Muhammad was "Feminist"?

"Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 1, Book 6, Hadith 301". Sunnah.com. Retrieved 6 July 2015.Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri: Once Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) of `Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion."


"Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 88, Hadith 219". Sunnah.com. Retrieved 6 July 2015.Narrated Abu Bakra: During the battle of Al-Jamal, Allah benefited me with a Word (I heard from the Prophet). When the Prophet heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, "Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler." 

Wife Beating in Islam

Sura 4:34


In its full context and in it's original arabic wording we find the following rather troubling:
- it is a command, not a mere provision.
- There is no mention of beating being a "last resort" after other means fail. Instead it is equally plausible that the text means to employ all 3 means at the same time.
- The precursor to employing such action, is if the husband "fears rebelliousness" or in other english translations, "fears disobedience" - this is not the same as ACTUAL disobedience. It's merely the perceptions of the husband. If he THINKS that his wife may act disobediently in future, he is commanded to take action to discipline her by the methods listed.
- There is no mention of "not causing pain".

Now, granted that there may be more to this than simply what it says at face value. I am sure many attempts have been made to explain this verse in a particular context and perspective to make it sound less inhumane and more sensible. But according to the Quran and the Tafsir of Al-Tabari, it is clear in meaning for its readers and doesn't need any further explanation. It's words CAN be taken at face value. (Sura's 3:7, 11:1, 6:114, 16:89, 41:3).

But when Islamic leaders who have credibility come out making public statements like this, it doesn't help. it makes it difficult for the unbiased outsider looking in to interpret it any differently. Attempts to make this passage sound less simply come across as dubious.

We can grant that the way that many Muslims today respond to this teaching is not as barbaric. We can grant that they choose to accept and apply only a more sensible interpretation of this passage. But you have to admit that for the outsider looking in who is only taking the Quran text to mean what it says, it is perfectly understandable that they would be outraged when they come across this part of the Quran, and when islamic leaders make public statements like the one above.



"daraba" can also mean "to go away"
"go away" meaning? To separate with them permanently? Or to leave the house? Is there a tradition of anyone in 7th century arabia (who understood the arabic better than anyone could today) who took it to mean that? For "daraba" to be read as "go away" wouldn't fit the literary context as the list of actions would be 1. advise them. 2. be sleep separately. 3. go away from them?

Razi's commentary, "At-Tafsir al-Kabir," on 4:34
"A women complained to Muhammad that her husband slapped her on the face, (which was still marked by the slap). At first the prophet said to her: "Get even with him", but then added: "Wait until I think about it". Later on, Allah supposedly revealed 4:34 to Muhammad, after which the prophet said: "We wanted one thing but Allah wanted another, and what Allah wanted is best."[

So what we have is a non-consensus amongst scholars as to what this verse meant when it was revealed. So we on the fence are tasked with figuring out which scholar is right and who's not. To simply take a more "non-fundamentalist" scholar's word as more authoritative because it sounds better to us is just wishful thinking. We are saying "we believe this to be true because we prefer it to be true".

Reason why "non-fundamentalists" are likely to be *wrong*: The hadith traditions corroborate the more "fundamentalist" reading that wife-beating is at least "permissible", if not instructed - references below.

(1) Sahih Bukhari, vol. 7, # 715 - A woman was beaten by her husband because of marriage discord. The women did not commit any illegal sexual act. She was beaten and bruised because her husband said she was "disobedient" and he thought she wanted to go back to her former husband.

Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!

The woman was badly bruised. Her skin was green. Aisha acknowledged that the Muslim women were suffering (from being beaten) more than the non-Muslim women. Muslims today proclaim that Islam gave women rights but Aisha, the "mother of the believers" said otherwise! She said that the Pagan women were treated better!

Muhammad did not rebuke the man for beating his wife. In fact, he reproached the women for saying Rahman was impotent. Even though she was hurt Muhammad accepted her bruises and beating because to Muhammad it was not abuse. In Muhammad’s eyes she deserved the beating.

