Mohammad Salum

[Mohammad Salum @mohammad_salum]

@MattAbrah4m @MuftiMoncler @Aal_Moalim Jazak’Allah bro

[Mohammad Salum @mohammad_salum]

@MattAbrah4m @MuftiMoncler @Aal_Moalim can you link the thread

[Mohammad Salum @mohammad_salum]

@ShAmmarKhatib1 @PhDniX @abdul_jabbar390 @JosephLumbard @FirdawsBlahzay Jazak’Allah akhi.

[Mohammad Salum @mohammad_salum]

@ShAmmarKhatib1 @PhDniX @abdul_jabbar390 @JosephLumbard @FirdawsBlahzay Okay i appreciate the response and engagement. A paper on this would be very interesting and useful. Also could you link me to the article in Arabic.

[Mohammad Salum @mohammad_salum]

@ShAmmarKhatib1 @PhDniX @abdul_jabbar390 @JosephLumbard @FirdawsBlahzay But how could those reasons of critique be considered even whilst (and when) the transmission of those recitations were widespread and (more importantly) authentic? Could one not argue that this may undermine the very relatability of mere widespread authentic transmission?

[Mohammad Salum @mohammad_salum]

@ShAmmarKhatib1 @PhDniX @abdul_jabbar390 @JosephLumbard @FirdawsBlahzay Okay, but could this pose an issue in terms of the reliability of transmission i.e. if transmissions of recitations which we consider were widespread and are authentic were criticised by early scholars how would this be reconciled with the reliability of the transmission?

[Mohammad Salum @mohammad_salum]

@ShAmmarKhatib1 @PhDniX @abdul_jabbar390 @JosephLumbard @FirdawsBlahzay Okay understood. Could we therefore simply say that these critiques were based on the limited access these scholars had to certain material/information which later scholars had upon which they can consistently negate their critique?

[Mohammad Salum @mohammad_salum]

@ShAmmarKhatib1 @PhDniX @abdul_jabbar390 @JosephLumbard @FirdawsBlahzay Could one critique one of these readings today based on the critique of earlier scholars? If not, why?