[WARNING: JPG Files could not be copeid correctly, please refer to the original Source]
By Samuel Green
INTRODUCTION
Many Muslims have told me that the Qur'an has been perfectly preserved
and that all Qur'ans around the world are absolutely identical. They have said
this in order to prove that the Qur'an is superior to the Bible. Maybe a Muslim
has said this to you? Maybe you are a Muslim and this is what you believe and
have said about the Qur'an yourself?
It is common for Muslims to believe and say this because this is what
their leaders teach them. Consider the following quote.
No other book in the
world can match the Qur'an ... The astonishing fact about this book of ALLAH is
that it has remained unchanged, even to a dot, over the last fourteen hundred
years. ... No variation of text can be found in it. You can check this for
yourself by listening to the recitation of Muslims from different parts of the
world. (Basic Principles of Islam, p. 4)
The above claim is that all Qur'ans around the world are identical and
that "no variation of text can be found". In fact the author issues a
challenge saying, "You can check this for yourself by listening to the
recitation of Muslims from different parts of the world". In this article
I will take up this challenge and see if all Qur'ans are identical.
CONTENTS
- Some history related to the
recitation of the Qur'an.
- A Comparison between two
Arabic Qur'ans from different parts of the world.
- The extent to which the
differences affect the meaning.
- Comparing more Arabic
Qur'ans.
- Appendix 1 - The Seven Ahruf and the Ten
Qira'at
- Appendix 2 - How do Islamic scholars
understand the different versions?
- Appendix 3 - Choosing the Best Reading -
Islamic Scholarship in Practice
- Appendix 4 - The Seven Ahruf, Ten
Qira'at, and Isnads of the Qur'an
- Appendix 5 - The Memorisation of the
Qur'an and the Qira'at
- Appendix 6 - Where to buy different versions of the Qur'an.
To start our investigation we turn to an Islamic encyclopedia written by
a practising Muslim. This scholar explains an important aspect of the history
of the Qur'an. Please read this quote a few times if you are new to this area
of study.
(C)ertain variant readings (of the Qur'an) existed and, indeed,
persisted and increased as the Companions who had memorised the text died, and
because the inchoate (basic) Arabic script, lacking vowel signs and even
necessary diacriticals to distinguish between certain consonants, was
inadequate. ... In the 4th Islamic century, it was decided to have recourse (to
return) to "readings" (qira'at) handed down from seven
authoritative "readers" (qurra'); in order, moreover, to
ensure accuracy of transmission, two "transmitters" (rawi,
pl. ruwah) were accorded to each. There resulted from this seven
basic texts (al-qira'at as-sab', "the seven
readings"), each having two transmitted versions (riwayatan)
with only minor variations in phrasing, but all containing meticulous
vowel-points and other necessary diacritical marks. ... The authoritative
"readers" are:
Nafi` (from Medina;
d. 169/785)
Ibn Kathir (from Mecca; d. 119/737)
Abu `Amr al-`Ala' (from Damascus; d. 153/770)
Ibn `Amir (from Basra; d. 118/736)
Hamzah (from Kufah; d. 156/772)
al-Qisa'i (from Kufah; d. 189/804)
Abu Bakr `Asim (from Kufah; d. 158/778)
(Cyril Glassé, The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, p. 324, bold added)
Ibn Kathir (from Mecca; d. 119/737)
Abu `Amr al-`Ala' (from Damascus; d. 153/770)
Ibn `Amir (from Basra; d. 118/736)
Hamzah (from Kufah; d. 156/772)
al-Qisa'i (from Kufah; d. 189/804)
Abu Bakr `Asim (from Kufah; d. 158/778)
(Cyril Glassé, The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, p. 324, bold added)
Therefore, we need to realise that the Qur'an has been passed down to us
from men called the "Readers". They were famous reciters of the Qur'an
in the early centuries of Islam. The way these men recited the Qur'an was
formally recorded in textual form by other men called the
"Transmitters". There are in fact more Readers and Transmitters than
those listed above. The table below lists the ten commonly accepted Readers,
their transmitted versions, and their current area of use.
The Reader
|
The Transmitter
|
Current Area of Use
|
|
"The Seven"
|
|||
Nafi`
|
Warsh
|
Algeria,
Morocco, parts of Tunisia, West Africa and Sudan
|
|
Qalun
|
Libya,
Tunisia and parts of Qatar
|
||
Ibn
Kathir
|
al-Bazzi
|
||
Qunbul
|
|||
Abu
`Amr al-'Ala'
|
al-Duri
|
Parts
of Sudan and West Africa
|
|
al-Suri
|
|||
Ibn
`Amir
|
Hisham
|
Parts
of Yemen
|
|
Ibn
Dhakwan
|
|||
Hamzah
|
Khalaf
|
||
Khallad
|
|||
al-Kisa'i
|
al-Duri
|
||
Abu'l-Harith
|
|||
Abu
Bakr `Asim
|
Hafs
|
Muslim
world in general
|
|
Ibn
`Ayyash
|
|||
"The Three"
|
|||
Abu
Ja`far
|
Ibn
Wardan
|
||
Ibn
Jamaz
|
|||
Ya`qub
al-Hashimi
|
Ruways
|
||
Rawh
|
|||
Khalaf
al-Bazzar
|
Ishaq
|
||
Idris
al-Haddad
|
|||
What the above means is that the Qur'an has come to us through many transmitted
versions. You cannot recite or read the Qur'an except through one of these
versions. Each version has its own chain of narrators (isnad) like a hadith.
