Response to the objectors from the chicks of defensive theology regarding the chains of transmission of the Qur’an, Debate highlights, part 1

 The Defensive Theology team has come out to us with some clips on YouTube to challenge the chains of transmission of the Quran. What made them do this challenge is their lack of chains of transmission. Their book lacks the chain of transmission that Muslims are proud of, as it is what documents the continuous transmission and the transmission of oral heritage.

This section will be dedicated to responding to their first clip, especially what relates to their talk about the chains of transmission of the Quran.

We will divide the response, God willing, into these sections:

First: An introduction explaining the emergence of the anomalous readings and explaining the difference between them and the continuous readings.

Second: Explaining the reason for the difference between the numbers of continuous readings and responding to the fabrications of Al-Munsir.

Third: Explaining the reason for the difference in the narration of the narrators from the same reader .

Fourth: Binding Al-Munsir with the statements of his scholars about his book .

First: An introduction to the emergence of the anomalous readings and explaining the difference between them and the continuous readings .

The Qur’an was revealed in one way, initially to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, during the Meccan period. Then, when he migrated, may God bless him and grant him peace, and the number of Muslims increased, the Qur’an was revealed in seven letters, that is, seven ways or aspects of reading the verse, and it was said seven dialects (and this difference is a difference in the classification of the content and not a difference in the substance of the content, and they are the mutawatir and anomalous readings whose chain of transmission is authentic, as we will see). The hadiths of the seven letters have been proven through authentic and mutawatir ways - and this is not the place to prove their mutawatir, but it is sufficient for us to present a few hadiths on that.
We 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: Sa’id ibn ‘Ufayr told us, he said: Al-Layth told me, he said: ‘Aqil told me, on the authority of Ibn Shihab, he said: ‘Urwah ibn al-Zubayr told me that al-Miswar ibn Makhrama and ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Abd al-Qari told him that they heard ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab say: I heard Hisham ibn Hakim ibn 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 began to recite in many ways 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 by his 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 have lied, for the Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) taught it to me in a way other than the way I 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 in ways 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 way I heard him recite. The Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) said, "It was revealed in this way." Then he said, "Recite, Umar." So I recited the way that I had been taught. The Messenger of Allah (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) said, "It was revealed in this way. This Qur'an was revealed in seven ways, so recite whatever is easy for you of it ."

And Gabriel, peace be upon him, used to review the Qur’an with him every year in Ramadan.
We read from Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of the Virtues of the Qur’an,
Chapter: Gabriel used to review the Qur’an with the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace. Masruq said, on the authority of Aisha, on the authority of Fatima, peace be upon her: The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, confided in me that Gabriel used to review the Qur’an with me every year, and this year he reviewed it with me twice, and I do not think that my time has come.
4711 Yahya ibn Qaz’ah told us, Ibrahim ibn Sa’d told us, on the authority of al-Zuhri, on the authority of Ubayd Allah ibn Abdullah, on the authority of Ibn Abbas.He said: The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, was the most generous of people with goodness, and he was most generous in the month of Ramadan, because Gabriel would meet him every night in the month of Ramadan until it ended, and the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, would recite the Qur’an to him . When Gabriel met him, he was more generous with goodness than the blowing wind.

In the last year, Gabriel, peace be upon him, recited the Qur’an to him twice.
Sahih al-Bukhari, Book of the Virtues of the Qur’an (same previous chapter)
4712 Khalid ibn Yazid narrated to us, Abu Bakr narrated to us, on the authority of Abu Hasin, on the authority of Abu Salih, on the authority of Abu Hurayrah, who said: The Qur’an would be recited to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, once every year, and he would recite it to him twice in the year in which he died. He would perform i’tikaf every year for ten days, and he performed i’tikaf for twenty days in the year in which he died.

This presentation is known as the last presentation and was attended by a group of the Companions such as Zaid bin Thabit and Ibn Masoud. 
We read from the book Al-Burhan fi Ulum Al-Quran, Part One, Type Thirteen, History of the Qur’an and the Differences in the Mushafs:
((Abu Abd Al-Rahman Al-Salami said: The reading of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Zaid bin Thabit, the Muhajireen and the Ansar was one; they used to read the general reading, which is the reading that the Messenger of God - may God bless him and grant him peace - read to Gabriel twice in the year in which he died. Zaid had witnessed the last presentation and he used to teach the people with it until he died, and therefore Abu Bakr relied on him in his collection, and Uthman appointed him as the scribe of the Mushaf. ))


Most of the Companions of the Messenger of God - may God bless him and grant him peace - would only read the last presentation, and some of them did not witness the last presentation so they read the presentations that came before it (which is what is now known as the anomalous readings), and some of them used to read the last presentation and the presentations that came before it (so they combined the mutawatir and the anomalous).
We read from Mushkil al-Athar by Imam al-Tahawi, may God have mercy on him, the chapter on explaining the problematic aspects of what was narrated regarding letters that are the same in writing but different in pronunciation.

((Then he assumed that their differences in pronunciation were due to these letters.That one of them was present when the Messenger of Allah (may Allah's prayers and peace be upon him) recited it, so he took it from him as he heard him recite it. Then Gabriel (may Allah's prayers and peace be upon him) presented the Qur'an to him and changed some of it. Then the Messenger of Allah (may Allah's prayers and peace be upon him) recited to the people the recitation from which Gabriel (may Allah's prayers and peace be upon him) returned what he had been reciting from it before that to... He did not recite it to him after that, so some of his companions were present, and some of them were absent from him, so whoever was present read what he recited from those letters according to the second recitation, and whoever was present for the first recitation and was absent from the second recitation did not know about that, so he adhered to the first recitation, and that was from him like what was from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. In the rulings that Allah the Most High abrogated after that on his tongue with what he abrogated it with, and from what some of them stopped at the first ruling and the second ruling, so he turned to the second ruling, and some of them were absent from the second ruling from those who were present at the first ruling and knew it, so he remained steadfast on the first ruling, and each group of them was on his assumption and on what is taken into account. Thus, it is like those letters that we mentioned, and we mentioned their differences in them from the Qur’an on this meaning, and each group of them is praiseworthy for what they are upon from it, and all the readings, from Allah the Most High, it is not necessary to rebuke whoever reads something from it and differs from what is other than it, and we ask Allah the Almighty for success .))

