@PhDniX @AbuSafiyah1 @AverageJoeHamON
@JosephLumbard
@pillar6741

I was asked for my feedback on the issue of the preservation of the Qur'an.

First, I purposely don't comment on everything I read or everything people bring to my attention. Unfortunately, some people don't want to truly have a meaningful conversation.
I will discuss some of the Important points mentioned in the thread.

Before I begin, I would like to thank our friend @PhDniX for his efforts in trying to clarify some of the most complex issues in the field. He does that while trying his best to stay neutral and respectful of other views.

1. All these issues that people keep bringing up were known to the early Muslim community and they never were an issue for them. After all, it was the Muslim scholars who documented all the Sahabah readings that differ from the 'Uthmanic Mushafs.

2. Is it possible to prove that every single reading is attributable to the prophet?

I already addressed this issue in this thread: https://twitter.com/ShAmmarKhatib1/status/1299476056097914882?s=19

@PhDniX said the following:
"The point of faith is that the hundreds of different readings generated by these readers all were at one point uttered by the prophet. There's just no way to prove that...

it's possible, and in some cases even likely that he pronounced some words in variant ways... but which ones?"

This is related to the question of wether or not all the variations were recited by the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ?
I usually like to use the terms recited/taught/approved for a reason.
In some cases, only general approval of the Prophet is required to validate a reading.

Can you imagine if the Arabs who spoke with the dialect of Imalah would seek the permission of the Prophet every single time a new Surah/verses were revealed?!
I personally think the dialect-based readings which are many only required a general approval of the Prophet.

Examples:
الفتح
الإمالة
التقليل
الإشمام...
السراط
الصراط
الزراط
رسْلنا
رسُلنا
البُيوت
البِيوت
Etc...

The differences in this category don't have any impact on the meaning.

This was all under the license of the 7 ahruf. The main purpose of this kind of permission was to make the Qur'an more accessible and easier to recite and memorise since the Arabs at that time spoke with many different lughat (dialects).

For more details on this part, please refer to the section:
"Were all variations recited by the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ?"
in my published paper on Yaqeen:
https://yaqeeninstitute.org/ammar-khatib/the-origins-of-the-variant-readings-of-the-quran/

3. Did all Muslim scholars agree on the understanding of the concept of preservation of the Qur'an?

Short answer:
No. Some scholars were flexible regarding this issue while other scholars were more strict.

Some people keep bringing up the issue of lost ahruf/abandoned ahruf (the ahruf that were not included in the 'Uthmanic Mushafs)... they're implying that the Qur'an we have today is incomplete.

These people fail to understand the whole concept of the license of the 7 ahruf and the fluidity in how the Qur'an was recited.

Many early scholars didn't have any issues with the theory of abandoned ahruf. I have explained this in many threads.

The Prophet said that this Qur'an was revealed in 7 different ahruf, so recite whichever one is easy for you.
He also said that each one of the 7 ahruf is sufficient.
(فأيُّما حَرْفٍ قَرَؤُوا عليه فقَدْ أَصَابُوا)
(فَاقْرَؤُوا ما تَيَسَّرَ منه)

When we want to discuss what the preservation of the Quran means, we go back to the scholars of Islam. Muslim scholars have known about these variant readings of companions for centuries and never said it compromised the preservation of the Quran in the slightest.

What's next? Are people going to start asking if we have audio recordings of the Prophet teaching all these different readings!
Even if we somehow discover a Qur'anic manuscript of the entire Qur'an which dates back to the Prophet and it agrees with the 'Uthmanic Mushafs,

skeptics will still say: okay but this still doesn't prove that the Qur'an is divine = from Allah...

The point is that this type of discussions with radical skeptics is pointless.

I always say that for the radical skeptic, no amount of proof will ever be sufficient.

"Even if We had sent them the angels, made the dead speak to them, and assembled before their own eyes every sign they demanded, they still would not have believed, unless God so-willed, but most of them are ignorant [of this] )."

Qur'an: 6:111

"Had your Lord so willed, all ˹people˺ on earth would have certainly believed, every single one of them!
Would you then force people to become believers?"

Qur'an: 10:99

4. Received the following question:

"How do we as Muslims understand the meaning of the preservation of the Holy Qur'an...I am honestly trying to understand it as a Muslim"

I often hear the statement that the Qur'an was preserved harakah-by-harakah and letter-by-letter = meaning that every single valid reading of the Qur'an was preserved and included in the 'Uthmanic Mushafs.

Let's now examine the above statement:

1. The Harakat (Fathah, Dhammah and Kasrah) were a later invention. So definitely they were NOT around since the time of the Prophet and when 'Uthman and his committee copied the Mushafs.

2. As I explained before, many early Muslim scholars were of the opinion that the 'Uthmanic Mushafs didn't include all the 7 ahruf because they were optional.
This means that some Ahruf were left out during the time of 'Uthman.

The famous ten readings we know today represent only a limited assortment of the variations that existed prior to the ʿUthmanic codex.

In the light of the above explanation, it is incorrect to say that the Qur'an was preserved harakah-by-harakah and letter-by-letter.

As Muslims, we believe that the Qur'an is the book of Allah that was sent to Prophet Muhammad as the final revelation to humanity.
We have enough data to prove that the Qur'an has been preserved since the time of 'Uthman.

Further back than him, we don't have Qur'anic manuscripts that date back to the time of the Prophet which can confirm the authenticity of the 'Uthmanic Mushafs.

However, We have the Qur'anic oral tradition where we recite and rehearse the Qur'an daily the same way as we were taught by our teachers. This unbroken tradition was practiced since the time of the Prophet.

The successively transmitted uninterrupted living oral tradition has always been the primary factor in establishing the validity of one’s recitation.

We also believe that the license of the 7 ahruf came from Allah. This is supported by the hadiths about the 7 ahruf.

So we have the following:
- The hadiths concerning the license of the 7 ahruf.
- The oral tradition.
- The Qur'anic manuscripts which attest to the authenticity of the 'Uthmanic text.

This is what the statement of (word-by-word preservation of the Qur'an) is based on.

That should be sufficient for us as Muslims.

I received some inquiries about point #4

I said the following:
"It is incorrect to say that the Qur'an was preserved harakah-by-harakah and letter-by-letter".

However, I explained what I mean by saying that.
I discussed it in the light of two things:
1. The history of the invention of Harakat.
2. The issue of wether or not the 'Uthmanic Mushafs contained all the 7 ahruf.

I think the statement is not correct because it doesn't take into account the above points.
Anyways, It all depends on the intended implications of such statement.

All scholars agree that the Qur'an was preserved. However, what that entails is a matter of disagreement among scholars. As I said before, many scholars were flexible on the issue of the 'Uthmanic Mushafs not containing all the ahruf.

The problem is that people use these different statements concerning the preservation of the Qur'an and some might not know the implications of such statements.