The Altering of Qur’an
and Loss of Many Verses
The Koran was revised and altered repeatedly during
its first 600 years of existence. What is called the Koran today is probably
only 3%-5% what was written at the time of the death of Mohammad. There is no living or dead Muslim Scholar can
declare what was removed, added, altered, or burned of the 300 original different
versions of the Koran, or even the one original Koran that was chosen over all
others and how representative the modern Koran is as
to what was originally recorded in that Koran.
This is the greatest
travesties and deceptions that have been laid upon those that are devout
Muslims. It is something that has been hidden, by all to
many modern lying scholars and teachers that the Koran is pure, and was handed
down as it is today by Allah and Mohammad.
If the Koran which is the
foundation of the whole of Islam can be proven by Ancient Muslim Scholars and
Muslim holy men and women to have been altered, re-written, and for large
portions of the Koran to have been destroyed by early Muslim leaders themselves,
– what then does the devout Muslim have to believe concerning Islam? These must then turn to the declared source
of the Koran, The Bible for their guidance to God, and
their hope of salvation.
On page 131 of his book, "El-Sheaa and Correction", the contemporary Muslim
scholar, Dr. Mosa-El-Mosawy, makes this frank
confession,
"Those who adopt the notion of the
perversion of the Qur’an are present among all different Islamic groups, but
the majority of them come from the El-Sheaa
scholars."
Perversion of Qur’an is an unimaginable
notion to the lay Muslim because the Scholars of Islam are hiding this truth
from being published or becoming known.
Of course, we weren’t just satisfied with
what Dr. El-Mosawy has already mentioned, but we went
back to the most popular ancient scholars and to Muhammad’s relatives and
companions to investigate this notion concerning the perversion and loss of
several parts of the Qur’an because those are the trustworthy people regarding
the history and development of Islam.
Upon examining the testimonies of these
great companions, the answer was positive. They clearly stated that perversion
and loss of large fragments of the Qur’an did occur. Let us scrutinize their
testimony in order to present to deluded Muslims the
truth as it is proclaimed by their trusted spiritual leaders and scholars. The
deceptive veil must be removed so people can see the true face of the Qur’an.
’Ibn Umar al–Khattab explicitly
admits,
"Let no one of you say that he has
acquired the entire Qur’an for how does he know that it is all? Much of the
Qur’an has been lost, thus let him say, ‘I have acquired of it what is
available"’ (Suyuti: Itqan,
part 3, page 72).
A’isha (also page 72) adds to the story of ibn Umar and says,
"During the time of the prophet, the
chapter of the Parties used to be two hundred verses when read. When Uthman edited the copies of the Qur’an, only the current
(verses) were recorded" (73 verses).
The same statement is made by Ubay ibn Ka’b,
one of the great companions. On page 72, part 3, the Suyuti
says,
"This famous companion asked one of the
Muslims, ‘How many verses in the chapter of the Parties?’ He said, ‘Seventy-two
or seventy-three verses.’ He (Ubay) told him, ‘It
used to be almost equal to the chapter of the Cow (about 286 verses) and
included the verse of the stoning.’ The man asked, ‘What is the verse of the
stoning?’ He said, ‘If an old man or woman committed adultery, stone them to
death."’
This same story and same dialogue which took
place between the companion and one of the Muslims is recorded by Ibn Hazm (volume 8, part 11,
pages 234 and 235). Then Ibn Hazm
said,
"’Ali Ibn Abi Talib said this has a
reliable chain of authority (The Sweetest [Al Mohalla]
vol. 8.)."
The Zamakh-shari
also cited it in his book, "al-Kash-Shaf’ (part
3, page 518).
