What Is The Challenge Of The Qur'an With Respect To Arabic Prose & Poetry?
Islamic Awareness
© Islamic Awareness, All Rights Reserved.
Last Modified: 9th September 1999
Assalamu-alaikum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu:
The Qur'an in many places challenges the people to produce a surah like it. It appears that the Christian missionaries who call the challenge irrelevent or an utterly subjective criterion are pretty much unaware of how the Arabic poetry and prose compares with the Qur'an. This article is devoted to deal with one aspect of the Qur'anic challenge of produce a surah like it. What is meant by surah like it with respect to the Arabic prose and poetry?
The verses of the Qur'an dealing with the challenge are given below (Hilali and Muhsin Khan's Translation):
Say: "If the mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another." [Qur'an 17:88]
And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him ), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful. [Qur'an 2:23]
And this Qur'an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah (Lord of the heavens and the earth), but it is a confirmation of (the revelation) which was before it [i.e. the Taurat (Torah), and the Injeel (Gospel), etc.], and a full explanation of the Book (i.e. laws and orders, etc, decreed for mankind) - wherein there is no doubt from the the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns,and all that exists).
Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it?" Say: "Bring then a surah (chapter) like unto it, and call upon whomsoever you can, besides Allah, if you are truthful!" [Qur'an 10:37-38]
Or they say, "He (Prophet Muhammad(P)) forged it (the Qur'an)." Say: "Bring you then ten forged surah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!" [Qur'an 11:13]
Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it (this Qur'an)?" Nay! They believe not! Let them then produce a recital like unto it (the Qur'an) if they are truthful. [Qur'an 52:33-34]
cAbdur Rahim Green mentions that:
These are the sixteen al-Bihar (literally "The Seas", so called because of the way the poem moves, according to its rhythmic patterns): at-Tawil, al-Bassit, al-Wafir, al-Kamil, ar-Rajs, al-Khafif, al-Hazaj, al-Muttakarib, al-Munsarih, al-Muktatab, al-Muktadarak, al-Madid, al-Mujtath, al-Ramel, al-Khabab and as-Saria'. So the challenge is to produce in Arabic, three lines, that do not fall into one of these sixteen Bihar, that is not rhyming prose, nor like the speech of soothsayers, and not normal speech, that it should contain at least a comprehensible meaning and rhetoric, i.e. not gobbledygook. Now I think at least the Christian's "Holy spirit" that makes you talk in tongues, part of your "Tri-Unity" of God should be able to inspire one of you with that!
To begin with; the Arabic language and Arab speech are divided into two branches. One of them is rhymed poetry. It is a speech with metre and rhyme, which means every line of it ends upon a definite letter, which is called the 'rhyme'. This rhymed poetry is again divided into metres or what is called as al-Bihar, literally meaning 'The Seas'. This is so called because of the way the poetry moves according to the rhythmic patterns. There are sixteen al-Bihar viz; at-Tawil, al-Bassit, al-Wafir, al-Kamil, ar-Rajs, al-Khafif, al-Hazaj, al-Muttakarib, al-Munsarih, al-Muktatab, al-Muktadarak, al-Madid, al-Mujtath, al-Ramel, al-Khabab and as-Saria'. Each one rhymes differently. For metres of Arabic poetry please see please see Lyall's book Translations Of Ancient Arabian Poetry, Chiefly Pre-Islamic.[1] He discusses al-Kamil, al-Wafir, al-Hajaz, at-Tawil, al-Bassit, al-Khafif and al-Madid briefly.[2]
The other branch of Arabic speech is prose, that is non-metrical speech. The prose may be a rhymed prose. Rhymed prose consists of cola ending on the same rhyme throughout, or of sentences rhymed in pairs. This is called "rhymed prose" or sajc. Prose may also be straight prose (mursal). In straight prose, the speech goes on and is not divided in cola, but is continued straight through without any divisions, either of rhyme or of anything else. Prose is employed in sermons and prayers and in speeches intended to encourage or frighten the masses.[3] One of the most famous speeches involving sajc is that of Hajjaj bin Yusuf in his first deputation in Iraq in post-Islamic and Quss bin Sa'idah in pre-Islamic times.
So, the challenge, as cAbdur Rahim Green mentions, is to produce in Arabic , three lines, that do not fall into one of these sixteen al-Bihar, that is not rhyming prose, nor like the speech of soothsayers, and not normal speech, that it should contain at least a comprehensible meaning and rhetoric, i.e. not gobbledygook. Indeed
The Qur'an is not verse, but it is rhythmic. The rhythm of some verses resemble the regularity of sajc, and both are rhymed, while some verses have a similarity to Rajaz in its vigour and rapidity. But it was recognized by Quraysh critics to belong to neither one nor the other category.[4]
It is interesting to know that all the pre-Islam and post-Islamic poetry collected by Louis Cheikho falls in the above sixteen metres or al-Bihar.[5] Indeed the pagans of Mecca repeated accuse Prophet Muhammad(P) for being a forger, a soothsayer etc. The Arabs who were at the pinnacle of their poetry and prose during the time of revelation of the Qur'an could not even produce the smallest surah of its like. The Qur'an's form did not fit into any of the above mentioned categories. It was this that made the Qur'an inimitable, and left the pagan Arabs at a loss as to how they might combat it as Alqama bin cAbd al-Manaf confirmed when he addressed their leaders, the Quraysh:
Oh Quraish, a new calamity has befallen you. Mohammed was a young man the most liked among you, most truthful in speech, and most trustworthy, until, when you saw gray hairs on his temple, and he brought you his message, you said that he was a sorcerer, but he is not, for we seen such people and their spitting and their knots; you said, a diviner, but we have seen such people and their behavior, and we have heard their rhymes; you said a soothsayer, but he is not a soothsayer, for we have heard their rhymes; and you said a poet, but he is not a poet, for we have heard all kinds of poetry; you said he was possessed, but he is not for we have seen the possessed, and he shows no signs of their gasping and whispering and delirium. Oh men of Quraish, look to your affairs, for by Allah a serious thing has befallen you.
It is a well known fact that the Qur'an was revealed in seven ahruf (or seven forms) to facilitate greater understanding of it among the Arabs who had different dialects. This was also to challenge them on their own grounds to produce a surah like that of the Qur'an. The challenge became more obvious when none of the seven major tribes could imitate it even in their own dialects as no one could claim that it was difficult to imitate due to it not being in their own dialect.[6]
What Do The Orientalists Say About The Inimitability Of The Qur'an?
