‎ The Holy Qur’an – Its Historical Authenticity ‎
Nadir Aqueel Ansari
Fundamental Sources of Knowledge in Religions ‎
No systematic study of a religion is possible without first determining its sources. Therefore, ‎before we make an attempt to understand Islam, we have to be sure of the source material ‎with us. We should first know what are the basic and fundamental sources from where ‎reliable knowledge can be obtained about the teachings of this great world religion. ‎
Since our understanding and study of Islam is to be based on them, these sources must ‎qualify certain criteria. As we shall see in this chapter, they must be
‎1.‎ Well defined ‎
‎2.‎ Authentic and ‎
‎3.‎ Intelligible. ‎
In other words, they should be so specific, reliable and meaningful that a matter so important ‎as religion can be based on them.‎
‎ ‎
Well Defined ‎
The source material of a religion should be well defined, specifically known and its boundaries ‎should be marked clearly. The genuine material should not be mixed up with spurious ‎material.‎
When we say that the sources are not well defined, it means that it is difficult to determine ‎whether something is part of the source material or not. It also shows that the source material ‎may be so widely spread, dispersed, diffused and confused with other material that it is not ‎possible to sift the genuine material from the fake.‎
Examples of such a source material (which is not well defined) can be found in a number of ‎religions. The sacred books of the Jews include Talmud, Mishnah and Gemara which are ‎spread over thousands pages. Talmud has two versions (Babylonian and Palestinian) and ‎many a times the different reports and versions do not agree. According to their scholars, ‎their book Talmud is still incomplete and is still being developed by the Jew Rabbis ‎[i]. There ‎are several versions of the literature and it is painstaking to determine what is genuine and ‎what is not.‎
Similarly among Hindus, the sacred literature is even more voluminous than that of Jews and ‎again has many versions.‎
Many tribal religions have no defined sources of their faith at all. Their religious source ‎material consists of a large treasure of songs, stories and myths.‎
Similar is the case of faiths where the fundamental teachings of a religion are kept secret. For ‎instance a few Muslim sub-sects and mystics like Hallaj, believed that the beliefs should not ‎be preached in public. They always kept them secret and only a few people in every era knew ‎the true teachings. It is reported that Imam Jafar said, ‘This affair of Imamat is occult and ‎veiled by a promise, and whoever unveils it will be disgraced by God.’‎ ‎[ii] On another occasion ‎he is reported to have said,‎
‎‘Keep our affairs secret, and do not divulge it publicly, for whoever keeps it secret and ‎does not reveal it , God will exalt him and whoever divulges it publicly and does not ‎keep it secret, god will disgrace him in this world and will take away light from his eyes ‎in the hereafter. Verily, taqiya (concealing) is of my religion and one who does not ‎keep taqiya has no religion. One who reveals our affairs is the one who denies ‎them’.‎ ‎[iii]‎
Obviously in such cases the source of religion is not only poorly defined, but is also hidden. A ‎student or follower of such a faith would not be able to access its sources of information ‎freely.‎
To summarize, the source material of a religion should be well defined, which means that:‎
• Its boundaries should be clear. ‎
• It should not be concealed. ‎
Authentic ‎
The sources also have to be authentic in historical terms. They should be so authentic as not ‎to leave any shadow of doubt about their genuineness. If the fundamental sources of a ‎religion do not come up to the standards of historicity, they are mere stories and myths and ‎are of little use for guidance and salvation.‎
The sources of Greek religion are myths which have little element of historical truth in them.‎
The Old Testament of Jews and the Bible of Christians have been so severely criticized by ‎the modern historians and scholars that a large number of Christian scholars themselves no ‎more believe that their sacred books were conveyed to them through reliable sources. ‎Moreover, the Christian religious literature consists of both canonical (declared authentic) and ‎apocryphal (doubtful) books. The debate as to which of them is genuine and which is ‎apocryphal is the one of the most important points of difference between the Protestants and ‎the Roman Catholics.‎
To summarize, the Authenticity of religious source material means that the historical process ‎through which the material has reached us should be reliable. The external historical ‎evidence should support that the material is not based on hearsay, is not based on the ‎evidence of a small number of people, and is backed by sound documentary and/or oral ‎evidence.‎
‎ ‎
Intelligible ‎
The sacred books of a religion must also be intelligible to us if at all they can guide us in the ‎spiritual as well as day to day matters. Religion is not meant for scholars, philosophers and ‎linguists only. It is meant for the common man also who is equally in need of correct moral ‎guidance. The sources should therefore be intelligible to all. The Intelligibility describes the ‎language as well as the contents of the sources.‎
The language should be comprehensible. In addition to the source material, sufficient ‎literature in the same language should also be available. The additional literature helps ‎determine the usage, precise meanings of words, idioms and shades of meanings. This is ‎intelligibility of the language.‎
The contents should also be intelligible, that is, the substance should not be complex, riddled ‎with ambiguities, too symbolic, and so obscure that it renders the literature of no practical ‎worth. Similarly, the contents should be free of contradictions, errors, and inconsistencies and ‎should be in accordance with common sense. ‎
For instance it is not possible to understand the religious scriptures of Buddhists and Hindus ‎in the modern age. They were written in Sanskrit and Paali languages, thousands of years ‎ago. These languages went into disuse centuries ago. There are few people who can ‎understand these scriptures, written in these dead languages. Moreover their content is ‎deeply philosophical and complex. Even if we are able to learn Sanskrit or Paali languages, ‎we will find their message very ambiguous, elusive and difficult to understand.‎
Same is the case with Jewish literature, which was written in classical Hebrew, which only a ‎few modern people can understand.‎
Similarly the books of mystic religions are also written in complex manner, employing difficult ‎terms and concepts, which make them unintelligible. Moreover, they interpret their religious ‎texts in a gnostic manner, that is they read hidden meanings in the text which are far from the ‎apparent meanings being conveyed by the words of the text.‎