These are unquestionable statements made by
the pillars of the Islamic religion who transmitted Muhammad’s sayings and
biography, "The Tradition", and who interpreted the Qur’an— among
them Ibn ’Umar, A’isha, Ubay Ibn
Ka’b and ’Ali Ibn Abi Talib. Ibn
’Umar states that a large part of the Qur’an was
missed. A’isha and Ubay Ibn Ka’b assert that dozens of
verses from the "Chapter of the Parties" have been lost. ’Ali
confirms that, too. In regard to this particular verse, the following incident
is recorded in "The Itqan" by Suyuti (part 1, page 168),
"During the collection of the Qur’an,
people used to come to Zayd Ibn
Thabit (with the verses they memorized). He shunned
recording any verse unless two witnesses attested to it. The last verse of
chapter of Repentance was found only with Khuzayma Ibn Thabit. Zayd
said, ‘Record it because the apostle of God made the testimony of Khuzayma equal to the testimony of two men.’ ’Umar came with the verse of the stoning but it was not
recorded because he was the only witness to it."
One can only wonder and ask, "Does ’Umar need another witness to agree with him? Would he lie
to God and the Qur’an? Because of that, ’Umar said
after that, "If it were not that people would say, "Umar has added to the book of God’, I would have recorded
the verse of the stoning" (part 3, page 75 of the Itqan).
Refer also to skiek Kishk’s
book (part 3, page 64). Another confession by A’isha:
"Among the (verses) which were sent
down, (the verse) of the ten breast feedings was abrogated by (a verse which
calls for five breast feedings. The apostle of God died and this verse was
still read as part of the Qur’an. This was related by Abu Bakr
and ’Umar" (refer to Suyuti’s
qan, part 3, pages 62 and 63).
Events Which Led To The Loss Of
Some Verses
A Domesticated Animal
Eats Qur’anic Verses
In his book (volume 8, part II, pages 235
and 236), Ibn Hazm says
plainly,
"The verses of stoning and breast
feeding were in the possession of A’isha in a (Qur’anic) copy. When Muhammad died and people became busy
in the burial preparations, a domesticated animal entered in and ate it."
A’isha herself declared that and she knew exactly what she
possessed. Also, Mustafa Husayn, who edited and
reorganized the book, "al-Kash-shaf" by the
Zamakh-Shari, asserts this fact in page 518 of part
3. He says that the ones who related this incident and said that a domesticated
animal ate the verses were reliable persons among them ’Abdulla Ibn Abi Bakr
and A’isha herself. This same story has been
mentioned also by Dar-al-Qutni, al-Bazzar and al Tabarani, on the
authority of Muhammad Ibn Ishaq
who heard it from ’Abdulla who himself heard it from A’isha.
Professor Mustafa indicates that this does
not negate that the abrogation of these verses may have occurred before the
domesticated animal ate them. Why then did ’Umar want
to record the verse of the stoning in the Qur’an if its recitation was
abrogated? And why did people used to read the verses of the breast-feeding?
And, if Muhammad died while these verses were still recited who abrogated them?
Did the domesticated animal abrogate them? It is evident that this really did
occur according to the witness of the companions, Muslim scholars, and A’isha herself.
Other Matters Which Were Lost, Not Recorded And Altered
In part 3, page 73, the Suyuti
said,
"Hamida, the
daughter of Abi Yunis, said,
‘When my father was eighty years old, he read in the copy of A’isha, "God and His angels bless (literally pray for)
the prophet Oh ye who believe, bless him and those who pray in the first
rows." Then she said, "That was before ’Uthman
changed the Qur’anic copies.""’
On page 74, we read,
"Umar said to
’Abdul-Rahman Ibn ’Oaf, ‘Didn’t you find among the verses that we received one
saying, "Strive as you strove at the first?" We do not locate it (any
more).’ ’Abdul-Rahman Ibn
’Oaf told him, ‘This verse has been removed among
those others which were removed from the Qur’an."’
It is well known that ’Abdul-Rahman Ibn ’Oaf was one of the
great companions and was among those who were nominated for the caliphate.
Also, on the same page (74, of part 3) of
"The Itqan", we read,
"Maslama al-Ansar said to the companions of Muhammad, ‘Tell me about
two verses which have not been recorded in the Qur’an which ’Uthman collected.’ They failed to do so. Maslama said, ‘Oh, ye who believed and immigrated and
fought for the cause of God by (sacrificing) your properties and yourselves,
you received the glad tidings, for you are prosperous. Also, those who
sheltered them, aided them and defended them, against whom God (revealed) His
wrath, no soul knows what is awaiting them as a reward for what they
did."’
