Textual History of the Qur'an: Difference between revisions

Textual History of the Qur'an (view source)

Revision as of 00:54, 9 December 2022

2,320 bytes added , 9 December 2022

no edit summary

[checked revision]

Lightyears

Editors, em-bypass-2, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators

2,743

edits

@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 Some Muslim scholars sought to explain the reported differences in the mushafs (codices) of the companions as merely being their own exegetical glosses. Such an explanation may be possible in some instances, but certainly not in others such as when pronouns or grammatical forms are changed or words are reported to have been simply omitted, for example in {{Quran|112|1}} where Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy omitted the word "Say" (qul)<ref>Noldeke, T. et. al. (1909, 1938) "The History of the Qur'an" Ed. and trans. by Behn W. H. (2013) Brill: Leiden pp.443 and 453<BR>His lists of companion variants are based on al Zamakhshari's tafsir, with further sources in footnotes as appropriate (p.431, footnote 280)</ref><ref>Jeffrey, Materials pp.114 and 180</ref>, or Ibn Mas'ud's omission of the entire verse {{Quran|94|6}}.<ref>Noldeke, History of the Qur'an p.442</ref><ref>Jeffrey, Materials pp.110</ref> Other explanations were that these were variations in the revelation ("ahruf", discussed in a section below) or abrogated versions of the verses, which encounter some of the same problems as just mentioned, as well as the issue of their sheer quantity and the difficulty of explaining the purpose of the less clear or specific wordings of the same sentences in the Uthmanic Qur'an.
-Many other examples of such variations among the sahaba are discussed in another online article and in the next few sections below.<ref>[http://www.islam-watch.org/Amarkhan/Corruption-in-Quran.htm Corruption and Distortion (Tahreef) in the Quran] by Amar Khan, 2009 [http://www.webcitation.org/6lPZcJIAX webcitation archive link]</ref> A full translation of the variants documented in Abu Ubayd's (d. 244 H.) Fudail al-Quran is also available.<ref>[https://theislamissue.wordpress.com/2021/11/28/variant-readings-from-abu-ubayds-fudail-al-quran/ Variant readings from Abu Ubayds Fudail Al-Quran] See also many other articles on the same website concerning specific pre-Uthmanic variants</ref>
+Many other examples of such variations among the sahaba are discussed in another online article and in the next few sections below.<ref>[http://www.islam-watch.org/Amarkhan/Corruption-in-Quran.htm Corruption and Distortion (Tahreef) in the Quran] by Amar Khan, 2009 [http://www.webcitation.org/6lPZcJIAX webcitation archive link]</ref> A full translation of the variants documented in Abu Ubayd's (d. 244 H.) ''Fudail al-Quran'' is also available.<ref>[https://theislamissue.wordpress.com/2021/11/28/variant-readings-from-abu-ubayds-fudail-al-quran/ Variant readings from Abu Ubayds Fudail Al-Quran] See also many other articles on the same website concerning specific pre-Uthmanic variants</ref>
 ===Qur'an of Ibn Mas'ud===
-It was widely reported that Abdullah ibn Mas'ud's Qur'anic text omitted surah al-Fatiha and the mu'awwithatayni (surahs 113 and 114).<ref name="Itqan ibn Masud">"''Imam Fakhruddin said that the reports in some of the ancient books that Ibn Mas'ud denied that Surah al-Fatiha and the Mu'awwithatayni are part of the Qur'an are embarrassing in their implications... But the Qadi Abu Bakr said "It is not soundly reported from him that they are not part of the Qur'an and there is no record of such a statement from him. He omitted them from his manuscript as he did not approve of their being written. This does not mean he denied they were part of the Qur'an. In his view the Sunnah was that nothing should be inscribed in the text (mushaf) unless so commanded by the Prophet (saw) ... and he had not heard that it had been so commanded.''" - as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.186</ref>  Ibn Mas'ud's denial that the last two surahs were part of the Qur'an is also recorded in Sahih Bukhari.<ref>"''Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:''
