The Satanic Verses
The "Satanic Verses," as they are called, were most definitely not something thought up by Salman Rushdie for his book of the same name. In fact, it is a well-attested incident in the life of Muhammad, related by four different biographers (at-Tabari, Ibn Ishaq, al-Waqidi, and a fourth biography, the Book of the Major Classes). The story is of course an embarrassment to many Muslims, since it, among other things, brings up deep doubts about Muhammad's credibility and the source of his recitation, the Qur'an. Anyway, here it is:
Muhammad was in Mecca, having little success winning over the pagans to his new religion, which only acknowledged one god, Allah, while the Quraish tribe (his own) was in charge of the Kaa'ba, where many idols were worshipped, including the three goddesses that will be the topic of this subject, Al-Lat, Uzza, and Manat. He had won over some followers, but had hit a brick wall. Some of his followers had gone to Abyssinia (Ethiopia) to seek refuge from persecution in that Christian kingdom. One day he began reciting some verses from Surah An-Najm (The Star, surah 53). He recited, "Have you seen the three goddesses, Lat and Uzza, and the third, Manat?" This is now verses 19 and 20 of the surah. He followed with, "These are the exalted birds, whose intercession is desired." At that, all Quraish acclaimed him, even postrating themselves to Muhammad's god Allah, since he had acknowledged their goddesses as intercessors with Allah, and said they would accept Islam this way. Things improved so that the Muslims from Abyssinia returned (this is disputed depending on the source, but it seems like some time passed before what happened next). Muhammad realized that those verses were wrong, that Satan had put them into his mouth, and repealed them, reciting in their place what Gabriel brought to him, "Have you seen the three goddesses, Lat and Uzza, and the third Manat? What! For you the male sex, and for Him the female! Behold, such would be a division most unfair! These are nothing but names which you have derived, you and your fathers, for which Allah has provided no authority. They follow nothing but conjecture and what they themselves desire, even though they have already recieved Guidance from their Lord!" (53: 19-23, which is followed by insistence that the angels can only intercede with Allah if He Himself wills it, and only those without faith name the angels with female names). This displeased the Quraish very much, and they went back to giving him a hard time, finally forcing him to leave Mecca for Medina with the followers he had managed to persuade into accepting him as Allah's Messenger.
So what does this mean?
If Muhammad could be fooled by the Devil into reciting wrong verses, what does that say about his credibility? Some accused him of merely trying to get more adherents by compromising his monotheism. Others wondered how many other verses might be falsified. Certainly it has been an embarrassment for Muslims, many of whom simply deny or ignore it (Yusuf Ali's translation of the Qur'an, with voluminous notes, possibly the best-known in the English-speaking world, doesn't even mention this whole incident).
Salman Rushdie's novel incorporates this story into the narrative (as part of a dream by one of the protagonists, Gibreel Farishta, "Gabriel the Angel", an actor who thinks he has actually become the angel Gabriel and keeps having these bizarre dreams in which he plays that role), along with many other incidents of Muhammad's life. The most offensive part probably wasn't the recounting of the story (in which Muhammad becomes Mahound, Mecca becomes Jahiliya -- Ignorance), and things are twisted a bit from the normal, but the doubt cast on the mission of Mahound, who is suspected by other characters of being a fraud, and the later portion of the dream in which Mahound's dozen wives in Medina are replicated by the dozen whores in a brothel in Jahiliya, each of whom takes on the name and personality of one of the wives and who prove very popular with the locals--that is, until Mahound shows up. This whole subplot does not take up very much of the book; the book is more about India, London, and transplanted Indian Muslims than about Islam or Muhammad. There is another brief subplot that obviously pokes fun at the Ayatollah Khomeini, in a thinly disguised version, as the Imam who wishes to stop time, but what I read was that it was portions of the Mahound section that were read in Farsi translation to the Ayatollah that made him so upset.
Unfortunately, the fact that this fatwa is still going strong after 14 years, and sometimes reaffirmed by the Islamic Republic of Iran or parties therein with a sizeable bounty, and defended by other Muslims, does not lead much hope to the idea of intelligent discussion of Islam anytime soon! Too often, anything seen as "blasphemous" of Islam, even if just honest differences of opinion, are occasion for death threats. How is anybody supposed to discuss anything about Islam intelligently with the threat of death hanging over their heads? And worst of all are the Western non-Muslims who defend it, saying that Westerners need to be more "sensitive" to Muslims' feelings, and this "sensitivity" only goes one way--Muslims often put out the most offensive literature trashing Christianity and Judaism as "false, distorted, corrupted religions," as well as plenty of stuff viciously putting down everything in the West, yet Westerners are the ones who need to be more sensitive!
