Recordings › In Depth: The Sanaʽa Manuscript -Mufti Abu Layth · 1 Mar 2019 › Segment 11 of 11
Does the Sana'a manuscript support or undermine the Muslim account of the Quran's history?
hadeeth ahadith ahaadeeth hadis hadees ahaadith muftis koran quraan al-quran sura soorah surat suwar soora chapter ayah aya ayat ayaat aayah aayat tilawah tilawat tilaawah sahabah sahaba sahabi sahabiyyah sahabiyat jihaad mujahid in sha allah insha'allah in shaa allah insha allah inshaa allahThe positive spin: the manuscript confirms the tradition's own account, and closing remarks
Play from 32:35
The video loads from YouTube only when you press play. Click a time in the transcript to seek.
Watch this part
Open on YouTube at 32:35The player starts at 32:35, the beginning of this part.
This segment32:35 to 36:43 · 4 min 08 sGeneral teaching
What this part covers
machinesummary, machine-writtenThe Sana'a find confirms the traditional account: a first-century Quran, companions who sometimes erred as the hadith say, and Uthman's standardisation of one reading. The largest discrepancy is a dropped word that exists elsewhere in the Quran.
In more detail
In conclusion Mufti Abu Layth offers a positive reading that he says others have not highlighted: the find reaffirms that the message passed down the generations has been accurate. It disproves those who say the Quran was invented after the second century of Islam; it disproves those who say all hadith were fabricated, since the hadith reporting that certain companions made mistakes about verses and wrote things down are shown to be true; and it confirms the living tradition's account that Uthman, to end people's arguments, locked in one recitation. It also shows, against those who say Muhammad and his companions never existed, that there was a Quran in the first century, that Muslims were honest in recording that some companions erred while the majority reading was followed, and that although some hadith have been misrepresented, much of the living tradition has held through the ages and conveyed significant truths now being affirmed by modern technology. He says Muslims have been transparent and that, had they covered these things up, the find could have come as a shock. Closing, he says he may go through some details later but there is nothing substantial: the biggest discrepancy he saw was a dropped word such as 'a severe punishment' or 'with their wealth and their lives', wording that exists in other surahs, so the writer may have put it in from the way the other verse is read; he then moves on to other matters.
Position stated
Mufti Abu Layth says the Sana'a find confirms the traditional account of the Quran's history, a first-century text, companions who sometimes misread, and Uthman's standardisation of one reading, and so vindicates the transparency of the Muslim tradition.
“this actually reaffirms for us that the message that we've been passing generally down the generations has been accurate”
Category: historical claim
Kind: general teachingTranscript
machine32:35 to 36:43 · click a time to seek · dotted terms open the glossary
the discrepancies are not so huge as in they're not actually they don't derail the message in any way right they're not that substantial right they also demonstrate that most likely these were a mistake that the that whoever wrote them he wrote and these were part of his notes why because they use words like like I said notes like don't say that sounds like a very personal note the other thing is this may have been it it has some potential that this was one of the writings that was then not locked in sorry one of the readings that was not locked in it's possible
although I don't believe that to be the stronger interpretation so that and in conclusion I want to add here this also you know in a positive spin to this I want to show a positive spin to this which people haven't really highlighted this actually reaffirms for us that the message that we've been passing generally down the generations has been accurate because you know there's many mus there's many people who've said for example the Quran was actually invented after the 2 Century of Islam it
disproves them there's many people who have said all Hadith have been fabricated but it proves that in the Hadith we showed it said in certain Hadith that certain companions used to make mistakes about certain Quran certain companions wrote this that they used to do this and that was true the living tradition told us thatman had actually to to to get rid of uh people's kind of debating and whatever decided to lock in a recitation now this is part of our just historic stories but yet it's true then because it shows that there