In case of Jewish and Christian scriptures (Old and New Testaments) the number of textual ‎errors, internal inconsistencies and disagreements with known history and common sense ‎have been pointed out by a number of scholars. ‎
Such original sources may be revered by the followers but are of no practical use to us in ‎finding the way to salvation. An intelligible piece of material should also be free of ‎inconsistencies and statements that simply violate the common sense. It should not contain ‎contradictory information on any subject. Such contradictions also rob the source material of ‎its intelligibility.‎
‎ ‎
To summarize, Intelligibility requires that the scripture be:‎
• written in a live language ‎
• comprising comprehensible contents ‎
• free of inconsistencies ‎
• should have apparent meanings and not ‘hidden’ meanings ‎
‎ ‎
Sources of knowledge on Islam ‎
To identify the sources of Islam, we turn to the Holy Qur’an, which says:‎
‎“O ye who believe, if you believe in Allah and the Day of Judgment, obey ‎Allah, obey the Messenger and the rulers among you; and if any dispute ‎arises among you on a matter, refer it to Allah and his Messenger” (Sura ‎Nisaa Verse 59).‎
This verse is the cornerstone of Muslim faith and society. It means that the ultimate source of ‎our religion is Allah and his Messenger. In this verse Allah has clearly outlined the sources ‎from where we should derive our religious faiths and practices.‎
This verse ordains Muslims to obey
• Allah ‎
• the Messenger (Holy Prophet) and ‎
• the Rulers. ‎
Immediately, it clarifies that in case of a dispute, we have to submit the dispute before
• Allah and ‎
• his Messenger. ‎
This time, even the rulers are excluded. This shows that in fact, the Muslims are required to ‎obey only Allah and his Messenger who are thus considered by the Muslims as the only ‎sources of Islam.‎
Addition to these or deletion of any one, would amount to transfiguring the faith of Islam. Even ‎the companions of the Holy Prophet (Pbuh), the best people in Muslim history, used to go ‎back to these sources if there was any dispute.‎
‎ ‎
What do we have with us that represent the will of Allah and his ‎Messenger? ‎
God has never communicated with us directly. He does not communicate with human beings ‎directly except through his chosen ones. It was Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh) who received ‎wahee (revelation) from God, which the Muslims have with them now. It was through the Holy ‎Prophet that Allah has expressed and conveyed His will and commandments for humanity ‎and His designs about the universe. The only source of knowledge about Islam, therefore, is ‎the personality of the Holy Prophet Peace be upon him. A Muslim has to believe and follow ‎whatever commands of Allah the Prophet communicated to him.‎
This means that we have to look for what the Holy Prophet has left for us. Now whatever we ‎have received from the Prophet can be classified into the following three source materials. ‎The Holy Prophet did not leave anything else to us except these three, i.e.‎
‎1.‎ The Holy Qur’an - Muslim Scripture, ‎
‎2.‎ The Sunnah - the practices of the Holy Prophet and ‎
‎3.‎ Hadeeth - the sayings, actions, biography of the Holy Prophet. ‎
We would attempt to analyze and investigate the Holy Qur’an, to ascertain whether it is ‎Authentic, Well Defined and Intelligible.‎
‎ ‎
The Holy Qur’an - its revelation and history of compilation ‎
The Holy Qur’an was presented to the people of Arabia by the Holy Prophet Muhammad ‎‎(Peace be upon him). It was presented in parts during 23 years of his prophetic life. The Book ‎presents itself as the word of God and the Holy Prophet also presented as such.‎
The Muslims believe that the Holy Qur’an, being the revealed word of God, is the cornerstone ‎of their faith. They get their philosophy, beliefs and laws from this book - it is their lifeblood. It ‎is the Word of God revealed to his Messenger Muhammad Peace be upon him, who read it ‎out before the world loud and clear. He not only recited it to the people of Arabia, he also ‎made elaborate arrangements to ensure that it’s contents be preserved and his companions ‎should learn it by heart and should also reduce it to writing. The Holy Prophet’s stress on the ‎supremacy of the Book of Allah, over all other sources of religious knowledge, was ‎unequivocal and categorical.‎
The Muslims believe that the Holy Prophet actually heard or received the divine words. The ‎Holy Qur’an was communicated to the Holy Prophet
• either through Wahee (Revelation), or ‎
• through an angel or ‎
• through words spoken by God Himself. ‎
All these three forms of communication, the Muslims believe, are verbatim in nature, that is to ‎say, that the Holy Qur’an consists of actual words of Allah, communicated to the Holy ‎Prophet.‎
The Holy Qur’an is not like the writings of the New Testament, where God inspired a scribe to ‎write down the scripture; the idea and words were those of the scribe while God only ‎supervised the scribe. In other cases, the Christians would like to say that the scribe was ‎inspired by God and revealed a certain idea to him. The scribe then wrote it down in his own ‎words. In case of the Qur’an, the words and ideas are both divine.‎
The words and verses of the Holy Qur’an were preserved, through the oral as well as the ‎written traditions, in the Holy Prophet’s lifetime. A very large number of companions of the ‎Prophet participated in this preservation process and the text was safely handed over to the ‎next generation. The process was so immaculate and tremendously sound, that the ‎preservation of the Holy Qur’an has become an established fact of history.‎
What do the Muslims mean when they say that the Holy Qur’an in their hands today is exactly ‎the one that was revealed to the Holy Prophet, and that this is an established fact of history? ‎The meaning and significance of this statement can be explained in the terms of history ‎where we would like to know when an historical fact is established beyond any shadow of ‎doubt.‎
‎ ‎
Chains of reports consisting of individuals ‎
Usually reports about the past have reached us through oral reports, written reports, practical ‎tradition or archaeological artifacts.‎
For instance, the views of Socrates originated as oral reports (words of mouth) which were ‎later recorded by Plato and other writers. The plays of Shakespeare have reached us through ‎documentary evidence (written words). The report that Buddha used to meditate in a certain ‎posture has reached us through archaeological remains (pieces of art - artifacts - like statues ‎and engravings). The Christian institution of Baptism and the way a newborn is baptized has ‎traveled through centuries to us through practical continuity (practice). These reports are ‎considered as micro-history. They are to be judged in the light of the authenticity of the ‎narrators (in case of oral evidence), the scribes (in case of written evidence), the clerics (in ‎case religious rites) or the artists that created the pieces of art (in case of archaeological ‎evidence).‎
