Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

German scholars prove Koran a forgery

60 views

Skip to first unread message

x

unread,

Jun 22, 2009, 3:44:28 AM6/22/09

Muslims believe in the infallibility of the real bible but say the
present texts are corrupt, and therefore to be ignored. It turns out
that the text of the Koran is at least as doubtful as that of the bible.

That is the substance of the following article which comes from
http://islammonitor.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2471&Itemid=92
That webpage has photos not reproduced here

Divine Downfall
Written by Sujit Das
Sunday, 21 June 2009

Ancient Qurï¿½anic Manuscripts of Sanaï¿½a and Divine Downfall
ï¿½Respect for the faith of sincere believers cannot be allowed either to
block or deflect the investigation of the historians ... One must defend
the rights of elementary historical methodologyï¿½.

Maxime Rodhinson, 1981; p. 57

Muslims often say that both Old Testament and New Testament are
corrupted and seriously changed. TPuin's Parchmenthey say, for a Holy
Scripture to be authoritative, it has to be preserved without any
changes at all, and point to their Qurï¿½an, which claims to have been
revealed word by word and letter by letter to Muhammad by Allah. Qurï¿½an
claims, ï¿½no change there can be in the words of Godï¿½ (10:64) and, ï¿½there
is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Godï¿½ (6:34).

But then how ridiculous the ï¿½doctrine of abrogationï¿½ is, by which later
revelations cancel previous ones, as Qurï¿½an (2:106) confirms,
ï¿½revelationsï¿½ We abrogate or cause to be forgottenï¿½. Also, a Hadith
(6:558) from Sahih Bukhari confirmed that Muhammad forgot many verses.
Again Sunaan ibn Majah, (3: 1944) recorded that after Muhammadï¿½s death
some revelations were eaten by a goat. How divine words can be eaten,
changed, cancelled or abolished, in spite of Allahï¿½s specific claim in
10:64 and 6:34?

Are not all these claims of Allah self-contradictory? But amazingly;
these plain truths do not bother the Muslims at all. Probably, if we can
present another ï¿½authenticï¿½ Qurï¿½an which is different from existing
standard form, Muslims will give way to logical thinking.

The devastating truth is that a large number of ancient Qurï¿½anic
manuscripts, dating from first century of Hijra were discovered in the
Great Mosque of Sanaï¿½a (Yemen) which significantly differs from the
present standard one. Carbon dating system confirmed that these Qurï¿½ans
are not forged one by religious rivalries. Moreover these Qurï¿½ans were
discovered by Muslims, not infidels.

Probably this is the most embarrassing event in Islamic history of 14
centuries.

The Great Mosque of Sanaï¿½a is one of the oldest Mosques in Islamic
history. The date of building goes back to 6th year of Hijrah when
Muhammad entrusted one of his companions to build a Mosque at Yemen,
which was extended and enlarged by Islamic rulers from time to time.

In 1972, during the restoration of this Great Mosque (heavy rain had
caused the west wall of the Mosque to collapse), laborers working in a
crown space between the structureï¿½s inner and outer roofs, stumbled
across a amazing grave site, which they did not realize at that time
because of ignorance. Mosques do not accommodate graves, and this site
contained no gravestone, no human remains and no funeral relics. It
contained nothing more, in fact, apparently looking an unappealing
mountain of old parchment and paper documents, damaged books and
individual pages of Arabic text, fused together by rain and dampness for
over a thousand year.
Quranic mess
The ignorant laborers gathered up the manuscripts, pressed them
carelessly into some 20 potato sacks, and set them aside on the
staircase of one of the Mosqueï¿½s minarets, where they were locked away.
The manuscripts would have been forgotten once again, were it not for
Qadhi Ismaï¿½il al-Akwa, then the President of Yemeni Antiquities
Authority, who realized the potential importance of the find. Al-Akwa
sought international assistance in examining and preserving the
fragments, because no scholar in his country was capable of working on
this rich find. In 1997, he managed to interest a visiting non-Muslim
German scholar, who in turn persuaded the German government to organize
and find a restoration project.