There are more versions than those listed above but they are not considered
authentic because their chain of narration is considered weak. Not all of these
versions are printed or used today, but several are. We will now compare two of
them.
All these facts can be a bit confusing when you first read them. If you
are feeling that way don't worry; it's normal. To make things simple we will
now compare two Qur'ans from different parts of the world to see if they are
identical. The Qur'an on the left is now the most commonly used Qur'an. It is
the 1924 Egyptian standard edition based on the of the transmitted version of
Imam Hafs. The Qur'an on the right is according to Imam Warsh's transmitted
version and is mainly used in North Africa.
When we
compare these Qur'ans it becomes obvious they are not identical. There are
five main types of differences between them.
|
The following examples are scanned copies of the same word/s in the same
verse from these two Qur'ans. On some occasions the verse number differs
because the two Qur'ans number their verses differently. There is a slight
difference in script as well: the letter Qaaf in the Warsh version is written
with only one dot above, and the Faa has a single dot below. This is the
orthography of North African (Maghribi) Arabic script.
EXTRA WORDS
THE
QUR'AN ACCORDING TO IMAM HAFS
|
THE
QUR'AN ACCORDING TO IMAM WARSH
|
Allah huwa l-ghaniyu
Allah is the self-sufficient ... 57:24 |
Allah l-ghaniyu
Allah, the self-sufficient ... 57:23 |
The
Hafs versions has an extra word, huwa, in this verse. This makes
the grammar different between these two Qur'ans. In the Hafs version it is a sentence, Allah
is the self-sufficient. While in the Warsh version it is a phrase, Allah,
the self-sufficient. Both Qur'ans are expressing the same idea but are
doing it in different ways and as a result are recited differently.
|
|
wasaari'uu
And hasten to ... 3:133 |
saari'uu
Hasten to ... 3:133 |
The
Hafs version has the extra word waw (and). This does not
change the meaning of the verse but does change the way it is recited.
|
GRAPHICAL/BISIC LETTER DIFFERENCES
THE
QUR'AN ACCORDING TO IMAM HAFS
|
THE QUR'AN
ACCORDING TO IMAM WARSH
|
wawassaa
And Ibrahim enjoined (wawassaa) on his sons ... 2:132 |
wa'awsaa
And Ibrahim instructed/made (wa’awsaa) his sons ... 2:131 |
The
Hafs version is a 2nd form verb, while the Warsh version has an extra alif to
make a 4th form verb. This intensifies the meaning of the verb.
|
|
yartadda
... turn back ... 5:54 |
yartadid
... turn back ... 5:56 |
The two
words are recited differently but have the same meaning. They are two
different examples of the 8th form jussive verb. This is most likely a
difference in dialect.
|
|
qaala
He said (qaala), "My lord knows ..." (21:4) |
qul
Say (qul): My lord knows ... (21:4) |
In the
Hafs version qaala is the perfect tense and therefore
Muhammad is the subject of the verb, but in the Warsh version qul is
the imperative and therefore the subject is God who is commanding
Muhammad/Muslims. This difference is repeated in 21:112.
|
|
walaayakhaafu
... and for him is no fear (walaayakhaafu) ... 91:15 |
falaayakhaafu
... therefore, for him is no fear (falaayakhaafu) ... 91:15 |
There
are different letters at the beginning of these words. This changes the
connection from "and" to "therefore".
|
DIACRITICAL DIFFERENCES
Arabic uses dots (i'jam) to distinguish certain letters that are written
the same way. For instance the basic symbol represents
five different letters in Arabic depending upon where the diacritical dots are
placed: baa', taa', thaa', nuun, yaa'. Here
we see another difference between these two Qur'ans; they do not have the dots
in the same place. The result is that different letters are formed.
THE
QUR'AN ACCORDING TO IMAM HAFS
|
THE
QUR'AN ACCORDING TO IMAM WARSH
|
nagfir
... we give mercy ... 2:58 |
yughfar
... he gives mercy ... 2:57 |
There
are different letters at the beginning of these words. This difference
changes the meaning from "we" to "he".
|
|
taquluna
... you (plural) say ... 2:140 |
yaquluna
... they say ... 2:139 |
There
are different letters at the beginning of these words. This difference
changes the meaning from "you" to "they".
|
|
nunshizuhaa
... we shall raise up ... 2:259 |
nunshiruhaa
... we shall revive/make alive ... 2:258 |
There
are different root letters in these words and this makes two different words.