+It was widely reported that Abdullah ibn Mas'ud's Qur'anic text omitted surah al-Fatiha and the mu'awwithatayni (surahs 113 and 114).<ref>For an early report about Ibn Masud omitting al Fatiha see the translation of Abu Ubayd's (d. 244 H.) ''Fudail al Quran'' [https://theislamissue.wordpress.com/2021/11/28/variant-readings-from-abu-ubayds-fudail-al-quran/ here]</ref><ref name="Itqan ibn Masud">"''Imam Fakhruddin said that the reports in some of the ancient books that Ibn Mas'ud denied that Surah al-Fatiha and the Mu'awwithatayni are part of the Qur'an are embarrassing in their implications... But the Qadi Abu Bakr said "It is not soundly reported from him that they are not part of the Qur'an and there is no record of such a statement from him. He omitted them from his manuscript as he did not approve of their being written. This does not mean he denied they were part of the Qur'an. In his view the Sunnah was that nothing should be inscribed in the text (mushaf) unless so commanded by the Prophet (saw) ... and he had not heard that it had been so commanded.''" - as-Suyuti, Al-Itqan fii Ulum al-Qur'an, p.186</ref>  Ibn Mas'ud's denial that the last two surahs were part of the Qur'an is also recorded in Sahih Bukhari.<ref>"''Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:''
 ''I asked Ubai bin Ka`b, "O Abu AlMundhir! Your brother, Ibn Mas`ud said so-and-so (i.e., the two Mu'awwidh-at do not belong to the Qur'an)." Ubai said, "I asked Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) about them, and he said, 'They have been revealed to me, and I have recited them (as a part of the Qur'an)," So Ubai added, "So we say as Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) has said."'' {{Bukhari|6|60|501}}<br>
@@ Line 134: / Line 134: @@
 *He also regarded "Your Lord has commanded" (waqada rabbuka) in {{Quran|17|23}} to be a scribal error which should have read "And your Lord has advised" (wawassa rabbuka)<ref>Qurtubi in his [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=5&tSoraNo=17&tAyahNo=23&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 tafsir for 17:23] quotes Abu Hatim (d.338 H) "And in Ibn Masud’s Qur’an 'and he advised (وَوَصَّى Wawassa)'. It is the reading of his companions and the reading of Ibn Abbas as well, and Ali and others, and also according to Ubai bin K’ab. Ibn Abbas said: It is only “And your Lord advised (وَوَصَّى Wawassa)”, so one of the waw (و) got attached and he read: 'And your Lord has commanded (وقضى Waqada).' For if it were a fate, no one would have disobeyed God. And Ad-Dhahaak said: I gathered with people when “recommended /commanded” the waw (و) was mixed with the sad (ص) at the time the Quran was written. Abu Hatim mentioned Ibn Abbas, like the words of Ad-Dhahaak. And he said on the authority of Maimon bin Mehran that he said: According to Ibn Abbas’s words to Nora, God Almighty said: {He has prescribed for you the religion which He had advised (وَصَّى wassa) upon Noah and which We have [also] revealed to you}. Then Abu Hatim refused to believe that Ibn Abbas said that. And he said: If we say this is true, the heretics are going to stab our Mushaf."</ref><ref>A similar comment is made by al-Razi in his [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=4&tSoraNo=17&tAyahNo=23&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 tafsir for 17:23]</ref>, as was the reading of Ubayy, ibn Mas'ud and others according to al-Tabari.<ref>Al-Tabari's tafsir for [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=1&tSoraNo=17&tAyahNo=23&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 tafsir for 17:23]</ref>
-*Ibn 'Abbas instructed that {{Quran|2|137}} should be read "And if they believe in that (āmanū bimā) which ye believe" instead of the standard Uthmanic "And if they believe in the like of that (amanū bi-mithli mā) which ye believe". Dr. Hythem Sidky notes that "This variant is recorded as being found in the muṣḥafs of the Companions Ibn Masʿūd and Anas b. Mālik and the Successor Abū Ṣāliḥ. Ibn ʿAbbās is also reported to have disliked the ʿUthmānic reading, which contains bi-mithl, as he considered God to have 'no equivalent (laysa lahū mathīl).'" Sidky notes that the āmanū bimā reading was also attested in the early manuscript BnF Arabe 331.<ref>Hythem Sidky (2019) [https://www.middleeastmedievalists.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/UW-27-Sidky.pdf Book review: Daniel Alan Brubaker, Corrections  in  Early  Qurʾānic  Manuscripts:
