The Holy Qur'an

Preservation of the Holy Qur’an

The straight path and the principal means which is full of the light of certainty and constant experience, and is the perfect guide for our spiritual welfare and our intellectual progress, is the Holy Qur’an which is charged with the settlement of all the religious contests of the world. Each and every word of it consistently carries thousands of repeated confirmations and it contains a large quantity of the waters of life for us and comprises many rare and priceless jewels which are hidden in it and are being displayed every day. It is an excellent touchstone whereby we can distinguish between truth and falsehood. It is the one bright lamp which shows the way of truth. Without doubt, the hearts of those who have a relationship with the straight path are drawn to the Holy Qur’an. The Gracious God has so fashioned their hearts that they are drawn towards this beloved like a lover and find no rest elsewhere, and hearing a plain and clear directive from it, they listen to nothing else. They accept joyfully and eagerly every verity contained in it. In the end, it becomes the means of illumination of the heart and lighting up the conscience and of wonderful disclosures. It leads everyone to the heights of progress according to their capacities. The righteous have always been in need of walking in the light of the Holy Qur’an.1

1. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, Izala-e-Auham, Ruhani Khaza’in, Vol. 3, 381-382.


Africa Studio | Shutterstock

Among the ancient books available today, scholars agree that the New Testament is the well-attested book. What that means is that there are more manuscripts of the New Testament than any other book from antiquity. There are thousands of manuscripts – partial or full – both in the original Greek language in which they were written, and in the form of translations in Latin, Ethiopic, Slavic and Armenian. As a leading New Testament scholar, Dr Bruce Metzger, proudly puts it, the book which is the runner-up to the New Testament in terms of manuscript testimony is Homer’s Iliad, with fewer than 650 Greek manuscripts1. However, when it comes to the preservation of ancient texts, scholars have pointed out differences between the numerous manuscripts available which makes it difficult to know without a shadow of doubt what the original words were.

Comparatively, the Holy Qur’an is the only ancient book which has been immaculately preserved for 1400 years.  This fact can be ascertained from evidence and by taking a closer look at both how the Qur’an was originally revealed and how it has been preserved since the time of the Prophet Muhammadsa. Critics of Islam have made many objections to the claim by Muslims that the Qur’an is perfectly preserved. This debate has become even more heated nowadays, because the preservation of other holy texts, such as the Bible, have also been brought under close scrutiny for the last two to three hundred years. It is alleged, for instance, that there are different ‘versions’ of the Qur’an and doubts are expressed regarding the motives of Hazrat Uthmanra (the third caliph after the Holy Prophet Muhammadsa) when he burned certain manuscripts of the Qur’an in favour of the official one. In light of this, it is important to first understand what methods were used to preserve the Qur’an.

An image of the Birmingham Qur’an manuscript. These pages, discovered in 2015, were carbon-dated to approximately 568CE to 645CE, which leaves open the possibility that this manuscript is from the time of the Holy Prophet(sa). As they are identical with present-day copies of the Qur’an, this is further evidence that the Qur’an has been preserved in its original words.
Public domain | Wiki Commons

Methods of Preservation of the Qur’an

Since the beginning of the revelation of the Holy Qur’an, much care was taken to ensure that it was recorded with 100% accuracy. God Himself gave a promise in the form of a prophecy that He would safeguard the revelation of the Qur’an from any kind of impurities. He says:‘Verily, We Ourself have sent down this Exhortation, and most surely We will be its Guardian.’2

In the commentary of the above verse in At-Tafsir Al-Kabir (The Large Exegesis), Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmadra, the second worldwide head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community, notes that it is no coincidence that the Qur’an has been preserved since its revelation. In fact, its preservation is hinted at in the words ‘Al-Kitab’ and ‘Qur’an’. This means that it was preserved in two ways. First, it was written down from the very beginning, and secondly, it has been memorised by people in its entirety since its very first revelation.3 Other than this, he notes several other factors that contributed to the preservation of the Qur’an:

1. God ensured that such people will exist who are able to memorise the Qur’an from beginning  to end.

2. The language of the Qur’an is very simple and attractive, enabling anyone to memorise it – fully or in parts – without difficulty.

