48:29 a false verse?
-
Dear Zlatan,
Peace
21107 which desribes Muhammad as a mercy - is not saying that Muhammad possesses mercy - but that God has sent him out of His Mercy.
Muhamad did posses the mercy, he possesed the great reading which is described AS the God`s MERCY at another place, so by reciting this to the people and by sticking to the merciful precepts in it he was merciful to believers.....and any people who stick to its precepts are mutually merciful, as described in 4829...
Again the Koran is a mercy 12111, 1782 FROM GOD. It was by no means possessed by Muhammad but merely delivered by him.
People can be kind to one another but mercy as in 'rahim' is a totally separate concept possessed only by God. Why do I say this?
Because 'mercy' is a form of compassion, kindness, or leniency offerred by one who is in charge of justice. God suffices in this role - and is the Merciful.
tell me are you merciful to your children?
if you say not then you are a bad parent....
God is merciful to us all and we (including all my family) are accountable to Him alone.
do you think the messenger wasnt merciful to his followers and adherents?
how can you think in that way?It's not about whether the messenger was kind or not - the word is simply not used for anything other than God's mercy in all but these two verses. One of those has been demonstrated to many people's (not all) satisfaction as a false verse (912 - so there remains 4829 using this word out of the usual way - ie. the other 114 occurrences refer to God alone.
Regards.
-
Peace
Dear Zlatan,
Peace
21107 which desribes Muhammad as a mercy - is not saying that Muhammad possesses mercy - but that God has sent him out of His Mercy.
Muhamad did posses the mercy, he possesed the great reading which is described AS the God`s MERCY at another place, so by reciting this to the people and by sticking to the merciful precepts in it he was merciful to believers.....and any people who stick to its precepts are mutually merciful, as described in 4829...
Again the Koran is a mercy 12111, 1782 FROM GOD. It was by no means possessed by Muhammad but merely delivered by him.
People can be kind to one another but mercy as in 'rahim' is a totally separate concept possessed only by God. Why do I say this?
Because 'mercy' is a form of compassion, kindness, or leniency offerred by one who is in charge of justice. God suffices in this role - and is the Merciful.
tell me are you merciful to your children?
if you say not then you are a bad parent....
God is merciful to us all and we (including all my family) are accountable to Him alone.
do you think the messenger wasnt merciful to his followers and adherents?
how can you think in that way?It's not about whether the messenger was kind or not - the word is simply not used for anything other than God's mercy in all but these two verses. One of those has been demonstrated to many people's (not all) satisfaction as a false verse (912 - so there remains 4829 using this word out of the usual way - ie. the other 114 occurrences refer to God alone.
Regards.
you may continue with your sophismes and apologetics, i leave you here, at least for today, since i have no strenght to write...your reasoning, better said, the lack of it , is a good demonstration of how code 19 infatuation disables functioning of the peoples
mind... and forces them to self-humiliation, one-dimensional thinking and inventing the most petty excuses in order to save the face of the code 19 idol.....i hope youll get out of the code abyss but i just can`t see how ...however the god is capable of all things....best wishes, Zlatan
-
Salaamun alaikum Truth, Zlatan,
I should mention also that verse 4829 is another verse that uses the word "rahiman" which is one of God's attributes towards humans.
The word used is 'ruhama bainahum'. Lets assume that association with Allah's attribute should make one expunge the verse, ok?
Allah is al-kareem.
69/40 says 'verily these are the words of rasulun KAREEM'Allah is al-aziz.
12/30 uses the phrase 'the wife of AL-AZIZ'Allah is al-malik
12/76 uses the word 'malik' for king.Al-Qur'aan is an Allah-centred book. Allah uses knowledge of him to relate back into the world and ourselves, that we may understand the world. He explains shirik/asssociationism in his own way, not in the unquranic way Rashad Khalifa wrote about.
Truth, I respect your right to opine, but in light of Quranic analysis, I'm afraid your hypothesis fails.
thanks and peace.
