TWO STAGES OF ABRAHAAM/IBRAHEEM.
-
Could you post a link of this manuscript, thanks in advance.
Sana'a manuscripts (UNESCO) downloaded they took it down (see page 111)
https//drive.google.com/file/d/1AqCXcBIkF3fq4RfDVUc3w3aeqzBZUFie/view
peace
-
Salaam,
IN THE HOLY QURAN I HAD NOTICED AND LATER RESEARCHED THAT ONLY IN SURAH AL-BAQARAH IBRAHEEM IS SPELLED AS (ABRAHAAM) WHILST IN THE OTHER SURAH'S HE IS ONLY MENTIONED AS IBRAHEEM. THERE IS A CLEAR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BOTH STAGES I FIND THIS INTEREESTING.
-This particular spelling of the word Ibraheem without (ya) in chapter 2 is the case in the " Hafs reading (qira'at Hafs)". (the majority of muslims 95 % follow this recitation)
- In the " Warsh reading (qira'at Warsh)", the word Ibraheem is spelled with (ya) in all occurrences. (About 3 %of muslims follow this recitation)
Some opinions about the qira'at (reading, recitation)
http//quransmessage.com/articles/seven%20readings%20FM3.htm
https//www.islamic-awareness.org/quran/text/qiraat/hafs.htmlWarsh recitation with English translation
http//www.quranflash.com/books/Warsh1/?en#sthash.aRVhBOGN.SctN6kSh.dpbsPeace, in oldest manuscripts spelled same with (ya) e.g. 22603 Ibrahim
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/260?handschrift=163
https//s15.postimg.cc/7wg2beth7/ch2v259-266-2.jpg
- This manuscript shows more resemblance with the Warsh reading (qira'at Warsh)",
I have verified the spelling of some words in this manuscript which are different between Warsh and Hafs.
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/128/handschrift/163
2132
Manuscript last line Warsh Hafs
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/5/vers/53/handschrift/163
553
Manuscript line 4 Warsh Hafs554
Manuscript line 7 Warsh Hafs
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/9/vers/107/handschrift/163
9107
Manuscript line 4 Warsh Hafs
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/18/vers/36/handschrift/163
1836
Manuscript line 10 Warsh Hafs
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/72/vers/16?handschrift=163
7216
Manuscript line 21 Warsh Hafs
- Other manuscripts shows more resemblance with the Hafs reading (qira'at Hafs)".
Example, this manuscript
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?action=post;quote=418009;topic=9610294.0
This is my understanding so far, i could be wrong.
The most important is what God says about the preservation of the Qur'an
LiteralWord by Word
159 Indeed, We We have sent down the Reminder, and indeed, We of it (are) surely Guardians.
4141 Indeed, those who disbelieve in the Reminder when it comes to them. And indeed, it (is) surely a Book mighty.
4142 Not comes to it the falsehood from before it and not from behind it. A Revelation from (the) All-Wise, (the) Praiseworthy.8521 Nay! It (is) a Quran Glorious,
8522 In a Tablet, Guarded.Muhammad Asad
159 Behold, it is We Ourselves who have bestowed from on high, step by step, this reminder? and, behold, it is We who shall truly guard it .
4141 Verily, they who are bent on denying the truth of this reminder as soon as it comes to them - for, behold, it is a sublime divine writ
4142 no falsehood can ever attain to it openly, and neither in a stealthy manner, bestowed from on high by One who is truly wise, ever to be praised.8521 Nay, but this is a discourse sublime,
8522 upon an imperishable tablet .M. M. Pickthall
159 Lo! We, even We, reveal the Reminder, and lo! We verily are its Guardian.
4141 Lo! those who disbelieve in the Reminder when it cometh unto them (are guilty), for lo! it is an unassailable Scripture.
4142 Falsehood cannot come at it from before it or from behind it. (It is) a revelation from the Wise, the Owner of Praise8521 Nay, but it is a glorious Qur'an.
8522 On a guarded tablet.Yusuf Ali
159 We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).
4141 Those who reject the Message when it comes to them (are not hidden from Us). And indeed it is a Book of exalted power.
