IBN QUTAYBAH'S CONTRIBUTION TO QUR'ANIC EXEGESIS (CHAPTER II)
-
Upload
muhammad-amin-samad -
Category
Documents
-
view
226 -
download
2
description
Transcript of IBN QUTAYBAH'S CONTRIBUTION TO QUR'ANIC EXEGESIS (CHAPTER II)
49
CHAPTER II
IBN QUTAYBAH'S REFUTATION OF ALLEGATIONS OF
SOLECISM, CONTRADICTION AND
AMBIGUITY IN THE VERSES
OF THE QUR’ĀN
A. Variant Readings in the Qur’ān
There has never been any disagreement among the ‘ulamā’ that the Qur'ān was revealed in seven ah.ruf (lit., "letters"), as it was reported by
many s.ah.ābah, such as „Umar, „Uthmān, Ubayy ibn Ka„b, Abū Hurayrah,
„Abd Allāh ibn „Abbās, and „Abd Allāh ibn Mas„ūd1 in many h.adīths. One
of these h.adīths runs as follows:
[from „Umar b. al-Khat.t.āb]
I heard Hishām b. H.ākim2 recite the sūra of the Furqān (25) during the
lifetime of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him
peace. I listened to his recitation, and [noticed that] he was reciting
according to many h.arfs in which the Messenger of God had never had
me recite. I was about to grab hold of him in [the middle of his] prayer,
but I waited till he had recited the final salutations. When he had
finished, I seized him by his robe and said: 'Who taught you to recite the
sūra which I have just heard you recite?' He said: 'The Messenger of
God taught me to recite it.' I said: 'You are lying. By God, the
Messenger of God himself taught me to recite this sūra which I have
just heard you recite.'
So I hurriedly took him to the Messenger of God and said: 'O
Messenger of God, I have heard this man recite the sūra of the Furqān in
h.arfs in which you never taught me to recite, and it was you yourself
who taught me to recite the sūra of the Furqān.' (...) The Messenger of
God said: 'Let him go, „Umar; and you Hishām, recite.' So he recited for
him the recitation I had heard him recite and the Messenger of God said:
'It was sent down like that.' Then the Messenger of God said: '[Now]
you recite, „Umar', and I recited it as the Messenger of God had taught
me. Then the Messenger of God said: 'It was sent down like that.' Then
the Messenger of God said: 'Indeed, this Qur'ān was sent down in seven
h.arfs. You should recite whichever comes easily to you.'[15]3
50
But the ‘ulamā’ have different opinions on the meaning of the term
ah.ruf in these h.adīths. According to al-H.āfiz. Abū H.ātim ibn al-H.ayyān al-
Bustī (d. 354/965) as reported by al-Qurt.ubī, there are 35 different opinions,
but al-Qurt.ubī himself mentions five opinions only.4
The term h.arf (pl. ah.ruf) means "an edge", "an aspect", "a boundary",
"a margin", "a side", and "a part of something". A letter is called h.arf
because it is a part of the alphabet.5 The example of the word h.arf meaning
wajh (an aspect, a side) in the Qur‟ān is as follows:
"And there is,
too, among men many a one who worships God on the border-line [of faith]: thus, if good befalls him, he is satisfied with Him, but if a trial assails him,
he turns away utterly,..." (Q. 22:11, Asad). Here worshipping Allah when one is only in favourable conditions or in doubt is called "worshipping Allah
one-sidedly".6
As many different views exist concerning what the seven ah.ruf
correspond to, some important ones are mentioned here, as follows:
a. As the term ah.ruf is applicable to the alphabet, the word, the meaning and
the side, it is considered ambiguous, so the seven ah.ruf is ambiguous.
This is the view of the grammarian Ibn Sa„dān.7
b. They are the seven dialects of the Arabs in which the Qur‟ān was revealed, among which was the dialect of the Quraysh. The other dialects are those
of the Hudhayl, Thaqīf, Hawāzin, Kinānah, Tamīm, and Yamān.8 This is
the correct view according to al-Bayhaqī. However, according to Abū H.ātim al-Sijistānī, the seven dialects are: the Quraysh, Hudhayl, Tamīm,
al-Azd, Rabī„ah, Hawāzin, and Sa„d ibn Bakr. Ibn Qutaybah, who rejects
this view, insists that the Qur‟an was revealed in the language of the
Quraysh, citing the Qur‟anic verse:
"And never have We sent forth any apostle otherwise than [with a
message] in his own people's tongue, …" (Q. 14:4, Asad).9
c. They are the seven categories of the contents of the Qur‟ān, namely: nahy (prohibiting), amr (commanding), h.alāl (lawful), h.arām (unlawful),
muh.kam (clear), mutashābih (ambiguous), and amthāl (parables).
Another view is that they are: amr, zajr (reprimand), targhīb (encouragement of good), tarhīb (discouragement of evil), jadal
(dialectic), qas.as. (narrative), and mathal (parable, pl. amthāl)10
. Yet
51
another view is that they are: wa‘d (promise), wa‘īd (threat), h.alāl,
h.arām, mawā‘iz. (exhortations), amthāl, and ih.tijāj (protest). Several
categories are also included by some scholars, such as nāsikh (abrogating) and mansūkh (abrogated).
d. They are dialectal readings for a single expression or a single word, with
different vowelisations, but have the same meaning, such as the expression "come!" can be expressed in many different dialects, such as:
halumma, aqbil, ta‘āl, iyyāya, qas.dī, nah.wī, and qurbī. This view is
attributed by Ibn „Abd al-Barr to the majority of the ‘ulamā’, pointing
out the h.adīth reported by Ah.mad and al-T.abrānī on the authority of
Abū Bakrah, as follows: The Prophet said: "Gabriel said: 'O
Muh.ammad, recite the Qur‟ān according to one h.arf.' Michael said:
'Request more [than this for him].' He said: '[Recite] according to two
h.arfs.' [This continued] until it reached seven ah.ruf. Each one is
curative and sufficient - as long as one does not finish up a verse of punishment with a verse of mercy, or a verse of mercy with one of
punishment - as if one were to say ta‘āl, aqbil, and halumma (all
meaning 'come')..."11
This type of variant reading was permitted at first, since it was difficult for the early Muslims to recite the Qur‟ān with one
reading due to their illiteracy and lack of ability to grasp and memorise
the Qur‟ānic verses perfectly. For example, Ibn Mas„ūd was reported to
have read to an unidentified person the verse
"Verily, [in the life to come] the tree of deadly fruit will be the
food of the sinful." (Q. 44:43-4, Asad). But the man read t.a‘ām al-
yatīm ("the food of the orphan"). When Ibn Mas„ūd failed to correct
him, he said: "Can you read t.a‘ām al-fājir ("the food of the insolent)?"
When the man said "yes", he said: "So, do it!" Later, when the one reading became easy for people, these variant readings became
abrogated. This is the view of Sufyān ibn „Uyaynah, Ibn Wahb, Ibn
„Abd al-Barr, al-T.ah.āwī, al-Bāqillānī, al-T.abarī and others.12
In other
words, in the early period of Islam, those Arabs who could not
memorise or recite correctly the Qur‟ān, due to reasons such as illiteracy and lack of memory or ability to articulate properly, were temporarily
permitted to recite it in their own words and languages, provided that
they did not change the meaning. Once they could recite it properly as taught by the Prophet, they had to adhere to it, and their former readings
52
became abrogated and later called qirā’āt munkarah ("rejected
readings"). This is apparently what al-T.abarī meant when he stated that
the „Uthmānic recension contained one reading only.
e. They are seven variant readings based on seven aspects. According to
Ibn Qutaybah, they are as follows:
1. The variant i‘rāb (desinential or grammatical inflection, rules governing vowel endings) of the word or the vowelisation of its letters
which changes neither its s.ūrah (form) nor its meaning, such as the
reading wa hal yujāzá illā ’l-kafūru, meaning "Is ever any requited
[thus] but the utterly ingrate?" instead of wa hal nujāzī illā ’l-kafūra, meaning "But do We ever requite [thus] any but the utterly ingrate?"
(Q. 34:17, Asad). Both readings convey the same idea and meaning,
namely, only the ingrate - like the people of Sheba whose ungratefulness led to the downfall of their kingdom Sheba, as
mentioned in the previous verses - will be requitted by Allah.13
The
first reading belonged to Ibn Kathīr, Nāfi„, Abū „Amr and Ibn „Āmir, while the second reading belonged to H.amzah, al-Kisā‟ī, H.afs. and
„Ās.im.14
2. The variant i‘rāb of the word and the vowelisation of its letters which
change its meaning only, not its s.ūrah, such as the reading of rabbunā
(in the nominative) and bā‘ada (in the indicative) instead of rabbanā
(in the vocative) and bā‘id (in the imperative) in the verse rabbunā bā‘ada bayna asfārinā, meaning "long has our Sustainer made the
distance between our journey-stages!" instead of rabbanā bā‘id bayna
asfārinā, meaning "Our Sustainer! Make long the distances between our journey-stages." (Q. 34:19, Asad). According to Ibn Qutaybah,
these two variant readings serve dual purposes: describing the prayer of
the people of Sheba (Saba‟) and the answer to this prayer.15
The first reading belonged to Abū S.ālih., Muh.ammad ibn al-H.anafīyah, Abū al-
„Āliyah, Nas.r ibn „Ās.im and Ya„qūb. It was also reported that Ibn
„Abbās said that the people of Sheba complained that Allah had made their journey-stages long, although Allah had shortened the journey for
them. They made this statement arrogantly and discontentedly (
). This reading was chosen by Abū H.ātim who said that the
people of Sheba did not ask Allah to lengthen their journey-stages but
rather to shorten them.16
The second reading was that of the masses
53
(qirā’at ’l-‘āmmah) according to al-Qurt.ubī. It was the reading of
Nāfi„, „Ās.im, Ibn „Āmir, H.amzah and al-Kisā‟ī according to Ibn
Mujāhid.17
3. The variant letters of the word which change its meaning only without changing its i‘rāb and s.ūrah, such as wa’nz.ur ilá ’l-‘iz.āmi kayfa
nunshiruhā, meaning "and look at the bones how We revive them",
instead of kayfa nunshizuhā, meaning "how We put them together" (Q.
2:259, Asad).18
The first reading belonged to Ibn Kathīr, Nāfi„ and Abū „Amr, whereas the second belonged to „Ās.im, Ibn „Āmir, H.amzah and
al-Kisā‟ī.19
4. The variant words which change the s.ūrah, but not the meaning, such
as the variant reading of Ibn Mas„ūd as well as „Abd al-Rah.mān ibn al-
Aswad in kānat illā zaqyatan wahidah instead of s.ayh.atan wāh.idah
both readings mean "Nothing was [needed] but one single blast [of Our
punishment]" (Q. 36:29, Asad), since the word zaqyah is the synonym of s.ayh.ah (lit. "a shout").
20
5. The variant words which change its s.ūrah and meaning, such as „Alī's
reading of wa t.al‘in mand.ūd, meaning "and a clustered spadix" instead
of wa t.alh.in mand.ūd, meaning "and a clustered acacia" (Q.56:29).21
However, according to Abū Bakr al-Anbārī, „Alī went back to the
Qur‟ān („Uthmānic recension) accepting that wa t.alh.in was the right
reading. When it was read to him wa t.alh.in mand.ūd he said: "Why
don't you read wa t.al‘in?" and cited the verse lahā t.al‘un nad.īd "(and
tall-palm-trees) with their thickly clustered dates." (Q. 50:10, Asad).
Qays ibn „Abbād said to him: "O Prince of the believers, shall we rub it
off from the mus.h.af?" He answered: "Today the Qur‟ān (meaning the
„Uthmānic recension) is not to be disturbed ( )."22
6. The variant reading by means of inversion ( ), such
as Abū Bakr's reading of wa jā’at sakrat ’l-h.aqq bi ’l-mawt, meaning
"and the agony of truth comes in death," instead of wa jā’at sakrat ’l-mawt bi ’l- h.aqq, meaning "and the agony of death comes in truth." (Q.
50:19, Pickthall).23
Al-Qurt.ubī states that Ibn Mas„ūd also read the
above verse the same as the reading of Abū Bakr and that we should not follow this reading. He contends that there are two reports about
54
Abū Bakr's reading: one which is the same as the one in the mus.h.af,
and that is what we should follow, and the other is what is mentioned
above and should be rejected; probably he forgot when he read that
reading, or the narrator might have made mistakes in narrating this report. Moreover, as reported by Abū Bakr al-Anbārī, Masrūq said that
when Abū Bakr was dying, he called his daughter „Ā‟ishah. When she
saw him she said: "This is like what the poet said: اَهِب
„... a day when she rattled in her throat (in dying) and the heart
became annoyed with it'". Abū Bakr told her: "Why don't you read wa
jā’at sakrat ’l-mawt bi ’l- h.aqq?" Here he did not read the verse with
inversion.24
7. The variant reading by means of addition and omission
, such as ‘amilat (with the omission of h) instead of ‘amilathu in
the verse wa mā ‘amilathu aydīhim, meaning "and their hands made it
not" (Q. 36:35).25
The first reading belonged to H.amzah, and al-Kisā‟ī,
whereas the second belonged to Ibn Kathīr, Nāfi„, Abū „Amr, Ibn
„Āmir and H.afs. who took it from „Ās.im.26
Another example cited by
Ibn Qutaybah is the addition of unthá ("female") according to Ibn
Mas„ūd's variant reading at the end of the verse
() , meaning "Behold, this is my brother: he has ninety-nine
ewes." (Q. 38:23, Asad).27
The variant readings which have different meanings as mentioned
above belong to the category of ikhtilāf taghāyur (difference by variation) which serve as complements or commentary to the others. With regard to the
variant readings which contradict each other which belong to the category of what Ibn Qutaybah called ikhtilāf tad.ādd (difference by contradiction) this
kind of reading is not permissible; it does not exist except in verses dealing with injunction or prohibition among abrogating (nāsikh) and abrogated
(mansūkh) verses.28
Although Muslim scholars have different interpretations regarding the
meaning of the seven variant readings of the Qur‟ān, they all agree to its validity as part of revelation. A question arises whether the seven variant
readings are included in the present „Uthmānic recension. Some scholars
among the fuqahā’ (Muslim jurists), qurrā’ (Qur‟ān reciters), and mutakallimīn (Muslim scholastic theologians), such as Ibn H.azm, confirm it,
55
contending that they are part of the revelation, and as such, are also
preserved by Allah, based on the Qur‟ānic verse:
".... Lo! We verily are its Guardian" (Q. 15:9).29
The second view is that of the great majority of the ‘ulamā’. They say that the „Uthmānic recension contains the seven variant readings which
agree to the rasm (orthography) - also called s.ūrah or shakl (consonantal
outline, consonantal skeleton) - of this recension only, compiled according
to the Prophet's last presentation of the Qur‟ān to Gabriel.30
Any other variant reading which is different from the rasm of the „Uthmānic recension
is unacceptable. Moreover, reading the variant readings based on dialects
was permitted only in the beginning of Islam, when the Arabs had difficulty in using the Quraysh dialect.
31
The third view is that of al-Qāsim ibn Farh. al-Shāt.ibī (d. 590/1194)
who said that the seven ah.ruf were included in Abū Bakr‟s compilation, but
only one variant reading in the „Uthmānic recension.32
Based on this statement of Ibn Qutaybah, the possible readings are those belonging to aspect one (such as wa hal yujāzá illā ’l-kafūru instead of
wa hal nujāzī illā ’l-kafūra) and two (such as rabbunā bā‘ada instead of
rabbanā bā‘id), and probably also aspect three (such as nunshiruhā instead of nunshizuhā) of his categorization. However, according to Muslim
scholars who advocate the seven variant readings based on the seven Arabic
tribal dialects, the only remaining reading in the „Uthmānic recension is the language of the Quraysh tribe to which the Prophet and the people of
Makkah belonged. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, the Prophet's order to
read the Qur‟ān with the seven variant readings was only permitted to ease the burden for the illiterate and non-Qurayshī Arabs with their different
tribal dialects.
Aِfter the death of the Prophet, the s.ah.ābah still read the Qur‟ān in
seven variant readings according to the readings they had received from him.
Disputes concerning these variant readings appeared and later became intense and almost caused fitnah (dissention), especially among Muslim
armies stationed far away from Makkah and Madīnah. This happened in
30/651 during the campaign of Azerbaijan and Armenia when the people of Shām (Syria) and Iraq met and listened to each other's reading of the Qur‟ān.