-
Salaamun alaikum Truth, Zlatan,
I should mention also that verse 4829 is another verse that uses the word "rahiman" which is one of God's attributes towards humans.
The word used is 'ruhama bainahum'. Lets assume that association with Allah's attribute should make one expunge the verse, ok?
Allah is al-kareem.
69/40 says 'verily these are the words of rasulun KAREEM'Allah is al-aziz.
12/30 uses the phrase 'the wife of AL-AZIZ'Allah is al-malik
12/76 uses the word 'MALIK' for king.Al-Qur'aan is an Allah-centred book. Allah uses knowledge of him to relate back into the world and ourselves, that we may understand the world. He explains shirik/asssociationism in his own way, not in the unquranic way Rashad Khalifa wrote about.
Truth, I respect your right to opine, but in light of Quranic analysis, I'm afraid your hypothesis fails.
thanks and peace
-
Salaamun alaikum Truth, Zlatan,
I should mention also that verse 4829 is another verse that uses the word "rahiman" which is one of God's attributes towards humans.
The word used is 'ruhama bainahum'. Lets assume that association with Allah's attribute should make one expunge the verse, ok?
Allah is al-kareem.
69/40 says 'verily these are the words of rasulun KAREEM'Allah is al-aziz.
12/30 uses the phrase 'the wife of AL-AZIZ'Allah is al-malik
12/76 uses the word 'MALIK' for king.Al-Qur'aan is an Allah-centred book. Allah uses knowledge of him to relate back into the world and ourselves, that we may understand the world. He explains shirik/asssociationism in his own way, not in the unquranic way Rashad Khalifa wrote about.
Truth, I respect your right to opine, but in light of Quranic analysis, I'm afraid your hypothesis fails.
thanks and peace
Peace mquran,
I am aware of the other 'attributes' being used in reference to men - but the two terms Al-Rahman and Al-Rahim have been selected out as the key components of the God's exclusive Lordship.
Al-Rahman - the all-powerful and Al-Rahim the all-merciful show the two sides to absolute Lordship of the God and are within the key basmalah at the start of each surah save one.
To believe in God one must accept his absolute power of all creation and submit oneself to His laws. In doing so one comes into the sphere of the God's mercy - though the God's mercy is impossible to quanitify or encompass.
These two 'attributes' are thus the key elements - all the other ones are in effect derivations of this pair and come into the sphere of either the God's power or His mercy.
That's my understanding and I do not believe that humans have or can have the key attributes of 'Rahman' or 'Rahim'.
Peace.
-
Salaamun alaikum truth,
I am aware of the other 'attributes' being used in reference to men - but the two terms Al-Rahman and Al-Rahim have been selected out as the key components of the God's exclusive Lordship.
Al-Rahman - the all-powerful and Al-Rahim the all-merciful show the two sides to absolute Lordship of the God and are within the key basmalah at the start of each surah save one.
Ok, may I surmise then that your criteria is the 'basmala' , truth ? May I ask you for evidence stating that these are 'key components' and whose words may not be repeated elsewhere ? I'm only asking, because if you don't have such evidence, you're using a criteria besides Allah's criteria.
Also, FYI, there is a difference between 'raheem', 'ruhaama' and 'AL-raheem'. The difference is not in quality, but gradation.
Once again, our discussion is purely academic to me. I respect your right to believe however you choose.
thanks and peace.
-
Peace truth, mujahid
21107 which desribes Muhammad as a mercy - is not saying that Muhammad possesses mercy - but that God has sent him out of His Mercy.
See also 961 where the messenger is litteraly called a MERCY to those who believe/are faithfull of you-rahmatun lilladheena amanoominkum
"...he believes in the god and he trusts to the faithful and is a mercy to those who believe among you...." 961
You say he is only sent out of mercy, but how this mercy is manifested ?
what does it mean that the revealed book is a mercy to believers?
How the book is being mercy?
Does it mean that it emanates a certain kind of invisible radiation that make us feel better?
Or we read it and applie? and in the applying it the mercy is contained and realised!!