3. The recitation of the Qur’an was made obligatory in salat – the five daily prayers – helping to preserve it.

4. God created love in the hearts of the people so that they would recite it regularly.

5. God ensured that the Holy Qur’an would spread throughout the world right after its revelation, making it impossible for any group or government to make changes or amendments to the text.

6. In the Islamic world, the study of a variety of academic fields has been traditionally based on the Qur’an, causing the Qur’an to be quoted in all kinds of books related to different fields of study. Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmadra says that if the quoted verses of the Qur’an from all these books are collected and compiled, that the whole of the Qur’an could be compiled from just those references.

7. The academic form of Arabic never changed and can be understood even today with ease. This helped preserve the original language of the Qur’an, in turn supporting the preservation of the Qur’an itself.

8. God protected the Qur’an by sending fresh revelation in its support through mujaddidin (reformers) and other chosen ones.4

Adding to the 8th point, Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmadra notes that in this day and age, when irreligiousness has reached its climax, God has sent the Promised Messiahas, who has purified the Qur’an from all incorrect interpretations and commentaries and presented it to the world in its purest form. Hence, in this manner, God has ensured that the Qur’an is preserved both in its script and in its true meanings and message.

Moreover, the Holy Qur’an itself points to how much care was taken in the way it was revealed in order to ensure its purity. For instance, God says that the Qur’an was revealed at a slow pace so that the Holy Prophetsa and the companionsra can learn it methodically and thoroughly without rushing through it:

‘And the Qur’an We have revealed in pieces that thou mayest read it to mankind at intervals, and We have sent it down piecemeal.’5

This fact is corroborated by history as it is known that the Qur’an was revealed over a period of twenty-three years, which ensured safe delivery of the message from God to the Holy Prophetsa and from him to his companionsra. This prevented it from being forgotten as there was plenty of time to memorise and revise the Qur’an in small, manageable portions. Hazrat Mirza Bashir Ahmadra, a son of the Promised Messiahas and scholar of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, has calculated that the Holy Prophetsa spent 7970 days as a Prophet, while the number of verses in the Qur’an are 6236 and the number of words in the Qur’an are 77,934. This means that on average, every verse of the Qur’an has 12 words, while the average daily revelation of the Qur’an is only 9 words6. In other words, the Qur’an was revealed so slowly that on average, even a full verse was not revealed on a daily basis.

Some critics of Islam allege that the Qur’an should have been revealed all at once and cast doubt in regards to the reasoning behind its slow revelation. This allegation was made during the time of the Holy Prophetsa as well and the Holy Qur’an addresses it as follows:

‘And those who disbelieve say, “Why was not the Qur’an revealed to him all at once?” We have revealed it thus that We may strengthen thy heart therewith. And We have arranged it in the best form.’7

In commentary of this verse, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the Promised Messiahas writes, ‘The disbelievers say, “Why was the Qur’an not revealed all at once?” [God says,] this is how it should have been so that We may strengthen your heart from time to time. This was also so that Divine knowledge and other kinds of knowledge are taught at their own time, appropriately. This is because it is harder to understand something before its time. With this wisdom, God revealed the Holy Qur’an over 23 years so that the prophecies were also fulfilled during this time.’8

The Scribes of the Holy Qur’an

Among the various precautions taken for the preservation of the Qur’an, let us examine just one – the writing down of the Qur’an. There were many companionsra of the Holy Prophetsa who had the responsibility of writing down the revelation of the Holy Qur’an. It is narrated that:

‘Whenever a verse was revealed, the Holy Prophetsa would call one of the scribes.’9

This means that the Holy Prophetsa had several scribes available to him. Quoting from Fathul Bari,  Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmadra gives a list of 15 scribes11, the most important of whom was Hazrat Zaidra bin Thabit.

Maulana Ahsanullah Danish, a scholar of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama‘at, who consulted various historical books that contain the names of the scribes, concludes that there were 28 companionsra who wrote down the Qur’an during the time of the Holy Prophetsa, and he has also noted that some researchers have placed the number as high as 40 companionsra.12  What all of this research shows is that those of his companionsra who were literate and could write were eager to preserve the verses of the Holy Qur’an by noting them down. In addition, this was their practice from the very beginning, and it was common for the companionsra to have some written portions of the Qur’an with them.