I pray for an end to this nonsense, even if it seems nowhere in sight.
Saturday, April 26, 2003
Thursday, April 24, 2003
The Ugly Muslim & Relations with Non-Muslims, especially in the West
It has to be said that one of the more offputting characteristics of far too many Muslims is their insufferable arrogance (even The Modern Religion Islamic website has an entire section devoted to "The Ugly Muslim" on just this topic). They take literally the dictum that even the worst Muslim is better than the best unbeliever, as well as the Qur'anic remark that the Muslims are "the best of nations" (3:110) -- and act like it! This even goes for some who are in no way "good" Muslims, not praying, drinking alcohol, screwing around, etc. (Muhammad said that all believers will go to Paradise, even if he committed fornication or stole, while unbelievers will burn in hell -- see the end of this article for the quotes.) And don't forget the oft-repeated Qur'anic injunction to not take the kuffar (unbelievers) for friends (3:28, 4:89, 4:139, 4:144, 5:51 (this time it's "Jews and Christians"), 5:57, 5:80-81, 9:16 ("take none but the ummah as friends"), 58:14, 60:1, 60:13).
You can see this in any number of Islamic websites and talkboards, as well as in person. I remember one sheikh from Syria giving a speech at a mosque in which he told a story about how a Muslim employer fired a woman for wearing hijab after 9/11, since he was frightened about possible backlash, but when she went to work at a "kafir" company, they not only let her wear it, but also gave her a room to pray in. This was followed by a remark about how the kafirs are "beasts," their women disgusting: "Look at pictures of kafir women at 60-70 years old, and Muslim women the same age--the unbeliever women will be ugly and horrible, while the Muslims will still be beautiful." Ugh. He said a bunch of other crap I took immense issue with, such as Muslim women being "infested" with "kafir" ideas of women's rights, such as working and having equal rights with men. (If this is what most Middle Eastern clerics think, we're all doomed!) Another case was where a mosque in the US was burned to the ground, and the local non-Muslims pitched in to rebuild it. Muslims overseas congratulated the Muslims for building a mosque in the midst of the "kafir." How do you suppose non-Muslims will take this denigration and refusal to acknowledge the good things that they do for Muslims?
The denigration of Western women as "whores" and "prostitutes" is of course well-known, as is the belief by too many Arab and/or Muslim men that all Western women are literally for sale and sexually available. In Islamic writings, the Western woman's life and beliefs are typically caricatured in a crude fashion, painting her as a pitiable object enslaved to materialism and hopelessly objectified, forced to wear revealing clothes, never as an autonomous person living her life the way she feels it should be, doing what she wants and wearing what she wants, whether it is revealing or not.
In terms of religion, Muslims of course believe that they have the truth, but the problem is that many Muslims also believe that the truth of Islam is so glaringly obvious that anyone who is truly exposed to it and does not convert is arrogant and evil ("Anyone who does not think Islam is the truth either does not have enough information or is not using his Allah-given powers of reason"--real quote). The problem, of course, is that members of other religions, or even of none, also think they have the truth, and are apt to roll their eyes at Muslims insisting that their truth is self-evident. There is a real lack of interest by Muslims to really find out what other religions are all about, what they believe, how they are practiced. Instead, discussions of other religions tend to be simplistic and hostile (Hinduism is "idol worship," nothing more; Judaism and Christianity are corrupted and don't need to be studied beyond what is said about them in the Qur'an), leading to a total lack of understanding. Muslims often complain that their religion is subject to distortions and stereotypes, but unfortunately many Muslims do the exact same thing with other religions, failing to see the hypocrisy in demanding respect for your religion while badly caricaturing and denouncing other religions. Unfortunately, it may be difficult to get these Muslims to see this hypocrisy, since in their minds Islam is the truth, all other religions are false, it's clear as day, and that's all there is to it. I don't know how to get deeper understanding, except perhaps living in close proximity with those of other religions, going to school with them, being friends, and so on.
