The answer to the first question is that the Quran is only what is recorded in the mushaf, and which, except for some areas of North Africa, is recited by a vast majority of the Muslim ummah. None else except the reading on which this Quran is recited is the Quran or can be presented in the capacity and status of the Quran. Thus we think that this question does not even arise.

In the following paragraphs, we shall present the details of this view.

The Quran says:

سَنُقْرِئُكَ فَلَا تَنسَىإِلَّا مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ إنَّهُ يَعْلَمُ الجَهْرَ وَ مَا يخْفَى (87: 6-7)

Soon We shall recite [all of] it to you [O Prophet!]; then you will not forget except what Allah pleases. He indeed knows what is apparent before [you] at this time, and that also which is concealed [from you]. (87:6-7)

لَا تُحَرِّكْ بِهِ لِسَانَكَ لِتَعْجَلَ بِهِإِنَّ عَلَيْنَا جَمْعَهُ وَقُرْآنَهُفَإِذَا قَرَأْنَاهُ فَاتَّبِعْ قُرْآنَهُثُمَّ إِنَّ عَلَيْنَا بَيَانَهُ (75: 16-19)

[To acquire] this [Quran] swiftly [O Prophet!] do not move your tongue hastily over it. Indeed, upon Us is its collection and recital. So when We have recited it, follow this recital [of Ours]. Then upon Us is to explain it [wherever need be]. (75:16-19)

The scheme of God regarding the revelation and collection of the Quran mentioned in these verses can be stated as follows:

Firstly, the Prophet (sws) has been told that the way the Quran is being revealed piecemeal to him keeping in view the circumstances is the correct way of revelation; however, he should not worry about its protection and collection and arrangement. A new recital would ensue after this chronological one. At that time, if the Almighty intends to revoke something on the basis of His wisdom, He will do so and then have the Prophet (sws) read it in a manner that he will not forget any part of it and the Quran will be consigned to him in its very final form which will remain protected.

Secondly, this second recital would take place once the Quran has been arranged in the form of a book, and simultaneously he would be bound to follow this recital in future. He would then not be allowed to read the Quran according to its previous recital.

Thirdly, it was told that if any directive needed further explanation, it would be done so at this second recital, and in this manner this book would stand completed in every way after collection and arrangement and explanation by the Almighty Himself.

It is this second and final recital of the Quran which is also termed as al-ardah al-akhirah (the final presentation). It is evident from various narratives that each year Gabriel would read out the Quran revealed in that year to the Prophet (sws) during the month of Ramadan. In the last year, in the al-ardah al-akhirah, he read out the Quran to him twice.

Abu Hurayrah (rta) narrates:

كان يُعْرَضُ على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم الْقُرْآنُ كُلَّ عَامٍ مَرَّةً فَعُرِضَ عليه مَرَّتَيْنِ في الْعَامِ الذي قُبِضَ فيه

Each year the Quran would be read out to the Prophet Muhammad (sws) once; however, the year he died, it was read out to him twice.[2]

The Prophet (sws) used to read the Quran on this recital till he died. After him, the rightly guided caliphs, and all the Companions (rta) from among the Muhajirun and the Ansar would read the Quran on this recital. There was no difference in this regard between them. Later, it was this recital which was called the al-qiraat al-ammah. Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami (d. 73 AH) reports:

كانت قراءة أبى بكر وَعمر و عثمان و زيد بن ثابت و المهاجرين وَالأنصار وَاحدة كانوا بقرءون القراءة العامة وَهى القراءة التى قرأها رسولالله صلي الله عليه وسلم على جبريل مرتين في العام الذى قبض فيه وكان زيد قد شهد العرْضَة الأخيرة وَكان يقرئ الناس بها حتى مات.

The reading of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and Zayd ibn Thabit and that of all the Muhajirun and the Ansar was the same. They would read the Qur’an according to the al-qira’at al-‘ammah. This is the same reading which was read out twice by the Prophet (sws) to Gabriel in the year of his death. Zayd ibn Thabit [3] was also present in this reading [called] the al-ardah al-akhirah. It was this very reading that he taught the Quran to people till his death.[4]

Consequently, it is only this recital which possesses oral tawatur from the time of the Companions (rta) to date. Our scholars generally call it the qira’at of Hafs (d. 180 AH) whereas it is actually al-qira’at al-‘ammah and classical scholars, as pointed out above, actually introduce it by this name. Ibn Sirin narrates:

القراءة التى عُرضت على النَّبىّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فى العام الذي قُبِص فيه هى القراءة التي يقرؤُها النَّاس اليوم.

