Refuting the “26 Qur’ans” Lie

On By Mohammed al-FirasIn Ahadith, Allah, Bible, Current Events, History, Islam, Islamophobes, Muhammad, Quran, Responses, Textual criticism

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيْم

 Refuting the “26 Qur’ans” Lie

By Quran and Bible Blog Contributor abusafiyah1

View as PDF

            Christian speakers such as Jay Smith, “Rob Christian” and many other known anti-Islam preachers trick their fans into believing that there are 26 or even up to 32 versions of the Qur’aan. What they fail to inform their supporters is that none of these are different “versions”! They hilariously quote differences in words from Hafs and Warsh to “prove” to their followers that the Qur’aan has been changed.

Qira’at and Ahruf

            The Hans Wehr Dictionary Of Modern Written Arabic defines Qirâ’a as:

“Qirâ’a pl. -ât recitation, recital (especially of the Koran); reading (also, e.g., of measuring instruments); manner of recitation, punctuation, and vocalization of the Koranic text.”[1]

Shaykh Saalih Al-Munajjid said (emphasis ours):

“The best of the scholarly opinions concerning what is meant is that there are seven ways of reciting the Qur’aan, where the wording may differ but the meaning is the same; if there is a different meaning then it is by way of variations on a theme, not opposing and contradiction.”[2]

In addition, Bilal Philips states that (emphasis ours):

“[a] Qirâ’ât is for the most part a method of pronunciation used in the recitations of the Qur’an. These methods are different from the seven forms or modes (ahruf) in which the Qur’an was revealed. The seven modes were reduced to one, that of the Quraysh, during the era of Caliph ‘Uthman, and all of the methods of recitation are based on this mode. The various methods have all been traced back to the Prophet (peace be upon him) through a number of Sahaabah who were most noted for their Qur’anic recitations. That is, these Sahaabah recited the Qur’an to the Prophet (peace be upon him) or in his presence and received his approval. Among them were the following: Ubayy Ibn K’ab, ‘Alee Ibn Abi Taalib, Zayd Ibn Thaabit, ‘Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud, Abu ad-Dardaa and Abu Musaa al-Ash’aree. Many of the other Sahaabah learned from these masters. For example, Ibn ‘Abbaas, the master commentator of the Qur’an among the Sahaabah, learned from both Ubayy and Zayd.”[3]

            The transmission of the Qur’an is mutawâtir, meaning, there are many narrators on each level of the chain. Thus, a mutawâtir hadith is one which is reported by such a large number of people that they cannot be expected to agree upon a lie, all of them together.[4]

            Shaykh Saalih Al-Munajjid also states that:

“[w]ith regard to the seven recitations or ten recitations, they are present in what was compiled by ‘Uthmaan and have to do with adding a letter or omitting a letter, or elongating or shortening a vowel. All of that is included in the one style that ‘Uthmaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) compiled. The intention behind that was to preserve the word of Allaah and protect people from differences that could harm them or cause fitnah among them.”[5]

            As for the “differences” between Hafs and Warsh, examples include the following:

  1. In Surah 2:86, the word يَعْمَلُونَ is used in the Warsh text while تَعْمَلُونَ is used in the Hafs text.
  2. In Surah 4:14, the word نُدْخِلْهُ is used in the Warsh text while يُدْخِلْهُ is used in the Hafs text.
  3. In Surah 3:157, the word تَجْمَعُونَ is used in the Warsh text while يَجْمَعُونَ is used in the Hafs text.
  4. In Surah 3:83, the word تُرْجَعُونَ is used in the Warsh text while the word يُرْجَعُونَ is used in the Hafs text.
  5. In Surah 3:146, the word قَاتَلَ is used in the Warsh text while the word قتِلَ are used in the Hafs text.

None of these recitations change the intended meaning of the verse.