Therefore, Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, collected the Qur’an and then Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, copied the copies of the Qur’an. Based on the last presentation

in Al-Mustadrak Al-Hakim, Part Two, Book of Interpretation

2857 - Jaafar bin Muhammad bin Naseer Al-Khaldi told us, Ali bin Abdul Aziz Al-Baghawi told us, in Mecca, Hajjaj bin Al-Munhal told us, he said: Hammad bin Salamah told us, on the authority of Qatada, on the authority of Al-Hasan, on the authority of Samurah, may God be pleased with him, he said: “ The Qur’an was presented to the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, in presentations.” They would say: Our recitation is the last presentation .

The chain of transmission of the narration is good, Imam Ibn Hajar, may God have mercy on him, in Fath Al-Bari, Commentary on Sahih Al-Bukhari, Book of the Virtues of the Qur’an, Chapter: Gabriel used to present the Qur’an to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace. He said: “Its chain of transmission is good .

” It is proven that our copies of the Qur’an include the aspects of the recitations proven from the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, in what the Uthmanic script allows and what was recited and agreed with the last presentation.
Ibn al-Jazari, may God have mercy on him, said in Al-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-‘Ashr, Part One, Introduction:
“ The majority of scholars from the early and later generations, and the imams of the Muslims, have held that these Uthmanic copies of the Qur’an contain only what their script allows of the seven letters, including the final presentation that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, presented to Gabriel, peace be upon him, including them and not leaving out a single letter from them.”
(I said): This statement is the one that appears to be correct; because the authentic hadiths and the well-known and widespread reports indicate and testify to it.... Then, when the Companions - may God be pleased with them - wrote those copies of the Qur’an, they stripped them of the dots and vowels so that they could bear what was not in the final presentation of what was authentically reported from the Prophet - may God bless him and grant him peace - and they only emptied the copies of the Qur’an of the dots and vowels so that the indication of the single line on both the transmitted, heard and recited words would be similar to the indication of the single word on both the rational and understood meanings, for the Companions - may God be pleased with them - received from the Messenger of God - may God bless him and grant him peace - what God Almighty commanded him to convey to them from the Qur’an, both its wording and its meaning , and they would not omit anything from the Qur’an that was authentically reported from him - may God bless him and grant him peace - nor would they prevent reading it.))

As for what differed from the Qur’an in terms of writing and reading, it is anomalous, even if its chain of transmission is authentic, because at that time it would be among the readings that were not read in the final presentation and were considered abrogated in recitation.
Imam Ibn al-Jazari, may God have mercy on him, said in his book Al-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-‘Ashr, Part One, Introduction:
((And their agreement on one letter was easy for them, and it was more appropriate for them to agree on the letter that was in the last presentation, and some of them say that it abrogated everything else; therefore, many scholars stated that the letters that were reported from Abu and Ibn Mas’ud and others that contradict these copies of the Qur’an were abrogated ))

The consensus of the Companions, may God be pleased with them, was established on the Uthmanic copies of the Qur’an and what is in them of readings that agree with the last presentation

from the book Al-Masahif by Ibn Abi Dawud al-Sijistani, may God have mercy on him, Chapter: Uthman’s collection of the Qur’an in the copy of the Qur’an. We read.
Abu Dawud said: Muhammad ibn Abaan al-Ja’fi told us that he heard it from Alqamah ibn Murthad, and the hadith of Muhammad is more complete from Uqbah ibn Jarwal al-Hadrami, who said: When al-Mukhtar left, we were the first to rush to him in this neighborhood of Hadhramaut, then Suwaid ibn Ghafla al-Ja’fi came to us and said: You have a right over me, and you have a neighbor, and you have a kinship, and by God I will not tell you today except something that I heard from al-Mukhtar, who came from Mecca. I was walking when someone nudged me from behind, and it was Al-Mukhtar who said to me: O Sheikh, is there any love left in your heart for that man? Meaning Ali, I said: I bear witness to God that I love him with my hearing, heart, sight and tongue. He said: But I bear witness to God that I hate him with my heart, hearing, sight and tongue. He said: I said: By God, I refuse except to discourage the family of Muhammad, and to burn the copies of the Qur’an, or he said, to burn, he is one of them, Abu Dawud is not sure. Suwaid said: By God, I will not tell you except something I heard from Ali ibn Abi Talib, may God be pleased with him. I heard him say: “O people, do not exaggerate in Uthman and do not say anything to him except good, or say something good to him about the copies of the Qur’an and burning the copies of the Qur’an, for by God , he did not do what he did to the copies of the Qur’an except with the approval of all of us ... He said: Ali said: “By God, if I were appointed, I would do the same as he did.”
And Dr. Muhibb al-Din Wa’iz, the researcher of the Book of the Qur’an, authenticated it in the margin of page 206:
((Its chain of transmission: Authentic))

We read in the Book of the Qur’an by Ibn Abi Dawud al-Sijistani, Part One, Chapter on the Collection of the Qur’an by Uthman, may God be pleased with him.
Abdullah narrated: Ahmad ibn Sinan narrated: Abd al-Rahman narrated: Shu’bah narrated: Abu Ishaq narrated: Mus’ab ibn Sa’d said: “ I found the people gathered together when Uthman burned the Qur’an, and they were amazed by that, and he said: None of them objected to that.”
Ibn Kathir, may God have mercy on him, commented on this narration in the first part of his interpretation, the chapter on the collection of the Qur’an: “This is a sound chain of transmission.”


Everyone, near and far, agreed on the trustworthiness of the Uthmanic copy and its accuracy, and that it is not permissible to contradict the reading of the Uthmanic copies of the Qur’an.
We read from Sahih Al-Bukhari, Book of Interpretation,
Chapter: And those among you who die and leave wives behind them, they shall wait concerning themselves four months and ten days. Then when they have reached their term, there is no blame upon you for what they do with themselves in an acceptable manner. And Allah is Acquainted with what you do.
They pardon and fear. 4256 Umayyah bin Bastam told me, Yazid bin Zurai’ told us, on the authority of Habib, on the authority of Ibn Abi Malekah, Ibn Al-Zubayr said: I said to Uthman bin Affan: And those among you who die and leave wives behind him, he said: The other verse has abrogated it, so why did you write it or leave it? He said: O son of my brother, I will not change anything from its place.

And we read what Abu Ubaid Al-Qasim bin Salam, may Allah have mercy on him, transmitted in his book The Virtues of the Qur’an, Collection of the Hadiths of the Qur’an, its Proof in its Writing, Composition, and Establishment of its Letters
((On the authority of Yazid bin Zurai’, on the authority of Imran bin Hudayr, he said: Abu Mijlaz said: “ Do you not wonder at Their foolishness, one of the things they criticized Uthman for was his tearing up of the Qur’an, then they accepted what was abrogated . Abu Ubayd said: He was trustworthy with regard to what was dropped, just as he was trustworthy with regard to what was abrogated. Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, said: If I were in charge of the Qur’an, I would do to it what Uthman did. Mus’ab bin Sa’d said: I knew the people when Uthman did what He did, and I did not see anyone deny that, meaning from the Muhajireen, the Ansar, and the people of knowledge. We have mentioned these two hadiths in other places. And what Uthman composed is what is among the Muslims today, and it is what is judged upon whoever denies something of it, just as it is judged upon the apostate, who is asked to repent, and if he refuses, then he is to be killed .

And based on what was mentioned above, three conditions were met to prove the validity of the reading:

1. The validity of the chain of transmission .

2. Conformity with the Arabic language, even if only in one aspect

. 3. Conformity with the Uthmanic script .

Ibn al-Jazari, may God have mercy on him, said in al-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-‘Ashr, Part One, Introduction:
“Then the reciters 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. 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. Because of this, differences increased among them, and control 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 imams rose up, and they exaggerated in their efforts and clarified the intended truth, and they collected the letters and readings, and attributed the aspects and narrations, and distinguished between the famous and the anomalous, and the correct and the unique, with principles that they established and pillars that they detailed. And here we point to them and rely as they relied on them, so we say:
Every reading that agrees with Arabic, even in one way, and agrees with one of the Ottoman copies of the Qur’an, even if only possibly, and its chain of transmission is sound, is the correct reading that cannot be rejected or denied. Rather, it is one of the seven letters in which the Qur’an was revealed and people must accept it, whether it is from the seven imams, or from the ten, or from other accepted imams. Whenever one of these three pillars is missing, it is called weak, anomalous, or invalid, whether it is from the seven or from someone greater than them. This is what is correct according to the imams of investigation from the early Muslims and later Muslims. Imam al-Hafiz Abu Amr Uthman ibn Sa’id al-Dani stated this explicitly, and Imam Abu Muhammad Makki ibn Abi Talib stated it in more than one place, as did Imam Abu al-Abbas Ahmad ibn Ammar al-Mahdawi. Imam al-Hafiz Abu al-Qasim Abd al-Rahman ibn Ismail, known as Abu Shamah, verified it, and it is the doctrine of the early Muslims, from which no one is known to have disagreed . ))

The number of successive readings does not matter, whether it is seven, ten, fourteen, or more. As long as the chain of transmission is sound and agrees with the Uthmanic script and language, even in one way, then the reading is reliable. However, if one of the three pillars is missing, then it is either weak or irregular. There is no evidence for the necessity of limiting it to a specific number unless the chain of transmission is poor or the three conditions are not fulfilled at a certain time except in that number.

We read from the book Manahil Al-Irfan by Al-Zarqani, may God have mercy on him, Part One, Section Eleven

((The ruling on what is beyond ten:

The disagreement also occurred regarding the four readings that exceed ten and complete the fourteen: It was said that some of them are transmitted in succession. It was said that they are correct. It was said that they are absolutely anomalous in all of them. It was said that the issue is not a matter of individuals or numbers, but rather it is rules and principles. So any reading in which the three pillars of that famous rule are fulfilled is acceptable, otherwise it is rejected. There is no difference between the readings of the seven reciters, the ten reciters, the fourteen reciters, and others, so the scale is the same in all of them, and the truth is more deserving of being followed.

The author of Al-Shafi said: Adherence to the readings of seven of the reciters without others has no trace or Sunnah, but rather it is from the collection of some of the later scholars, so they spread. And the one who said that it is not permissible to increase beyond that is mistaken. No one said that, with some modification.

Al-Kawashi said: Everything whose chain of transmission is authentic and its face is correct in Arabic and agrees with the line of the Imam’s Mushaf is from the seven that are explicitly stated. He means the seven letters in the well-known Prophetic hadith. Then he said: The imams’ denial of this matter has become severe against whoever thought The famous readings are limited to what is in At-Taysir and Ash-Shatibiyyah .

And we read from Al-Murshid Al-Wajeez by Abu Shamah Al-Maqdisi, may God have mercy on him, Part One, Chapter Five:
(( So every reading that is supported by the script of the Mushaf, along with the correctness of the transmission in it and its coming in the eloquent form of the Arabic language, then it is a correct and considered reading. If one of these three pillars is defective, then that reading is called anomalous and weak. This was indicated by the words of the earlier imams, and Sheikh Al-Muqri Abu Muhammad Makki bin Abi Talib Al-Qayrawani stated it in a separate book (1) that he composed on the meanings of the seven readings, and he ordered that it be attached to “The Book of Uncovering the Faces of the Readings” from his writings. It was mentioned earlier in what we quoted from his words in the fourth chapter before this chapter (2). Our Sheikh Abu Al-Hasan, may God have mercy on him, also mentioned it in his book “Jamal Al-Qurra” in the chapter on the levels of the principles and the strange chapters, and he said: [68 and]. “Some people have chosen the reading of Asim and Nafi’ in what they agreed upon and said: The reading of these two imams is the most authentic reading in terms of chain of transmission and the most eloquent in Arabic, and after them in eloquence is the reading of Abu Amr and Al-Kisa’i.” “ If the letter combines its strength in Arabic, its agreement with the Mushaf, and the consensus of the common people on it, then it is the chosen one according to most of them . And if they say: the reading of the common people, then they mean what the people of Medina and the people of Kufa agreed upon. For them, it is a strong reason that necessitates the choice. And perhaps they chose what the people of the Two Holy Mosques agreed upon, and they also called it the common people.”