When they heard the difference in their readings they disagreed and almost
accused each other of infidelity. In the meantime, the number of variant
56
readings was increasing in the course of time until it reached about thirty,
spreading throughout the Muslim lands.
This incident was witnessed by Hudhayfah al-Yamān who became
alarmed and feared of the spread of this fitnah. He went back to Madīnah and told „Uthmān: "Rescue this community before they disagree like the
disagreement among the Jews and the Christians." This news so shocked „Uthmān that he immediately acted accordingly.
It was to prevent this fitnah that „Uthmān ordered Zayd ibn Thābit,
„Abd Allāh ibn al-Zubayr, Sa„īd ibn al-„Ās. and „Abd al-Rah.mān ibn al-
H.ārith ibn Hishām to copy the texts of the Qur‟ān from the authorized copy
kept by H.afs.ah, the Prophet's wife and „Umar's daughter. He said that if the
three last scribes disagreed with the former (Zayd ibn Thābit) about the texts of the Qur‟ān, they should write them in the dialect of the Quraysh, as the
Qur‟ān was revealed in their dialect.33
Then „Uthmān sent four copies to
different cities accompanied with a qāri’: to Makkah with „Abd Allāh ibn al-Sā‟ib, to Syria with al-Mughīrah ibn Shihāb, to Bas.rah with „Āmir ibn „Abd
al-Qays, and to Kūfah with Abū „Abd al-Rah.mān al-Sulamī. In Madīnah
two copies were kept, one with Zayd ibn Thābit, and another by „Uthmān for himself. These qurrā’ taught people in their respective cities the variant
readings which had been confirmed being from the Prophet, reported by a
h.adīth mutawātir (a h.adīth handed down by many chains of unimpeachable
transmitters), and in agreement with the rasm of the copy (of the „Uthmānic recension) they possessed. They did not teach them the abrogated readings
nor those which had been reported with a h.adīth āh.ād (a h.adīth reported by
one chain of transmitters), although it agreed with the rasm of the copy. In
so doing, the variant readings reported with tawātur and which agreed with
the rasm of the copy were recorded and preserved. It was reported that „Uthmān also sent a copy to Yaman (Yemen) and Bahrayn. He ordered all
other copies to be burnt, including the mus.h.af of Ibn Mas„ūd and of Ubayy
ibn Ka„b.
As the „Uthmānic recension was written without dots and vowelisation
it included all mutawātir readings from the Prophet, such as fatabayyanū (Q. 4:94) which was the reading of all qurrā’ (as in our present mus.h.af)
except H.amzah who read fatathabbatū.34
Similarly, bushran (Q. 7:57) which
was the reading of „Ās.im (as in our present mus.h.af) is also read nashran,
which was the reading of A„mash and H.amzah; bushr is the easing (takhfīf)
57
of bushur, the broken plural of bashīr; nashr is the mas.dar of the verb
nashara (to spread).35
These variant readings were not the result of an
ijtihād in finding possible readings in „Uthmānic recension, but rather from
the readings taught by the Prophet himself to the s.ah.ābah. The s.ah.ābah, in
turn, taught them to the people of the next generation, the tābi‘īn until they reached us. Abū „Amr ibn al-„Alā‟ (d. 154/771), who was one of the seven
qurrā’ and one of the leading grammarians of Bas.rah, said that if he were
allowed to read other than what had already been read and taught he would
have read a different reading. When he was asked by al-As.ma„ī how to
make the distinction between wa taraknā ‘alayh (Q. 37:108) and wa
bāraknā ‘alayh (Q. 37:113) since both were written orthographically the same in the „Uthmānic codices, he answered that it could only be known by
hearing it from the early mashāyikh (scholars). This also indicates that
variant readings had already existed earlier than the „Uthmānic recension, and therefore, were not the product of it.
36
We have noticed that among the seven variant readings advocated by
Ibn Qutaybah which could be included in the „Uthmānic recension are three
readings only. They are those which do not change in the rasm, although they change in the i‘rāb, the meaning or the wording. What happens, then,
with the rest of the variant readings? They are found in the books of tafsīr.
We have also noticed that there are many interpretations regarding the
meaning of the term ah.ruf. The Qur‟ānic commentators know that it has
something to do with reading the Qur‟ān, as the Prophet allowed us to read
whichever is convenient for us among the seven ah.ruf. The term "seven"
itself does not necessarily mean the exact number. It could be a metonym for "several", since this term is often synonymous with "several" in Arabic
usage. Likewise, the term "seventy" and "seven hundred" could mean
respectively "many" and "very many."37
According to (al-Qād.ī) „Iyād. (d.
544/1149), the term "seven", "seventy", and "seven hundred" indicates the
greatness in number of units, tens and hundreds respectively.38
It is not surprising, then, that the grammarian Ibn Sa„dān (d.230/845) suggests that
the term ah.ruf meant in the h.adīth is ambiguous.39
It is noteworthy to include the views of two contemporary scholars
regarding the meaning of seven ah.ruf and their existence or non-existence in
the „Uthmānic codices. They are Mannā„ al-Qat.t.ān and Muh.ammad „Abd
al-„Az.īm al-Zarqānī. According to the contemporary scholar Mannā„ al-
58
Qat.t.ān the more acceptable view is that the seven ah.ruf are the seven
languages of the Arabs for one meaning, such as aqbil, ta‘āl, halumma, ‘ajjil
and asri‘. They are different words for one meaning, namely, "come!” This
is the view of Sufyān ibn „Uyaynah and Ibn Jarīr al-T.abarī.
Among the arguments of followers of this view are as follows:
(1). A man read a different reading from what „Umar had learned from the
Prophet. The Prophet told them that both were correct, and said that the Qur‟ān is correct as long as the verse of mercy is not substituted with
that of punishment and vice versa. (Reported by Ah.mad ibn H.anbal with
reliable transmitters as well as al-T.abarī).
(2) Busr ibn Sa„īd said that Abū Juhaym al-Ans.ārī told him that two men
disagreed on a verse, each claimed to have received it from the Prophet.
When they asked him about it he said that the Qur‟ān was sent down with seven ah.ruf, that they should not dispute over the Qur‟ān, for
disputing over it could lead to infidelity (kufr). (Reported by Ah.mad).
(3). Al-A„mash said that Anas read inna nāshi’at al-layl hiya ashaddu
wat.’an wa as.wabu qīlā (Q. 73:6). When he was told that it should be
wa aqwamu qīlā he said that aqwamu, as.wabu and ahya’u are the same.
(Reported by al-T.abarī, Abū Ya„lā and al-Bazzār with sound
transmitters).40
(4) The tābi‘ī Muh.ammad ibn Sīrīn said that he was told that Gabriel and
Michael came to the Prophet. Gabriel told the Prophet to read the Qur‟ān
in two h.arfs. Michael told Gabriel to give him more which he did until it
reached seven ah.ruf. Muh.ammad ibn Sīrīn said further that there is no
variance of reading in the matters of h.alāl, h.arām, amr or nahy. It is like
saying ta‘āl, halumma and aqbil. We read in kānat illā s.ayh.atan
wāh.idah (Q. 36:29 and 53), whereas Ibn Mas„ūd read in kānat illā
zaqyatan wāh.idah. (Reported by al-T.abarī, the h.adīth is mursal as the
name of the s.ah.ābah was not mentioned in the isnād).41
The argument against the view that the seven readings are seven
languages (dialects) of the Arabs is that there are more than seven languages
of the Arabs. In addition, „Umar and Hishām ibn H.ākim who had different
readings belonged to the same Quraysh tribe and language. It was unlikely that „Umar would reject his own language. Therefore, the difference was in
wording but the same in meaning as mentioned above.42
59
Al-T.abarī who has the same view answers a hypothetical question:
"Where can we find in the Qur‟ān a single reading read in seven different
languages with different wordings but agree in meaning?" He says: "We do
not claim that they still exist nowadays." "What, then, would happen to the other six variant readings?", another hypothetical question. He answered
that the Muslim community was ordered to preserve the Qur‟ān and was
given a choice in reading and keeping any of the seven ah.ruf.43
At the time
of „Uthmān, the situation necessitated adherence to one reading only in order to avoid the fitnah (civil strife). The Muslim community which is immune
from error (ma‘s.ūm) agreed to this decision.44
The third view is that the seven ah.ruf are the seven aspects: amr, nahy,
h.alāl, h.arām, muh.kam, mutashābih and amthāl. The argument against this
view is that since the Muslims are allowed to choose any of the seven ah.ruf,
they may choose the h.arām aspect of a particular verse, whereas others
choose its h.alāl aspect. It is inconceivable that the legal judgment of
something could be halal and h.arām at the same time. Moreover, the
flexibility in the possibility in reading up to seven ah.ruf would not be in
turning something h.alāl, for example, into h.arām, or changing its meaning.
The h.adīth mentioned before stated that the Prophet confirmed that variant
readings would not be contradictory to each other.45
The fourth view says that the seven ah.ruf are based on seven aspects
(similar to Ibn Qutaybah's view). However, al-Qat.t.t.ān states that some of
these variant readings claimed by the followers of this view are of āh.ād
(reported by one chain of authority), whereas there has never been any disagreement among Muslim scholars that the accepted readings of the
Qur‟ān are those reported in mutawātir (many chains of authority).
Furthermore, the majority of the claimed variant readings vary only in the vowelisation of consonants of the words and the way of expressing them,
like the variant i‘rāb, tas.rīf (conjugation), tafkhīm (emphatic pronunciation),
imālah (inclining), iz.hār (clear pronunciation), idghām (contraction) and
ishmām (giving "the flavour" of one sound to another). These types of
variant readings do not change the wording or the meaning, and therefore belong to one word.
46
Al-Qat.t.ān states further that the upholders of this fourth view believe
that the „Uthmānic codices include all these seven ah.ruf. Since the
60
„Uthmānic codices write without alif following letter mīm, it can be
read either in singular (li’amānatihim) or in plural (li’amānātihim). The
same with which is written without alif after letter bā’, so that it can also
be read bā‘id. However, this cannot be applied to variant readings based on
addition (ziyādah) and omission (naqs), such as wa a‘adda lahum jannātin
tajrī tah.tahā ’l-anhār (Q. 9:100) and min tah.tihā ’l-anhār with the
additional min. Another example is the reading wa mā khalaqa ’l-dhakara wa ’l-unthá (Q. 92:3) and wa ’l-dhakara wa ’l-unthá with the omission of
mā khalaqa. Similarly, the variant reading based on inversion and
substitution cannot be included in the „Uthmānic codices.47
Al-Qat.t.ān contends that should the seven ah.ruf be included in the
„Uthmānic codices, the „Uthmānic codex - the copy kept by „Uthmān himself which is also called al-Mus.h.af al-Imām, the Master Copy of the
Qur‟ān - would not have become conclusive in settling the conflict in difference of readings. This conflict was permanently settled only by uniting
people in one of the seven ah.ruf revealed in the Qur‟ān. Otherwise, the
conflict would have remained unsettled and there would not have been any
difference between „Uthmānic compilation and that of Abū Bakr. The permission to read in seven ah.ruf was only given in the beginning to obviate
inconvenience. This permission was no longer needed in the time of „Uthmān. The compilation of the Qur‟ān in one reading by „Uthmān was
agreed by the s.ah.ābah. It was such a great work, al-Qat.t.ān contends, that it
ended the conflict in variant readings and united the community.48
Another contemporary scholar, Shaykh Muh.ammad al-Zarqānī,
chooses the view of Abū al-Fad.l al-Rāzī regarding the seven ah.ruf which is
almost similar to that of Ibn Qutaybah. Al-Zarqānī quoted al-Rāzī's view as
follows:
1) The variation of number and gender of the noun: singular, dual or plural,
masculine or feminine, such as the reading (liamānātihim) in plural
and (liamānatihim) in singular.
2) The variation in tenses of the verb: mād.ī (past), mud.āri‘ (imperfect) and
amr (imperative), such as reading qālū rabbanā bā‘id bayna asfārinā
and ...rabbunā ba‘‘ada...
61
3) The variation in wujūh al-i‘rāb (aspects of grammatical inflection), such
as wa lā ["not" indicating negation] yud.ārru kātibun wa lā shahīd and
wa lā ["not" indicating prohibition] yud.ārra... (for being majzūm by lā)
4) Variation by means of omission and addition, such as wa mā khalaqa ’l-dhakara wa ’l-unthá and wa ’l-dhakari wa ’l-unthá with the omission
of mā khalaqa.
5) Variation by means of inversion, such as wa jā’at sakratu ’l-mawt bi ’l- h.aqq which is also read wa jā’at sakratu ’l- h.aqq bi ’l-mawt.
6) Variation by means of substitution, such as munshizuhā and nunshiruhā,
as well as wa tal h.in and wa tal‘in.
7) Variation of languages (dialects) in fath., imālah, tarqīq (softening the
pronunciation), tafkhīm, iz.hār and idghām, such as the opening and
shading in reading atá and mūsá in the verse (Q.
79:15) and Q. 20:9), so that it is read atá and até as
well as mūsá and mūsé. Similarly, the word balá is read balá as well as balé in balá qādirīn (Q. 75:4).
49
One of the main differences between al-Razi's view and that of Ibn
Qutaybah is that Ibn Qutaybah does not include the variation of dialects in
pronouncing words as one of the seven ah.ruf. The reason is that despite
these variations, such as the Hudhalīs in pronouncing letter h.ā’ of h.attá
sounding like the letter ‘ayn and read ‘attá h.īn for h.attá h.īn, they still
belong to the same word and meaning. On the contrary, al-Rāzī counts it as
one of the seven ah.ruf to which al-Zarqānī leans, since the difference among
the Arab tribes in the past was mainly in dialects.50
Al-Zarqānī quotes Ibn
H.ajar who stated that al-Rāzī adopted and edited Ibn Qutaybah's view on the
seven a h.ruf.51
According to al-Zarqānī the seven ah.ruf in al-Rāzī's view were
included in the „Uthmānic codices. Each of these codices contained the rasm which agrees with all or some of the seven ah.ruf, so that each codex
contained at least one h.arf. The word liamānatihim (Q. 70:32), for example,
both in singular or in plural are included in these codices, because it was written in the singular, but a small alif was added to it to indicate that it can
be read in plural.52
The word ya‘kifūna and ya‘kufūna, rabbanā bā‘id and
rabbunā bā‘ada, as well as wa lā yud.ārru and wa lā yud.ārra are all
included in these codices, since they contained no vowel signs.53
62
With regard to the fourth variant reading which is variation by means
of addition and omission al-Zarqānī gives an example other than that given
above. It is wa a‘adda lahum jannātin tajrī tah.ahā ’l-anhār and ...min
tah.tihā... with the addition of min, both readings are mutawātir, and both
agree with the rasm of the mus.h.af. The reading with the addition of min
agrees with that in the Meccan codex (the mus.h.af sent to Makkah), whereas
that with the omission of min agrees with that of other codices. Any reading
which does not agree with the rasm of any of the „Uthmānic codices are abrogated by the last reading read by Gabriel to the Prophet - then the
Prophet to Gabriel - at the year of his death. This includes Ibn „Abbās's
reading wa kāna warā’ahum malikun ya’khudhu kulla safīnatin s.ālih.atin
ghas.ban with the addition of s.ālih.atin. All of the s.ah.ābah agreed that this
reading had been abrogated.54
With regard to the fifth variant reading which is variation by means of
inversion, al-Zarqānī states that the example given above which is wa jā’at sakratu ’l- h.aqq bi ’l-mawt (the inversion of ...al-mawt bi ’l- h.aqq) is also
abrogated. A similar abrogated inverted reading is idhā jā’a fat h .u ’llāh wa
’l-nas.r (the inversion of ... nas.ru ’llāh wa ’l-fat h.). The valid example given
by al-Zarqānī for the inverted reading is fayaqtulūna wa yuqtalūna and
fayuqtalūna wa yaqtulūna. Both reading are mutawātir, and agree with the rasm of the „Uthmānic codices, since they contain no vowel signs.
55
With regard to the sixth variant reading which is variation by means of
substitution, al-Zarqāni states that some readings of this genre are acceptable
which agree to the rasm of the „Uthmānic codices, like fatabayyanū and fatathabbatū, for both are written with the same rasm, namely, .
