robert spencer-did muhammad exist__ an inquiry into islams obscure origins-intercollegiate studies institute (2012) (1)

to be a human creation, not a perfect copy of an eternal divine book. But by the tenth century, this idea was
generally regarded as a heresy. The Mutazilites, facing persecution, eventually died out, along with the
idea that the text of the Qur'an was ever subject to human vagaries.
And so the nineteenth-century non-Muslim historian William Muir asserted that the Qur'anic text had
been preserved so carefully that “there are no variations of importance—we might almost say no
variations at all—to be found in the innumerable copies scattered throughout the vast bounds of the
Empire of Islam.” 3 The twentieth-century Qur'an commentator and politician Syed Abul Ala Maududi said
that the Qur'an “exists exactly as it had been revealed to the Prophet; not a word—nay, not a dot of it—has
been changed. It is available in its original text and the Word of God has now been preserved for all times
to come.” 4
This claim is a commonplace of Muslim apologetic literature. Yet today's Qur'ans are based on a text
that can be traced back to medieval Islamic tradition but no further. The standard text, published in Cairo
in 1924, is based on Islamic traditions about the text of the Qur'an that date at their earliest from more than
a century after Muhammad is supposed to have lived. 5 The lack of variation to which Gülen and so many
other Islamic spokesmen refer reflects the fact that most Qur'ans today depend on the same medieval
sources, not on anything close to an original seventh-century manuscript. And even that consistency breaks
down on closer inspection. So, too, does the claim that the Qur'anic text has never been changed since the
various suras were delivered to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel. Even Islamic tradition shows this
contention to be highly questionable, with indications that some of the Qur'an was lost and other parts
were added to or otherwise changed.
There is little dispute, however, about the Islamic account that the Qur'an originated with Muhammad.
For most people who consider the question at all, what is at issue is whether Muhammad was really
reciting revelations from Allah or passing off warmed-over biblical stories and other material as the
divine voice. But an examination of the records—including early Islamic tradition itself—indicates that
the canonical text of the Qur'an cannot be attributed to Muhammad alone.
Flexible Revelations
Even the canonical Islamic accounts of how Muhammad received revelations suggest a less-than-heavenly
origin to many Qur'anic verses. The hadiths concerning the circumstances of Qur'anic revelations
sometimes betray a certain improvisational quality. Since, as we have seen, these stories are almost
certainly not actual historical accounts, the question must be raised as to why they may have been
invented. The answer to this lies in the evolving nature of Islamic tradition itself: These stories were
developed as the particular characteristics of Islam were coming to the fore. Islam began to take shape as
a religion different from—indeed, opposed to—Judaism and Christianity. Central to it was the figure of
the prophet Muhammad, and tales of his exploits began to be circulated among the subjects of the Arabian
Empire.
But if the founding figure of the new religion was to have received a perfect new scripture from the
supreme God, why not have the stories of its delivery emphasize its perfection and flawless transmission?
To be sure, many hadiths emphasize just those things. If, however, Islam and the Qur'an were evolving