Gerd Puin - authority on Qur'anic historical orthography/paleography - on Quran

[Peter]

Video on oldest Quran al-Walid reign 705 to 715 AD - different from Cairo text in use today. Words changed verses and whole chapters rearranged.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLSEaPxePZc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsh1ZyXnMT4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerd_R._Puin

Gerd Rüdiger Puin (born 1940) is a German scholar and an authority on Qur'anic historical orthography, the study and scholarly interpretation of ancient manuscripts. He is also a specialist in Arabic paleography. He was a lecturer of Arabic at Saarland University, in Saarbrücken Germany.

Sana'a Qur'an find



Gerd R Puin photo of one of his Sana'a Qur'an parchments, showing layered revisions to the Qu'ran

Gerd Puin was the head of a restoration project, commissioned by the Yemeni government, which spent a significant amount of time examining the ancient Qur'anic manuscripts discovered in Sana'a, Yemen, in 1972, in order to find criteria for systematically cataloging them. According to writer Toby Lester, his examination revealed "unconventional verse orderings, minor textual variations, and rare styles of orthography and artistic embellishment."[1] The scriptures were written in the early Hijazi Arabic script, matching the pieces of the earliest Qur'ans known to exist. Some of the papyrus on which the text appears shows clear signs of earlier use, being that previous, washed-off writings are also visible on it. In 2008 and 2009 Dr Elisabeth Puin published detailed results of the analysis of Sanaa manuscript DAM (dar al-makhtutat) 01.27-1 proving that the text was still in flux in the time span between the scriptio inferior and the scriptio superior of the palimpsest (Ein Frueher Koranpalimpsest aus San'a', part 1 in Schlaglichter 2008, part 2 in Vom Koran zum Islam 2009, both ed. Markus Gross and Karl-Heinz Ohlig, Verlag Hans Schiler Berlin).

More than 15,000 sheets of the Yemeni Qur'ans have painstakingly been cleaned, treated, sorted, cataloged and photographed and 35,000 microfilmed photos have been made of the manuscripts. Some of Puin's initial remarks on his findings are found in his essay titled the "Observations on Early Qur'an Manuscripts in San'a" which has been republished in the book What the Koran Really Says by Ibn Warraq.

Assessment of the Qur'an

In the 1999 Atlantic Monthly article referenced below, Gerd Puin is quoted as saying that:[1]
My idea is that the Koran 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. Even within the Islamic traditions there is a huge body of contradictory information, including a significant Christian substrate; one can derive a whole Islamic anti-history from them if one wants. The Qur’an claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen,’ or clear, but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn’t make sense. Many Muslims will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Qur’anic text is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Qur’an is not comprehensible, if it can’t even be understood in Arabic, then it’s not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid. Since the Qur’an claims repeatedly to be clear but is not—there is an obvious and serious contradiction. Something else must be going on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerd_R._Puin

[Peter]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Koran_Really_Says

What the Koran Really Says: Language, Text and Commentary (2002) is the title of a book edited and translated by Ibn Warraq and published by Prometheus Books. The book is a collection of classical essays, some translated for the first time, that provide commentary on the traditions and language of the Koran, discussing its grammatical and logical discontinuities, its Syriac and Hebrew foreign vocabulary, and its possible Christian, Coptic and Qumranic sources.

[Peter]

Muhammad's followers have gutted and destroyed this Wikipedia article. Before long Wikipedia will be nothing more than another propaganda tool of Muhammadanism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerd_R._Puin

Here's what it was reduced to
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gerd_R._Puin&oldid=456381351

Here is an archived page from the "history" button just before the destruction
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gerd_R._Puin&oldid=449535620
_____________

Later....

I undid the destruction that was done to the page. Everyone should get involved with helping Wikipedia from being victim to Muhammad's followers. That undo only took the push of 3 "undo" links, which I noted in "discussion".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gerd_R._Puin#Destruction

[Dave2]

Greetings and Marhaba. I am new to this forum and was reading about the work of Prof. Puin on texts of the Quran from Yemen which had no dots on the letters. What I am interested in knowing is how is it possible that someone would write the Quran without dots which are essential to knowing which word is which?! Without dots it's impossible to know if a letter is a ya, ta, ba, or na. Or if a letter is kha, ja or ha.
Thanks.