Soon after the project began, it became clear that the ï¿½paper graveï¿½ is
a resting place for, among other things, tens of thousands of fragments
from close to a thousand different codices of the Qurï¿½an, the Muslim
holy scripture. Muslim authorities during early days cherished the
belief that worn out and damaged copies of the Qurï¿½an must be removed
from circulation leaving only the unblemished editions of the scripture
for use. Also such a safe place was required to protect the books from
looting or destruction if invaders come and hence the idea of a grave in
the Great Mosque in Sanaï¿½a, which was a place of learning and
dissemination of the Qurï¿½an and was in existence from the first century
of the Hijrah.

Restoration of the manuscript has been organized and supervised by Gerd
R. Puin of Saarland University, Germany. Puin is a renowned specialist
on Arabic calligraphy (the study of fine and artistic handwriting) and
Qurï¿½anic paleography (the study of ancient writing and documents). For
ten years he extensively examined those precious parchment fragments. In
1985, his colleague H. C. Graf V. Bothmer joined him.

Carbon-14 tests date some of the parchments to 645-690 AD. Their real
age may be somewhat younger, since C-14 estimates the year of the death
of an organism (parchment is animal skin), and the process from that to
the final writing on the parchment involves an unknown amount of time.
Calligraphic dating has pointed to 710-715 AD. Some of the parchment
pages seemed to date back to the seventh and eighth centuries, or
Islamï¿½s first two centuries, perhaps the oldest Qurï¿½an in existence.

In 1984, the House of Manuscripts (Dar al Makhtutat) was founded close
to the Great Mosque, as part of a cooperation project between Yemeni and
German authorities. An enormous endeavor began to restore the Qurï¿½anic
fragments. Between 1983 and 1996, approximately 15,000 out of 40,000
pages were restored, specifically 12,000 fragments on parchment and
manuscripts dating back to the seventh and eighth centuries.

Dar al-Makhtutat Library where the newly acquired Manuscripts and
cataloguing are stored. (Photo Source: Dreibholz, 1999. p. 22)

Until now, only three ancient copies of the Quï¿½ran are found. The one
preserved in the British Library in London, dates from the late seventh
century and was thought to be the oldest one. But the Sanaï¿½a manuscripts
are even older. Moreover, these manuscripts are written in a script that
originates from the Hijaz - the region of Arabia where prophet Muhammad
lived, which makes them not only the oldest to have survived, but one of
the earliest authentic copies of the Qurï¿½an ever. Hijazi Arabic is the
script (Makkan or Madinan) in which the earliest Qur'an was written.
Although these pieces are from the earliest Qur'an known to exist, they
are also palimpsests (manuscripts on which the original writing has been
effected for re-use).

The rare style of fine and artistic handwriting had fascinated both Puin
and his friend Bothmer but more surprise was waiting for them. When
these ancient Qurï¿½ans were compared with the present standard one, both
of them were stunned. The ancient texts were found to be devastatingly
and disturbingly at odds with the existing form. There are
unconventional verse ordering, small but significant textual variations,
different orthography (spelling) and different artistic embellishment
(decoration).

It scattered the orthodox Muslim belief that the Qurï¿½an as it has
reached us today is quite simply ï¿½the perfect, timeless, and unchanging
Word of Godï¿½. It means Qurï¿½an has been distorted, perverted, revised,
modified and corrected, and textual alterations had taken place over the
years purely by Human hands.

The sacred aura surrounding this Holy Scripture of Islam, which remained
intact for over 14 centuries is gone with this astonishing discovery and
the core belief of billion plus Muslims that the Quï¿½ran is the eternal,
unaltered word of God is now clearly visible as a great hoax, a totally
downright falsehood. Not only this; the Qurï¿½anic claim that nobody can
alter the words of God is also a fake. Qurï¿½an is supposed to be, if we
borrow words from Guillaume (1978, p. 74), ï¿½The holy of holies. It must
never rest beneath other books, but always on top of them, one must
never drink or smoke when it is being read aloud, and it must be
listened to in silence. It is a talisman against disease and disasterï¿½.
Muslims call the Qurï¿½an ï¿½Mother of Booksï¿½ and believe no other book or
revelation can compare (Caner & Caner, 2002. p.84). However, itï¿½s all
gone now. The end result of whole Islamic struggle for fourteen
centuries is a big zero.