(2)Sunan Abu Dawud 709 #2141 - #2142
Iyas Dhubab reported the apostle of Allah as saying: "Do not beat Allah's handmaidens", but when Umar came to the apostle of Allah and said: "Women have become emboldened towards their husbands", he (the prophet), gave permission to beat them. Then many women came round the family of the apostle of Allah complaining against their husbands. So the apostle of Allah said, "Many women have gone round Muhammad's family complaining against their husbands. They are not the best among you".Umar reported the prophet as saying: "A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife"

(3) Sahih Muslim Sahih Muslim #2127:

…When it was my turn for Allah's Messenger to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi'. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O 'Aisha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?…

(4) Sahih Muslim #2127:

…When it was my turn for Allah's Messenger to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi'. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O 'Aisha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?…

(5) Jabir b. 'Abdullah reported: Abu Bakr came and sought permission to see Allah's Messenger. He found people sitting at his door and none amongst them had been granted permission, but it was granted to Abu Bakr and he went in. Then came 'Umar and he sought permission and it was granted to him, and he found Allah's Apostle sitting sad and silent with his wives around him. He (Hadrat 'Umar) said: I would say something which would make the Holy Prophet laugh, so he said: Messenger of Allah, I wish you had seen (the treatment meted out to) the daughter of Kharija when she asked me some money, and I got up and slapped her on her neck. Allah's Messenger laughed and said: They are around me as you see, asking for extra money. Abu Bakr then got up went to 'Aisha and slapped her on the neck, and 'Umar stood up before Hafsa and slapped her saying: You ask Allah's Messenger which he does not possess. They said: By Allah, we do not ask Allah's Messenger for anything he does not possess." (Hadith, Sahih Muslim, Book 009, #3506, Muhammad doesn't slap his wives, but laughed at hearing about his friend Umar slapping his wife when they asked for more money. Muhammad's wife was slapped by her father upon hearing she too had been asking for more money.)

Freedom of Religion in Islam

According to Muslims:

Terrorism and violence has no place in TRUE Islam because the Quran says:

There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing. (Surah 2:256)

For you is your religion, and for me is my religion. (Surah 109:6)

The Short Response:

The Quran also teaches to obey the Prophet Muhammad PBUH several times.

Surah 8:1
Surah 8:20
Surah 4:80
Surah 9:71
Surah 5:92
 

The above are just a handful of the many verses that repeatedly remind us that Allah wants us to obey the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. Quite simply, the legacy that Prophet Muhammad left was not one which encouraged, let alone allowed, freedom of religion.

There are two accounts in Sahih Al-Bukhari, considered by Muslim scholars to be the most authentic of all the Hadith, where Prophet Muhammad is reported to have said:

"If anyone changes his religion, then kill him."

Bukhari 84:57-58
Bukhari 52:260


Conclusion:

This tradition which is currently practiced under Sharia Law (Islamic Law) was initiated by Prophet Muhammad PBUH himself! Apostates of Islam, according to the instructions of Prophet Muhammad PBUH are to be killed.

So, when one says that Islam teaches freedom of religion, what they really mean is that anyone is free to accept or reject Islam, but if the one who rejects Islam is an apostate, they should be killed.

"Freedom of religion", in Islam, means that apostates are free to reject Islam just as Muslims are free to practice their religion in killing the apostate.

Dr. Zakir Naik becomes Christian?

A major difference between Islam and Christianity, while both claim to be monotheistic, is the belief in the Trinity


According to Muslims:

Trinitarianism is not true monotheism. Christians believe that the Father is God, Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God. That makes 3 gods! Jesus is the Messiah but he cannot be God. Jesus is only a prophet, a human being, a messenger sent by God. The Bible says that Jesus prayed to God! If he was God then who was he praying to? He did not have the attributes of God such as omnipresence, omnipotence, timelessness or eternal being, omniscience, etc. Jesus never claimed to be God, not even according to the Bible!


The Short Response:

All the above arguments made against the Christian belief in a Trinitarian God are straw man arguments. Christianity also rejects the caricature of the Trinity that Muslims reject. It is likely that for many Muslims, their difficulty with accepting the Trinity roots from a lack of understanding of what the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is, and how it is textually substantiated from the Bible.


The Trinity Explained:

The word, "Trinity" does not occur anywhere in the Bible. It is a model which early Christian theologians thought up to be the culmination of 7 fundamental statements which are clearly taught in the Bible texts.

1. There is ONE God.
2. The Father is God.
3. Jesus is God.
4. The Holy Spirit is God.
5. The Father is not Jesus or the Holy Spirit.
6. Jesus is not the Father or the Holy Spirit.
7. The Holy Spirit is not the Father or Jesus.

The Trinity is the concept of a SINGLE existential being, who exists in 3 distinct but perfectly united persons. Here, the word, "person" does NOT have anything to do with human characteristics but simply means that they are distinct from eachother.

For further reading about the doctrine of the Trinity, see: http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2013/04/24/what-do-we-mean-by-person-and-essence-in-the-doctrine-of-the-trinity/

At this point, it is normal for Unitarian Monotheists (such as Muslims) to respond that the entire concept of the Trinity cannot possibly make any logical sense. In other words, such a relationship where the persons of the Trinity are distinct from one another but are a single perfectly united existential being is a logical impossibility. The problem is that these same people who pose this objection accept a trinitarian view of humans without even realising it!