[Peter]

Hi Dave, and welcome to the forum!
If it's OK I'd like to merge your thread with the thread we already have going on Puin here:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2576.0

As to why the dots are missing, since you have been studying up on Puin and the early manuscript, you have likely already read: "The scriptures were written in the early Hijazi Arabic script, matching the pieces of the earliest Qur'ans known to exist."

In answer to your question, my guess is they simply winged it, and perhaps that's another reason so much of the Quran is simply unintelligible.

[Dave2]

Prof. Puin's work is in this short video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNdvsLh128Q
According to the book online THE HISTORY OF THE QUR'ANIC TEXT by Muhammad Mustafa Al-A'Zami, in the conclusion on page 148 (www.islamicbulletin.com/free_downloads/quran/history_of_quranic_text.pdf)
he argues that the lack of dots was intentional, i.e. that dots WERE used in Arabic writing even before the Quran, but the Quran was first written intentionally without dots to prevent independent study or use of it without reliance on an oral tradition.

However, not all the letters using dots had them prior to that time. It would seem that the Arabic script as it is recognized today is fairly new and doesn't go back before the Common Era.

Yet, I would ask what would have prevented someone knowing the correct pronunciation from thereafter using the dots and circumventing this desire to protect the Quran from independent users?!

[Dave2]

I began this new thread only because it appeared that the earlier thread did not have too much interaction on it.

[Peter]

I began this new thread only because it appeared that the earlier thread did not have too much interaction on it.

Don't worry about posting on existing threads. Even if they say something like "warning this thread hasn't been posted on for 300 days" (or something like that).

[Dave2]

Here is an interesting article on the overall subject:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1999/01/what-is-the-koran/4024/?single_page=true

[Peter]

However, not all the letters using dots had them prior to that time. It would seem that the Arabic script as it is recognized today is fairly new and doesn't go back before the Common Era.

I understand from these scholars that the Arabic language didn't exist before the Christian era, and didn't have a written form until some time into the Christian era.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2561.0

[Peter]

...he argues that the lack of dots was intentional, i.e. that dots WERE used in Arabic writing even before the Quran, but the Quran was first written intentionally without dots to prevent independent study or use of it without reliance on an oral tradition.

But the actual net effect of intentionally allowing words dozens of different meanings would be to cast the Quran into hopeless and irreconcilable confusion (which it is) and make it's interpretation fair game for whoever followed to interpret it in any fashion they so chose. The kind of confusion Puin described of the Quran and we witnessed once again recently in the forum in the confusion regarding the adult "suckling" hadith. http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2612.0

[Dave2]

Are you saying that the story of nursing adults is based on a misreading of the letters?
Also it is possible that the missing dots is like a scientific text using lots of acronyms. I was told that old Arabic scientific writings also lacked the dots.

[Mujaheed]

...he argues that the lack of dots was intentional, i.e. that dots WERE used in Arabic writing even before the Quran, but the Quran was first written intentionally without dots to prevent independent study or use of it without reliance on an oral tradition.

But the actual net effect of intentionally allowing words dozens of different meanings would be to cast the Quran into hopeless and irreconcilable confusion (which it is) and make it's interpretation fair game for whoever followed to interpret it in any fashion they so chose. The kind of confusion Puin described of the Quran and we witnessed once again recently in the forum in the confusion regarding the adult "suckling" hadith. http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2612.0

THIS IS A HUGE DISPLAY OF IGNORANCE REGARDING THE QURAN, THE QURAN IS OFT RECITED VERSES NOT OFT WRITTEN VERSES, DESTROY ALL THE QURANS IN THE WORLD AND I WILL HAVE ONE ACCURATELY WRITTEN IN AN HOUR EXACTLY AS THE PROPHET RECITED IT. HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE IT IS THE MIRACLE OF THE QURAN  QURAN IS A RECITED TEXT AND EVRY WORD AND LETTER HAS AN EXCT PLACE AND PRONOUNCIATION. WE CAN WRITE THE QURAN FROM HUFAATH (THE SCIENCE OF MEMORISING THE QURAN) NOT FROM COPIES THAT ARE FLAWED.