As if it is not enough, many manuscripts showed the sign of palimpsests,
i.e., versions very clearly written over even earlier washed off
versions. The under-writing of palimpsest is, of course, often difficult
to read visually, but modern tools such as ultraviolet photography can
highlight them. It suggests that the Sanaï¿½a manuscripts are not the only
variants, but, even before that, Qurï¿½anic text had been modified and
re-written on the same paper. It means, Allahï¿½s claim (Q 56: 77-78;
85:21-22) that original text is preserved in heaven on golden tablets,
which none can touch except angels is also a fairy-tale.

Puin after extensively studying these manuscripts came to the conclusion
that the text is actually an evolving text rather than simply the word
of God as revealed in its entirety to Muhammad (Warraq, 2002, p. 109).
He is thrilled, ï¿½So many Muslims have this belief that everything
between the two covers of the Qurï¿½an is just Godï¿½s unaltered word. They
like to quote the textual work that shows that the Bible has a history
and did not fall straight out of the sky, but until now the Qurï¿½an has
been out of discussion. The only way to break through this wall is to
prove that the Qurï¿½an has a history too. The Sanaï¿½aï¿½s fragments will
help us to do this.ï¿½

Puin even concluded (cited Taher, 2000), ï¿½It is not one single work that
has survived unchanged through the centuries. It may include stories
that were written before the prophet Mohammed began his ministry and
which have subsequently been rewrittenï¿½.

During their research, as Puin (Lester, 1999) recalls, ï¿½They [Yemeni
authorities] wanted to keep this thing low profile, as we do too,
although for different reasons. They donï¿½t want attention drawn to the
fact that there are Germans and others working on the Qurï¿½ans. They
donï¿½t want it made public that there is work being done at all, since
the Muslim position is that everything that needs to be said about the
Qurï¿½anï¿½s history was said a thousand years ago.ï¿½

In fact, Puin and his colleague Bothmer knew for sometime during their
study that Qurï¿½an is an evolving text but they wisely understood the
possible implications of their findings and kept quiet. If Yemeni
authorities come to know about this discovery, they may even refuse them
further access. This is actually what Puin called ï¿½different reasonsï¿½.
So both sides kept quiet, and those two scholars carried on their
research unabated.

Puinï¿½s findings also confirm Wansbroughï¿½s assumption on Qurï¿½anic text.
During the seventies Wansbrough concluded that Qurï¿½an evolved only
gradually in the seventh and eighth centuries after a long period of
oral transmissions and different sects used to argue furiously with each
other on the genuineness of the revelations. The reason that no Islamic
source material from the very beginning of Islam never survived is
because it never existed. In fact Puin admitted ï¿½rereading Wansbroughï¿½
during the course of analyzing the Yemeni fragments (Warraq, 2002. p. 122).

Puin's other radical theory is that pre-Islamic sources have entered the
Qurï¿½an. He argues that two tribes it mentions, As-Sahab-ar-Rass
(Companions of the Well) and the As- Sahab-al-Aiqa (Companions of the
Thorny Bushes) are not part of the Arab tradition, and the people of
Muhammad's time certainly did not know about them. He also disagrees
that Qurï¿½an was written in the purest Arabic. The very word Qurï¿½an
itself is of foreign origin. Contrary to popular Muslim belief, the
meaning of "Qurï¿½an" is not recitation. It is actually derived from an
Aramaic word, ï¿½Qariyunï¿½, meaning a lectionary of scripture portions
appointed to be read at divine service. Qurï¿½an contains most of the
biblical stories but in a shorter form and is "a summary of the Bible to
be read in service".

Bothmer has painstakingly finished taking more than thirty-five thousand
microfilm pictures of the fragments by 1997 and brought the pictures
back to Germany (Warraq, 2002. p. 109). It means now Bothmer, Puin and
other scholars will finally have a chance to scrutinize the texts and to
publish their findings freely.

Puin is interested to write a book on this in the future, but already
wrote several short essays on their findings in various science
magazines, where he pointed out several aberrations between the ancient
Qurï¿½an and the present standard one (cited Warraq, 2002. p. 739- 44). In
refuting the sacredness of Qurï¿½an, Puin wrote, ï¿½My idea is that the
Qurï¿½an is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even
at the time of Muhammad. Many of them may even be a hundred years older
than Islam itself. The Qurï¿½an claims for itself that it is ï¿½mubeenï¿½, or
clear. But [contrary to popular belief] if you look at it, you will
notice that every fifth sentence or so simply does not make senseï¿½the
fact is that a fifth of the Qurï¿½anic text is just incomprehensible. If
the Qurï¿½an is not comprehensible, if it canï¿½t even be understood in
Arabic, then itï¿½s not translatable into any language. That is why
Muslims are afraid. Since the Qurï¿½an claims repeatedly to be clear but
is notï¿½there is an obvious and serious contradiction. Something else
must be going onï¿½.