Second: Explaining the reason for the difference between the numbers of the transmitted readings among the people of knowledge and responding to the fabrications of Al-Munsir .

I say: We have shown that the origin of the reading is the three conditions mentioned above, and Al-Munsir has objected to us with what he quoted from the words of some of the people of knowledge - including Al-Nawawi, may God have mercy on him - their limitation of the transmitted readings to seven and their application of the term “shadhudh” to what is above that, and his attempt to delude the reader that Al-Nawawi had applied the term “shadhudh” to the reading of Ya’qub, Abu Ja’far, and Khalaf, and this is the very definition of deception, and we will explain it in the following points:

1. The definition of the shadhud reading and the impossibility of its application to the three readings above the seven .

As for the anomalous reading, it is the reading whose chain of transmission is sound and agrees with Arabic, even if in one way, except that it differs from the Uthmanic script,

as we read from the book “Munjid al-Talibin wa Murshid al-Muqri’in” by Ibn al-Jazari, may God have mercy on him, Chapter Two:
((The second category of the correct reading is that which agrees with Arabic and its chain of transmission is sound, and differs from the script as mentioned in Sahih, such as additions, omissions, and substitution of one word for another, and the like of what came from Abu al-Darda’, Umar, Ibn Mas’ud, and others. This reading is called anomalous today, because it deviates from the script of the agreed upon Mushaf, and even if its chain of transmission is sound, it is not permissible to recite it, neither in prayer nor otherwise. Imam Abu Umar Ibn Abd al-Barr said in his book “al-Tamhid”: Malik said: Whoever recites in his prayer the recitation of Ibn Mas’ud or another of the Companions, which differs from the Mushaf, should not pray behind him, and the scholars of the Muslims are unanimous on that except for a group of people who deviated, and we should not pay attention to them. I said: Our companions, the Shafi’is and others, said: If he recites an anomalous reading in prayer, his prayer is invalid if he is knowledgeable, and if he is ignorant, his prayer is invalid. And that reading was not counted for him, and the scholars of Baghdad agreed to discipline Imam Ibn Shanbudh, and to ask him to repent for his reading and his recitation of the anomalous, and Imam Abu Omar Ibn Abdul Barr narrated the consensus of the Muslims that reading with the anomalous is not permissible, and that it is not permissible to pray behind someone who recites it. As for what agrees with the meaning and the script or one of them without transmission, it is not called anomalous but rather a lie

and its intentional one is an infidel. This is what cannot be applied to the three readings, even if some call them individual readings, because they fulfilled the three conditions mentioned above, so the characteristic of anomalousness was removed from them .

We read from the book Al-Itqan fi Ulum Al-Quran by Imam Al-Suyuti, may God have mercy on him, the first part in the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and twenty-seventh type
((Know that Judge Jalal al-Din al-Balqini said: The recitation is divided into Mutawatir, Ahad, and Shadh. Mutawatir are the seven well-known recitations, Ahad are the three recitations that complete the ten, and the recitation of the Companions is included with them, and Shadh are the recitations of the Successors such as al-A’mash, Yahya ibn Waththab, Ibn Jubayr, and the like.

This is This speech is subject to consideration, which is known from what we will mention. The best person who spoke about this type is the Imam of the reciters of his time, the Sheikh of our Sheikhs, Abu al-Khayr ibn al-Jazari. He said at the beginning of his book al-Nashr: Every recitation that agrees with Arabic, even in one way, 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 recitation that… It is not permissible to reject it, nor is it permissible to deny it. Rather, it is one of the seven letters in which the Qur’an was revealed, and it is obligatory upon the people to accept it, whether it is from the seven Imams, the ten, or other accepted Imams. Whenever one of these three pillars is missing, it is called weak, anomalous, or invalid, regardless of whether it is from the seven Imams, the ten, or other accepted Imams. It was from the seven or from someone greater than them. This is the correct view among the imams of investigation from the Salaf and Khalaf .

Ad-Dani, Makki, Al-Mahdawi and Abu Shama stated this explicitly. It is the school of thought of the Salaf, and no one is known to have disagreed with it.

We will provide you with the chains of transmission of the reading of Yaqub Al-Hadrami, may Allah have mercy on him, as an example:

We read in An-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 the authority of Abu `Amr, Their chain of transmission was presented, and Sallam also read on the authority of Abu al-Mujashir Asim ibn al-Ajaj al-Jahdari al-Basri, and on the authority of 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 the authority of Sulayman ibn Qatah al-Tamimi, their client. Al-Basri, and he read on Abdullah bin Abbas, and Shihab read on Abu Abdullah Harun bin Musa Al-Ataki Al-A’war the grammarian, and on Al-Mu’alla bin Isa, and Harun read on Asim Al-Jahdari and Abu Amr with their chain of transmission, and Harun also read on Abdullah bin Abi Ishaq Al-Hadrami, who is the grandfather of Ya’qub, 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 mentioned, and Abu Al-Ashhab read on Abu Raja `Imran bin Milhan Al-`Attaridi, and Abu Raja read on Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari, and Abu Musa read it to the Messenger of God - may God’s prayers and peace be upon him and his family - and this is a chain of transmission that is extremely sound and lofty. And

Imam al-Nawawi - may God have mercy on him - cannot call this anomalous, since he referred to his book al-Tibyan, as well as what Ibn Abd al-Barr mentioned in al-Istidhkar in his speech .

Here is what Ibn Abd al-Barr said in al-Istidhkar, Book of the Qur’an, Chapter on What Came in the Qur’an:
((This narration from Malik is contrary to the narration of Ibn al-Qasim and contrary to what the group of jurists are upon, that one should not recite in prayer anything other than what is in the Mushaf of Uthman in the hands of the people. For this reason, Malik, who in the narration of his companions from him other than Ibn Wahb, said that one should not recite according to the letter of Ibn Mas’ud because it is contrary to what is in the Mushaf of Uthman. Isa narrated from Ibn al-Qasim in the Mushaf according to the recitation of Ibn Mas’ud. He said: I think that it should be forbidden. People are the ones who sell it, and those who read it are beaten and prevented from doing so.