E H Palmer, as early as 1880, recognized the unique style of the Qur'an. But he seem to have been wavering between two thoughts. He writes in the Introduction to his translation of the Qur'an:
That the best of Arab writers has never succeeded in producing anything equal in merit to the Qur'an itself is not surprising. In the first place, they have agreed before-hand that it is unapproachable, and they have adopted its style as the perfect standard; any deviation from it therefore must of necessity be a defect. Again, with them this style is not spontaneous as with Muhammad and his contemporaries, but is as artificial as though Englishmen should still continue to follow Chaucer as their model, in spite of the changes which their language has undergone. With the Prophet, the style was natural, and the words were those in every-day ordinary life, while with the later Arabic authors the style is imitative and the ancient words are introduced as a literary embellishment. The natural consequence is that their attempts look laboured and unreal by the side of his impromptu and forcible eloquence.[7]
The famous Arabist from University of Oxford, Hamilton Gibb was open upon about the style of the Qur'an. In his words:
...the Meccans still demanded of him a miracle, and with remarkable boldness and self confidence Mohammad appealed as a supreme confirmation of his mission to the Koran itself. Like all Arabs they were the connoisseurs of language and rhetoric. Well, then if the Koran were his own composition other men could rival it. Let them produce ten verses like it. If they could not (and it is obvious that they could not), then let them accept the Koran as an outstanding evident miracle.[8]
And in some other place, talking about the Prophet(P) and the Qur'an, he states:
Though, to be sure, the question of the literary merit is one not to be judged on a priori grounds but in relation to the genius of Arabic language; and no man in fifteen hundred years has ever played on that deep-toned instrument with such power, such boldness, and such range of emotional effect as Mohammad did.[9]
As a literary monument the Koran thus stands by itself, a production unique to the Arabic literature, having neither forerunners nor successors in its own idiom. Muslims of all ages are united in proclaiming the inimitability not only of its contents but also of its style..... and in forcing the High Arabic idiom into the expression of new ranges of thought the Koran develops a bold and strikingly effective rhetorical prose in which all the resources of syntactical modulation are exploited with great freedom and originality.[10]
On the influence of the Qur'an on Arabic literature Gibb says:
The influence of the Koran on the development of Arabic Literature has been incalculable, and exerted in many directions. Its ideas, its language, its rhymes pervade all subsequent literary works in greater or lesser measure. Its specific linguistic features were not emulated, either in the chancery prose of the next century or in the later prose writings, but it was at least partly due to the flexibility imparted by the Koran to the High Arabic idiom that the former could be so rapidly developed and adjusted to the new needs of the imperial government and an expanding society.[11]
As the Qur'an itself says:
And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true. But if ye cannot- and of a surety ye cannot- then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones,- which is prepared for those who reject Faith. (Qur'an 2:23-24)
Lastly, the beautiful style of the Qur'an is admired even by the Arab Christians:
The Quran is one of the world's classics which cannot be translated without grave loss. It has a rhythm of peculiar beauty and a cadence that charms the ear. Many Christian Arabs speak of its style with warm admiration, and most Arabists acknowledge its excellence. When it is read aloud or recited it has an almost hypnotic effect that makes the listener indifferent to its sometimes strange syntax and its sometimes, to us, repellent content. It is this quality it possesses of silencing criticism by the sweet music of its language that has given birth to the dogma of its inimitability; indeed it may be affirmed that within the literature of the Arabs, wide and fecund as it is both in poetry and in elevated prose, there is nothing to compare with it.[12]
The above sentences speak of themselves. Summing up: Within the Arabic literature, either poetry or prose, there is nothing comparable to the Qur'an. Muslims throughout the centuries are united upon the its inimitability.
There is also a talk by Christian missionaries that there are grammatical 'errors' in the Qur'an. In retort, it can be mentioned that the Arab contemporaries of Muhammad(P) were most erudite and proficient in the idiosyncrasies of Arabic speech; and hence, if they had found any grammatical 'errors' in the Qur'an, they would have revealed it when Muhammad(P) challenged them with to do so. Therefore, since they did not take up his challenge on this issue, we can be rest assured that no such grammatical 'errors' exist in the Qur'an.
Indeed the grammatical errors claimed by Christian missionaries have been already discussed and refuted in a reputed journal.[13] It turns out that lack of knowledge of intricate constructions in classical Arabic by Christian missionaries gave rise to so-called grammatical 'errors'.
I'jaz al-Qur'an (Or Inimitability Of The Qur'an) & Its Exposition
I'jaz literally means "the rendering incapable, powerless". It is the concept relating to the miraculous nature of the Qur'an. What consitutes this miracle is a subject that has engaged Muslims scholars for centuries. By the early part of the third century AH (ninth century CE), the word i'jaz had come to mean that quality of the Qur'an that rendered people incapable of imitating the book or any part; in content and form. By the latter part of that century, the word had become the technical term, and the numerous definitions applied to it after the tenth century have shown little divergence from the key concepts of the inimitability of the Qur'an and the inability of human beings to match it even challenged (tahiddi).[14]
Thus, the Islamic doctrine of i'jaz al-Qur'an consists in the belief that the Qur'an is a miracle (mu'jizah) bestowed on Muhammad(P). Both terms, i'jaz and mu'jizah come from the same verbal root. While mu'jizah is the active principle of a'jaza, i'jaz is its verbal noun.[15]
The early theological discussions on i'jaz introduced the hypothesis of sarfah ("turning away") and argued that the miracle consisted of God's turning the competent away from taking up the challenge of imitating the Qur'an. The implication of sarfah is that the Qur'an otherwise could be imitated. However, cAbd al-Jabbar (d. 1025 CE), the Mu'tazilite theologian rejected sarfah because of its obvious weaknesses.
cAbd al-Jabbar rejects the doctrine of sarfah for two main reasons. Firstly, because it contradicts the verse of the Qur'an stating that neither jinn nor human can rival the Qur'an, and secondly because it makes a miracle of something other than the Qur'an, i.e., the sarfah, the prohibition from production, and not the Qur'an itself. In addition to this, according to 'Abd al-Jabbar, the doctrine of sarfah displays four major weaknesses:
- It ignores the well-known fact that the Arabs of Muhammad's time had acknowledged the superior quality of speech of the Qur'an;
- It is in direct conflict with the meaning of the verses of the Challenge;
- It implies that the Qur'an is not a miracle; and
- It asserts that the Arabs were out of their minds (khuruj 'an al-'aql).
This doctrine, in fact, implies that they could have produced a rival to the Qur'an, but simply decided against doing so. It effectively calls into question either their motives or their sanity. Therefore, according to cAbd al-Jabbar the correct interpretation of sarfah is that the motives to rival the Qur'an disappeared (insarafah) because of the recognition of the impossibility of doing so.[16]
cAbd al-Jabbar insisted on the unmatchable quality of the Qur'an's extra-ordinary eloquence and unique stylist perfection. In his work al-Mughni (The Sufficient Book), he argued that eloquence (fasahah) resulted from the excellence of both meaning and wording, and he explained that there were degrees of excellence depending on the manner in which words were chosen and arranged in any literary text, the Qur'an being the highest type.[17]
al-Baqillani (d. 1013 CE), in his systematic and comprehensive study entitled I'jaz al-Qur'an upheld the rhetorically unsurpassable style of the Qur'an, but he did not consider this to be a necessary argument in the favour of the Qur'an's uniqueness and emphasized instead the content of revelation.
The choice and arrangement of words, referred to as nazm was the focus of discussion by al-Jahiz, al-Sijistani (d. 928 CE), al-Bakhi (d. 933 CE) and Ibn al-Ikhshid (d. 937 CE). al-Rummani and his contemporary al-Khattabi (d. 998 CE) discussed the psychological effect of nazm of the Qur'an in their al-Nukat fi I'jaz al-Qur'an and Bayan I'jaz al-Qur'an, respectively.
The author who best elaborated and systematized the theory of nazm in his analysis of the i'jaz is cAbd al-Qahir al-Jurjani (d. 1078 CE) in his Dala'il al-I'jaz. His material was further organized by Fakhr ad-Din al-Razi (d. 1209) in his Nihayat al-I'jaz fi Dirayat al-I'jaz and put to practical purposes by al-Zamakhshari (d. 1144 CE) in his exegesis of the Qur'an entitled al-Kashasaf, rich in rhetorical analysis of the Qur'anic style.[18]
Hardly anything new has been added by later authors.
