Read on Twitter
Very interesting thread(s) about the Qur'an. Yes it could be pre-Uthmanic. If it is it could be Hafs's/Zayd's copy as at least one academic said.
What caught me in some of your tweets is similar to here. The "if Uthamic story is believed" & y not earlier?
I have some thoughts https://twitter.com/Burairss/status/1334967401134215168
What caught me in some of your tweets is similar to here. The "if Uthamic story is believed" & y not earlier?
I have some thoughts https://twitter.com/Burairss/status/1334967401134215168
First two main points;
1 - Yes Uthmanic story did happen
2 - Manscrupts were all copied from archetype material
But, in terms of the historical record we have two glaring commissions in terms of the story in the Uthmanic story.
These are important for a historical narrative
1 - Yes Uthmanic story did happen
2 - Manscrupts were all copied from archetype material
But, in terms of the historical record we have two glaring commissions in terms of the story in the Uthmanic story.
These are important for a historical narrative
1- no evidence of mass burning of pre-Uthmanic material. No such widespread narrations
2- No narrations of mass copying from ONLY Uthman's four exemplars he sent out. No people queuing up to copy because they destroyed their first copies.
We can add to that;
2- No narrations of mass copying from ONLY Uthman's four exemplars he sent out. No people queuing up to copy because they destroyed their first copies.
We can add to that;
-Material used was valuable, hence why burn when you can write over? So again little material evidence of this type of destruction of pre-Uthmanic script. Only Sana'
- Uthman's copies are all very quickly lost track of. No one knows with certainty what happened to them
- Uthman's copies are all very quickly lost track of. No one knows with certainty what happened to them
The Uthmanic story itself says his text was based on the earlier Zayd collection, itself based on material in circulation in Madina, itself all having one origin point; scribes writing it down in front of the Prophet/in his presence.
All of the above needs to be included
So ...
All of the above needs to be included
So ...
I have a working theory.
Since the Madina material Zayd used remained in circulation, it must have been copied and travelled in the direction of Muslim movement. From Madina to Syria, Madina to Basra, Basra to Kufa.
Uthman's actual influence could be less than what we think
Since the Madina material Zayd used remained in circulation, it must have been copied and travelled in the direction of Muslim movement. From Madina to Syria, Madina to Basra, Basra to Kufa.
Uthman's actual influence could be less than what we think
What could could be more important is regional progression and copying.
That could better explain the (at least indication) data Sidky showed where it isn't 1 codex copied three times, but 1 copied twice, then from Basra is copied Kufa and another Basra. Plus influences/contami
That could better explain the (at least indication) data Sidky showed where it isn't 1 codex copied three times, but 1 copied twice, then from Basra is copied Kufa and another Basra. Plus influences/contami
I ran this idea by Van Putten and Sidky. Both disagree that it is a possible scenario and adamant that all existent "Uthmanic" manuscripts can not be descended other than from Uthman's four exemplars
(and another point is the lack of 100% certainty on how many Uthman sent out)
(and another point is the lack of 100% certainty on how many Uthman sent out)
That might be fine for pure academics like themselves not wanting to take an extra step or put forward positive arguments without material evidence. Yet material evidence can fit many scenarios, not all valid arguments need it, e.g deductive, and lack of evidence is important
Especially the lack of evidence where you would expect to find some in a historical record that has so much. Where
1-Is the mass destruction of Qur'anic material in circulation? (or many "lower text" examples?)
2-The mass copying from just 4 exemplars
3-Are Uthman's masaahif??
1-Is the mass destruction of Qur'anic material in circulation? (or many "lower text" examples?)
2-The mass copying from just 4 exemplars
3-Are Uthman's masaahif??
On this latter Sidky put together an excellent thread tracing the history of Uthman's own copy. Very sparse information though
What Imam Malik said by his time is correct; it was lost.
No one knows with certainty where any of them went.
What does that tell us? Just "nothing"?
What Imam Malik said by his time is correct; it was lost.
No one knows with certainty where any of them went.
What does that tell us? Just "nothing"?
Anyway, I put a lot more in a Reddit post which is more like a "thoughts dump" ... something for me to add and edit to and remember what I was thinking.
If you are interested it is in the link below
Salaams https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/jy76z0/on_regionality_of_quranic_codices_video_evidence/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
If you are interested it is in the link below
Salaams https://www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/jy76z0/on_regionality_of_quranic_codices_video_evidence/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
PS: again to be clear, I'm aiming for a pre-Uthmanic standardization argument, not a "no-Uthman influence at all" argument. He was part of it, but did not have the power nor logistics to control all Qur'anic material in circulation.
That material must have had an influence.
That material must have had an influence.