The Evidences from the Authentic Sunnah

            With regards to the 7 or 10 Qira’at, the following ahadith explain their significance:

“Narrated by Abdullah: That he heard a man reciting a Qur’anic Verse which he had heard the Prophet reciting in a different way. So he took that man to the Prophet (and told him the story). The Prophet said, ‘Both of you are reciting in a correct way, so carry on reciting.’ The Prophet further added, ‘The nations which were before you were destroyed (by Allah) because they differed.’”[6]

“Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas: Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Gabriel recited the Qur’an to me in one way. Then I requested him (to read it in another way), and continued asking him to recite it in other ways, and he recited it in several ways till he ultimately recited it in seven different ways.’”[7]

In Imam Malik’s Muwatta:

“Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Urwa ibn az-Zubayr that Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abd al-Qari said that he had heard Umar ibn al-Khattab say, “I heard Hisham ibn Hakim ibn Hizam reciting Surat al-Furqan (Sura 25) differently from me, and it was the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who had recited it to me. I was about to rush up to him but I granted him a respite until he had finished his prayer. Then I grabbed him by his cloak and took him to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said, ‘Messenger of Allah, I heard this man reciting Surat al-Furqan differently from the way you recited it to me.’ The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, ‘Let him go.’ Then he said, ‘Recite, Hisham,’ and Hisham recited as I had heard him recite. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, ‘It was sent down like that.’ Then he said to me, ‘Recite’ and I recited the sura, and he said, ‘It was sent down like that. This Qur’ an was sent down in seven (different) ways, so recite from it whatever is easy for you.‘”[8]

In addition to this, there are the mutawâtir reports that reach the Companions of the Prophet.

Proofs from Unbiased Academics

            Academics, such as Marin van Putten, state that the variants do not prove that the Quran has not been preserved (see below for a screenshot of his Twitter account), so even western academics refute the Christian missionaries. We can thus summarize that:

  1. No actual scholar considers the Qira’at to be against the claim that the Qur’aan has been preserved.
  2. Unlike what the Christian missionaries tell us, the Qur’anic manuscripts are identical.
  3. Islamic scholars have known about the Qira’at for centuries. Yet, nobody used them to prove that the Qur’aan has been changed.
  4. None of the Qira’at are different versions of the Qur’aan. Those using Yasir Qadhi’s words to show that Islamic scholars agree that the Qur’aan is changed are wrong as he himself clarified the error saying that missionaries have twisted his words to suit their agenda. He then stated scholars agree it is a proven fact that the Qur’aan has been preserved in its entirety and that all the Qira’at are revealed from Allaah.
Marin van Putten

Reason for the Deception of Christian Missionaries

            To all the Christians using the “26 or 32 versions” lie, do any of these “versions” have the following kinds of occurrences? Of course not!

Abu Safiyah - Bible versions Luke 17-36
Abu Safiyah - Bible versions John 7

Christian speakers such as Jay Smith made up the “26 Qur’ans” lie since Muslims truthfully criticize the Bible as being corrupted. It is sad that he has to use our own Islamic sources to state that the Qur’an has been “corrupted”, even though they say nothing of the sort! It is extremely deceptive of Christians such as SOCO Films to show random and unsuspecting Muslims, who are completely unaware of the legitimacy of the qira’at, the alleged “differences” between them!

            Based on the evidence, the claim that there are 26 or even 32 different Qur’ans is an easily refutable lie. And Allaah (God) knows best.

[1] Hans Weir, A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, 4th Edition, ed. J. Milton Cowan (Urbana, Illinois: Spoken Language Services, Inc., 1993), p. 882.

[2] https://islamqa.info/en/answers/5142/the-revelation-of-the-quraan-in-seven-styles-ahruf-sing-harf

[3] https://www.islamic-awareness.org/quran/text/qiraat/hafs

[4] https://www.islamic-awareness.org/quran/text/qiraat/hafs

[5] https://islamqa.info/en/answers/125091/uthmaans-compilation-of-the-mushaf-in-one-style-harf

[6] Sahih Al-Bukhari, 66:87, https://sunnah.com/bukhari/66/87.