Other readings such as ka ’l-s.ūfi ’l-manfūsh rather than ka ’l-‘ihni
’l-manfūsh and fa’md.ū ilá dhikri ’llāh rather than fa’s‘aw ilá dhikri ’llāh,
these readings are abrogated and do not agree with the „Uthmānic codices.56
With regard to the seventh variant reading which is the variation of
languages or dialects, these readings do not change the words and therefore
also agree with the rasm of the „Uthmānic codex. One example is the verse hal atāka h.adīth mūsá (Q. 20:9) in which the letter yā’ is written instead of
alif in atāka and mūsá, namely, and to indicate that both words
can be read with imālah, namely, atéka and musé.57
The letter yā’ in words such as mūsá „īsá and mus.t.afá is called alif maqs.ūrah (lit., "a shortened
alif") and phonetically written with letter a with an accent aigu on it (á)
63
according to McGill University transliteration system. (See the table of the
transliteration system on p. v above).
We have seen how al-Zarqānī explained and defended the view of al-
Rāzī concerning the seven ah.ruf and their inclusion in the „Uthmānic
codices. He has proved that variation of readings by means of inversion, substitution as well as addition and omission which could not take place in
the „Uthmānic codices according to al-Qa t.t.ān could and did occur. This
argument can also be used to justify Ibn Qutaybah's view which, as
mentioned earlier, is very similar to that of al-Rāzī.
Al-Zarqānī rejects the view of al-T.abarī and Sufyān ibn „Uyaynah that
the seven a h.ruf are the seven dialects of one word with the same meaning. It
is like the reading of halumma, aqbil, ta‘āl, ‘ajjil, asri‘, qas.dī and nah.wī
used when we call someone to come to us as mentioned before. All these, al-
Zarqānī contends, belong to one variant reading only, namely, the
substitution of the words in general which is broader than the substitution with exclusively synonymous words.
58
Al-Zarqānī also rejects the view that there was only one reading that
remained in the „Uthmānic codices and the rest were abrogated and excluded
from them with the approval of the s.ah.ābah. He states that these are false
arguments. Even in the time of the Prophet people disagreed on reading the Qur‟ān in variant readings. The Prophet confirmed to them the existence of
these variant readings which are a mercy for them and for the Muslim
community at large. When he was told to read the Qur‟ān to his people with one reading, he asked for more and said that his community could not bear
it. As his community will remain till the Resurrection Day, and so their
inability to bear only one reading will also remain. If Muslim nations have problems with the correct pronunciation of some letters of the Qur‟ān and
some dialects, how could it be possible that the s.ah.ābah who were living in
the best generation close this door of mercy and lenience that had been
opened by Allah to the Muslims? How could they disagree with the
Prophet's guidance in his asking lenience for his community with variant readings? How could they disagree with the Prophet in his confirming the
existence of these variant readings (rather than limiting them to one reading) in settling the disagreement among people in his community? How could
„Uthmān do such things without any action from the s.ah.ābah to prevent
him from doing these deeds? In addition, how could the ijmā‘ (agreement)
take place on keeping one h.arf and abandoning the other six a h.ruf when the
64
meaning of ah.ruf itself had not been agreed upon? Had this actually
happened, why did not „Uthmān allow these six ah.ruf to remain in history,
not to be totally forgotten, since they were not abrogated? Why did not history keep them, when the s.ah.ābah kept in history the abrogated and
isolated readings, even fabricated traditions that reach us today and will
reach people in the future?59
We have seen how al-Qat.t.ān and al-Zarqānī adopted different views
about the seven ah.ruf and how these two scholars defended their respective
views. Al-Qat.t.ān adopted the view of al-T.abarī and others that the seven
ah.ruf were seven synonyms of a word, and only one reading existed in the
„Uthmānic codices, as the other six were only optional. On the other hand al-Zarqānī adopted al-Rāzī's view which is similar to that of Ibn Qutaybah, and
contended that the seven ah.ruf which are seven aspects of readings existed
in the „Uthmānic codices.
B. Ungrammatical Usage in the Qur’ān
Ibn Qutaybah mentions five main grammatical errors (alh.ān, sing. la
h.n), in the Qur‟ān alleged by his opponents. They are as follows:
1. ) for (Q. 20:63)
2. (٦٩) for (Q. 5:69)
3. ... for (Q. 4:162)
4. () for (Q. 21:88)
5. ١٠) for (Q. 63:10)
He cites the statement of „Ā‟ishah on the authority of Abū Mu„āwiyah
Muh.ammad ibn H.āzim al-Tamīmī (d. 193/809), from Hishām ibn „Urwah
ibn al-Zubayr (d. 146/763-4) and from his father from „Ā‟ishah who said that there were three scribes' errors in the Qur‟ān, mentioning the first three
errors above.60
He also cites the statement of „Uthmān who said: "I see a
solecism in it, and the Arabs will correct it with their tongue (
); so, he did it, but kept the rasm as it was. Moreover, al-Hajjāj
was reported to have assigned „Ās.im, Nājiyah ibn Rumh., and „Alī ibn
As.ma„ to trace any Qur‟ānic book which did not agree with the „Uthmānic
65
recension, to destroy it and to give its owner sixty dirhams as
compensation.61
1.
Regarding the first alleged solecism, namely, inna hādhāni lasāh.irān,
Ibn Qutaybah mentions three views, as follows:
a. According to grammarians whom Ibn Qutaybah does not identify, among
whom was al-Kisā‟ī, it is the dialect of the Balh.arth (Banī ‟l-H.ārith) ibn
Ka„b tribe who express the dual with alif in all of the three cases. They
say, for example, marartu birajulān, qabid.tu dirhamān, and jalastu bayna
yadāh.62
The example in poetry is as follows: *
"He was hit with a blow that led him to a barren, dusty
place." Here bayna udhunāhu is used instead of bayna udhunayh.63
b. It is the error of the scribe and therefore should be read inna hādhayn
lasāh.irān. This is the view of Abū „Amr al-„Alā‟ and „Īsá ibn „Umar
among the qurrā’ who affirm „Ā‟ishah's statement, and „Ās.im ibn Abī al-
S.abāh al-Jah.darī who explicitly supports „Uthmān's statement mentioned
before. „Ās.im al-Jah.darī, the muqri’ and mufassir of Bas.rah, in his
mus.h.af (codex) followed the „Uthmānic recension, but read inna
hādhayn, wa ’l-s.ābi‘īn, wa ’l-muqīmūn, and wa ’l-s.ābirūn.64
c. Some unidentified qurrā’ read in hādhān sāh.irān based on Ubayy ibn
Ka„b's reading in his mus.h.af, in dhān illā sāh.irān, as well as that of „Abd
Allāh ibn Mas„ūd who read an hādhān sāh.irān.65
Commenting on this reading Ibn Khālawayh states that the qurrā’
unanimously agree in reading inna except Ibn Kathīr and H.afs. from „Ās.im,
both read in; they read hādhān (with alif) except Abū „Amr who read hādhayn (with yā’). They agree in reading with the light nūn in the dual
form hādhān, except Ibn Kathīr who read it with a stressed nūn, namely,
hādhānn.66
The argument of those who read inna hādhān is the report of al-D.ah.h.āk from Ibn „Abbās who said that Allah revealed the Qur‟ān in the
language of all the tribes of the Arabs, and in this case, in the language of the Balh.arth ibn Ka„b tribe that uses alif invariably in the dual form. The
argument of those who read in is that by reading inna with the light nūn, it
invalidates its grammatical function, so that hādhayn in the accusative case
66
returns to its original nominative case hadhān. Therefore, there is no
solecism in this case. Moreover, another argument is that the word in here
does not mean "verily", but rather mā (not), and the letter lām means illā
(except), so that the reading means ("These
two people are none but two magicians"). The example from the Qur‟ān is
the verse ( :٤) meaning ("No
human soul but has a guardian over it." Q. 86:4).67
Abū al-„Abbās al-Mubarrad interprets the meaning of inna in this
reading as na‘am (yes). He says that when a Bedouin came to Ibn al-Zubayr
saying: "May Allah curse the camel that carried me to you," he answered inna wa rākibuhā, meaning na‘am wa rākibuhā ("yes, and its rider"). As a
shāhid, he cites the poems of „Ubayd Allāh ibn Qays as follows:
("My reprovers came early in the morning abusing me and I blamed
them; they said, 'Hoariness has come upon you, and you have become
old,' and I said 'yes'").68
The argument of those who read hādhayn is the afore-mentioned
statement of „Uthmān who considered hādhān to be a solecism and stated that the Arabs would correct it with their tongues. If it were said that
„Uthmān was more entitled to correct the solecism, it would be said that the
solecism is not an error, but rather a deviation from using the Qurayshī dialect.
69 The argument of those who read hādhānn is that the stress on the
letter nūn serves as a substitute for the missing alif as an indication that a
letter is missing in that word. Therefore, this stress indicates that the word hādhān is made of incomplete letters and to distinguish it from words made
of complete letters. In other words, as the word is the combination of
and the dual , one of its two alifs is replaced with the stressed nūn.70
Ibn Qutaybah states that the word hādhān was written in the „Uthmānic codex (Mus.h.af al-Imān) without alif, and in fact, the dual is
always written in it without alif, such as qāla rajulāni ( Q. 5:23),
fa’ākharāni yaqūmāni ( Q. 5:107).71
Moreover, it is reported by
„Abd Allāh from „Amr ibn „Abd Allāh al-Awdī from Wakī„ from al-A„mash
from Ibrāhīm who said that people thought that in reading, the letter alif and
67
the letter yā’ were the same, and that inna hādhāni and inna hādhayni were
identical when reading.72
Al-Farrā‟ gives three reasons for reading inna hādhān in the above
verse: (a) It is the language of the Banī al-H.ārith as mentioned earlier; (b)
When the Arabs say muslimūn they added in the written word the letter waw after a d.ammah on the letter mīm that preceded it. When they say muslimīn,
they added the letter yā‘ after putting a kasrah on the letter mīm. However,
when they say ithnayn, if they put the letter yā‘, it would not be preceded by
a kasrah, but by a fath.ah. Therefore, they keep the letter alif as it is and
write ithnān; similar to the case of ithnān is hādhān (c) The letter alif is a
support for the word hādhā. In the dual number only one letter is added to it, namely, the letter nūn, so that it becomes hādhān in all cases. It is like al-
ladhī in which the letter yā’ remains after adding the letter nūn in the plural,
so that it becomes al-ladhīn, except for the Banī Kinānah who read it as al-ladhūn.
73
Al-Suyūt.ī mentions five views given by Arabic grammarians as well
as by himself in justifying the above reading as follows:
a. It is the language of the Kinānah and the Banī ‟l-H.ārith to always put
the letter alif in the dual form as mentioned earlier.
b. The word inna means "yes", which is the view of Abū ‟l-„Abbās and al-Mubarrad as mentioned earlier, so that it does not affect the inflection
of words which follow it, namely, hādhān remains as it is.
c. The whole expression hādhān las.āh.irān - which consists of mubtada’
(subject) and khabar (predicate) - is the khabar of the hidden mubtada’,
namely, the d.amīr al-sha’n (the pronoun indicating circumstances) which
serves as the ism of inna. Therefore, the full expression is .
d. The same as above, except that sāh.irān is the khabar of the hidden
mubtada’, so that the full expression is .
e. The letter hā’ in hādhān should be joined with inna instead of dhān, so
that it is read .
f. According to al-Suyūt.ī, the significance of the alif of the dual in hādhān
is that it rhymes together with the word that follows it, namely, sāh.irān
as well as yuridān, so that they all rhyme together. As evidence, he gives similar examples from the Qur‟ān. The use of tanwīn (nunation)
with the additional alif in the word salāsil - so that it becomes salasilan
68
- will make it rhyme with the word that follows it, namely, aghlālan
and sa‘īran (Q. 76:4). Similarly, the nunation of Saba’ changes it to
Saba’in to rhyme with binaba’in and yaqīnin. (Q. 27:22).74
Al-Zarqānī gives four variant readings of as follows: (a)
was the reading of Nāfi„ and others; (b) was the reading of Ibn
Kathīr; (c) was the reading of H.afs.; and (d) was the reading of
Abū „Amr. As the „Uthmānic codices contained the seven ah.ruf the word
hādhān was written without alif or yā’, so that it could be read with the
four variant readings mentioned above.75
2.
With regard to the verse ( ... :
٦٩) "Lo! those who believe, and those who are Jews, and Sabaeans, and Christians..." (Q. 5:69, Pickthall), Ibn Qutaybah gives us the reasons for
reading al-s.ābi’ūn without falling into a grammatical error, as follows: The
word al-s.ābi’ūn is marfū‘ (in the nominative case),76
because it is radd ‘alá
mawd.i‘ (a return to the position) of the whole expression inna ’l-ladhīna
āmanū, namely, in the nominative case. The assertive particle inna does not affect the meaning of the sentence. Therefore, it is possible to say, for
example, .This expression conveys the same meaning as
(except for emphasis which Ibn Qutaybah does not mention).
Other "sisters" of inna do affect the meaning of the sentence, so that the
word after the conjunction must also be affected; for example,
. Here the word zaydun has to be put in the accusative case, because
la‘alla affects the meaning of the sentence, namely, the existence of doubt in
it, whereas inna does not. Ibn Qutaybah contends further that according to
the grammarian al-Kisā‟ī of the Kūfan school, it is possible to say
or . This is also the view of the grammarians of the
Bas.ran school. They say it is possible to read inna ’llāha wa malā’ikatuhu
(instead of malā’ikatahu) yus.allūna ‘alá ’l-nabiyyi (Q. 33:56), and cite the
following poem of D.ābi‟ al-Burjumī as a shāhid: "Faman yaku amsá bi ’l-
madīnati rah.luhu, fa’innī wa qayyārun [instead of qayyāran] bihā
lagharību.77
69
According to al-Farrā‟, since the subject al-ladhīna is indeclinable, the
effect of inna on it is weak, therefore the word al-s.ābi’īn which is connected
to it is also weak and can be ignored; consequently, it is possible to read al-
s.ābi’īn in the nominative case, namely, al-s.ābi’ūn. However, he disagrees
with al-Kisā‟ī in the possibility of using the expression .
Because the word ‘abd is declinable, the effect of inna cannot be weak on it
as well as on the word connected to it, namely, zayd; therefore, zaydan should be used here. He contends further that the afore-mentioned poem of
al-Burjumī does not support al-Kisā‟ī's view in accepting zaydun in the
above example. The reason is that qayyār is connected to the pronoun ī in innī, an indeclinable, and metonymically expressed word, whereas zayd is
connected to a declinable word ‘abd. Similarly, it is not possible to read inna
’llāha wa malā’ikatuhu (Q. 33:56) for the same reason. In addition, it is more likely and permissible to say qayyārun (besides the usual reading
qayyāran) than al-s.ābi’ūn. The reason is that the word al-ladhīna with
which it is connected can be read as al-ladhūna in the nominative case.78
Another reason for justifying the reading al-s.ābi’ūn is that, according
to al-Kisā‟ī, the word is following the noun in the term hādū, which does not
mean "the Jews" as usually interpreted, but "the people who repented and
returned to the right way", an interpretation similarly given to the verse innā hudnā ilayka ("behold, unto Thee have we turned in repentance!" Q. 7:156,
Asad). Since some of the Sabaeans were included among "the people who
repented and returned to the right way", the word al-s.ābi’ūn is placed in the
nominative case. Al-Kisā„ī probably means that al-s.ābi’ūn is in the
nominative case because this term is connected to people who are following
the right path, namely those who are hādū as well as āmanū. Again, al-Farrā‟ rejects this view stating another interpretation that the believers in the
beginning of the verse refer to the pretending believers only and not the
sincere ones, then the Jews and Christians are mentioned. The verse
continues with "...
whosoever [among them, i.e., the pretending believers,79
the Jews, the
Sabaeans and the Christians] believeth in Allah and the Last Day and doth
right - there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve." (Q. 5:69, Pickthall).
80 It means that whoever among those people, whether they
disbelieve or pretend to believe, will be safe if they become believers.