If those various manuscripts with fragments of the Qur’an written had been put together, complete copies of the Qur’an could be produced from them. On top of this, some companionsra had written down the Qur’an in its entirety, as is evident from the following Hadith (oral traditions carried down from the time of the Holy Prophetsa): 

‘Qatada narrated: I asked Anasra bin Malik: “Who collected the Qur’an at the time of the Prophetsa?” He replied, “Four, all of whom were from the Ansar [those Muslims who were originally from the city of Madinah]: Ubayy bin Ka‘b, Mu‘adh bin Jabal, Zaid bin Thabit and Abu Zaid.”’13

‘Anasra bin Malik narrated: “When the Prophetsa died, none had collected the Qur’an but four persons: Abu Ad-Darda’, Mu‘adh bin Jabal, Zaid bin Thabit and Abu Zaid.”’14

Based on these two narrations, it can be determined that from the tribe of Hazrat Anasra alone there were four people from the Ansar who had written down the Qur’an in its entirety during the lifetime of the Holy Prophetsa.

The First Single-Volume Manuscript of the Qur’an

Based on his research on the compilation of the Qur’an, Maulana Ahsanullah Danish writes that while it is true that the Qur’an had been written down in its entirety by the companionsra, the Qur’an did not exist in the form of a hardbound book or a single volume (as it does today) during the lifetime of the Holy Prophetsa.15 This is why, during the Khilafat (Caliphate) of Hazrat Abu Bakrra, the first successor of the Holy Prophetsa, when the battle of Yamama took place in which 500 Muslims who had memorised the Qur’an were martyred, Hazrat Umarra suggested to Hazrat Abu Bakrra that the Qur’an should be compiled into the form of a single volume.16 This incident is described at length in Sahih Bukhari and mentions that while Hazrat Abu Bakrra was hesitant to begin with, since the Qur’an had never been compiled into a single volume during the life of the Holy Prophetsa, he eventually realised the necessity of this undertaking, and assigned Hazrat Zaidra bin Thabit to do this task. This was because he was the most trusted and prominent scribe of the Qur’an during the lifetime of the Holy Prophetsa.17

Some critics allege that this point was the first attempt to write the Qur’an as Hazrat Abu Bakrra clearly said that this had never been done during the lifetime of the Holy Prophetsa. However, this allegation is born out of a poor understanding of the actual narration in Arabic. Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmadra points out that the words which Hazrat Umarra said to Hazrat Abu Bakrra were:

This means, ‘I suggest that you order the collection of the Qur’an’. In other words, he was not suggesting the writing down of the Qur’an, as that had already been done. He was suggesting the collection of the Qur’an into a single, complete volume. Similarly, when Hazrat Abu Bakrra called Hazrat Zaidra, he said to him ‘ijma’hu’, meaning that he should collect it in one place. He did not tell him to write it down for the first time. Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmadra concludes by saying, ‘These words themselves demonstrate that at that time, the question in front of them was that of collecting the pages of the Qur’an into a single volume. They were not concerned about writing it down per se.’18

Contrary to the way critics wish to portray this narration, it actually shows the extent to which the companionsra strove to preserve the purity of the Qur’anic text. Prior to the time of the narration, the Qur’an had already been written down in its entirety by several companionsra. It had been memorised in its entirety by several companionsra, and it was being recited, memorised, studied, discussed and quoted frequently. On top of all this, the companionsra still wished to go a step further and have the Qur’an put together into a single volume. What remarkable, sincere service to the Qur’an! Is it still possible to assume that the Qur’an was corrupted in light of such evidence to the contrary? Furthermore, the reason why this single-volume manuscript could not be prepared during the time of the Holy Prophetsa is because the Qur’an was being revealed to him constantly and it was not possible to know if the revelation of the Qur’an had ended. However, when the Holy Prophetsa had passed away, it was understood that the Qur’anic revelation has come to an end and the Qur’an could now be collected into a single book form.