The extraordinary discovery of Puin had fascinated Andrew Rippin, a
Professor of religious studies and a leading expert on Qurï¿½anic studies.
Rippin (cited Warraq, 2002. p.110) concluded, ï¿½The impact of the Yemeni
manuscripts is still to be felt. Their variant readings and verse orders
are all very significant. Everybody agrees on that. These manuscripts
say that the early history of Qurï¿½anic text is much more of an open
question than many have suspected. The text was less stable and
therefore had less authority, than has always been claimedï¿½.

Rippinï¿½s observation was superb. During the period of early Caliphs,
Islam grew as political movement and not as a religious movement. A book
like Qurï¿½an was required to keep the Muslims in unity. Qurï¿½an is just
like a ï¿½status symbolï¿½ of Islam, without which Islam would have died
during the time of Muhammad only. Qurï¿½an is purely manmade. Some sort of
Divinity was attached to the Qurï¿½an so that it can command some respect
because it could not stand on its own worth. This way, in acknowledging
the claims of the Qurï¿½an as the direct utterance of the Divinity, the
early manipulators had blocked all the criticism, which can otherwise
expose it. Qurï¿½an itself prohibits criticism in the verses 5:101 and
5:102. We do not know when religious blindness crept in, but
undoubtedly, the early Muslims after Muhammad were more liberal than the
present generation we are seeing today. The authenticity of many verses
had been called into question by the early Muslims themselves. Many
Kharijites, who were followers of Ali in the early history of Islam,
found the Sura recounting the story of Joseph offensive, an erotic tale
that cannot belong to the Qurï¿½an (cited Warraq, 1998. p.17).

Warraq (1998, p. 14) has the same view as Rippin, ï¿½Muslim scholars of
the early years of Islam were far more flexible in their position,
realizing that parts of the Qurï¿½an was lost, perverted and that there
were many thousand variants which made it impossible to talk of ï¿½theï¿½
Qurï¿½anï¿½.

There is another proof that Qurï¿½anic messages were distorted in the
early days of Islam and nothing like ï¿½Theï¿½ Qurï¿½an does exist any more.
Inscriptions of several Qurï¿½anic verses are decorated on the Dome of
Rock of Jerusalem, which is most probably the first Islamic monument
meant to be a major artistic achievement, built in 691 CE (Whelan, 1998,
pp 1-14). These inscriptions significantly differ from the present
standard text (Warraq, 2000, p. 34).

Mingana (cited Warraq, 1998. p.80) lamented, ï¿½The most important
question in the study of the Qurï¿½an is its unchallengeable authorityï¿½.
This is the only reason; critical investigation of the text of the
Qurï¿½an is a study which is still in its immaturity. As Rippin (1991, p.
ix) lamented, ï¿½I have often encountered individuals who come to the
study of Islam with a background in the historical study of the Hebrew
Bible or early Christianity, and who express surprise at the lack of
critical thought that appears in introductory textbooks of Islam. The
notion that ï¿½Islam is born in the clear light of historyï¿½ still seems to
be assumed by a great many writers of such texts.ï¿½ï¿½

Cook and Crone (1977, p. 18) concluded, ï¿½[The Qurï¿½an] strikingly lacking
in overall structure, frequently obscure and inconsequential in both
language and content perfunctory in its liking of disparate materials
and given to the repetition of whole passages in variant versions. On
this basis, it can be argued that the book is the product of a belated
and imperfect editing of materials from a plurality of traditions.ï¿½
Crone (cited Warraq, 1998, p. 33) elsewhere wrote, ï¿½The Qurï¿½an has
generated masses of spurious informationï¿½.