The two words have a similar meaning but are not identical.
|
|
ataytukum
I gave you ... 3:81 |
ataynakum
We gave you ... 3:80 |
There
are different letters in the middle of these words. This difference changes
the meaning from "I" to "we".
|
|
yu'tiihim
... he gives them ... 4:152 |
nuutiihimuu
... we give them ... 4:151 |
There
are different letters at the beginning of these words. This difference
changes the meaning from "we" to "he".
|
|
hum `ibadu l-rahmani
... they are slaves of the Most Gracious ... 43:19 |
hum `inda l-rahmani
... they are with the Most Gracious ... 43:19 |
The
middle letter of the middle word is different in these verses. This changes
the meaning of these words significantly: In the Hafs version the word is a
noun and means slaves while in the Warsh version the word is
a preposition and means with. Thus, the verses have a different
meaning.
|
VOWEL DIFFERENCES
Arabic uses small symbols (tashkil) above and below the letters to
indicate some of the vowels of a word. Here we see another difference between
these two Qur'ans; they do not use the same vowels in the same place.
THE
QUR'AN ACCORDING TO OF IMAM HAFS
|
THE
QUR'AN ACCORDING TO OF IMAM WARSH
|
maaliki yawmi
Owner of the Day ... 1:4 |
maliki yawmi
King of the Day ... 1:3 |
The
Hafs version has a long alif which makes an active
participle meaning owner, while the Warsh version is a nominal
noun meaning king.
|
|
yakhda'uuna
... they deceive ... 2:9 |
yukhaadi'uuna
... they seek to deceive ... 2:8 |
There
are different vowels on the first and second letters of these words. The Hafs
version is a 1st form of the verb, while the Warsh version is a 3rd form.
|
|
yakdhibuuna
... they lie ... 2:10 |
yukadhdhibuuna
... they were lied to (or) they deny ... 2:9 |
There
are different vowels on the first and second letters of these words. The Hafs
version is a 1st form of the verb, while the Warsh version is a 2nd form
either active or passive. (Note: this word appears twice in this verse.)
|
|
hatta yaquula
... so that they said ... 2:214 |
hatta yaquulu
... until they said ... 2:212 |
There
is a different vowel on the last letter. The fatha vowel
used in the Hafs version places the verb into the subjunctive mood which
gives the preceding particle hatta the meaning so
that. The Warsh version uses the damma vowel which
places the verb into the imperfect indicative mood which gives the
particle hatta the meaning until.
|
|
ta'aamu miskiinin
... a redemption by feeding a poor man ... 2:184 |
ta'aami masakiina
... a redemption by feeding poor men ... 2:183 |
There
are several different vowels in these words. These change the noun from
singular to plural; and hence changes the number of men you are required to
feed to redeem yourself for failing to fast.
|
|
qatala
And many a prophet fought (qatala) ... 3.146 |
qutila
And many a prophet was killed (qutila) ... 3.146. |
There
are different vowels in these words. These change the meaning from the active
to the passive and thus changes the meaning of the verse.
|
|
risaalatahu
his message ... 5:67 |
risaalatihi
his message ... 5:69 |
There
are different vowels on the last two letters of these words. These change the
case and pronunciation of the word. The Hafs version is in the accusative
case while the Warsh is in the genitive. This reflects a different
understanding of the grammar of the sentence.
|
|
sihraani
... two works of magic ... 28:48 |
saahiraani
... two magicians ... 28:48 |
There
are different vowels on the first two letters of these words. These change
the word from an active participle in the Hafs version to a noun in the Warsh
and thus changes the meaning of the verse.
|
|
rabbiha wa kutubihi
... her lord and his books. 66:12 |
rabbiha wa kitabihi
... her lord and his book. 66:12 |
There
are different vowels used for the word kitab (book). This
difference makes the word plural in the Hafs version and singular in the
Warsh version. This slightly changes the meaning of the verse because in the
Hafs version Mary believes in all of God's books, while in the Warsh version
she believes in the book that is with her.
|
THE NUMBER OF DIFFERENCES
We have now considered four types of differences between these two
Qur'ans: extra words, differences in letters, diacritical dots and vowels, but
how many of these differences are there between these two Qur'ans? There are
Islamic reference books that answer this question. The title page below is from
a book entitled, "The Readings and Rhythm of the Uthman (Qur'anic)
Manuscript".
In this book the author displays the text of the Hafs version of the
Qur'an but underlines any word where there is a difference among the Readers.
This difference is then shown in the margin. The author has used a colour coded
system to show which Reader is different. If the variant word in the margin is
red this indicates that the Reader was Imam Warsh. Please study the page below
and identify the underlined words and then the corresponding colour coded words
in the margin.
When the red coded differences are counted there are found to be 1354
accepted differences between the Hafs and Warsh versions.
BASMALAH DIFFERENCES
There is another type of difference between these two Qur'ans, the
Basmalah. The Basmalah is the phrase, "In the Name of Allaah, the
Ever-Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy". Both the Hafs and Warsh versions of
the Qur'an have the Basmalah at the start of every sura except sura 9. In this
way they are identical, however, while including it in their Qur'ans these
Imams understood the Basmalah in very different ways. For Imam Hafs, the
Basmalah was part of the revelation and part of the first verse as it was
recited, while for Imam Warsh, the Basmalah was a du'a (supplication) to
introduce each sura; it was written at the start of each sura, like the sura
titles, but was not considered part of the revelation. Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi
explains this.