Surely we know that its not a book of magic but book of helpful remedies and advices and morals....and good news!
the messenger was a godly man who recited the book( containing mercy) and thus he was merciful...he has recited its wisdom, good news, advices, warnings, restrictions of bad things and orders to do good and thus he was merciful, he also constantly applied the books precepts and thus he was merciful....believers are of the people who immitate his example and thus they are merciful to each other...and they recommend each other patience/perseverance and compassion/mercy(9017 allatheena amanoo watawasaw bialssabri watawasaw bialmarhamati )and thus they are merciful
You say no one posses the mercy, but Jesus` followers have had in their hearts kindness and compassion/mercy instiled(5727 wajaAAalna fee quloobiallatheena ittabaAAoohu ra/fatan wa rahmatan )
Of course we do not posses it in an absolute way, its all the gift from the god, the origin of any good is the god....
Also, if the messenger possesed the book or was only delivering it is totally irrelevant....your bringing of this phylosophising was innapropriate...The point is that we have recieved it through his agency and thats why he was called merciful/compassionate...its the same case as with obeying the mesenger... we do not obey muhamad the person but the god`s commandements he brought.... however it was nevertheless appropriate for the god to say "obey the messenger"... Why do you then find innapropriate that He has called him merciful to believers?
If i come out out of this discussion better guided, of course it wont be because of you, though it might happen with a little of your assistence, it was actually the god who has guided me through you, and thus it also wouldnt be innapropriate to say that you have guided me, eventhough the book says the god is the one who guide...and theres no contradiction in it...
To say that no one can be merciful beacuse the God is the merciful is to cut off all the logic... as well as the grammar....
As for the marks on the faces from influence/effect of prostrating , its truly irrelevent if it is meant literarly or methaphorically cause at the end of the day it boils down to methaporical meaning....
As the verse says its their mathal/example/similitude/parable in tawraat...noone would ever claim that the second mathal in the verse-believers being like the plant is literal so why should one insist to understand the first mathal in the same verse literarly, particularly because in the whole book the "methaphorical" meaning is prevailing" ?
best wishes, Zlatan
-
dear all, peace
mquran, zlatan, i do not know if you can still recall my answer to this very questioning regarding the attributes adn their use for human and God adn ...ect.
this issue was raised by ( i think his name was aziz) and it took place on teh quran study by brother joe i think. i remeber stating most fi not all of the attibutes in the book that are sued for men as well as for God.
these are but clear demonstrations of manipulation and/or ignorance.
the language is a material used by human and developed by human. teh work rahim was nothing knew to the arasb fo the time of revelation and they used it as a word meaning what ti means. even the word 'god(s) is used by God to refer to humans! adn that is simply because GOD is a concept rather can a physical thing.
so, pls save your energy and time and focus on serious study.
peace
mh -
My initial feeling was then somehow validated while researching the issue of verses 9128-129 and how there were hadiths that indicated or suggested that these verses were false.
While reading on such issues - I got a shock when I read that 4829 also had a hadith pertaining to it and accusing it of being a false verse. I asked a question about such hadiths some weeks ago but no one seemed to be able to point me to the source of this ahadeeth despite the fact I had not been able to re-find this piece of information.
Now I thought hard about it - and thought about the motivation for such an ahadeeth and there certainly could be reasons to fabricate a ahadeeth against a verse like 4829. I dismissed it.
Then the issue of "seal" of the prophets was discussed at length various times by different parties and as a side finding the issue of "Kana" or "was" a messenger became apparent in relation to "Muhammad".
Today someone on 19.org (Bahman Goharzad) pointed out that of the 4 mentions of Muhammad in the Quran that 3 of them are in the PAST TENSE - ie. 3144, 3340, 472 EXCEPT 4829 which is in the present tense!
I therefore put forward that 4829 is a serious candidate for being a false verse. I want to examine all the evidence for this and I'm sure it is of interest to everyone else. Please put forward any reasons why this proposition about 4829 may be true or false.
It is a heavy issue and I have some more thoughts on this but I'll wait till some other and possibly better arguments emerge.
