Anda di halaman 1dari 9

History of the Qur’an Module 4

Contents

1. Collection of the Qur’a#n

B. The Contemporary View

Section II: A Critique of the Classical View (Continued)

iii. The Extraneous Verses


iv. The Seven Ah@ruf
v. The Variant Readings

Section II: A Critique of the Classical View (Continued)

iii. The Extraneous Verses


This opinion of the classical scholars cannot be accepted and requires serious
reconsideration. No verse which is thought to exist outside the Qur’a#n can be
considered as still operational in any way. How can a part of the Qur’a#n be
extraneous to it? The Qur’a#n we have today is itself a proof on the fact that
everything outside it is not its part in any way.

iv. The Seven Ah@ruf


All interpretations that have been offered in support of this H~adi#th do not
convincingly explain it. Some of the interpretations have already been criticized
by classical scholars themselves (see the previous section). Of the various others
offered, some of them are examined here.

i. Seven Ah@ruf as Seven Dialects


This interpretation42 raises the following questions:

42. Suyu#t@i#, Itqa#n Fi# Ulu#mi’l-Qur’a#n, 2nd ed., vol. 1, (Bayda#r: Manshu#ra#t al-Rad@i#, 1343
History of the Qur’an 2 Module 4

Firstly, the text of the H~adi#th itself negates this meaning. It is known that both
‘Umar (rta) and H@isha#m (rta) belonged to the same tribe: the Quraysh. People of
the same tribe cannot have different dialects.
Secondly, even if it is accepted that this difference was of dialect between
various tribes, the verb unzila (was revealed) is certainly very inappropriate. The
Qur’a#n has specified that it was revealed in the language of the Prophet’s tribe:
the Quraysh (See for example: 19:97, 44:58). How can it be accepted that the
Almighty Himself revealed the various dialects?
Thirdly, even if the Seven Ah@ruf mean ‘seven eloquent dialects’, the next
question which arises is regarding the determination of these seven. Who is going
to ascertain them? Eloquence is something that depends on one’s appreciation and
cannot be left to mere arguments.
Fourthly, had it been a mere difference in dialect, Hisha#m could have easily
explained to ‘Umar (rta) that he was reading the Qur’a#n in another dialect of
Arabic; the H@adi#th on the other hand describes his plight and helplessness at the
hands of ‘Umar (rta).
Fifthly, it is known that Hisha#m had accepted Islam on the day Makkah was
conquered. If this Hadi#th is accepted, it would mean that for almost twenty years
even the closest companions of the Prophet (sws) like ‘Umar (rta) was unaware of
the Qur’a#n being revealed in some other reading. This clandestine teaching of
course directly contradicts many verses of the Qur’a#n which direct the Prophet
(sws) to convey and communicate each and every verse of the Qur’a#n. See for
example 5:67.

ii. Seven Ah@ruf as Seven Types of Pronunciation


Consider next, if the word Ah@ruf is meant to imply seven types of
pronunciation43. Another H@adi#th supports this meaning:

‫ﺻﻠﱠﻰ ﺍﻟﱠﻠ ُﻪ َﻋﹶﻠْﻴ ِﻪ َﻭ َﺳﻠﱠ َﻢ ِﺟْﺒﺮِﻳ ﹶﻞ ﹶﻓﻘﹶﺎ ﹶﻝ ﻳَﺎ ِﺟْﺒﺮِﻳ ﹸﻞ ِﺇﻧﱢﻲ ﺑُ ِﻌﹾﺜﺖُ ِﺇﻟﹶﻰ‬
َ ‫ﺐ ﻗﹶﺎ ﹶﻝ ﹶﻟ ِﻘ َﻲ َﺭﺳُﻮ ﹸﻝ ﺍﻟﻠﱠ ِﻪ‬ ٍ ‫َﻋ ْﻦ ﹸﺃَﺑﻲﱢ ْﺑ ِﻦ ﹶﻛ ْﻌ‬
‫ﲔ ِﻣْﻨ ُﻬ ْﻢ ﺍﹾﻟ َﻌﺠُﻮ ُﺯ ﻭَﺍﻟﺸﱠْﻴ ُﺦ ﺍﹾﻟ ﹶﻜِﺒﲑُ ﻭَﺍﹾﻟ ُﻐﻠﹶﺎﻡُ ﻭَﺍﹾﻟﺠَﺎ ِﺭَﻳﺔﹸ ﻭَﺍﻟﺮﱠ ُﺟ ﹸﻞ ﺍﱠﻟﺬِﻱ ﹶﻟ ْﻢ َﻳ ﹾﻘ َﺮﹾﺃ ِﻛﺘَﺎﺑًﺎ ﹶﻗﻂﱡ ﻗﹶﺎ ﹶﻝ ﻳَﺎ‬ َ ‫ﺃﹸ ﱠﻣ ٍﺔ ﹸﺃﻣﱢﻴﱢ‬
‫ﻑ‬
ٍ ُ‫ﺤﻤﱠ ُﺪ ِﺇﻥﱠ ﺍﹾﻟ ﹸﻘﺮْﺁ ﹶﻥ ﺃﹸْﻧ ِﺰ ﹶﻝ َﻋﻠﹶﻰ َﺳْﺒ َﻌ ِﺔ ﹶﺃ ْﺣﺮ‬
َ ‫ُﻣ‬
Ubayyi Ibn Ka‘ab reports that [once when] the Prophet (sws) met Gabriel, he
told him: I have been sent to an unlettered nation. Among it are old men and
women, slave men and slave women and people who are unlettered. [At

AH), p. 169
43. Suyu#t@i#, Itqa#n Fi# Ulu#mi’l-Qur’a#n, 2nd ed., vol. 1, (Bayda#r: Manshu#ra#t al-Rad@i#, 1343
AH), p. 166
History of the Qur’an 3 Module 4

this], Gabriel said: The Qur’a#n has been revealed on Seven Ah@ruf.44

It is evident from this text that the Prophet (sws) asked for some relief in
reading the Qur’a#n correctly, since it would have to be read by various sections of
his Ummah (children, old people, converts) and all of them would not be in a
position to read it with the correct pronunciation. This interpretation too raises
some questions.
Firstly, the H@adi#th says that these seven variations in pronunciation were
revealed by the Almighty. Variations in pronunciation concern the readers. Can
they be revealed? The science of pronunication (Tajwi#d) developed many years
after the Qur’a#n was revealed and all these types were then identified thereafter.
Secondly, relief in pronunciation is always of the same text. In other words,
contrary to the dialects of the same language in which words change, a text on
which any relief is to be given in pronunciation and accent, the words never
change. Why would the Prophet (sws) ask permission for this?
Thirdly, since difference in pronunciation of the same text is something which
cannot be objected to since this does not ‘change’ anything, ‘Umar (rta) would
never have reacted in such a stern way had this been the case. On the contrary, he
would have certainly given this allowance given the considering the fact that he was
encountering a new convert to Islam.
iii. Seven Ah@ruf as Seven Types of Verses
Another interpretation offered of this H@adi#th is that it implies seven types of
verses. The Seven Ah@ruf mean Mut@laq and Muqayyad (unconditional and
conditional), ‘A%m and Kha#s@ (general and specific), Nas@s@ and Mu’awwal (certain
and derived) Na#sikh and Mansu#kh (abrogater and abrogated), Istithna# (exception)
and its types.45

Regarding this interpretation, the following points merit serious consideration:


Firstly, if the H~adi#th is translated according to this interpretation, it would read:
‘The Qur’a#n has been revealed in seven types of verses; read it upon any of these
verses’. This translation obviously makes no sense.
Secondly, how could H@isha#m read through just one or some types of the above
verses because they do not occur such that all seven types form seven distinct
groups.
Thirdly, even if it is somehow accepted that H@isha#m was selectively reading the
Qur’a#n, there was no reason for ‘Umar (rta) to get angry. ‘Umar (rta) was a H@a#fiz@

44. Tirmadhi#: Kita#bu’l Qira#’a#t


45. Suyu#t@i#, Itqa#n Fi# Ulu#mi’l-Qur’a#n, 2nd ed., vol. 1, (Bayda#r: Manshu#ra#t al-Rad@i#, 1343
AH), p. 172
History of the Qur’an 4 Module 4

of the Qur’a#n. How could some other types of verses not be known to him?
Fourthly, verses of the Qur’a#n are of several types. The classification made
above is not exhaustive at all. Many more types can be enlisted. Moreover the
above types of verses were identified by later scholars.