Throughout pages 73 and 74 of part 3, the Suyuti records for us all the remarks made by Muhammad’s
companions in regard to the unpreserved Qur’anic
verses which the readers failed to find in the Qur’an which ’Uthman collected and which is currently in vogue. It is
worthwhile to notice that we only quote the testimonies of the most reliable
authorities whose witness is highly regarded and cited by all the scholars and
students of the Qur’an such as ’Ali, ’Uthman, Abu Bakr, A’isha (Muhammad’s wife), Ibn Mas’ud, and Ibn ’Abbas. In the context of
expounding the Qur’an, these scholars are always quoted to shed light on the
events which took place during the time of Muhammad. No one could interpret the
tenets of Islam better than these scholars could.
If we ponder the first part of "The Itqan", by the Suyuti, we
read (page 184),
"Malik says
that several verses from chapter 9 (Sura of
Repentance) have been dropped from the beginning. Among them is, ‘In the name
of God the compassionate, the Merciful’ because it was proven that the length
of Sura of Repentance was equal to the length of the Sura of the Cow."
This means that this chapter has lost 157
verses. Also (page 184), the Suyuti tells us that the words, "In the name of God
the compassionate, the merciful" were found in the chapter of Repentance
in the Qur’anic copy which belonged to Ibn Mas’ud which ’Uthman confiscated and burned when the current Qur’an was
edited.
Not only verses have been dropped, but also
entire chapters have been abolished from the ’Uthmanic
copy which is in the hands of all Muslims today. The Suyuti
and other scholars testify that the Qur’anic copies
of both Ubay and Ibn Mas’ud include two chapters called "The Hafad" and "the Khal"’.
They both are located after the chapter of "the ’Asr" (103) (refer to pp. 182 and 183 of part one
of the gn).
He also indicates that the Qur’anic copy of ’Abdulla-Ibn Mas’ud does not contain the chapter of "The Hamd" and "The Mu’withatan"
(Surah 113, 114). On page 184, the Suyuti tells us that Ubay ibn Abi Ka’b
recorded in his Qur’anic copy two chapters that start
with, "Oh God, we ask for your assistance," and "Oh God, you
whom we worship." These are the two chapters of "The Hafad" and "The Khal’. " On page 185, the Suyuti
assures us on the authority of the most famous companions of the prophet that
’Ali ibn Abi Talib was aware of these two chapters. ’Umar
ibn al-Khattab was
accustomed to read them after his prostration. The Suyuti
records them in their entirety on page 185. They are available to any Arab who
wishes to read them. Then, the Suyuti adds that the
two chapters are found in the Qur’anic copy of ibn ’Abbas also. What more we
should say after we heard the testimonies of ibn ’Abbas, ’Umar, ’Ali, ibn Mas’ud and ibn Abi Ka’b
Talib? It is evident that the Qur’an once included
these two chapters.
If the reader asks, "What do you mean
by saying ‘...the Qur’anic copy of ibn ’Abbas’, or ‘... the copy of ibn Mas’ud ... A’isha’, etc.? Were there many different Qur’anic copies?’ I will not supply the answer, but I leave
that to the Muslim scholars and chroniclers as we examine how the Qur’anic copies were burned and only one universal copy was
kept.
The Collection Of The Qur’an And The Fierce Dispute Among The Scholars And
The Companions
Among the greatest events which took place
during the reign of ’Uthman ibn
’Affan, third caliph after Muhammad, is the
collection of the Qur’an. It is appropriate here to record briefly the story of
the first collection of the Qur’an which occurred during the time of Abu Bakr after the death of Muhammad. All chroniclers, without
exception, have never questioned the authenticity of the incident (refer to
"The Itqan" of Suyuti,
part 1, page 165, Dr. Ahmad Shalabi, pp. 37 and 38,
al-Bukhari, part 6, page 477). What did the Bukhari say in this regard?