Discussions in micro history hinge on detailed and incisive discussions on individuals ‎‎(scribes, narrators and artists etc.). The authenticity of the report depends upon the veracity ‎of these individuals. The lives of these individuals are examined to get an idea of the ‎authenticity of the report they have conveyed us. Their character, capabilities, resources, ‎environment, and location at a certain place and time are studied. Obviously, the individual ‎being the kingpin in such instances of micro-history must be shown to be reliable, truthful, ‎unprejudiced and intelligent (to confirm his ability to comprehend, retain and truly express the ‎facts).‎
Once the personal traits of the individuals are investigated, the historians turn to the question ‎of continuity. Continuity means that the individuals involved in collecting and then transmitting ‎the report to us must be shown to be in a state of uninterrupted contact and communication. ‎We are referring to the fact that there should be an immediate proximity in time and place ‎between the two reporters who form one ring of the chain of transmission. There should be no ‎time when the report remained with anonymous narrators because then we cannot investigate ‎the personal traits of the individuals. It should also not suffer from oblivion because, in that ‎case, any change or corruption in the report, during the time it remained hidden from us, ‎cannot be ruled out. If the communication between two consecutive reporters is smooth, ‎continuous and uninterrupted, the report gathers strength. This evidence for continuity is ‎however to be produced in respect of each stage of the chain of reporters, enabling us to say ‎with a fair degree of confidence that the report is worth consideration. ‎
If the investigation of individuals and continuity of the report leads to positive conclusions, we ‎have established one chain of the report. Sometimes two or more such chains of reports, ‎leading to the same event, can be established. For example, two courtiers of Akbar the Great ‎may narrate the same incident. In such cases, the supporting narration should be identical or ‎at least similar. If the individuals involved in the chain and the continuity of their transmission ‎has been investigated, these corroborating reports strengthen and reinforce each other and ‎we are able to place more confidence in the substance brought out by them.‎
We can summarize our discussion by saying that in micro history, the following components ‎are vital:‎
• Individuals ‎
• Continuity of the report ‎
• Corroboration (if any, by way of multiple chains of individuals) ‎
If an event or a substance is supported by this investigation it becomes worth considering for ‎a historian. However, information obtained through chains of individual to individual ‎transmission can never establish a fact beyond any shadow of doubt. The primary reason is ‎that in such examinations, the historicity of the report ultimately depends on one or two ‎individuals. If our assessment about even one of the individuals in the chain of reporters is ‎faulty, the entire chain is shaken. These individuals may be widely known as men of ‎reasonably good character, fairly reliable memory, relatively sound understanding and ‎relatively free of prejudices. However, they cannot be assumed to be of infallibly good ‎character, unfailing memory, perfect understanding and absolutely free of prejudices. This ‎makes our assessment of individual reports somehow subjective and introduces an element ‎of probability in our judgments.‎
Similarly, our investigation (and finally our judgment) about them can be extremely cautious, ‎scientific and objective, yet it cannot be infallible and indubitable. We were told that an ‎individual was known to be honest, truthful and reliable, but we know that individual behavior ‎is not predictable. After all we are dealing with human beings. One may be honest and truthful ‎throughout one’s life but stumble in the end. One may have a sound memory yet he may ‎sometimes be forgetful also.‎
Moreover, how are we going to collect evidence about the personal traits of these individuals? ‎Obviously we would be looking for more parallel chains of reporters to learn about a certain ‎individual. These sources would suffer from the same limitations, thereby compounding our ‎problem. ‎
Before proceeding ahead let us summarize our discussion. The chains of reports consisting of ‎individuals, may lead us to a fair degree of plausibility of an event, yet they cannot lead us to ‎the knowledge of the event that is beyond any shadow of doubt because of the following ‎reasons:‎
‎1.‎ The reliability of the report hinges on one or two individuals ‎
‎2.‎ These individuals are not infallible. ‎
‎3.‎ Our investigation and judgment about these individuals can also be incorrect. ‎
The Hadeeth Scholars of early Muslim History were alive to the above discussion and they ‎termed Individual to Individual Report as Khabr-e-Wahid (or Individual Report). Almost the ‎entire Hadeeth literature consists of Akhbar-e-Ahad (Individual Reports).‎
‎ ‎
Chains of reports consisting of Generations ‎
On the other hand in macro history we deal with facts, incidents and reports transmitted, not ‎by one or two individuals to another individual, but by one generation that witnessed a fact ‎and testified it to the next generation. For example, the fact that the Crusades did take place ‎between Christians and the Muslims is a fact transmitted by generations to generations. The ‎generation that actually fought and witnessed the wars conveyed this knowledge to the next ‎generation and so on till it reached us. This communication to succeeding generations can be ‎through any means - oral, written or through any mode of art. But the important condition is ‎that there should be no interruption between the successive generations that were involved.‎
Here we may note that the units of such chains of transmission are not individuals, but ‎generations. This singular difference changes the very character of such a report.‎
Historical facts are empirical observations of men. This means that they communicate to other ‎people facts they had observed through their senses. The limitations of senses are known. ‎However, in Generation-to-Generation Transmission, we are talking of the empirical ‎observations of the entire generations and not of a few individuals. Such testimony, obviously, ‎provides us the surest and the most reliable knowledge of a past event. Such knowledge is as ‎definite as anything can be in human matters.‎
When we are talking of scientific principles of history, an important condition of Generation-to- ‎Generation Transfer is that it should not deal with opinions and ideas of individuals but the ‎hard facts, which were witnessed, seen and/or heard by the first Generation (empirical ‎facts).‎ ‎[iv] This condition eliminates the possibility of mythologies and opinions being included ‎in the Generation-to-Generation Transmission.‎
