Exposing Islam

Part 22 – Political Editing of the Qur’an Under Uthman

How the Third Caliph Centralized, Standardized, and Controlled Islam’s Holiest Text

Introduction: The “Perfectly Preserved” Claim

Islamic teaching insists that:

The Qur’an today is exactly the same as the one revealed to Muhammad.
Not a single letter has changed since the 7th century.
Allah Himself promised to preserve it (Surah 15:9).

This claim is non-negotiable for Muslim faith.
If the Qur’an has been altered, then:

The doctrine of divine preservation collapses.
Allah’s promise in the Qur’an is false.
Islam’s core credibility takes a direct hit.

The problem?
The historical record — including Islam’s own sources — clearly shows that the Qur’an did not exist in a single, unified form during Muhammad’s lifetime, and that it was politically edited, standardized, and selectively preserved under Caliph Uthman ibn Affan.

Section 1 – The Qur’an at Muhammad’s Death: Fragmented, Oral, and Incomplete

When Muhammad died in 632 CE:

The Qur’an was not compiled into a single book.
It existed in:
- The memories of his followers (oral recitation).
- Written fragments on parchment, palm leaves, bones, stones.
Some verses were known only to individuals.

Islamic tradition itself records that:

“Let none of you say, ‘I have learned the whole Qur’an,’ for how does he know what all of it is? Much of the Qur’an has been lost.”
—Ibn Umar, quoted in Al-Suyuti’s Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an

This already contradicts the “perfect preservation” myth.

Section 2 – The Trigger: The Battle of Yamama and the Fear of Loss

Shortly after Muhammad’s death:

Apostasy wars (Ridda wars) broke out.
At the Battle of Yamama, many Qur’an memorizers (huffaz) were killed.

This panicked the Muslim leadership.
According to Sahih Bukhari 4986:

Umar ibn al-Khattab urged Caliph Abu Bakr to compile the Qur’an before more reciters died.
Zaid ibn Thabit was tasked with collecting it from “palm leaves, thin white stones, and from the hearts of men.”

This first collection:

Was stored with Abu Bakr.
Then passed to Umar.
After Umar’s death, it went to his daughter Hafsa.

Note: This “Hafsa codex” was not identical to later official Qur’ans — and Uthman eventually had it destroyed.

Section 3 – The Crisis of Multiple Readings

As Islam expanded into non-Arab territories (Iraq, Syria, Armenia, Azerbaijan), Muslim soldiers began arguing over different versions of the Qur’an.

Sahih Bukhari 4987 records:

Hudhaifa ibn al-Yaman feared that differences in Qur’anic recitation among Muslim armies could lead to the same divisions as among Jews and Christians.

This was not about pronunciation alone — but about variant wordings and verse differences between regional codices.

By this time, different companions had their own Qur’anic codices:

Ibn Mas‘ud’s codex (lacked Surah 1, 113, 114)
Ubayy ibn Ka‘b’s codex (included two surahs not in the current Qur’an)
Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari’s codex (different order and variants)

Section 4 – Uthman’s Political Solution

Caliph Uthman (r. 644–656 CE) faced:

Expanding empire.
Need for unity in religion to avoid civil war.
Disputes between Qur’an readers from different regions.

His response:

Ordered Zaid ibn Thabit (again) and others to produce a standardized Qur’an from Hafsa’s copy.
Sent this “official” Qur’an to major cities — Medina, Kufa, Basra, Damascus.
Burned or destroyed all other Qur’anic materials to eliminate competing versions.

Islamic tradition admits this destruction:

“Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all other Qur’anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.”
—Sahih Bukhari 4987

Section 5 – The Political Nature of the Standardization

This was not purely a “religious preservation” effort — it was political control:

Uthman’s Qur’an fixed one dialect (Quraysh) over others.
It erased regional variations in word choice and content.
It cemented the Qur’an as an instrument of state authority.

By destroying other codices, Uthman removed:

Evidence of earlier versions.
Competing interpretations.
Texts that could undermine his political legitimacy.

This was textbook political centralization.

Section 6 – What Was Lost?

Islamic sources mention:

Verses about stoning adulterers (found in hadith, not in current Qur’an).
Verses about adult breastfeeding (ridha’a al-kabir).
A “Surah of the Two Valleys” in Ubayy’s codex.
Entire surahs now missing from the canon.

Example from Sahih Muslim 1050:

“We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to Surah Bara’ah, then I forgot it, but I remember from it…”

These were not “minor spelling differences” — they were entire missing passages.

Section 7 – The Problem of the “Seven Ahruf”

The Qur’an was reportedly revealed in “seven ahruf” (modes/versions).
This admission alone shows:

There was never one “perfect” text.
Variants existed from the very beginning.

Uthman’s edition reduced this to one — and the rest were destroyed.

Modern Muslim apologists claim these were just “pronunciation styles,” but the hadith evidence shows differences in meaning and vocabulary.

Section 8 – Surviving Manuscripts Prove Variation

Modern textual studies (e.g., Birmingham manuscript, Sana’a palimpsests) reveal:

Early Qur’ans contained variants in wording, verse order, and surah order.
The Sana’a manuscript has undertexts with significant differences from the Uthmanic text.

These manuscripts date to the late 7th–early 8th century, showing that:

Standardization took time.
Variations persisted after Uthman’s burning.

Section 9 – The Contradiction with Preservation Claims

The doctrine:

“Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian.” (Surah 15:9)

The history:

The Qur’an existed in multiple versions.
A political leader chose one.
All others were destroyed.
Even the “chosen” version required later diacritical and vowel marks to be readable.

If Allah was truly guarding the Qur’an:

Why allow multiple competing versions to exist?
Why rely on a caliph’s political intervention to “preserve” it?
Why permit verses to be lost entirely?

Section 10 – Political Fallout and Opposition

Uthman’s actions were not universally accepted:

Ibn Mas‘ud refused to hand over his codex.
Some companions criticized the destruction of alternative copies.
The resentment contributed to political unrest that eventually led to Uthman’s assassination.

This proves:

Uthman’s Qur’an was not simply “accepted by all Muslims.”
The “consensus” narrative is another later invention.

Section 11 – The Aftermath: Uthman’s Qur’an Was Not the Final Version

Even after Uthman:

The text continued to evolve.
Abd al-Malik (r. 685–705) and al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf made further textual reforms.
The Qur’anic script was initially without dots or vowels, leading to multiple possible readings.

This is why today there are different qira’at (readings), with slight changes in meaning — further evidence that the text was never “frozen in time.”

Section 12 – Why This Undermines Islam’s Foundation

Islam’s authority rests on the Qur’an being:

Perfectly preserved.
Exactly as revealed to Muhammad.
Divinely protected from corruption.

The history of Uthman’s political editing proves:

The text was subject to human choice.
Material was lost.
A specific version was enforced at the expense of others.

This means the Qur’an is no more divinely preserved than any other ancient text — and perhaps less so, because the evidence of its variants was deliberately destroyed.

Section 13 – Connection to the Series

This part links directly to:

Part 23 – Oral Transmission Weaknesses.
Part 2 – Variant Qur’ans.
Part 19 – Fabrications in Hadith Collections.

Conclusion: The Caliph Who Chose God’s Words

The Qur’an Muslims read today is:

The product of a political decision, not divine preservation.
One version among several early contenders.
Purged of competing variants by fire and decree.

Uthman’s editing was about unity through control, not faithfulness to an original revelation.
The claim that the Qur’an is “word-for-word identical to Muhammad’s recitation” is historically indefensible.

Next in series Part 23: Oral Transmission Weaknesses