[7] Sahih Al-Bukhari, 66:13, https://sunnah.com/bukhari/66/13.

[8] https://sunnah.com/urn/404740

27 thoughts on “Refuting the “26 Qur’ans” Lie”

      1. lol ok just to turn the tables, that argument shits on themselves coz as per their logic

        Muslims had mutiple different readings > implying somehow the OG Quran got corrupted > one/some readings became “canon”/mainstream > we can’t be **certain** which of all variants is the original one> negates Islam

        As per textual/historical evidence Christians had different gospels often contradicting each other> somehow implying the OG bible got corrupted > 4 gospels and some epistles were canonised> taking all the canon and non canon into account we can’t know for **certainty** which is the OG one > negates christianity

        Like

      2. I also forgot to add how they dismiss our narrations on this matter as sneaky or explicit attempts at reconciliation, this also backfires very badly when they rely on their traditions (which are dubious and weak as per our criteria) for canonization in the first place

        Like

  4. Yo doubchebag, you realize that the 7 ahruf were revealed right? I guess you didn’t read the article but here ya go: https://abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/tag/ahruf-sabah/

    1. Muslims had multiple different readings that in basically are the same (Yes)
    2. Implying somehow the OG Quran got corrupted (I lost braincells, how did u jump to this?)
    3. One/some readings became “canon”/mainstream (Yes the Uthmani One)
    4. We can’t be **certain** which of all variants is the original one (All of them are valid)
    5. Makes no sense tbh

    A more proper flow is:

    1. Multiple ahruf (7) were revealed for different dialects? (yes)
    2. Are all ahruf are valid? (yes)
    2. They were standardized and reduced to one? (yes)
    3. Are we are using one of the valid ahruf after standardization? (yes)
    4. We are still reading the Quran as it was 1450 years ago, from the copy of Abu Bakr RA.

    Like

    Reply

    1. “I lost braincells, how did u jump to this?”

      Please don’t be sad, it doesn’t make much difference coz you didn’t have enough brain cells to understand a synchoresis and an epitrope in the first place

      Like

      Reply

    2. @jackietruzaf, you had good intentions brother so please accept my apologies for being rude, point is my whole argument was an epitrope and a synchoresis and you misunderstood the whole point…may God reward you for your efforts

      Like

      Reply
  6. JesusPrayedToTheFATHER

    why in this “refutation” do you not explain:

    1. In the Hafs recitation, Surah As-Saffat (37:12-13) states:”And you wonder that they mock [at you]. And when they are reminded, they do not remember.”
    2. In the Warsh recitation, the same verses (Surah As-Saffat 37:12-13) read slightly differently:”And he wonders that they mock [at him]. And when they are reminded, they do not remember.”

    this is more than just a grammatical variant, IT CHANGES THE MEANING, IT GIVES ALLAH A HUMAN ATTRIBUTE! its ALTERED, CHANGED = NOT PRESERVED.

    Like

    Reply
    1. stewjo004

      @JesusPrayedToTheFATHER (Ironic you refuted your own beliefs)

      So a couple of things

      1. How did you get Allah having a human attribute? The “he” in the verse is Muhammadﷺ. Both passages are talking about Muhammadﷺ
      2. Listened to warsh and they’re both sound the same. Listen for yourself:https://surahquran.com/English/yaseen/37.html can you post the Arabic please?
      3. That doesn’t mean its changed. Again muslims used ALL of the recitation styles during the time of Muhammadﷺ This isn’t like you’re pulling up some new Quran found in an egyptian garbage dump or something

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
      1. JesusPrayedToTheFATHER

        ya know.. it seems there are so many versions of the quran, i seem to have used the wrong one – my mistake.

        Not the Warsh but the Khalaf version (3rd Quran mentioned so far) uses the arabic “Ajebto” and the WARSH Quran uses “Ajebta”. Ajebto means I, and Ajebta means YOU. Ajebto in the Khalafs version means Allah wondered why the mocked – Ibn Abbas recitation says Allah “I” wondered.