In a remarkable book on the compilation, arrangement, and revelation of the Qur’an – Al-Itqan fi ’ulumil Qur’an – Hazrat Imam Jalaluddin Sayyutirh writes about the precautions that were taken to put together this first volume of the Qur’an.19 He writes that in light of narrated traditions, it should be understood that Hazrat Zaidra was himself a hafiz (one who had committed the entire Qur’an to memory) but he still sought other witnesses to each verse both in written form as well as through memorisation before adding it to the single volume of the Qur’an that he was asked to prepare. Then, Imam Jalaluddinrh says:

‘Abu Da’ud narrates that Abu Bakrra said to Umarra and Zaidra: “Sit at the entrance to the mosque and whoever comes to you with any portion from the book of Allah [i.e. the Holy Qur’an] with the support of two witnesses, write it down”. Ibn Hijr says, “The two witnesses refer to two formats, that is, through memorisation and in writing. Sakhawi writes in his book Jamalul-Qura, “This means that two witnesses should give testimony that it was written down in front of the Holy Prophetsa…”Abu Shama says, “It was their intention that the Qur’an be written down in the same words that were written down in the presence of the Holy Prophetsa, and not just based on memory.”’21

Based on these numerous narrations, Hazrat Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmud Ahmadra writes that for every single verse of the Qur’an, both the memory of that verse and a written format of that verse were asked for before it was included in the single volume compiled by Hazrat Abu Bakrra. In addition, for most of the Qur’anic verses, there were dozens or even hundreds of witnesses who said that they had learnt the verse from the Holy Prophetsa directly. Many verses even had thousands of witnesses.22  The final volume that was produced out of this monumental exercise is called Mushaf-e-Umm (Master Copy) and no companionsra laid any objection to the accuracy of this manuscript of the Qur’an.

Standardised Copy of the Qur’an

During the time of Hazrat Uthmanra, the third Khalifah (Caliph) of the Holy Prophet Muhammadsa, copies of this Mushaf-e-Umm were made and distributed to different Muslim lands as official, standardised copies of the Qur’an. This was because he started receiving complaints that different tribes enunciated or pronounced words of the Qur’an in distinctive ways and so Hazrat Uthmanra forbade all variations of enunciation of even vowel points and sent a standard copy to be recited in the standard way. This standard form of recitation or pronunciation of words was based on the dialect of the Holy Prophetsa, or the dialect of the Quraish of Makkah. In Arabic, this is called Qira’ah and the closest analogy for English speakers to understand the difference between Qira’at (the plural of Qira’ah) is to think of the difference between American English and British English in terms of pronunciation. Since Arabic is a much more diverse language as compared to English, this difference in dialects becomes much more profound and distinctive among Arabic speakers. Hence, Hazrat Uthmanra responded to this challenge of differences in pronunciation by standardising the written copy of the Qur’an along with its mode of recitation. As an added precaution, he ordered the burning of all other written manuscripts of the Qur’an – whether they were complete, or only had portions of the Qur’an written on them. Since a colossal effort had already been made to prepare the Mushaf-e-Umm, there was no need to keep any other manuscripts of any other shape or form. One fear of allowing such manuscripts to exist was that some companionsra took personal notes on their manuscripts and it could have led to confusion for later peoples as they may have wondered which part is the Qur’an and which part is a footnote or a side note.

The Manuscript of Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra

Some critics of Islam object that Hazrat ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘udra (a companion of the Holy Prophetsa did not consider Surah Al-Fatihah (the first chapter of the Holy Qur’an) and the Mu‘awwidhatain (the last 2 chapters of the Qur’an) as part of the original text of the whole Qur’an, causing his hypothetical manuscript to be made up of 111 chapters instead of 114 chapters. We call it hypothetical because he never compiled an official manuscript, as opposed to the Mushaf-e-Umm and never declared or formally announced that his manuscript should be considered a standard instead of any other manuscript. Regardless, it is indeed true that some narrations mention this opinion of Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra. For instance, it is narrated in Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal as follows:

‘It is narrated by Abdur Rahman bin Yazid that Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra used to erase the Mu‘awwidhatain from his manuscripts and used to say, “They are not from the Book of Allah [i.e. the Holy Qur’an]”. One narrator, A‘mash, narrates that Asim narrates from Zirr, who in turn narrates from Hazrat Ubayy bin Ka‘bra [who said], “We asked the Holy Prophetsa about them [i.e. Mu‘awwidhatain], and he said, ‘This is how I have been commanded’, and so I convey [this to others].”’24