"’Umar said
to Abu Bakr, ‘I suggest you order that the Qur’an be
collected.’ Abu Bakr said to him, ‘How can you do
something which Allah’s messenger did not do.’ Then Abu Bakr
accepted his proposal and came to Zayd and said to
him, ‘You are a wise young man and we do not have any doubts about you. So you
should search for the fragments of the Qur’an and collect it.’ Zayd said, ‘By Allah if they had ordered me to shift one of
the mountains it wouldn’t have been heavier for me than this ordering me to
collect the Qur’an."’
The question which presents itself is, why did not Muhammad give orders to collect the Qur’an?
Why did not the angel Gabriel suggest to him to do such an important task to
avoid the disagreement, dispute, and the fight which spread among the people?
He could have avoided the debate about the chapters and the verses of the
Qur’an which raged among the great scholars.
Secondly, why did Zayd
consider the task of collecting the verses of the Qur’an more difficult than
removing a mountain? There is no answer for the first question. Of course,
Gabriel was supposed to order Muhammad to collect the Qur’an while he was still
alive in order to save his people from the disputes and fights. The answer for
the second question is evident because a great number of the reciters and the memorizers of the Qur’an had already been
killed in the wars of the apostasies, especially in the battle of Yamama. So, how could Zayd
collect the Qur’an thoroughly? Removing a mountain is much easier, as he said.
Now what happened during the time of ’Uthman? In his book "The History of Islamic Law"
(page 38), Dr. Ahmad Shalabi says,
"The Qur’an was collected and entrusted
to Hafsa. It was not proclaimed among people until
the era of ’Uthman ibn ’Affan. Huthayfa, one of
Muhammad’s companions who fought in Armenia and Adharbijan,
said to ’Uthman, ‘The Muslims disagree on the
(correct) reading of the Qur’an and they fight among themselves.’ ’Uthman ordered Zayd ibn Thabit and the other three to
collect the Qur’an in one copy. After they accomplished that, ’Uthman gave the order to bum the rest of the Qur’anic copies which were in the hands of Muhammad’s
companions. That was in the year 25 H."
All Muslim scholars concur—such as Al-Bukhari (part 6, page 225), Suyuti
in "The Itqan" (part 1, page 170), and Ibn Kathir in "The Beginning
and the End" (part 7, page 218) in which he remarks,
"’Uthman
burned the rest of the copies which were in the hands of the people because
they disagreed on the (correct) reading and they fought among themselves. When
they came to take ibn Mas’ud’s
copy to bum it, he told them, ‘I know more than Zayd ibn Thabit (whom ’Uthman ordered to collect the copies of the Qur’an).’ ’Uthman wrote to ibn Mas’ud asking him to submit his copy for burning."
When ibn Mas’ud said that he was more knowledgeable than Zayd, his claim was not questioned because he was a very
reliable person. In part 7, page 162 of his book, "The Beginning and the
End", ibn Kathir said
about him that he used to teach people the Qur’an and the traditions. Some even
thought that he was a member of Muhammad’s family because he had easy access to
Muhammad’s assembly while Zayd was still young. The Bukhari comments (part 6, page 229) that Muhammad prompted
his adherent to learn the Qur’an from four people, among them ibn Mas’ud Zayd
was not mentioned among them. Yet, when ’Uthman asked
Zayd to collect the Qur’an, he did not add ibn Mas’ud to the committee. A contemporary
scholar, Sheikh Kishk, remarks in his book,
"Legal Opinions" (part 1, page 102),
"The four most important commentators
are ibn ’Abbas, ibn Mas’ud, ’Ali ibn Abi Talib
and ’Ubay ibn Ka’bal-Ansari."
So ibn Mas’ud is one of the four great expounders of the Qur’an
and Zayd ibn Thabit did not enjoy the same prestige of ibn Mas’ud.
It was common knowledge that both ibn Mas’ud and ibn Ali Ka’b were accustomed to
write the two chapters of the Hafad and the Khal’ which are now eliminated from the current Qur’an
which Zayd collected. Ibn Mas’ud asserts that the chapter of the praise and the Mu’withatan are not part of the Qur’an (refer to "The Itqan" by Suyuti, part 1,
pp. 221, 222). Despite that, Zayd recorded them.