Muslims will often demand the right to practice their own religion by wearing the hijab or getting time off to pray, and denouncing, for example, the French or Turkish government for banning the headscarf, but I have yet to read anything by a Muslim denouncing the discrimination against non-Muslims in Muslim countries, the banning of the practice of all religions other than Islam in Saudi Arabia, the special privileges given to Muslims in Malaysia, the attacks against Jews and Christians, or the whole classical Islamic system of dhimmitude as laid out in shari'ah, in which non-Muslims have almost no rights, and certainly next to none against Muslims, except perhaps not being killed in exchange for payment of jizya (and this isn't even mentioning those "tolerant" shari'ah laws like: No Muslim should be killed for killing a disbeliever, the testimony of a Jew or Christian is not accepted in Muslim courts, they can do nothing to offend the Muslims or risk death, and on and on). Many Western organizations will help people of all religions or none; Islamic charities help Muslims and only Muslims. And unfortunately there are those Muslims who consider themselves above the laws of the Western nations they live in, demanding that the West accept them but making no effort to reciprocate.
Fortunately, many Muslims, especially younger ones reared in the West, do not subscribe to this kind of nonsense, happily becoming friends with non-Muslims and seeing themselves as citizens of the countries they live in. This needs to be encouraged.
Hadiths:
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 41, Number 573:
Narrated Abu Dhar:
Once, while I was in the company of the Prophet, he saw the mountain of Uhud and said, "I would not like to have this mountain turned into gold for me unless nothing of it, not even a single Dinar remains of it with me for more than three days (i.e. I will spend all of it in Allah's Cause), except that Dinar which I will keep for repaying debts." Then he said, "Those who are rich in this world would have little reward in the Hereafter except those who spend their money here and there (in Allah's Cause), and they are few in number." Then he ordered me to stay at my place and went not far away. I heard a voice and intended to go to him but I remembered his order, "Stay at your place till I return." On his return I said, "O Allah's Apostle! (What was) that noise which I heard?" He said, "Did you hear anything?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Gabriel came and said to me, 'Whoever amongst your followers dies, worshipping none along with Allah, will enter Paradise.' " I said, "Even if he did such-and-such things (i.e. even if he stole or committed illegal sexual intercourse)" He said, "Yes."
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 76, Number 514:
Narrated 'Ubada bin As-Samit:
The Prophet said, "Whoever loves to meet Allah, Allah (too) loves to meet him and whoever hates to meet Allah, Allah (too) hates to meet him". 'Aisha, or some of the wives of the Prophet said, "But we dislike death." He said: It is not like this, but it is meant that when the time of the death of a believer approaches, he receives the good news of Allah's pleasure with him and His blessings upon him, and so at that time nothing is dearer to him than what is in front of him. He therefore loves the meeting with Allah, and Allah (too) loves the meeting with him. But when the time of the death of a disbeliever approaches, he receives the evil news of Allah's torment and His Requital, whereupon nothing is more hateful to him than what is before him. Therefore, he hates the meeting with Allah, and Allah too, hates the meeting with him."
It has to be said that one of the more offputting characteristics of far too many Muslims is their insufferable arrogance (even The Modern Religion Islamic website has an entire section devoted to "The Ugly Muslim" on just this topic). They take literally the dictum that even the worst Muslim is better than the best unbeliever, as well as the Qur'anic remark that the Muslims are "the best of nations" (3:110) -- and act like it! This even goes for some who are in no way "good" Muslims, not praying, drinking alcohol, screwing around, etc. (Muhammad said that all believers will go to Paradise, even if he committed fornication or stole, while unbelievers will burn in hell -- see the end of this article for the quotes.) And don't forget the oft-repeated Qur'anic injunction to not take the kuffar (unbelievers) for friends (3:28, 4:89, 4:139, 4:144, 5:51 (this time it's "Jews and Christians"), 5:57, 5:80-81, 9:16 ("take none but the ummah as friends"), 58:14, 60:1, 60:13).
You can see this in any number of Islamic websites and talkboards, as well as in person. I remember one sheikh from Syria giving a speech at a mosque in which he told a story about how a Muslim employer fired a woman for wearing hijab after 9/11, since he was frightened about possible backlash, but when she went to work at a "kafir" company, they not only let her wear it, but also gave her a room to pray in. This was followed by a remark about how the kafirs are "beasts," their women disgusting: "Look at pictures of kafir women at 60-70 years old, and Muslim women the same age--the unbeliever women will be ugly and horrible, while the Muslims will still be beautiful." Ugh. He said a bunch of other crap I took immense issue with, such as Muslim women being "infested" with "kafir" ideas of women's rights, such as working and having equal rights with men. (If this is what most Middle Eastern clerics think, we're all doomed!) Another case was where a mosque in the US was burned to the ground, and the local non-Muslims pitched in to rebuild it. Muslims overseas congratulated the Muslims for building a mosque in the midst of the "kafir." How do you suppose non-Muslims will take this denigration and refusal to acknowledge the good things that they do for Muslims?