        How can allah Wonder(be shocked, suprised?) – these are the attributes of a Human being. via an altered version of the Quran. All knowing , yet suprised or shocked by something.

        Even AI knows lol “in the context of Surah As-Saffat (37:12) from the Quran, the speaker is Allah (God). This verse is part of a passage where Allah is expressing wonder or amazement at the behavior of certain individuals who mock or ridicule the divine message.”

        and Here is a lovely video of an ARABIC SPEAKER explaining this exactly as I have with visual evidence and an Arabic breakdown (Start at 12:30 to hear the sheik Lie about it before the arabic speaker explains): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuphsyLd1tE

        SN: Prayer is simply communication. Jesus was in constant communication with the father, his father, as they share one will.

        Like

      2. stewjo004

        1. Not a version when they’re all being recited since the time of Muhammadﷺ while this seems “drastic” in English its basically the adding of “a”,”i”,or “o” in Arabic even though the same word is being used. Versions is like the Bible not having entire passages made up in it like the lady taken in adultery or the ending of Mark. I hope that cleared up that confusion

        2. Allah is being sarcastic with them. This is frequent in the Quran

        3. Oh God was praying to Himself what an interesting religion you have. So question does Jesus have God’s attributes as well?

        Liked by 1 person

      3. JesusPrayedToTheFATHER

        Lmao, now Allah is being sarcastic (another very human attribute). Very silly allah is with his Frequent sarcasm. Gotcha. Literally did not help your book at all, you just gave allah Another human attribute.

        so what was wrong with the actual original copies of the quran that Uthman ordered to be Burned? Why did he order that to be done again? The true original manuscripts of the quran were burnt by uthamn why again?

        i get you, like how the quran us full of stories that already existed, and are even called out in the quran as “Fairy tales and Fables of the ancient” by the people who already hear them by the time muhamad came and tried to tell the story like it actually happened. Everything Good about the quran comes from the bible and was already preached by the Actual prophets and Jesus. Muhammad just regurgitated and plagiarized a old texts that already existed (torah, gospel, apocrypha stories, and old acient jewish tales)

        5 Pillars are just a rip off of already established Christian beliefs (except for one which is an adopted pagan practice from the 6th century pagan arabs):

        1. Baptism, confessing belief with your mouth( declaration of faith) Shahada

        2. Prayer, wherever, at anytime of day any much as one likes (Communication with God, Worship to, Thanks to God) not mandatory 5 times a day on a rug facing a black stone like Salah

        3. Giving to the less fortunate (Charity) Zakat

        4. *Adopted Pagan practice* A pilgrimage to mecca to bow down to to and kiss a physical black stone- that takes away your sin- and will have eyes on the day of judgement and intercede for you (all according to the islam). – Yeah that one came from the Meccan pagans before muhammad. Guess he didn’t want to get rid of all of the pagan practices he used to participate in. – Christ just wants us to go to Church. lol

        5. Lent (actual Fasting) not Not eating while the sun is up and then literally Feasting till the sun comes up – Ramadan

        its all straight from the teachings of Jesus and the bible. thats what makes it seem like its from God, its a bunch of stuff God already taught. lol

        Lastly: “All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.” They share the same essence, they are one in the same. So yes.

        Like

      4. stewjo004

        @man with the interesting religion

        1. What is your evidence God can’t be sarcastic?
        2. Original manuscripts weren’t burnt? THis is the problem you all just keep making fanfictions like you did with the Bible. Muslims voluntarily burnt so as not to to cause confusion and standardize. As you saw there a single a,i,or o can change the meaning. So new Muslims kept getting into arguments of if people were messing up etc so this was to reduce confusion
        3. We have our own stories in the Quran so youre already off to a good start. Next, why would different stories be preached if these are the tales of the prophets so that argument doesn’t even make sense. Hpwever we can prove the lack of plagirism due to the Quran not copying the Bible’s many mistakes like Joesph’s(as) dream not being fullfilled due to his mother dying, or there being Pharaohs during Joseph(as) and Abraham’s(as) time
        4. Again we are not a NEW religion we’re corrected your manmade pagan BS you stole from Plato and turned into Scripture case in point https://postbarthian.com/2019/05/02/the-repression-of-early-jewish-christianity-and-the-succession-of-islam-as-its-rightful-heir-ft-hans-kung/