+*Ibn 'Abbas instructed that {{Quran|2|137}} should be read "And if they believe in that (āmanū bimā) which ye believe" instead of the standard Uthmanic "And if they believe in the like of that (amanū bi-mithli mā) which ye believe". Dr. Hythem Sidky notes that "This variant is recorded as being found in the muṣḥafs of the Companions Ibn Masʿūd and Anas b. Mālik and the Successor Abū Ṣāliḥ. Ibn ʿAbbās is also reported to have disliked the ʿUthmānic reading, which contains bi-mithl, as he considered God to have 'no equivalent (laysa lahū mathīl).'" Sidky notes that the āmanū bimā reading was also attested in the early manuscript BnF Arabe 331.<ref>Hythem Sidky (2019) [https://www.middleeastmedievalists.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/UW-27-Sidky.pdf Book review: Daniel Alan Brubaker, Corrections  in  Early  Qurʾānic  Manuscripts: Twenty Examples] Al-ʿUṣūr al-Wusṭā 27 (2019): 273-288 (p.285)</ref> The opinion of Ibn Abbas is noted in al-Tabari's tafsir for this verse.
-Twenty Examples] Al-ʿUṣūr al-Wusṭā 27 (2019): 273-288 (p.285)</ref> The opinion of Ibn Abbas is noted in al-Tabari's tafsir for this verse.
 ==Extant Early Manuscripts==
 [[File:MvPUthmanicNonUthmanic.png|thumb|Diagram classifying Qur'anic readings<ref>[https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1265724957100834816 Twitter.com] - Dr. Marijn van Putten ([https://web.archive.org/web/20200528101235/https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1265724937119170571 archive])</ref>]]
-A significant number of early Hijazi manuscript fragments have been radio-carbon dated to the first Islamic century, collectively covering the Qur'an between them (for a detailed discussion with images, see the article by Michael Marx and Tobias Jocham<ref>https://corpuscoranicum.de/pdf/Radiocarbon_Dating_of_Quran_Manuscripts.pdf</ref>). All but one of those discovered so far have been of the Uthmanic text type (the exception being the lower text of the [[Sana'a Manuscript|Ṣan'ā' 1 manuscript]], which is a palimpsest (codex which was washed and written over) found in Sana'a, Yemen, and which contains variants not found in any of the accepted readings of the Qur'an.<ref>"The text does not belong to the 'Uṯmānic textual tradition, making this the only known manuscript of a non-'Uṯmānic text type." Behnam Sadeghi and Uwe Bergmann, “The Codex of a Companion of the Prophet and the Qur’ān of the Prophet,” Arabica 57, no. 4 (2010): 343–436. p.343</ref>). However, these manuscripts are not identical. Every early manuscript falls into a small number of regional families (identified by variants in their rasm, or consonantal text), and each moreover contains non-canonical variants in dotting and lettering that can sometimes be traced back to those reported of the Companions.<ref name="Morteza Karimi-Nia">Morteza Karimi-Nia of the Encyclopaedia Islamica Foundation, Tehran, says in a paper on the Codex Mashhad manuscript:
+A significant number of early Hijazi manuscript fragments have been radio-carbon dated to the first Islamic century, collectively covering the Qur'an between them (for a detailed discussion with images, see the article by Michael Marx and Tobias Jocham<ref>https://corpuscoranicum.de/pdf/Radiocarbon_Dating_of_Quran_Manuscripts.pdf</ref>).
+All but one of the early Quran manuscripts discovered so far have been of the Uthmanic text type (the exception being the lower text of the [[Sana'a Manuscript|Ṣan'ā' 1 manuscript]], which is a palimpsest (codex which was washed and written over) found in Sana'a, Yemen, and which contains variants not found in any of the accepted readings of the Qur'an.<ref>"The text does not belong to the 'Uṯmānic textual tradition, making this the only known manuscript of a non-'Uṯmānic text type." Behnam Sadeghi and Uwe Bergmann, “The Codex of a Companion of the Prophet and the Qur’ān of the Prophet,” Arabica 57, no. 4 (2010): 343–436. p.343</ref>). However, these manuscripts are not identical. Every early manuscript falls into a small number of regional families (identified by variants in their rasm, or consonantal text), and each moreover contains non-canonical variants in dotting and lettering that can sometimes be traced back to those reported of the Companions.<ref name="Morteza Karimi-Nia">Morteza Karimi-Nia of the Encyclopaedia Islamica Foundation, Tehran, says in a paper on the Codex Mashhad manuscript:
 {{Quote-text||"''Irrespective of the above-mentioned regional differences, any early Qurʾānic codex simultaneously contains variant readings. In other words, no codex contains only a single reading. However, it must be noted that the seven variant readings attributed to the Seven Readers, which have been prevalent since the fourth/tenth century, are only rarely evident in the Qurʾānic manuscripts of the first two Islamic centuries. In these manuscripts, instead, one can find either the above-mentioned regional differences (as between Mecca, Medina, Kufa, Basra, or Damascus) or differences in lettering and dotting, which do not necessarily reflect the canonical variants of the Seven Readers but can be traced back to the readings of one of the Prophet’s Companions or Followers.''"}}
@@ Line 145: / Line 146: @@
 Morteza Karimi-Nia, [https://www.academia.edu/33908045/Mashhad_Codex_Uthm%C4%81nic_Text_of_the_Qur_%C4%81n_with_Ibn_Mas_%C5%ABd_Arrangement_of_S%C5%ABras_Possibly_Meccan_Medinan_Codex_in_the_Library_of_%C4%80st%C4%81n-e_Quds_paper_presented_in_the_conference_Paleo-Quranic_Manuscripts_Conference_State_of_the_Field_May_4-6_2017_Central_European_University_Budapest_ A new document in the early history of the Qurʾān: Codex Mashhad, an ʿUthmānic text of the Qurʾān in Ibn Masʿūd’s arrangement of Sūras], Journal of Islamic Manuscripts,  Volume 10 (2019) 3, pp. 292-326  DOI:10.1163/1878464X-01003002</ref> The Ṣan'ā' 1 manuscript is especially known to have this feature.<ref>Behnam Sadeghi and Uwe Bergmann, “The Codex of a Companion of the Prophet and the Qur’ān of the Prophet,” Arabica 57, no. 4 (2010): 343–436. See pages 390 ff.</ref><ref>See the list of companion variants in Appendix 1 of Sadeghi & Goudarzi, [https://www.scribd.com/doc/110978941/Sanaa-1-and-the-Origins-of-the-Qur-An San'a' 1 and the Origins of the Qur'an] Der Islam 87, No. 1-2 (February 2012) 1-129</ref><ref>[https://www.islamic-awareness.org/quran/text/mss/soth.html Codex Ṣanʿāʾ I – A Qur'ānic Manuscript From Mid–1st Century Of Hijra] Islamic Awareness</ref>
-Michael Cook's stemmatic analysis of the above mentioned regional variants reported in the Uthmanic copies has shown that they form a tree relationship<ref name="Cook">Cook, M. (2004) “The Stemma of the Regional Codices of the Koran,” ''Graeco-Arabica'', 9-10</ref>. By analysing orthographic idiosyncrasies common to known manuscripts of the Uthmanic text type, Dr. Marijn van Putten has given further proof that they all must descend from a single archetype, generally assumed to be that of Uthman.<ref>van Putten, M. (2019) [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bulletin-of-the-school-of-oriental-and-african-studies/article/grace-of-god-as-evidence-for-a-written-uthmanic-archetype-the-importance-of-shared-orthographic-idiosyncrasies/23C45AC7BC649A5228E0DA6F6BA15C06/core-reader The 'Grace of God' as evidence for a written Uthmanic archetype: the importance of shared orthographic idiosyncrasies] Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, Volume 82 (2) pp.271-288</ref>
+Michael Cook's stemmatic analysis of the above mentioned regional variants reported in the Uthmanic copies has shown that they form a tree relationship<ref name="Cook">Cook, M. (2004) “The Stemma of the Regional Codices of the Koran,” ''Graeco-Arabica'', 9-10</ref>. By analysing orthographic idiosyncrasies (i.e. spellings) common to known manuscripts of the Uthmanic text type, Dr. Marijn van Putten has given further proof that they all must descend from a single archetype, generally assumed to be that of Uthman.<ref>van Putten, M. (2019) [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bulletin-of-the-school-of-oriental-and-african-studies/article/grace-of-god-as-evidence-for-a-written-uthmanic-archetype-the-importance-of-shared-orthographic-idiosyncrasies/23C45AC7BC649A5228E0DA6F6BA15C06/core-reader The 'Grace of God' as evidence for a written Uthmanic archetype: the importance of shared orthographic idiosyncrasies] Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, Volume 82 (2) pp.271-288</ref>
