Why didn't scholars bury the different qira'at? | Mufti Abu Layth

thing i mean uh would you not argue then or could one not argue uh that you see there is there are so many transmissions in let's say the books of hadith the books of sunnah the books of in of history and all different things about varying recitations and people reading the quran different like you said the incident of let's say abdullah and i know you have an amazing very detailed i was quite shocked how detailed it was with abdullah masood and you know this whole thing about me i would attain and and some very amazing points you

made on that as well about his students but uh with all these narratives exist without them i mean without going into their mind new details but they one one kind of consistent fact is people are saying that people seem to be disagreeing on the hundred percent entity of the quran like they agree on the quran but they seem to disagree on its uh certain things like some people saying this ain't from me that ain't from it now wouldn't they just hide this fact like why even why would muslims even uh you know transmit this because this is not coming to us from today

orientalists i mean they're bringing some factors but really the bulk of everything is coming from our own sources it's coming from our book saying by the way you know hisham ibn hakeem this is how he read omar disagreed this is what abdullah said this is what he said obey said our books are saying this so why not just cover this up because they have muslim scholars have at times you know not to digress the discourse but like let's say you mentioned about the jesus thing and i uh personally agree i'm also of the view with like what gamdi sabi is that there isn't a second coming and and you get scholars like let's say in the past

who says that they disagreed on this you know but yet their names seem to have been buried like scholars just buried it they didn't transmit it why did they not do the same here then i think this that's sheer honesty uh they didn't mince words i think that uh whatever was the truth whatever was the reality uh just was just brought forth this is very similar to the fact when you see that we have certain scribal errors in the quran and this is something which every single scholar acknowledges for example we have extra alif

extra vows extra ers and they were so confident that even if they preserve those errors in in writing because the orality is so strong that people will recognize them that these are errors and hence they are marked by a circle so that people know that these have been erroneously written but because they have been written by the sahaba you say okay we'll just preserve it in writing and we know that they are wrong so i think it's sheer honesty that they transmitted the rest of the parath as well and they didn't hide it because ultimately the thesis that they that they i would say worked up was that they also somehow are part of the quran and they form

some historical connection with the quran that we have so i think it was their own purity of intent which even today exists and which is of course a matter of uh very uh singular amazement that why is it that we have this this phenomenon of a parallel transmission but this goes to speak volumes in favor of the fact that you analyze that 20-year period or 22-year period in which the quran was revealed and then rearranged so these variations were bound to exist i mean had the quran been given the same sequence as it was revealed that was the final sequence perhaps you would not have had any variation because it would have been preserved

as as it was revealed but because it was re recompiled it was given a new order a new sequence and some changes there had to be these these left out things of these remnants which were there and they were so dear to the sahaba that they saw they thought that because they heard it from the mouth of the prophet and they have some significance so they'll just not do away with it and they did not realize that this would become a huge problem later on because something which is of historical significance would be mingled up and would become part of the main discourse you know what i also feel uh dr saab is that

um i feel that the early generations like for uh especially what is called the self usually up between the one to two almost two hundred years of muslims at least you know up until the atabata being imam malik's age that kind of age i feel that they were also a lot more secure with their faith in certain things like these things didn't like it didn't kind of shake their faith as much like it i'm sure like it was a challenge but it doesn't like i feel that with time as institutionalization came in to islam i mean this is my thought i

mean i'm just saying that i feel that people became very insecure about anything challenging a narrative um but yeah i mean because i i do find it really strange that all of these things which are so challenging for people today they actually in our sources well discussed in the early to the extent that you know and people disagree like so people felt that you know no there were multiple readings there were different things and they weren't really shaken by this um hmm that's i i just find that very quite bewildering