Generation-to-Generation transmission is thus marked by:‎
‎1.‎ The fact is witnessed by a large number of people, sometimes the entire generation. ‎
‎2.‎ The fact consists of an empirically observed (seen or heard) phenomenon and does ‎not consist of any opinion. ‎
‎3.‎ The generations continue to transfer the fact to the successive ones, without ‎interruption and at all stages the number of the people involved in transmission is so ‎large that it is impossible to assume that they misperceived the fact or agreed to tell a ‎lie or forgot the truth. ‎
Summarizing the salient differences between Individual-to-Individual Transmission and ‎Generation-to-Generation Transmission are:‎
‎1.‎ The reliability of the report from generation to generation does not hinge upon one or ‎two individuals. It rather depends on the hundreds and thousands of people that lived ‎together in a known place and time. ‎
‎2.‎ It is no more necessary to investigate the character, understanding, memory or ‎impartiality of individuals involved in a Generation-to-Generation transmission. The ‎entire generations can neither be investigated not should it be necessary. When such ‎a large number of people convey a fact, it is impossible that all of them could have ‎wrongly reported it, forgotten it or could have developed a consensus on telling lies. ‎
‎3.‎ There is no need to establish the continuity of reporting chain consisting of ‎individuals. One generation is so perfectly enmeshed into another, and the contact ‎and proximity with the next generation is so intimate and obvious that conducting an ‎inquiry to prove it is not required, and the continuity should be taken as granted. ‎
‎4.‎ When hundreds and thousands of people are conveying a fact to the next generation, ‎we do not need any corroborating evidence. Agreement of the entire generation is so ‎overwhelmingly strong that it renders further corroboration redundant. ‎
‎5.‎ An Individual-to-Individual Report only makes a fact probable and therefore remains ‎open to further investigations and is revised in the light of fresh discoveries, whereas ‎a Generation-to-Generation Transmission proves the fact beyond any shadow of ‎doubt. ‎
To further elaborate the issue, these differences between an Individual-to-Individual Report ‎and Generation-to-Generation Transmission have been represented graphically also.‎
‎ ‎
Subject matter of books on history ‎
The ordinary books of history we read apparently consist of narration of, investigation into and ‎compilation of individual to individual reports. Such reports by the dint of being only probable ‎at best require investigation and reconciliation between different accounts. They catch most of ‎the historian’s attention and interest. That is why, normally history is considered to consist of ‎Individual to Individual Reports.‎
A closer examination would however reveal that the books of history actually rest on the ‎foundation of Generation to Generation Reports, around which the details, gathered from ‎Individual to Individual Reports, are built. The Generation to Generation Reports are ‎historically established facts and therefore historians seldom question them or contest them. ‎Since they are taken as known facts, a superficial reader of history may miss them. But seen ‎more carefully, the history books are like flesh of Individual to Individual Reports, put on the ‎skeleton of Generation to Generation Reports.‎
In a way, we are talking here of Historical Foundationalism, which signifies the fact that most ‎history accounts have a foundation, which is self evident and need not be proved because of ‎overwhelming empirical evidence. The details of the historical account constitute the pyramid ‎of history, which rests on this firm, secure and certain base. These details are mostly obtained ‎through Individual to Individual Reports and are selected out of the huge mass of reports, ‎preferring those that fit well with the foundation. This is Historical Coherentism where, the ‎details must be in harmony with the foundation of history. The Individual to Individual Reports ‎then fit into a jigsaw puzzle with an observable interlocking strength. Historical Coherentism ‎thus governs our selection and preference of Individual to Individual Reports out of the ‎conflicting and divergent mass available. Once an individual report fits well with the structure ‎and is not in conflict with the Foundation, it becomes acceptable as a probable report. ‎Obviously, Historical Foundationalism provides the basic framework while Historical ‎Coherentism helps us fill in the details.‎
Due to excessive debates on the probable reports, and because most of the facts about the ‎past are based on them, the Individual to Individual Reports assume an apparently ‎conspicuous position, whereas the foundation goes unnoticed by a common reader. Although ‎if asked, we learn that he fully accepts the foundation (Generation to Generation Reports) ‎with full certitude.‎
An illustration would help us understand this. If an historian writes a book on Hitler, guess ‎how much volume of the book would be devoted to the details of the personality, life events, ‎wars, family, views and character of Hitler? Probably the whole book! On the other hand, how ‎many pages would be employed to answer the questions - whether Hitler really existed? Did ‎Hitler live in the twentieth century or the Middle Ages? Was Hitler a German or a Red Indian? ‎Obviously, we should except not even a sentence on these issues. Why? Because the ‎foundation of writing Hitler’s history is know with certainty. It should therefore be taken without ‎debate. If not mentioned in the book, the readers take these facts for granted. As a result the ‎book would almost entirely consist of Individual to Individual Reports while the Foundation ‎‎(Generation to Generation Reports) is not mentioned. In this way, historians work more on ‎Individual Reports and the significance of self evident (Generation to Generation) Reports are ‎not brought to the fore. But the core of the book consists of a number of historically ‎established facts and any Individual Report that tends to call these facts into question is ‎conveniently shelved. Reports such as those suggesting that Hitler never existed or that he ‎was a Chinese by descent or that he lived in Middle Ages would all be termed as unfounded ‎in reality and would be seen as myths.‎
Similarly, while studying the history of the Holy Qur’an, we have to see the Foundation which ‎is common to all reports, and then see the Individual Reports that fit in with the foundation. ‎Obviously, any Individual Report that contradicts the Generation to Generation Report cannot ‎be accepted.‎
‎ ‎
Terminology of the Muslim Historiography ‎
