Response to 10 Difference in Hafs n Qaloon Narrations

 

Distortion in terminology


Distortion in terminology has many meanings, including: Distortion in order: i.e. moving the verse from its place to another.


Among them is distorting the meaning and changing it to something that contradicts the apparent meaning of its wording, and this includes interpretation by opinion, and whoever interprets the Quran other than its reality and interprets it in a meaning other than its meaning, then he is a distortion.


The Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever interprets the Quran according to his opinion and gets it right has erred.” See: Al-Kashshaf 3: 146.


Among them is distortion of the wording: which includes all of the addition or subtraction, change and substitution, and the division of that is as follows:


Distortion by addition: meaning that some of the Mushaf that we have in our hands is not from the revealed speech.


1- Adding a letter or more to the verse.
2- Adding a word or more to the verse.
3- Addition in a single Surah.
4- Addition in all Surahs.
Distortion by deficiency: meaning that some of the Mushaf that we have does not include all of the Qur’an that was revealed to the Prophet, as some of the Qur’an may have been lost to the people either intentionally or due to forgetfulness. This part may be a letter, a word, a verse, or a Surah.


1- Deficiency in a verse by a letter or more.
2- Deficiency in a verse by a word or more.
3- Deficiency in a single Surah.
4- Deficiency in all Surahs.
Distortion by replacing one word with another.
Distortion by replacing one letter with another.
Distortion by replacing one vowel with another.
This is the meaning of distortion and its types as defined and explained by Muslim scholars.


The question here is: Does this meaning of distortion apply to the Surahs, verses, and words of the Qur’an?


And let the reader remember the verse in Surat An-Nisa 82 “Do they not then consider the Qur’an carefully? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy.”




In our world today, Muslims read two copies of the Qur’an with two different readings:


1- The Qur’an according to the reading of Asim according to the narration of Hafs, which was issued under the supervision of Al-Azhar in Cairo in 1924. This copy of the Qur’an is circulated in all Islamic countries except the countries of the Maghreb.
2- The Qur’an according to the reading of Nafi’ according to the narration of Warsh, which was issued in Algeria in 1905. This copy of the Qur’an is circulated in the countries of the Maghreb except for Libya and Tunisia.
3- The Qur’an according to the reading of Nafi’ according to the narration of Qaloon, which is circulated in Libya and Tunisia.
4- The Mushaf according to the narration of Khalaf from Hamza..



Differences in the different readings of the Quran:


We often hear our Muslim brothers saying, challenging us to find any differences in the Quran, and they say out of ignorance of the truth that not a single letter of the Quran has been changed because Allah has promised to preserve it, and therefore it is impossible to find any difference in it. But the truth that the Muslim does not know is that there are very big differences between the Mushafs, and I will come to a small part of them in this research, but this small part will be enough to achieve what is stated in Surat An-Nisa 82, and the result is that the Quran is not from Allah.. Now let us start by stating the differences between the readings.


To make the search easier for the Muslim and to make sure of what I am saying, I have put the following two links here:


1- The Qur’an narrated by Qaloon from Nafi


’ http://audio.islamweb.net/audio/inde...&qid=939&rid=3


2- The Qur’an narrated by Hafs from Asim


http://quran.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?...okID=11&Page=1


3- The Qur’an narrated by Khalaf from Hamza


http://www.el-moslem.com/bookDetails.php?id=118


Now let us begin, with Allah’s blessing, to explain the differences between these Qur’ans.


The first difference:

Surah Al Imran 146

Hafs narration: {146} And how many a prophet fought with him many pious men, but they never lost heart for what befell them in the cause of Allah, nor did they weaken, nor did they humble themselves. And Allah loves the patient.

Qaloon narration: {146} And how many a prophet fought with him many pious men, but they never lost heart for what befell them in the cause of Allah, nor did they weaken, nor did they humble themselves. And Allah loves the patient.


Which verse is correct? Was he killed with him or fought with him??? Isn't this a big difference in meaning, word and letter? Doesn't the word "killed" have a completely different meaning from the word "killer"???

The second difference:


Surah Al Imran 125

Hafs narration: {125} Yes, if you are patient and fear Allah and they come to you in haste, your Lord

will reinforce you with five thousand angels with marks. Qaloon narration: {125} Yes, if you are patient and fear Allah and they come to you in haste, your Lord will reinforce you with five thousand angels with marks

. Isn’t this a difference in meaning and wording as well? Isn’t “marked” different in meaning and wording from “marked”??? Isn't there a difference between the subject and the object in the Arabic language??


The third difference:


Surah Al Imran 161

Hafs narration: {161} And it is not for a prophet to take spoils. And whoever takes spoils will bring what he took on the Day of Resurrection. Then every soul will be fully compensated for what it earned, and they will not be wronged.