The denigration of Western women as "whores" and "prostitutes" is of course well-known, as is the belief by too many Arab and/or Muslim men that all Western women are literally for sale and sexually available. In Islamic writings, the Western woman's life and beliefs are typically caricatured in a crude fashion, painting her as a pitiable object enslaved to materialism and hopelessly objectified, forced to wear revealing clothes, never as an autonomous person living her life the way she feels it should be, doing what she wants and wearing what she wants, whether it is revealing or not.
In terms of religion, Muslims of course believe that they have the truth, but the problem is that many Muslims also believe that the truth of Islam is so glaringly obvious that anyone who is truly exposed to it and does not convert is arrogant and evil ("Anyone who does not think Islam is the truth either does not have enough information or is not using his Allah-given powers of reason"--real quote). The problem, of course, is that members of other religions, or even of none, also think they have the truth, and are apt to roll their eyes at Muslims insisting that their truth is self-evident. There is a real lack of interest by Muslims to really find out what other religions are all about, what they believe, how they are practiced. Instead, discussions of other religions tend to be simplistic and hostile (Hinduism is "idol worship," nothing more; Judaism and Christianity are corrupted and don't need to be studied beyond what is said about them in the Qur'an), leading to a total lack of understanding. Muslims often complain that their religion is subject to distortions and stereotypes, but unfortunately many Muslims do the exact same thing with other religions, failing to see the hypocrisy in demanding respect for your religion while badly caricaturing and denouncing other religions. Unfortunately, it may be difficult to get these Muslims to see this hypocrisy, since in their minds Islam is the truth, all other religions are false, it's clear as day, and that's all there is to it. I don't know how to get deeper understanding, except perhaps living in close proximity with those of other religions, going to school with them, being friends, and so on.
Muslims will often demand the right to practice their own religion by wearing the hijab or getting time off to pray, and denouncing, for example, the French or Turkish government for banning the headscarf, but I have yet to read anything by a Muslim denouncing the discrimination against non-Muslims in Muslim countries, the banning of the practice of all religions other than Islam in Saudi Arabia, the special privileges given to Muslims in Malaysia, the attacks against Jews and Christians, or the whole classical Islamic system of dhimmitude as laid out in shari'ah, in which non-Muslims have almost no rights, and certainly next to none against Muslims, except perhaps not being killed in exchange for payment of jizya (and this isn't even mentioning those "tolerant" shari'ah laws like: No Muslim should be killed for killing a disbeliever, the testimony of a Jew or Christian is not accepted in Muslim courts, they can do nothing to offend the Muslims or risk death, and on and on). Many Western organizations will help people of all religions or none; Islamic charities help Muslims and only Muslims. And unfortunately there are those Muslims who consider themselves above the laws of the Western nations they live in, demanding that the West accept them but making no effort to reciprocate.
Fortunately, many Muslims, especially younger ones reared in the West, do not subscribe to this kind of nonsense, happily becoming friends with non-Muslims and seeing themselves as citizens of the countries they live in. This needs to be encouraged.
Hadiths:
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 41, Number 573:
Narrated Abu Dhar:
Once, while I was in the company of the Prophet, he saw the mountain of Uhud and said, "I would not like to have this mountain turned into gold for me unless nothing of it, not even a single Dinar remains of it with me for more than three days (i.e. I will spend all of it in Allah's Cause), except that Dinar which I will keep for repaying debts." Then he said, "Those who are rich in this world would have little reward in the Hereafter except those who spend their money here and there (in Allah's Cause), and they are few in number." Then he ordered me to stay at my place and went not far away. I heard a voice and intended to go to him but I remembered his order, "Stay at your place till I return." On his return I said, "O Allah's Apostle! (What was) that noise which I heard?" He said, "Did you hear anything?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Gabriel came and said to me, 'Whoever amongst your followers dies, worshipping none along with Allah, will enter Paradise.' " I said, "Even if he did such-and-such things (i.e. even if he stole or committed illegal sexual intercourse)" He said, "Yes."