In the Historiography (Ilm-e-Hadeeth) developed by the Muslims, the Individual to Individual ‎Report is termed as Khabr-e-Wahid (Individuals’ Report) whereas the Generation to ‎Generation Report is called Mutawatir, and the process of Generation to Generation ‎Transmission is known as Tawatur.‎
The entire history is seen as divided into these two broad categories. It is believed that ‎Tawatur is above all suspicion and there is no need to investigate the individuals involved in ‎communicating it. Rather, a Mutawatir report is defined as one in which there is no need to ‎examine the individuals constituting the chain, because there is no chain of individuals that ‎can be termed as the basis of the tawatur.‎ ‎[v] We would, henceforth, use these terms in our ‎subsequent discussions.‎
Tawatur is thus defined as the process by which one generation communicates a fact ‎‎(observed or heard) to another, and so on, without interruption. This communications is ‎achieved in such a manner that the number of communicators in each generation is so large ‎that there is no possibility of the fact being misperceived, misconstrued, forgotten or their ‎having agreed to tell a lie or
‎ ‎
The Holy Qur’an has reached us through Tawatur ‎
The Holy Qur’an has reached us through the process of tawatur - historical continuity and ‎perpetuation achieved through transfer from generation to generation. When we say that the ‎Qur’an has reached us through tawatur, we mean to say that so many people in every ‎generation conveyed it to the next and so on that there can be no doubt about its authenticity. ‎It would be incorrect to believe that a few persons in one generation transmitted it to a few ‎persons in the next. It was handed over by the entire generations to the successive ‎generations. The Generation of the Companions of the Holy Prophet witnessed the revelation ‎and compilation of the Holy Qur’an during the life of the Holy Prophet and then handed it over ‎to the next generation and so on.‎
The authenticity of the Holy Qur’an has far exceeded the need for any debate. In the ‎presence of established history, we would not accept any individual reports and rumors that ‎assail the Mutawatir Foundation. Since it has achieved the status of Tawatur, no odd ‎Individuals’ Report would affect its credibility. When generations and generations of people ‎without interruption hold the Qur’an as the one and only version of the divine guidance ‎received from the Holy Prophet, such dissenting individual reports would not infringe upon its ‎authenticity. The overwhelming evidence of millions of people would simply override the ‎evidence of a few individuals. ‎
‎ ‎
.‎

History of Compilation of the Holy Qur’an ‎
The details of the history of compilation of the Holy Qur’an found in the books of history and ‎exegesis provide us the details of the process of Qur’anic preservation and dissemination. ‎However, while we scan through the hadeeth literature and historical records, it should be ‎kept in mind that the historical authenticity, of the Holy Qur’an, is not based on these records, ‎but on Tawatur.‎
‎ ‎
During the Holy Prophet’s Life ‎
During the first thirteen years of his ministry at Mecca, when there were few converts without ‎the support of state authority, the Prophet Muhammad used to read out the revealed ‎passages to the small group of his followers and non-believers. His followers used to commit ‎the revelation to their hearts. There is evidence that the revealed verses or chapters were ‎also written down on whatever writing material was available.‎
It is reported that when Umar, learnt about his the conversion of his sister and her husband to ‎Islam, he hurried to her sister’s house in anger. When he arrived at her house, she hid the ‎part of Qur’an she was reading. When Umar expressed his eagerness to see what they were ‎reading, his sister informed him that the Holy Scripture is sacred and can only be touched by ‎clean people. She told her to wash his hands before touching the scripture.‎ ‎[vi] This shows ‎that as early as in the sixth year of the Holy Prophet’s ministry, the Holy Qur’an was being ‎written down, in addition to being learnt by heart.‎
However, when the Holy Prophet migrated to Medina and established a state he attached ‎priority to this task. He developed institutionalized systems under the state machinery to ‎preserve and disseminate the Holy Qur’an on a large scale. To ensure this, extremely ‎elaborate arrangements were made.‎
The Holy Prophet constituted a committee of about forty or more of his literate companions, ‎who were assigned the task of writing the Holy Book.‎ ‎[vii] The names of some of these scribes ‎have been mentioned by Ibn-o-Abdi Rabbihi ‎[viii] and Ibn Qayyum‎ ‎[ix]. The scribes included:‎
‎1.‎ Abubakr Siddique ‎
‎2.‎ Umar bin al Khattab ‎
‎3.‎ Uthman bin Affan ‎
‎4.‎ Ali bin Abi Talib ‎
‎5.‎ Zubair ‎
‎6.‎ Aamir bin Fuhairah ‎
‎7.‎ Ubayy bin Ka’ab ‎
‎8.‎ Zaid bin Thabit ‎
‎9.‎ Khalid bin Sa’eed bin Al Aas ‎
‎10.‎ Mu’awiya bin Abi Sufyan ‎
‎11.‎ Mughira bin Shu’bah ‎
‎12.‎ Abdullah bin Arqam ‎
‎13.‎ Alulaa’ bin Uqbah ‎
‎14.‎ Amar bin al Aas ‎
‎15.‎ Thabit bin Qais ‎
‎16.‎ Abdullah bin Ruwahah ‎
‎17.‎ Khalid bin al Waleed ‎
Iraqi, in his Life of the Prophet (in verse), begins the account of the Scribes with the stanza:‎
And his scribes were forty two. (Wa kuttabuhu ithnani wa arba’oon).‎ ‎[x]‎
Ibnu Abdi Rabbihi differentiates between Scribes reserved for recording the Holy Qur’an and ‎the Scribes engaged in official correspondence of the State of Medinah. The famous ‎companion, Hanzala bin Rabee’ Al Usaidiyy was the full time Secretary of this Committee. He ‎is termed as the Secretary of all the Scribes of the Holy Prophet (‘khalifatu kulli kaatibin min ‎kuttaabin Nabi).‎ ‎[xi] He was supposed to remain present most of the time with the Holy ‎Prophet. Later, after the death of Hanzala, this responsibility was shifted to another ‎Companion.‎
It can be understood that the reason for nominating such a large number of scribes was ‎obviously, to ensure that a Scribe was always available, whenever the need arose. The ‎Revelation could come to the Holy Prophet at any place and time, while traveling or during the ‎military campaigns. This shows how serious the Holy Prophet was to preserve the Holy ‎Qur’an.‎
On receiving a verse or verses from Allah, the Holy Prophet used to call one of the members ‎of the committee and get it dictated ‎[xii]. At this time, the Holy Prophet also used to instruct the ‎Scribe as to where the newly revealed verse or verses were to be placed in the Holy ‎Qur’an ‎[xiii]. The Holy Prophet thus not only used to dictate scattered verses but also give a ‎divine order of arrangement of each verse. The ordering of verses and surahs was not left out ‎for the later generations. This was necessary because it is reported that more than one Surah ‎‎(Chapter) used to be revealed upon the Holy Prophet simultaneously‎ ‎[xiv]. The Scribes ‎therefore needed Divine Guidance about the arrangement of the Holy Qur’an also.‎