4142 No falsehood can approach it from before or behind it It is sent down by One Full of Wisdom, Worthy of all Praise.8521 Day, this is a Glorious Qur'an,
8522 (Inscribed) in a Tablet Preserved! -
Salaam,
-This particular spelling of the word Ibraheem without (ya) in chapter 2 is the case in the " Hafs reading (qira'at Hafs)". (the majority of muslims 95 % follow this recitation)
- In the " Warsh reading (qira'at Warsh)", the word Ibraheem is spelled with (ya) in all occurrences. (About 3 %of muslims follow this recitation)
Some opinions about the qira'at (reading, recitation)
http//quransmessage.com/articles/seven%20readings%20FM3.htm
https//www.islamic-awareness.org/quran/text/qiraat/hafs.htmlWarsh recitation with English translation
http//www.quranflash.com/books/Warsh1/?en#sthash.aRVhBOGN.SctN6kSh.dpbs- This manuscript shows more resemblance with the Warsh reading (qira'at Warsh)",
I have verified the spelling of some words in this manuscript which are different between Warsh and Hafs.
Peace -- not sure when Warsh/Hafs (7) revelations absurdness started and trust the oldest.
99.99999% of majority is clueless e.g. meaning of kalala or son/s get 2x the daughter, etc.
-
Salaam,
This is a part of your post from
https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9610157.msg424062#msg424062... likewise Abraham consistently spelled in every chapter then ~100-150 years later there was a revision, numerous alif's added, verses rearranged, etc.
Peace Noon,
In this manuscript( arabe331) and before what you call " ...~100-150 years later... "
the name Abraham is spelled without the letter "ya " in chapter 2 in 12 occurrences and in one occurrence Abraham with "ya "In other chapters the name Abraham is spelled with the letter "ya " in 3 occurrences and without the letter "ya " in 2 occurrences
The rest of the manuscript ( Marcel 3, A 6959 + A 6990, E16264 R) is not available online(afaik) to verify the other occurrences of the name Abraham, and (Ms. Leiden Or. 14.545b + Or. 14.545c) don't contain the name Abraham.
More information about this manuscript
Date
1st century of hijra.
Noseda included this manuscript in his table of hijz manuscripts from 1st century hijra. Giving information about a hijz manuscript kept at the Universiteitsbibliothek Leida (i.e., University Library, Lieden), he does not mark any dash to indicate the contents of the manuscript. One may surmise that perhaps Noseda had only limited information concerning this manuscript at the time of writing and made note of the existence of the manuscript. However, it was Nabia Abbott in 1939, who first classified two folios from this codex at the Oriental Institute, Chicago, to be from 1st/2nd century AH.
Originally believed to date from the latter part of the eight century, the folio of MS Leiden Or. 14.545b has now been subject to radiocarbon analysis under the auspices of the Corpus Coranicum project and has been dated to 652-763 CE with 95.4% probability, with that range being broken down into a 89.3% probability that it dates to between 652 and 694 CE and a 6.1% probability that it dates to between 747 and 763 CE.
Size & Folios
41.3 cm x 34.8 cm. There are 19 lines per page. Manuscript on parchment.
This manuscript has 87 folios = 56 (Arabe 331, Biblioth?que Nationale, Paris) + 26 (Marcel 3, National Library of Russia, St. Petersburg) + 2 (Ms. Leiden Or. 14.545b + Or. 14.545c, University Library, Leiden) + 2 (A 6959 + A 6990, Oriental Institute, Chicago) + 1 (E16264 R, University of Pennsylvania Museum). The extant folios contain ~28.5% of the text of the Qur'an.
....
https//www.islamic-awareness.org/quran/text/mss/arabe331.html
Manuscript( arabe331)
Chapter 2
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/125/handschrift/32
https//i.imgur.com/IWRORSB.png
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/133/handschrift/32
... ...
https//i.imgur.com/namqoBK.pnghttps//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/180/handschrift/32/flip/1
https//i.imgur.com/pBVUJFf.png
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/258/handschrift/32
https//i.imgur.com/RAwSMgr.png
Other chapters
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/15/vers/51/handschrift/32
https//i.imgur.com/cK4MB90.png
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/16/vers/120/handschrift/32
https//i.imgur.com/SciWTsY.png
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/51/vers/24/handschrift/32
https//i.imgur.com/jI5DwJb.png
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/53/vers/37/handschrift/32
https//i.imgur.com/AoKU8ej.png
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/57/vers/26/handschrift/32
https//i.imgur.com/lgtY5V0.png
Allah knows best.