+He has noted that the famous "Birmingham Quran" too has these spelling idiosyncracies and therefore is "clearly a descendant of the Uthmanic text type".<ref>[https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1220812853495640066 Twitter.com] - Dr. Marijn van Putten ([https://web.archive.org/web/20200124212157/https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1220812853495640066 archive])</ref> It is a two page fragment (Minghana 1572a), now known to be part of a longer manuscript fragment held in Paris (BNF Arabe 328c). In her PhD thesis, Alba Fedeli showed that the combined manuscript contains numerous variants, including some which affect meaning (especially the subject or object of verbs) and a few that had been reported in the qira'at literature. These mainly involve alifs and the sparse consonantal dottings present in the manuscript.<ref>Fedeli calls the combined fragments of this manuscript in Birmingham and Paris MS PaB.<BR />"A comparison between the copy of MS PaB and the Medina muṣḥaf leads to a number of differences being identified. These variants can be understood as a mirror of the linguistic competence of the copyist and his linguistic context, in that the manuscript bears some phonetic, orthographic, morphologic and syntactic variants, but also a few lexical variants, among which there are variants related to the voice and recipient of the message and some variants due to mechanical errors during the copying activity. Lastly, the manuscript exhibits a few peculiar features as regards the subdivision of the Qur’ānic text into verses. Furthermore, the analysis of the manuscript text compared with the literature of the Islamic tradition reveals a few qirā’āt that are substantiated through the manuscript itself."</BR />See pp. 147-199 of Alba Fedeli, (2014). [https://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/5864/1/Fedeli15PhD.pdf EARLY QUR’ĀNIC MANUSCRIPTS, THEIR TEXT, AND THE ALPHONSE MINGANA PAPERS HELD IN THE DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL COLLECTIONS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM] (PDF) (Ph.D.). Birmingham University.</ref>
 The rasm is only part of the story of the textual transmission of the Qur'an. In the earliest Quran manuscripts (and, we can assume, in the fragments originally collected by Zayd), homographic Arabic consonants were only sparsely dotted to distinguish them, which Adam Bursi has found was the typical scribal practice at that time even for Arabic poetry.<ref>Bursi, Adam. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5913/jiqsa.3.2018.a005 Connecting the Dots: Diacritics, Scribal Culture, and the Qurʾān in the First/Seventh Century] Journal of the International Qur’anic Studies Association, vol. 3, International Qur’anic Studies Association, 2018, pp. 111–157, https://doi.org/10.5913/jiqsa.3.2018.a005.</ref> They also lacked most word-internal ʾalifs (unwritten or inconsistent usage in most situations), and had no marks for short vowels or other diacritics. When vocalised manuscripts with vowels and other diacritics start to appear, many (mostly non-canonical) readings are found to be imposed upon the rasm.<ref>See for example comments by leading manuscript expert and linguist Dr. Marijn van Putten [https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1282206245026504704 here] ([https://web.archive.org/web/20200712065515/https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1282206245026504704 archive]), [https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1294253564378976259 here] ([https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1294253564378976259 archive]) and [https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1212824936768778245 here] ([https://web.archive.org/web/20210816162500/https://twitter.com/PhDniX/status/1212824936768778245 archive])</ref>

Textual History of the Qur'an: Difference between revisions

Textual History of the Qur'an (view source)

Revision as of 00:54, 9 December 2022

Navigation menu

Search