Zaid bin Thabit reports that after the verse had been dictated by the Holy Prophet, he would ‎ask the Scribe to read it out. Then the Holy Prophet used to listen to what had been written ‎and would request the Scribe to read it out. Errors were rectified and the Holy Prophet used to ‎approve the final draft ‎[xv]. It was then issued for all (Thumma ukhraju bihi ila alnaas) and the ‎people used to make personal copies of the approved draft and would also try to memorize ‎it ‎[xvi].‎
The Companions were motivated to study, learn and memorize the Holy Qur’an because of ‎the central place it had in their lives and also because the Holy Prophet emphasized upon it ‎so frequently and forcefully. Such sayings of the Holy Prophet abound in the Hadeeth ‎literature that declare ‘Reading the Holy Qur’an from a written copy (Mushaf) is as superior to ‎recitation by memory, as mandatory (farz) prayers are superior to optional (nafl) prayers’. He ‎said that he who recites the Holy Qur’an during the night is indeed enviable ‎[xvii]. He said, ‎‎‘The best among you is the one who learns and teaches the Qur’an‎ ‎[xviii]’. The Prophet’s ‎emphasis on memorizing the Qur’an was so marked that he is reported to have substituted ‎this ability of a poor Companion for the Mehr (money he had to pay to his bride on his ‎marriage).‎ ‎[xix] He would sometimes ask his Companions to recite the Holy Qur’an to him. ‎Abdullah bin Masood asked the Holy Prophet, ‘Should I recite (the Holy Qur’an) to you when it ‎was actually revealed on you?’ The Holy Prophet replied: ‘I like listening to the Qur’an when ‎read by others’‎ ‎[xx]. ‎
Given the swelling number of his followers after Migration, the Qur’an was learnt and ‎recorded by a large number of his followers.‎ ‎[xxi] From among the Ansar alone, Anas bin ‎Malik reports that four prominent Companions had compiled the Qur’an: Ibayy bin Ka’ab, ‎Mu’az bin Jabal, Zaid bin Thabit and Abu Zaid ‎[xxii]. In another report, Anas adds the name of ‎Abu Darda also ‎[xxiii]. Relying on this report, many authors have erroneously confined the ‎number of Companions who compiled the Qur’an to four. Actually the report only intends to ‎mention such Companions from among the Ansar and does not include the names of such ‎Companions from among the Muhajiroon (the immigrants to Medina from Mecca).‎
Some of the companions must have recited the Qur’an over to the Holy Prophet for approval. ‎Abdullah ibn e Masood is reported to have said that he recited Surah Yusuf to the Holy ‎Prophet while Ubayye is reported to have learnt the entire Qur’an from the Holy ‎Prophet.‎ ‎[xxiv]. Imam Bukari has reported in his Saheeh that in only one combat at Bair e ‎Ma’oonah, seventy Qura’a (those who specialized in reciting the Qur’an) fell as martyrs. The ‎number of written copies had become quite common within the life of the Holy Prophet. ‎Ayshah, the wife of the Holy Prophet, is reported to have had a Mushaf in her house (the ‎house of Holy Prophet) from which, she is seen dictating the Holy Qur’an to a visitor from ‎Iraq ‎[xxv]. This report also confirms the existence of a Mushaf in the house of Holy Prophet. A ‎large number of Companions had Musahif and they felt motivated to carry them during ‎battles. The Holy Prophet used to discourage his Companions from carrying the Musahaf with ‎them on military expeditions ‎[xxvi].‎
On the occasion of the Last Hajj, the Holy Prophet delivered a sermon in which he said that ‎people should acquire Knowledge before it is lost. On this an Arab Bedouin rose and asked: ‎Would the Knowledge be lost while we have Musahif (written copies of the Holy Qur’an) ‎among us?‎ ‎[xxvii] This observation during the life of the Holy Prophet establishes the ‎ubiquitous nature of Musahif in the earliest times. It is therefore obvious that the Holy Qur’an ‎was compiled and written down before the Holy Prophet left this world. A copy of the Holy ‎Qur’an was retained with the Holy Prophet (in his house as reported by Bukhari in his Saheeh ‎from Aishah). In addition numerous written copies abounded among the Companions, which ‎had been copied from the Master Copy (al Imam) with the Holy Prophet or had been directly ‎dictated from the Holy Prophet.‎
‎ ‎
Arrangement of Surahs in the Holy Qur’an ‎
The Qur’an was being revealed in accordance with the needs of the different stages of the ‎prophetic mission. It was however not compiled in the chronological order of its revelation. ‎While compiling and arranging it, the Qur’an was being given a new order, which was to have ‎a meaningful coherence for the readers in future. Whenever the Prophet dictated a passage ‎of the Qur’an to the Scribes, he used to tell him where in the Qur’an that passage would be ‎placed. This means that not only was the Qur’an being recorded and memorized as it was ‎being revealed piecemeal, it was also being compiled and given a new order under the ‎personal supervision of the Prophet. The Prophet in turn was being instructed by Allah about ‎the placement of passages in the desired order.‎ ‎[xxviii] That is why the Companions use the ‎word ‘Compilation’ while defining their functions as Scribes. It is reported: We used to sit with ‎the Holy Prophet and compile the Holy Qur’an on parchments ‎[xxix].‎
When the entire Book had been revealed, it is reported in several traditions that the Angel ‎Gabriel heard the final recitation of the Holy Qur’an from the Holy Prophet ‎[xxx]. This final ‎presentation of the Holy Qur’an (Arzai Akheerah) gave the final shape to the Holy Book under ‎the directions of Allah.‎
Thus the entire Qur’an was systematically recorded and arranged on written material during ‎the lifetime of the Prophet. The Holy Qur’an was recorded on tanned hides, stone tablets, ‎wooden tablets, pieces of cloth, shoulder bones etc. One complete set of the Qur’an was with ‎the State authorities, i.e. with the Holy Prophet. It was placed in the Mosque of the Prophet ‎‎(Masjid-e-Nabavi) where the Holy Prophet lived. From there any one was free to make a copy ‎for himself or to refer to it in case he wished to memorize it. It however appears that apart ‎from this centrally placed copy, a number of other copies also existed. A few of them must ‎have been complete copies whereas in case of others, only portions of the Qur’an were in ‎possession of a number of Companions of the Prophet.‎
Abdullah ibn e Abbas was asked as to what did the Holy Prophet leave behind him. He ‎replied: ‘The Holy Prophet did not leave anything but it was bound within a volume’‎ ‎[xxxi].‎
‎ ‎
The Significance of the Qur’an in the life of Companions ‎