70
Al-Zamakhsharī gives us the reason for reading al-s.ābi’ūn instead of
al-s.ābi’īn in the above verse: it is the mubtada’ (subject) of a hidden khabar
(predicate) kadhālik ("like that"). It is like saying
("Lo! those who believe, and those who are Jews, and
Christians, all of them will be so-and-so, and the Sabaeans will also be like
that"). Al-Zamakhsharī rejects the view that al-s.ābi’ūn should be ma‘t.ūf to
the phrase , because this could occur only after the completion of the
sentence, namely, after mentioning the predicate. Therefore, according to
him, it is wrong to say, for example, , (but rather,
).81
Al-Suyūt.ī mentions five views reported from Abū al-Baqā‟, including
the three views mentioned above. The two remaining views are as follows:
a. Inna in the verse in question means "yes", and the words that follow,
including al-s.ābi’ūn, are in the nominative case. As a shāhid, the poem of
„Ubayd Allāh ibn Qays mentioned before was cited.82
b. Al-s.ābi’ūn is a plural treated as a singular number, and its letter nūn is the
letter of the inflection ( ). There
is no further comment from al-Suyūt.ī.83
This means that al-s.ābi’ūna, being
treated as a singular noun, its letter wāw remains, although the word is in the accusative case; instead, its letter nūn is inflected with fath.ah, so that it
becomes al-s.ābi’ūna. It is like the term Fir‘awnu (in the nominative case)
and Fir‘awna (in the accusative case).84
3.
The verse in question runs as follows:
( :١٦٢).
"But as for those from among them who are deeply rooted in
knowledge, and the believers who believe in that which is revealed
unto thee, and that which was revealed before thee and those who are
[especially] constant in prayer, and those who pay the poor-due, and
the believers in Allah and the Last Day - these it is unto whom We
shall grant a mighty reward." (Q. 4:162)
71
Following the „Uthmānic recension it is written wa ’l-muqīmīn al-
s.alāh (in the accusative case) in the above verse rather than wa ’l-muqīmūn
al-s.alāh (in the nominative case). The latter is grammatically considered the
correct one, as it is connected to al-mu‘minūn which is also in the
nominative case. Ibn Qutaybah mentions five different views among the grammarians concerning wa ’l-muqīmīn al-s.alāh in the above verse, as
follows:
a. The expression is ma‘t.ūf (conjoined) with the pronoun ka in ilayka, so
that the verse means ("...,they believe in
that which has been revealed unto thee, ... and unto those who were
constant in prayer"). This view, however, is rejected by the grammarians of the Bas.ran school. They contend that a noun cannot be connected with
a pronoun in the genitive case, unless it is accompanied by the preposition
of that pronoun. In this case, the verse should be read wa ilá ’l-muqīmīn
al-s.alāh. The absence of the preposition ilá in the Qur‟ānic text wa ’l-
muqīmīn al-s.alāh indicates that there is no such connection as mentioned
above.85
b. The expression is ma‘t.ūf with the pronoun ka in qablika, so that the verse
means ("... and in that which was revealed
before thee and before those who were constant in prayer"). This view is
also rejected by the grammarians of the Bas.ran school on the same
argument mentioned above. In this case, the term qabl is not mentioned in
al-muqīmīn al-s.alāh.86
c. The expression is ma‘t.ūf with mā unzila ilayka, so that the verse means
("... believe in that which is revealed
unto thee ... and believe in those who are constant in prayer"). This is the
view of al-Kisā‟ī. As a shāhid it is mentioned in the Qur‟ān
("and trusts the believers", Q. 9:61, Asad) which means .
d. The expression is in the accusative case because it is a praise (
), as if it is said ("I praise those who are constant in
prayer"), or ("I mean those who are constant in prayer").
According to Sībawayh and others among the grammarians of the Bas.ran
school the transition of a noun into the accusative case is a legitimate grammatical device to emphasise its significance, in this case, those who
72
are constant in prayer.87
Asad, Pickthall and Ali follow this view by
adding the term "especially" - between parenthesis by Asad and Ali - in
translating this expression (al-muqīmīn al-s.alāh).
e. The expression is in the accusative case as a break required after using
long successive words in the nominative case. Then the expression goes on and returns to the nominative case. This is the view of Abū
„Ubaydah.88
Al-Suyūt.ī mentions six views, including those mentioned above
except the view of Abū „Ubaydah. The remaining two views are as follows:
a. The expression is ma‘t.ūf with the word qabl in qablika, so that the verse
means ("... and that which was
revealed before thee and that which was revealed to those who were
constant in prayer").
b. The expression is ma‘t.ūf with the pronoun hum in minhum, so that the
verse means "But as for those
from among them who are deeply rooted in knowledge ... and from
among those who are constant in prayer").89
This view, as mentioned
earlier, is rejected by the grammarians of the Bas.ran school, since the
Qur‟ānic text does not say wa min al-muqīmīn al-s.alāh.
Al-T.abarī gives us some views on the verse in question. He says that
Qur‟ānic commentators do not agree that al-rāsikhūn fi ’l-‘ilm and al-muqīmīn al-s.alāh mentioned in the above verse relate to the same category
of people. Those who say so maintain that al-muqīmīn al-s.alāh is in the
accusative case for the following reasons:
a. It was the scribe's error and should be al-muqīmūn al-s.alāh. This is the
view of Abān ibn „Uthmān ibn „Affān and „Ā‟ishah; it is also the reading of Ibn Mas„ūd in his codex.
90
b. The expression is s.ifah (the characteristic) of al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm. It is
because of the length of the verse that al-muqīmūn al-s.alāh is changed
into the accusative case (i.e., al-muqīmīn al-s.alāh) as a praise. This is the
view of some grammarians of the Bas.ran and the Kūfan schools. They
say that the Arabs occasionally change the i‘rāb of the middle s.ifah of
something they are praising or blaming, and finally return to the i‘rāb of
the first s.ifah.91
73
Other grammarians say that al-muqīmīn al-s.alāh is not the s.ifah of al-
rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm, although the latter are also found among the former. In
this case, al-muqīmīn al-s.alāh is in the genitive case (khifd.). Al-T.abarī
gives us some views in understanding the verse, some of which have already
been mentioned by Ibn Qutaybah and al-Suyūt.ī above. Their different
understandings of the verse are as follows:
a. ("... and the believers
believe in that which is revealed unto thee, and that which was revealed
before thee and [believe] in [the injunction of] performing prayer..."). Al-mu’tūn al-zakāh is in the nominative case because it is ma‘t.ūf with al-
mu’minūn, so that the verse means
("and the believers believe in that which is revealed unto thee ... they are
those who pay the poor-due").
b. ("...and the believers believe
in that which is revealed unto thee ... and in angels"), so that the al-muqīmūn al-s.alāh are the angels who pray to Allah by glorifying Him and
asking forgiveness for people on the earth.
c. ( "... and believe
in those who are constant in prayer, they and those who pay the poor-due..."). Those who are constant in prayer in the above view are the angels
or the prophets - or the infallible imāms according to the Shī'īs as
mentioned by al-T.abarsī.92
d. "But as for those from among
them who are deeply rooted in knowledge ... and from among those who
are constant in prayer" as mentioned by al-Suyūt.ī (b) above.
e. ("..., and the believers believe in
that which has been revealed unto thee, ... and unto those who were constant in prayer"), as mentioned by Ibn Qutaybah (a) above.
The best view according to al-T.abarī is the second view (b) above
which is that of al-Kisā‟ī. Therefore, the verse means
("... and the
believers of them believe in that which is revealed unto thee O Muhammad from the Book, and that which was revealed among My Books before thee,
and in the angels who are constant in prayer."). If we go back to the s.ifah of
74
al-rāsikhūna fi ’l-‘ilm, the verse means
("But as for those from among
them who are deeply rooted in knowledge, and the believers in the Books, and the angels, and those who pay the poor-due, and the believers in Allah
and the Last Day...").93
If we examine the view chosen by al-T.abarsī for the interpretation of
the verse in question, it contains the pillars of faith and of Islam. The belief
in Allah, His angels, His messengers - as angels and messengers are those who are constant in prayer
94 - His revealed Books, and the Last Day
mentioned in the verse, are among the pillars of faith. The five pillars of
Islam are represented by establishing the obligatory prayers and paying the zakāt mentioned in this verse as well as other verses scattered throughout the
Qur‟ān.
If we look into the meaning of the verse in question, we find that they
are almost identical to those of verses 2-5 of sūrat al-Baqarah. These verses run as follows:
.
"This is the Book wherein there is no doubt, a guidance for those who
fear Allah (al-muttaqīn), who believe in [the existence] of that which is
beyond the reach of human perception (al-ghayb), and are constant in
prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them, and who
believe in that which is revealed unto thee, and that which was revealed
before thee, and are certain of the Hereafter. These are rightly guided by
their Lord, and these shall surely prosper (al-muflih.ūn)." (Q. 2:2-5).
The similarity between the two groups of verses is as follows:
Q. 2:2-5 Q. 4:162
a. a.
b. b.
c. c.
d. d.
e. e.
f. f.
75
g. g.
h. h.
We have noticed that the meaning of the two groups are almost
identical. The expression yu’minūna bimā unzila ilayka wa mā unzila min
qablika is found in both groups. The term al-ākhirah (the Hereafter) in Q. 2:4 is itself al-yawm al-ākhir (the Last Day) in Q. 4:162. As those who are
constant in prayer in Q. 2:2-5 are the muttaqīn it is highly probable that
those who are constant in prayer in Q. 4:162 are the al-rāsikhūn fi ’l-‘ilm and al-mu’minūn. For this reason, I lean to the view of Sībawayh, al-Farrā‟,
Khalīl and the grammarians of the Bas.ran school in general, that al-muqīmīn
al-s.alāh is in the accusative case because it indicates praise as mentioned
above. There are many ways to emphasise a statement: we highlight it,
underline it, or write it in italics. One of many ways to emphasise a
statement in the classical Arabic literature as well as in the Qur‟ān is by changing its case, as we have noticed above.
4.
With regard to the verse kadhālika nunjjī ’l-mu’minīn ("thus We save
believers" Q. 21:88), Ibn Qutaybah says that although it is written in the
mus.h.af with one letter nūn, all the qurrā’ read it with two nūns, namely,
nunjī, except „Ās.im who read it nujjī with one nūn.95
The reason for
dropping the second nūn, in their view, is that this letter nūn is hidden in the
letter jīm, or, as al-T.abarī put it, is not clearly pronounced, as is in allā
(originally an lā), so that this letter nūn is dropped. The subject is then Allāh,
and the object is al-mu’minīn which is in the accusative case.96
On the other hand, „Ās.im‟s reading is acceptable among some
grammarians, such as al-Farrā‟, Abū „Ubayd, and Tha„lab. They base their view on the assumption that there is a hidden mas.dar (verbal noun) after the
verb which serves as the subject in the verse, namely, al-najā’, so that the
verse reads nujjī ’l-najā’u ’l-mu’minīn which later becomes nujjī ’l-
mu’minīn. It is like the expression d.uriba al-d.arbu zaydan which later
becomes d.uriba zaydan; the more acceptable expression is man kadhaba
kāna sharran lahu ("whoever lies it is bad for him") in which the subject al-
kadhib (lying) is not expressed but understood. As a shāhid in poetry they
76
cite the satiric poem of Jarīr ridiculing Farazdaq, as follows:
("Even if Qufayrah [Farazdaq's mother] bore a
dog's cub, dogs would be cursed of that cub"). La subba ... al-kilābā here means la subba al-sabbu ... al-kilābā, so that al-kilābā remains in the
accusative case.97
Abū „Ubayd who chooses „Ās.im's reading says that he
(Abū „Ubayd) does so, because he does not like to disagree with the text of
the mus.h.af; moreover, there is also a variant reading similar to this verse,
namely, li-yajziya qawman bimā kānu yaksibūn ("so that He may requite
people according to what they have earned." Q. 45:14). This verse is read by Abū Ja„far al-Madanī li-yujzā qawman, meaning li-yujzā ’l-jazā’u
qawman.98
The use of the mas.dar of a verb as a subject in the above examples is
unacceptable according to al-Zajjāj and Abū H.ātim, because it only repeats
the meaning of the verb. They say that it is not possible to say d.uriba zaydan
meaning d.uriba ’l-d.arbu zaydan, because the verb d.uriba has already
indicated the action of beating (al- d.arb), and therefore, the use of al- d.arb is
redundant. They reject „Ās.im‟s reading nujjī ’l-mu’minīn as a solecism,
because the noun al-mu’minīn is in the accusative case where no subject is mentioned. Therefore, the proper expression with nujjī is al-mu’minūn, like
the expression kurrima ’l-s.ālih.ūn.99
Another view of Abū „Ubayd is that the reading nujjī is originally nunjī, and the second nūn is contracted with the letter jīm. However, the idea
of contraction (idghām) is rejected by al-Nah.h.ās who says that because the
articulation of the two letters is very different no grammarian allows the
contraction of nūn with jīm. For example, the verse man jā’a bi’l-h.asanah
(Q. 6:160, 27:89, and 28:84) is never read maj jā’a bi ’l-h.asanah. The best
explanation for this, according to al-Qurt.ubī, is that of „Alī ibn Sulaymān al-
Akhfash. He says that due to the combination of two letter nūns in nunjī the
second nūn is dropped. It is like wa lā tafarraqū (Q. 3:103) which is
originally wa lā tatafarraqū.100
Another view worth mentioning is that of Abū „Alī who says that „Ās.im should have read nunjī with two letter nūns, but only one nūn was
clear. People who heard his reading thought that there was a contraction
between the letter nūn and the letter jīm. Therefore, they changed it with one
letter nūn.101
77
If we look into the present Qur‟ānic text based on the variant reading
of „Ās.im we find that a small lone letter nūn is put after the letter nūn in n-j-
y. Its purpose is to help the reader in reading the word, so that he will read it
rather than . However, since this lone nūn is not joined with the rasm
of the word, the rasm is not affected or changed. It is written like this:
. Therefore, I lean to the view of Abū „Alī above. It means that „Ās.im did really read nunjī like the other qurrā‟. The only difference is that
he did not pronounce the second nūn clearly, since it was not written in the
„Uthmānic recension.
5.
According to Ibn Qutaybah most of the qurrā’ read fa’as.s.addaqa wa
akun (without waw) rather than wa akūna.102
He states that the reason for
reading akun is that according to some grammarians the word akun takes the
position of fa’as.s.addaqa, namely, in the apocopate form (jazm). Without
(fā‟) the word has to be in the apocopate form, namely, as.s.addaq.
Originally, the expression is law lā akhkhartanī ... atas.addaq wa akun min
al-s.ālih.īn. As a shāhid they give the following example in poetry:
("Give me your camel so that I may leave you
and go back to my way," namely, "treat me well and bring back your kindness to me, for this may induce me to make peace with you and bring
me back to what I used to be"). Without la‘allī it is read us.ālih.kum in the
apocopate form, and that is the reason astadrij is also in the apocopate form.
However, it is also possible to read wa akūna which is the reading of Abū „Amr ibn al-„Alā‟ according to Ibn Qutaybah, and of Ibn Mas„ūd and other
qurrā’ according to al-Farrā‟.103
Ibn Mas„ūd maintains that this reading is
correct and not disagreeing with the rasm of the mus.h.af, since the letter
waw may be dropped in the text while it remains there in the reading. It is
like the letter alif which is dropped in al-Rah.mān ( ) and Sulaymān
( ).104
78
C. Contradiction and Disagreement
in the Verses of the Qur’ān
There are some Qur‟ānic verses in which, to some people,
contradiction ( ) seems to occur. In other verses disagreement ( )
seems to occur because of (a) not noticing the existence of relevance, (b) misunderstanding the words, or (c) misunderstanding the expression used in
these verses. To prove the absence of such contradiction and disagreement in
these verses Ibn Qutaybah explains them one by one, among which are as follows:
1. Contradiction
a. (: ٣٩) ("For on that Day neither man nor
invisible being will be asked about his sin." Q. 55:39, Asad) seems to be
contradictory with (: ٩٣-٩٢) "But by
thy Sustainer! [On the Day of Judgment] We shall indeed call them to account, one and all, for whatever they have done!" )Q. 15:92-93, Asad).