The basmalah is the phrase that occurs at the beginning
of each soorah of the Qur'aan, except for Soorah at-Tawbah,
and reads, as every Muslim knows,
'Bismillaah ar-Rahmaan ar-Raheem'
(In the Name of Allaah, the Ever-Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy).
(In the Name of Allaah, the Ever-Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy).
There is a difference of opinion amongst the scholars of the Qur'aan
over whether this phrase is to be considered as a verse at the beginning of
each soorah, in particular Soorah al-Faatihah, or
whether this is merely a phrase said for blessings between the soorahs,
and is meant to identify where one soorah ends and the next
begins.
The scholars are agreed that the basmalah does not form
part of Soorah at-Tawbah, and that it is a verse of the Qur'an
in 27:30 ... but disagree as to its status at the beginning of the other soorahs ...
The scholars who claim that the basmalah at the
beginning of the soorahs is a verse of the Qur'aan, (include)
Imaam ash-Shaafi'ee (d. 204 A.H.) (and) Imaam Ahmad (d. 241) ... However, those
that do not hold the basmalah at the beginning of the soorahs to
be a part of the Qur'aan (include) Imaam Maalik (d. 179) (and) Aboo Haneefah
(d. 150 A.H.) ...
Based on this classic difference of opinion, the qira'aat (the
Readers) themselves differ over whether the basmalah was a
verse in Soorah al-Faatihah and the other soorahs.
Among the Qaarees (the Readers), Ibn Katheer,'Aasim and
al-Kisaa'ee were the only ones who considered it to be a verse at the beginning
of each soorah, whereas the others did not. (Abu Ammaar Yasir
Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur'aan, pp.
157-158.)
To summarize the above. The four Imams who founded the Hanafi, Maliki,
Shafi'i and Hanbali schools disagree as to whether the Basmalah is part of the
revelation at the start of each sura. Imam ash-Shafi'ee and Imam Ahmad believed
that it was, while Imam Maalik and Aboo Haneefah believed it was not. As a
result the different Readers who come from these schools have different views
too. For Ibn Kathir, al-Kisa'i, and Abu Bakr `Asim (Hafs) the Basmalah was part
of the revelation of each sura, but for the majority of the Readers: Nafi`
(Warsh), Abu `Amr al-'Ala', Ibn `Amir, Hamzah, Abu Ja`far, Ya`qub al-Hashimi,
and Khalaf al-Bazzar, the Basmalah was not part of the revelation. Therefore,
while both of the Qur'ans we are examining contain the Basmalah, in the Hafs
Qur'an it is considered part of the revelation, while in the Warsh Qur'an it is
not considered part of the revelation but du'a.
This is a significant difference because the Basmalah appears 113 times
at the start of the surahs and has 4 words, which means there are 452 extra
words in the Qur’an according to Imam Hafs than the Qur’an of according to Imam
Warsh.
THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE DIFFERENCES AFFECT THE MEANING
I am often told by Muslims that the differences between these Qur'ans
are only a matter of dialect, accent or pronunciation, and do not affect the
meaning, however, this is clearly not the case. The examples given earlier show
that the differences are far more significant: they change the subject of the
sentence, whether the verb is active or passive, singular or plural, how the
grammar of the sentence is to be understood, and whether or not the Basmalah is
even part of the revelation at the start of each sura. These differences do
affect the meaning. The evidence speaks for itself.
Subhii al-Saalih[1] summarizes the differences into seven categories.
1. Differences in grammatical indicator (i`raab).
2. Differences in consonants.
3. Differences in nouns as to whether they are singular, dual, plural,
masculine or feminine.
4. Differences in which there is a substitution of one word for another.
5. Differences due to reversal of word order in expressions where the
reversal is meaningful in the Arabic language in general or in the structure of
the expression in particular.
6. Differences due to some small addition or deletion in accordance with
the custom of the Arabs.
7. Differences due to dialectical peculiarities.
We can also add to this list the difference in the status of the
Basmalah.
Therefore, the claim that these differences are just a matter of dialect
and do not affect the meaning is false. The evidence speaks for itself.
Our investigation so far has only considered two versions of the Qur'an,
but as we saw at the beginning of this article there are many other versions
that could also be examined for variants. The book below does this. It is a
Qur'an that lists the variants from the Ten Accepted Readers.
Translation
Making Easy the Readings of What Has Been Sent
Down
Author
Muhammad Fahd Khaaruun The Collector of the 10 Readings From al-Shaatebeiah and al-Dorraah and al-Taiabah
Revised by
Muhammad Kareem Ragheh The Chief Reader of Damascus
Daar al-Beirut
|
In this edition of the Qur'an, Muhammad Fahd Khaaruun has collected
accepted variant readings from among the Ten Accepted Readers and included them
in the margin of the 1924 Egyptian standard edition of the Hafs version of the
Qur'an. These are not all the variants, there are other variants that could
have been included, but the author has limited himself to the variants of the
Ten Accepted Readers. As the title of his book suggests this makes it easy to
know what the variant readings are because they are clearly listed.