I don't know whether you have changed your mind or not but I just want to say that I disagree with such approach to quran. For those who are homosexuals, if they use such approach, then I am pretty sure they will argue that 781 is a candidate of false verse.
781 "You come to men with desire instead of women; you are a transgressing people."
That is just an example and the possibility is open.
Having said that, may I request the hadith pertaining to 4829? I am requesting it for my "hadith collections" and not for debating you. Thanks.
-
Peace "andy" and all,
Ive already refuted this. 4829 surely lies within the mathematical pattern based on no 19 and therefore is part of the Quran for sure. Crucial terms like "Allah" and "messenger" are mentioned in it plus the verse no itself. Besides your right as regards to the hadith argument which is definitely not enough to say whther a particular verse belongs to the Quran or not. Infact 4829 is part of another amazing interlock which has only been discovered recently by bro Asad
http//19.org/forum/index.php/t/4275/222/
GOD Bless! -
Peace,
This is where ive discussed this with bro Truth(aka oben) here
http//19.org/forum/index.php/m/18034/222/#msg_18034
In Oben's last post he makes a grand mistake, which i forgot to pt out, by stating that alternatively we could count the word "Allah" in all the unnumbered Bismillahs as well + 5 Allahumma and the no equals xple of 19. HOWEVER he then continues to say that this way well have 114 occurences of Rahim and i ask how can that be? Now since he has counted "Allah" in all uno Bismillahs he also has to do the same for the words "Rahim" and "Rahman" in which case we will have 226 "Rahim" and 57+112= 169 words "Arrahman" both of which are not xples of 19. You see when you use a rule you gotta apply it consitently. Only then is it valid and can be considered significant. GOD Bless!
GOD Bless! -
Harsh and stern are not making Muhammad lose his value, indeed it rising up very high his value. Why because believing in Islam ( a system for life) has to be furqon, able to distinguish what bathil acts and haq acts as taught by Al Quran.
His harsh and setrn to disbelivers are still within corridor of to make them be a moslem, not to eredicate them. The key is da'wah.
-
Salaam brother Jonny,
Peace "andy" and all,
Ive already refuted this. 4829 surely lies within the mathematical pattern based on no 19 and therefore is part of the Quran for sure.As for me, 4829 is the revelation of Allah for sure, so if any pattern or someone's logic does not lie within it, then the pattern or the thought is wrong and not the other way around.
-
Peace "andy"
As for me, 4829 is the revelation of Allah for sure, so if any pattern or someone's logic does not lie within it, then the pattern or the thought is wrong and not the other way around.
JK- Now look i agreed that it is BUT this thought of yours shows that your not believing on a rational basis. Your putting the cart infront of the horse. Once weve analysed the Quran and found a pattern and see a line of consitency and we see that one particular verse or word or even letter stands in the way of a bunch of complex interlocks, then it's definitely not part of the Quran. This is how the scientific method works. You may assume it has to be correct because you probably think that "this is what the majority believes the quran is", thereby narrowing down what the Quran is, or "how is it possible that a false verse be in so close proximity to the Quran". Indeed this latter argument has also been put forward before but it is nonsensible simply because anyone can take up a pen and add a few verses here and there. Hence we only have this great mathematical pattern which guards the Quran against addition and ensures it's preservation, at least today. GOD Bless!
-
Salaam Jonny,
Peace "andy"
JK- Now look i agreed that it is BUT this thought of yours shows that your not believing on a rational basis.
It is much more irrational to declare "some" verses in quran are false verses just because it does not fit "something" ("something" can be one's thought, pattern, etc). Especially if there are hadiths which "support" the rejection of quran.
Your putting the cart infront of the horse. Once weve analysed the Quran and found a pattern and see a line of consitency and we see that one particular verse or word or even letter stands in the way of a bunch of complex interlocks, then it's definitely not part of the Quran.
The fact that the pattern must reject quran in order to work shows that it is not really pattern. I use quran as criterion to judge right and wrong, and not the other way around.