Anyone who has read the history of the Bible as a text as well as the constantly changing canon at the whims of the leaders of the Church and some 300,000+ variant readings in the New Testament itself would suggest that no book in history enjoyed such as reputation. The process of serious editing through which the Christian Bible went through is unparalleled in its almost 2000 year history. This would itself make the Bible an inimitable book.
As far as the language of the Bible and its stylistic perfection is concerned, the Bible does not make any such claim. Therefore, it not does challenge the mankind of produce a few verses or a chapter like it. Further, it is a Christian claim that the Bible contains scribal and linguistic errors. The language in which the Greek New Testament was written is demotic Greek which itself has little or no regard for grammatical rules of classical Greek. Comparing the stylistic perfection of the Qur'an versus stylistic imperfection of the Bible, von Grunebaum states:
In contrast to the stylistic perfection of the Kur'an with the stylistic imperfections of the older Scriptures the Muslim theologian found himself unknowingly and on purely postulative grounds in agreement with long line of Christian thinkers whose outlook on the Biblical text is best summed up in Nietzsche's brash dictum that the Holy Ghost wrote bad Greek.[19]
Futher, he elaborates the position of Western theologians on the canonization process and composition of the Bible:
The knowledge of the Western theologian that the Biblical books were redacted by different writers and that they were, in many cases, accessible to him only in (inspired) translation facilitated admission of formal imperfections in Scripture and there with lessened the compulsive insistence on its stylistic authority. Christian teaching, leaving the inspired writer, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, free in matters of style, has provided no motivation to seek an exact correlation between the revealed text on the one hand and grammar and rhetoric on the other. It thereby relieved the theologian and the critic from searching for a harmony between two stylistic worlds, which at best would yield an ahistoric concept of literary perfection and at worst would prevent anything resembling textual and substantive criticism of Revelation....
In Christianity, besides, the apology for the "low" style of the Bible is merely a part of educational problem - what to do with secular erudition within Christianity; whereas in Islam, the central position of the Kur'an, as the focal point and justification of grammatical and literary studies, was theoretically at least, never contested within the believing community.[20]
That pretty much sums up the Bible, its stylistic perfection (or the lack of it!) and the position of Western theologians.
And Allah knows best!
Relevent Articles
Is Quss Bin Sa'idah's 'Poetry' Meeting The Challenge Of The Qur'an?
Islamic Awareness  Qur'an Miracle What Is The Challenge Of The Qur'an? |
References
[1] C J Lyall, Translations Of Ancient Arabian Poetry, Chiefly Pre-Islamic, Williams & Norgate Ltd., London, 1930.
[2] Ibid., pp. xlv-lii.
[3] Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah, Franz Rosenthal (Translator), Volume III, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1958, p. 368.
[4] A F L Beeston, T M Johnstone, R B Serjeant and G R Smith (Editors), Arabic Literature To The End Of The Ummayad Period, 1983, Cambridge University Press, p. 34.
[5] Louis Cheikho, Shucara' 'al-Nasraniyah, 1890-1891, Beirut.
[6] Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips, Tafseer Soorah al-Hujuraat, 1988, Tawheed Publications, Riyadh (Saudi Arabia), p. 28.
[7] E H Palmer (Tr.), The Qur'an, 1900, Part I, Oxford at Clarendon Press, p. lv.
[8] H A R Gibb, Islam - A Historical Survey, 1980, Oxford University Press, p. 28.
[9] Ibid., p. 25.
[10] H A R Gibb, Arabic Literature - An Introduction, 1963, Oxford at Clarendon Press, p. 36.
[11] Ibid., p. 37.
[12] Alfred Guillaume, Islam, 1990 (Reprinted), Penguin Books, pp. 73-74.
[13] M A S Abdel Haleem, Grammatical Shift For The Rhetorical Purposes: Iltifat & Related Features In The Qur'an, Bulletin of School of Oriental and African Studies, Volume LV, Part 3, 1992. (Now online)
[14] Mircea Eliade (Editor in Chief), The Encyclopedia Of Religion, Volume 7, Macmillam Publishing Company, New York, p. 87, Under I'jaz by Issa J Boullata.
[15] Yusuf Rahman, The Miraculous Nature Of Muslim Scripture: A Study Of 'Abd al-Jabbar's I'jaz al-Qur'an, Islamic Studies, Volume 35, Number 4, 1996, p. 409.
[16] Ibid., pp. 415-416.
[17] The Encyclopedia Of Religion, Op.Cit, p. 88.
[18] Ibid.
[19] B Lewis, V L Menage, Ch. Pellat & J Schacht (Editors), Encyclopedia Of Islam (New Edition), 1971, Volume III, E J Brill (Leiden) & Luzac & Co. (London), p. 1020 (Under I'djaz).
[20] Ibid.
------------------------------
Talk about empirical evidence. The Qur'an puts forth a challenge to prove if it is from God Almighty (Qur'an 2:23, Qur'an 10:37-38, Qur'an 11:13, Qur'an 17:88, Qur'an 52:33-34).
The challenge is simple, all you need to do is to produce a surah (chapter) like it i.e., the Qur'an. Now this challenge is open mankind and can be done at any time. The Qur'an is available for you to pick up, read and verify its contents towards taking up the challenge. You can use all types of analytical devices before you carry out the challenge, as the Qur'an between the two bindings can literally be examined, the physical book, the book of Allah Swt. It’s a challenge which can be observed, the Qur'an is with us.
Now let's move to the Bible challenge
Paul states that if Christ was not raised then your preaching and faith is in vain i.e., meaningless (1 Corinthians 15:14). Question is, how can you verify an event which happened 2 thousand years ago? What considerable empirical evidence would support Jesus raised after days without appealing to the gospels, considering there was not New Testament gospel when Paul was writing this. How can this challenge be met? This challenge is meaningless and holds no credibility and cannot be verified unlike the challenge of the Qur'an.
Paul is referring to a historical event which cannot be substantiated with observable evidence, yet the Qur'an's challenge is observable and can be carried out at any time.
Conclusion: The test of the bible fails thus, Paul helped prove no resurrection equals to no crucifixion and all their faith and preaching is in vain.
And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. (1 Corinthians 15:14)
----------
What considerable empirical evidence,
objective outside the gospels not subjective would substantiate Pauls defence
that Jesus was raised after three days as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:14 that "if Christ has not been raised, our preaching
is useless and so is your faith."
What is this observable evidence that Paul claims it can be proven that he put his faith on the line.
-------------------------------------------
Quran Preservation & Compilation -1 (Prophet’s lifetime)
A concise and comprehensive response to the lies and misgivings about Qur’an preservation and compilation during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.
Many Orientalists and Christian missionaries have spoken against Qur'an in their bid to create confusions about its impeccable preservation. In this series we shall study in brief the whole process of Qur'an preservation and compilation. Naturally, first to discuss is phase that covers the life of the Holy Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.
2. Memorization: The Primary Means of Qur’an Preservation
Therefore we read in Sahih Muslim that Allah Almighty said to the Holy Prophet:
But nevertheless Qur'an was also written down and this was done right during the life time of the Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. And all the later masahif were based on what was dictated by the Holy Prophet himself. We shall see the details shortly.
Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- had more than 40 companions who usually worked as scribes. The names of these companions have been mentioned in various authentic works.[3] Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- made special arrangements for the Qur'an to be written. How the Qur'an was written and how it was was checked by the Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- is evident from the following example:
This is a categorical proof that Companions used to write Qur'an in the supervision of the Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- and got it checked from him before making it public.