Qaloon narration: {161} And it is not for a prophet to take spoils. And whoever takes spoils will bring what he took on the Day of Resurrection. Then every soul will be fully compensated for what it earned, and they will not be wronged.

Notice the difference between yaghullu and yughalla. Also, the subject and the object. In Hafs’ narration, it is the subject, and in Qaloon, it is the object. Isn't this a difference in wording and meaning??? Which one is correct???

The fourth difference:

Surat Az-Zukhruf 19

, Hafs narration: {19} And they have made the angels, who are

the servants of the Most Merciful, females. Did they witness their creation? Their testimony will be recorded, and they will be questioned. Qaloon narration: It is verse number 18, not 19, and its text is as follows: “And they have made the angels, who are the servants of the Most Merciful, females. Did they witness their creation? Their testimony will be recorded, and they will be questioned.”

Although the number of the verses is different in both narrations, we find that there is also a difference in the word “ashhadu” and “ashhadu.” Note the fat-ha mark on the letter The letter “shin” in Hafs’ narration and the letter “sukun” in Qaloon’s narration... This difference in pronunciation led to a difference in meaning as well...


The fifth difference

Surat Az-Zukhruf 24

Hafs narration: {24} He said, "Even if I bring you better guidance than that which you found your fathers following?" They said, "Indeed, we, in that with which you were sent, are disbelievers." Qaloon narration: {23} Say, "Even if I bring you better guidance than that which you found your fathers following?" They

said, "Indeed, we, in that with which you were sent, are disbelievers."

There is also a difference in the number of the verse and also in the word "say" and "said"!!! Isn't "say" different from "said" and makes the meaning completely different???


The sixth difference

Surah Al-Baqarah 119

Hafs narration: {119} Indeed, We have sent you with the truth as a bringer of good tidings and a warner.

And you will not be asked about the companions of Hellfire. Qaloon narration: {118} Indeed, We have sent you with the truth as a bringer of good tidings and a warner. And you will not be asked about the companions of Hellfire

. Also a difference in the verse number and a difference between the words “you will be asked” and “you will be asked.” The difference in wording led to a difference in meaning. Does the verse say to Muhammad, “You will not be asked, O Muhammad,” or does it say, “You will not be asked, O Muhammad?”

The Seventh Difference

Surah Al-Baqarah 191

Hafs narration: {191} And kill them wherever you find them and expel them from where they have expelled you. And persecution is worse than killing. And do not fight them at Al-Masjid Al-Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.

Khalaf narration: {191} And kill them wherever you find them and expel them from where they have expelled you. And persecution is worse than killing. And do not kill them at al-Masjid al-Haram until they kill you there. But if they kill you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers
.
When we tell our Muslim brothers that their Quran urges the killing of the People of the Book, citing Surah At-Tawbah 29 as evidence, the Muslim response is that At-Tawbah 29 says “fight” and does not say “kill,” and there is a big difference between “fight” and “kill.” Ok, here is Khalaf’s Mushaf using the words “fight them” and “kill you”!! Doesn’t the difference in pronunciation lead to a difference in meaning???

The eighth difference,

Al-Baqarah 184,

Hafs narration: {184} A specified number of days. So whoever among you is ill or on a journey - the same number from other days. And upon those who are able [to fast] is a ransom - the feeding of a poor person. And whoever volunteers good, it is better for him. And that you fast is better for you, if you only knew.

Khalaf narration: {184} A specified number of days. So whoever among you is ill or on a journey - the same number from other days. And upon those who are able [to fast] is a ransom - the feeding of a poor person. And whoever volunteers good, it is better for him. And that you fast is better for you, if you only knew. {184} For a specified number of days. And whoever among you is ill or on a journey - the same number of other days. And for those who are able to do it - a ransom - the feeding of poor people. But whoever does good voluntarily - it is better for him. And

for you to fast - it is better for you, if you only knew. Qaloon’s narration: {184} For a specified number of days. And whoever among you is ill or on a journey - the same number of other days. And for those who are able to do it - a ransom - the feeding of poor people. But whoever does good voluntarily - it is better for him. And for you to fast - it is better for you, if you only knew. You know

Note the difference between the words “tātāwā’a” and “yātāwā’u” between the narrations of Hafs and Khalaf, and also the word “miskīn” and “masakīn” between the narrations of Hafs and Qalūn. Isn’t this a difference in pronunciation and a distortion according to the Islamic definitions of distortion??

The ninth difference

Surah Al-Baqarah 285

Hafs narration: {285} The Messenger has believed in what was revealed to him from his Lord, and [so have] the believers. All of them have believed in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers. We make no distinction between any of His messengers, and they say, “We hear and we obey. Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the final destination.”