        Liked by 1 person

      5. YeshuaAkbar

        lmao, gerater “here” is in the geral sense, so now you speak for the sense i intened to use ahkbar in? thanks.

        lmao we got em upset and cussing now. its cool bro, you just said they weren’t burnt, then went on to explain why they were burnt. lmao because different recitations were causing MAD confusion. lls uthman had to hit that reset button. uthman had to establish a standard narrative if you will… and we all know, according to muslims scholars, the standard narrative Has Holes in it. lmao.

        you literally just spanked the quran, “Aaron was is her uncle” THEN WHY is the quran calling her his sister? shouldnt the verse then say “oh miriam neiece of aaron” lmao either way its still HISTORICALLY INACCURATE.

        You’re right the verse was very clear – Cleary INACCURATE in calling mother mary miriam sister of aaron. I dont need to call you a fool or stupid or call your quran BS (even tho it is), jesus taught me better than that.

        Thanks for responding the my questions , with typical dawah script responses. lol i thought you’d be different. I’m out fam, keep seeking the truth.

        Like

      6. stewjo004

        @ man with the interesting religion

        Oh because I forgot, so then please explain how Jesus is All Knowing for me here I can’t wai to hear it:

        “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Mark 13:32)

        Liked by 1 person

  7. YeshuaAkbar

    I’ve got a quran question: why does the Quran confuse Mary mother of Jesus with Miriam Sister of Aaron – Aaron who was the brother to MOSES and Miriam that lived 1000 years before Mary & jesus?

    Surah Maryam (19:27-28) in the Quran:

    “So she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, ‘O Mary, you have certainly done a thing unprecedented. O sister of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste!'” (Quran 19:27-28)

    “Sister of Aaron” is not / has never been used as an expression of astonishment.

    Like

    Reply
    1. stewjo004

      @Yehshua(your name is heretical in Christian belief as it means Yeshua is greater than all which would include the Father and Holy Spirit)

      Sister of Aaron is already explained in a hadith and it doesn’t have to do with astonishment (though they were shocked at the “scandal”):

      Mughira ibn Shu’ba reported: When I came to Najran, the Christian monks asked me, “You recite the verse, ‘O sister of Aaron,’ (19:28) but Moses was born long before Jesus by many years.” When I came back to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, I asked him about it and he said, “…they used to name people with the names of prophets and righteous people who had passed before them.”

      https://www.abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2012/10/05/sister-harun-quran/

      A simple example from this using the Bible :

      This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham (Matt 1:1)

      As Jesus went on from there, two blind men followed him, calling out, “Have mercy on us, Son of David!” (Matt 9:27)

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
      1. YeshuaAkbar

        Ahkbar simply means greater. did i say Yeshua Ahkbar then the father and holy spirit? it could be saying Jesus is greater than Muhammad. (seeing how allah took jesus up to heaven and let muahamd choke & die) i wouldnt make assumptions of what im saying jesus is rgeater than..

        but yeah that’s what was commonly used “Son of [insert ancestor]” that reflects direct lineage. NOT “Sister of” i challenge you to find me a reference where Sister of (anybody) was used to”

        okay but Mary mother of Jesus’s father’s name was Joachim. So the Quran is just lying about who Mary’s father is? or has it just gotten the family history terribly wrong by saying Mary’s father has the same name as Moses, Aaron, and Miriam’s father? Amran!?!

        its laughably historically inaccurate. about more than just who Mother Mary’s father and brother were.