Abu Umm said:The opinion of the majority of the people of tradition and opinion in the cities is that it is not permissible for anyone to recite in his prayer, whether it is a voluntary prayer or a written prayer, anything other than what is in the agreed upon Mushaf, whether the recitation is contrary to it and is attributed to Ibn Mas`ud, or to Ubayy, or to Ibn `Abbas, or to Abu Bakr, or to `Umar, or is attributed to the Prophet. (May Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him ))

and we read from the book Al-Minhaaj in the explanation of Sahih Muslim, Part Five, Book of Mosques and Places of Prayer:
((But our school of thought is that the anomalous reading cannot be used as evidence and does not have the ruling of a report from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him, because its transmitter did not transmit it except as the Qur’an, and the Qur’an is not proven except by continuous transmission by consensus, and if it is not proven as the Qur’an, it is not proven as a report, and the issue is established in the principles of jurisprudence and in it A disagreement between us and Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him).

Did the readings of Yaqub, Khalaf, and Abu Ja`far contradict the Uthmanic script for the missionary to be certain that the words of al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) apply to them?!

2. The reason why some scholars limit the readings to seven and some of them extend them to ten, eleven, or fourteen is due to the following reasons:

1. As for limiting them to seven, the reason is the lack of knowledge and awareness of the other readings, and that is because the frequency of the three or four readings above ten was limited to some countries and not others .

We read from the book “Munjid al-Muqri’in wa Murshid al-Talibin” Chapter Two:
“When that happened, the Muslims decided to gather on the readings of trustworthy imams who devoted themselves to performing the great Qur’an. So they chose from every country to send him a copy of the Qur’an from imams who were famous for their trustworthiness and honesty in transmission, good religion, and perfect knowledge. They spent their lives in reading and teaching, and their affair became famous. The people of their country agreed on their justice in what they transmitted and their documentation of what they read and narrated and their knowledge of what they read. Their reading did not deviate from the line of their Qur’an. Among them in Medina were Abu Ja’far, Shaiba, and Nafi’. In Mecca, Abdullah bin Katheer, Hamid bin Qais al-A’raj, and Ibn Muhaisin. In Kufa, Yahya bin Waththab, Asim, al-A’mash, Hamza, and al-Kisa’i. In Syria, Abdullah bin Aamer, Atiyah bin Qais al-Kalabi, and Yahya bin al-Harith al-Zumari. In Basra, Abdullah bin Abi Ishaq, Abu Amr bin al-Ala’, Asim al-Jahdari, and Ya’qub al-Hadrami. Then the readers after that…” They dispersed throughout the country and were succeeded by nations after nations, and disagreement increased among them, and accuracy decreased, and the breach widened, so the trustworthy and critical imams rose up and recorded, recorded, collected, and composed according to what reached them and was correct with them, as mentioned above. What has reached us today is mutawatir and correct and definitive, the readings of the ten imams and their famous narrators; this is what was recorded from the statements of the scholars, and people today in the Levant, Iraq, Egypt, and the Hijaz follow it. As for the countries of the Maghreb and Andalusia, we do not know what their condition is today, but we have been informed that they read according to the seven paths of the fourteen narrators only, and perhaps they read according to Yaqub al-Hadrami, so if someone from our country traveled to them, he would do them a great favor .

2. As for raising it to more than ten, its reason is that those four readings and others, such as the reading of Al-Hasan Al-Basri and Ibn Muhaisin, were known and present with their chains of transmission at that time, then the matter settled on ten today without other readings, since the books of readings that contained their chains of transmission are almost lost, except for a few, and as for reading them with the chain of transmission and permission, it stopped due to the fame of other readings .

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. And for this reason, the followed scholars of Islam from the predecessors and imams did not dispute that it It is not necessary to recite with these specific recitations in all Muslim countries. Rather, whoever has established the recitation of Al-A’mash, the teacher 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 with them without any 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 Hamzah, such as Sufyan ibn Uyaynah, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Bishr ibn al-Harith and others, choose 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 reciters of Hamza and Al-Kisa’i. And the scholars and imams have words on this matter that are well-known among the scholars. That is why the imams of the people of Iraq, who had established the ten or eleven readings, like these seven, would collect that in books and recite it in prayer and outside of prayer, and this is agreed upon by the scholars and none of them 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 as it was proven from the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace. Of the types of openings in prayer, and of the types of description of the call to prayer and the call to prayer, and 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 the one who knows a type and does not know anything else, he does not have the right to deviate from what he knows to what he does not know, and he does not have the right to denounce the one who knows what he does not know of that, nor to contradict him, as he said: 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 deviant 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, “By the night when it covers and 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 (the fasting of three consecutive days) and like his reading: (It was only one sip) and the like of that))

and we read from the book Manahil Al-Irfan by Al-Zarqani, may Allah have mercy on him, Part One, Section Eleven:
((This is an opinion close to being correct, had he not limited his view to what is the reality that exists among us today from the readings and did not apply the ruling or detail it in it, but rather presented the speech generally as you see.

The investigation is what Abu Al-Khair Ibn Al-Jazari went to, that the ten readings that are in our hands today are mutawatir and not others. He said in Munjed Al-Muqri’in what indicates that what has gathered these three pillars in our time, that is, in that famous rule, with the note of replacing the condition of the validity of the chain of transmission with its mutawatir, is the reading of the ten imams that people have agreed to accept. The successors took it from the predecessors until it reached our time . The reading of one of them is like the reading of the rest in that it is definitive. As for the saying of the one who said: The mutawatir readings have no limit, if he meant the readings known in our time, then it is incorrect because there is no mutawatir reading today beyond the ten readings. And if he meant what includes the readings of the first generation, then it is possible. Therefore

, the attempt of Al-Munsir to delude the reader and deceive him that the reason for the difference in the number is the denial of the reading itself is deception and a lie, because it does not go beyond the two previous reasons, and the consensus has been established on the ten readings, and the application of the anomaly to the four above the ten is only from the type of what Al-Zarqani said about the cessation of the reading with them and the absence of a chain of transmission currently connected to the reading, not that it violated one of the three conditions for the validity of the reading.