was and that it seems to have been locked in or people have tried to work on it it demonstrates that they these things were not fabricated because some people have said Muhammad was not even a real figure and his companions didn't even really exist and people afterwards made them up but it shows that that actually so these things have been true that that Muslims when they said that there was a Quran and it was there in the first century of Islam it proves that it said that when Muslims themselves said in our own books that by the way that there were various ways of reading the Quran it was true that Muslims themselves said that certain companions did make mistakes and you
know we're going to be honest about that but they went with a majority reading that was true Muslims themselves said that certain in the time ofman people started to argue and disagree andman tried to take strategic action to lock in the reading of the Quran it shows that to be true so it shows that there is you know even though there are I'm sure there are many Hadith sometimes that have been misrepresented and are not true and things like this but it shows a lot of the living tradition the living stories and things like this that have come down have actually held you
know throughout the ages and they've conveyed significant truths like we're seeing this with modern day technology now revealing and affirming the stories that we've only been reading for decades so I think that's an amazing spin on this and it shows that you know Muslims have been trans transparent and had have we covered up these things then it could have come as a shock so okay I hope that's of some help inshallah answer some of these questions um right so right people inshallah so any other issues you can reach out to me I will what I will try to do as well is go
through some of these in some detail but there isn't it's nothing so substantial to go through like I said the biggest one I could see was the drop of one word like like a severe punishment and things like this what I said those who do Jihad with their wealth and their lives like okay it had that you know it claimed to have had that word but here it didn't exist in in the in the modern day reading or in the current Quran that we have but then we know that those wordings do exist in other suras of the Quran so it's not that it doesn't exist in the Quran but just not in that Surah and so it's possible that the person
whilst reading put it there because it's a common way that it's read in the in the other verse so these things do happen okay right folks let's um let's move on what else have we got
Paragraphs overlapping 32:35 to 36:43. Full text on the recording page.
Cite this segment
Stable id, transcript version and tier are part of the citation. Every change to a transcript is logged.Mufti Abu Layth Archive, segment 2019-03-01-S11, auto-transcribed, may contain errors. https://muftiabulayth.org/r/k6faz7xw53y/s/11/ (accessed 1 November 2026)
- APA 7
Mufti Abu Layth. (2019, March 1). Does the Sana'a manuscript support or undermine the Muslim account of the Quran's history? [Video, segment 2019-03-01-S11, auto-transcribed, may contain errors]. Mufti Abu Layth Archive. Retrieved November 1, 2026, from https://muftiabulayth.org/r/k6faz7xw53y/s/11/
- Chicago author-date
Mufti Abu Layth. 2019. "Does the Sana'a manuscript support or undermine the Muslim account of the Quran's history?" Video, segment 2019-03-01-S11, auto-transcribed, may contain errors. Mufti Abu Layth Archive. Recorded March 1, 2019. Accessed November 1, 2026. https://muftiabulayth.org/r/k6faz7xw53y/s/11/
- BibTeX
@misc{abulayth-2019-03-01-S11, author = {Mufti Abu Layth}, title = {{Does the Sana'a manuscript support or undermine the Muslim account of the Quran's history?}}, year = {2019}, month = {3}, date = {2019-03-01}, howpublished = {\url{https://muftiabulayth.org/r/k6faz7xw53y/s/11/}}, url = {https://muftiabulayth.org/r/k6faz7xw53y/s/11/}, organization = {Mufti Abu Layth Archive}, urldate = {2026-11-01}, note = {Segment 2019-03-01-S11, auto-transcribed, may contain errors} }
Something wrong here?
Tell us what is wrong and it will be checked against the recording. Nothing changes until a person has reviewed it.
Sending a note needs JavaScript, which is off or unavailable in this browser. Nothing has been sent.
No name, email address or account is asked for or stored, and the inbox does not store your IP address. For rate limiting it keeps an unreadable fingerprint of your connection for 48 hours, and our database provider's own logs record connections as every website's do. Only your note, its kind, the page and the moment in the recording are kept, for review.