iv. Seven Ah@ruf as Seven Styles of the Qur’a#n


Another interpretation of this H@adi#th is that the Seven Ah@ruf refer to seven
styles of the Qur’a#nic verses46: H@azf-i-S@ilah (suppression of the preposition),
Taqdi#m u Ta#khir# (pre-positioning and post-positioning), Ista‘a#rah (metaphor),
Takra#r (repetition), Kina#yah wa’l H@aqi#qah wa’l Maja#z (realism and symbolism),
Mujmal wa’l Mufas@s@al (the compact and the detailed), Zahir wa’l Gharib (The
evident and the rare).
All points raised in the criticism of (iv) apply equally to this interpretation.
In short, it seems that because of all these unconvincing explanations, Suyu#t@i#
after realizing their weakness has admitted in Tanwi#ru’l-Hawa#lik, a commentary
on the Mu’at@t@a# of Imam Ma#lik, that this H@adi#th should be regarded among the
Mutasha#biha#t (ie something whose meaning is not known):

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


To me the best opinion in this regard is that of the people who say that this
H@adi#th is from among matters of Mutasha#biha#t, the meaning of which cannot
be understood.47

v. The Variant Readings


None of these readings can be accepted in any way owing to the following
reasons:
(i) The whole of the Muslim Ummah today, except for a few North African
countries, is united in reading the Qur’a#n in just one way. It is historically known
that the reading of Na#fi‘ was officially promulgated in the third century h@ijrah in
North Africa after the rise of Malikite Fiqh in this area.48 The only complete reading
of the Qur’a#n which is in vogue from the time of the Prophet (sws) is the Qir‘a#t al-
‘A%mmah (the universal reading) – the very reading read out to the Prophet (sws)
once the revelation of the Qur’a#n had been completed. It was this very reading
which existed among the companions of the Prophet (sws). Abu# ‘Abdu’l Rah@man

46. Suyu#t@i#, Itqa#n Fi# Ulu#mi’l-Qur’a#n, 2nd ed., vol. 1, (Bayda#r: Manshu#ra#t al-Rad@i#, 1343
AH), p. 172
47. Suyu#ti@ ,# Tanwi#ru’l-Hawa#lik, 2nd ed., (Beirut: Da#ru’l-Jayl, 1993), p. 199
48. For details see: Hind Shalbi#, Al-Qira#’a#t bi-Afriqiyyah, 1st ed., (Tunisia: al-Da#ru’l
‘Arabiyyah li’l-Kita#b, 1983) pp. 223-35
History of the Qur’an 5 Module 4

Sullami# (d:105 AH49 ) narrates:

‫ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻗﺮﺍﺀﺓ ﺃﰉ ﺑﻜﺮ ﻭَﻋﻤﺮ ﻭ ﻋﺜﻤﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻳﺪ ﺑﻦ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﺍﳌﻬﺎﺟﺮﻳﻦ‬: ‫ﻗﺎﻝ ﺃﺑﻮ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺮ ﲪﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﻤ ّﻲ‬
‫ﻭَﺍﻷﻧﺼﺎﺭ ﻭَﺍﺣﺪﺓ ’ ﻛﺎﻧﻮﺍ ﺑﻘﺮﺀﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺍﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ’ ﻭَﻫﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺍﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﱴ ﻗﺮﺃﻫﺎ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺍﷲ ﺻﻠﻲ ﺍﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‬
‫ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺟﱪﻳﻞ ﻣﺮﺗﲔ ﰲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺬﻯ ﻗﺒﺾ ﻓﻴﻪ’ ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺯﻳﺪ ﻗﺪ ﺷﻬﺪ ﺍﻟﻌ ْﺮﺿَﺔ ﺍﻷﺧﲑﺓ ’ ﻭَﻛﺎﻥ ﻳﻘﺮﺉ‬
.‫ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﻬﺑﺎ ﺣﱴ ﻣﺎﺕ‬
The reading of Abu# Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthma#n and Zayd Ibn Tha#bit and that of
all the Muha#jiru#n and the Ans@a#r was one. They would read the Qur’a#n
according to the Qir‘a#t al-‘A^mmah. This is the same reading which was read
out to the Prophet (sws) in the year of his death by Gabriel. Zayd Ibn
Tha#bit50 was also present in this reading [called] the ‘Ard@ah-i-Akhi#rah51. It
was in this very reading that he taught the Qur’a#n to people till his death.52

This reading is generally known today as the Reading of H@afs@ (Qir’a#t-i-H@afs@).