Ibn Qutaybah's commentary is that the Resurrection Day ( ) will last
fifty thousand years.105
On that day people will be and then will not be
questioned. They will be questioned and put on trial in Allah's court. After the completion of reckoning good and bad deeds they have done on
the earth, then what Allah described when He said
(: ٣٣ ) "When the sky is rent asunder and becomes red like
[burning] oil" (Q. 55:37, Asad) will take place. The talking and arguing
will cease, the faces of the blessed will turn white and of the damned will
turn black (Q. 3:106-7 and 39:6). The two parties will be identified with marks; the leaves containing the record of their deeds will fly from their
hands; the blessed will be sent to Heaven and the damned will be sent to
Hell (Q. 56:8-9 and 41). This is the moment where neither man nor invisible being (jinni) will be questioned about his sin as mentioned in the
above verse.106
b. It is stated in one verse (: ٢٨) "[And]
He will say: 'Contend not before Me, [O you sinners,] for I gave you a
forewarning [of this Day of Reckoning].'" (Q. 50:28, Asad), whereas in
the other it is stated: (: ٣١ ) "And then,
behold, on the Day of Resurrection you all shall place your dispute before your Sustainer." (Q. 39:31, Asad). Ibn Qutaybah's commentary is that
79
people will argue against each other where the wronged will complain
against the wrong-doers, and when the disputes are settled Allah will tell
them not to speak, argue or make any excuse any longer, for their arguments and excuses will be of no avail. Ibn Qutaybah presents one
interpretation given by „Ikrimah on the verse
( :٣٦-٣٥) "That Day on which they will not [be able to] utter
a word, nor be allowed to proffer excuses!" (Q. 77:35-36, Asad) and the
verse Q. 39:31 above. „Ikrimah said that on that Day they will argue with
each other, then Allah will seal their mouths, and their hands and legs will talk.
107
2. Disagreement
a. Not noticing the existence of relevance, as follows:
(1) The verse “And if you have reason to fear that
you might not act equitably towards orphans,” continues with
(: ٣) “then marry from among [other]
women such as are lawful to you - [even] two, three, or four" (Q. 4:3,
Asad) which seems irrelevant. Ibn Qutaybah's explanation is that if you
fear that you might not deal fairly with the orphans that are assigned to you, then fear also that you might not do justice among women if you
marry them. Therefore, marry two, three or four wives and not more. Otherwise, you will not be able to do justice among them. The verse
continues with: "But if you have reason to fear that you might not be
able to treat them with equal fairness, then [only] one - or [from among] those whom you rightfully possess." It means that if you still
fear that you would not be able to do justice with two, three or four
wives, then marry one wife only, or confine yourself to your imā’ (slave girls) whom your right hand possesses. This is more appropriate,
so that you would not become unfair with them. Quoting Ibn „Abbās
Ibn Qutaybah said that like the orphans, women are also under the protection of men. Since justice is highly required from the guardians
of orphans towards these orphans, so it is with the husbands towards
their wives. Therefore, the number of wives is limited to four and not more to avoid injustice.
108
(2) One verse reads:
"God has laid down that the Ka„bah, the Inviolable Temple, shall be a symbol for all mankind; and [so, too] the sacred month [of pilgrimage]
80
and the garlanded offerings," then the verse continues with
( :٩٣ ) "that these
[are symbols] meant to make you aware that God is aware of all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth, and that God has full knowledge
of everything." (Q. 5:97, Asad). The second part of the verse seems to
be irrelevant to the first part.
In order to show the existence of relevance between the two parts of the above verse, Ibn Qutaybah described at first the condition of the Arabs
before the advent of Islam. He said that the Arabs in the pre-Islamic era were
accustomed to waging war among themselves, shedding blood and taking others' property unjustly, frightening travellers, seeking vengeance and
killing an innocent person rather than the killer in revenge. They even killed a close friend or a relative in retaliation for another close friend or relative.
An example can be seen with Tawbah ibn al-Mud.arris al-„Abasī who wrote
a poem consoling his mother after killing his own maternal uncle in revenge
for his brother's assassination. They might kill three, four or more persons in
revenge for one person. An unidentified poet wrote a poem regarding such
an event when he said "They accused
)you( of killing one of their men; in revenge, they killed eight men )of
yours(; then they continued tending (their camels) fearlessly (of any
retaliation from you)." For this reason Allah made the Ka„bah, the Inviolable Temple and the sacred territory (al-h.arām) around it, so that people who
were afraid for themselves could take refuge within this sacred territory. Allah made the sacred month so that when it arrived people and their
property became safe again. After they had sacrificed or put the garland
around the neck of the animals to be sacrificed they would be free to go and travel in search of their subsistence which would make them prosper and
safe from poverty. If Allah had left these Arabs in their state of ignorance
and continuous state of hostility, travelling and trade would have stopped and they would have become extinct. Allah did not want this to happen. He
did what He did because He knew what was good for them and wanted us to
know that Allah is aware of all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth and has full knowledge of everything.
b. Misunderstanding the words, as follows:
(1) The word kuffār in the following verse is misunderstood by some
people as "infidels" rather than "tillers". The verse runs as follows:
( :٢٠ ) "Its parable is that of [life-giving]
81
rain: the herbage which it causes to grow delights the tillers of the
soil..." (Q. 57:20, Asad). They wondered why the verse specified the
infidels alone in rejoicing on seeing the growth of the plants when the believers would not have their faith decrease if they shared the infidels'
joy. Ibn Qutaybah states that the word kuffār in the above verse means "the farmers", as the root-meaning of the word kafara from which
kuffār is derived means "to cover". The farmer who sows the seeds is
called kāfir, because he covers them with soil when he plants them. The night is called kāfir because it covers everything with its darkness. It is
in this sense that the pre-Islamic poet Labīd said
“...in a night where the clouds covered its stars". In addition, another
Qur‟ānic verse mentions the word zurrā„ (farmers) instead of kuffār, as
follows: ( :٢٩)
"... [they are] like a seed that brings forth its shoot, and then He strengthens it, so that it grows stout, and [in the end] stands firm upon
its stem, delighting the sowers..." (Q. 48:29, Asad).109
(2) The word subātan in the following verse is misunderstood by some
people and translated as "sleep" rather than "rest". The verse reads as
follows: : ٩) “And [We] made your sleep for rest."
(Q. 78:9, „Ali). Therefore they wonder how sleep is made for sleep. Ibn Qutaybah explains that subātan in the above verse means "rest", so
that the verse means "and We made sleep for rest for your body".
Saturday is called meaning "the day of rest" on which the
children of Israel have rest. The word sabt originally means "stretching"
from which it becomes "rest". The expression means "the
woman undid the plait of her hair". However, sleep is sometimes called subāt because sleep occurs with stretching.
110 Another meaning of
subāt is given by al-Qurt.ubī which is "cutting" ( ). The expression
means “he cut his hair,” and if someone sleeps he cuts his
relation with people and his work.111
c. Misunderstanding the expression in the verses, as follows:
(1) The verse “... and goblets that will [seem to] be crystal"
(lit., "and goblets which were crystal"), then the verse continues with
(: ١٦-١٥) “Crystal-like, [but] of silver" (Q. 76:15-6,
Asad) (lit., "crystal [made] of silver"). To some people the two verses
82
seem to disagree. The first verse mentions goblets made of crystal, then
in the second, the crystal is made of silver. Ibn Qutaybah's explanation
is that everything in Paradise such as beds and cups are different from what we have in this world. Allah mentions what we know in this world
to indicate what we do not know in the next world. Referring to Ibn „Abbās's statement, Ibn Qutaybah says that there is nothing in this
world similar to that in Paradise except in names. The goblets in this
world are made of crystal or of silver. In Paradise these goblets are white as silver and pure as crystal. The verse, then, means according to
Ibn Qutaybah "crystal as if it were silver" rather than "crystal-like, [but]
of silver" as viewed by Ibn Kathīr and translated by Asad above.112
(2) The verse (: ٣٣) “That We may send upon
them stones of clay" (Q. 51:33, Pickthall). This verse seems to indicate
that the stones were made of clay. Referring to Ibn „Abbās's interpretation, Ibn Qutaybah says that these stones are ājurr (baked
bricks), for it is as hard as stone.113
D. The Ambiguity of the Verses of the Qur’ān
1. The meaning of ambiguity
The word tashābuh (similarity, resemblance, likeness), which is the
mas.dar of the word mutashābih (ambiguous, obscure) as explained by Ibn
Qutaybah, is the resemblance of a word with another in its appearance (
) when they differ in meaning. For example, the fruit of Paradise
resembles that of the earth, but the taste is different, as mentioned in the
following verse: (: ٢٥) ("It is given to them [namely, the
people of Paradise] something resembling it." Q. 2:25). The verb tashābaha
("to resemble one another") in the verse (: ١١٨) "their hearts
are all alike" (Q. 2:118) means "their hearts resemble each other in infidelity
and in harshness". The verb ishtabaha ("to resemble one another") in the
expression ("the matter is obscure to me") means "it resembles
another matter, so that I can hardly make any distinction between the two". The verb shabbaha ("to liken, to make equal or similar") in the expression
("you made me uncertain") if you covered the truth with falsehood
( ). Magicians ( ) are called ("dubious
persons"), because they make falsehood seem reality.114
83
The word mutashābih may also be applied to something ambiguous
(mysterious) and subtle, even if it does not make us confused with its
resemblance to something else. The letters of the alphabet at the openings of many chapters of the Qur‟ān, known as al-h.urūf al-muqat.t.a‘ah (lit.,
"disjoined letters"), are sometimes called mutashābih since they resemble other letters. These ambiguous letters will be dealt with in chapter four of
this study.
2. Muh.kamāt and Mutashābihāt
There has never been any dispute among Muslim scholars regarding the existence of muh.kamāt (clear verses) as well as mutashābihāt
(ambiguous verses) in the Qur‟ān. The Qur‟ān itself affirms their existence
as follows: (
: ٣) “He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Book,
containing verses that are clear in and by themselves [namely, precise in
meaning] - they are the essence of the Book - and others allegorical..." (Q.
3:7). But they disagree in regard to the verses which are considered to belong to the mutashābihāt and in the possibility of knowing their ta’wīl.
The Ash„arīs and the Mu„tazilīs believe that the mutashābihāt are explained
by the muh.kamāt, but what is ambiguous (mutashābih) according to the
Ash„aris is clear (muh.kam) according to the Mu„tazilīs and vice versa. For
example, the Qur‟ānic verse ( : ٢٩) “Then
whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve;" (Q.
18:29, Pickthall), and (: ٣٠) “Yet, you cannot
will, except by the will of Allah." (Q. 76:30, Dawood). According to the
Ash„arīs, the first verse is mutashābih because they do not believe in the infinite free-will, while the second one is muh.kam. The Mu„tazilīs hold the
opposite view, because they do not believe in finite free-will.
Generally speaking, the muh.kamāt are verses which decide clearly and
elaborately with clear evidence the ruling of something whether it is h.alāl
(lawful, permissible), h.arām (unlawful, prohibited), wa‘d (promise), wa‘īd
(threat), thawāb (reward), ‘iqāb (punishment), amr (command), zajr
(reproof), khabar (news of the past), mathal (parable), ‘iz.ah (sermon,
advice), ‘ibar (deterrent examples), etc. These muh.kamāt verses are the
mother of the Book, namely, the foundation (origin, source) of the Book,
wherein the religion of Islam, the religious obligations (al-farā’id.), penal
84
laws (al-h.udūd), and matters concerning Muslims' religious affairs are
found. However, there are different opinions among the ‘ulamā’ on what is
precisely meant by muh.kamāt and its relation to mutashābihāt, among
which are as follows:
a. The muh.kamāt are verses which are to be acted upon (al-ma‘mūl bihā)
and abrogate others, while the mutashābihāt are verses which are
abrogated and which are not to be followed. Among the followers of this
view are Ibn „Abbās, Qatādah, al-Rabī„, and al-D.ah.h.āk ibn Muzāh.im.115
b. The muh.kamāt are verses in which h.alāl and h.arām are explained; the
rest are mutashābihāt. This is the view of Mujāhid.116
c. The muh.kamāt are verses which have no more than one ta’wīl, while the
mutashābihāt are those which are subject to many interpretations. This is
the view of Muh.ammad ibn Ja„far ibn al-Zubayr.117
Al-Sayyid al-
Murtad.á who supports this view states that the majority of the
mutashābihāt have many meanings. It is difficult to know which of these
interpretations is meant by Allah.118
d. The muh.kamāt are verses which deal with stories of nations and
messengers sent to them which were elaborately told to the Prophet and
then to his followers. The mutashābihāt are those which are ambiguous
due to the repetition of the stories in different chapters of the Qur‟ān; some stories are related in the same wording with different meanings, but
others in different wording but with the same meanings. This is the view
of Ibn Zayd who cites the verse:
( :١) "A-L-R. (This is) a Book, with verses that have been made clear
in and by themselves, and then have been distinctly spelled out from One
Who is wise and all aware." (Q. 11:1). One example of the mutashābihāt given by Ibn Zayd is the story of Prophet Moses mentioned in many
chapters in the Qur‟ān with different wording but with the same meanings
(ideas). Another example is the use of ( :٢٣) ("introduce
therein" Q. 23:27) which has the same meaning with ( :٤٠)
("load therein" Q. 11:40), ( :٣٢) ("thrust thy hand" Q.
28:32) which has the same meaning with ( :١٢) ("put thy
hand into" Q. 27:12), and ( :٢٠) ("a snake, moving rapidly", Q.
85
20:20, Asad) has the same idea with ( :١٠٣) ("a serpent,
plainly visible", Q. 7:107, Asad).119
e. The muh.kamāt are verses whose meanings and interpretations are known
by the ‘ulamā’, while the mutashābihāt are those whose interpretations are known to Allah alone, such as the time of the coming of the
Doomsday, and al-h.urūf al-muqat.t.a‘ah. This is the view of Jābir ibn
„Abd Allāh ibn Rubāb to which al-T.abarī leans.120
3. The ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt
One of the big issues in the course of the history of the Qur‟ānic exegesis is whether the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm (those who are deeply rooted in
knowledge) know the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt or not. One group, such as
Ibn H.azm, says that the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm do not know the ta’wīl of the
mutashābihāt. The other group, such as Ibn Qutaybah, believes that they
know them. The discrepancy lies in their way of reading and understanding
the following verse:
" But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that which is allegorical seeking (to create) dissension and seeking its interpretation.
None knoweth its interpretation save Allah. And those who are deeply
rooted in knowledge say: „We believe in it; it is all from our Lord‟; but only the wise take heed." (Q. 3:7)
The core issue in the above verse is lā ya‘lamu ta’wīlahu illā ’llāh wa
al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm yaqūlūn āmannā bihi. Those who assert that the al-
rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm do not know the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt, in reading the above verse, make a pause in illā ’llāh, and then start a new sentence with
wa al-rāsikhūn fī al-‘ilm, as translated above. Asad, Ali, Pickthall and
Dawood all make a full stop after translating illa ’llah. Among those who hold this view are: Ā„ishah, „Urwah ibn al-Zubayr, al-H.asan al-Bas.rī,
Mālik, al-Kisā‟ī and al-Farrā‟. But those who assert that the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-
‘ilm know the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt, instead of making that pause, they
continue the reading with wa ’l-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm, which, in so doing, becomes connected with Allāh by means of the conjunction wa ("and").
Consequently, the meaning of the verse becomes that beside Allah, the al-
rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm also know the ta‘wīl of the mutashābihāt. Among those who hold this view are Ibn „Abbās, al-Rabī„ and Muh.ammad ibn Ja„far ibn
al-Zayd.121
Ibn al-Anbārī accepts both interpretations and includes this verse
86
among the al-ad.dād in his work al-Ad.dād. However, he states that the
majority of scholars hold the first view.122
Ibn Qutaybah maintains that the significance of the mutashābihāt in
the Qur‟ān is that as the Qur‟ān was revealed in the language of the Arabs
with its own way of expression and style, such as the use of brevity, elaborateness, emphasis, symbolic expression, the concealment of meanings
at one time and then revealing it at another, it can be understood by quick-
understanding people only. Otherwise, every verse would be clear to everybody, disregarding his level of understanding. Consequently, there
would be neither rivalry for precedence (tafād.ul) among people, nor diligent
study (to understand the Qur‟ān), and ideas would become dead. Similarly,
in every branch of knowledge, there are things which are sublime and subtle through which students should pass, so that they will ascend from one level
to another, until they reach its highest level. In this way, scholars will
possess the merit of insight and good judgment, for which they will be rewarded by Allah.
