I have written in my treatise Mizan that the Qur’an is what is recorded in the
mushaf, and which, except for some areas of North Africa, is recited by a vast
majority of the Muslim ummah without the slightest variation. A question may
arise on this: even if for the sake of discussion it is accepted that the Qur’an
is only what has just been specified and the common masses only read and study
it, then why is the attitude of Muslim scholars different from this? How did it
happen that the scholars of Tafsir, Hadith and Fiqh from the very beginning of
these disciplines accorded equal status to the multiple readings of the Qur’an,
and would give preference to one over the other on the basis of their own
opinion and inclination? So much so, jurists and hadith scholars of the likes of
Imam Malik and Imam Shafi‘i gave preference to the reading of Nafi‘ ibn Abi
Nu‘aym (d. 169 AH) and ‘Abdullah ibn Kathir (d. 120 AH) respectively.
The answer to this question is that long before all these scholars, the earliest
Muslim authorities had formed the opinion that though it is not essential for
the common man to acquire knowledge through the akhbar-i ahad, it is essential
for the scholars and the select to accept them and after being satisfied about
their isnad, there is no difference in acquiring and adducing the knowledge
gained through them and the knowledge that pervades the common Muslims and which
is being transferred from their generations to generations. Imam Shafi‘i writes
in his celebrated treatise Al-Risalah:
وعلم الخاصة سنة من خبر الخاصة يعرفها العلماء ولم يكلفها غيرهم
وهي موجودة فيهم أو في بعضهم بصدق الخاص المخبر عن رسول الله بها وهذا اللازم لأهل
العلم أن يصيروا إليه
And the knowledge of the select is the sunnah which is acquired through their
reports, which the scholars know and which is not essential for the common man
to know. This sunnah is present with all the scholars or with some of them from
God’s Messenger (sws) through the information provided by a reliable informant
and this is the knowledge which scholars must necessarily turn to.
Thus after the demise of the Prophet (sws), when trustworthy narrators started
to state, for example, that while a companion had read the word
مَالِك (owner) as مَلِك
(king) in verse 2 of Surah Fatihah, and يَكْذِبُوْن in
its intensive form as يُكَذِّبُوْن in verse 10 of
Surah Baqarah and يُوْصى in its passive form in verse
12 of Surah Nisa’, then this was accepted in scholarly circles the way the
reports of his other sayings and deeds were being been accepted. The reason for
this was evident: if they did not accept these reports regarding the Qur’an,
they would also not have any basis to accept reports which depicted the
Prophet’s deductions, verdicts, explanations and exemplary character except if
they were deemed to be against a Qur’anic verse. The proliferation of variant
readings took place because of this opinion of the tabi‘un (followers of the
companions). Not much later, among the experts of readings which were being
produced, some became prominent who were not merely adept in various modes of
pronunciation of the Arabian dialect like izhar, ikhfa’, idgham, imalah, tafkhim,
ishmam and itmam etc but took a step ahead and by giving preference to one
reading of the Qur’an over the other as found in various reports of the
knowledge of the select (‘ilm al-khasah) referred to above compiled their
specific set of readings that became famous by the names of these experts. This
was much like the jurisprudence of Imam Malik, Imam Shafi‘i and other leading
jurists becoming famous by their names. For this very reason, these experts of
Qur’anic readings are called “Readers invested with Preference” (ashab al-ikhtiyar).
The result of this was and should have been that the students turn to them to
learn their preference and choice of readings just as they turned to the jurists
and Hadith scholars to learn jurisprudence and Hadith respectively. Moreover,
many a time, it happened that these readers having preference adopted an
intellectual centre of those times like Makkah, Madinah, Kufah, Basrah and Syria
besides others as their abode. The result was that such was the fame that a
preferential reading acquired among the scholars and readers of an area that it
came to be said that the people of that area followed his reading. The word
“people” here referred to the scholars and readers only and not to the common
masses. The masses never accept or reject such things in this way. It is
precisely for this reason that the situation changed and men of a learning of a
particular area after some time adopted the preferential reading of some other
reader. And it is for this reason that except for these learning centres, no
other reading is found anywhere in the Muslim world nor is there any historical
evidence of such acceptance or rejection of a reading. The only exception to
this is Qirwan where Qadi ‘Abdullah ibn Talib who in the later part of the third
century hijrah passed the order that people should only be taught the reading of
Nafi‘.
Thus, after this, common Muslims as well were forced to read the Qur’an on the
reading of Nafi‘ in Qirawan and in some other areas which were under its
influence. The reason for this probably was that these people were the followers
of Imam Malik’s fiqh and about Imam Malik, it has been pointed out above that he
would generally prefer the reading of Nafi‘.