Below is a page from this reference Qur'an. You can see the variant
readings listed in the margin. Approximately two thirds of the verses of the
have some type of accepted variant. This is approximately 4000 accepted
variants.
Below is a six volume encyclopedia set which records all known variants.
It is entitled: Mu'jam al-qiraa'aat al-Quraaneeyah, ma'a maqaddimah fee
qiraa'aat wa ashhar al-qurraa (The Encyclopedia of the Quranic
Readings with an Introduction to Readings and Famous Readers).
Here is a sample page from this encyclopedia set. Almost every verse in
the Qur'an has variants associated with it.
CONCLUSION. We began this article by considering this common Islamic claim:
No other book in the
world can match the Qur'an ... The astonishing fact about this book of ALLAH is
that it has remained unchanged, even to a dot, over the last fourteen hundred
years. ... No variation of text can be found in it. You can check this for
yourself by listening to the recitation of Muslims from different parts of the
world. (Basic Principles of Islam, p. 4)
This claim is wrong. All of the Islamic evidence shows there are
different canonical versions of the Qur'an used around the world today. They
differ in their words, basic letters, diacritical dots, vowels, and the
Basmalah; and these change the meaning of words and sentences. Therefore how
the Qur'an is recited around the world today is different; not all Qur'ans are
identical.
I realise this may be hard for some Muslims to accept because in their
culture they have grown up being taught there is only one Qur'an, however, this
is the fault of Islamic leaders who continue to exaggerate about the Qur'an as
they attack the Bible.
This article only considers the different Arabic versions of the Qur'an used
in the world today. If you wish to learn about the different
Qur'ans in Islam's early history then read The Preservation of the Qur'an.
Why are there so many different versions of the Qur'an? The traditional
Islamic answer comes from a hadith in which Muhammad said Allah gave the Qur'an
in seven modes (ahruf).
Narrated Umar bin Al-Khattab: ... (Muhammad said) "This Qur'an has
been revealed to be recited in seven different ways (ahruf), so recite of it
whichever is easier for you." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61,
no. 514)
Islamic scholars agree that there are differences between the ahruf but
do not agree as to what these differences are:
As for what is meant
by these seven ahruf, there is a great deal of difference on this
issue. Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276 A.H.) recorded thirty-five opinions on the issue,
and as-Suyootee listed over forty. Ibn Sa'adan (d. 231 A.H.), a famous grammarian
and reciter of the Qur'aan, even declared that the true meaning of the ahruf was
known only to Allaah, and thus to attempt to investigate into this issue was
futile! (Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the
Qur'aan, p. 175)
Some of the main options for the differences between the seven ahruf
are:
- Different Arabic dialects.
- Synonyms.
- Differences in Arabic
grammar, i.e. sentence construction.
If this hadith is authentic we can at least say that Muhammad allowed
differences in how the Qur'an was recited. If the hadith is fabricated it still
indicates a situation where different versions of the Qur'an existed and needed
to have their existence justified. Either way, both options indicate that early
in Islam's history there were different versions of the Qur'an. So how did the
seven ahruf become the ten qira'at of Uthman's Qur'an?
The seven ahruf and ten qira'at are related but are not the same thing.
Here is a summary from the Islamic sources of what seems to be the best
explanation for how the seven ahruf became the ten qira'at:
1. Muhammad allowed the seven ahruf of the Qur'an. Each ahruf was a way
of reciting the Qur'an, that is, each ahruf had its own qira'ah/reading.
2. These differences caused problems for the early Muslims.
Narrated Anas bin
Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people
(Muslims) of Syria and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Armenia
and Azarbaijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Syria 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) ... (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 510)
3. Caliph Uthman solved this problem by establishing one text, in one
dialect, and destroying the other versions. His goal was to remove the
differences and unite the Muslim community around a single text recited in the
Qurayshi dialect.
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 Az-Zubair, 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. ... (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no.
510)
4. Uthman's Qur'an removed most of the differences between what Muslims
were reciting, however, some were able to remain due to the vague nature of the
Arabic script that was used at this time.
The (Arabic) script used in the seventh century, i.e. during the
lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad, consisted of very basic symbols, which
expressed only the consonantal structure of a word, and even that with much
ambiguity. While today letters such as baa, taa, thaa, yaa, are easily
distinguished by points, this was not so in the early days and all these
letters used to be written with a straight line. (Von Denffer, `Ulum
Al-Qur'an - An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur'an, p. 57)
This vague nature of the script of Uthman's Qur'an allowed sections of
the qira'at/readings from the other ahruf to be transferred into Uthman's
Qur'an. If the qira'at/readings of the other ahruf was compatible with Uthman's
basic text, it could continued to be read in Uthman's Qur'an. In this case the
basic script was vocalised with different diacritical and vowel markings (as we
have seen). This resulted in different readings/qira'at/vocalisations for the
same word in Uthman's Qur'an. Thus, Uthman's Qur'an was no longer a single ahruf
with its own reading/qira'ah but a mixture of readings from different ahruf.