PLEASE STUDY THE SUBJECT PROPERLY BEFORE POSTING IT YOUR EXPERT DOES NOOT THE FIRST THING OF THE QURAN AND THEREFORE THIS IS A FRAIL ATTEMPT BY THE AUTHORS TO SLANDER THE PERFECT WAY OF LIFE FOR MANKIND FROM ALLAH.

[Peter]

...he argues that the lack of dots was intentional, i.e. that dots WERE used in Arabic writing even before the Quran, but the Quran was first written intentionally without dots to prevent independent study or use of it without reliance on an oral tradition.

But the actual net effect of intentionally allowing words dozens of different meanings would be to cast the Quran into hopeless and irreconcilable confusion (which it is) and make it's interpretation fair game for whoever followed to interpret it in any fashion they so chose. The kind of confusion Puin described of the Quran and we witnessed once again recently in the forum in the confusion regarding the adult "suckling" hadith. http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2612.0

THIS IS A HUGE DISPLAY OF IGNORANCE REGARDING THE QURAN, THE QURAN IS OFT RECITED VERSES NOT OFT WRITTEN VERSES, DESTROY ALL THE QURANS IN THE WORLD ........

All of the many versions of the Quran were collected up, and all but a preferred version burned, on two separate occasions. Once under Bakr and again under Uthman - while editing the final copy of the preferred version.
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/textual_history_of_the_koran.htm

....... AND I WILL HAVE ONE ACCURATELY WRITTEN IN AN HOUR EXACTLY AS THE PROPHET RECITED IT. HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE ........

The term for it is brainwashing. Particularly to have convinced you of such poppycock as evidenced by the matter of fact that the Arabic language has changed quite considerably since Muhammad's day.

....... IT IS THE MIRACLE OF THE QURAN  QURAN IS A RECITED TEXT AND EVRY WORD AND LETTER HAS AN EXCT PLACE AND PRONOUNCIATION.

That's a conspicuous IMPOSSIBILITY, since the primitive classical Arabic of Muhammad's day, is a far cry from the modern Arabic of today. See how easy it is to prove the falsehood in your ridiculous claims?

WE CAN WRITE THE QURAN FROM HUFAATH (THE SCIENCE OF MEMORISING THE QURAN) NOT FROM COPIES THAT ARE FLAWED.

PLEASE STUDY THE SUBJECT PROPERLY BEFORE POSTING IT YOUR EXPERT DOES NOOT THE FIRST THING OF THE QURAN AND THEREFORE THIS IS A FRAIL ATTEMPT BY THE AUTHORS TO SLANDER THE PERFECT WAY OF LIFE FOR MANKIND FROM ALLAH.

The perfect way of life of prostrating to the Quraish pagan's black stone idol in Mecca five times a day, while praying in the names of the Arabian pagan's deity "Allah" and his "messenger" Muhammad, and running back and forth between Al-Safa and Al-Marwah as the Arabian jinn-devil worshipers did?
http://petewaldo.com/hajj_umrah.htm
Or is the Sunni murder of Shiites what you are referring to as the "perfect way of life"? The Dar al Salaam VS the Dar al Harb!

The quote regarding every fifth sentence or so in the oldest Quran not making sense in the OP, is from an authority on Qur'anic historical orthography, the study and scholarly interpretation of ancient manuscripts. He is also a specialist in Arabic paleography. Regardless of what it has morphed into since then. Even Muhammad knew it was in such a self-contradictory mess that he had to institute a doctrine of abrogation.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=116.0

You keep failing to answer my questions on shirk. Your posts will go to spam until you do. Please click on the link and do it before posting here or anywhere else.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=3344.msg14499#msg14499

[PeteWaldo]

Why the Quran Was Revealed in Arabic (David Wood)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rigMARKrNDw

An amusing comment under the video regarding Muslims suggesting you can only really understand the Quran properly if you read it in Arabic, is tantamount to saying, you have to read Meinkampf in German or you might get the impression that Hitler was evil.