A similar narration appears in Sahih Bukhari as follows:

‘Zirr bin Hubaish narrates, “I asked Ubayy bin Ka‘bra, ‘O Abul Mundhir! Your brother, Ibn Mas‘udra said such-and-such [i.e., the Mu‘awwidhatain do not belong to the Qur’an]’. Ubayyra said, ‘I asked the Holy Prophetsa about them, and he said, “They have been revealed to me, and I have recited them (as a part of the Qur’an).”’ Ubayyra added, “So, we say according to what the Holy Prophetsa said.”’

First, it must be clear from these narrations that Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra is only expressing an opinion about the last 2 chapters of the Qur’an. Other narrations mention that he thought these were merely prayers revealed to the Holy Prophetsa in order to seek protection from Allah on behalf of his grandsons, Hazrat Imam Hasanra and Hazrat Imam Hussainra. Commenting on similar objections about Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the Promised Messiahas writes:

‘These ignorant people say that Ibn Mas‘udra requested a prayer duel, which means that it is permissible for Muslims to do prayer duels. However they cannot prove that Ibn Mas‘udra did not retract his opinion, and they also cannot prove that a prayer duel took place resulting in Divine punishment for those in error. The truth is that Ibn Mas‘udra was an ordinary person, not a Prophet or Messenger. If he made a mistake out of passion, does that mean that we should consider his statement part of:

[It is nothing but pure revelation that has been revealed by God26]?’27

The Promised Messiahas is explaining here that no matter what the case, the status of Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra is not so high that we should consider him immune from errors in judgement. His words and statements do not have the same status as the words of the Holy Prophetsa regarding whom it is clearly stated in the Qur’an that what he said for religious guidance was pure revelation from God. At the same time, there is absolutely no doubt that Abdullah bin Mas‘udra was a great teacher of the Holy Qur’an and one of the most revered companions and among the earliest converts to Islam, and it behoves every Muslim to respect him. A simple error in judgment about three of the chapters of the Holy Qur’an does not diminish his high status in the eyes of any Muslim. Our prayer for him has always been and continues to be: Radhi-Allahu ‘anho (may Allah be pleased with him!).

Second, the narrations themselves clearly refute the error of Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra as Hazrat Abdullah bin Ubayyra – another revered teacher of the Qur’an – is reported to have checked with the Holy Prophetsa about the Mu‘awwidhatain and he told him that they were part of the Qur’an. Similar to this narration, there are many other well-authenticated Ahadith (traditions) that quote the Holy Prophetsa as clearly stating that Surah Al-Fatihah and the Mu‘awwidhatain are part of the Holy Qur’an and not separate from it. An interesting point is that other narrations state that Ibn Mas‘udra did not include the Mu‘awwidhatain in his manuscript, or that they were missing from his manuscript, but they do not record him saying that they are not a part of the book of Allah. This is a subtle difference which means that there is some confusion as to the real reason why Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra did not include these two chapters in his manuscript. It may have been the opinion of Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra or it may have been the opinion of the person narrating this about him. In either case, these are just their opinions, which are clearly refuted in these narrations as well as many other narrations from authentic sources. As Maulana Ahsanullah Danish puts it, on the one hand, we have the opinion of the companionsra of the Holy Prophetsa supported by historical evidence, the united opinion of the entire ummah, the united opinion of the huffaz (those who have memorised the Qur’an by heart) of the Qur’an, and on the other hand, there is the opinion of the person narrating this from Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra or perhaps the opinion of Hazrat Abdullah bin Mas‘udra himself. What does our rational mind tell us?  Accept the doubt of one or two people or the clear-cut statements of the Holy Prophetsa that plainly state that both Surah Al-Fatihah and the Mu‘awwidhatain are part of the revealed Holy Qur’an.