The reading on which the Quran was read out to the Prophet (sws) in the year of his death is the same according to which people are reading the Quran today.[5]

If the Quran is deliberated upon in the light of its coherence and arrangement, internal evidence from within the Quran also pronounces this very judgement. The work which has been done by the scholars of the Farahi school of thought on the Quran in recent times speaks volumes that the text of the Quran does not accept the variant readings. A person can see examples of this at many instances in Islahi’s Tadabbur-i Qur’an. He writes:

Differences in variant readings have also been resolved in this commentary. The conventional and mutawatirreading is only the one on which the Quran has been written, which we have in our hands. In this reading, the interpretation of each and every word and verse of the Quran is done in such a manner in the light of classical Arabic literature, coherence and parallels of the Quran that no doubt remains. Consequently, I have interpreted each verse on the basis of this reading and can say with full confidence that if this interpretation is done on the basis of some other readings then it can only be done at the expense of sacrificing the eloquence, wisdom and meaningfulness of the Quran. [6]

Here, it is possible that the narrative on the Seven Ahruf might cause some confusion to some people in this regard. The narrative reads:

عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ عَبْدٍ الْقَارِيِّ أَنَّهُ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ يَقُولُ سَمِعْتُ هِشَامَ بْنَ حَكِيمِ بْنِ حِزَامٍ يَقْرَأُ سُورَةَ الْفُرْقَانِ عَلَى غَيْرِ مَا أَقْرَؤُهَا وَكَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَقْرَأَنِيهَا فَكِدْتُ أَنْ أَعْجَلَ عَلَيْهِ ثُمَّ أَمْهَلْتُهُ حَتَّى انْصَرَفَ ثُمَّ لَبَّبْتُهُ بِرِدَائِهِ فَجِئْتُ بِهِ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنِّي سَمِعْتُ هَذَا يَقْرَأُ سُورَةَ الْفُرْقَانِ عَلَى غَيْرِ مَا أَقْرَأْتَنِيهَا فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَرْسِلْهُ ثُمَّ قَالَ اقْرَأْ يَا هِشَامُ فَقَرَأَ الْقِرَاءَةَ الَّتِي سَمِعْتُهُ يَقْرَأُ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ هَكَذَا أُنْزِلَتْ ثُمَّ قَالَ لِي اقْرَأْ فَقَرَأْتُهَا فَقَالَ هَكَذَا أُنْزِلَتْ إِنَّ هَذَا الْقُرْآنَ أُنْزِلَ عَلَى سَبْعَةِ أَحْرُفٍ فَاقْرَءُوا مَا تَيَسَّرَ مِنْهُ

‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Abd al-Qari narrated: “ ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab said before me: ‘I heard Hisham ibn Hakim ibn Hizamreading Surah Furqanin a different way from the one I used to read it, and the Prophet (sws) himself had read out this surah to me. Consequently, as soon as I heard him, I wanted to get hold of him. However, I gave him respite until he had finished the prayer. Then I got hold of his cloak and dragged him to the Prophet (sws). I said to him: “I have heard this person [Hisham ibn Hakim ibn Hizam] reading Surah Furqan in a different way from the one you had read it out to me.” The Prophet (sws) said: “Leave him alone [O ‘Umar].” Then he said to Hisham: “Read [it].” [‘Umar said:] “He read it out in the same way as he had done earlier.” [At this,] the Prophet (sws) said: “It was revealed thus.” Then the Prophet (sws) asked me to read it out. So I read it out. [At this], he said: “It was revealed thus; this Quran has been revealed in Seven Ahruf. You can read it in any of them you find easy from among them.”’ [7]

If the following points about this narrative are kept in contemplation, it becomes evident that it is an absolutely meaningless narrative which should not be considered of any worth in this regard:

Firstly, even though this narrative has been recorded in the basic books of Hadith literature, no one in history has ever been able to offer a convincing explanation of it rendering it totally ambiguous. Al-Suyuti [8] has recorded several interpretations of this narrative, and then while acknowledging the untenablility of each of these has confessed that this narrative should be regarded among the mutashabihat, whose meaning is only known to God.

وأرجحها عندي قول من قال : إن هذا من المتشابه الذي لايدري تأويله

And to me the best opinion in this regard is that of the people who say that this Hadith is from among matters of mutashabihat, the meaning of which cannot be understood.[9]

Secondly, the only plausible interpretation of the word ahruf is that it connotes pronunciation of words [10] the Arabs were used to. However, in this case, the text of the Hadith itself negates this meaning. It is known that both Umar (rta) and Hisham (rta) belonged to the same tribe: the Quraysh. Obviously, people of the same tribe could not have had different pronunciations.

Thirdly, even if it is accepted that this difference was of pronunciation between various tribes and as a result they were allowed to read it variously, the verb unzila (was revealed) is very inappropriate. The Quran has specified that it was revealed in the language of the Prophet’s tribe: the Quraysh (See for example: 19:97, 44:58). After this, it can be accepted that the various tribes were allowed to read it according to their own accents, but how can this be accepted that the Almighty Himself revealed the various dialects and pronunciations.

Fourthly, it is known that Hisham had accepted Islam on the day Makkah was conquered. If this Hadith is accepted, it would mean that even after the conquest of Makkah senior Companions and even a close associate like Umar (rta) was unaware of the fact that the Prophet (sws) secretly taught the Quran in some other form and reading from the one openly heard from him and preserved in writing and in memory. Every person can realize how grave this claim is and how far reaching its effects are.

