Ameen brother thank you dear admin for your hard work and clarifying this topic and debunking the nonsense by muqdima channel❤ may Allah reward you for speaking out the truth!
I replied to my previous comment on your video that I am going to upload a response but somehow my comment got disappeared, I tried a couple more times. At first I thought that you were deleting my comment but later I came to know that there was some problem going on with YT and my comments were disappearing on other videos as well. Anyway I am glad that you watched it.
@@essamarkhoun95he did it as an academic and historian point of view... Not a scholarly way to teach people about islam... He cleared any biases and taught transparency... Nothing wrong in that
after 6 days, consecutive searching for best video, finally my algorithm suggested me this video...Allah is great, i searched for truth and i finally find it..Thankyou keep it up your work..Plz dont go for propagandist videos..even we dont know how ignorant they are and what are their intentions.
@@Haqeeqat Brother Alhamdulelah people like you have always raised our heads with pride. Your critique is based on available and observable facts of this manuscript as well as based on sources from Islamic literature. The astonishing fact is that these objections are not new to Islam and The Qurani. and have already been answered in the very times of the prophet and companions as clearly found in Islamic traditions. May Allah be pleased with you and give you the strength to present islam in it's TRUE spirit Amin
As much as the content is good, the language used and how the author of this video addresses other RU-vid user is totally unacceptable and far from academic standards. Even if someone is in wrong or presents points which have no factual ground, there is no need to be rude and abusive. Good quality material, very poor - to say at least - presentation. This is not how a Muslim talks about his fellow brother.
al-Muqaddimah is a secularist, which puts him out of the fold of Islam as in Islam, Shariah is followed at all times. Also his doubt on the authenticity of the Quran is enough to takfir him.
The title of video "The sana'a palimpsest: between lies, imaginations, opinion and the truth".. However, in this video itself, the narrator uses hearsay (or hadith) to prove certain narrative. So, the complete title of this video should be "The sana'a palimpsest: between lies, imaginations, opinion, truth and hearsay".
It's easy for someone who hasn't studied the science of hadith to call it "hearsay" (which is actually the antonym of the word "Sahih Hadith") But, take it from someone who has studied it that it's much more reliable than manuscripts, all the history you've been taught and all the news that you consume on a daily basis. Secondly, the hadith is quoted to provide Islamic narrative, where the people who first received the revelation are the ones describing how they received it. So, even if you don't want to take it as hadith per se, you can take it as documented history (still not hearsay).
You can see some of the examples of Qira'at in early manuscripts in this video for example: @ 25:10 : "فتبينوا" in manuscript Arabe 331 Filio 41 (verso) showing Qira'ah of Hafs 'An 'Asim, while "فتثبتوا" in manuscript DAM 01-29.1 Folio 29 (verso) showing Qira'ah of al-Kisai and Hamzah. And even The Sana'a Palimpsest in Maktabah al-Sahrqiyyah @ 55:25 is showing Qira'ah of Warsh 'An Nafi'. To find Qira'at for a particular verse you can go to Quranpedia. And for the opinions of scholars about the Qira'at, I have recommended a book @ 1:21:45. Perhaps, I will do a video about it as well later, but for now I have some other important projects that are coming so stay tuned. JazakAllahu Khairan
@@Haqeeqat Jazakallahu khairan brother your channel will be famous soon inshallah I specially like the last and latest information you share in this video. Keep it up brother👍
Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great The great video. Sir how do you know all these? your talent is amazing. I just wish I knew any way of learning all about islimic history and all. This video deserves more views. Very informative.
Informative but overly aggressive, there is room for everyone to learn and share knowledge. Kudos to Almoqaddima for sharing your video and being open to criticism and to you for the effort in the video
He was the most knowledgeable "in writing the text of Qur'an" as al-Dhahabi said: "زيدا كان يكتب الوحي لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فهو إمام في الرسم، وابن مسعود فإمام في الأداء" Zaid used to write the divine revelation for the Prophet of Allah - may the blessings of Allah be upon him - so, he is imam in rasm (text) and Ibn Mas'ud is imam of adā' (recitation). سير أعلام النبلاء ط الرسالة ، ج 1 ، ص 488 Dr. Ghānim Qaddūrī Hamad explains it further in his book: رسم المصحف: دراسة لغوية تاريخية ، ص 114
You said never trust things published by others but get first hand info.... now tell me where did you get all this stuff you have been narrating... had you visited those persons and Sana manuscript.?