Imagine I was involved in a car accident and suffered very serious injury but was still conscious.

You could say "Diva has suffered serious injuries". In this case, "Diva" refers exclusively to my body. However we understand that my body IS me. It isn't just an incomplete part of me. It is entirely me.

Now let us say that in my final waking moments, I say that I'm afraid and think I'm going to die. You could say "Diva is afraid and thinks he is going to die". Here, "Diva" refers exclusively to my mind. My mind is neither my body nor my soul but it IS entirely me.

 Eventually, let us imagine that I succumb to my wounds and die. At my funeral one may say, "Diva is no longer with us", in reference to my soul (or spirit) being entirely me. At that moment, it would be considered absolutely ridiculous for someone to object saying, "what are you talking about? He's right there in the coffin!". Yes, my body is there in the coffin and it IS me but my soul which is ALSO me is not there.

 

So, what we can observe is that we humans can be conceptualised as triune beings.  It's nonsense to jump from this to accusing someone of believing that each individual human is actually 3 existential beings! No, not at all! A human can be said to be a single existential being who exists as 3 distinct but perfectly united members of a trinity - mind, body and soul (or spirit).


Dr. Zakir Naik's Challenge:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3Z-XFq8F_w

The man on stage is a prominent, well-known Muslim theologian and apologist. He travels all over the world to teach and give talks on Islam, always drawing huge crowds consisting of both Muslims and Non-Muslims.

The above video is one of several instances where Dr. Zakir Naik, in a conference talk, issues a challenge to a Christian audience member. To paraphrase, the challenge is to to show him where in the Bible, Jesus is recorded to claim that he is God. If he sees such a verse or passage in the Bible, Dr. Zakir Naik says he will become a Christian.

Well, Dr. Zakir Naik, challenge accepted. Here are two accounts from the Bible where Jesus claims to be God.

John 10: 30-33
30 I and the Father are one.”
31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

John 14: 8-11
8 Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”
9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. 11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the works themselves.

In the first passage (John 10), even the Jewish listeners who understood the context of Jesus' words fully understood that this is what he meant and were ready to stone him. To interpret his sayings otherwise would be to claim to understand his Aramaic words better than those who were actually there and heard what he said in their own native language.

As for the second (John 14), it is difficult to interpret "anyone who has seen me has seen the Father" as anything other than a claim to divinity.

So, as long as Dr. Zakir Naik's challenge was sincere and not rhetorical, this should be sufficient to convince him.

Quran versions?

According to Muslims:

The first complete written compilation of the Quran was written during the time of Abu Bakr's caliphate. The task was commissioned by him to Zaid bin Thabit, an official scribe to Prophet Muhammad PBUH. This first manuscript contained every verse that had ever been revealed by Prophet Muhammad PBUH.


The Question:

Muslims often contrast the Quran with the Bible in that there are multiple versions of the Bible but only ONE version of the Quran. Can you really be sure of that?


Sources:

Muslims also believe in a collection of documents called Hadith. Hadith's are of the writing genre of history. They are believed to be written accounts of people who were close to Prophet Muhammad PBUH. They are not believed to be the literal words of God and are not divine texts in that sense. Their accounts give important insights into the life of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH and key events in the history of Islam.


The Difficulty:

Consider the following hadith's.

Narrated Umar bin Al-Khattab:
I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat Al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle and I listen to his recitation and noticed that he recited in several different ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. I was about to jump over him during his prayer, but I controlled my temper and when he had completed his prayer, I put his upper garment around his neck and seized him by it and said, "Who taught you this Surat which I heard you reciting ?" He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me". I said, "You have told a lie, for Allah's Apostle taught it to me in a different way from yours". So I dragged him to Allah's Apostle and said, "I heard this person reciting Surat Al-Furqan in a way which you haven't taught me!". On that Allah's Apostle said, "Release him (Umar) recite, O Hisham!" Then he recited in the same way I heard him reciting. Then Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed in this way", and added, "Recite, O Umar", I recited it as he had taught me. Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed in this way. This Qur'an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever is easier for you."

Bukhuri: vol. 4, hadith 682, book 56
Narrated Ibn Mas'ud:
I heard a person reciting a (Quranic) Verse in a certain way, and I had heard the Prophet reciting the same Verse in a different way. So I took him to the Prophet and informed him of that but I noticed the sign of disapproval on his face, and then he said, "BOTH OF YOU ARE CORRECT, so don't differ, for the nations before you differed, so they were destroyed." 