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 76, Number 514:
Narrated 'Ubada bin As-Samit:
The Prophet said, "Whoever loves to meet Allah, Allah (too) loves to meet him and whoever hates to meet Allah, Allah (too) hates to meet him". 'Aisha, or some of the wives of the Prophet said, "But we dislike death." He said: It is not like this, but it is meant that when the time of the death of a believer approaches, he receives the good news of Allah's pleasure with him and His blessings upon him, and so at that time nothing is dearer to him than what is in front of him. He therefore loves the meeting with Allah, and Allah (too) loves the meeting with him. But when the time of the death of a disbeliever approaches, he receives the evil news of Allah's torment and His Requital, whereupon nothing is more hateful to him than what is before him. Therefore, he hates the meeting with Allah, and Allah too, hates the meeting with him."
Differences in the Qur'an
Muslims today say that the Qur'an now in our hands is the exact copy of what was revealed to Muhammad by the angel Gabriel, but the story is more complicated than that!
The first Qur'ans were written in unpointed Arabic, that is, the dots that distinguish certain otherwise identical letters, such as b, t, th from each other (to give just one example; see here for the Arabic alphabet ) were not written into the text. They were only added some time later, and then the signs for vowels were not added until much later after that. In addition, there are several different collections of the Qur'an mentioned in Muslim sources, such as those of Ali (the cousin and son-in-law of Muhammad), Ibn Masud, Hafsa, Abu Bakr (the first caliph) and Uthman (the third caliph). According to these sources, Uthman (some say Abu Bakr) decided to make an "official" Qur'an, so he collected all the different versions lying around, as well as making use of anyone who had memorized the whole Qur'an or any part of it, made an official recension, then burned all the other copies and distributed his own collection to all the important Muslim cities such as Damascus and Kufa (Iraq). The Qur'an in use today is supposed to be a direct copy of what is called the "Uthmanic Codex," the book that Uthman had written. There are tales told suggesting that Uthmand did not get all of what was "recited" of the Qur'an (which means recitation or reading). For example, as-Suyuti, a prominent Qur'an commentator, quoted Ibn Umar al-Khattab, the son of the second caliph, as saying, "Let no one of you say that he has acquired the entire Qur'an, for how does he know that it is all? Much of the Qur'an has been lost, thus let him say, ‘I have acquired of it what is available.’" He also relates a story about how Aisha, one of the wives of Muhammad, claimed that the surah al-Ahzab (33) used to have 200 verses, but when written down, it only had 73. He also tells another story that in one of those missing verses, there was the Verse of the Stoning: "If an old woman or man commits adultery, stone them to death," but, according to Aisha, the piece of paper on which this was written was eaten by a goat who happened to wander into her room! Suyuti also has several other stories in this vein in his Itqan, plainly suggesting that Qur'anic scholars of the time were aware that the Qur'an then in their hands wasn't everything that had been revealed through Muhammad.
Traditionally, there were seven different qira'at (recitations; readings) of the Qur'an (which itself means recitation or reading), each showing slight differences in the way the Arabic letters were written, or even in the words themselves. (See this page for more of the nitty-gritty.) Each qirr'a (singular) was transmitted by two different reciters (qurra'), meaning there were actually 14 different versions of the Qur'an. In addition, there were also three other, different versions considered not quite as definitive as the previous seven, each transmitted by two different reciters, for a total of 20 different versions of the Qur'an! It was said that Gabriel recited the Qur'an to Muhammad according to all seven readings, so each was really correct. Here's a list of the seven different "canonical" versions (first number is AH, after Hegira, the second is AD/CE):
Nafi (from Medina; d.169/785)
Ibn Kathir (from Mecca; d.120/737)
Abu `Amr al-'Ala' (from Damascus; d.154/771)
Ibn `Amir (from Basra; d.154/771)
Hamzah (from Kufah; d.156/773)
al-Qisa'i (from Kufah; d.189/804)
Abu Bakr `Asim (from Kufah; d.127/744)
The current, most widespread version is the Egyptian edition of the qirr'a of 'Asim as transmitted through Hafs (d.190/805). Another version still in use, mostly in Morocco, is that of Nafi transmitted through Warsh (d. 197/812). However, there are special editions of the Qur'an containing several of the readings of the Qur'an. As you can see, all these men died well over a hundred years after the death of Muhammad, so it has to be taken on faith that what they recited was accurately transmitted over those hundred years, and also that our versions today are the same as theirs.