It was a strange thing, ’Uthman’s
order to burn the companions’ copies. If we question that, we will be inclined
to believe that these copies differed from the Qur’anic
copy which Zayd edited and compiled, otherwise ’Uthman would not have burned them. This is not the
conclusion of the author, but it is the opinion of many great contemporary
Muslim scholars, among them Ibrahim al-Abyari, who expressed his view in his book, "The
History of the Qur’an" (3rd print, 1982, page 107). He plainly says,
"There were also other copies of the
Qur’an such as the copy of Abi Musa al-Ash’ari, al-Maqdad ibn al-Aswad, and Salim the client of Abi Huthayfa. There were differences between those copies,
differences which Huthayka attested to it. That
frightened ’Uthman, thus he issued an order to
collect the Qur’an because the Kufis followed the
copy of ibn Mas’ud; the
Syrians the copy of ibn Abi
Ka’b; the people of
On page 41, he adds:
"Ibn Qutayba says that the differences between the recitations
of the various Qur’anic copies may include the
meaning also."
Also on page 109, he says:
"When Abu Bakr
and ’Umar assigned Zayd ibn Thabit to compile the Qur’an,
there was a previous compilation of the Qur’an made by a group of the greatest
companions such as ’Ali ibn Abi
Talib, ibn Mas’ud and ibn ’Abbas and others."
The Muslim has the right to wonder and to
ask why Abu Bakr and ’Umar
took the trouble to do that when ibn Mas’ud and ibn ’Abbas who were (according to Muhammad) the most knowledgeable
people in the Qur’an, had already accomplished it? Why did they not at least
add them to the committee or solicit their opinions?
In regard to the copy of ’Ali ibn Abi Talib,
the Imam Khu’i tells us in his book, "al-Bayan" (page 222), the following:
"The existence of Imam ’Ali’s copy is
an unquestionable matter. All scholars admit it and say that it contains
additions which are not found in the current Qur’an. These additions are under
the title of ‘The Revelation of God for the Explanation of the Intended’
(purpose)."
The Imam Khu’i is
one of the greatest scholars among the Shi’ites. He
drew his information from what the Imam al-Tabari had
recorded in his book, "’al-Ihtijaj"’
("Apology") (refer to Dr. Musa, The Shi’ites
and the Reformation, pp. 132,133).
Dr. Musa also indicates:
"Our scholars and legists infer from an
episode recorded by the Tabari in the book of al-Ihtijaj about the existence of a Qur’anic
copy compiled by the Imam ’Ali. This episode tells that ’Ali said to Talha (one of Muhammad’s relatives and companions) that
every verse God bestowed upon Muhammad is in my possession, dictated to me by
the apostle of God and written by the script of my hand, along with exposition
of every verse and all the lawful and unlawful (issues)."
Dr. Musa tells us, that despite the fact
that he studied Islam and jurisprudence under the direction of the Imam al-Khu’i, he was involved in a fierce argument in regard to
this serious matter. But we will tell Dr. Musa that all the Shi’ites
and their scholars (whose total number is more than one hundred fifty million
Muslims scattered all over the Islamic countries) believe this. Even Sheikh Kishk who was one of the Sunnis’
scholars, repeats similar statements in his book, "Legal Opinions"
(part 1, page 103). He says,
"’Ali remarked, ‘Ask me about the book
of God. I swear to God that there is no verse which I do not know whether it
was sent down at night or during time, or on a plain or on a mountain."’
He also states similar words about ibn Mas’ud. In spite of that,
’Ali ibn Mas’ud and ibn Abi Ka’b
had been disqualified from contributing to the compilation of the Qur’an and
their copies were neglected, though they were the most important expounders of
the Qur’an along with ibn ’Abbas.