Also there are proofs that during the life time of the Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- the written manuscripts of Qur'an were there. In fact writing of the Qur'an was in practice from the early days of Islam as evident from the incident leading to conversion of one of the closest companions, ‘Umar bin al-Khattab, when he found his sister and brother-in-law with a parchment on which the verses of Surah Taha (chapter 20) were written.[5]
There are some other traditions which indicate that Companions had written copies of complete or incomplete Quran. For example;
Obviously these traditions are categorical evidence that the Companions used to have written copies of the Qur’an even during the life time of the Holy Prophet- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- and that it was not something unusual.
Likewise, there is evidence for the manuscripts of the Qur’an in the instruction of the Holy Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- to Hakim bin Hizam when he sent him to Yemen as a governor. He said:
4- Prophet’s encouragement for writing the Qur’an
The Holy Prophet –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- only arranged for getting every revelation written in front of him he also encouraged the people to write the Qur’an for themselves and leave it after them for their children besides giving them instructions about the manuscripts. Mark the following narration;
Orientalists claim that Qur’an was not written in full during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet -may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. This is false and the fact is that whole of the Qur’an was indeed written in the supervision of the Holy Prophet but it was not compiled into one collection. This is testified by the statement of Zaid bin Thabit, one of the chief scribes. He said:
-- by Waqar Akbar Cheema
Authenticated by Al-Haithmi in Majma’ Al-Zawaid 8/257, Hadith 13938
Understanding Seven Ahruf –2 (Best Explanation)
Understanding Seven “Ahruf”
Translation of
a section from Shaykh Taqi Usmani’s book ‘Uloom al-Qur’an
DISCLAIMER! It must be noted, it is NOT the original work of the respected Shaykh, nor has the translation been reviewed by the him. His book is in Urdu and is available HERE. The translation titled “An Approach to Quranic Sciences” published by Darul Ishat has been used with some changes. Headings have been added. References have been revised using the latest available editions of the works cited, and notes in the footnotes are by the publisher here. Any mistake in the translation, references or notes may be attributed only to the publisher of this post.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Most Acceptable Explanation of Seven “Ahruf”
In our view the best explanation and interpretation of Seven “Ahruf” of the Qur’an is that it means “Variation on the Recital”. The seven “ahruf” refer to variations in the recitals of the Qur’an of seven kinds. Hence although the recitals are more than seven yet the variations found in them are of seven kinds (We will explain that later)
To the best of our knowledge this view was first propounded by Malik. The renowned commentator the Qur’an, Nizamuddin Qumi al-Nishapuri has written in his Tafsir Ghar’aib ul-Qur’an that Malik believed that the seven “ahruf” denoted the following seven variations in the recital of the Qur’an:
1) Variation in numbers, so that one word is read as singular in one recital and plural in another recital, for example وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَةُ رَبِّكَ and كلمات ربك (6:116)
2) Variation in gender, that a masculine word in one recital becomes feminine in the other, for example لايُقْبَلُ becomes لاتقبل
3) Variations in placement of dialectical marks, the kasrah and fathah and changed e.g. هَلْ مِنْ خالِقٍ غَيْرُ اللَّهِ becomes غَيْرِ اللَّهِ
4) Variation in verb, for example يَعْرِشُونَ becomes يُعَرِّشُوْنَ
5) Variation in syntax, for example لكِنَّ الشَّياطِينَ becomes لكِنِ الشَّياطِينَ
6) Variations caused by transposition, for example, تَعْلَمُونَ becomes يَعْلَمُونَ and نُنْشِزُها becomes نَنْشُرُها
7) Variation of pronouncement or accent, variations in tafkhim, tarqiq, imalah, madd, qasr,izhar, idgham rendering sound heavy, soft, inclining it, prolonging, shortening, expressing clearly and assimilating.[1]
Further, the same view has been adopted by Ibn Qatayba[2], Abul Fadl al-Razi[3], Qadi Abu Bakr bin al-Tayyib al-Baqillani[4] and Ibn al-Jazari.[5] Ibn al-Jazari, the renowned scholar of recitals of the Qur’an, has stated in connection with this Hadith,
I remained in doubt about this tradition and pondered over it for more than thirty years till Allah, the Almighty, unveiled to me its –if Allah so wills- correct explanation.[6]
All these scholars are in agreement that by seven “ahruf” in this Hadith is meant the seven kinds of the variation in recital, but there is some difference in the formulation of those variations because each of them has arranged them independently. Of these the one whose enlistment is most concise, well arranged and firmly established is Abul Fadl al-Razi. According to him, variation in recitals of the Qur’an is of seven kinds[7]:
1) Variation in nouns: This includes difference in number and gender e.g. وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَةُ رَبِّكَ , in one recital (qira’t) has been read as وَتَمَّتْ كلمات رَبِّكَ (6:115)[8]
2) Variation in verbs: The same verb is read in the past, present or future tense, or as an imperative, for example باعد بَين أسفارنا has also been read as بعد بَين أسفارنا (34:19)[9]
3) Variations in the position of dialectical marks: There is variation in i’rab, kasrah, fatha, dhamma. Its example is وَلَا يُضَارَّ كَاتِبٌ and وَلَا يُضَارُّ كَاتِبٌ (2:282) and ذُو الْعَرْشِ الْمَجِيدُ and ذُو الْعَرْشِ الْمَجِيدِ (85:15)[10]
4) Variations caused by Omissions and Additions: There is an extra word in a reading which is not found in another. For example وَمَا خَلَقَ الذَّكَرَ وَالْأُنْثَى (92:3) becomes وَالذَّكَرِ وَالْأُنْثَى [11] in another recital. In this the word وَمَا خَلَقَ is omitted. In the same way in one recital (qira’t) it is تَجْرِي مِنْ تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ and in another it is تَجْرِي تَحْتَهَا الْأَنْهَارُ (9:100)[12]
5) Variation of placement of words” A word precedes in a reading while it follows in another e.g. وَجَاءَتْ سَكْرَةُ الْمَوْتِ بِالْحَقِّ becomes وَجَاءَتْ سَكْرَةُ الْحَقِّ بِالْمَوْتِ (50:19)[13]
6) Variations caused by replacement of words: There is a word in one reading but quite another word in the other reading e.g. نُنْشِزُها (2:259)[14] becomes نَنْشُرُها and فَتَبَيَّنُوا (4:94, 49:6)[15] becomes فَتَثَبَّتُوْا and طَلْحٍ (56:29)[16] becomes طَلْعٍ
7) Variation of Accent: It rests round changes in tafkhim, tarqiq, imalaha, qasr, madd, hamz, izhar and idgham (e.g. Musa read with imalah becomes Musay)[17]
The scheme of Abu Fadl Razi appears more comprehensive as compared to that of Ibn al-Jazari, Ibn Qutaybah and Qadi Abu Bakr Ibn al-Tayyib [al-Baqilani] in that no variation has been left out in this. Contrary to this, the schemes of other three scholars do not contain the last mentioned variation (of accent). In Malik’s scheme we do find mention of variations of accent, but we do not find adequate clarification, for example, their addition or omission, prefixing or suffixing, and replacement of words. Abul Fadl’s description takes account of all these differences. Ibn al-Jazari who spent more than thirty years pondering over the seven “ahruf” understood them as seven forms of variation, has also quoted this scheme with great emphasis and no objection has been raised by him. Rather, taking his view as a whole it appears that he prefers Abul Fadl’s scheme to his own[18]. Ibn Hajr has also preferred this scheme, because he has reproduced the views of Ibn Qutaybah and remarked, “This is a good interpretation.” Then he has described the seven kinds of variations of Abul Fadl and remarked;
I think that by adopting Ibn Qutaybah’s verdict Abul Fadl has further polished it.[19]
In the recent times, Abdul ‘Azim Zurqani has also adopted the same view and has given arguments in its support.[20]
Even though there is difference in details of the kinds, the scholars, Malik, Ibn Qutaybah, Abul Fadl Razi, Ibn al-Jazari and Qadi al-Baqillani agree that the seven “Ahruf” in the Hadith refer to seven kinds of variation in recital.