But in case of Bible, it is different, as Rodhinson (1980, p. viii)
observed, ï¿½[For Bible] the scientific attitude begins with the decision
to accept something as fact only if the source has been proved
reliableï¿½. Muslims wrongly interpret the honesty Christians display
about some variant readings of the Bible as weakness (Ali & Spencer;
2003. p. 76-9). Christians, like Hindus, want to see their Holy book
through scientific and historical point of view. When old Biblical
manuscripts, parchments or ancient Hindu manuscripts are discovered,
Christian and Hindu scholars almost climb over each otherï¿½s shoulder to
gain an early access to them. Such findings cause great excitement to
them. But sadly, no such excitement exists in Islam. Christians and
Hindus are eager to see more and more light shed on the earliest
manuscripts of their scriptures, while Muslims resist, often with strong
determination. The contrast is really striking. While both Hindu and
Christian faiths are strongly backed up by archeological and historical
evidence; so far neither any archeological exploration was allowed in
Mecca and Medina, nor there is any prospect in the future (Peters, 1986.
p. 72-4).

Muslim criticism of Qurï¿½an is very rare and almost nonexistent as Sina
(2008, p. 6) lamented, ï¿½Muslims are genuinely incapable of questioning
Islamï¿½. Recently the ex-Muslim websites are doing some remarkable work
on this. Ultimately, these enlightened people will successfully free
their Muslim brothers and sisters from the Islamic prison. Otherwise
whatever criticism is done on Qurï¿½an are all by the Christian scholars.
But Muslims should not take the Christian criticism as a mark of
religious opposition. Christian scholars have done much more criticism
of their own religion than Islam (Sproul & Saleeb, 2003. p. 17; Spencer,
2007, p. 1).

But once the Sanaï¿½a findings are published in details, Islam will not be
the same as it was for fourteen centuries. Islam is definitely going to
take a strange position. Many Muslims will cast doubt on Qurï¿½anic
sacredness and the very ï¿½romanticï¿½ concept of the Qurï¿½an will gradually
disappear and then a very interesting development can be observed. The
first question which will appear in their mind is - which version is
superior. But then, it is not possible to choose a Qurï¿½an and discard
the other by preference. Because the Muslim belief also confirms that
who denies a single verse of the Qur'an denies the entire revelation.
This is a logical impossibility and since scientific research had
already spoken out the truth; many Muslims will seek a way out of this
nonsense and will try to free themselves from the tyrannical oppression
of living in a false religion.

While discussing Muslimï¿½s apathy to science, reason and natural law,
Jaki (cited Spencer, 2002, p. 127) wrote, ï¿½What is occurring in the
Muslim world today is a confrontation, not between God and devilï¿½ but
between a very specific God and science which is a very specific
antagonist of that God, the Allah of the Qurï¿½an, in whom the will wholly
dominates the intellectï¿½. The Sanaï¿½a discovery will just add fuel to the
fire. Today the Muslim world is beset with frustration. Islam is
supposed to be the final revelation and Muslims are supposed to be the ï¿½
Best of Mankindï¿½, but the reality is just opposite. Muslim nations are
poorest in the world (Ohmyrus, 2006, p. 128). A time will come when the
religious authorities will be asked by the common Muslims to refute the
critics by logic, science and reason, not by the brutal force or Fatwa.
As Parvez Manzoor wrote, ï¿½Sooner or later [we Muslims] will have to
approach the Qurï¿½an from methodological assumptions and parameters that
are radically at odds with the ones consecrated by our traditionï¿½
(Warraq, 2002, p. 123)

But the Sanaï¿½a manuscripts will also provoke another question. If Qurï¿½an
is a lie, how the lie survived for so many centuries? The reason is that
the Divinity attached to Qurï¿½an is not ï¿½A Small Lieï¿½, but ï¿½The Big Lieï¿½.
The big lies are very powerful, and it always has a psychological effect
on the listeners. The bigger the lie, the more believable it is. Adolf
Hitler wrote in Mein Kamph (1925), ï¿½The broad mass of a Nation will fall
victim to a big lie than to a small one.ï¿½ Big lies are extraordinarily
convincible because it offsets the scale of the listenerï¿½s commonsense,
as Sina (2008, p. 179) explained, an ordinary person does not dare to
tell a big lie thinking that it would not be believed and he would be
ridiculed. Since there is no one who had never told a lie in his life,
small lies are often detectable sooner or later. But the big lies are so
strange that it often startle the listener. When the lie is gigantic,
the average person is left to wonder how anyone can have the courage,
the impudence to say such a thing.