Similar was the case with some small settlements which came under the influence
of scholars. These settlements were very few in number and even exist today at
some places. All other areas except these were never influenced by these changes
nor did the scholars tried to influence them. Both carried on with their own
ways. Thus the tradition of benefitting from variant readings in the disciplines
of tafsir, Hadith, fiqh and others has been going on without interruption, and
is still going on to a greater extent. Scholars discuss these readings in their
writings, gatherings and religious seminaries, and professional readers today
recite the Qur’an on seven, ten and even more variant readings. However, everone
can see that among the common masses, there is only one Qur’an in currency
everywhere. They took it from the common companions, and in the terminology of
Imam Shafi‘i transferred it from ‘ammah to ‘ammah (common masses to common
masses). No doubt, it is also called the riwayah of Hafs but this should not be
a cause of any misconception because one thing is mere reading or intonation and
another is reading or intonation in the accent of the Arabs in a pleasing way by
giving due regard to technical subtleties like imalah, tafkhim, ishba‘,
ikhtilas-i silah, ishmam, rawm, tarqiq and taghliz that does not alter the
meaning of the discourse in any way. It is this second aspect which is acquired
from the riwayah of Hafs in this Qur’an, and ascribed to him on this basis. He
was taught this reading from his teacher ‘Asim ibn Abi al-Najud (d. 127 AH) who
in turn was a student of the celebrated follower Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami
(d. 74 AH). al-Sulami taught its subtleties in Kufah to various students for
almost forty years. About him, Abu Bakr ibn Mujahid (d. 324 AH), the first
person to have selected the seven canonical readings, has specified that he did
not teach his own preferential reading but the very one on which ‘Uthman (rta)
had striven to gather the ummah on. He writes:
أول من أقرأ بالكوفة القراءة التي جمع عثمان رضي الله تعالى عنه
الناس عليها أبو عبد الرحمن السلمي
The first person who taught the reading in Kufah on which ‘Uthman had gathered
the people was Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami.
He is the same person who upon seeing the proliferation of various readings
among people had said:
كانت قراءة أبى بكر وَعمر و عثمان و زيد بن ثابت و المهاجرين
وَالأنصار وَاحدة كانوا بقرءون القراءة العامة وَهى القراءة التى قرأها رسول الله
صلي الله عليه وسلم على جبريل مرتين في العام الذى قبض فيه وكان زيد قد شهد
العرْضَة الأخيرة وَكان يقرئ الناس بها حتى مات.
The reading of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and Zayd ibn Thabit and that of all the
Muhajirun and the Ansar was the same. They read the Qur’an according to the al-qira’at
al-‘ammah. This is the same reading which was read out twice by the Prophet (sws)
to Gabriel in the year of his death. Zayd ibn Thabit was also present in this
reading [called] the al-‘ardah al-akhirah. It was this reading that he taught
the Qur’an to people till his death.
It is this very reading that is written in our codices of the Qur’an. Not a
single bit of evidence can be furnished from history except the endeavours of
‘Uthman (rta) (d. 36 AH) and Hajjaj ibn Yusuf (d. 94 AH) to unite all Muslims on
one Qur’an in which a scholar used his influence or a ruler or a qadi used
political power to impose this Qur’an among the Muslims, the way it was done is
some West African counties with regard to the reading of Nafi‘. It was this
Qur’an which the Prophet (sws) and his successors gave currency to among the
Muslims and it has remained in currency ever since. Consequently, when the
readers of the Muslims were compiling their preferences in readings and when
their Hadith scholars were collecting the reports of ‘ilm al-khassah and their
jurists and exegetes were solving the difficulties of the Qur’an through them,
Mulims were reading this very Qur’an in the whole world. At the end of the
first century hijrah when they entered India, they entered while reading it and
when they landed at the shores of Java, Sumatra, Malaya and other islands of the
Far East at the end of the eighth century, it was this very Qur’an which was in
their hands and God willing will remain in their hands till the Day of Judgement.
Here a person can pose the question: If despite all these facts, the academic
tradition of the Muslims accepted all the reports related to ‘ilm al-khassah,
why then has the Farahi school adopted a different stance in this regard? Our
answer is that it is not easy for any person of learning to disregard reports
narrated by reliable narrators; this needs an explicit Qur’anic directive. Thus
if the true meaning of the relevant verses of Surah Qiyamah had become evident
at the very beginning, Muslim scholars, jurists and exegetes would probably have
adopted the same stance as the scholars of the Farahi school. Imam Hamid al-Din
has explained the true meaning of these verses. Hence, that explicit Qur’anic
directive has become available on the basis of which it can be said even if all
the narratives which depict the variant readings of the Qur’an are correct, they
have been abrogated by the reading of the ardah akhirah for the universal
addressees of the Qur’an; hence they cannot be accepted in any way whatsoever.
It is a directive of the Qur’an that after its collection and arrangement,
Muslims will be bound till the Day of Judgement to read it on the reading it was
read by the Almighty after this collection. No Muslim can dare deviate from this
directive of the Qur’an. It states:
لَا تُحَرِّكْ بِهِ لِسَانَكَ لِتَعْجَلَ بِهِ إِنَّ عَلَيْنَا
جَمْعَهُ وَقُرْآنَهُ فَإِذَا قَرَأْنَاهُ فَاتَّبِعْ (٧٥:
١٦-١٨)
[To acquire] this [Qur’an] swiftly [O Prophet!] do not move your tongue hastily
over it. [It will be revealed like this. Rest assured] its collection and
recital is Our responsibility. So when We have recited it [at that time], follow
this recital. (75:16-18)
(Translated from Al-Bayan by Dr Shehzad Saleem)
|