Same is the case of the narratives which record the collection of the Quran in the time of the caliphs Abu Bakr (rta) and ‘Uthman (rta). The Quran specifies that it was arranged and collected in the time of the Prophet (sws) under the direct guidance of the Almighty, as has been referred to earlier. On the other hand, these narratives present an entirely different picture which is not only against the Quran but also against common sense. In the six canonical books, these narratives are primarily recorded on the authority of Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri (d. 124 AH). Authorities of rijal regard him to be guilty of tadlis and idraj. Besides these, if some other facets of his personality as referred to by Imam Layth ibn Sad (d. 175 AH) in his letter to Imam Malik (d. 179 AH) are kept in consideration, none of the narratives reported by him regarding such important issues as this is acceptable. He writes:

وكان يكون من ابن شهاب اختلاف كثير إذا لقيناه ، و إذا كاتبه بعضنا فربما كتب فى الشئ الواحد على فضل رأيه وعلمه بثلاثة أنواع ينقض بعضها بعضا، ولا يشعر بالذى مضى من رأيه فى ذلكالأمر، فهو الذى يدعونى إلى ترك ما أنكرت تركى إياه.

And when we would meet Ibn Shihab, there would arise a difference of opinion in many issues. When any one of us would ask him in writing about some issue, he, in spite of being so learned, would give three very different answers, each of which would negate the other and he would not even be aware of what he had already said. It is because of this that I have left him – something which you did not like. [11]

Such is the reality behind these narratives. Consequently, this is an absolute truth that the Quran has one reading only which is found in our codices. Besides this, the readings which are found in commentaries on the Quran or are read and taught in our schools of religious instruction or are even in currency in certain areas are the remnants of those malignant campaigns from which no religious discipline of the Muslims has unfortunately remained protected.

These readings may have arisen from the insistence of some on the reading on which the Quran was revealed before the al-ardah al-akhirah and from the forgetfulness of the narrators but later owing to the same motives which led to the fabrication of Hadith, they became so rampant that at the end of the Umayyid dynasty several of them had come to prominence. It is said that Abu Ubayd Qasim ibn Sallam (d. 224 AH) selected twenty five of them in his book. The seven readings which are famous in current times were selected by Abu Bakr ibn Mujahid (d. 324 AH) at the end of the third century hijrah. Thus it is generally accepted that their number cannot be ascertained but every reading is Quran which has been reported through a correct chain of narration, is compatible in any way with the masahif prepared by Uthman (rta) and is correct from any aspect as far as the Arabic language is concerned. Some of these readings are regarded as mutawatir; however, a look at their chains of narration which are found in books leaves no doubt that they are ahad (isolate), and most of their narrators are suspect in the eyes of the rijal authorities. Consequently, no scholar can even accept them as Hadith, what to speak of the Quran.

(Meezan: Javed Ahmed Ghamidi)

(Translated by Dr. Shehzad Saleem)

____________________________________

[2]. Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn Isma‘il al-Bukhari, Al-Jami‘ al-sahih, 2nd ed. (Riyad: Dar al-salam, 1999), 896, (no. 4998).

[3].Besides him, other Companions (rta) would certainly have been present during the al-‘ardah al-akhirah. Consequently, a narrative reported by ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (rta) mentions that ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (rta) was a also a witness to this event. See: Abu al-Qasim Sulayman ibn Ahmadal-Tabarani, Al-Mu‘jam al-kabir, 2nd ed., vol. 12 (Mawsil: Maktabah al-zahra, 1983), 103, (no. 12602).

[4]. Abu ‘Abdullah Badr al-Din Muhammad ibn Bahadur ibn ‘Abdullah al-Zarkashi, Al-Burhan fi ‘ulum al-Qur’an, 2nd ed., vol. 1 (Beirut: Dar al-fikr, 1980), 237.

[5]. Jalal al-Din ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Kamal al-Din Abi Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Sabiq al-Dinal-Suyuti,Al-Itqan fi ‘ulum al-Qur’an, 2nd ed., vol. 1 (Baydar: Manshurat al-radi, 1343 AH), 177.

[6]. Amin Ahsan Islahi, Tadabbur-i Qur’an, vol. 8, 8.

[7]. Abu‘Abdullah Malik ibn Anas, Al-Mu’atta’ (Peshawar: Al-Maktabah al-haqqaniyah, n.d.), 130, (no. 567).

[8]. Al-Suyuti,Al-Itqan,vol. 1, 165-172.

[9]. Jalal al-Din ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Kamal al-Din Abi Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Sabiq al-Dinal-Suyuti, Tanwir al-hawalik ila al-Mu’atta’ Imam Malik, 2nd ed. (Beirut: Dar al-jil, 1993), 199.

[10]. The actual words are: lughat and lahjat. There is a difference between the two. In the former the pronunciation of the word changes because of a variation in harakat (eg. بُخْل and بَخَل), while in the latter the pronunciation of a word changes because of a variation in accent. (Translator)

[11].‘Abbas ibn Muhammad ibn Hatim al-Duri, Tarikh Yahya ibn Ma‘in, vol. 2 (Beirut: Dar al-qalam, n.d.), 375.