It is ’Ali’s copy which contains additional
material lacked in the current Qur’an and includes revelations from God for
explaining the intended purposes. This is what happened in the course of the
compilation of the Qur’an during the time of ’Uthman ibn ’Affan. Thus, it is no wonder
that ibn Kathir explicitly
mentions that Muhammad ibn Abi
Bakr, the righteous, and the brother of A’isha, Muhammad’s wife had participated with ’Ammar ibn Yasir,
one of the famous companions, in the assassination of ’Uthman,
reiterating, "You have altered God’s book" (refer to the Bidaya and The Nihaya, part 7,
page 185). On page 166, ibn Kathir
records that a large number of the reciters of the
Qur’an used to curse ’Uthman and encouraged people to
revolt against him.
The question is, "Why do the reciters of the Qur’an do that and why does ibn Kathir vow that ibn Abi Bakr
said that to ’Uthman? Did ’Uthman
really change the copies of the Qur’an as Hamida
daughter of Abi Yunis
testified along with the rest of the great companions whom we mentioned? Yes
indeed!
The Dispute Among The Companions And The Seven
On the authority of all the scholars, the Suyuti tells us that the most eminent companions disagreed
on the number of chapters of the Qur’an and their verses. They disagreed on the
order of the chapters. He listed for us the order of the chapters in ’Ali’s and
ibn Mas’ud’s copies (refer
to the Itqan, part 1, pp. 176 and 189). He tells us
that the multitude of scholars said that the order of the chapters was the
outcome of the companions’ opinion and they disagreed about that among
themselves. The Suyuti admits on this page that both
’Ali and ibn Mas’ud each
owned his own copy. Also Ubay ibn
Ka’b possessed his own, too.
He regarded the dispute over the verse,
"In the name of God the Compassionate and Merciful", a striking
example about the dispute between the most eminent companions and the scholars.
Some said that it is not one of the Qur’anic verses,
so ibn ’Abbas told them
that they eliminated 114 verses from the Qur’an because it was repeated 114
times. The Zamakh-shari, who recorded this incident
in the Kash-shaf (part 1, pp. 24-26) states that
those who denied these verses were ibn Mas’ud himself, Abu Hanifa, Malik and all the reciters and
legists of Medina, Basra and Syria.
Imam Malik used to
say, "This verse should not be read aloud or privately because it is not
part of the Qur’an. Sheikh Kishk agrees with the Zamakh-shari in this matter and confirms that a dispute has
resulted among the greatest scholars because of this verse. Some famous
scholars such as the Qurtubi and ibn
’Arabi are of the same opinion as Malik
that this verse is not of the Qur’an (refer to "Legal Opinions" of
the contemporary Egyptian scholar Sheikh Kishk, part
9, pp. 41-47).
Of course, this verse is included in all the
chapters of the Qur’an except the chapter of the Repentance. The reason for
that is a very significant story which reveals that the compilation of the
Qur’an and the order of the chapters are the product of human effort in
compliance with the order of ’Uthman. In his "Itqan" (part 1, pp. 172,173), the Suyuti
tells us:
"Ibn ’Abbas said to ’Uthman, ‘What made you combine the chapter of the Anfal
and the chapter of Tawba (repentance) without
separating them by the verse, "In the name of God the compassionate, the
Merciful"? (And why) did you put them among the seven long (chapters)?’ ’Uthman said, ‘The chapters used to be bestowed upon the
apostle of God. The chapter of Anfal was among the
early ones which were revealed in
The order and organization of the Qur’an
depended on ’Uthman’s view as he admitted himself to ibn ’Abbas. This time ’Uthman’s opinion was wrong. The Suyuti
tells us in "The Itqan" (part 1, page 195)
that a dispute broke out among the scholars because of this verse which was
revealed in some of the seven readings but not in all of them.
You may wonder what "the seven
readings" are, and what we mean when we say that
the Qur’an was sent down in "seven letters" (readings). We would
briefly answer this question before we move to the last subject in this chapter
which is the religious teachings, the mythical episodes and the meaning of the
chapters included in the contents of the Qur’an.
The Seven Letters (
Both former and latter Muslim scholars agree
on this issue. They all relied on Muhammad’s famous statements which Bukhari and others recorded, as well as an incident which
is frequently quoted by most of these scholars. The incident took place between
’Umar ibn al-Khattab and one of the great companions by the name of Hisham ibn al-Hakam
in which Muhammad was the arbitrator.