        Confusing mary with miram is just like 1 out of 50 things the Quran just gets Wrong. the Quran is clearly not perfectly detailed and explained about all things as it claims to be. Good thing we got hadiths tho, they really help clear up all the mistakes and unclearness in the quran.

        Thank you.

        Like

      2. stewjo004

        @Yeshua

        Greater here is in the general sense of ANYTHING. So yes by saying this you are proclaiming Jesus is greater than the Father and Holy Spirit. Good job

        It is a lineage, Aaron is her Uncle. By using Amram you can see why she’s called that

        Moving on, you were the fool who didn’t know something the verse was clear enough. So idk you’re point here. Your stupidity is not the majority, sorry to say

        Fianlly, what historical inaccuracy? We literally know a handful of things using the historical method about Jesus. But if you would like to see actual mistakes in the “gospel according tos” here’s an article detailing some of its many failures as a fanfiction that scholars have noted for decades:

        https://quranandbibleblog.com/2018/07/21/top-8-contentions-against-the-crucifixion-part-i/

        Liked by 1 person

      3. stewjo004

        @the literal man worshipper

        1. Doesn’t matter how you think you’re using it, what matters is the language. Don’t use things if you don’t know the meaning otherwise you end up commiting heresy like you’re currently doing

        2. Didn’t cuss? I used it in the context of saying BS. There is literally nothing you nor your religion can do to bother me as I seriously do not care. It is objectivably falsifiable and no serious student of the text can believe in it

        3. Uthman(ra) didn’t do anything. He literally took one (in this case Quraish) and made that the standard to cut down on issues. People still used the others. This is exactly what Christians and Jews did except it took you hundreds of years to do so which is now why you don’t know which version of the Hebrew Bible is correct

        4. Already answered they use famous ancestors for themselves. If she shares the same name it makes sense to use that title for herbas a throwback. Ta dah!!! Not that complicated for the intelligent.

        5. Could care less if you insult or not (even though you did and are now trying to do the standard self righteous Christian shtick) the Bible is literal fanfiction and has about as much authority as a Harry Potter book. It has scientific/ historical inaccuracies, false prophecies, morally dubious teachings, provent theological plagirism/evolution,off its own admission incomplete even after hella editing and finally teaches a concept of God that fears His creation. Why do I need to respect or take this thing seriously again?🤔

        PS

        Still no answer on how Junior is God but not All Knowing yet?

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Vaqas Rehman

      @Yeshua

      “why does the Quran confuse Mary mother of Jesus with Miriam Sister of Aaron – Aaron who was the brother to MOSES and Miriam that lived 1000 years before Mary & jesus?”

      Easy, it dosen’t. Not only do we have companion evidence in the form of the authentic hadith’s as Stew mentioned to you, but the Quran itself mentions the sister of Moses alayhis salam in chapter 28 verses 11-13. She is not named much less identified with the the virgin Mary alayhis salam. An odd choice if they were meant to be the same person.

      “okay but Mary mother of Jesus’s father’s name was Joachim. So the Quran is just lying about who Mary’s father is? or has it just gotten the family history terribly wrong by saying Mary’s father has the same name as Moses, Aaron, and Miriam’s father? Amran!?!

      its laughably historically inaccurate. about more than just who Mother Mary’s father and brother were.”

      And where pray tell, do we find the “family history” that her father’s name was Joachim? By all means name the source that is accepted by Chrstians everywhere & you no doubt view as historically accurate as well as full of truth.

      Also the idea of using “Sister of Aaron” as an expression of shock only looks ahistorical when forget it’s clearly contexal not general. To cite a irl example, when I was younger I knew a kid named Isa. When he was being rowdy I made the joke “What would Jesus do? Not his homework apparently!” as a riff on a popular expression.

      Now imagine your father is named after someone, you follow the religion of that namesake’s son, are descended from the brother of the son, and are named after their sister, it’s not unrealistic people would link you to your namesake as a form of chastisement for behavior contrary to the respect of the name.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

Leave a comment