We read what Al-Zarkashi narrated from Ibn Al-Salah in his book Al-Burhan fi Ulum Al-Quran, Part One, Type Twenty-Two:
((The Shaykh of the Shafi’is said: It is a condition that what is recited be, according to the continuous transmission of it from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, the Qur’an, and its transmission has become widespread in that regard and the nation has accepted it, like these seven recitations, because what is considered in that is certainty and certainty based on what has been established and paved in The fundamentals, and if that is not found in it, except for the ten, then it is forbidden to recite it with a prohibition, not a prohibition of dislike, in prayer and outside of prayer.It is forbidden for those who know the sources and meanings, and for those who do not know that. It is obligatory for those who are able to enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong to carry out the obligation of that. Rather, those scholars who transmitted it transmitted it for benefits, including what is related to the knowledge of Arabic, not reading it. This is the path of those whose path is straight. Then he said: The anomalous reading is that which was transmitted as the Qur’an without being transmitted by continuous transmission and widespread transmission. It is accepted by the Imams, as is included in Al-Muhtasib by Ibn Jinni and others. As for reading with the meaning of permitting it without transmitting the Qur’an, this is not from the anomalous reading at all. The one who dares to do this is daring against something great and has gone astray with a great straying, so he is punished and prevented by imprisonment and the like, and it is obligatory to prevent The reciter of the Shawāḥid and his sinfulness after he is made aware of it, and if he does not refuse, then he is subject to the ta’zīr according to its condition. As for when the reciter begins to recite, then he should not stop reciting with it what remains of the speech related to what he began with. And whatever contradicts this, then some of it is permissible and some of it is forbidden, and his excuse prevents him from fulfilling his right, and knowledge is with Allah, the Most High

. What is more amazing than this is that this missionary quoted words from the book Al-Munjid by Ibn Al-Jazari about his retraction of the statement of limiting it to ten, and he said something to the effect of: Look at how he relied on dreams and visions. The truth is that this missionary is either ignorant or he is a liar, from the same book, and even from the same chapter!!!! So look and be amazed, dear reader, at the audacity and impudence of this missionary in his deception!!!!

From the book Al-Munjid by Ibn Al-Jazari, may God have mercy on him, Chapter Seven:
((I said: The truth is that this statement is not appropriate, and Ibn Mujahid made an effort to collect it, so he mentioned what he received according to the extent of his narration, for he, may God have mercy on him, did not have a wide journey like others who were in his time. However, may God have mercy on him, he claimed what he did not have, and because of that, people made a mistake, because he said in the introduction to his book, “And informing about the readings that people follow in the Hijaz, Iraq, and Syria,” and this is not the case, rather he left out much of what people in these countries followed in his time. At that time, people used to read according to the reading of Abu Ja`far, Shaybah, Ibn Muhaysin, Al-A`raj, Al-A`mash, Al-Hasan, Abu Al-Raja, Ata, Muslim bin Jundub, Ya`qub, Asim Al-Jahdari, and others from the imams. The mention of those who used to read during the time of his sheikhs according to the reading of Abu Ja`far and Ya`qub has already been mentioned, and he left behind about fifty sheikhs, so how can he say that he is informing about the readings that people follow in these countries, and Abu Ali Al-Ahwazi and others said: He is the one who excluded Ya`qub from the seven and replaced him with Al-Kisa’i? It was said: Because Ya`qub did not occur. Its chain of transmission is only for him, but as for Ja`far, his narration did not occur to him, and otherwise he mentioned for Abu Ja`far in his book the seven virtues what he did not mention for anyone else.

I said, then he should have made that clear or come up with a phrase that indicates it, which is to say what the people are upon or what has reached me or what I have chosen or something like that so that his imitators do not fall into what is not permissible, as it is an error in claiming that Ibn Mujahid meant by these seven the seven in the hadith, Ibn Mujahid is far removed from that.))

As for the issue of reading with the anomalous reading that contradicts the Uthmanic script in prayer, we have seen from the opinion of Ibn al-Salah, may God have mercy on him (mentioned above) and Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may God have mercy on him, which is the opinion of the majority of scholars.

He said in Majmoo’ al-Fatawa in the book of interpretation, chapter on the seven letters, that it does not include a contradiction in meaning:
((As for the anomalous reading that deviates from the Uthmanic script, such as the reading of Ibn Mas’ud and Abu al-Darda’, may God be pleased with them both, (And by the night when it covers and the day when it appears and the male and the female) as has been proven in The two Sahihs. And like the reading of Abdullah (fasting three consecutive days) and his reading: (if it is only one zakah) and the like. So if this is proven from some of the Companions, is it permissible to recite it in prayer? According to two opinions of the scholars, which are two famous narrations from Imam Ahmad and two narrations from Malik. “One of them” This is permissible because the Companions and the Followers used to recite with these letters in prayer. “ The second” is that this is not permissible, and this is the opinion of most scholars. Because these readings have not been proven to be transmitted in a continuous manner from the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace. Even if they were proven, they were abrogated by the last presentation, as it has been proven in the Sahihs: “On the authority of Aisha and Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with them, that Gabriel, peace be upon him, used to review the Qur’an with the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, once every year. Then, in the year in which he died, In it he opposed it twice, and the last opposition is the reading of Zaid bin Thabit and others. It is the one that the Rightly-Guided Caliphs Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali ordered to be written in the copies of the Qur’an. Abu Bakr and Umar wrote it during the caliphate of Abu Bakr in copies that Zaid bin Thabit was ordered to write, then Uthman ordered it to be written in the copies of the Qur’an during his caliphate. And sending it to the cities and gathering the people around it with the agreement of the Companions, Ali and others. ))

And the statement of Ibn al-Qayyim, may God have mercy on him, is rejected. It is an effort on his part for which he will be rewarded, God willing. We are not obligated to do it unless it is a book, a sound Sunnah, or consensus.

We read from the introduction to Sunan al-Bayhaqi, may God have mercy on him
: ((30 - Abu Bakr ibn al-Harith informed us, Abu Muhammad ibn Hayyan informed us, Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hasan informed us, Abd al-Jabbar informed us, Safar informed us, on the authority of Abd al-Karim, on the authority of Mujahid, who said: “ There is no one whose statement is not taken and left except the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace.” May God bless him and grant him peace. ”

31 - And we narrated its meaning on the authority of Amer Al-Sha’bi.