However, its correct name is the Qir‘a#t al-‘A%mmah. In the words of Ibn Si#ri#n (d:110
AH53):

‫ﱮ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﰱ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺬﻱ ﹸﻗﺒِﺺ ﻓﻴﻪ’ ﻫﻰ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺍﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﱵ‬


ّ ‫ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺍﺀﺓ ﺍﻟﱴ ﻋُﺮﺿﺖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﱠﻨ‬: ‫ﻗﺎﻝ‬
.‫ﻳﻘﺮﺅُﻫﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﱠﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻴﻮﻡ‬
The reading on which the Qur’a#n was read out to the Prophet (sws) in the
year of his death is the same according to which people are reading the

49. See Abu’l H~ajja#j Mizzi#, Tahdhi#bu’l-Kama#l, 2nd ed., vol. 14, (Beirut: Mu’assasah Al-
Risa#lah, 1413 AH), p. 410
50. This of course does not mean that only Zayd was present during the ‘Ard@ah-i-
Akhi#rah. Other companions would certainly have been present as well. Consequently, the
following Ha#dith tells us that Ibn Mas‘u#d was also present:

The Prophet (sws) was read out the Qur’a#n each year. However, the year he died it
was read out to him twice. Ibn Mas‘u#d was present in this last recital, and [as a
result] came to know what was abrogated and what was changed. (Ah@mad Ibn
H@ambal, Musnad, vol. 1, pp. 362-3)

51. ie the final presentation


52. Zarkashi#, Burha#n, 2nd ed., vol. 1, (Beirut: Da#ru’l-Fikr, 1980) p. 237
53. See Abu’l H@ajja#j Mizzi#, Tahdhi#bu’l-Kama#l, 2nd ed., vol. 25, (Beirut: Mu’assasah Al-
Risa#lah, 1413 AH), p. 354
History of the Qur’an 6 Module 4

Qur’a#n today.54

This is the testimony of a famous person who died more than seventy years
after the Prophet (sws).
(ii) There exists a consensus of opinion among the scholars of our Ummah on the
fact that the Qur’a#n is Mutawa#tir (ie such a large number of people have transmitted
the Qur’a#n that the existence of any error in the transmitted text is impossible).
Consequently, Suyu#t@i# asserts:

‫ﻻ ﺧﻼﻑ ﹶﺃ ﹶﻥ ﻛ ﹼﻞ ﻣﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ ﳚﺐ ﺃﹶﻥ ﻳﻜﻮﻥ ﻣﺘﻮﺍﺗﺮًﺍ ﰲ ﺃﹶﺻﻠﻪ ﻭﺃﹶﺟﺰﺍﺋﺔ ﻭﹶﺃﻣّﺎ ﰲ ﳏﻠﻪ ﻭﻭﺿﻌﻪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺒﻪ ﻓﻜﺬﻟﻚ ﻋﻨﺪ ﳏﻘﱢﻘﻲ ﺃﹶﻫﻞ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﱠﺔ’ ﻟﻠﻘﻄﻊ ﺑﹶﺄ ﹼﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﺓ ﺗﻘﻀﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻮﺍﺗﺮ ﰲ ﺗﻔﺎﺻﻴ ﹼﻞ… ﻓﻤﺎ ُﻧﻘِﻞ‬
. ‫ﺁﺣﺎﺩًﺍ ﻭ ﱂ ﻳﺘﻮﺍﺗﺮ ’ ﻳُﻘﻄﻊ ﺑﺄﹶﻧﻪ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺁﻥ ﻗﻄﻌﹰﺎ‬
There is no difference of opinion about the fact that whatever is contained in
the Qur’a#n is Mutawa#tir both in totality and in part. To the Ahlu’l-Sunnah,
the placements therein and its arrangement are all Mutawa#tir so that it [the
Qur’a#n] becomes indisputable. This is because it is an acknowledged fact
that the Qur’a#n is a document whose details desire Tawa#tur ….
Consequently, whatever part of the Qur’a#n has been transmitted through the
Ah@a#d (isolate reports) and is not Mutawa#tir is unquestionably not the Qur’a#n
by any means.55