..............................................................................
-
Corpus Coranicum project and has been dated to 652-763 CE with 95.4% probability
peace, again use "the oldest" manuscripts e.g. this one spread across two libraries.
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/20/vers/1?handschrift=281
Birmingham, Cadbury Research Library (University of Birmingham) Islamic Arabic 1572
9 sheets - 33.3 x 24.5 cm.mm - fol. 1 and 7 (= 1572a) 568-645, 2 (95.4%) ; fol. 2-6, 8 and 9 (= 1572b) before 750 (?) Parchment - Cadbury Research Library (University of Birmingham) (Birmingham, UK) - 004 129-004 152; 004 153-005 027; 006 074-006 122; 006 122-006 143; 018 017-018 031; 019 091-020 030 - 22-30 lineshttps//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/11/vers/75?handschrift=158
Paris, National Library of France Arabic 328 (c)
16 sheets - 333x245mm - Radiocarbon measurement of the Birmingham Fragment Islamic Arabic 1572 (a), originally from the same code 568-645 CE (95.4%) - parchment - Biblioth?que nationale de France (Paris, FR) - 010 035 009-010 048 007; 010 049 000-011 110 000; 020 099 000-020 113 000; 020 117 000-020 128 000; 020 131 000-022 058 000; 022 062 000-023 027 000 - 24-25 lineshttps//i.postimg.cc/SNvMWQXx/ch11v70-84.jpg
-
Salaam,
peace, again use "the oldest" manuscripts e.g. this one spread across two libraries.
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/20/vers/1?handschrift=281
Birmingham, Cadbury Research Library (University of Birmingham) Islamic Arabic 1572
9 sheets - 33.3 x 24.5 cm.mm - fol. 1 and 7 (= 1572a) 568-645, 2 (95.4%) ; fol. 2-6, 8 and 9 (= 1572b) before 750 (?) Parchment - Cadbury Research Library (University of Birmingham) (Birmingham, UK) - 004 129-004 152; 004 153-005 027; 006 074-006 122; 006 122-006 143; 018 017-018 031; 019 091-020 030 - 22-30 lineshttps//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/11/vers/75?handschrift=158
Paris, National Library of France Arabic 328 (c)
16 sheets - 333x245mm - Radiocarbon measurement of the Birmingham Fragment Islamic Arabic 1572 (a), originally from the same code 568-645 CE (95.4%) - parchment - Biblioth?que nationale de France (Paris, FR) - 010 035 009-010 048 007; 010 049 000-011 110 000; 020 099 000-020 113 000; 020 117 000-020 128 000; 020 131 000-022 058 000; 022 062 000-023 027 000 - 24-25 linesPeace Noon,
Topic is about the spelling of the name "Abraham" in chapter 2.
The manuscript you posted does not contain chapter 2. -
Topic is about the spelling of the name "Abraham" in chapter 2.
The manuscript you posted does not contain chapter 2.[peace -- already posted ch 2 older manuscripts and you posted other chapters, therefore.
-
Salaam,
not oldest makes no difference if spelled with/without ya or written in English.
Peace Noon,
Oldest, older continuously changing your definition of oldest.
I think it is not wise / prudent to rule out that the particular spelling of certain words in the Quran is part of revelation and has purposes and meanings we don't know yet.
Example when the scribes were writing this 961
They must have had instructions, a source, otherwise why would they write
bismi allah without Alif and bismi rabbika with Alif
The spelling of the name Abraham without the letter "ya
in chapter 2, and Abraham with the letter "ya " in the rest of the Quran seems intended and for a reason.It is more likely that original was spelled without "ya " in chapter 2 and with "ya " in the 24 other chapters, and that some scribes added the letter "ya " in chapter 2 to conform to the rest of the manuscript, "thinking they were correcting an error" of previous scribes, while this particular spelling seems intended.
