrypha from the Septuagint))







So the claim is:
1. The Vulgate is a Latin translation of the Greek Septuagint
2. Augustine quotes from the Vulgate
3. The Jesuit monastic translation relied on the Vulgate translation of the Septuagint.

We now put the texts to see the size of the disaster we are dealing with and to overlook:

The text quoted by Clement of Alexandria: For
he that is without fear, cannot be justified.

Translation of the Vulgate text:
For he that is without fear, cannot be justified

Translation of the Septuagint text from the Sinaiticus:
A furious man cannot be justified.

Disaster!!!!

Reality:
1. Clement of Alexandria's quote differs from the Vulgate text, although it is supposed to be quoting from it!!!
2. The translation of the Vulgate text differs from the Septuagint text in the Sinaiticus, although it is supposed to be a translation of it!!!
3. Clement's quote differs from the Septuagint text in the Sinaiticus and from any Arabic translation!!!

Third: Origen distorts a text in the New Testament in order to avoid the disastrous mistake that the authors of the New Testament made, and then he claims that his phrase is correct because the Greek copyists made many mistakes!!!!
We read from Origen’s commentary on the Gospel of John, Chapter 6, as he speaks about the text of John 1/28:
((These things were done in Bethabara, beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing. John 1:28 We are aware of the reading which is found in almost all the copies, These things were done in Bethany. This appears, moreover, to have The reading was at an earlier time; and in Heracleon we read Bethany. We are convinced, however, that we should not read Bethany, but Bethabara disciples, and of the prophets. Now, Bethany, as the same evangelist tells us, was the town of Lazarus, and of Martha and Mary; it is fifteen stadia from Jerusalem, and the river Jordan is about a hundred and eighty stadia distant from It. Nor is there any other place of the same name in the neighborhood of the Jordan, but they say that Bethabara is pointed out on the banks of the Jordan, and that John is said to have baptized there etymology of the name, too, corresponds with the baptism of him who made ready for the Lord a people prepared for him; for it yields the meaning House of preparation, while Bethany means House of obedience. Where else was it fitting that he should baptize, who was sent as a messenger before the face of the Christ, to prepare His way before Him, but at the House of preparation? And what more fitting home for Mary, who chose the good part, Luke 10:41, 43 which was not taken away from her, and for Martha, who was cumbered for the reception of Jesus, and for their brother, who is called the friend of the Savior, than Bethany, the House of obedience? Thus we see that he who aims at a complete understanding of the Holy Scriptures must not neglect the careful examination of the proper names in it. In the matter of proper names the Greek copies are often incorrect, and in the Gospels one might be misled by their authority. The transaction about the swine, which was driven down a steep place by the demons and drowned in the sea, is said to have taken place in the country of the Gerasenes. Now, Gerasa is a town of Arabia, and has near it neither sea nor lake. And the Evangelists would not have made a statement so obviously and demonstrably false; for they were men who carefully informed themselves of all matters connected with Judæa. But in a few copies we have found, into the country of the Gadarenes; And, on this reading, it is to be stated that Gadara is a town of Judæa, in the neighborhood of which are the well-known hot springs, and that there is no lake there with overhanging banks, nor any sea . But Gergesa, from which the name Gergesenes is taken, is an old town in the neighbourhood of the lake now called Tiberias, and on the edge of it there is a steep place abutting on the lake, from which it is pointed out that the swine were cast down by the demons. ))
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/101506.htm

Origen accuses Greek scribes of always making mistakes in writing names!!!!

Did you like this, O missionary? You have two solutions:
1. Origen is a liar
2. Your book is distorted
3. Your book is wrong


Your book is outdated

. May God’s prayers and peace be upon our master Muhammad, his family, and his companions.