Part 2: The True State Of The Qur'an
CHAPTER XIII (Cont'd.)
It is apparent that the Turks have been doing some major "reforming" over the years.5 They had tampered with the graphic form in a multitude of places6, and the Egyptians felt it necessary to ‘restore’ the text to its original form in these 5300 places.
But what is most telling about this type of tampering, and is indicative as to why in 1924 the Egyptians weren’t able to just copy any manuscript (or printed text) let alone an early manuscript, is that even in what are considered to be Islam’s earliest manuscripts the graphic form has been corrected like this.
We note this in the photocopy of BLOr 2165 7, which Von Denffer has provided at the rear of his Ulum al-Qur’an, where he states that it is Sura 24:32-36 [right hand page] and 37-44 [left hand page]. We propose to examine ayas 32-34 only [see comparison with 1924 Egyptian graphic form on page following].
Notice that E and F show alifs in the graphic form of BLOr. 2165, which many consider to be the "most ancient manuscript", but which are omitted from the graphic form of the 1924 Edition.
In A, B, C and D we find the 1924 Egyptian with graphic alifs, but the ‘most ancient manuscript’ with none.
In our earlier Samarqand ‘original’ vs. 1924 Edition comparison this type of thing was also evident. For example in Page #356 [as shown again here] we
find the 1924 Egyptian has a graphic alif which was not in the Samarqand ‘original’.
Some, seeking to mislead, declare that in A, B, C and D these alifs were intended to be part of the ‘vocal form’ of BLOr. 2165. If this were so, and the same reading were intended, we would find what we do in both G and H where the 1924 Egyptian Edition (‘oral tradition’) has the ‘small alifs’ which could have been intended to be in the ‘vocal form’ of BLOr. 2165.
2/ For Replacing Thousands Of Missing Alifs
We begin to see the truth in Hamidullah’s declaration that a ‘difficulty’ has been ‘removed’ by the invention of this "small alif". The context of Hamidullah’s statement defines it clearly: