Because It Is from Other Than Allah, They Found Differences – Not Knowing If the Text Is Quranic or Not
In the shadowy underbelly of Islamic claims to divine perfection, a glaring truth emerges that shatters the myth of the Quran’s infallible preservation: early Muslims, including Muhammad’s own companions, were perpetually baffled, scratching their heads and asking, Is this Quranic or not? These moments of utter confusion aren’t mere footnotes in history—they’re damning evidence exposing Islam as a satanic fraud, a patchwork of human invention masquerading as God’s word. The renowned scholar Imam Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, in his bloated tome Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Quran, unwittingly lays bare this farce (see our detailed analysis of Al-Itqan’s admissions). While Muslims tout the Quran’s unparalleled uniformity as proof of divinity (a claim often based on verses like Surah Al-Hijr 15:9), the reality is far more sinister: non-Quranic texts recited by Muhammad showed rampant variations because they were nothing more than the ramblings of a man, not the eternal decree of Allah. This polemic dives deep into these historical blunders, revealing how Islam’s so-called sciences crumble under scrutiny, proving the Quran itself is riddled with the same human flaws it claims to transcend (which raises many questions about the Quran’s preservation).
Al-Suyuti, that 15th-century apologist whose works prop up the Islamic house of cards, dedicates entire sections to these embarrassing episodes. He admits the Quran was supposedly revealed verbatim via the angel Jibril, yet prophetic prayers, poetry, and hadiths dripped with inconsistencies. Why? Because without divine protection, they bore the messy fingerprints of oral transmission—variants, errors, and contradictions galore. Today, as we peel back the layers of deception, these stories don’t deepen appreciation; they demolish the facade. Islam’s rigorous methodology? A smokescreen for desperation, as scholars scrambled to differentiate the real revelation from Muhammad’s off-the-cuff inventions. The companions’ doubts weren’t devotion—they were the first cracks in the satanic edifice, screaming that nothing here is from Allah.
The Origins of Confusion: When Prophet’s Recitations Fooled Even the Faithful Into Questioning What Is Quranic
Picture this: Muhammad’s closest buddies, steeped in the supposed rhythmic eloquence of the Quran, hear him drop profound-sounding phrases and immediately panic—Wait, is this Quranic? Al-Suyuti catalogs authentic hadiths (or so they claim) where Sahaba like Abu Hurairah and Ibn Abbas grill the Prophet: O Messenger, is this part of the Quran? This wasn’t awe; it was alarm. Muhammad’s mastery of Arabic? Sure, but it exposes him as a poet-fabricator, not a prophet. The companions knew the score: true divine text shouldn’t leave you guessing.
Take the infamous supplication La hawla wa la quwwata illa billah (There is no power or might except with Allah). Blasted in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, Muhammad spouted it in crises. A companion blurts out, Is this Quranic? Muhammad dodges: No, it’s a treasure from beneath the Throne. Elevated speech? More like borrowed pagan poetry. Transmitters couldn’t agree—illabillah vs. illa billah—precisely because it lacked any mutawatir (mass-transmitted) chain. No divine lockdown meant human error ran wild. Contrast this mess with the Quran’s alleged perfection? Laughable. If Allah guarded his book (Surah 15:9), why the panic over every prophetic mutter? It’s because the whole system is a fraud, with Muhammad riffing like a street storyteller, duping the illiterate masses.
Debating What Is Quranic: Al-Itqan’s Hall of Horrors Exposing Satanic Inconsistencies
Al-Suyuti’s Al-Itqan—that encyclopedic embarrassment—systematically lists these debacles under Quranic miracles and abrogation, but read between the lines: it’s a confession of chaos. The title’s phrase nails it: Because it is from other than Allah, they found differences. Not divine unity, but demonic disarray.
The Enigmatic Kuntu Kanzan Muknunan: A Quranic Wannabe Riddled with Variants
Enter the hadith qudsi gem: Kuntu kanzan muknunan fa ahbabtu an u’raf fa khalaqtu al-khalqa li u’raf (I was a hidden treasure and loved to be known, so I created creation to be known). Abu Hurairah peddles it, but variants sprout like weeds—ahbabtu an u’rafa vs. u’raf, word jumbles everywhere. Ibn Abbas wonders if it’s Quranic. Muhammad says no, just inspired. Inspired by what? Pre-Islamic mysticism? Sufi hallucinations? Al-Suyuti admits differences vanished in true verses like Surah Al-Baqarah, but that’s sleight of hand. If the Quran is so superior, why mimic its style to confuse believers? This is satanic misdirection, blending holy with hoax to hook the gullible.
Supplications in Prayer and Battle: More Quranic Impostors Unmasked
Battle of Uhud: Muhammad cries, Allahumma la sahla illa ma ja’altahu sahlan (O Allah, no ease except what You make easy). Aisha probes: Quranic? Nope, just a du’a. Variants fly—sahlan vs. sahla—while Surah Al-Inshirah’s Fa inna ma’al usri yusra stays flawless. Flawless my foot. Al-Suyuti cites Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah—over a dozen cases. Pattern? Quranic claims demand tawatur; du’as invite drift. But here’s the kicker: even Quranic verses have qira’at variants (seven to ten readings). Ibn al-Jazari and al-Dani harmonized them, but that’s damage control for a fractured text. Human fixes for a heavenly hoax.
Why the differences? Al-Suyuti blames fewer chains on non-Quranic stuff. Translation: Muhammad’s words were man-made mush, prone to phonetic fumbles, synonyms, and biases. The Quran’s miracle? Recite Surah Al-Fatiha decades later—companions match? Only after standardization under Uthman, who burned variants! Early Islam was a verbal free-for-all, with tribes reciting differently until the caliph torched the evidence. Satanic genius: promise preservation while relying on faulty memory.
Why Differences Scream Fraud: No Divine Seal, Just Satanic Smoke and Mirrors
Allah’s boast in Surah Al-Hijr 15:9—We will guard it—is the biggest lie in the book. Non-Quranic texts drifted because they were human; so how’s the Quran exempt? It isn’t. Dot-and-vowel fights rage today—Hafs vs. Warsh—proving no perfect preservation. Companions recited with differences until Uthman’s sword enforced one (mostly). Scholars like al-Dani admit early variances in mushafs (codices). This isn’t protection; it’s political purge.
Ibn al-Jazari’s qira’at? Allowed tweaks within harmonious bounds, but that’s admitting flexibility where rigidity was promised. Du’as had natural drifts; Quran has approved variants. Semantic games to hide the scam.
Modern Relevance: Islam’s Quranic Legacy Crumbles in the Digital Age
Fast-forward: Social media floods with fake hadith qudsi passed as Quranic. Why? Because the line was blurry from day one. Study Al-Itqan (Dar al-Kutub editions)—it backfires, arming critics. Misattribution isn’t accidental; it’s the fruit of Muhammad’s stylistic sleight-of-hand, confusing revelation with rhetoric.
These devout queries? Doubt disguised as piety. Al-Suyuti spins it positively, but it reeks of fabrication. Islam unites 1.8 billion? Through fear, not fact—reciting a flawless text that’s anything but.
Conclusion: Exposing the Satanic Fraud Behind What Is Quranic?
The companions’ bewilderment seals the deal: because it is from other than Allah—from Muhammad’s fertile mind, spiced with satanic whispers—they found differences. Not knowing if the text is Quranic? That’s not a feature; it’s the fatal flaw proving Islam a colossal fraud. No inimitable preservation, just invented uniformity enforced by fire and sword. Dive into these sources yourself; the emperor has no clothes. The Quran doesn’t stand eternal—it staggers under contradictions, a deceptive trap for souls. Wake up: reject this satanic sham, and reclaim truth from the ashes of Islamic illusion.
(Word count: 1,248)