The Holy Qur’an constituted the foundation of the early Muslim community during the life of ‎Holy Prophet. It was recited five times a day, people used to commit it to their hearts and ‎used to study it with utmost care and concentration. People were graded and appreciated in ‎the community, on the basis of their knowledge of the Qur’an. All affairs of the state as well as ‎the social life of Arabia were governed in the light of the provisions of the Qur’an. All civil ‎servants, military commanders and judges used to seek guidance from the Holy Qur’an. ‎During the Prophet’s life time, when he used to send governors and judges to far off places, ‎he used to instruct them that they have to govern and decide in the light of the Qur’an. These ‎facts show that Qur’an was alive in that society not because of written manuscripts but as an ‎exigency of Faith and an inevitable source of guidance for social, political and legal affairs.‎
It is therefore incorrect to suggest that the Holy Qur’an was compiled and written in the days ‎of Caliphs Abubakr Siddique or Uthman Ghani. Actually the Holy Qur’an was preserved under ‎the personal supervision of the Holy Prophet in his lifetime. It is also natural to believe that he ‎could not neglect the task of its preservation. The primary mission of the Holy Prophet was to ‎deliver the Divine Message to mankind. This message was nothing but the Holy Qur’an. He ‎could not shift this responsibility to later generations.‎
This happened exactly in accordance with what the Holy Qur’an had instructed:‎
Verily, upon us is the (responsibility of) its collection and recital. So when We ‎have recited it, follow this recitation. Then upon Us is (the responsibility) to ‎explain it. (75:16-19)‎
These verses demonstrate in so many words the divine scheme of Qur’anic preservation.‎
‎ ‎
Canonization of the Qur’anic Text ‎
Canonization is the process culminating at the acceptance of a religious scripture in a religion. ‎Canonization has usually occurred in other religions centuries after the scripture was ‎presented by the Prophet or the Founder of the faith. For instance, the New Testament was ‎canonized through convening a series of conferences and councils of religious scholars and ‎the final contents were decided centuries later.‎
It is interesting that we do not find any process of Canonization and the debates attending it in ‎Muslim history. The reason is obvious; the Qur’anic text was compiled and preserved well ‎within the life of the Holy Prophet, leaving no room for later disagreements. It was, so to say, ‎canonized by the Holy Prophet himself.‎
‎ ‎
During the Caliphate of Abu Bakr ‎
It is important to understand the nature of services of the First Caliph towards this end. During ‎the reign of Caliph Abu Bakr, the increasing number of Huffaz who were embracing ‎martyrdom in the battlefield emerged as a cause of alarm to Umar ibn e Khattab. He ‎suggested to the Caliph that
‎1.‎ After the death of the Holy Prophet, the State should take over the responsibility of ‎the dissemination of the Holy Qur’an ‎
‎2.‎ An official copy of he Holy Qur’an should be prepared which is written on pages of ‎even size and bound up in a volume. ‎
Abu Bakr, the first Caliph therefore decided to arrange the Qur’an in one volume. He ‎constituted a committee under the chairmanship of Zaid. All the companions assisted him and ‎the volume thus compiled was attested by hundreds of companions. Every companion who ‎had any verse recorded on any material was called in and was required to produce two ‎witnesses also who testified that a verse was actually dictated by the Holy Prophet and was ‎placed properly as desired by the Prophet.‎ ‎[xxxii] Witnesses were called in to make the ‎procedure more stringent. This was to ensure that the Generation of the Companions should ‎collectively participate in this blessed service.‎
This achievement of the first Caliph was not the only effort for the preservation of the Qur’an. ‎The instant effort only related to the written and documentary dissemination of the Holy Book. ‎As we shall show later, written tradition is not the only way through which the Qur’an was ‎preserved and other means were also adopted to preserve the Holy Book.‎
Although the Qur’an had been compiled in the life time of the Prophet, yet the task of ‎preparation of an Official copy involved rewriting it on pages of even size. Given the sensitivity ‎the Companions attached to the Holy Book, this task could not be left over to one person. The ‎Companions valued the Holy Book more than anything else. The entire group of Companions ‎ensured that, while copying verses from the original office copy, and binding them in one ‎volume, even an iota of difference or error should not be allowed to occur. Moreover, written ‎and oral evidence should also be called, not to discover something new, but to further ‎confirm. The procedural caution observed by the Committee constituted by Abubakr, can be ‎well compared with any modern attempt to publish the Holy Qur’an on a large scale. The ‎copies are compared and checked and the contents are then certified by expert Huffaz. ‎These Huffaz have memorized the Holy Book in totality and they are available in huge ‎numbers.‎
The bound volume of the Holy Book, prepared by the Committee and approved by the main ‎body of Companions, was then placed in public where people could make as many copies of ‎the scripture as they wished.‎ ‎[xxxiii] ‎
‎ ‎
During the Caliphate of Uthman ‎
After the death of Caliph Abu Bakr, that volume of Holy Book was entrusted to Umar and, ‎after his death, to Hafsa bint Umar (the wife of the Holy Prophet).‎
During the caliphate of Uthman, a large number of non-Arabs also embraced Islam. Arabic ‎was not their mother tongue. They used to speak Persian, Syrian and a number of other ‎languages. Many of them read Arabic in different ways. Even some Arabs from far flung areas ‎used to recite the Qur’an in different accents. Such differences in pronunciation had no impact ‎on the long term preservation of the Qur’an because the by now numerous written copies of ‎the Qur’an were available and thousands of people were there who recited it in the original ‎accent. Although minor in nature, yet the differences in the pronunciation were seen with ‎concern by the cautious Caliph who feared they could develop into different versions with the ‎possibility of different meanings. It was required that just like a standard text, a standard ‎pronunciation should also be decided.‎
It was however not a difficult decision. Uthman in consultation with all the companions, ‎decided that the Qur’an will be read in the accent of the Holy Prophet, i.e. the accent of the ‎Quraysh of Mecca. Obviously, only the way the Holy Prophet pronounced the divine words ‎could be accepted as the true and faithful way.‎
Uthman then got prepared copies of the Qur’an. These were written in accordance with the ‎accent and calligraphic style of the Quraysh, and these copies were placed in the major cities ‎of the Muslim Caliphate. These copies served as the master copies for all the Muslims and ‎numerous copies were prepared and circulated. Two of the master copies prepared by ‎Uthman are reported to be still available in museums at Tashkent, and Istanbul. It is known ‎that not only written copies were circulated by the third Caliph, but he also sent expert Qari’s ‎‎(experts in recitation of the Holy Book) along with the scriptures. These Qari’s were selected ‎from the Quraysh who could read the Book in accordance with the accent and pronunciation ‎of the Holy Prophet.‎