This is how the scientific method works. You may assume it has to be correct because you probably think that "this is what the majority believes the quran is", thereby narrowing down what the Quran is, or "how is it possible that a false verse be in so close proximity to the Quran". Indeed this latter argument has also been put forward before but it is nonsensible simply because anyone can take up a pen and add a few verses here and there.
You can call that "something" scientific works, rational thinking, or whatever you like. If that "something" contradicts quran, then that "something" is wrong and not the other way around.
Hence we only have this great mathematical pattern which guards the Quran against addition and ensures it's preservation, at least today. GOD Bless!
Brother Jonny, insha Allah in the future we will have pattern which does not contradict quran.
2106 When we abrogate any miracle, or cause it to be forgotten, we produce a better miracle, or at least an equal one. Do you not recognize the fact that GOD is Omnipotent?
Just be patient and keep working.
20114 Then High above all is God, the King, the True. And do not be hasty with the Quran before its inspiration is completed to you, and Say "My Lord, increase my knowledge."
PS This is an example of pattern which works without contradiction with quran
http//www.thumperscorner.com/discus/messages/2151/Sample_of_Symmetric_Book-10875.zip -
Peace "andy",
It is much more irrational to declare "some" verses in quran are false verses just because it does not fit "something" ("something" can be one's thought, pattern, etc). Especially if there are hadiths which "support" the rejection of quran.
JK- Forget about the hadith. That is irrelevant to me.
The fact that the pattern must reject quran in order to work shows that it is not really pattern. I use quran as criterion to judge right and wrong, and not the other way around.
JK- Where does the pattern reject the Quran? It seems you do not even understand the difference between the Quran and Mushaf. In case you dont plz visit
http//19.org/forum/index.php/m/4320/222/#msg_4320
You cannot use the Quran as your criterian UNTIL YOU KNOW WHAT THE QURAN IS. Think about that one.You can call that "something" scientific works, rational thinking, or whatever you like. If that "something" contradicts quran, then that "something" is wrong and not the other way around.
JK- And just how does it contradict the Quran? It doesnt contradict the Quran at all. Btw did you know that even before RK noticed that 9128&129 were false verses he counted the word "Allah" to be 2698 and not 2699, although it should have been the latter. This is the same mistake which Abdul Baqi comitted. He also fell short of one and that is not because he deliberately left out 11 since he did put that no in his index but in the end firgot to include it in his count. Sont you see how GOD is controlling the numbers? He delieberately left the count as 2698 otherwise RK probably wouldnt even get attracted to the pattern in the Quran. Only later was it realized that 9129 made the count increase by one and other factors involving around this. Every new independent discovery ive seen so far always at some point or another again indicates that sura 9 has got only 127 verses. That should tell you something. GOD has given us the scientific method so we can recognize His true Word.
Brother Jonny, insha Allah in the future we will have pattern which does not contradict quran.
2106 When we abrogate any miracle, or cause it to be forgotten, we produce a better miracle, or at least an equal one. Do you not recognize the fact that GOD is Omnipotent?
Just be patient and keep working.
20114 Then High above all is God, the King, the True. And do not be hasty with the Quran before its inspiration is completed to you, and Say "My Lord, increase my knowledge."
PS This is an example of pattern which works without contradiction with quran
http//www.thumperscorner.com/discus/messages/2151/Sample_of_Symmetric_Book-10875.zipJK- Now your forcing things here. You wont find any other consistent pattern. Many have tried but failed. The system has already been discovered deeply with this and the boundaries of the Quran have now been defined with more than 99.999% accuracy, showing that we are on the right way. Now one more thing for you to remember. Remember that GOD says in the Quran that He will protect it, right? This means that this is a law the Law of GOD, correct? Now any logical person knows that a law cannot possibly be proven to exist unless somebody tries to break it, get it? For example if i say to someone in a room that he cannot exit it and that person stayed in the room forever, then nobody would ever know whether what i said is corect or not. It's only when the person tries to escape and then is forced back in that my statement would be proven right. Same is the case with GOD's statement of preservation. If nobody even attempted to temper with the Quran, ow in GOD's name are we supposed to know it's protected. Thus the exposition of 9128&129 as being non Quranic has actually proven what GOD stated. GOD Bless!