Muhammad’s Statements
Muhammad said:
"Gabriel made me read in (one dialect),
I consulted with him again and continued asking for more (dialectical reading)
and he continued to add to that until I finished with seven readings"
(refer to Bukhari, part 6, page 227, and "The Itqan", part 1, page 131).
The Suyuti tells
us that this admission is quoted in al-Bukhari, and Sahih of Muslim on the authority of ibn
’Abbas. Also, ibn ’Abbas indicated to us (part 1, page 132) that Muhammad
said,
"My Lord told me to read the Qur’an in
one dialect. I sent back and asked Him to make it easy for my people. He
answered me (saying), ‘Read it in two dialects.’ I requested of him again, thus
he sent to me (saying), ‘Read it in seven dialects."’
"Gabriel and Michael visited me.
Gabriel sat at my right side and Michael at my left side. Gabriel said (to me),
‘Read the Qur’an in one dialect.’ Michael said, ‘Add (more dialects)’ until he
reached seven dialects."
These are Muhammad’s statements, but before
we allude to the meaning of the seven letters (readings) as they were recorded by
Muslim scholars, let us look at the incident which took place between ’Umar and Hisham (part 6, page 482
of al-Bukhari).
Umar ibn Al-Khattab
said, "I heard Hisham ibn
Hakim reciting Al-Furqan and I listened to his
recitation and noticed that he recited in several different ways which Allah’s
messenger had not taught me. I was about to jump on him during his prayer and
when he had completed his prayer, I put his upper garment around his neck and
seized him by it and said, ‘Who taught you this Surah
which I heard you reciting?’ He replied, ‘Allah’s Messenger taught it to me.’ I
said, ‘You have lied for Allah’s Messenger has taught it to me in a different
way.’ So I dragged him to Allah’s Messenger and said to him, ‘I heard this
person reciting Surah Al-Furqan
in a way which you haven’t taught me.’ Allah’s Messenger said, ‘It was revealed
in both ways. This Qur’an has been revealed to be recited in seven different
ways, so recite out of it whichever way is easier for you."’
Refer also to Dr. Shalabi’s
book (page 40) along with other major sources, for all of them have recorded
this story. It is very interesting to notice that Muhammad, the prophet,
approved the readings of both of them in spite of the obvious differences
between them which provoked ’Umar and forced him to
treat Hisham brutally and pull him by his clothes.
The Meaning Of The Seven Letters (
The Suyuti says in
"The Itqan" (part 1, pp. 131-140), scholars
have argued among themselves about the meaning of the seven letters Some like ibn Qutayba said that there is a
difference in the meaning and not only in the usage of the vocabulary or the
dialect. For some words, the meaning may change according to the vocalization
of the word. The verb may be in the past tense or imperative as we find in
chapter Saba’: 19; or it depends on the word’s diacritical points which incur a
change in the meaning; or whether a phrase was added or deleted from the verse;
or if a word is replaced by another. These are the views of ibn
Qutayba who is one of the most famous scholars of his
time.
Ibn al-Jazri agrees with him
and admits that the meaning changes from one reading to another. The Suyuti states that Muslim scholars have said so because of
the incident which occurred between ’Umar and Hisham ibn Hakeem,
because both of them belonged to the same tribe of Quraysh
and used the same dialect. It is impossible to say that ’Umar
disapproved Hisham’s dialect. This denotes that the
Seven Letters do not mean mere difference in the dialect of the Arab tribes,
otherwise ’Umar would not have objected to Hisham’s reading (refer to Suyuti,
part 1, page 136). Yet some other scholars such as al-Tabari
argue that the difference is only in the vocabulary. One scholar agrees with
the Tabari who said that ibn
Mas’ud used to read:
"‘Every time the (lightning) shines,
they walk therein’ (chapter 2:20). Yet other times, he may read, ‘Passed
through or went forward’; that is, stating the same meaning but using different
vocabularies."