Assalaamu alaykum What do you say about people who claim that the Science of Hadith and the grading of narrators was invented too late, which means we cannot possibly know about the biographies and reliability of early narrators. What do you think about this?
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاتة Brother Haqeeqat, you have done a great job. I have some comments I hope you take with an open heart: 1- in 27:55 you say the bible scholars didn't know to distinguish between a camel and a heavy. It comes to my mind the verse in Surah Al-A'raf7:40 where scholars have different interpretations based on the way of reciting the verse. Can you clarify more about this? Because I didn't see the difference. 2- I wish you put the references to increase your authenticity and make it more academic. جزاك الله خير
وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته I appreciate your comment, and I know that Dr. Ali Mansour Kayali made a video where he made the claim that even the word mentioned in the Qur'an is "Jummal" (Heavy rope) and not "Jamal" (Camel). And that there is a Qira'ah reported that supports the claim. And our brother Naif Alajmey made a response where he refuted this claim. If you know Arabic you can watch his video: هل المراد بالجمل البعير أم الحبل الغليظ ؟ د. نايف العجمي I am also going to post a video in response to a video titled, The Wicked Bible by hochelaga where at time @6:32 he repeated the claim and preferred the word "Heavy rope" over "Camel", and in my video I will prove that the original word was "Camel", and the expression of camel or elephant passing through the eye of a needle was common among the Jews. And the video will be filled with references In Sha' Allah. جزاك الله خيرا
Taking into consideration all the internet sensationalism around the Qur'an, I thank God that we have objective Muslims who approach these issues correctly.
15:48 As far as I can tell, that is meant to be depicting Gabriel revealing the Qur'an to Prophet Muhammad. What do you mean "it's just a weird and creepy painting"? I also really dislike how you blurred the videos of Dr. Eleanore Cellard and Dr. Asma Hilali? Regardless of how you theologically understand veiling, it must always be the woman's choice. Both women clearly do not choose to veil themselves. Overall good video, you clearly have a depth of knowledge on the subject. As others have said, this could be better communicated in a discourse if you left out the snide personal attacks and grandstanding.
@@ShahidTheFuzzy Yes but it’s still depicting what it’s depicting, and I don’t see how being heterodox makes something weird and creepy. I especially wouldn’t want to hear something that biased from someone engaging in scholarship.
@@dresdi Of course he can, I can't reach through the monitor and interact with his editing process. I'm just pointing out that it's disrespectful to the women.
how is it disrespectful? he's not restricting their right to not wear the veil, he is choosing to edit the video for use in HIS VIDEO. if you think editing someone to blur their face is disrespectful you must be EXTREMELY sensitive. If someone chose to walk around naked in broad daylight, would the news report not blur their genitals out of respect? @@LoudWaffle
I really enjoy this field of study! I am currently studying Archaeology, however, it is mostly analysis of artefacts and geological aspects, with little to no focus on manuscripts and the likes of it. Should I switch to History instead?
It is actually a good sign that people publish videos like this. Yes...its dogmatic, heavy handed and a tad abrasive but thats the wild and wackie world of scholarship....and Islam is a relative new-comer to the arena. The Holy Quran is in need of serious dissection in order to foster stronger belief in the core tenets of the faith and not some superstitious attachments to documents, manner of dress, dietary laws and economics. Like the examinations of the Christian and Judaic scriptures, scholarship will address the conclusions made by the Arab religious right over the centuries and will polish the impact of the Word of God for the guidance it is to a closer relationship with Him. FWIW.
My question is if all the original documents are readily available in Yemen including the microfilms and the photos why lock them up and not allow scholars to study them further objectively? Personally I dont trust memory works (recitations) as a source of scholarly work.
mashallah, what a great video, your style of detailed references and addressing claims point by point is great, this channel is a gem, can't wait for future videos.
Asalam 3laikum RahmatAllahi ta 3la wa barakatu JazakAllah Khair for this well put together video, I had just watched Al Muqqadimah's video on this as I was interested in the implications of the sannaa manuscript. My Christian friend was trying to tell me that the Quran was "Cleaned up" by the Uthmani committee, a bit ridiculous but with my limited knowledge I wasnt able to adequately respond.