Third: Clarifying the reason for the narrators’ differences in their narration on the authority of one reciter .

I say: The reason is simple, which is that the reader teaches a group of his students a reading, then he learns another reading from the mouth of his sheikh with a continuous chain of transmission, so he teaches another group of his students with that reading, and both of them are with a continuous chain of transmission to the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, and they do not contradict the Uthmanic script or the language, and some of the narrations from them may be anomalous and contradict the script, and some of them are weak and their chain of transmission to the reader is not authentic at all .

We read from Al-Murshid Al-Wajeez by Abu Shamah Al-Maqdisi, may God have mercy on him, Part One, Chapter Four:
((Then Makki, may God have mercy on him, said :

“If someone asks: What is the reason for the great difference from these imams, and each one of them had a unique reading that he chose from what he read to his imams?”

He said: “The answer is: Each one of the imams read to groups with different readings, and that was transmitted based on what he read, so they were in a period of their lives, reading to the people what they read, so whoever read to them with whatever letter it was, they did not reject it from him; since that was from what they read to their imams.”

“Do you not see that Nafi’ said: He read to seventy of the followers, so whatever two agreed upon, I took, and whatever one doubted, I left. He means - and God knows best - from what contradicted the Mushaf. And whoever read to him what two of his imams agreed upon, he did not criticize him for that.”

“It was narrated from him that he used to teach the people everything he read until it was said to him: We want to read to you according to your choice from what “It was narrated.”

“And this is Qalun (1) his protégé and the one most special to him, and Warsh (2) the most famous of the people who bore it.”

And from the same source in the fifth chapter:
“And know that the correct, reliable, and agreed-upon readings have ended with the seven readers mentioned above, and their transmission from them became famous due to their undertaking of that and the people’s consensus on them, so they became famous for it as imams became famous in every science of hadith, jurisprudence, and Arabic, who were followed and relied upon in it.”

If we say: The correct readings were attributed to them and transmitted from them, then we are not among those who say: All that was narrated from them is of this description, rather what was narrated from them is called weak and anomalous due to its departure from the aforementioned rule due to the disruption of some of the three pillars, and for this reason you see the books of the compilers of the seven readings differing in that, for in some of them is mentioned what was omitted in others , and the correct, based on the consideration we mentioned, is present in all of them, God willing.

The difference in the authenticity of some of the narrations of Nafi’ or not is due to studying the chains of transmission of the narrations from Nafi’ and looking into his fulfillment of the three conditions, especially the first condition, which is the authenticity of the chain of transmission .

Fourth: Obligating Al-Munsir to the statements of his scholars about his book .

We see how your scholars accused the Jews of distorting the Old Testament:
We read from the book of the Second Canonical Books: (The books of the Holy Bible that the Protestants deleted from their Gospels)
4- They say that some of the ancient and well-known theological fathers - and they specifically mentioned Organius and Jerome - did not include these books in the lists of the canonical books of the Old Testament. Indeed, Jerome, who wrote introductions to most of the books of the Torah, placed these deleted books in a special place for them, considering them to be interpolated and of doubtful authenticity. We respond to that by saying that, although some theologians initially ignored the canon of these books, they, including Origen and Jerome, later acknowledged these books and cited them. We also add that, although a few did not include these books in the list of books of the Torah, relying on the words of Josephus, the Jewish historian,Or based on the opinions of some individual Jews whose doctrine was to delete the parts of the book that blamed them for their shameful deeds and transgressions, but many of the famous Church Fathers other than those we mentioned recognized the canon of these books and proved their authenticity and cited the verses contained in them. (See more about this topic here on the website of St-Takla.org in the articles and other books sections).

We read from the book of Justinus the Philosopher and Martyr, page 231-234, in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, chapter 71-73, where Justinus says, addressing Trypho the Jew,
“Chapter Seventy: I certainly do not trust your teachers, since they do not recognize the validity of the translation of the Holy Scriptures that the seventy elders in the court of Ptolemy, King of Egypt, did, and they are trying to make another translation of their own. You should know that they have deleted many parts from the version that these elders who were with Ptolemy translated, those parts that clearly indicate that the crucified one is a god and a man and that he will be crucified and die… Trypho interrupted: “Before this, we want you to mention some texts that you say were completely deleted from the translation of the seventy elders .”
Chapter Seventy-Two: “ I will do as you please. They deleted this part of the paragraphs in which Ezra speaks about the law of the Passover: “And Ezra said to the people, ‘This Passover is our savior and our refuge. If you understand and this enters your heart, we will dishonor him on the cross and put our hope in him. For this place will not be left forever, says the Lord of hosts, but if you do not believe in him and do not listen to his teachings, you will be a mockery to the nations. And from the book of Jeremiah they deleted: “And I am led as a lamb to the slaughter, they have devised schemes against me, saying, Come, let us put a beam in his bread, and cut him off from the land of the living, that his name may be remembered no more.” And since this passage from the book of Jeremiah is still found in some copies in the Jewish synagogues - because it was deleted a short time ago - and since these words refer to the conspiracy of the Jews to kill Christ by crucifixion, he declared that he was “led as a lamb to the slaughter.” Such words so confused them that they resorted to blasphemy. They also deleted these words from the book of Jeremiah: “The Lord God remembered his dead among the children of Israel who lay in the graves, and came down to them to announce his salvation.”
Chapter 73: In Psalm 95 the phrase "on a tree" has been omitted, so that while the text says, "Say among the nations, The Lord reigns on a tree," they have left only, "Say among the nations, The Lord reigns." ... Tryphon said, "The Lord alone knows whether our teachers have made portions of the Scriptures as you say or not, but this statement seems absurd."
I agreed with him, " Yes, it does seem absurd, for it is an act more hideous than the raising of the golden calf which they made while they were full of manna that came down to earth, and more hideous than the offering of their children as sacrifices to demons or the slaughter of the prophets. It seems that you have not even heard of the Scriptures which you have mutilated, as I said. But the many texts which I have already mentioned to you, in addition to those which you have retained, are sufficient to prove the points on which we differ. "