"Many (of the passages) of the Qur'an that were sent down were known by those who died on the day of Yamama ... but they were not known (by those who) survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Qur'an, nor were they found with even one (person) after them." (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p. 23)

Narrated 'Aisha: Allah's Apostle heard a man reciting the Qur'an at night, and said, "May Allah bestow His Mercy on him, as he has reminded me of such-and-such Verses of such-and-such Suras, which I was caused to forget." (Bukhari, Volume 6, Book LXI, Number 558)

When he gave the salutation, he was asked: Has something new happened in the prayer, Apostle of Allah? He said: What is it? They said: You prayed so many and so many (rak'ahs). He then relented his foot and faced the Qiblah and made two prostrations. He then gave the salutation. When he turned away (finished the prayer), he turned his face to us and said: Had anything new happened in prayer, I would have informed you. I am only a human being and I forget just as you do; so when I forget, remind me, and when any of you is in doubt about his prayer he should aim at what is correct, and complete his prayer in that respect, then give the salutation and afterwards made two prostrations. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 3, Number 1015)

Narrated Abdullah:
I recited before the Prophet 'Fahal-min-Mudhdhakir'. The Prophet said, "It is Fahal-min Muddakir." (Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 397)

Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur'an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bar'at. I have forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: "If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust." And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it: "O people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise: (lxi 2.) and "that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection" (xvii. 13) (Sahih Muslim, Book V, Number 2286)

Bukhari: vol. 6, hadith 510, pp. 478-479; book 61
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war to conquer Arminya and Adharbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. Said bin Thabit added, "A Verse from Surat Ahzab was missed by me when we copied the Qur'an and I used to hear Allah's Apostle reciting it. So we searched for it and found it with Khuzaima bin Thabit Al-Ansari. (That Verse was): 'Among the Believers are men who have been true in their covenant with Allah.' (33.23) 

In summary, if we consider the above hadith to be accurate and true historical accounts, we can make the following observations:

• There existed variations in the Quran verse recitations both during and after Prophet Muhammad's PBUH time
• Some believers, including Prophet Muhammad PBUH by his own confession, were unable to memorise some Quran verses or parts of them. 

Review:

There are variances between archaeological manuscripts of Bible texts, but only the oldest manuscripts are used for translating into the currently published Bibles. But even with textual variances in the manuscripts, none of them are of any theological significance and they do not differ in meaning. The agnostic/atheist former head of New Testament Studies and current head of Religious Studies at University of North Carolina, Dr. Bart Ehrman, wrote a book called Misquoting Jesus as a critique of the variances in New Testament manuscripts. None of the examples discussed in his book are textual variances of theological significance.

With the Bibles published today, it is true that there are multiple "versions" or translations. Many Muslims insist that the Quran should only be recited in Arabic, even translated Quran's still come with the Arabic text alongside the other language. However, for Christians, there is no such mandate to read the bible texts in their original languages. Just as there are multiple English translations of the Quran, there are multiple translations of the Bible in various languages and even within certain languages. There is however, no discrepancy in anything of theological significance. This is true of all of the currently published translations of the Bible, and of all the archaeological manuscript findings.

There are disagreements between Christians of different denominations and these are not because of differences in the texts or translations but because of differences in interpretation of texts which have the same content. We see the same phenomenon amongst different types of professing Muslims. For example, a small minority who are labelled as terrorists sincerely believe that the Quran mandates their horrific acts of violence, while the majority of Muslims outright condemn such acts. This is only one example amongst many other issues including, eating prohibitions, hand positions and posture while praying, touching dogs, smoking.

According to the final excerpt the differences were drastic enough that Uthman, the third caliph, felt the need to rewrite the manuscripts into a single standardised version and destroy all other Quranic materials, fragmented or whole. Such gross differences in Quran readings and texts which warranted such extreme measures existed only some 10-20 years after the passing of Prophet Muhammad, and even less time after the first manuscript was produced during the first caliphate of Abu Bakr.


Conclusions:

The evidence above strongly indicates that the Muslims claim of there only ever being one version of the Quran is false. Instead, what is more likely true is that only one version of the Quran exists today, because all other versions were purposefully destroyed and purged.

However, just as there are variations in wording without any change in meaning with the Bible manuscripts and current translations, the same can be said of the differences in Quran versions mentioned in the above hadith excerpts. Even with the existence of such variances, it doesn't justify that we reject Islam as the only true one among competing world-views. Instead, we can continue to treat today's Quran as an accurate representation of the message and meaning of the Quran verses circulated orally during the time of Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

Quran is incomplete?

