[36th Thread: aabhas fiasco of Qur'anic Manuscript]

1.i. @Aabhas24 notorious tagline: 'Respond should you have enough substance'.
However he's plagiarized the thread from https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.answering-islam.org/fileadmin/authors/smith/birmingham_quran.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiy8Mvq37TtAhUGwTgGHS0ODeoQFjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw3ay0gfsRKmsc6A7317zjhG & claimed himself that he can't read Arabic. Besides, he hasn't studied Codicology 1/
ii. Philology, Paleontology. Yet he talks big which reeks of cognitive dissonance.

Firstly,the preservation of Qur'an can be proven through

a.Philosophy of testimony(which has more epistemic weight than MSs).Even Hume can't question it 2/

b.Nazm theory https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333881987967303680?s=20
2. c.Manuscripts
Talking of manuscripts, C-14 dating isn't the only way to examine the text of Birmingham MS. We can do that using UV, MSI, XRF on the text rather than worrying about parchment. No lower text found.

Where is the evidence for your claim? https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333881990056173573?s=20
3. Wrong again. Sadeghi & Mohsen has published on the dating of Sana'a MS & suggested it'd be produced 4 yrs after Rasulallah death or atleast of pre-Uthman standardization due to diff of writings in upper & lower texts. So No! It doesn't predate 600AD. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333881991897305088?s=20
4. Lewis argument is flawed as it's based on assumption since philologically the marks of lower text matches with Zuhayr's inscription of 22AH(642 CE).The parchment doesnt seem to be much older than its lower writing bcz of luxurious material. So No,578CE. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333881993604460544?s=20
5.i. Taha's book on Pre-Islamic Poetry has been refuted by the scholars long before. Even western academics casted aside his work.
2 more reasons to note :--

1. Poetry in Arabic falls into 16 forms but Qur'an structure doesn't fit any of them. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333881995273719808?s=20
ii. 2. Oral formulaic composition debunked Taha's filmsy evidence as mostly poetry used to be transmitted orally in pre-Islamic era.

3. Taha work was based on Cartesian doubt & so it's methodologically flawed.
In fact, Descartes epistemology has circular reasoning fallacy.
6. (I)- First we need to establish with certitude that the dots are even diacritical marks!
The lower text in some ways looks more elaborate like decorations & captions between surahs & the dots are in same ink as the whole text but then we've similar https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882002236346368?s=20
7.i. Calligraphic styles.
(II)- Its variants are similar in nature to those reported of Companion codics. Verse numbering wasn't there in MS in the first place.

The parchment was of expensive material which actually proves that it can't predate 600AD.
The lower text has no
ii. no layout, verse numbering while it's older writing.
But, lower text has surah divisions but upper text lacks it?
Lower text also agrees with non-Uthmanic in case of wording so thereby suggesting it's not later codex but earlier. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882004538945537?s=20
8.i. This is not fun part as in most places,Lower & upper texts don't match but all the manuscripts descended from Uthmanic codex remain the same in their wording, structure.
Thus, the modern print Qur'an which is based on Qur'anic orthography comes very https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882006178918400?s=20
ii. close to reproduce the ancestral script from where later manuscripts descended.
There occured many manuscripts with more dissimilar text types than the Qur'an we've today which is universally accepted to have a common ancestor.

So this is strawman https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882007823077376?s=20
9. Brubaker book has been refuted here
https://www.academia.edu/40931921/Daniel_Alan_Brubaker_Corrections_in_Early_Qur%CA%BE%C4%81nic_Manuscripts_Twenty_Examples_Lovettsville_Think_and_Tell_Press_2019_

In addition @AbuSafiyah1 wrote a refutation to his book
https://twitter.com/AbuSafiyah1/status/1274724373094494208?s=20