5. This vague nature of the Arabic text also allowed new variants to
arise that were compatible with Uthmanic text.
When more and more Muslims of non-Arab origin and also many ignorant
Arabs studied the Qur'an, faulty pronunciation and wrong readings began to
increase. It is related that at the time of Du'ali (d. 69H/638) someone in
Basra read the following aya from the Qur'an in a faulty way,
which changed the meaning completely:
That God and his apostle dissolve obligations with the pagans (9:3)
That God dissolves obligations with the pagans and the apostle.
This mistake occurred through wrongly reading rasulihi in
place of rasuluhu, which could not be distinguished from the
written text, because there were no signs or accents indicating the correct
pronunciation. Unless someone had memorised the correct version he could out of
ignorance easily commit such a mistake. (Von Denffer, `Ulum Al-Qur'an -
An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur'an, p. 58)
Islamic scholars record at least 50 different
readings/qira'at/vocalisations systems that had developed for Uthman's
Qur'an.[2] These different qira'at show a range of opinions existed as to how
the Uthman text could be read. In fact, since there were at least 50 different
qira'at it shows that there was confusion as to how the Uthman text should be
read.
6. Ahmad ibn Musa ibn Mujahid solved this problem by choosing seven of
these qira'at/reading systems as canonical, and in time another three were
accepted. Reciting any of the non-canonical qira'at was now forbidden and
punishable.
Two Qur'an readers
were famously tried for reciting unacceptable variants, Ibn Miqsam in 322/934
and Ibn Shannabudh in 323/935. Both were forced to recant. (Christopher
Melchert, Ibn Mujahid and the Establishment of the Seven Qur'anic
Readings, p. 5)
The result is there are now ten canonical qira'at/readings/vocalisations
systems for Uthman's Qur'an. This is how the qira'at of the seven ahruf, and
the variants that arose from the vagueness of the text, became the ten qira'at
of Uthman's Qur'an. This is why there are different versions of the Qur'an
today. For more detailed examination of this history read The Preservation of the Qur'an
In this article we have considered the Ten Accepted Readers and looked
at two of them in particular, however, there are many others. Islamic scholars
record up to 50 different versions.[2] No one accepts all of these as
authentic. They are judged in the same way a hadith is judged for authenticity.
In this way the Qur'an is the same as the Hadith.
Most Islamic scholars believe that all of the authentic versions are
from God.
This oral tradition (of the Qur'an) embraces ten distinct systems of
recitation, or, as they are generally called among scholars,
"Readings" (qiraa'aat), each tranmitted by a "school" of
Koran-readers deriving its authority from a prominent reader of the second or
early third century of the Islamic era. The slight variation among the Ten
Readings is attributable to the dialectal variation in the original Revelation.
... It should be emphasized that all of the Readings were transmitted orally
from the Prophet. (Labib as-Said, The Recited Koran: A History of the
First Recorded Version, p. 53)
Every reading in accordance with Arabic (grammar) even if (only) in some
way, and in accordance with one of the masaahif of Uthmaan,
even if (only) probable, and with sound chain of transmission, is a correct
(Sahiih) reading, which must not be rejected, and may not be denied, but it
belongs to the seven modes (ahruf) according to which the Qur'aan was revealed,
and the people are obliged to accept it, no matter whether it is from the
seven Imaans, or the ten or from other accepted Imaans (Abu-l-Khair
bin al-Jazari; cited from Ahmad von Denffer, Ulum Al-Qur'an, p.
119.)
Some Islamic scholars believe there is only one recitation of the Qur'an
and that the different qira'at/versions come from the Readers and not God.
The Koran was originally recited in one language and one dialect, namely
that of the Quraysh. However, as soon as readers from the different tribes began
to recite it, a variety of readings emerged, reflecting dialectal differences
among the readers. The diversity was so great that later generations of readers
and scholars had to labor intensely over the recording and careful analysis of
these readings. In so doing they give rise to a special science, or rather
special sciences, devoted exclusively to this enterprise. ...
I should pause here to note that certain religious authorities have
supposed that the Seven Readings were transmitted by a process of continuous
transmission (tawaatur) on a wide scale from the Prophet himself, unto
whom, so they allege, they were revealed by Gabriel. These authorities
therefore consider that whoever rejects any of the established readings is an
unbeliever. They have not, however, been able to produce any evidence for what
they claim except that the tradition which reads, "The Koran was revealed
in seven dialects (ahruf)".
The truth of the matter is that the seven Readings had nothing to do
with the Revelation, nothing in the least; and whoever rejects any of them is
not for having done so an unbeliever; nor has he sinned or gone astray in his
religion. The origin of these Readings is to be found in the diversity of
tribal dialects among the early Muslim Arabs, and everyone has the right to
dispute them, and to accept and reject them, or parts of them, as seems proper.