It is obvious to the reader that the
differences between the seven readings include the meaning and the
vocabulary because both ’Umar and Hisham belonged to the same tribe which speaks the same
dialect. Yet they differed in their reading of the verses because the Qur’an
was given without any vocalization or diacritical points, as the scholars
indicated. In this case, it is inevitable that the meaning be exposed to change
and disruption as ibn Qutayba,
ibn al-Jazri and others
mentioned and demonstrated by definite examples.
It is evident then that there are seven
different dialects in the Qur’anic text. That created
a dilemma for Muslim scholars. Even Suyuti himself
alluded (page 136) to the fact that this issue has created a doubt in the minds
of the scholars because the seven dialects required Gabriel to deliver each
verse seven times.
Scholars’ Admission Of A Strange Thing
In his "Itqan"
(paragraph 1, page 137), the Suyuti remarks,
"A great scholar, that is the Mawardi, said that Muhammad had permitted the reading (of
the Qur’an) on the basis of any of the Seven Letters as it happened in the
episodes of ’Umar. He also allowed replacing a letter
with another letter."
The Suyuti also
says on (pages 141,142),
"The multitude of the scholars and the
legists said that the ’Uthmanic Qur’an was (written)
in accordance to one letter (dialect) only."
On pages 170 and 171, the Suyuti adds:
"When the lads and their teachers
fought against each other during the era of ’Uthman
due to the difference in reading (the Qur’anic text),
he (’Uthman) standardized the reading and made people
recite it accordingly because he was afraid of riots since the Iraqis and the
Damascenes disagreed on the dialect. But before that, the Qur’anic
copies (used to be read) on the basis of the Seven Letters in which the Qur’an
was given."
Let us now examine what Dr. Shalabi said in this regard. In his book, "The History
of Islamic Law" (pp. 40-41), he remarks:
"’Uthman
wanted to have a standardized text read by all Muslims, but, after the era of ’Uthman, Muslims began again to read the Qur’an based on the
Seven Letters as they used to do before. Each country followed the dialect of a
famous reciter whom it trusted. Then public opinion
settled on the Seven Readings taken from the most eminent reciters
who were Nafi’, Ibn Khathir, Abu ’Umar, Ibn ’Amir, ’Asim,
Hamza and the Kisa’i.
Such circumstances created a problem for
many Muslims who were seeking a solution. One of the inquirers asked Sheikh Kishk a question which this scholar attempted to answer in
his book, "Legal Opinions" (part 1, pp. 113 and 114). The question
was, "I heard a reciter reading the Qur’anic text, ‘O ye who would believe even if a godless
messenger brought you news, be cautious.’ He read it, ‘Investigate’ instead of,
‘Be cautious’. I ask for a clarification for this
reading and other similar verses."
Sheikh Kishk
answers:
"The reading of the reciter,
‘Investigate’, is a correct famous reading which has been handed down (to
people). Hamza, Kasa’i and Khalaf followed it. These three were among the ten on whom
the Muslims relied that their reading is correct. The Qur’anic
copies to which the inquirer referred, do not contain
this reading. Thus, the reading is correct because the Qur’anic
copies with which (the inquirer) is acquainted have the diacritical points
based on the recitation of Hafas. If the Qur’an, in
our time was written according to the recitation of Hamza
or the reading of any of those who were with him, the diacritical points would
be congruent with the reading of (Hafas).
"Maybe, there are Qur’anic
copies which are written in the same pattern as this reading, yet the point to
be taken into account is the authenticity of the chain of authority and its
uninterrupted succession. All these readings proved to be correct and they were
handed down uninterrupted. If the noble inquirer had pondered a little, he
would have found that the formation of the word lends itself to be read in two
ways based on the difference in the diacritical points. This is one of the
secrets of the ’Uthmanic copy because during the era
of the caliph ’Uthman ibn ’Affan, there was no vocalization or diacritical
points."
Despite this answer, the question which is
still without explanation is, "In which dialect was the Qur’an given to
Muhammad? In which dialect were the tablets when it was still with God? Was
there one Qur’an or seven Qur’ans with seven dialects? What did Sheikh Kishk (and his prophet Muhammad) mean when he said all
the dialects and all the meanings are correct?"