The Quran that exists today is a single document/ book. It is believed by Muslims to be the literal words of God, exactly as it was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. It is believed to be complete, unedited and untampered with.


Question:

How was the Quran first made into the form we have it in today?


According to the Muslim:

The Prophet Muhammad PBUH was illiterate - he could neither read nor write.
So, the verses of the Quran were uttered by him as direct revelations from God. His closest followers of the earliest converts to Islam would write his utterances on whatever they could find and later memorize them. The verses of the Quran were initially transmitted orally but the fragments of written verses were later compiled into a single text. This text, called the Quran, is exactly what we have printed in Arabic today.


Sources:

Muslims also believe in a collection of documents called Hadith. Hadith's are of the writing genre of history. They are believed to be written accounts of people who were close to Prophet Muhammad PBUH. They are not believed to be the literal words of God and are not divine texts in that sense. Their accounts give important insights into the life of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH and key events in the history of Islam.


The Difficulty:

With regards to the initial compilation of the Quran, one hadith (from Sahih Al-Bukhari) says this:

Volume 6, Book 61, Number 509: Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet's Companions who fought against Musailama). (I went to him) and found 'Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), "Umar has come to me and said: "Casualties were heavy among the Qurra' of the Quran (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yamama and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra' on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Quran be collected." I said to 'Umar, "How can you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" 'Umar said, "By Allah, that is a good project. "Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which 'Umar had realized." Then Abu Bakr said (to me). 'You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Quran and collect it in one book)." By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Quran. Then I said to Abu Bakr, "How will you do something which Allah's Apostle did not do?" Abu Bakr replied, "By Allah, it is a good project." Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and 'Umar. So I started looking for the Quran and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat At-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is: 'Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty... (till the end of Surat-Baraa' (At-Tauba) (9.128-129) Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Quran remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with 'Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of 'Umar.

So, to summarise what the hadith excerpt above says:

• A large number of Qurra (muslims who memorised the Quran) died in battle.
• Out of concern that "a large part of the Quran may be lost" Umar (the second caliph of Islam and a father-in-law to Prophet Muhammad PBUH), urged Abu Bakr (the first caliph) to have the Quran verses compiled into one book.
• Abu Bakr then comissioned one of Prophet Muhammad's PBUH official scribes and narrator of this hadith, Zaid bin Thabit, to do it.
• Both Abu Bakr and Zaid bin Thabit recognised that it was a difficult task which Prophet Muhammad PBUH himself did not do nor comission. (All the events recorded in this hadith excerpt took place after Prophet Muhammad's PBUH passing.)
• Zaid bin Thabit thought it was a more difficult task than moving a mountain, which is impossible.
• Zaid did his best to gather all the verses he could, including the last one.
• The completed manuscripts were then kept in the custody of Abu Bakr and passed on to succeeding caliphs.

Consider also this excerpt from another Muslim source:

"Many (of the passages) of the Qur'an that were sent down were known by those who died on the day of Yamama ... but they were not known (by those who) survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Qur'an, nor were they found with even one (person) after them." (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p. 23)


Conclusions:

The difficulty for Muslims here is their claim that the Quran of today is exactly as it was revealed through Prophet Muhammad PBUH. From the first hadith accounts, there isn't any certainty of that. Instead, there is sufficient reason to doubt it, although not to dismiss the claim altogether. It explicitly says that "a large portion" of it may have been lost.

Towards the end of the first excerpt, Zaid bin Thabit does say "I started looking... and collecting it till I found the last verse of Surat At-Tauba". This legitimately can, but doesn't necessarily, mean that every verse to ever be revealed through Prophet Muhammad PBUH was found. Instead it could mean that he found only the verses that were known to the Muslims who were his sources.

Also, the compiled script is said to be "complete". This also is subject to interpretation. The word "complete" could either refer to the task of compiling the Quran into a single document, or it could refer to the compilation itself being a full record of every revelation from Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

All of this becomes conclusive in light of the second excerpt. It clearly says there were verses only known to the men who were killed and no records of those verses remained. Thus it would have been impossible for these verses to have also been gathered. The claim that the Quran exists today in its complete form exactly as revealed through Prophet Muhammad PBUH is simply contrary to evidence, and no more than a statement born of unsubstantiated wishful thinking.

Despite what is logically more likely in light of the evidence, what a Muslim chooses to believe in regards to this matter will ultimately depend how strongly influenced they are by personal interests, biases, and predispositions.