123
Ibn Qutaybah gives many examples from the hadīths, the sayings of
the s.ah.ābah, poetry and Arabic expressions to indicate the existence of
difficult expressions which cannot be easily understood, similar to the
mutashābihāt in the Qur‟ān. One of them is the saying of the Prophet, as
follows: "Women who dress and at the same time are naked will not enter Heaven," meaning that women who wear very thin or skimpy clothes which
reveal the outline of their bodies are effectively naked. Such women will not
enter Heaven.124
Ibn Qutaybah explicitly asserts that he does not belong to "those who claim that the mutashābih in the Qur‟ān is unknown to the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-
‘ilm". His arguments are as follows:
a. Allah would not reveal anything in the Qur‟ān except for the benefit of
mankind, and that He would expose what He meant by what He had revealed.
125
b. It is impossible to believe that the Prophet himself did not know the ta’wīl
of the mutashābihāt. Since he knew the mutashābihāt, despite the verse "None knoweth its interpretation save Allah" it is possible that his elected
s.ah.ābah would also have known it. He taught „Ali the tafsīr. Ibn „Abbās,
for whom the Prophet had prayed to become expert in the ta’wīl of the
Qur‟ān, was reported to have said that he knew everything in the Qur‟ān
except four things which he knew later, namely: ( :٣٦) (filth,
87
Q. 69:36), ( :١٣) (compassion, Q. 19:13), ( :١١٤) (soft of
heart, Q. 9:114), and ( :٩) (inscription, Q. 18:9).126
c. If the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm did not know the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt, they would not have any supremacy over seekers of knowledge, or even
the ignorant among Muslims, because all of them say, "We believe in it; it
is all from our Lord."
d. The word yaqūlūn in the verse is a hāl (an adverb or a circumstantial
phrase) to the verb ya‘lamu. It is like the expression
"Nobody comes to you except „Abd Allāh and Zayd says 'I
am happy to visit you.'"), meaning
("Nobody comes to you except „Abd Allāh and Zayd, saying 'I am happy
to visit you.'" As a shāhid from poetry Ibn Qutaybah cites the poem of Yazīd ibn Mufarrigh al-H.imyarī lamenting an unidentified person, or
satirising „Ubbād ibn Ziyād according to S.A. S.aqr, or regretting the loss
of his servant Burd by selling him out of necessity according to al-T.abarsī.
127 The poem reads as follows:
"You have cut your tie with Umāmah after weary days, and
the wind is weeping its grief, and the lightning is
illuminating (in) a cloud."
It means "the lightning illuminating the cloud is also weeping its grief". If
the lightning did not share with the wind in its grief, it would not have made
any sense ( ) to mention it in the poem.128
Ibn Qutaybah considers the term mushkil as a synonym of mutashābih.
He states that since the word mushkil literally means "something which
makes a form" (ashkala), namely, "it takes the form of something else", it resembles it.
129 He believes that the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm know the ta’wīl of
the mutashābihāt. With this in mind, Ibn Qutaybah calls his book which is
being studied here Ta’wīl Mushkil al-Qur’ān.
It is worthy to mention here the arguments of a scholar who held a different view, living in a different time and place, to compare it with those
of Ibn Qutaybah. The person was Ibn H.azm, an advocate of the Z.āhirī
88
school who lived in Andalusia (Muslim Spain) in the fifth/eleventh century,
two centuries after Ibn Qutaybah's time. Ibn H.azm insisted that the al-
rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm do not know the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt. His main
argument is as follows:
a. The word al-rāsikhūn fī ’l‘ilm in the verse in question is the subject of a new sentence. The conjunction wa ("and") in the verse joins two sentences
instead of two nouns, as translated above.
b. Allah prohibited people from seeking the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt, for
He said in the verse that those who seek and follow its ta’wīl are those in whose hearts is perversity and are creators of fitnah.
c. Had the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm known the ta’wīl they would have explained
it to the people, because they are enjoined by Allah to do so, or they
would be cursed by Him. He said:
(: ١٥٩) “Those who hide
the proofs and the guidance which We revealed, after We had made it
clear in the Scripture: such are accursed of Allah and accursed of those who have the power to curse." (Q. 2: 159, Pickthall).
130 If they explained
it to the people, these people would have the same knowledge of it with
the explainer, so that it would not become mutashābih any longer. In other words, there would be no more mutashābihāt left unexplained. Yet, the
Qur‟ān states the existence of the mutashābihāt in the Qur‟ān. Since the
al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm would never conceal the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt if they knew it, for fear of Allah‟s curse, and since no ta’wīl has been
given, it means that they do not know it.
d. „Ā‟ishah reported that the Prophet, after reading the verse in question,
said: "If you see people who follow what is mutashābih [in the Qur‟an], they are those whom Allah called as such [namely, those in whose heart is
doubt]. Therefore, beware of them."131
Both Ibn al-Anbārī and Ibn Qutaybah regarded al-h.urūf al-
muqat.t.a‘ah as mutashābihāt. For the former, they are the only ambiguous
contents of the Qur‟ān,132
whereas for the latter their interpretation is known
by the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-ilm which will be dealt with in due course.
Among the arguments given by those who assert that the al-rāsikhūn fī
’l-‘ilm do not know the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt are the following:
89
a. Ibn Mas„ūd's variant reading of Q. 3:7, as reported by Ibn Dā‟ūd on the
authority of al-A„mash, is as follows:
("and those al-rāsikhūna fī ’l-‘ilm say: 'We believe in it.'"133
Nobody knows its interpretation except Allah.
b. Ubayy ibn Ka„b's variant reading is
("Its interpretation is with Allah only, and the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm
say 'We believe in it'").134
c. In the codex of Ibn „Abbās it is written wa yaqūlu ’l-rāsikhūna fī ’l-‘ilm.
135
d. A h.adīth reported by al-Bukhārī, Muslim and Abū Dā‟ūd on the authority
of „Ā‟ishah that the Prophet, after citing the verse in question (Q. 3:7)
warned the Muslims not to seek the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt in the
Qur‟ān.
e. A h.adīth reported by Ibn Mardawayh from „Amr ibn Shu„ayb from his
father who reported from his („Amr's) grand-father, that the Prophet said:
"The verses of the Qur‟ān were not revealed to contradict one another; therefore, act upon what you know in it, and believe in what is ambiguous
in it."136
A similar h.adīth was also reported by al-H.ākim on the authority
of Ibn Mas„ūd, and by al-Bayhaqī on the authority of Abū Hurayrah.
f. It was reported by Ibn Abī H.ātim that „Ā‟ishah said: "Their [i.e., al-
rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm's] soundness of instruction is that they believe in its (the
Qur‟ān's) mutashābihāt without knowing their ta’wīl.
g. Al-Dārimī in his Musnad reported from Sulaymān ibn Yassār that „Umar beat S.abīgh ibn „Isl for his questioning about the ta’wīl of the
mutashābihāt in the Qur‟ān.137
h. Ibn „Abbās's statement that tafsīr is divided into four categories: known by everybody, known by the Arabs through their language, known by
scholars, and known by Allah alone.138
i. If the seeking of the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt were permitted, Allah
would not have denounced it, as mentioned in the beginning of the verse in question (Q. 3:7).
j. It would not be eloquent to begin the sentence in the verse in question with
yaqūlūn āmannā bihi; instead, wa hum yaqūlūn…or wa yaqūlūn… would
be proper.139
Moreover, it would be stylistically deviating from the ostensible meaning of the text to consider the expression yaqūlūn āmannā
90
bihi as a āl for exclusively al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm with the exclusion of
Allāh.140
k. If the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm knew the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt with a
dalālah (an indicant, a hint), their faith in the mutashābihāt would have been like that in the muh.kamāt; therefore, this faith of theirs in the
mutashābihāt would not have been highly praised.
l. The expression kullun min ‘indi rabbinā ("it is all from our Lord") in the
verse indicates that the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm believe in what they know in
detail and what they do not. Otherwise, the expression would not have any meaning.
Among the arguments given by those who assert that the al-rāsikhūn fī
’l-‘ilm know the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt are the following:
a. A h.adīth stating that the Prophet prayed to Allah for Ibn „Abbās that He
would teach him the ta’wīl of the Qur‟ān.
b. A statement of Ibn „Abbās, as reported by Mujāhid, that he was one of the
al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm who knew the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt.
c. The statement of Ibn Mas„ūd that he knew the asbāb al-nuzūl of the verses of the Qur‟ān.
d. The statement of al-H.asan that he would like to know the meanings and
the asbāb al-nuzūl of the verses of the Qur‟ān.
e. The s.ah.ābah asked the Prophet or the more knowledgeable among
themselves, such as Ibn „Abbās, the meaning of verses unclear to them. Moreover, they learned from the Prophet not more than ten verses at one
time and acted according to their contents. Then they learned about ten
other verses until they learned the whole Qur‟ān.
f. Allah enjoins the Muslims to ponder the meanings of the Qur‟ānic verses without restriction to the muh.kamāt.
g. The s.ah.ābah and the tabi‘īn gave their commentary on all the verses of
the Qur‟ān, with the exception of some mutashābihāt. However, it does
not mean that nobody knows their ta’wīl. The ‘ulamā’ among these people have agreed that the Qur‟ān is understandable and explicable, and
the existence of the mutashābihāt in it does not necessarily mean that
Allah conceals His knowledge of them from people.
h. Allah mentions in the Qur‟ān that its verses, without exception, are bayān (explanation), hudan (guidance), shifā‘ (healing) and maw‘iz.ah (advice).
These can only be achieved by understanding their meanings.
91
i. It would be unreasonable that Allah would reveal to the Prophet through
Gabriel something which neither Gabriel nor the Prophet could
understand. Since the purpose of sending His revelation is to be understood, it would be useless to reveal something which is beyond
human understanding.
j. It is true that some knowledge is kept by Allah Himself, such as the time of the occurrence of the Doomsday, but such things are not revealed in the
Qur‟ān, which are not meant to be known by mankind.
k. Assuming that some Qur‟ānic verses are mutashābihāt the ta’wīl of which
is known by Allah alone could be abused as a pretext to avoid complying with many Qur‟ānic verses.
l. Allah in the verse in question denounced exclusively those in whose hearts
is perversity, due to their ignorance and evil intention, for they do not
want to find the truth, but to create dissension (fitnah). To these people the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt would not be known, but rather to the al-
rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm.
Al-Farrā‟'s position on this issue is clear, namely, al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm
do not know the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt. He states that al-rāsikhūn is
marfū„ by yaqūlūn, and not by ya‘lamu. It is similar to the verse
(: ٤٣) "..., their gaze returning not to them, and their
hearts as air" (Q. 14:43), where af’idatuhum is marfū‘ by hawā’, not by lā yartaddu.
141 Here "their hearts" is a subject for a new sentence, and is not
connected with "their gaze".
Abu „Ubaydah‟s position on the above issue is not clear. He does not
give us his commentary on Q. 3:7 except that the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm are
the „ulamā‟ who are also of sound faith ( ).142
It is possible
that his position is like that of al-Farrā‟, or else, he would have said that the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm also know the ta’wīl of the mutashābihāt. If it is so,
then Ibn Qutaybah disagrees not only with al-Farrā‟, but also with Abū
„Ubaydah, two of his prominent teachers.
The complexity of the issue is that there is no indication that the verse in question limits the division of the Qur‟ānic verses into exclusively
muh.kamāt and mutashābihāt. Moreover, the ‘ulamā do not agree as to what
belongs to the category of mutashābihāt as well as their interpretation.
However, the effective enquirers (al-muh.aqqiqīn) among the mufassirīn
bring about reconciliation between the two contending views by accepting
both of them with the following explanation:
92
The Qur‟ānic verses in their relation to each other can be divided into
three categories: absolutely clear ( ), absolutely ambiguous
( ), and partly clear and partly ambiguous (
). The nature of the ambiguity of the mutashābihāt is either in wording
(lafz.), such as the word abb (fodder - which is an uncommon word among
the Arabs - in Q. 80:31); in meaning (ma‘ná), such as the attributes of Allah; or in both wording and meaning, such as the injunction on fighting the
idolators in Q. 9:5. These mutashābihāt in their relation to human level of
understanding are divided into three categories: things which are completely unknown by people and beyond human understanding, such as the
appearance of the beast as one of the signs of the Doomsday mentioned in
Q. 27:82; things which can be known by people, such as uncommon words and some laws; and lastly, things which are known by exclusively the al-
rāsikhūn fī ’l-ilm. In other words, they know some mutashābihāt and do not
know some others which belong to the first category. This type of knowledge is the one which the Prophet had prayed for, his cousin Ibn
„Abbas. When the al-rāsikhūn fī ’l-‘ilm said āmannā ("we believe"), they believed in the mutashābihāt regardless whether they knew the ta’wīl of
them or not.
93
ENDNOTES TO CHAPTER II
1. Al-Suyūt.ī mentions also other s.ah.ābah, all twenty-one in number, see al-
Itqān, vol. 1, p. 131. Ibn al-Jazarī also mentions the same names, but excludes
Sulaymān ibn Surād, see al-Nashr fī ’l-Qira’āt al-‘Ashr, ed. by Muh.ammad „Alā‟ al-
D.abbā‟ (Egypt: al-Maktabah al-Tijāriyyah al-Kubrá, n.d.), vol. 1, p. 21.
2. Hishām ibn H.ākim ibn H.izām ibn Khuwaylid al-Qurashī al-Asadī was one of
the s.ah.ābah. He belonged to the Quraysh tribe of Banī Asad (ibn Khuzaymah); see Ibn
H.ajar al-„Asqalānī, Kitāb al-Is.ābah fī Tamyīz al-S.ah.ābah 4 vols. (Baghdād: Dār al-
„Ulūm al-H.adīthah, n.d.), vol. 3, p. 603.
3. Al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 1, p. 10; John Cooper, The Commentary of the Qur’ān
by Abū Ja‘far Muh.ammad b. Jarīr al-T.abarī, being an Abridged Translation of Jāmi‘
al-Bayān ‘an Ta’wīl Ay al-Qur’ān, with introduction and notes (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1987), vol. 1, p. 17; Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 34-35; and al-Bukhārī,
S.ah.īh., vol. 6, p. 100.
4. Al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 1, pp. 42-46. Al-Suyūt.ī says that there are forty
different opinions, but he mentions sixteen opinions only, then he mentions the thirty-
five different opinions given by Ibn H.ibbān al-Bustī, see al-Itqān, vol. 1, pp. 131-141.
5. Ibn al-Jazarī, al-Nashr, vol. 1, p. 23.
6. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 35-6. Lane's translation of the above verse is as
follows: "And of men is he who serves God standing aloof with respect to religion, in
fluctuating state, like him who is in the outskirts of the army, who, if sure of victory and
spoil, stands firm, and otherwise flees." See Edward W. Lane, Arabic-English Lexicon,
Book 1, 8 pts. with continuous pagination (New York: Fredrick Ungar Publishing Co.,
1956), pt. 2, p. 550. For further details, see al-T.abarī, Jāmi„, vol. 17, pp. 93-94; see also
J. Cooper, Commentary, vol. 1, pp. 29-30.
7. Al-Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 1, p. 131.
8. Ibn al-Jazarī, al-Nashr, vol. 1, p. 24.
9. Al-Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 1, p. 135.
10. The two views are based on h.adīth, see al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 1, p. 24; and J.
Cooper, Commentary, vol. 1, p. 29.
11. J. Cooper's translation, see Cooper, Commentary, vol. 1, p. 21; see also al-
Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 1, p. 134.
12. Al-Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 1, pp. 134-135. According al- al-T.abarī, the person
was Abū al-Dardā‟ rather than Ibn Mas„ūd, see Jāmi‘, vol. 25, p. 78
13. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 36.
14. See Abū Bakr Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-Sab‘ah fī ’l-Qirā’at, verified by Dr.
Shawqī D.ayf, 2nd ed. (Cairo: Dār al-Ma„ārif, 1400/[1979-1980]), pp. 528-529. Al-
94
Farrā‟ also mentions the two variant readings without giving any details of it, see Abu
Zakariyā Yah.yá al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, ed. A.Y. Najātī and M.A. al-Najjār , 3
vols. (Egypt: al-Hay‟ah al-Mis.riyyah al-„Āmmah lil-Kuttāb, 1972-1980), vol. 2, p. 359.
Another example is the verse wa ya’murūna ’l-nāsa bi ’l-bakhli instead of bi ’l-bukhli;
both have the same meaning, namely, "and bid others to be niggardly" (Q. 4:37 and
57:24, Asad). The mas.dar (verbal noun) bakhal is the root of the verb bakhila and
bakhala, whereas bukhl is that of bakhula. The other similar variant reading is ilá
maysurah instead of ilá maysarah (Q. 2:280), see Ibn Qutaybah Ta’wīl, p. 36; it is like
the terms maqbarah and maqburah, and mashraqah and mashruqah, see al-
Zamakhsharī, al-Kashshāf, vol. 1, p. 181.
15. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 36-37 and 41. Another example cited by Ibn
Qutaybah which belongs to this category of variant reading is the reading of Ibn „Abbās
wa’ddakara ba‘da amahin, meaning "and he remembered after forgetting" instead of
wa’ddakara ba‘da ummatin, meaning "he remembered after a long period of time" (Q.
12:46). The two readings mean that the man who had been released from prison
remembered the case of Prophet Joseph after a period of time and after he had forgotten
it. Both readings, Ibn Qutaybah asserts, were revealed to the Prophet to include these
two meanings, ibid., pp. 37 and 40.
16. See al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 14, pp. 290-291. The first reading is also
chosen by Asad in translating the verse in question, see The Message, p. 34.
17. See al-Qur t.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 14, p. 290; Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-Sab‘ah, p.
529. Apart from the variant readings rabbanā bā‘id and rabbunā bā‘ada, al-Farrā‟ also
mentions rabbanā ba‘‘id, rabbanā ba‘uda, and rabbunā ba‘‘ada, see Ma‘ānī ’l-
Qur’ān, vol. 2, pp. 359-360. They are all written in one rasm, namely .
18. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 37 and 41. Another example is the reading of
furrigha ‘an qulūbihim, meaning "fear is emptied [i.e., freed] from their hearts" instead
of fuzzi‘a ‘an qulūbihim, meaning "the terror [of the Last Hour] is lifted from their
hearts." (Q. 34:23, Asad), see ibid., pp. 37 and 42. The latter reading belongs to the
seven qurrā’ except Ibn „Āmir who read fazza‘a; see Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-Sab‘ah, p.
530.
19. See Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-Sab‘ah, p. 189.
20. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 37; al-T.abarī, Jāmi„, vol. 1, p. 18 and al-Qur t.ubī, al-
Jāmi„, vol. 15, p. 21. Another example is the reading of ka ’l-s.ūf al-manfūsh instead of
ka ’l-‘ihn al-manfūsh, both have the same meaning, namely, "like fluffy tufts of wool."
(Q. 101:5, Asad), see Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 37.
21. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 37. Instead of wa t.al‘in mand.ūd, Ibn al-Jazarī who
quoted Ibn Qutaybah's view mistakenly put wa t.al‘in nad.īd which he himself rejected
and said that this reading has nothing to do with the varying of readings (
); see Ibn al-Jazarī, al-Nashr, vol. 1, pp. 27-28. Al-Suyūt.ī correctly quoted the
95
same variant reading, see al-Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 1, p. 132.
22. In another report when „Alī was asked whether the term wa t.alh.in should be
replaced with wa t.al‘in in the mus.h.af, he answered: "The Qur‟ān should be neither
disturbed nor replaced" ( ); see al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 17, pp.
208-209.
23. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 24 and 37; and al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 26, p. 100.
24. See Abū al-Fidā Ismā„īl Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-‘Az.īm, with
introduction by Dr. Yusūf „Abd al-Rah.mān al-Mur„ishī, 4 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-
Ma„rifah, 1407/1987), vol. 4, p. 240; and al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 17, pp. 12-13. It is
also the view of Ibn H.azm that the above variant reading of Abū Bakr belonged to the
category of the qira’āt munkarah. He asserts that anybody other than the Prophet could
make mistakes and should not be followed; see Abū Muh.ammad „Alī Ibn H.azm, al-
Ih.kām fī Us.ūl al-Ah.kām, ed. Ah.mad Shākir, 8 vols. in 2 bindings (Cairo: Mat.ba„at al-
„Ās.imah, n.d.), vol. 4, p. 537.
25. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 38.
26. See Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-Sab‘ah, p. 540.
27. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 38; and al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi„, vol. 15, p. 174. The
addition of unthā (female) and dhakar (male) for emphasis is common among the
Arabs; they say, for example, ("this is a male man"), see al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘,
vol. 23, p. 91.
28. See Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 40; and al-Tirmidhī, Sunan, vol. 5, pp. 193-194
(h.adīth no. 2943).
29. Ibn H.azm, al-Ih.kām, vol. 4, pp. 520-521.
30. Ibn al-Jazarī, al-Nashr, vol. 1, p. 31.
31. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 42.
32.See al-Zarkashī, al-Burhān, vol. 1, p. 223.
33. Ibn H.azm, al-I h.kām, vol. 4, p. 523.
34. See al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 5, p. 337.
35. Al-Qurt.ubī mentions seven variant readings of bushran. They are: (1)
bushran itself and (2) nashran, as mentioned above; (3) nushuran which was the
reading of Abū „Amr and the people of the two holy cities, Makkah and Madinah;
nushur is the broken plural of nāshir in the pattern of shāhid and shuhud; (4) nushran
which was the reading of al-H.asan and Qatādah; nushr is the easing (takhfīf) of nushur,
like reading kutb and rusl for respectively kutub and rusul; (5) bushrá which was the
reading of Muh.ammad al-Yamānī; (6) bashran; bashr is the mas.dar of bashara which
means bashshara (to bring good news); and (7) bushurá. Al-Qurt.ubī does not give us
96
the names of the qurrā’ to whom the last two variant readings belong; see al-Jāmi‘, vol.
7, pp. 228-229.
36. See the introduction of Dr. Shawqī D.ayf (ed.) in Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-
Sab‘ah, p. 12.
37. See Ibn Manz.ūr, Lisān, vol. 8, pp. 145-146.a
38. See al-Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 1, p. 131.
39. Ibid.
40. Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr, vol. 4, p. 465.
41. See Mannā„ al-Qat.t.ān, Mabāh.ith fī ‘Ulūm al-Qur’ān. 19th edition (Beirut:
Mu‟assasat al-Risālah, 1406/1983), pp. 162-163.
42. Ibid, p. 163
43. See al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 1, p. 20.
44. There is a h.adīth stating that "the community of Muh.ammad (or, in another
version, 'my community') will never agree on an error". (Reported by al-Bukhārī, al-
Tirmidhī, Ibn Mājah, and Ah.mad ibn H.anbal).
45. Al-Qat.t.ān, Mabāh.ith, pp. 164-165.
46. Ibid., pp. 165-166.
47. Ibid., p. 166.
48. Ibid., pp. 1 and 666-667
49. See al-Zarqānī, Manāhil al-‘Irfān, vol. 1, pp. 155-157.
50. Ibid., pp. 161-163.
51. Ibid., p. 158.
52. The reading li’amānatihim in the singular is that of Ibn Kathīr, whereas the
rest of the qurrā’ read li’amānātihim in the plural. Al-T.abarī states that the correct
reading is li’amānātihim in the plural. Dr. Labīb al-Sa„īd criticises al-T.abarī in this and
other cases where correct readings were considered wrong by him. Al-Sa„īd contends
that this reading of Ibn Kathīr was also transmitted with tawātur (handed down by
many chains of unimpeachable transmitters). Moreover, like the rest of the qurrā‟, Ibn
Kathīr read al-amānāt and amānātikum in the plural in Q. 4:58 and Q. 8:27
respectively. He could have read both in the singular as he did in Q. 70:32 above, had it
been from his own whim rather than from Allah. See Dr. Labīb al-Sa„īd, Difā‘an al-
Qirā’āt al-Mutawātirah fī Muwājahat al-T.abarī ’l-Mufassir (A Defence on the
Mutawātir Qirā’āt in Countering the Commentator al-T.abarī) (Cairo: Dār al-Ma„ārif,
[1398]/1978), p. 116. It is noteworthy that al-T.abarī lived in the period of ikhtiyār
("choice"). It was the period where scholars of the Qur‟ānic text chose their own
readings in verses written in ambiguous rasm. The choice was governed by three
97
criteria: the rasm of the mus.h.af, the Arabic language and the isnād. This period of
ikhtiyār ended in 322/934 when Ibn Mujāhid's choice of the seven variant readings of
the text (qirā’āt) of the seven qurrā’ was declared canonical by the authorities in
Baghdād, as they were qirā’āt with mutawātir isnāds. See A. Jones, "The Qur‟ān - II,"
in Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period, eds. A.F.L. Beeston et al.
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), pp. 241-242. Al-T.abarī chose the
readings based on his knowledge of the Arabic language, whereas many other readings
were later accepted and included in the seven qirā’āt. Al-T.abarī passed away earlier in
310/923. Had he lived and witnessed the canonisation of the seven qirā’āt, he would
not have chosen or preferred one among the seven canonised qirā’āt.
53. Al-Zarqānī, Manāhil al-‘Irfān, vol. 1, pp. 169-170.
54. Ibid., p. 170. Quoting from Abū „Amr al-Dānī (d. 444/1052) in his work al-
Muqnī‘, A.T. Welch mentioned variant readings among the „Uthmānic codices. For
example, it was written in the standard codex in Madīnah (Q. 3:184) and
(Q. 40:21), whereas in the mus.h.af sent to Damascus it was written (with
the additional bi) and . Similarly, it was written in the standard codex (Q.
36:35) and (Q. 40:26), whereas in the mus.h.af sent to Kūfah it was written
(with the ellipsis of hu) and (with the addition of alif). These brought Welch to the
following conclusion: "Such variations can best be explained as resulting from
carelessness on the part of the scribes or lack of concern for exact uniformity among the
authorities." See A.T. Welch, "al-Ķur‟ān", EI2, p. 408. The reading wa bi’l-zubur wa
bi’l-Kitāb was that of Ibn „Āmir and was written in the mus.h.afs of the people of Syria;
see al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 4, p. 296. The reading ‘amilat was that of the Kūfans,
whereas the rest read ‘amilathu, including „Ās.im, as in the Egyptian standard edition of
the mus.h.af issued in 1924, and Nāfi„; see Mus.h.af al-Jamāhīrīyah bi-Riwāyat al-Imām
Qālūn (Tripoli: Jam„iyat al-Da„wah al-Islāmīyah al-„Ālamīyah, 1395/1986), p. 442. The
reading was that of „Ās.im, as in the Egyptian standard edition, whereas was
that of Nāfi„ as in the Mus.h.af al-Jamāhīrīyah, p. 469. This finding supports the view
that the variant readings were kept in the „Uthmānic codices, and that they were not the
outcome of the scribes' negligence or "lack of concern for exact uniformity among the
authorities" as assumed by Welch.
55. Ibid., pp. 170-171.
56. Ibid., 171.
57. Ibid.
58. Ibid., p. 175.
59. Ibid., pp. 177-178.
60. This report was narrated by Is.h.āq ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Mukhlad, known as Is.h.āq
ibn Rāhawayh (d. 238/853), one of Ibn Qutaybah's teachers. See Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl,
98
pp. 25-26.
61. Ibid, p. 51. This is probably what was meant by Ibn Abū Dā‟ūd when he said
that al-Hajjāj ibn Yūsuf "has changed in the „Uthmānic codex eleven ah.ruf ", such as
lam yatasanna became lam yatasannah (Q. 2:259) and biz.anīn became bid.anīn (Q.
81:24); see Abū Bakr „Abd Allāh Ibn Abī Dā‟ūd, Kitāb al-Mas.āh.if, ed. Arthur Jeffery
(Egypt: al-Mat.ba„ah al-Rah.mānīyah, 1355/1936), pp. 117-118. Instead of changing the
ah.ruf in the „Uthmānic codex which seemed to be in the above statement, al-Hajjaj
changed the ah.ruf that did not agree with the „Uthmānic codex as stated by Ibn
Qutaybah above. Al-T.abarsī and Saqr reject the genuinness of the stories concerning
the statements of „Ā‟ishah and „Uthmān mentioned above and considered them
fabricated ones; see al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 2, p. 139; and Ibn Qutaybah,
Ta’wīl, p. 26, n. 3.
62. See Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 20; and Ibn Fāris, al-S.āh.ibī, p. 20. According to
al-Suyūt.ī, it is also the dialect of the Banī Kinānah, see al-Itqan, vol. 2, pp. 273-274.
Abū al-Khat.t.āb claimed to have heard the Kinānah tribe using alif invariably for the
dual; see Abū „Ubaydah, Majāz al-Qur’ān, ed. Dr. M.F. Sezgin (Egypt: Muh.ammad
Sāmī Amīn al-Khānjī, n.d.), p. 21. Besides the Balh.arth, al-T.abarī mentions also the
Khath„am and the Zubayd tribes in Yemen, see his work, Jāmi‘, vol. 16, p. 121.
According to Ibn Jamā„ah, among the grammarians who state that the Banī al-H.ārith
use alif invariably in the dual number is al-Kisā‟ī. Other tribes mentioned by al-Kisā‟ī
are the Khath„am, the Zubayd and the Hamadān. Abū Khat.t.āb mentioned the Kinānah;
others mention the Banī al-„Anbar, the „Udhrah, the Murād and others; see Dr. „Abd al-
„Al Mukarram in his note in Abu „Abd Allāh ibn Khālawayh, al-Hujjah fī ’l-Qirā’āt al-
Sab‘, ed. and annot. Dr. „Abd al-„Alī Sālim al-Mukarram (Beirut and Cairo: Dār al-
Shurūq, 1399/1979), p. 242, n. 6, quoting Ibn Jama„ah's marginal notes on the
commentary on Ibn al-H.ājib's al-Shāfiyah (N.p.: Mat.ba„at Dār al-T.ibā„ah al-„Āmirah,
n.d.), vol. 1, p. 277.
63. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 50;and al-Zabīdī, Tāj al-‘Arūs, 10/405. According to
Ibn Manz.ūr, the poem belonged to Hawbar al-H.ārithī who mentioned udhunayh instead
of udhuynāh, see Lisān, vol. 10, p. 64, vol. 9, p. 163, and 20, p. 226. Another example
from poetry is as follows: in which abā
abāhā and ghayatāhā are used respectively for abā abīhā and ghayatayhā; see Ibn
Khālawayh, al-H.ujjah, p. 242; and al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 4, p. 16.
64. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 51.
65. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 52; and Abū Zakariyā Yah.yá ibn Ziyād al-Farrā‟,
Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, ed. A.Y. Najātī and M.A. al-Najjār, 3 vols. (Egypt: al-Hay‟ah al-
Mis.riyyah al-„Āmmah lil-Kuttāb, 1972-1980), vol. 2, pp. 183-184. The variant reading
in hādhān lasāh.irān and in hādhān sāh.irān are also attributed to Ibn Mas„ūd, see A.
99
Jeffery, ed. Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’ān: The Old Codices
(Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1937), pp. 146 and 60.
66. Ibn Khālawayh, al-H.ujjah, p. 242 and Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-Sab‘ah, p. 419.
67. Ibn Khālawayh, al-H.ujjah, pp. 242-243 and 368.
68. Ibid., p. 243. The view that particle inna in the verse inna hādhān means
"yes" is rejected by al-T.abarsī with the following argument: (a) If it was so, hādhān
would become mubtada’ and lasā h.irān its khabar with the emphatic la. This emphatic
la in the khabar in the Arabic language should not occur with a simple mubtada’,
except in an isolated case or necessity. In other words, the mubtada’ has to be
emphasised first, then the emphatic la can be added to its khabar; (b) Quoting Abū „Alī,
translating inna with "yes" in the above verse does not fit in the structure of the
sentence. It is not correct to say "yes, these two are surely sorcerers" confirming
Prophet Moses's statement in verse 61:
( :٦١) "Woe unto you! Do not invent lies against God, lest He afflict you
with most grievous suffering: for He who contrives [such] a lie is already undone!" (Q.
20:61, Asad). It is also improper to say "yes ..." after the statement: :
٦٢ )"So they debated among themselves as to what to do; but they kept their counsel
secret" (Q. 20:62, Asad). See al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 4, pp. 15-16.
69. Ibn Khālawayh, al-H.ujjah, pp. 243-244.
70. Ibid., p. 121.
71. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 57. This is also apparent in the mus.h.af of Madīnah.
See Mus.h.af al-Jamāhīrīyah, pp. 111 (Q. 5:25) and 125 (Q. 5:109) which is based on
the reading of Nāfi„, the qāri’ of Madīnah. However, in the Egyptian mus.h.af which is
based on the reading of „Ās.im, the qāri’ of Kūfah, the alif of the dual is written in
rajulān and fa’ākharān yaqūmān.