Big lies always work wonder in politics. As George Orwell (cites Sina,
2008, p. 179) said, ï¿½Political language ï¿½ is designed to make lies
sound truthful and murder respectable and give an appearance of solidity
to pure windï¿½. Today when the divinity of Qurï¿½an is scattered by the
Sanaï¿½a manuscripts, the spiritual nature of Islam is also exposed. Islam
is nothing but a pure Arab political movement. The Divinity was attached
to Qurï¿½an, when Arabs started conquering the surrounding nations and
Islam was imposed on them by force. Arabs not only imposed Islam on
others but also imposed this irrational belief of Qurï¿½anic divinity to
the minds of their victims, so that once Arabs are gone, the conquered
people cannot come out from this mental enslavement and return back to
their original faith. It is a rare political skill. Many companions of
Muhammad clearly knew that Qurï¿½an was a fake, but they remained with
their prophet to share the booty and to enjoy the women. We all know,
after Muhammadï¿½s death, several Arab tribes returned back to their
original belief and idolatry flourished.

With much shock to the Muslims; modern study on Psychology had spoken
out the truth that Muhammad was an imposter, a madman who was suffering
from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Narcissists are such
self-absorbed persons who are pathological liars. It means, either they
are unaware of their lies or feel completely justified and at easy in
lying to others. Their mental condition is such that they have that rare
capability to believe their own lies (Vaknin, 1999, p. 24).

And, yes, Adolf Hitler, who knew of the power of Big lie and misguided
millions of Germans, is also recognized as a Narcissist. Today Hitler is
the most hatred historical figure in Germany. Like a mathematical
certainty Muhammad will earn the same fate. But we really do not know,
how many million people will die before we can put Muhammad in dustbin
with his Allah, Qurï¿½an and Islam altogether. For Hitler it was National
Socialism (another name of Nazism) and for Muhammad it was Islam, but
deep down, both were two sides of same coin ï¿½ a successful manipulator.

Sina (2008, p. iv, 260) commented, ï¿½Islam is like a house of cards,
sustained by lies. All it takes to demolish is to challenge one of those
lies holding it together. It is a tall building, erected on quicksand;
once you expose its foundation, the sand will wash away and this mighty
edifice will fall under its own weightï¿½ and again, ï¿½Islam stands on a
very shaky ground. It rests on nothing but lies. All we have to do to
demolish it is to expose those lies and this gigantic edifice of terror
and deception will collapse.ï¿½

Letï¿½s see, once the sacred aura of Qurï¿½an is gone, what other lies are
exposed.

First; if there are two or more versions of Qurï¿½an, then there must be
equal number of Allahs. So if only two Qurï¿½ans are authentic, is Islam
any longer monotheism? How to decide, which Allah gave which Qurï¿½an? If
there is only one Allah, then which Qurï¿½an is authentic?

Second; if we still believe that one Qurï¿½an is authentic, then how Allah
allowed the others to survive?

Third; is it true anymore that Qurï¿½an (10.64) says Allahï¿½s words do not
change - this is indeed the mighty achievement? If yes, what more than
one Quran is doing now? If not, how this false revelation is recorded in
Qurï¿½an? Did Satan put it?

Final; Bukhari (4.52.233) recorded ï¿½Unbelievers will never understand
our signs and revelations.ï¿½ But we see, for understanding the Sanaï¿½a
Qurï¿½an, the Yemeni authorities invited German scholars because there was
no one in Yemen capable of working on this rich find.

No wonder Sina (2008) concluded, ï¿½No matter how you look at Islam it
turns out to be a foolish religion.ï¿½

Muslims have sold their soul to Muhammad, but can they logically clear
the above doubts? The Sanaï¿½a episode had put them in such an awkward
position, that even circular reasoning or absurd logic will not help. Is
not it time for prudent Muslims to give a second thought to their
cherished faith? Instead of trying hard to reason out the above doubts,
is not it more sensible to agree that a billion plus Muslims had been
fooled by a vulgar imposter named Prophet Muhammad? Is not it time for
Muslims to care for what is true? As poet Thomas Gray (cited Sagan,
1997, p. 12) wrote, ï¿½ï¿½ where ignorance is bliss, ï¿½Tis [It is] folly to
be wiseï¿½.