-
Salaam Jonny,
Peace "andy",
JK- Forget about the hadith. That is irrelevant to me.
As far as I know, verses 9128-129 are chosen to be rejected because there is a hadith which supports the rejection. As for me, I repeat again and again, I use quran as the criterion to judge right or wrong and not the other way around. In this case, I reject the hadith and believe in quran.
JK- Where does the pattern reject the Quran? It seems you do not even understand the difference between the Quran and Mushaf. In case you dont plz visit
http//19.org/forum/index.php/m/4320/222/#msg_4320
You cannot use the Quran as your criterian UNTIL YOU KNOW WHAT THE QURAN IS. Think about that one.Because the pattern rejects verses of quran. It is that simple, isn't it?
JK- And just how does it contradict the Quran? It doesnt contradict the Quran at all. Btw did you know that even before RK noticed that 9128&129 were false verses he counted the word "Allah" to be 2698 and not 2699, although it should have been the latter. This is the same mistake which Abdul Baqi comitted. He also fell short of one and that is not because he deliberately left out 11 since he did put that no in his index but in the end firgot to include it in his count. Sont you see how GOD is controlling the numbers? He delieberately left the count as 2698 otherwise RK probably wouldnt even get attracted to the pattern in the Quran. Only later was it realized that 9129 made the count increase by one and other factors involving around this. Every new independent discovery ive seen so far always at some point or another again indicates that sura 9 has got only 127 verses. That should tell you something. GOD has given us the scientific method so we can recognize His true Word.
It does contradict quran because it reject quranic verses.
JK- Now your forcing things here. You wont find any other consistent pattern. Many have tried but failed. The system has already been discovered deeply with this and the boundaries of the Quran have now been defined with more than 99.999% accuracy, showing that we are on the right way.
I am not forcing anything. For me it is very simple As long as any pattern does not contradict quran, I can accept. On the other hand, no matter how impressive the pattern might be, if it contradicts quran then there must be something wrong. Take it from me bro, if Allah really designed quran with code 19 pattern, insha Allah sooner or later we will come to see it (no need to reject any verse).
7516 Do not move your tongue with it to make haste.
7517 It is for Us to gather it and relate it.
7518 So when We relate it, you shall follow its revelation.
7519 Then it is for Us to clarify it.Be patient be patient ...don't haste OK?
Now one more thing for you to remember. Remember that GOD says in the Quran that He will protect it, right? This means that this is a law the Law of GOD, correct? Now any logical person knows that a law cannot possibly be proven to exist unless somebody tries to break it, get it? For example if i say to someone in a room that he cannot exit it and that person stayed in the room forever, then nobody would ever know whether what i said is corect or not. It's only when the person tries to escape and then is forced back in that my statement would be proven right. Same is the case with GOD's statement of preservation. If nobody even attempted to temper with the Quran, ow in GOD's name are we supposed to know it's protected. Thus the exposition of 9128&129 as being non Quranic has actually proven what GOD stated. GOD Bless!
That is an excellent argument ... Let's see ...
Shahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509
Narrated Zaid bin Thabit
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the! Qur'an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur'an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur'an be collected." I said to 'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur'an and collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur'an. Then I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Abu Bakr replied, "By Allah, it is a good project." Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and 'Umar. So I started looking for the Qur'an and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is
'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty..(till the end of Surat-Baraa' (At-Tauba) (9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur'an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with 'Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of 'Umar.
The hadith above can be viewed as an attempt of the enemies of the prophet to tamper the quran. Yet, the attempt has failed since Allah promised He will protect His Book. Had their attempt to corrupt quran been successful, we would have not seen verses 9128-129. Have you ever thought that way?
-
Good post Andy
The Quran also confirmed that there was an attempt to tamper with the Quran and Allah prevented this from happening
Salam