The evidence for the excellent preservation of the text of the Holy Qur’an is quite extensive. A recent discovery of a manuscript of the Qur’an gives further evidence for this. It was found in the University of Birmingham and scholars have said that it is perhaps the oldest manuscript of the Qur’an in the world. It dates from the period of 568 CE to 645 CE which makes it a possible manuscript from the time of the Holy Prophetsa himself.29 It contains parts of chapters 18 to 20 of the Holy Qur’an and a comparison with a present-day copy of the Qur’an reveals that they are identical, without any differences. Despite all of this evidence, if some critics object to the idea that the Holy Qur’an has been preserved perfectly, it can only be due to bias. An honest researcher in this field has no option but to affirm that the prediction of the Qur’an regarding its perfect preservation has indeed been fulfilled.


About the Author: Imam Farhan Iqbal is a missionary of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. He received his degree in Islamic Theology and Comparative Religions in July 2010 from Jamia Ahmadiyya Canada (The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community’s training seminary for missionaries.). He has served as an Imam for the Baitul Islam Mosque in Vaughan, Canada, for 5 years. He is currently serving as Imam of the Baitun Naseer Mosque, Ottawa, Canada. Imam Farhan has represented the Community in various interfaith events, radio programs discussing various matters of faith, and is co-host of the podcast The Conviction Project. He has also hosted several live and recorded programs on MTA (Muslim Television Ahmadiyya). He has co-authored 2 books, namely, With Love to Muhammadsa, the Seal of the Prophets and Understanding Islam: Dispelling Myths about Jihad, Oppression and Violence in Islam.



1. Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ (Michigan: Zondervan, 1998), 78.

2. Hazrat Mirza Bashir-Ud-Din Mahmud Ahmadra, At-Tafsir Al-Kabir, Volume 4, 17.

3. For a detailed discussion of all the points for the preservation of the Qur’an, see pages 17-20 of At-Tafsir Al-Kabir (Volume 4).

4. Ahsanullah Danish, Az-Zikrul Mahfuz (Qadian: Fazle Umar Printing Press, 2007), 12.

5. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, Haqiqatul Wahi, Ruhani Khaza’in, Volume 22, 357.

6. Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal, Musnad Ashratul Mubashareen bil-jannati, Musnad Uthman bin Affan.

7. Hazrat Mirza Bashir-Ud-Din Mahmud Ahmadra, Introduction to the Study of the Holy Qur’an (Surrey: Islam International Publications Ltd., 1996), 356.

8. Ahsanullah Danish, Az-Zikrul Mahfuz (Qadian: Fazle Umar Printing Press, 2007), 23.

9. Sahih Bukhari, Kitab Fadha’il-ul-Qur’an, Babul Qurra min Ashabin-Nabisa.

10. Ibid.

11. Ahsanullah Danish, Az-Zikrul Mahfuz (Qadian: Fazle Umar Printing Press, 2007), 77.

12. Hazrat Mirza Bashir-Ud-Din Mahmud Ahmadra, Introduction to the Study of the Holy Qur’an (Surrey: Islam International Publications Ltd., 1996), 362.

13. Sahih Bukhari, Kitab Fadha’il-ul-Qur’an, Bab Jam‘ul Qur’an.

14. Hazrat Mirza Bashir-Ud-Din Mahmud Ahmadra, Fadha’ilul Qur’an, 25-26.

15. Al-Itqan fi ulumil Qur’an [An-Nau‘ Ath-thamin ‘Ashar, fi jam‘ihi wa tartibihi] (Lebanon: Resalah Publishers, 2008), 131.

16. Translation of the original by author

17. Hazrat Mirza Bashir-Ud-Din Mahmud Ahmadra, At-Tafsir Al-Kabir, Volume 10, 84-85.

18. Al-Masnad lil-Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Masnadul Ansar, Hadith Zir bin Hubaish ‘an Ubayy bin Ka’b, Hadith no. 21087, Volume 15 (Cairo: Darul Hadith, 1995), 441.

19. Translation of the original by author.

20. Sahih Bukhari, Kitabut Tafsir, Book 65, Hadith 4977, retrieved from

21. The Holy Qur’an, 53:5.

22. Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, Ruhani Khaza’in, Volume 3, 421-422.

23. Ahsanullah Danish, Az-Zikrul Mahfuz (Qadian: Fazle Umar Printing Press, 2007), 276.

24. Sean Coughlan, “Birmingham’s ancient Koran history revealed,” BBC, accessed April 5, 2017,