In point of fact, people have disputed the Readings and argued over
them, and have even accused each other of error with respect to them; yet we
know of no Muslim who ever charged another with unbelief over this matter
(Taahaa Husayn, Fi'l-Adab al-jaahilii, cited from Labib
as-Said, The Recited Koran: A History of the First Recorded Version,
pp. 97&99)
It is generally known that there are seven or ten different recitations
of the Qur'an - By recitation is meant the different wordings which convey the
same or allied meanings Maalik and Malik -
Such as Yatta'harna and Yat'harna. It is generally
believed the recitation of the seven or the ten reciters of the first, second
and third century of Islam are valid and the Muslims are allowed to adopt
either of these in their reciting Qur'an and it is generally held that the
origin of these various recitations go back to the time of the Holy Prophet who
approved these varieties but according to the Shia Ithna-Ashari School whose
views are based on the teachings of the Holy Imams, the revealed recitation of
the Qur'an cannot be but one and as the Imam puts it, "Qur'an is One, came
down from the One, the variation in recitation comes from the reciters not from
God." (S. V. Mir Ahmed Ali, The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and
Commentary, p. 58a)
As we have seen in Appendix 2 that the orthodox Islamic understanding
regarding the different qira'at/readings is that all of the authentic qira'at
are from God. Thus all of the Hafs qira'ah is a true revelation just as all of
the Warsh qira'ah is a true revelation. Now scholars can say these things but
what they do reveals what they truly believe. This is the case for Abdullah
Yusuf Ali who made one of the most famous and widely used English translations
of the Qur'an.
Yusuf Ali based his translation on the Hafs qira'ah, however, he
consulted other qira'at, and sometimes used a different qira'ah at certain
points in his translation. That is, he chose from among the qira'at the reading
that made the best sense.
We see this with his translation and footnote for sura 21:112. Below are
scans from The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation, and Commentary, 4th
ed., Brentwood, Md., U.S.A.: Amana Corp., 1989, by Abdullah Yusuf Ali:
What has Yusuf Ali done in translating sura 21:112? The Arabic text
displayed in his translation is the Hafs version, and it reads qaala (He
said), however, Yusuf Ali has followed the majority of the qira'at which
read qul (Say). The reason he gives for using a different
qira'ah is:
2767. ... The beter
(sic) reading is "Say" in the imperative, rather than "He (the
Prophet) said (or says)" in the indicative mood. ...
That is, he believes the Warsh, along with other versions, give a better
reading and so translates according to them. He does this again for sura 21:4,
and explains that his decision has the support of other Islamic scholars:
2666. ... But more
than one Commentator understands the meaning in the imperative, and I agree
with them.
Choosing the best reading occurs several times throughout his
translation: It occurs for sura 23:112 with the choice explained in footnote
2948, and a highly significant choice occurs in sura 33:6 with the following
explanation:
Here we see that the reading/qira'ah of Ubayy ibn Ka'ab has these extra
words: "and he is a father of them". This means Ubayy ibn Ka'ab
recited sura 33:6 as follows:
The Prophet is closer
to the Believers than their own selves, and he is a father of them and
his wives are their mothers. ... (Qur'an 33:6)
This difference has an enormous affect on the meaning: Should Muslims
consider Muhammad their father or not? In this case Yusuf Ali seems to accept
both readings as valid but chooses not to include Ubayy ibn Ka'ab's reading as
part of his translation.
The Islamic scholar, Alan Jones, like Yusuf Ali, explains how he has
selected the best reading for his translation of the Qur'an.
The basic text used
for this translation is that of the Egyptian standard edition, first issued in
1342/1923 and revised in 1381/1960 and subsequently. This is the most widely
used text. It had it origins in the Iraqi city of Kufa in the second century of
the Islamic era, and is technically known as the Hafs recension of the `Asim
reading. Very rarely I have preferred a somewhat more conservative reading that
originated in Medina: Warsh's recension of Nafi's reading. There is a note when
I have done so. The notes also refer from time to time to the readings of one
of the Companions of the Prophet, `Abdallah Ibn Mas'ud. (Alan Jones, The
Qur'an - Translated into English, p. 19)
What the above examples demonstrate is that Islamic scholars do not
treat all of the qira'at/readings as equally valid but instead choose the best
reading from among them. Christians do not have a problem with Islamic scholars
doing this because this is something Christian scholars do with the Bible. But
Christians do have a problem when Muslims claim that all the qira'at/readings
are revelation when clearly Islamic scholars do not treat them this way.
It is ridiculous to believe that God gave the Qur'an with thousands of
variants; and it is quite reasonable for Islamic scholars to choose the best
reading from among them. The doctrines of the seven ahruf and the ten authentic
qira'at are simply an attempt to harmonize and justify the many variants. There
may be some limited historical basis for these doctrines but in practice they
do not work and Islamic scholars choose the best reading. In practice, Islamic
scholars treat the different qira'at/readings as the first stage of
interpreting the basic arabic text of the Qur'an.
As we saw in appendix 2, the orthodox Muslim belief is that each of the
ten accepted qira'at, as a whole, can be traced perfectly back to Muhammad.