In my humble opinion this is the best explanation of the seven “ahruf.” The intention of the hadith also appears that the words of the Qur’an may be read in different ways, and these different ways are seven in number. Since there is no specification of these seven variations in any Hadith it cannot be said with certainty about any scheme that it confirms to the intention of the Hadith, but apparently the scheme of Abul Fadl Razi is more correct because it is applicable to the various forms of recitals current to-date.
3.1.Reasons for preference
Of the several explanations of the seven “ahruf” in Hadith, commentaries and books on the sciences of the Qur’an that we have come across, we prefer the opinion that the phrase refers to seven kinds of variation in the recital of the Qur’an. The reasons for our conviction are;
1) According to this view, we do not have to consider “Ahruf” and recitals (qir’aat) as two separate things. A common problem in the views of Ibn Jarir and al-Tahawi is that they ask us to accept that two kinds of differences existed in recital of the Qur’an; one pertaining to “ahruf” and the other to recital and that the former was abrogated but the later persists. But we do not find even a weak tradition in the vast collection of Hadiths to show that “ahruf” and “qira’at” are two separate things. The Hadiths mention only variation in “ahruf” and it is for this alone the word “qira’at” (recital) is extensively used. If the recital were something different from these there must have been some indication in the traditions.
2) Why is it that the narrations reaching the degree of tawatur may be found pertaining to variations in “ahruf”, but there is no mention of distinguishable variation in recital (qira’at) in even a single report? How can it be said, just on the basis of conjecture that apart from the variations of “ahruf” there was yet another type of variation in the words of the Qur’an?
3) In the foregoing proposition this difficulty is totally resolved because it uses the term “ahruf” and recitals (qira’at) in the same meaning.
4) If we accept the view of Ibn Jarir then we have to assume that six out of the seven rendering have been abrogated or have become obsolete and only the Quraysh version continues. The present recitals are variations of that. The difficulties in accepting this view shall be discussion in detail subsequently. In the preferred view, however, there are no such defects because, according to it, all the seven “ahruf” remain safe and existent even today.
5) According to the preferred view the meaning of the Seven “Ahruf” come out true without any stretching while we have to resort to conjectures in the meanings of “ahruf” or in that of “seven” in other propositions.
6) Of the views of all the scholars that have come before us, the person who is most renowned and in the closest proximity to the prophetic era is Malik, and he according to al-Nishapuri shares the same view.
7) Ibn Qutayba and Ibn al-Jazari are both well recognized authorities on the subject of recitals (qira’at), and both of them uphold the same view. It has already been mentioned that the later arrived at this conclusion after giving it due thought and consideration for thirty years.
3.2.Objections and replies
Let us now see what objections may be raised on this view or have been actually raised.
3.2.1 Grammatical classification was not existent in the Prophet’s time
The first objection raised against this view is that all the variations described in its name depend on grammatical classification, but at the time when Prophet (saaw) pronounced this Hadith, such grammatical classifications and phrases were not known, and most people did not even know reading and writing. Against this backdrop it is difficult to cite these variations as Seven “Ahruf.”
Ibn Hajr has replied to this objection in the following words;
This does not necessarily entail weakness in Ibn Qutaybah’s view, because it is possible that the said reliance may have occurred by chance and became known through reasoning for induction, and the prudence therein is not hidden.[21]
In our humble comprehension, it is true that these grammatical terms were not in use during the Prophetic era, and perhaps this explains the reason why the Prophet did not expound the meaning of “Seven Ahruf.” But this is obvious that the basis did exist even at that time although they not have given the form of grammatical terms. One should not wonder if the Prophet himself had recognized the underlying ideas and divided the variations into seven points. If the details of the seven kinds of variations were described at that time it might have been beyond general comprehension. Therefore, instead of going into details the Prophet (saaw) explained that the types for variations were seven. Later on these terms came into use; the learned scholars described the causes of variations in relevant words and phrases. As we have already said, it is difficult to dogmatically term any one proposition as the one that confirms to the intentions of the Prophet. However, when different people conclude that kinds for variation are seven it becomes nearly certain that Prophet (saaw) also meant seven kinds of variation, though he himself did not give their details later established by the scholars, particularly when there is no other reasonable explanation.
3.2.2 What facility do the “Seven Ahruf” create?
The second objection to this view can be that that since the Qur’an was revealed on “Seven Ahruf” to make its recital easy for the people this would hold true with the view of Ibn Jarir. There were people belonging to different tribes in Arabia and it was difficult for one tribe to read according to the dialect of the other. But according to Malik, Razi and Ibn al-Jazari all Seven “Ahruf” belonged to the Quraysh dialect and it remains ambiguous as to why the variations of recitals were allowed to continue when the Qur’an was meant to be revealed in only one dialect?
This objection is based on the idea that the Prophet (saaw) asked for the facility of reciting the Qur’an on Seven “Ahruf” in view of the variations in the dialects of various tribes and it was for this reason that Ibn Jarir termed the Seven “Ahruf” as “Seven Dialects of Arabia.” But this assumption is not supported by any Hadith. On the other hand, in one of his narrations the Prophet has clearly elucidated as to what was in his mind while seeking the facility of Seven “Ahruf.” Al-Tirmidhi has quoted Ubayy bin K’ab through an authentic chain of narrators.
The Holy Prophet met Gabriel near the rocks of Marwah. He said to Gabriel, “I have been sent to an unlettered nation which comprises the aged nearing their graves, elderly women and also the children.” Gabriel said, “Ask them to recite the Qur’an on ‘Seven Ahruf’”.[22]
In another narration reported by al-Tirmidhi again, the Prophet (saaw) is reported to have said to Gabriel;
I have been sent to an unlettered nation wherein there are elderly women, old men and also (young) boys and girls and the people who have never read a book.[23]
The words of this Hadith explain very clearly that the Prophet (saaw) had in view that he was sent to an unlettered and illiterate people who included different age groups and types. If only one way of recital was fixed it could have created problems for them. On the contrary, if several alternatives were available it would become possible that a person not being able to recite with one method may utter the same words in a different style. This will enable them to perform their salah correctly. Often it happens that aged men or elderly women or illiterate person get used to a word in particular accent or phonation, and for them even a minor variation of a dialectical mark may be a difficulty. That is why the Prophet (saaw) sought this facility, for example, if a person cannot easily express in active voice he can recite (the same) in passive voice according to other recital[24], or if somebody is unable to recite the singular easily he may read it as plural, if somebody finds one accent difficult he may use the other accent available[25]. In this way the reader will have seven options available to him.
You might have noted that in this Hadith the Prophet (saaw) while seeking the facility of Seven “Ahruf” did not request it to facilitate different tribes but he had age groups and illiteracy in mind, but contrary to this he expressed his concern on differences in their ages and their being illiterate. This clearly proves that the basic reason of giving the facility of Seven “Ahruf” was not the dialectical differences of the various tribes but it was illiteracy of the people in general, so that they could benefit from it.