To protect the Qurï¿½an from more humiliation, Yemeni authorities already
debarred Puin and Bothmer from further examination of those manuscripts.
In fact, now they do not allow anyone to see those manuscripts anymore
except some very carefully selected non-Qurï¿½anic parchments, which are
at display at the ground floor of Dar al-Makhtutat Library. But this is
not going to help. The bird is already out of the cage and it is useless
closing the door now. More than thirty-five thousand microfilms are out
of Yemen before the authorities came to know and already several
duplicates are made. The present author is sure that at this very
moment, in some undisclosed location in Germany, a group of experts are
endlessly working on the microfilms and Puin is burning enough midnight
oil to complete his book, which, once published, will hammer another
nail in the coffin of Islam. Islam is in real danger now.

Obviously, by realizing the Divine downfall within sight, many Muslims
are disturbed and offended. The fundamentalists will not accept Puin's
and Bothmerï¿½s work as having been done with academic objectivity, but
see it as a deliberate attack on the integrity of the Quï¿½ranic text
(Taher, 2000). Naturally, those two German scholars will be at forefront
of their rage. Puin fears a violent backlash from orthodox Muslims
because of his "blasphemous" theory, which he says, he cannot take
lightly. By remembering the Salman Rushdie affair he wrote, ï¿½My
conclusions have sparked angry reactions from orthodox Muslims. They've
said I'm not really the scholar to make any remarks on these
manuscriptsï¿½. If Puin's views are taken up and trumpeted in the media,
and if there are not many Muslims being rational about it, then all hell
may break loose. There will be some hostile response and riots causing
much death and destruction, may be another fatwa from Khomeini and
surely some hollow threats from our camera-loving Bin Laden, and his
ideological brothers. But can they stop the truth from spreading?

UNESCO has shown genuine interest in the Sanaï¿½a manuscripts ever since
the Memory of the World programme is started. In 1995, the Organization
also produced a CD-ROM in Arabic, English and French illustrating the
history of the collection containing both Qurï¿½anic and non-Qurï¿½ani
material. The CD-ROM offers 651 images of 302 Qurï¿½anic fragments,
indexed by script, frames, etc, a general introduction to the Yemenite
manuscripts collections and a brief description on the evolution of
Arabic calligraphy (Abid, 1997).

Ursula Dreibholz, a preservation expert who worked on the Sanaï¿½a project
for eight years as the chief conservator is much frustrated by seeing
the lack of concern of Yemeni authorities to protect those manuscripts
by using modern technology (1983, pp. 30-8). Neither the security
devices are correct, nor is adequate attention being given to the
manuscripts to avoid further deterioration (1996, pp 131-45). In fact,
Dreibholz (1999, pp 21-5) said that it was her greatest concern to
create a safe and reliable permanent storage system for the restored
fragments. Also, there is poor storage hardly any protection from
insects and water. Most importantly, the real problem is the lack of a
fire prevention or detection system, keeping in mind the truly
catastrophic fires that have destroyed important libraries and artworks
around the world throughout history. The Yemeni authorities said neither
they have money nor means to install such fire protection systems. She
does not understand the genuine reason behind the apathy of Yemeni
authorities.

Here Muslim fundamentalists can see a silver lining in the cloud. No one
knows when a devastating fire will break out ï¿½accidentallyï¿½ and destroy
all the Qurï¿½anic manuscripts, which are really causing such heartburn to
them. After all, for saving Islam, Qurï¿½an must be saved for which
Muslims will go any length. If necessary they will burn the Qurï¿½an to
save it from logical analysis. Their devotion to stupidity is really
that high. Probably, Yemeni authorityï¿½s unwillingness to install such
fire protection systems is an initial preparation for such an act in the
future. Never underestimate the destructive capability of the brainless
bigots.

References

Journals:

1. Abid, Abdelaziz (1997); ï¿½Memory of the Worldï¿½: Preserving
Our Documentary Heritage. Museum International, Vol. 49, No. 1, January
1997 issue. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.

2. Dreibholz, Ursula (1983); A treasure of early Islamic
manuscripts on parchment. Significance of the find and its conservation
treatment. AIC Preprints of papers presented at the 11th annual meeting
in Baltimore, Maryland, 25-29 May 1983. Washington, DC.