The isnad is the list of names of those who passed this
qira'at on from Muhammad. Thus the claim is that the whole of the Hafs qira'ah,
in this form, can be traced back to Muhammad. However the relationship between
the seven ahruf and ten accepted qira'at of Uthman's Qu'ran makes the
authenticity of these isnads problematic.
If we assume that the hadith about the seven ahruf is authentic, then we
can conclude that it would be possible for a qira'ah/reading of a ahruf to be
passed on as a complete whole, and for this to be traced back via an isnad to
Muhammad. However, the ten accepted qira'at of Uthman's Qur'an are not the same
as the qira'ah of a individual ahruf. As we saw earlier, Uthman destroyed most
of the differences between the ahruf, and only those readings/qira'at that were
compatible with his basic text were able to remain, and be included, as a
reading/qira'ah of his text. This means that the ten accepted readings/qira'at
based on Uthman's Qur'an are a mixture of qira'at/readings from various ahruf
and not a continuous whole reading/qira'ah going back to Muhammad. The only
continuous whole readings that exist are going back to the establishment of the
Uthmanic text. Therefore, the isnads for the Ten Accepted Readers which claim
to go back to Muhammad as a whole are false.
The Qur'an is famous for being memorised. Some Muslims have told me that
it doesn't matter if there are differences between the written Qur'ans
because the Qur'an is firstly oral and only secondarily
written. However, this is a false distinction for two reasons: Firstly, the
Qur'an says that it is written (Q. 80:11-15) just as it is memorized,
therefore, what is written matters. Secondly, these written Qur'ans are meant
to be an exact record of the oral recitation of the 10 famous Readers. That is,
the written versions claim to be the memorised oral versions. Thus the
differences between the written versions are the differences between the
memorised oral versions.
I have bought some of these Qur'ans from my local Islamic bookshop. Any
Islamic bookshop should be able to order them for you. They are also available
online and from the following suppliers.
- Easy Quran Store -
Individual Qur'an Versions
- Easy Quran Store - 10
Version Qur'an
- Neel Wa Furat - 10 Version
Qur'an
- Iqra Shop - Imam Qunbol Version, Imam Warsh Version
- 14 Qira'at Online
- Qur'an Flash - Several versions of
the Qur'an available for download.
ENDNOTES
[1] Subhii al-Saalih, Muhaahith fii `Ulum al-Qur'aan,
Beirut: Daar al-`Ilm li al-Malaayiin, 1967, pp. 109ff.
[2] Al-Nadim, The Fihrist of al-Nadim - A Tenth Century survey
of Muslim Culture, New York: Columbia University Press, 1970, pp. 63-71.
Also, Ibn al-JazarT, Nashr, vol. 1, pp. 34—7, cited from, Intisar
A. Rabb, "Non-Canonical Readings of the Qur'an: Recognitition and
Authenticity (the Himsi Reading)", Journal of Qur'anic Studies,
2006, vol. 8, no. 2, p. 124 footnote 114.
REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
Revisiting the Collection and
Transmission History of the Qur’an - A video series by Dr. Shehzad
Saleem
S. V. Mir Ahmed Ali, The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and
Commentary, New York: Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, 1988.
Basic Principles of Islam, (no author listed) Abu Dhabi, UAE:
The Zayed Bin Sultan Al Nahayan Charitable & Humanitarian Foundation, 1996.
Adrian Brockett, `The Value of the Hafs and Warsh transmissions for the
Textual History of the Qur'an', Approaches to the History of the
Interpretation of the Qur'an, ed. Andrew Rippin; Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1988, pp. 33-45.
Ahmad von Denffer, Ulum Al-Qur'an, UK: The Islamic
Foundation, 1994.
Cyril Glassé, The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, San
Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989.
Alan Jones, Arabic Through the Qur'an, Cambridge: The
Islamic Text Society, 2005.
The Qur'an - Translated into English, U.K.: Gibb
Memorial Trust, 2007.
Christopher Melchert, "Ibn Mujahid and the Establishment of the
Seven Qur'anic Readings", Studia Islamica, 2000, no. 91 , pp.
5-22.
"The Relation of the Ten Readings to One
Another", Journal of Qur'anic Studies, 2008, no. 10, pp.
73-87.
Al-Nadim, The Fihrist of al-Nadim - A Tenth Century survey of
Muslim Culture, New York: Columbia University Press, 1970.
Intisar A. Rabb, "Non-Canonical Readings of the Qur'an:
Recognitition and Authenticity (the Himsi Reading)", Journal of
Qur'anic Studies, 2006, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 84-127
Subhii al-Saalih, Muhaahith fii `Ulum
al-Qur'aan, Beirut: Daar al-`Ilm li al-Malaayiin, 1967.
Labib as-Said, The Recited Koran: A History of the First
Recorded Version, translated by B. Weis, M. Rauf and M. Berger, Princeton,
New Jersey: The Darwin Press, 1975.
Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi, An Introduction to the Sciences of the
Qur'aan, United Kingdom: Al-Hidaayah, 1999.
No comments:
Post a Comment