Now, if the chains of narrators of these variant readings are examined, none of
them can be claimed as Mutawa#tir. They may be Mutawa#tir from their famous
originators but they are certainly not Mutawa#tir all the way from these originators
up to the Prophet (sws). At best, they can be classified as Ah@a#d (isolate reports).
An example would suffice to illustrate this. Following are the ways56 in which one
of the Qurra#’, ‘A%s@im Ibn Abi# Najwad Al-Bahdlah (d: 127 AH57) has narrated his
reading from the Prophet (sws):

54. Suyu#t@i#, Itqa#n Fi# Ulu#mi’l-Qur’a#n, 2nd ed., vol. 1, (Bayda#r: Manshu#ra#t al-Rad@i#, 1343
AH), p. 177
55. Suyu#t@i#, Itqa#n Fi# ‘Ulu#mi’l-Qur’a#n, 2nd ed., vol. 1, (Bayda#r: Manshu#ra#t al-Rad@i#, 1343
AH), p. 266
56. See Ibnu’l-Jazari#, Al-Nashr Fi’l-Qira#’a#t al-‘ahsr, vol. 1, (Egypt: Maktabah al-
Tujja#riyyah), p. 155
57. See Abu’l H~ajja#j Mizzi#, Tahdhi#bu’l-Kama#l, 2nd ed., vol. 13, (Beirut: Mu’assasah Al-
Risa#lah, 1413 AH), p. 478
History of the Qur’an 7 Module 4

I
Muh~ammad (sws)

‘Abdu’lla#h Ibn Mas‘u#d

Zirr Ibn H~ubaysh Abu# ‘Abdu’l-Rah@ma#n Sullami# Abu# ‘Amr Sha#yba#ni#

‘A%s@im Ibn Abi# Najwad

H~afs@ Ibn Sulayma#n Abu# Bakr ‘Ayya#sh

II
Muh~ammad (sws )

Zayd Ibn Tha#bit Ubayyi Ibn Ka‘ab

Abu# ‘Abdu’l-Rah~man Sullami#

‘A%s@im Ibn Abi# Najwad

H~afs@ Ibn Sulayma#n Abu# Bakr ‘Ayya#sh

III
Muh~ammad (sws)
‘Ali# ‘Uthma#n

Zirr Ibn H~ubaysh Abu# ‘Abdu’l-Rah@ma#n Sullami #

‘A%s@im Ibn Abi# Najwad

H~afs@ Ibn Sulayma#n Abu# Bakr ‘Ayyash


History of the Qur’an 8 Module 4

Muslim scholars recognize this very fact, but quite inexplicably most of them
still insist on accepting these variant readings:

‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺃﻬﻧﺎ ﻣﺘﻮﺍﺗﺮﺓ ﻋﻦ‬. ‫ﺃﺣﺪﻫﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﻊ ﻣﺘﻮﺍﺗﺮﺓ ﻋﻨﺪ ﺍﳉﻤﻬﻮﺭ’ ﻭﻗﻴﻞ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺋﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﻌﺔ ’ ﺃﻣﱠﺎ ﺗﻮﺍﺗﺮﻫﺎ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻨﱮ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﷲ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﻓﻔﻴﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﺈ ﹼﻥ ﺇﺳﻨَﺎﺩ ﺍﻷﺋﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺒﻌﺔ ﻬﺑﺬﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﰲ ﻛﺘﺐ ﺍﻟﻘﺮﺍﺀﺍﺕ ’ ﻭﻫﻲ ﻧﻘﻞ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺣﺪ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﻮﺍﺣﺪ ﱂ ﺗﻜﻤﻞ ﺷﺮﻭﻁ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﺗﺮ ﰲ‬
‘.‫ ﻭﻫﺬﺍ ﺷﻰﺀ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﰱ ﻛﺘﺒﻬﻢ‬: ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺀ ﺍﻟﻄﺮﻗﲔ ﻭﺍﻟﻮﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬
The opinion of the majority is that these readings are Mutawa#tir. However,
one opinion is that they are Mashhu#r58…. The truth in this regard is that they
are Mutawa#tir from these seven [Qurr’a#]. As far as their Tawa#tur from the
Prophet (sws) is concerned, this is debatable. For the chain of narrators of
these seven are found in the books of Qira#‘a#t. These chains are transmission
from a single person to another and do not fulfil the condition of Tawa#tur
neither from the first narrator to the last nor in between.59