Moreover, Brubaker completely ignored that scribal errors don't affect pronounciation nor oral transmission & reading tradition.
10. But Brubaker didn't realize that these 20 minor corrections were already accounted for in older manuscripts & these are just scribal errors, not change in the original text of the Qur'an.
So the whole book is based on assumption & flawed methodology. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882009660256256?s=20
11. Scribal errors ≠ Textual variations. 🤦🏻‍♂️
And there is not called 'change in textual pattern' when 20/21 words in the whole copy of Qur'an are omitted or allegedly added or written over.
While the earlier manuscripts has preserved all those omissions. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882011304427521?s=20
12. This tells us nothing as different companions used to possess their codices, oral transmission was widespread & impressive & careful copying from the archetype with orthographic idiosyncrasies that are consistently reproduced across early manuscripts. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882012977876992?s=20
13. This is so embarrassing for @Aabhas24
The codex Mashhad which is of 1st c. AH has >90% Quran has same text type, ignoring folios that contain later kufic hand.
Other manuscripts of Uthmanic type bear the same resemblance.

So how's this an argument?
https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882019319668737?s=20
14. Alif isn't a big issue.
For ex - سلام(today) vs سلم(Rasulullah time)
Or سمٰوٰت vs سموت doesn't change anything for the reader back then.

This is not spelling as the pronounciation would remain same.

Color vs colour.
You don't pronounce differently. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882021555236864?s=20
15. Again, same mistake.
Diacritical marks are added to pronounce the words easily. It won't change the structure of consonant nor meaning.
كتابا vs كتاباً
won't make any difference in reading.

Like, jail vs gaol.
Similar meaning, different form. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882023388200960?s=20
16. It's written يشرك/yushriku in the manuscript.🤷🏻‍♂️

Also, for someone who said I can't read Arabic, how does he know the difference between يشرك vs تشرك ?
Moreover, these are different recitations(al-Qira'at) which is a different subject in Ulum al Quran.
https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882025145626625?s=20
17. The verse numbering aren't there in the folios AT ALL.

Damn! This is what happens when you just copy-paste. 🤦🏻‍♂️

For the present Qur'an, all of the text regardless of numbering still matches with the text in the manuscript as well as later MSs. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882026848444416?s=20
18. As mentioned by @husamshahid88
The letter back then & now are still same.

Warsh and Hafs don't differ in letters but are the main canonical methods of reciting the Qur'an. https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882028433973249?s=20
19. Qur'an is complete, perfect & unchanged since it doesn't depend on رسم/script but more on قرأء/recitation & massive transmission of the same Text with the structure & coherence remain the same.
Qur'an itself says upon Allah is compilation & recitation.
https://twitter.com/Aabhas24/status/1333882030254219264?s=20
My personal opinion :-

The Birmingham manuscript seems to be descendant of Uthmanic type text.
However, if Uthmanic story is to be believed then the type script is itself pre-Uthmanic & must have copied it from Hafsa.

Birmingham manuscript could be Hafsa mushaf.
No conflict!
This is a refutation to aabhas thread on Birmingham manuscript; the final blow to his plagiarism & crap!

@husamshahid88 @its_huz @Cometics_ @ScheibeFuhrer
@IamKarwan @UrbanXpat @MallickZ08 @Falak_Kahkashan @NoorainAhmed1 @subiism @NeoTiger_ @The_Merynism @MogalAadil @monerief
A thread on Birmingham manuscript in response to aabhas

@Amatur_Rahman1 @nnigarkhanam @Tayyaba_80 @DesignerFaqeeh @SitaraMThomas @HumraSayeed3 @blissfehmi @zoyarasul
@Abomination_Jk @Fatima_Z0hra @nazmaaman @KhanShirin0
You can follow @Burairss.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
Those who think consciousness raising & movement building are disconnected, or even a distraction from electoral politics have not paid attention to the history of social change.In this thread, we
Read more
The 2020s will be known as the Remote Work decadeA few predictions of what is likely to emerge[ a thread ] Third Space: Office and Working from Home will
Read more
1/29: Have you ever had a concept explained to you that helps frame complex issues you’ve been wrestling with and opens your eyes to new possibilities? A concept that I
Read more
By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.