3.2.3 The explanation is based on conjecture
The third objection could be that the seven variations of the recital of Qur’an, are in any case conjectural and hypothetical. This can be said of the opinions of all of them including Malik, Abul Fadl Razi, Ibn Qutaybah, Ibn al-Jazari or Qadi Ibn al-Tayyib. That is why each of them has described the details of the seven causes of variations differently. How then can we say about any of them that they conformed to the Prophet’s (saaw) saying?
The answer to this objection is that we do not find an explicit clarification of Seven “Ahruf” in any Hadith or narrations of the Companions. Hence, the inference has been drawn from a collective study of all narrations available. Thus, as an accepted thing this view seems to be nearer to reality than others because no basic objection arises out of this. Judging from this standard, we feel almost certain that the phrase Seven “Ahruf” in this tradition means the seven kinds of variation in recital of the Qur’an. As for specifying and determining these forms, we have already stated that there is no other way of doing it except reasoning through induction. The one induced by Abu Fadl al-Razi appears to us the most comprehensive but we cannot say with certainty that if this was what the Prophet meant to say, nevertheless this does not put to question the underlying fact that by Seven “Ahruf” Prophet (saaw) meant the seven kinds of variation in recital. We neither have the means to gain the cognizance of its details, nor is it necessary.
3.2.4 No consideration of the meaning
The fourth objection to this view may be raised that it takes into consideration only the words and differences in the variations in their expressions. Their meanings have not been dealt with, even though there is a narration according to which Seven “Ahruf” mean “Seven kinds of meanings.” Al-Tahawi has quoted ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud as saying that the Prophet (saaw) said;
Formerly the Book used to be revealed in one chapter on one “harf” and the Quran has been revealed in seven chapters on Seven “ahruf”. (The seven “ahruf” are) zajir (that which restricts), amir (that which commands), halal (permissible), haram (Prohibited), muhkam (Established), mutashabeh (exact meanings not known) and amthal (Examples).[26]
It is on this evidence that certain scholars have attributed the Seven Ahruf to seven kinds of meanings.
But the above tradition is based on weak precedent. Al-Tahawi has stated about this tradition that it is reported by Abu Salamah as a narration from ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud, but Abu Salamah never met ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud.[27]
Apart from this, explaining all such views attributed to earlier scholars, Ibn Jarir al-Tabari says that these expressions were not made as an interpretation of the Hadith on Seven “Ahruf” but they meant to say that the Quran consisted of this type of subjects.[28]
As for those who have commented on the Hadith itself, their opinion is patently wrong. Anyone with a rudiment of understanding will know on casting a superficial glance on the other Hadiths that various words do not amount to change in meanings and subjects. They are only variations of words in the recital. That is why none of the scholars on this subject accept this interpretation, rather they have rebutted it.[29]
[1] Al-Nishapuri, Gharaib al-Quran, 1/24
[2] Al-Suyuti, al-Ittiqan., 1/165
[3] Ibid., 1/166
[4] Al-Qurtubi, Al-Jami’ li-Ahkam al-Qur’an, 1/45
[5] Al-Suyuti, op. cit. 1/166
[6] Ibn al-Jazri, An-Nashr fil Qira’at al-‘Ashr., 1/26
[7] Ibn Hajr al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari., 9/29
[8] In Uthman’s Masahif it is written as كلمت ربك. .See Muhammad ibn Nizam al-Din al-Naiti al-Arakani, Nathar al-Marjan fi Rasm Nazm al-Quran, Usman Press, Hyderabad (Deccan) n.d. vol. 2 p.226
[9] Uthmani Masahif put it as بعد i.e. without ‘alif’ (See Nathar al-Marjan vol.5 p.467) It is so because even without putting ‘alif’ it can be recited that way but with ‘alif’ the recital without it would not be considered. Therefore, writing it with ‘alif’ would have undermined the very purpose for which Uthman undertook the task.
[10] Such differences are easily considered within the skeleton of the words. The Masahif of Uthman had no dialectical marks so there was no question any such proven recital being left out.
[11] The recital وَالذَّكَرِ وَالْأُنْثَى was abrogated towards the end of Prophet’s life. Therefore it is not preserved in any of the Masahif. (See Fath al-Bari vol.8 p.707)
[12] These are both mutawatir qira’at (recitals) and present a unique and interesting case. Among the masahif of Uthman, it is Mushaf of Makkah that puts this ayah as تَجْرِي مِنْ تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَار while all the other masahif put it as تَجْرِي تَحْتَهَا الْأَنْهَارُ and the later one is actually the more famous recital, though both are equally valid. The meaning is exactly the same either way.
This strikes at the very roots of the orientalists’ and missionary propaganda that some of the recitals were left out. Nothing of that sort happened. We can see even when effort was being made to unite the whole community on standard mushaf arrangement was made to take care of the recitals that could not be accommodated in one dictation. Had the other so-called lost recitals been valid, they would have been preserved too.
[13] The recital وَجَاءَتْ سَكْرَةُ الْحَقِّ بِالْمَوْتِ is not valid (anymore) and is not preserved in any Mushaf. It is reported this way from Abu Bakr and Ibn Mas’ud, however some scholars contend it was so reported only by the way of commentary (See, I’rab al-Qur’an 4/150 of Ibn Nahaas) Some say it was actually abrogated (See Manahil al-‘Irfan 1/171) The above assertion is proven by the fact that Abu Bakr (RA) is himself reported to have recited the verse the way it is preserved in the Masahif to this day, (See Tafsir al-Tabari, vol.22 p.346) Similarly in the well known qira’at that have come down to us through Ibn Mas’ud not one keeps it as سَكْرَةُ الْحَقِّ بِالْمَوْتِ. All Masahif put this verse as سَكْرَةُ الْمَوْتِ بِالْحَقِّ.
This kind of variation i.e. variation in placement of words however still exists in the Masahif. It is in 9:111. According to the one recital it is فَيَقْتُلُونَ وَيُقْتَلُونَ (they kill and are killed), while in another recital it is فَيُقْتَلُونَ وَيَقْتُلُون (they get killed and they kill), See Manahil al-‘Irfan 1/170. As the skeleton of the words is same for both these recitals they were easily accommodated as the text had no dots or dialectical marks.
[14] As the text in Uthman’s masahif had no dots, both these recitals were preserved in it because it is all about placement of dots though it leads to change in words. The words nevertheless have more or less same meaning.
[15] Same as explained in n.33 above
[16] The recital with the word طَلْعٍ was abrogated. A report involving Ali (RA) proves this. See Tafsir al-Tabari vol.23 p.111 (Also see, Al-Qira’at fi Nazr al-Mustashriqin wal Mulhidin, pp.191-192) As it was abrogated the text in the Uthmani Masahif had no consideration of this (Nathar al-Marjan vol.7 p.171)
[17] Such variations are easily accommodated in one skeleton of the text
[18] Ibn al-Jazri, op. cit., 1/27-28
[19] Ibn Hajr al-‘Asqalani, op. cit., 9/29
[20] Al-Zurqani, Manahil al-‘Irfan fi ‘Uloom al-Qur’an, 1/155-156
[21] Ibn Hajr al-‘Asqalani, op. cit., 9/29
[22] Cf. Ibn al-Jazri, op. cit. 1/20.