3. Dreibholz, Ursula (1996); The Treatment of Early Islamic
Manuscript Fragments on Parchment in The Conservation and Preservation
of Islamic Manuscripts, Al-Furqan Islamic Heritage Foundation, London

4. Dreibholz, Ursula (1999); Preserving a treasure: the
Sana'a manuscripts. Museum International. Islamic collections. Vol. LI,
No. 3, July 1999 issue. Blackwell Publishers. Oxford.

5. Whelan, Estelle (1998); Forgotten Witness: Evidence for
the Early Codification of the Qurï¿½an. Published in The Journal of
America Oriental Society. January to March Issue, 1998. University of
Michigan. USA.

Books:

1. Ali, Daniel & Spencer, Robert (2003); Inside Islam: A
guide for Catholics. Ascension Press. Pennsylvania.

2. Caner E. M; Caner E.F (2002); Unveiling Islam. Kregel
Publications. Grand Rapids. U.S.A

3. Cook, Michael; Crone, Patricia (1977); Hagarism: The
making of the Islamic world. Cambridge.

4. (Dr) Vaknin, Sam (1999); Malignant Self Love: Narcissism
Revisited. Narcissus Publications, Skopje. Czech Republic.

5. (Ed.) Warraq, Ibn (1998); The origins of the Koran:
Classic Essays on Islamï¿½s holy book. Prometheus Books. NY.

6. (Ed.) Warraq, Ibn (2000); The Quest for Historical
Muhammad. Prometheus books. NY.

7. (Ed.) Warraq, Ibn (2002); What the Koran really says ï¿½
Language, Text and Commentary. Prometheus books. NY.

8. Guillaume, Alfred (1978); Islam. Harmondsworth.

9. Mein Kampf; a 1939 English translation by Houghton
Mifflin and edited of verbosity. Reynal & Hitchcock

10. Ohmyrus (2006); The Left and Islam: Tweedledum and
Tweedledee in Beyond Jihad: Critical voices from the inside by
Shienbaum, Kim and Hasan, Jamal. Academia Press, LLC, Bethesda.

11. Peters, F.E (1986); Jerusalem and Mecca: The topology of
the Holy City in the near east. NY.

12. Rippin, Andrew (1991): Muslims: their religious beliefs
and practices. London.

13. Rodhinson, Maxime (1980); Muhammad (Original in French,
translated to English by Anne Carter). The New Press. NY

14. Rodhinson, Maxime (1981); A Critical Survey of Modern
Studies on Muhammad in Studies on Islam ed. M. Swartz. Oxford University
Press, USA

15. Sagan, Karl (1997); The Demon-Haunted World. Science as
a Candle in the Dark. Ballantine Books. The Random House Publishing
group. NY.

16. Sina, Ali (2008); Understanding Muhammad, A
Psychobiography. Felibri.com

17. Spencer, Robert (2002); Islam Unveiled: Disturbing
questions about the worldï¿½s fastest growing faith. Encounter Books. San
Francisco.

18. Spencer, Robert (2007); Religion of Peace? Why
Christianity is and Islam isnï¿½t. Regnery Publishing, Inc. Washington DC.

19. Sproul R. C & Saleeb, Abdul (2003); The dark side of
Islam. Crossway Books (a division of Good News Publishers). Wheaton.
Illinois.

Internet Sources:

1. Taher, Abul (2000): Querying the Koran. The Guardian.
Guardian News and Media Limited. Published on 8th August, 2000. (Last
accessed 3rd June / 2009)

2. Sina, Ali (2008): Probing Islam. An internet based debate
between J. A Ghamidi, K. Zaheer and Ali Sina, FFI. (Last accessed 7th
February / 2008).

3. Lester, Toby (1999); What Is the Koran? Atlantic Monthly
January 1999 issue. (Last accessed 3rd June / 2009).

4. Wikipedia (2009); Gerd R. Puin, (Last accessed 3rd June
/ 2009).

Author can be contacted at counte...@rediffmail.com

Unknown

unread,

Jun 22, 2009, 11:51:58 AM6/22/09

Thank you for this informative article. Two thumbs up!

--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ipvdBnU8F8
- KRudd at his finest.

"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
- Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.

"This is the recession we had to have!"
- Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.

"Silly old bugger!"
- Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.

"By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
- Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.

"A billion trees ..."
- Borke, pissed as a newt again.

"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor
general!"
- Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
appointee for Governor General John Kerr.