(iii) Not only are these readings isolate reports (Ah@a#d), but also many of the
narrators of these readings are not regarded as trustworthy by the scholars of
‘Ilmu’l-Rija#l as far as accepting Ah@a#di#th from them is concerned. As an example,
this is what is written about H@afs@ Ibn Sulayma#n, perhaps the most famous and
most widely acclaimed of all the disciples of the major Qurra#’:

‫ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺃﺑﻮ ﻗﺪﺍﻣﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺮﺧﺴﻲ ﻭﻋﺜﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻦ ﺳﻌﻴﺪ ﺍﻟﺪﺍﺭﻣﻲ ﻋﻦ ﳛﲕ ﺑﻦ ﻣﻌﲔ ﻟﻴﺲ ﺑﺜﻘﺔ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻋﻠﻲ ﺑﻦ‬
‫ﺍﳌﺪﻳﲏ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﺍﳊﺪﻳﺚ ﻭﺗﺮﻛﺘﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻤﺪ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺒﺨﺎﺭﻱ ﺗﺮﻛﻮﻩ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ ﻣﺘﺮﻭﻙ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺎﺋﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻴﺲ ﺑﺜﻘﺔ ﻭﻻ ﻳﻜﺘﺐ ﺣﺪﻳﺜﻪ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﰲ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻣﺘﺮﻭﻙ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺻﺎﱀ ﺑﻦ ﳏﻤﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻐﺪﺍﺩﻱ ﻻ ﻳﻜﺘﺐ‬
‫ﺣﺪﻳﺜﻪ ﻭﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺜﻪ ﻛﻠﻬﺎ ﻣﻨﺎﻛﲑ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺯﻛﺮﻳﺎ ﺑﻦ ﳛﲕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺟﻲ ﳛﺪﺙ ﻋﻦ ﲰﺎﻙ ﻭﻋﻠﻘﻤﺔ ﺑﻦ ﻣﺮﺛﺪ‬
‫ﻭﻗﻴﺲ ﺑﻦ ﻣﺴﻠﻢ ﻭﻋﺎﺻﻢ ﺃﺣﺎﺩﻳﺚ ﺑﻮﺍﻃﻴﻞ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺯﺭﻋﺔ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﺍﳊﺪﻳﺚ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺃﰊ‬
‫ﺣﺎﰎ ﺳﺄﻟﺖ ﺃﰊ ﻋﻨﻪ ﻓﻘﺎﻝ ﻻ ﻳﻜﺘﺐ ﺣﺪﻳﺜﻪ ﻫﻮ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﺍﳊﺪﻳﺚ ﻻ ﻳﺼﺪﻕ ﻣﺘﺮﻭﻙ ﺍﳊﺪﻳﺚ ﻗﻠﺖ ﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﻪ ﰲ ﺍﳊﺮﻭﻑ ﻗﺎﻝ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺑﻜﺮ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻴﺎﺵ ﺃﺛﺒﺖ ﻣﻨﻪ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﺮﲪﻦ ﺑﻦ ﻳﻮﺳﻒ ﺑﻦ ﺧﺮﺍﺵ ﻛﺬﺍﺏ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺮﻭﻙ ﻳﻀﻊ ﺍﳊﺪﻳﺚ ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺃﲪﺪ ﺑﻦ ﻋﺪﻱ ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺟﻲ ﻋﻦ ﺃﲪﺪ ﺑﻦ ﳏﻤﺪ ﺍﻟﺒﻐﺪﺍﺩﻱ ﻋﻦ ﳛﲕ‬
‫ﺑﻦ ﻣﻌﲔ ﻛﺎﻥ ﺣﻔﺺ ﺑﻦ ﺳﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﻭﺃﺑﻮ ﺑﻜﺮ ﺑﻦ ﻋﻴﺎﺵ ﻣﻦ ﺃﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻟﻨﺎﺱ ﺑﻘﺮﺍﺀﺓ ﻋﺎﺻﻢ ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺣﻔﺺ‬

