`Abdullah (, Abu Bakr `Abdullah b. abi Da'ud, "K. al Masahif", ed. A. Jeffery, Cairo, 1936/135) reports,
'We differed about a sura, as to whether it consisted of thirty-five or thirty-six verses, so we went to the Prophet who was engaged in conversation with `Ali. When we told him we disagreed over the reading, his face reddened as he replied, "Those before you perished through their disagreements." He whispered something to `Ali who said, "The Prophet commands you to recite as you were taught."'
(p. 149, Abu Ja`far Muhammad b. Jarir al Tabari, "Tafsir", pp. 23-4)
*** Unable to explain away the reason for the discrepencies, Muhammad, as was his wont, became very angry and threatened those who asked him the relevant question.
His methodology was to invariably resort to TERROR whenever he was challenged about anything that he could not explain***
Ubai's codexwas known to contain two Suras not found in the Othmanic text -- Surat al-Khal` and Surat al-afd, as well as verse on men's greed following
(William Campbell, "The Quran and the Bible in the Light of History and Science", Section Three, III.B) [Note: surat al-Khal has three verses, and surat al-Hafd has six, Jeffery p. 180ff]
In addition to these two men, Islamic history and Hadiths mention primary collections made by Ali Ibn Abi Talib, the Prophet's son-in-law, whose codex was arranged in chronological order starting with Sura 96;
by Ibn Abbas, whose codex is mentioned by Al-Suyuti (Itqan, 154)as including the two extra Suras of Ubai;
and by Abu Musa, whose codex was used by the people of Basra.
It also contained the two extra Suras of Ubai(Itqan 154) as well as the verse on the greed of men
(Sahih Muslim, 1, 285-286). (William Campbell, "The Quran and the Bible in the Light of History and Science", Section Three, III.B)
Al Qadi `Iyyad reports that in the night prayer the Prophet recited Q 4 before Q 3 and that that was the order of the two chapters in the mushaf of Ubayy. This led the Qadi to conclude that the sura order had not been fixed by the Prophet, but had been left to the discretion of the Companions.
(p. 216, Ahmad b. `Ali b. Muhammad al `Asqalani, ibn Hajar, "Fath al Bari", 13 vols, Cairo, 1939/1348, vol. 9, p. 32)
Baqillani, nothing that the order of the suras is not insisted upon for the purposes of prayer, private study or public instruction, supposed that this explained the different ordering reported to have occurred in the Companion codices. (p. 216-217)
The codex ascribed to `Abdullah is said to lack three of the suras present in our (the `Uthmanic) text. The codices ascribed to ibn `Abbas, Ubayy and Abu Musa are said to contain two suras which the `Uthmanic text lacks.
(p. 220, Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. abi Bakr al Suyuti, "al Itqan fi `ulum al Qur'an", Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, pt 1, p. 65)
The Mu`tazili scholar al Nazzam is reported to have impugned `Abdullah's memory on the ground that he had denied two suras (sic) which are part of the Book of Allah....
This is a reference, says ibn Qutaiba, to Q 113 and Q 114 ... What induced `Abdullah to refrain from recording the two suras in his mushaf was that he observed that the Prophet used the chapters as charms to invoke the divine protection upon his grandsons, al Hasan and al Husain.
(pp. 220-221, Abu Muhammad `Abdullah b. Muslim, ibn Qutaiba, "K. ta'wil mukhtalif al Hadith", Cairo, 1966/1386, pp. 31)
Why did 'Uthman feel the need to destroy other copies of the Qur'an, unless they contained variants?
Why did Ibn Ma'sud refuse to hand over his copy for destruction?
How do we know that 'Uthman's copy was better than any of the others?
There are Hadiths that refer to suras which are not in the modern Qur'an. Surely this indicates that the Qur'an has changed since the time of these Hadiths.
By simply comparing existing manuscripts, it can be shown that not all Qur'an manuscripts are the same. Therefore, the Qur'an has not been perfectly preserved.
If the Qur'an truly is uncorrupted, why does the 'Muslim' world not publish the oldest Qur'an manuscripts?
What is there to hide?
*** There are many more other references if the above are not enough to clearly show that there is very little that is 'divine' about the corrupted Quran.
The most prominent Qurans in existence are the Samarkand Manuscript, in the Tashkent library, Uzbekistan and the Topkapi Manuscript, in the Topkapi Museum, in Istanbul, Turkey.
When their TEXTS are checked against the currently used Qurans, they do not match in hundreds of instances ***