The author, Shaykh Taqi Usmani, has quoted it with these words from al-Nashr fil Qira’ar al-‘Ashr, where it is narrated with reference to Jami’ Tirmidhi, however verbatim it is not found in Jami’ Tirmidhi, though all the words are proved through various versions of the same report. See Sahih Ibn Hibban, Hadith 739. Classified as Sahih by Albani and Hasan by Shu’aib Arna’ut.
[23] Jami’ al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 2944. Classified as Hasan Sahih by al-Tirmidhi and Albani.
[24] As is the case for Qur’an 34:23
[25] This permission is, however, restricted for choice between the sanctioned multiple readings, not that one can recite any verse as he wishes according to these principles.
[26] Al-Tahawi, Sharah Mushkil al-Athar., 8/115 Hadith 3102
There is some detail on this narration. Most scholars have found a problem with it due to a break between Ibn Mas’ud and the narrator after him. Albani has, however, authenticated it considering other chains. See Silsala Sahiha Hadith 587
Besides its authenticity its meaning also needs a careful consideration. It appears the narration does not define “ahruf” with the “zajir”, “amir” etc. rather the chapters (abwab) are defined this way.
Ibn Hajr al-‘Asqalani quoted Abu Shama as saying, “It is possible that this explanation is for the chapters (abwaab) and not “ahruf”. These are the seven chapters and kinds of subjects on which it (the Qur’an) has been revealed and it is not restricted to one of these subjects like other (revealed) books.”
Moreover, he supported the above mentioned idea referring to some versions of the narration giving “zajir” and “amir” with “an-nasb” i.e. in the accusative case/subjunctive mood. See, Mustadrak al-Hakim (Hadith 2031).
Ibn Hajr al-‘Asqalani further says that; “From what makes it clear that “zajir”, “amir” etc. are not the explanation of “ahruf” is the statement of Ibn Shihab [al-Zuhri ] given in Sahih Muslim [Hadith 819]; ‘It has reached me that these seven “ahruf” are essentially one, not differing about what is permitted and what is forbidden .’” See Fath al-Bari, 9/29
[27] Ibid.
[28] Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, Jami’ al-Bayan fi Ta’wil al-Qur’an., 1/70
[29] Ibn al-Jazri, op. cit., 1/25
Quran Preservation & Compilation -4 (under ‘Uthman)
نشرت بواسطة: Waqar Akbar Cheema 11:12 PM في burn , burnt , manuscripts , qur , Qur'an , Qur'an Preservation and Compilation , Quran , Quran compilation , Quran scribes , Recitals , usman , uthman , warsh , writing 8 تعليقات
We have actually seen in earlier posts of this series that Qur’an was put into written record during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- but it was scattered. During the time of Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him- the circumstances demanded for making an official copy of the Qur’anic text which was done by a committee headed by Zaid bin Thabit –may Allah be pleased with him. Today we discuss the the steps taken by ‘Uthman in this regard.
The background:
The manuscripts prepared under Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him- remained in his custody as long as he lived. After his death they were kept with ‘Umar –may Allah be pleased with him- and when he was martyred they went to Hafsa –may Allah be pleased with her- who was not only the daughter of ‘Umar but also the widow of the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him.
During the rule of ‘Uthman Muslim conquests reached regions like Armenia and Azerbijan. So with Islam reaching many non-Arab nations the differences in recitation of the Qur’an got manifest. Following report says about it;
Anas ibn Malik reported that Hudhayfa ibn al-Yaman came to 'Uthman while the people of Syria were conquering Armenia and Azerbaijan with the people of Iraq. Hudhayfa was alarmed by the difference in their recitation. Hudhayfa said to 'Uthman, "Amir al-Mu'minin! Deliver this Community before they disagree about the Book as the Jews and Christians differed!" So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa, saying, "Send us the pages in your possession and we will copy them and then return them to you." So Hafsa sent them to 'Uthman. He ordered Zayd ibn Thabit, 'Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr, Sa'id ibn al-'As, and 'Abdu'r-Rahman ibn al-Harith ibn Hisham to transcribe copies. 'Uthman said to the group of the three Qurashis, "When you and Zayd ibn Thabit disagree about any of the Qur'an, write it in the dialect of Quraysh. It was revealed in their language." They did that. When they had copied it out, 'Uthman returned the pages to Hafsa and he sent a copy of what they had copied out to every region and commanded that every sheet or copy which had any other form of the Qur'an should be burned. (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 4604)
The problems that caused consternation:
This was certainly perturbing. There were basically two issues that caused consternation.
1) People started reciting Qur’an in their own dialects. Even though this did not change the meanings and was tolerated earlier but with more and more diversity of nations among Muslims the problem was showing its teeth and it was now feared that in some time people will start to have startling differences in Qur’anic rendering which could potentially cause great trouble in later times.
Example of such differences can be the fact that Banu Qays read the letter ك as ش. This was referred to us “Kashkasha Qays.” Or Banu Tamim would render the word أن as عن. This was called, “’An’ana Tamim.” This was the state of affairs among Arabs; one can imagine how things could go out of control with non-Arabs coming in. The above and more on it can be found in Shaykh Tahir bin Salih al-Jaza’iri’s al-Tibyan fi Mabahith al-Quran p.52
The issue was that if someone were to produce his own manuscript considering such “anomalous” writing conventions, with the passage of time it was sure to cause a lot of fuss.
2) In certain cases slight variation was sanctioned by the Prophet –may Allah bless him- himself and there was to be no issue with it but some people make grave charges against each other because of it. e.g. in Surah 1 verse 4 one may read the word as “Maalik” with a long vowel (Kitabul Masahif, 239 Narrated by Anas) or simply “Malik” with a short vowel (Durr Manthur 1/6 cf. Ibn al-Anbari Narrated by Anas). They are more examples of this kind.
Now naturally people who had mastered any of the allowed renderings or pronounced words differently from the convention of the Quraysh, which is followed to this day, made their private manuscripts like that and taught their students likewise. This meant that without taking due steps things were to get out of control and could give way to serious issues in the times to follow.
Agreement to make one standard Mushaf:
‘Uthman –may Allah be pleased with him- raised the issue with fellow companions and asked for their intake. Once asked about his own opinion he, as reported by ‘Ali –may Allah be pleased with him- said:
“I see that we bring people to a single Mushaf so that there is neither division nor discord”. And we said, “An excellent proposal.” (Ibn Abi Dawud’s Kitab al-Masahif, Hadith 62. Classified as Sahih by Ibn Hajr in Fath al-Bari)
An independent manuscript was arranged:
As reported by Kathir bin Aflah, a twelve member committee was formed to oversee the task. (Kitab al-Masahif, Hadith 72. Classified as Sahih by Ibn Kathir)
This committee did not simply considered the Official Qur’anic Manuscripts prepared under Abu Bakr –Allah be pleased with him- infact they prepared an independent Manuscript repeating the same practice as carried out during the time of Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him.
Mus’ab bin Sa’d reported: ‘Uthman delievered a sermon to the people and said: Your prophet did (just) fifteen years ago and you differ regarding Qur’an. Bring to me anything you have from the Qur’an that he heard from the Messenger of Allah –may Allah bless him. Then it started that a man would come to him with writing on pieces of board and shoulder-blades and parchments. So whoever came to him with something, he asked: “Did you hear this from the Messenger of Allah –may Allah bless him?” Then he asked, “Who is best in language among the people?” They said, “Sa’id bin al-‘As.” Then he asked, “Who is the best in writing among the people?” They said, “Zaid bin Thabit.” He said. “Then let Zaid write and Sa’id dictate.” And then he got the Musahif written and sent to various cities. And I did not see anyone objecting to it. (Kitabul Masahif, Hadith 67. Classified as Sahih by Dr. Muhibuddin Wa’iz)
Comparison with what was accomplished during the time of Abu Bakr:
So exactly same method was employed and the whole text collected again from the scattered pieces prepared in the presence of the Qur’an. This was very much like what was done during the time of Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with him.