We read from John Chrysostom's book Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew, chapter IX, page 113:
6. We see here the cause why the angel also, putting them at ease for the future, restores them to their home. And not even this simply, but he adds to it a prophecy, “That it might be fulfilled,” said he, “which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.” And what manner of prophet said this? Be not curious, nor over busy. For many of the prophetic writings have been lost; And this one may see from the history of the Chronicles. For being negligent, and constantly falling into ungodliness, some they suffered to perish, others they themselves burned uphand cut to pieces. The latter fact Jeremiah relates;the former, he who composed the fourth book of Kings, saying, that after a long time the book of Deuteronomy was hardly found, buried somewhere and lost . But if, when there was no barbarian there, they betrayed their books, much more when the barbarians had overrun them. For the fact that the prophet had foretold it, the apostles themselves in many places call Him a Nazarene.
http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.e...atthew,_EN.pdf


And what about the difference in the canonicality of some books! Some church fathers went to the validity of the Book of Enoch!!
( We read from the Bible Dictionary:
((And the writer of the Book of Enoch says that the “Son of Man” existed before the creation of the world. See p. 48:2 and 3. And that he will judge the world. See p. 69:27. And that he will rule over the righteous people. See p. 62:1-6. The author of Jude quotes Enoch 1:9 in verses 14 and 15. Some of the New Testament sayings about the end of days have their equivalents in Enoch. Some of the fathers of the early Christian era quoted some of the sayings of this book. Among these was Justin. Martyr, Arrenius, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen.
But later Christian leaders denied and rejected this book. Among them were John Chrysostom, Augustine, and Jerome or Origen. Neither the Jews nor the Christians considered this book to be among the canonical books. )) ))

And we read from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
(( Passing to the patristic writers, the Book of Henoch enjoyed a high esteem among them, mainly owing to The so-called Epistle of Barnabas twice cites Henoch as Scripture. Clement of Alexandria , Tertullian , Origen , and even St. Augustine suppose the work to be a genuine one of the patriarch. But in the fourth century the Henoch writings lost credit and ceased to be quoted. After an allusion by an author of the beginning of the ninth century, they disappear from view. ))
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01602a.htm

It is known that this book It is considered legal in the Ethiopian Church and on the same level as the Holy Books, and not as claimed by the Holy Bible

. We read from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
((But, just as the great number of translators employed caused the Bible text to be unusual, so also the revision of it was not uniform and official, and consequently the number of variant readings became multiplied. Its canon, too, is practically unsettled and fluctuating. A host of apocryphal or falsely ascribed writings are placed on the same level as the inspired books, among the most esteemed of which we may mention the Book of Henoch, the Kufale , or Little Genesis, the Book of the Mysteries of Heaven and Earth, the Combat of Adam and Eve , the Ascension of Isaias The Hâymanotâ Abaw (Faith of the Fathers), the "Mashafa Mestir" (Book of the Mystery), the "Mashafa. Hawi" (Book of the Compilations), "Qérlos" (Cyrillius), "Zênâ hâymânot" (Tradition of the Faith) are among the principal works dealing with matters moral and dogmatic. But, besides the fact that many of the quotations from the Fathers in these works have been modified, many of the canons of the "Synodos" are, to say the least, not historical. ))
https://www.newadvent .org/cathen/05566a.htm

What about the New Testament???
I say: There are many books that the Church Fathers disputed over whether they were considered canonical or not. If we go back, we will find, for example,
that the Book of the Shepherd of Hermas was considered a canonical book to the point that it was found in The Sinaiticus Codex is one of the canonical books of the New Testament .

It is an apocryphal book from the New Testament Apocrypha and was not included among the canonical books. However, this book was circulated in the first Christian centuries and was widespread among the churches and also influential to the point that some of the fathers The Church considered the book a canonical book like other books of the New Testament, so much so that the book appeared in the Muratorian list and is also present in the Sinaiticus version!
The composition of the book dates back to the first half of the second century, and some have suggested that it was composed between the years 140-150.

Read the Jesuit monastic translation, page 12:
(( And the New Testament is complete in the handwritten book called ((the Sinaitic Codex)) because it was found in a monastery. Saint Catherine. Rather, the Epistle to Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas were added to the New Testament, and they are two works that will not be preserved in the New Testament canon in its final form .

And we read from the introduction to the New Testament, page 153:
(( In the year 1749, one of the archaeologists, Muratau, discovered Some of the fragments found are a list of the New Testament Scriptures, which appears to have been written against Marcion. These fragments include four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, nine letters of Paul to the churches, four to individuals, two letters of John, the Book of Revelation, a letter of Peter, and the Shepherd of Hermes. He said it would be better if It is read in churches, but it is not placed at the same level as the rest of the books .

We read from the book The Oldest Christian Texts, Part One, translated by Father George Nassour, pages 79-80:
((A thousand Hermas, a parishioner of the Church of Rome, wrote his book known as "The Shepherd" in the years 140-150, when his sister Pope Pius I was running the affairs of the church. The book was a great success and enjoyed unprecedented popularity, so much so that Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen placed it on the same level as the Holy Books. In the early fourth century, Eusebius mentioned that The Shepherd was recited in some churches and used in the instruction of catechumens or those seeking baptism . In

general, what does Eusebius say in his book, Church History?
We read from Eusebius’ book, History of the Church, Book Three, Chapter Three:
((1 The First Epistle of Peter is recognized as authentic and was used by the ancient elders in their writings as a book that is not open to any dispute, although we know that his Second Epistle, which is in our hands now, is not among the canonical books , but nevertheless, since it became clear to many that it was used with the rest of the books....
5 As for the fourteen epistles of Paul, they are known and there is no dispute about them, and it is not honest to overlook this fact, which is that some rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying that the Church of Rome doubted it on the basis that Paul did not write it. As for what those who preceded us said about this epistle, I will allocate a special place for it in the appropriate situation, and as for the Acts of Paul, I did not find it among the undisputed books))

So as you see, the Book of the Shepherd of Hermas was canonical according to some of the Church Fathers, and the Church of Rome rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews and doubted its attribution to Paul, while we find Eusebius himself denying that the Second Epistle of Peter - which is a canonical book according to the Orthodox and Catholics - Legal travel!!