Khalaf narration: {285} The Messenger has believed in what was revealed to him from his Lord, and [so have] the believers. All of them have believed in Allah and His angels. And His Book and His Messengers. We make no distinction between any of His Messengers. And they say, “We hear and we obey. Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the final destination

.” Notice the difference between the words “and His Books” and “and His Book.” The difference in pronunciation is completely different from the meaning, because it is known in the Quran that when it mentions one book, it means the Quran, but when it mentions “His Books,” it means all the heavenly books. So which is correct??? “His Books” or “His Book”???

The tenth difference

Surah Al-Hadid 24

Hafs narration: {24} Those who are

stingy and enjoin stinginess on people. And whoever turns away - then indeed, Allah is the Free of need, the Praiseworthy. Qaloon narration: {23} Those who are stingy and enjoin stinginess on people. And whoever turns away - then indeed, Allah is the Free of need, the Praiseworthy.

Despite the difference in the verse number in both copies of the Qur’an, we find that in Qaloon’s narration the word “He” has disappeared from the verse!! Isn’t this considered a distortion??? Isn’t this considered the omission of an entire word???

The eleventh difference

Surah Maryam 19

Hafs’ recitation: He said, “

I am only a messenger from your Lord to you that He may bestow upon you a pure boy.” Nafi’, Abu Amr, Qaloon, and Warsh’s recitation: He said, “I am only a messenger from your Lord to you that He may bestow upon you a pure boy.”

Al-Bahr Al-Muhit, Al-Kashshaf: He said, “I am only a messenger from your Lord to you. He has commanded me to bestow upon you a pure boy.

” Note the differences in the verses in those recitations. Sometimes He says, “to bestow,” and another time, “to bestow,” and another time He says, “He has commanded me to bestow.”

The doubt:
The difference in the Quranic readings indicates confusion in the Quranic text, and also contradicts what the Quran has stated about the absence of any difference in it, such as the Almighty’s saying: {And if it had been from other than Allah, they would have found within it much discrepancy} (An-Nisa’: 82) and His saying: {Falsehood cannot come to it from before it or from behind it} (Fussilat: 42) and His saying as a fundamental principle: {Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian} ... to what it contains of changing the words of the Quran, and changing the words of the Quran, and contradicting what is in the Preserved Tablet, and contradicting what the Muslims narrate and contradicting what is in the Preserved Tablet, and contradicting what the Muslims narrate.