In some "oldest manuscripts" with "ya "and in others whithout "ya " in chapter 2.peace -- already posted ch 2 older manuscripts and you posted other chapters, therefore.
First you post this manuscript carbon dating 662-765, 2 (95,4%)
Peace, in oldest manuscripts spelled same with (ya) e.g. 22603 Ibrahim
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/260?handschrift=163
https//s15.postimg.cc/7wg2beth7/ch2v259-266-2.jpg
Then this manuscript date 700-1000
Peace, is this about numerology why in oldest manuscripts it's spelled the same?
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/260?handschrift=878
https//s15.postimg.cc/55kokatrf/ch2v259-261.jpg
And this manuscriptdate 2nd century
They did it 100+ years later; how many examples old manuscripts do you need -- one should suffice?
Sana manuscript 2nd century!
https//s22.postimg.cc/50fx9kb4x/Sana_ch2v120-125-2.jpg
Then you post (links to) manuscripts that don't contain chapter 2, not sure what you want to prove by this.
Do you know how statistical probability dating works?
MA VI 165 Quran 95.4% probability between 649-675 CE
http//idb.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/diglit/MaVI165No chapter 2 in this manuscript.
Birmingham Quran 95.4% probability between 568-645 CE
http//www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/cadbury/quran-manuscript/index.aspxNo chapter 2 in this manuscript.
peace, again use "the oldest" manuscripts e.g. this one spread across two libraries.
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/20/vers/1?handschrift=281
Birmingham, Cadbury Research Library (University of Birmingham) Islamic Arabic 1572
9 sheets - 33.3 x 24.5 cm.mm - fol. 1 and 7 (= 1572a) 568-645, 2 (95.4%) ; fol. 2-6, 8 and 9 (= 1572b) before 750 (?) Parchment - Cadbury Research Library (University of Birmingham) (Birmingham, UK) - 004 129-004 152; 004 153-005 027; 006 074-006 122; 006 122-006 143; 018 017-018 031; 019 091-020 030 - 22-30 lineshttps//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/11/vers/75?handschrift=158
Paris, National Library of France Arabic 328 (c)
16 sheets - 333x245mm - Radiocarbon measurement of the Birmingham Fragment Islamic Arabic 1572 (a), originally from the same code 568-645 CE (95.4%) - parchment - Biblioth?que nationale de France (Paris, FR) - 010 035 009-010 048 007; 010 049 000-011 110 000; 020 099 000-020 113 000; 020 117 000-020 128 000; 020 131 000-022 058 000; 022 062 000-023 027 000 - 24-25 linesNo chapter2 in this manuscript.
Compare to the (links to) manuscripts that i posted
I think it is difficult to maintain your claim that in "oldest" manuscripts the name Abraham was spelled with the letter "ya .This manuscrpt, date 700-850
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/126/handschrift/170
2126 I B R H M
2127 I B R H Mhttps//i.imgur.com/E1rYxDu.png
This manuscrpt, date 700-900
In this manuscript in chapter 2 the word Ibrahim is also spelled IBRHM
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/124?handschrift=428
....https//i.imgur.com/ZmgdsXt.png
This manuscrpt, date
.... radiocarbon analysis under the auspices of the Corpus Coranicum project and has been dated to 652-763 CE with 95.4% probability, with that range being broken down into a 89.3% probability that it dates to between 652 and 694 CE and a 6.1% probability that it dates to between 747 and 763 CE....Manuscript( arabe331)
Chapter 2
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/125/handschrift/32
https//i.imgur.com/IWRORSB.png
Allah knows best.
-
Oldest, older continuously changing your definition of oldest.
peace -- simple definition (specific age) e.g. manuscript is older than another manuscript.
They must have had instructions, a source, otherwise why would they write
off topic, perhaps open a separate topic on word to peruse.