Great effort and explanation , thoroughly researched , I watched the Al Muqdama video before yours long ago, completely biased and propaganda, being fake liberals and was waiting for something like this, you destroyed his video completely, but you sound very insultive, mocking over aggressive and direct , you don't have to be, , don't bring your emotions to videos rather keep it fully researched and share knowledge with respect
I think arabs can read it wothout dots etc its easy even i could read some words without looking at the verses with dots etc but if i compared the pages from the manuscripts with the pages today with dots etc, i could read it actually ❤
1:06:11 you said about al arzatul akhira the last revelaltion revealed to prophet Muhammad ﷺ in ramazan that was then recited to zaid ibn thabit Is there any source for it that has isnad going back to prophet or sahaba? Jazakallahu khairan
The two books I've recommended by Dr. Muhammad bin Abd al-Rahman Alttasan has detailed discussion on this topic with all the narrations and their isnad along with their authenticity.
@user-ut3tt8ew8m The term "original" is irrelevant for the Qur'an because it implies that there was something from which copies were made. But that's not the case for the Qur'an because it is the verbatim word of God, orally transmitted to us exactly as it was revealed. So, the proper term is "preserved" or "unchanged." The Qur'an with all its readings/recitations is preserved and unchanged word for word, letter for letter. The minute scribal mistakes in some manuscripts doesn't mean anything, as none of them is supported by data. However, you can say that we don't have the original Torah, or Bible, for that matter. For example, the oldest manuscript of the New Testament is the size of a credit card and was written in the 2nd century CE by an anonymous author. Also, the Bible is not preserved by any means. It is changed upside down and inside out. All of what is stated above is the truth, backed up by evidence, and not a lie.
@@Haqeeqat IS there any Book that shows the différence between the lower text and the othmanic quran verse by verse in arabic !? If yes send me a link or something i want to read it
@@Haqeeqat are you sure it's 50 years !? Bcs i Heard in video that there is a high probability that the same person who wrote the upper layer IS the same who wrote the lower layer ...and i Heard from another video that the Time between the two layers is short ...i hope you give the reference where you found that it's 50 years
25:20 you show different writings with different pronunciations and called them all valid ( of course without any proof). My question is … which one is the one that is in the Quran that is in heaven?
I have given enough proof for all the different recitations accepted by the Muslims, and not just the ones shown @25:20, but you just don't seem to care. Secondly, the question you've asked is a very old question, it has already been answered more than 4 years ago by Abu Umar al-Bahith in his video: الرد على سؤال جريء: 546 هل لم يتغير أي حرف في القرآن؟ ج2 And much before him by Ali al-Qari in his book Mirqat al-Mafatih with evidence that all the seven Ahruf are written inside al-Lawh al-Mahfuz. And lastly, it would be better if you stick to the subject of the video as this is not the video explaining seven Ahruf and Qira'at in detail, as I have mentioned in the video.
there is no space left for argue...when i will say the Quran was already compiled by Umar and Abu Bakr...it was already preserved and was safely kept by Hazrat Hafza and we have direct words of Allah...Uthman sent copies of it to different states after confirmation of each verse from Hufaz...so it must not be concern of our that anyone had just personal copy of Quran in Yamen whome Uthman couldn't reach.
The Gospels are not different stories, they are different eyewitness accounts of the same event with minor (Not contradictory) variations we expect to see from different observers of the same event. All the so called contradictions in the Gospels is easily solvable and all the Gospels complement each other in such a way that they prove each other's authenticity.
Tell that to Dan McClellan spitting on your shitty gospels. The contradictions that are found in the gospels are solved through sheer apologetics. Meaning, apologists come up with guesstimates to solve a certain case so that they can validate the belief of other Cringianity believers. This same accusation doesn't stand against Islam because we interpret the Quranic verses in light of the tradition, also known as the Hadith. You, on the other hand interpret your verses in light of later doctrines, which begs the question whether the interpretations of your books are accurate in the first place (Hence why scholars differ on so many verses, and don't settle upon on one understanding). The Bible is a joke, it contains individually written books which Christians, being Christians are forced to believe are all univocal with each other, when they are not. Which is why Christians get room to fit the Trinity in. Here's a demonstration: Xtian: My Church says Jesus is God. Muslim: But Acts states that Jesus was a man through whom God did miracles, so how can he be God? Xtian: NO! But revelations states that Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega, the first and last! Which means he's both God and man, this is evidence for the Trinity! Nah. It's just one author speaking from one individual perspective while also using traditional understandings here and there.
A script written over another script is being given authentication. It was an abandoned manuscript and to draw too many conclusions from it is fallacy at best.
That's correct and that's why I gave the analogy of a gamer's channel, however, some "Muslim Researchers" on YT are so much indulged in the works of orientalists whose sole purpose is to spread doubts among the Muslims. That's why I had to make this video response and cover the topic from all aspects.