58. ie widely attested


59. Zarkashi#, Burha#n, 2nd ed., vol. 1, (Beirut: Da#ru’l-Fikr, 1980) p. 319)
History of the Qur’an 9 Module 4

‫ﺃﻗﺮﺃ ﻣﻦ ﺃﰊ ﺑﻜﺮ ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﻛﺬﺍﺑﺎ ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺑﻜﺮ ﺻﺪﻭﻗﺎ‬


‘Abdu’l-Rah@ma#n Ibn Abi# H@a#tim, ‘Umar Ibn Shu‘ayb S@a#bu#ni#, Ah@mad Ibn
H@ambal, Bukha#ri#, Muslim and Nasa#‘i# call him Matru#ku’l-H@adi#th (From whom
Ah@a#di#th are not accepted) .… In the opinion of Yah@ya# Ibn Mu‘i#n as quoted by
Abu# Quda#mah Sarakhsi# and ‘Uthma#n Ibn Sa‘i#d he is not trustworthy …. ‘Ali#
Ibn Madi#ni# says: he is weak in matters of H@adi#th and I have forsaken him
voluntarily. …. Abu# Zur‘ah also says that he is weak in matters of H@adi#th …..
S~a#lih@ Muh@ammad Al-Baghda#di# says the Ah@a#di#th narrated by him are not worth
writing and all of them mention unfamiliar things in religion. Zakariyyah Ibn
Yah@ya# Al-Sa#ji# narrates from Samma#k and ‘Alqamah Ibn Marthad and Qays Ibn
Muslim that his Ah@a#di#th are not reliable …. ‘Abdu’l-Rah@ma#n Ibn Abi# H@a#tim
says that he asked his father about H@afs@. His father said that his Ah@a#di#th are not
even worth writing. He is weak in matters of H@adi#th, cannot be attested to and
his Ah@a#di#th are not acceptable. Abdu’l-Rah@ma#n Ibn Yu#suf says that he is a
great liar, worthy of being forsaken and forges Ah@a#di#th. H@a#kim Abu# Ah@mad
says: He wastes Ah@a#di#th. Yah@ya# Ibn Sa‘i#d says that he took a book from him
but never returned it. He would take books from people and copy them. Abu#
Ah@mad Ibn ‘Addi# narrates from Al-Sa#ji# and Ah@mad Ibn Muh@ammad Al-
Baghda#di# and Yah@ya# Ibn Mu‘i#n that H@afs@ Ibn Sulayma#n and Abu# Bakr Ibn
‘Ayya#sh are the most competent of all who know the reading of ‘A%s@im. H@afs@ is
even more competent than Abu# Bakr. However, H@afs@ is a great liar while Abu#
Bakr is reliable.60

It seems quite strange that a person so widely regarded as unreliable (even


called a liar) in accepting H@adi#th from be regarded as a very dependable person as
far the Qur’a#n is concerned.
It is clear from this analysis that these extant readings which are found in books
of Tafsi#r and read and taught in religious schools can in no way be accepted.
Whether they originated from insistence by some to cling to the first recital of the
Qur’a#n61, or were mere explanations of the actual verses written down by the
companions in their own codices or, like the extraneous verses, were concocted to
disparage the Qur’a#n is a mystery which perhaps may never be solved. However,
this much is certain that they have nothing to do with the text of the Qur’a#n.
________________

60. See Abu’l H@ajjaj Mizzi#, Tahdhi#bu’l-Kama#l, 2nd ed., vol. 7, (Beirut: Mu’assasah Al-
Risa#lah, 1413 AH), pp. 13-15
61. As pointed out earlier with reference to 75:16-19, this initial recital of the Qur’a#n
was replaced by a final one by the Almighty Himself.