First you post this manuscript carbon dating ? 662-765, 2 (95,4%)
yes an example containing chapter 2
Then you post (links to) manuscripts that don't contain chapter 2, not sure what you want to prove by this.
yes in response to your example which did not contain chapter 2.
likewise my example was ~100+ years older than your example.Birmingham, Cadbury Research Library (University of Birmingham) Islamic Arabic 1572
9 sheets - 33.3 x 24.5 cm.mm - fol. 1 and 7 (= 1572a) 568-645, 2 (95.4%)Paris, National Library of France Arabic 328 (c)
16 sheets - 333x245mm - Radiocarbon measurement of the Birmingham Fragment Islamic Arabic 1572 (a), originally from the same code 568-645 CE (95.4%)Compare to the (links to) manuscripts that i posted
This manuscrpt, date 700-850
This manuscrpt, date 700-900
This manuscrpt, date
.... radiocarbon analysis under the auspices of the Corpus Coranicum project and has been dated to 652-763 CE with 95.4% probability, with that range being broken down into a 89.3% probability that it dates to between 652 and 694 CE and a 6.1% probability that it dates to between 747 and 763 CE....that is how you confuse people by sandwiching example which does not contain chapter 2.
conclusion few examples written with/without ya should suffice that it was not a big deal.
-
Salaam,
yes in response to your example which did not contain chapter 2.
Peace Noon,
I did not post a manuscript that does not contain chapter 2 .
likewise my example was ~100+ years older than your example.
- This is the oldest manuscript ( that contains chapter 2 ) that you posted
Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Wetzstein II 1913 (Ahlwardt 305)
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/2/vers/260?handschrift=163
95.4% statistical probability dated between 662-765 CE- This is the oldest manuscript that i posted
...
radiocarbon analysis under the auspices of the Corpus Coranicum project and has been dated to 652-763 CE with 95.4% probability,
...https//www.islamic-awareness.org/quran/text/mss/arabe331.html
Where do you see " ~100+ years older "?
Birmingham, Cadbury Research Library (University of Birmingham) Islamic Arabic 1572
9 sheets - 33.3 x 24.5 cm.mm - fol. 1 and 7 (= 1572a) 568-645, 2 (95.4%)Paris, National Library of France Arabic 328 (c)
16 sheets - 333x245mm - Radiocarbon measurement of the Birmingham Fragment Islamic Arabic 1572 (a), originally from the same code 568-645 CE (95.4%)^^^ This manuscript does not contain chapter 2, therefore irrelevant !!!
that is how you confuse people by sandwiching example which does not contain chapter 2.
Confusion is when you post 3 manuscripts that do not contain chapter 2.
conclusion few examples written with/without ya should suffice that it was not a big deal.
If the particular spelling of the name Abraham in chapter 2 is part of revelation and preserved in the current hafs manuscript, then it has a purpose, and this purpose would be lost if the letter ya was added.
Allah knows best.
-
Salaam,
Salaam,
Qiraa'a ( reading ) Hichaam an ibn Amer.
رواية هشام عن ابن عامرChapter 2 " IBRAHAAMA" ابرهم
Audio
http//dl.islamweb.net/audiopath/Audio3/quran/MeftahAlstunai/HishamIbnAmer/002.mp3
04151 ---------> 04752
Chapter 2 verse 124 to verse 140, you will hear 11 occurrences of " IBRAHAAMA" ابرهم
In the rest of the Quran " IBRAHEEMA" ابرهيم
Example chapter 87
Audio
http//dl.islamweb.net/audiopath/Audio3/quran/MeftahAlstunai/HishamIbnAmer/087.mp3
132
you will hear " IBRAHEEMA" ابرهيم
The link does not work anymore, new link here
Qiraa'a ( reading ) Hichaam from ibn Amer. رواية هشام عن ابن عامر
Chapter 2 سورة البقرة " IBRAHAAM" ابرهم
Audio
https//audio.islamweb.net/audio/index.php?page=souraview&qid=1552&rid=26
4148 ------> 4752
Chapter 2 verse 124 to verse 140, you will hear 11 occurrences of " IBRAHAAM" ابرهم
In the rest of the Quran " IBRAHEEM" ابرهيم
Example chapter 3 سورة آل عمران
Audio
https//audio.islamweb.net/audio/index.php?page=souraview&qid=1552&rid=26
2000 -------> 2125
Chapter 3 verse 65 to verse 68, you will hear 3 occurrences of " IBRAHEEM " ابرهيم
والله اعلم
Allah knows best.