This is just from Muslim sources, not even considering the archaeological evidence recently dug up, such as the ancient Qur'ans discovered in a mosque in Yemen (here's the Atlantic Monthly article about them), which show considerable differences from our current text.
So what is the actual Word of Allah? Is it a kind of Schrodinger's Cat, existing as both one thing and another at the same time? I find the subject fascinating.
Muslims today say that the Qur'an now in our hands is the exact copy of what was revealed to Muhammad by the angel Gabriel, but the story is more complicated than that!
The first Qur'ans were written in unpointed Arabic, that is, the dots that distinguish certain otherwise identical letters, such as b, t, th from each other (to give just one example; see here for the Arabic alphabet ) were not written into the text. They were only added some time later, and then the signs for vowels were not added until much later after that. In addition, there are several different collections of the Qur'an mentioned in Muslim sources, such as those of Ali (the cousin and son-in-law of Muhammad), Ibn Masud, Hafsa, Abu Bakr (the first caliph) and Uthman (the third caliph). According to these sources, Uthman (some say Abu Bakr) decided to make an "official" Qur'an, so he collected all the different versions lying around, as well as making use of anyone who had memorized the whole Qur'an or any part of it, made an official recension, then burned all the other copies and distributed his own collection to all the important Muslim cities such as Damascus and Kufa (Iraq). The Qur'an in use today is supposed to be a direct copy of what is called the "Uthmanic Codex," the book that Uthman had written. There are tales told suggesting that Uthmand did not get all of what was "recited" of the Qur'an (which means recitation or reading). For example, as-Suyuti, a prominent Qur'an commentator, quoted Ibn Umar al-Khattab, the son of the second caliph, as saying, "Let no one of you say that he has acquired the entire Qur'an, for how does he know that it is all? Much of the Qur'an has been lost, thus let him say, ‘I have acquired of it what is available.’" He also relates a story about how Aisha, one of the wives of Muhammad, claimed that the surah al-Ahzab (33) used to have 200 verses, but when written down, it only had 73. He also tells another story that in one of those missing verses, there was the Verse of the Stoning: "If an old woman or man commits adultery, stone them to death," but, according to Aisha, the piece of paper on which this was written was eaten by a goat who happened to wander into her room! Suyuti also has several other stories in this vein in his Itqan, plainly suggesting that Qur'anic scholars of the time were aware that the Qur'an then in their hands wasn't everything that had been revealed through Muhammad.
Traditionally, there were seven different qira'at (recitations; readings) of the Qur'an (which itself means recitation or reading), each showing slight differences in the way the Arabic letters were written, or even in the words themselves. (See this page for more of the nitty-gritty.) Each qirr'a (singular) was transmitted by two different reciters (qurra'), meaning there were actually 14 different versions of the Qur'an. In addition, there were also three other, different versions considered not quite as definitive as the previous seven, each transmitted by two different reciters, for a total of 20 different versions of the Qur'an! It was said that Gabriel recited the Qur'an to Muhammad according to all seven readings, so each was really correct. Here's a list of the seven different "canonical" versions (first number is AH, after Hegira, the second is AD/CE):
Nafi (from Medina; d.169/785)
Ibn Kathir (from Mecca; d.120/737)
Abu `Amr al-'Ala' (from Damascus; d.154/771)
Ibn `Amir (from Basra; d.154/771)
Hamzah (from Kufah; d.156/773)
al-Qisa'i (from Kufah; d.189/804)
Abu Bakr `Asim (from Kufah; d.127/744)
The current, most widespread version is the Egyptian edition of the qirr'a of 'Asim as transmitted through Hafs (d.190/805). Another version still in use, mostly in Morocco, is that of Nafi transmitted through Warsh (d. 197/812). However, there are special editions of the Qur'an containing several of the readings of the Qur'an. As you can see, all these men died well over a hundred years after the death of Muhammad, so it has to be taken on faith that what they recited was accurately transmitted over those hundred years, and also that our versions today are the same as theirs.
This is just from Muslim sources, not even considering the archaeological evidence recently dug up, such as the ancient Qur'ans discovered in a mosque in Yemen (here's the Atlantic Monthly article about them), which show considerable differences from our current text.
So what is the actual Word of Allah? Is it a kind of Schrodinger's Cat, existing as both one thing and another at the same time? I find the subject fascinating.