Thus the contribution of Uthman is not that he compiled the Qur’an for the first time, as is ‎generally understood. The Holy Qur’an had already been compiled during the life of the Holy ‎Prophet. It was bound in a single volume of pages of even size, during the caliphate of ‎Abubakr. Uthman’s valuable contribution lies in his ability to take notice of the challenge of ‎different accents getting popular among the new converts. He immediately resolved it with the ‎consultation of the companions of the Holy Prophet and decided in favor of only one authentic ‎accent - that of the tribe of the Holy Prophet. He thus united the Ummah on one recitation of ‎the Qur’an.‎
‎ ‎
During the caliphate of Ali and the rule of Mu’awia
After the assassination of Uthman, the Muslim Ummah underwent a division into two separate ‎camps, which fought bloody wars with each other. During such ages of turmoil, for an ‎ideology that is still young, there is every possibility that the warring factions start disputing ‎the very basis of the ideology that stimulated their growth, and may end up with two different ‎sets of sacred literature. But in this case, both the groups continued to have unquestionable ‎belief in the same book. Ali upheld the book as it was received from the earlier three Caliphs ‎and so did Mu’awia.‎
Their viewpoints might have differed on political issues, but they were united on the text of the ‎Holy Qur’an, and continued with the efforts of the Ummah to protect, respect and propagate ‎the Holy Book. Had Ali compiled a different version of the Holy Qur’an (as held by a few ‎individual reports) he would have imposed his version instead of the one that (according to ‎the belief of a few Shia scholars) had been unfairly imposed by the earlier Caliphs. Caliph ‎Ali’s six years rule is devoid of any such assertion. On the contrary we find him reciting the ‎same text, basing his judicial decision on it and taught the same to the next generation.‎
‎ ‎
Since then ‎
After the age of turmoil, the Muslims had flourishing, stable and long rule of Umayyad and ‎Abbaside dynasties who proclaimed the standard version of the Qur’an as the only accepted, ‎canonized and authentic version of the revealed book. After the fall of Abbasides, the ‎Uthmani Caliphate of Turkey took over this task and the state attached priority to preserving, ‎publication, and disseminating the Holy Qur’an. Only one text was known and recognized. ‎There never existed any other versions. Thousands of Muslims continued to recite the entire ‎Holy Qur’an every year in Taraweeh Prayers during the holy month of Ramazan, for the last ‎fourteen centuries. On introduction of printing press, the printed copies spread far and wide in ‎large numbers and the now even the remotest possibility of any corruption of the text does not ‎exist.‎
‎ ‎
Oral Communication ‎
A book can be communicated to the next generations through written (documentary) means ‎or through oral tradition. So far we have discussed the documentary aspect of its history.‎
This history of documentary transmission is very valuable and praiseworthy, but it is not what ‎the Muslims are proud of. They are proud of the history of transmission of the Book through ‎memorizing tradition.‎
Thousands and millions of Muslims memorized the Holy Qur’an accurately in all generations. ‎Whenever there is a difference between huffaz, they always find a third one to consult and ‎verify. The Muslims do not rely on the written word as much as they do on the oral ‎transmission. When the Holy Qur’an is printed, we require two huffaz to read the text and ‎approve it.‎
The Holy Qur’an was thus received by the first generation of Muslim Ummah (i.e. the ‎companions of the Holy Prophet) from the Prophet in written and verbal forms and was then ‎transmitted to the next generation, and so on, till it reached us. Such a large number of ‎people have participated in this generation to generation transfer of this book that there ‎remains no shadow of doubt about its historical authenticity.‎
‎ ‎
Written and Oral Communication ‎
A book can be communicated to the next generations through written (documentary) means ‎or through oral tradition. So far we have discussed the documentary aspect of its history.‎
This history of documentary transmission is very valuable and praiseworthy, but it is not what ‎the Muslims are proud of. They are proud of the history of transmission of the Book through ‎memorizing tradition.‎
Thousands and millions of Muslims memorized the Holy Qur’an accurately in all generations. ‎Whenever there is a difference between huffaz, they always find a third one to consult and ‎verify. The Muslims do not rely on the written word as much as they do on the oral ‎transmission. When the Holy Qur’an is printed, we require two huffaz to read the text and ‎approve it. Usually a Hafiz knows the name of his teacher from whom he heard and ‎committed the Book to his mind, and the name of his teacher’s teacher, a connection that ‎sometimes goes to the Prophet’s companions.‎
The Holy Qur’an was thus received by the first generation of Muslim Ummah (i.e. the ‎companions of the Holy Prophet) from the Prophet in written and verbal forms and was then ‎transmitted to the next generation, and so on, till it reached us. Such a large number of ‎people have participated in this generation to generation transfer of this book that there ‎remains no shadow of doubt about its authenticity. This is known as tawatur.‎
‎ ‎
Well Defined ‎
The Holy Qur’an is a well-defined text with 114 chapters (surahs). Its verses, words and ‎letters have also been counted. There are no parallel apocryphal (fake or dubious) texts of the ‎Qur’an.‎
‎ ‎
Intelligibility of the Holy Qur’an ‎
The Holy Qur’an is in Classical Arabic used by the Quraysh tribe of Mecca. Arabic language ‎has remained an alive language since then, being the mother tongue of millions of Arabs. ‎Modernization has had impact on the language yet the classical Arabic is still widely ‎understood. Sufficient literature in classical Arabic dating before Holy Qur’an also exists and ‎helps us understand the usage and idiom of classical Arabic.‎
‎ ‎
Conclusion ‎
Judging the Holy Qur’an in the light of the criteria discussed in the beginning of this chapter, ‎we find that it is the only religious scripture that comes up to these standards:‎
• The contents of the Holy Qur’an are definite and well defined. There is no dispute ‎whether a certain verse or word is a part of it or not. Its contents are undisputed and ‎are known with certainty. Thus the Holy Qur’an is an original source that is perfectly ‎well-defined. ‎
• The above historical detail of its compilation and preservation shows that the Holy ‎Qur’an is a perfectly authentic and reliable book. It has reached, from the Prophet to ‎our times, through the process of tawatur.‎