72. Ibn Abī Dā‟ūd Sulaymān al-Sijistānī, Kitāb al-Mas.āh.if, p. 104. This is also
the view of al-T.abarsī who said that the best view is that inna hādhān lasāh.irān
belongs to the language of the Kinānah tribe, or, according to Abū al-H.asan and Abū
„Alī al-Fārisī, the language of the Banī al-H.ārith; see Majma‘ al- Bayān, vol. 4, pp. 16-
17.
73. See al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, vol. 2, p. 184.
74. Al-Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 2, pp. 573-4. However, the variant reading salāsilan
belongs to Nāfi„, al-Kisā‟ī, Abū Bakr from „Ās.im, and Hishām from Ibn „Āmir. The
reading of Qunbul, Ibn Kathīr and H.amzah is salāsila’ (with waqf, a slight stop)
without alif or tanwīn. The rest of the qurrā’ also read salāsila‟ but with the additional
alif. See al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 19, p. 123. Following the variant reading of the qāri’
of Madīnah, Nāfi„, the mus.h.af printed by the Islamic Call Society in Libya in 1986
100
writes salāsilan. On the other hand, the mus.h.af printed in Egypt, which is largely
circulated in the Muslim world, writes salāsila‟, following the reading of „Ās.im, the
qāri‟ of Kūfah. See Mus.h.af al-Jamāhīriyyah, p. 575 (Q. 76:4). For the Egyptian
mus.h.af see the text of the Qur‟ān in the translation of Asad, Ali, or Pickthall. A similar
example is the reading of Nāfi„ qawārīran and of „Ās.im qawarira’ (Q. 76:15).
75. See al-Zarqānī, Manāhil al-‘Irfān, vol. 1, pp. 373-374 and 393.
76. However, „Ā‟ishah, Ubayy and others are reported to have al-s.ābi‘īna in
their codices, see Ibn Abī Dā‟ūd al-Sijistānī, Kitāb al-Mas.āh.if, p. 232.
77. Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 52-53. The poem was cited by D.abī ibn al-H.ārith
al-Burjumī in his prison when he was jailed in the time of „Uthmān for slandering
women of unblemished reputation (qadhf al-muh.s.anāt). It means: "Whoever makes
Madinah his final destination, [as for me] I and [my riding animal] Qayyār are strangers
in it." Qayyār was the name of his horse or his camel. See al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān,
vol. 1, p. 311, n. 2.
78. Al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, vol. 1, pp. 310-311.
79. Similarly, it is said that the believers in the verse:
: "And [always], O you believers - all of you - turn unto God in
repentance, so that you might attain to a happy state!" (Q. 24:31, Asad) are pretending
believers only, namely, the hypocrites; see al-Zarkashī, al-Burhān, vol. 2, p. 220.
However, al-Qurt.ubī does not include hypocrites in the term al-mu’minūn ("the
believers") in this verse and states that asking for repentance is incumbent exclusively
on believers; see al-Jāmi‘, vol. 5, p. 90, and vol. 12, p. 238. The Prophet was reported to
have said in one h.adīth on the authority of Ibn „Umar as follows: "Verily, I turn unto
Him in repentance a hundred times every day" (Reported by al-Bukhārī, Ibn H.anbal and
al-Bayhaqī).
80. See al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, vol. 1, p. 312. An almost identical verse
with the word al-s.ābi‘īna (in the accusative case) put after, rather than before, the word
al-nas.ārá (the Christians), and with the addition of "surely their reward is with their
Lord" is found in Q. 2:62. Nāfi„ read al-s.ābūn and al-s.ābīn without hamzah in the
Qur‟ān, whereas other qurrā’ read them with hamzah, namely, al-s.ābi’ūn and al-
s.ābi’īn; see Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-Sab‘ah, p. 158; see also Mus.h.af al-Jamāhīriyyah,
pp. 120 (Q. 5:71) and 10 (Q. 2:61).
81. See al-Zamakhsharī, al-Kashshāf, vol. 1, p. 373.
82. This poem is also used as a shāhid in dealing with the verse inna hādhān
lasāh.irān, see p. 63 above. 83. Al-Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 2, p. 274.
84. There are many different views about the Sabaeans. According to Abū
101
„Ubaydah, they were people who changed their religion. The root meaning of s.aba’a is
"to rise, to grow". The expression means "the stars rise from their
points of rising", and s.aba’at sinnuh means "his tooth is growing"; see Majāz al-
Qur’ān, vol. 1, p. 172. The Sabaean is called S.ābi’ (pl. S.ābi‘ūn) as well as S.ābin (pl.
S.ābūn) which is the variant reading of Nāfi„. The root meaning of s.abā (present: yas.bū)
is "to lean". According to al-Suddī and Ish.āq ibn Rāhawayh, they are a sect among the
people of the Book. According to Abū al-„Āliyah and al-D.ah.h.āk they belonged to a
sect among the people of the Book who read the Psalms (al-Zabūr), and for this reason,
Abū H.anīfah and Ish.āq ibn Rāhawayh allowed the Muslims to eat their slaughtered
animals and to marry their women. On the other hand, according to al-Qurt.ubī they
were people who believed in one God but believed also in the stars' influence, and for
this reason, Abū Sa„īd al-Istakhrī stated that they were non-belivers. Al-Khalīl said that
they claimed to be the followers of Prophet Noah. According to Mujāhid, al-H.asan and
Ibn Abī Nujayh, they are people who mix Judaism with Magian. According to Qatādah
and al-H.asan, they worship angels, face the Qiblah in their five daily prayers and read
the Psalms. According to Ibn Kathīr, the right view is that of Mujāhid and Wahb ibn
Munabbih who said that they were neither Jews, Christians, Magians nor polytheists,
but rather people who remained in their nature and did not follow any particular
religion. Therefore the polytheists called a person who converted to Islam a Sabaean,
namely, a person who was not a follower of any religion on earth at that time. See al-
S.ābūnī, Mukhtasar, vol. 1, p. 72; and al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 1, pp. 434-435. B. Carra
de Vaux divides the Sabaeans into two groups: the followers of Prophet Yah.yá (John
the Baptist), and the pagan Sabaeans who lived under the Muslim rule. For further
details, see B. Carra de Vaux "al-Sabi„a", SEI, pp. 477-8. See also M. Asad, The
Message, p. 14, n. 49.
85.
See al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 2, p. 139.
86.
Ibid.
87.
This is also the view of al-Farrā‟ according to Ibn Qutaybah; see Ta’wīl, pp.
53-4; al-Zamakhsharī, al-Kashshāf, vol. 1, p. 366; al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 2,
p. 139; al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 6, p. 13; and al-Zarqānī, Manāhil al-‘Irfān, vol. 1, p.
388.
88.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 53; Abū „Ubaydah, Majāz al-Qur’ān, vol. 1, p. 142.
Similar to al-muqīmīn is al-s.ābirīn in Q. 2:177. Of all the qurrā’ only „Ās.im al-Jah.darī
read it as al- s.ābirūn, although in writing, he kept it as al- s.ābirīn for the same reasons
mentioned before. For further details, see Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 53-54.
89.
These views are reported by Abū al-Baqā‟. See al-Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 2, p.
274; see also al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 2, p. 139.
90.
Al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 6, p. 18. This is also the reading of Ubayy, Anas, „Ās.im
102
al-Jah.darī, Sa„īd ibn Jubayr, and others. See Arthur Jeffery, ed., Materials, pp. 38 and
216. Al-Zamakhsharī mentions that this reading is that of Mālik ibn Dīnār, „Ās.im al-
Jah.darī and „Īsá al-Thaqafī, as written in the codex of „Abd Allāh (ibn Mas„ūd); see al-
Kashshāf, vol. 1, p. 336. According to al-Qurt.ubī, the reading of Ubayy is al-muqīmīn,
as in the „Uthmānic recension; see al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 6, p. 13. This is also the
reading of Abu „Amr in one report, see al-Zarqānī, Manāhil al-‘Irfān, vol. 1, p. 388.
91.
Al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 6, p. 18.
92.
See al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 2, p. 140.
93.
For further details, see al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 6, pp. 19-20.
94.
See al-Suyūt.ī, al-Itqān, vol. 2, p. 274.
95.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 54; and Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-Sab‘ah, p. 430. Beside
„Ās.im, Ibn „Āmir also reads nujjī with one nūn; see al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol.
4, p. 60.
96.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 55; Ibn Khālawayh, al-H.ujjah, p. 250; and al-T.abarī,
Jāmi‘, vol. 17, p. 65.
97.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 55-56; al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, vol. 2, p. 210;
and al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 11, p. 335.
98.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 55; and Ibn Khālawayh, al-H.ujjah, p. 250.
99.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 55, n. 1.
100.
See al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 11, p. 335.
101.
See al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 4, p. 60.
102.
The text says without , but this must be misprinted, as none of
the qurrā’ read it that way. It should be , and the expression "without
wāw" is meant by Ibn Qutaybah the absence of wāw in , namely, not . See
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 56, al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, vol. 1, pp. 87-88; and vol. 3,
p. 160, and Ibn Khālawayh, al-H.ujjah, p. 346.
103.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 56; Abū „Ubaydah, Majāz al-Qur’ān, vol. 2, p. 259;
and Ibn Mujāhid, Kitāb al-Sab‘ah, p. 637. Besides Ibn Mas„ūd, according to the codex
of Ibn „Abbās it is read wa akūna. The codex of Ubayy ibn Ka„b reads fa’atas.addaqa.
Ibn Mas„ūd's variant reading is . See A. Jeffery, Materials, pp.
171 and 206.
104.
See A. Jeffery, Materials, pp. 171 and 206. See also al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-
Qur’ān, vol. 1, pp. 87-88 and vol. 3, p. 160.
105.
Ibn Qutaybah is referring to the Qur‟ānic verse:
( :٤) "Whereby the angels and the Spirit ascend unto Him in a
103
Day whereof the span is fifty thousand years." (Q. 70:4). This is the interpretation of
„Ikrimah, Qatādah and Ibn „Abbās as reported by al-T.abarī. However, in another report
attributed to Ibn „Abbās he was asked about the day in which the span is fifty thousand
years. He asked the questioner about the day in which the span is one thousand years
mentioned in Q. 32:5). When the questioner declined to answer, Ibn „Abbās told him
that both days were mentioned by Allah in the Qur‟ān, and He Himself knew them best.
Ibn „Abbās did not want to give any commentary on them. See al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol.
29, p. 45.
106.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 65. According to Qatādah, the questioning will
occur before their mouths were sealed, their hands spoke and their feet testified as
mentioned in Q. 36:65. See al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 17, p. 174; and Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr,
vol. 4, p. 295.
107.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 66. See also Q. 36:65. In the Hereafter the wronged
will dispute against the wrong-doers, the speakers of truth against the liars and non-
believers against believers and the weak against the arrogant; see al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘,
vol. 15, p. 254.
108.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 72-73. This is also the view of Qatādah and
Mujāhid. This is one interpretation given by al-T.abarī. The other interpretation is that of
„Ā‟ishah who says that the verse deals with the guardians of orphans who intend to
marry them for their wealth and beauty with lower than the minimum dowry. The verse
prohibits them from doing so unless they pay the dowry in full, or marry other women.
For further details, see al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 4, pp. 155-160; al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol.
5, p. 11; and Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr, vol. 1, pp. 459-461.
109.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 75-76; and al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 17, p. 255.
110.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 79-80; and al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 19, p. 171.
111.
Al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 19, p. 172.
112.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 80. Al-Qurt.ubī and Ibn Kathīr also mention Ibn
„Abbās's interpretation with the addition that Ibn „Abbas makes the exception with the
crystal that it is of silver. But he says further that the crystal of Paradise is like silver (in
its whiteness) with the purity of crystal. See al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 19, p. 141. Ibn
Kathīr also quotes Ibn „Abbās's statement who says that the goblets are of silver but
transparent so that its content can be seen through it; such goblets will not be found in
this world. See Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr, vol. 4, p. 486.
113.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 81. Al-Qushayrī states that the verse said "stones of
clay" to distinguish it from the "stones of water" which are hail stones. See al-Qurt.ubī,
al-Jāmi‘, vol. 17, p. 48.
114.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 101-102.
115.
Al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 3, pp. 114-115.
116.
Ibid., p. 115.
104
117.
Ibid., pp. 115-116. This is also the view of Abū „Alī al-Jubbā‟ī, according to
al-T.abarsī, see Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 1, p. 409.
118.
See al-Murtad.á, al-Amālī. vol. 2, p. 97.
119.
Al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 3, p. 116; and al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 1, p.
409.
120.
Al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 3, pp. 116-117; and al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol.
1, p. 409.
121.
Al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 1, p. 410.
122.
Ibn Al-Anbārī, al-Ad.dād, pp. 424-425.
123.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 86.
124.
For further details and more examples, see Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, pp. 87-98.
125.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 98.
126.
Ibid., p. 99.
127.
Ibid., p. 101, n. 2; and al-T.abarsī, Majma‘ al-Bayān, vol. 1, p. 410.
128.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 101. See also Ibn al-Anbārī, al-Ad.dād, p. 424. For
further details on this poem, see al-Murtad.á, al-Amālī, vol. 1, p. 44; and Abū al-Faraj
al-As.bahānī, Kitāb al-Aghānī, ed. Rudolph E. Brünnow, 20 vols. (Leiden: E.J. Brill),
vol. 17, pp. 53-55.
129.
Ibn Qutaybah, Ta’wīl, p. 102.
130.
Many interpretations are given on his verse: (a) It is about the Jewish rabbis
and the Christian priests who concealed the prophecies about Prophet Muh.ammad; (b)
It is about the Jews of Madīnah who concealed the law of stoning; (c) It is applicable to
anyone who conceals the truth or the teachings of Islam. This verse is the reason why
Abū Hurayrah narrated the h.adīths of the Prophet. See al-Qurt.ubī, al-Jāmi‘, vol. 2, pp.
184-185. Another Qur‟ānic verse referred to by Ibn H.azm is as follows:
( ... :١٨٣ ) "And (remember) when Allah laid a
charge on those who had received the Scripture (He said): Ye are to expound it to
mankind and not to hide it...." (Q. 3:187, Pickthall).
131.
For further details on Ibn H.azm's view on the mutashābihāt, see al-Ih.kām,
vol. 4, pp. 489-494.
132.
Ibid., vol. 1, p. 44 and vol. 4, p. 491.
133.
A. Jeffery, Materials, p. 32; and al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, vol. 1, p. 191.
134.
Jeffery, Materials, pp.123-4; and al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, vol. 1, p. 191.
135.
Jeffery, Materials, p. 196. See also al-T.abarī, Jāmi‘, vol. 3, p. 113; and al-
S.ābūnī (ed.), Mukhtas.ar, vol. 1, p. 265.
136. Al-S.ābūnī, Mukhtas.s.ar, vol. 1, p. 265
105
137.
See Ibn Taymiyyah, Tafsīr Sūrat al-Ikhlās., p. 130.
138.
Al-S.ābūnī, Mukhtas.ar, vol. 1, p. 265; Ibn Taymiyyah, Tafsīr Sūrat al-Ikhlās.,
p. 136; and Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmū‘ Fatāwá (Muqaddimat al-Tafsīr), vol. 13, p. 375.
139.
This is also the view of S.ābigh ibn „Isl who was beaten by „Umar when he
said that if the wāw is wāw ‘at.f (wāw of conjunction) between the two nouns and not
wāw isti’nāf (wāw of continuation between two sentences or phrases), the verse would
have said wa yaqūlūn; see Ibn Taymiyyah, Tafsīr Sūrat al-Ikhlās., p. 130. For further
details on S.abīgh, see Abbott, Qur’ānic Commentary, pp. 107-10.
140.
At least two Qur‟ānic verses use the same style as the verse (Q. 3:7) in
question, and therefore, weaken this argument. One of them is
( :٢٢) "And thy Lord shall come with angels, rank in rank" )Q. 89:22, Pickthall) in
which "rank in rank" is attributed to the angels only. The other verse deals with the
distribution of the fay’ (the spoils) of the Banī al-Nad.īr among the three groups of
people, namely, the muhājirīn, the ans.ār (Q. 59:8-9), and
( ... :١٠) "...and those who came (into the faith) after them, say: 'Our Lord!
Forgive us...'" Q. 59:10, Pickthall).
141.
Al-Farrā‟, Ma‘ānī ’l-Qur’ān, vol. 2, p. 78, and vol. 1, p. 191.
142.
Abū „Ubaydah, Majāz al-Qur’ān, vol. 1, p. 86.