The reason why ‘Uthman –may Allah be pleased with him- took all this trouble again is same as explained with reference to Orientalist Bergstrasser in the discussion about Abu Bakr’s contribution.
Similarity:
Zaid bin Thabit -may Allah be pleased with him- who was in charge of both the endeavors testified that after making independent Mushaf during the time of ‘Uthman he compared it with what was prepared during Abu Bakr’s time and found them exactly similar. He said:
“I compared the Mushaf with those manuscripts; they did not differ in anything.” (Mushkil al-Athar, Hadith 2645)
So this also serves as a testimony for the extreme care taken and robustness of the methodology that a practice was repeated twice and there was no discrepancy at all. And all praise be to Allah!
Unique Achievements:
As to the unique accomplishments of ‘Uthman –may Allah be pleased with him- consider the following points.
1. During the time of Abu Bakr Surahs were not arranged. Surah arrangement was done during ‘Uthman’s time- may Allah be pleased with them both. See Mustadrak al-Hakim Hadith 2901.
This is also supported by the fact that in Sahih Bukhari the narration from Zaid bin Thabit about the project under Abu Bakr uses the plural word “Suhuf” (Manuscripts) while in his own report about the work done under ‘Uthman, he uses the singular “Mushaf” (Manuscript) showing that during Abu Bakr’s time a manuscript was prepared for each Surah and they were not arranged as such.
2. Special attention was paid to the fact that Qur’an is written in such a way that all the authentic ways of recitation are taken care of. Dialectical marks were not put, nor were the dots this allowed multiple warranted ways recitation.
3. During the time of Abu Bakr, only one official copy was prepared. ‘Uthman made multiple copies and sent them to all provincial headquarters –may Allah be pleased with them both. According to Abu Hatim al-Sajistani in total seven manuscripts were prepared and sent one each to Makkah, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Basra and Kufa and one was kept at Medina. See Kitabul Masahif, Narration 94.
How the problems were solved:
We mentioned two problems that highlighted the expediency for what was achieved during ‘Uthman’s time –may Allah be pleased with him.
Solution to Problem 1:
Problem 1 was solved by ensuring that spelling convention of only the Quraysh is followed. As clear from the Hadith from Sahih Bukhari quoted above which clearly says;
'Uthman said to the group of the three Qurashis, "When you and Zayd ibn Thabit disagree about any of the Qur'an, write it in the dialect of Quraysh. It was revealed in their language."
Also note that the person appointed to dictate i.e. Sa’id bin al’As was from the Quraysh.
This point needs a clarification. The possible difference was certainly about the spelling convention and not the wording itself. Following narration proves it;
“One day they differed if it was التابوت or التابوه. Men from Quraysh said it was التابوت while Zaid said it was التابوه. This difference was brought to ‘Uthman. He said write التابوت for Qur’an was revealed in the language of the Quraysh.” (Kanzul Ummal, Hadith 4775 cf. Ibn Sa’d, Tirmidhi etc.)
This shows it was only about spelling convention and not the wording itself.
Solution to Problem 2:
Problem 2 was solved because of the writing convention as it incorporated all the valid readings. Besides with each manuscript was sent a person with sound and profound knowledge of the Sunnah ways of recitation. See History of the Qur’anic Text p.95 cf. Abdul Fattah al-Qadi’s al-Qiraat fi Nazar al-Mustashriqin
Uthman did not destroy anything:
Many people have a misconception that ‘Uthman –may Allah be pleased with him- destroyed something that was in vogue during his time and before him.
This is false for multiple reasons.
1. As we saw, Zaid bin Thabit made comparison between the manuscript made under ‘Uthman and the the ones made under Abu Bakr –may Allah be pleased with them all- and said:
“I compared the Mushaf with those manuscripts; they did not differ in anything.” (Mushkil al-Athar, Hadith 2645)
And no one has ever said that Abu Bakr destroyed anything from or about the Qur’an. And with above narration under consideration, the only reasonable conclusion is that neither did ‘Uthman –may Allah be pleased with them both.
2. Following two narrations need special attention.
‘Ali said, “Do not speak of ‘Uthman anything but good because by Allah, whatever he did concerning the Masahif he did in our presence. He asked us, ‘What do you say regarding these recitations for it has reached me that some say to the others, ‘our recitation is better than yours’ even though this takes one towards disbelief?’ We said to him, ‘what is your opinion?’ He said, ‘I see that we should make all people recognize one Mushaf then there will be no difference or discord.’ We said, ‘An excellent proposal.’” (Kitabul Masahif, Hadith 62. Classified as Sahih by Dr. Wa’iz)
Narrated Anas: People differed about the Qur’an during the time of ‘Uthman to the extent that even teachers and children had differences. This reached ‘Uthman. He said, “You deny (valid recitations) in my presence and make mistakes in that. Those away from me must be more violent in denying and making mistakes. O companions of Muhammad! Come together and write for the people a manuscript to be followed.” (al-Ittiqan 1/69)
So evidently ‘Uthman –may Allah be pleased with him- was only looking to preserve all the valid recitations and do away with mistakes being made in them (recall problems 1 & 2). If he was to destroy anything it was only something that could potentially give way to differences and deny the warranted slight variations.
(in-sha-Allah! A detailed paper explaining the idea of slight variations to follow soon)
Burning of the Manuscripts:
With above details in mind we can now easily fathom the reason as to why ‘Uthman –may Allah be pleased with him- burnt some manuscripts.
They were certainly personal manuscripts that did not incorporate within their spelling convention all of warranted multiple readings. This could lead later generations studying Qur’an from those manuscripts to maintain that only what their manuscripts read was true and they might have resorted to same denial which ‘Uthman feared.
In personal manuscripts there might have been instances where a person followed his tribal spelling convention. It was feared that if studied by someone not cognizant of the details and basis of the writing that way, it could again lead to serious problems.
So considering the above ‘Uthman –may Allah be pleased with him- decided to destroy all sources of the potential threat in the form of personal manuscripts. And in this endeavor he had the support of the companions of the Prophet.
Mus’ab bin Sa’d reported: “I saw a large number of people present when ‘Uthman burnt the manuscripts. They liked it.” He (further) said, “And not one of them opposed it.” (Kitabul Masahif, Hadith 33. Classified as Sahih by Ibn Kathir and Dr. Wa’iz)
The companions were on board:
The whole idea was not Uthman’s brainchild, nor was it imposed in a dictatorial fashion. It was a collective affair and the task was as such collectively achieved and people were taken on board.
About the Mushaf prepared we learn that, “then it was read to the Companions in the presence of ‘Uthman.” (Ibn Kathir’s Fadhail al-Qur’an 1/89)
With regards to Uthman’s endeavors to make all people follow one manuscript ‘Ali –may Allah be pleased with him- said: “By Allah, if I were in charge of the affairs, I would have done what has been done.” (Kitabul Masahif, Hadith 62. Classified as Sahih by Dr. Wa’iz)
The only person to have reservations about the endeavors of ‘Uthman was Abdullah bin Mas’ud –may Allah be pleased with them him. In-sha-Allah in the next post we discuss the issue of his reaction; reasons for it, implications and misconceptions.
Indeed Allah knows the best!