The response:
Introduction to the reader ...:
Allah Almighty revealed the Holy Quran in the language of the Arabs, and the language of the Arabs has different dialects, such that there are some words in each dialect that the people of the other language do not understand or know, so Allah Almighty made it easy for the nation by revealing the Quran in seven letters. In the two Sahihs, on the authority of Ibn Abbas May Allah be pleased with them, that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: "Gabriel taught me one letter, so I reviewed it with him, and I kept asking him for more and he kept giving me more until he reached seven letters ."
This doubt is based on a clear fallacy and contradiction of reality. The explanation for this is what the specialists have decided, that narration, reception, and hearing are the origin by which the recitation is proven, and its writing is proven, and not the opposite. The recitations, by consensus of the Muslims, were not proven by ijtihad and opinion, but rather they are proven by hearing and receiving.
The way to receive the Quran was by audio hearing:
- Hearing my voice from Gabriel to Muhammad, peace be upon them.
- Hearing my voice from the Messenger to the scribes of the revelation first and to the Muslims in general.
- Hearing my voice from the scribes of the revelation to those who heard it from them from the general Muslims.
- Hearing my voice until now from the memorizers of the Quran who have mastered it to those who learn it from them from the individuals of the Muslims.
This has been the origin since the Quran began to be revealed until this moment and until the Day of Judgment, in receiving the Quran from the sender to the receiver, and writing is not the origin..!
Readings: “It is the pronunciation of the words of the Qur’an as the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, pronounced them. ”
The issue of the difference in readings is a divine decree and is not merely a difference between people. It is not merely a linguistic or dialectal issue as some people think, but rather it is part of the revelation that transcends language and dialects to be the subject of a Quranic miracle.
The first authority for these readings is of course the Master of Messengers and the one to whom they were revealed, may the prayers and peace of my Lord be upon him, and the chains of transmission have been transmitted from him to this day. The reading that is considered correct is the one that was narrated from the Messenger of God,  so we see that the reciters were very keen to transmit these readings with precise chains of transmission, to the point that today we know exactly the history of each reading and the group of reciters who narrated it, and from whom each one of them took it. The scholars have set precise and strict conditions and controls regarding the narration of the Quran and its narrators, including the requirement of continuous transmission in every letter and verse of it so that it is considered Quran. Whoever knows this realizes that Allah has preserved His Book, and made the actions of these scholars reasons in which His effective will and wisdom that dictates its preservation appear. And God Almighty said the truth: ( Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian) ..!
And the companions from whom the ten readings were transmitted are:
Uthman and Ali (from Quraysh)
Abdullah bin Masoud (Al-Hudhali)
Ubayy ibn Ka'b and Zayd ibn Thabit (from Banu al-Najjar from al-Khazraj),
Abu al-Darda' (al-Khazraji)
, Abu Musa (al-Ash'ari al-Yamani).
Al-Dhahabi says in Ma'rifat al-Qurra' al-Kibar (1|42): “These are the ones who we have been told memorized the Qur'an during the life of the Prophet, and it was taken from them in passing, and the chains of transmission of the recitation of the ten imams revolved around them. The Qur'an was collected by others from among the Companions, such as Mu'adh ibn Jabal, Abu Zayd, Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhayfah, Abdullah ibn Umar, and Utbah ibn Amir, but their recitation did not reach us. (1)
As for the ten readings, they were attributed to the ten readers (( The attribution of the reading to the imam or narrator was only because he was famous for it in the way he taught it to others and people transmitted it from him one after the other in the same way, and that all of it is proven from the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, so there is no point in attributing some of the readings to him )), and for each reader of them there are two narrators, what is required of us from their blessed collection here is:
1) Warsh the narrator from the reader Nafi` ..
2) Hafs the narrator from the reader Asim ... and there are paths for each of these narrators ..
The difference between the readings of Hafs and Warsh goes back basically to the difference in the path from which each of them took it, so Hafs took it from Asim, and Warsh took it from Nafi`.... and each reader of these readers has his path with his connected chain of transmission from the Prophet .. For example, Hafs pronounces the hamza and Warsh does not pronounce it, for example: Al-Mu’minun / Al-Mu’minun, The earth,/:the earth, faith/faith, and so on..). There is also a difference between them in dividing the surahs into verses, and this sometimes results in a difference in the number of verses in the surahs from one reading to another!
The aspects of difference in the readings of the two imams Hafs and Warsh are many and varied, whether in the words, their pronunciation or their intonation. The word that is read in two or more ways has an acceptable meaning for each reading that increases and enriches the meaning. Since it was originally from God and was revealed to His Prophet, then there is no shameful matters, contradiction or confusion resulting from the multiple readings. Rather, their meanings and purposes are in agreement.
An example of this between the narrations of Warsh and Hafs is the following:
God Almighty said: (In their hearts is a disease, so God has increased their disease. And for them is a painful punishment because they used to lie .)
Hafs read (yakdhibun) with a fatha on the ya’, a sukoon on the kaf and a kasra on the dhal, meaning they tell false news about God and the believers. Warsh read ( yukkadhibun )
with a damma on the ya’, a fatha on the kaf and a shaddah on the kasra on the dhal, meaning they lie to the messengers in what they brought from God of revelation. The meaning of each of the two readings does not contradict or contradict the other. Rather, each of them mentioned A description of the hypocrites, the first description of them is that they lie in reporting about Allah, His Messengers, and the people, and the second description of them is that they deny the Messengers of Allah in what He revealed to them of legislation, and both are true.. And the Almighty’s saying in Al-Fatihah: ( Master of the Day of Judgment) Hafs read (Malik) with a fatha on the meem and a kasra on the lam, an active participle from malak, meaning the judge who manages the affairs of the Day of Judgment, which is the Day of Resurrection. Warsh read (Malik) as an adjective, not an active participle, meaning it is more general than the meaning of (Malik), that is: the one in whose hand is the command and prohibition, and the keys to everything, what is apparent of it and what is hidden, and both meanings are appropriate to Allah Almighty, and they are praise to Allah Almighty..







And the Almighty’s saying: (And they have made the angels who are the servants of the Most Gracious females..)
Hafs read (servants of the Most Gracious) and the servants of the Most Gracious who are meant here are of course the angels and Warsh
read (And they have made the angels who are with the Most Gracious females..)
and they are also in Warsh’s reading the same meaning and the same as the angels... And the Almighty’s saying: ( Righteousness
is not that you turn your faces toward the east or the west..) Hafs read (righteousness is an in the accusative) and Warsh read (righteousness is in the nominative) and the Almighty’s saying: (And look at the bones - how We resurrect them ..) Hafs read Nanshizha with a dotted zay meaning We establish them and move them and Warsh read Nanshurha with a ra meaning We revive them and clothe them with flesh and the Almighty’s saying: (What is with you will be exhausted, but what is with Allah will be destroyed..) (Remaining ) And We will surely reward those who are patient with the best of what they used to do.) Hafs read “Wilajzina” with a “nun ” and Warsh read it with a “ya ”. There is no difference, as you can see, in the meaning . And the Almighty’s saying: (The seven heavens and the earth and whoever is in them glorify Him. And there is not a thing but glorifies Him with praise, but you do not understand their glorification. Indeed, He is Forbearing, Forgiving.) Hafs read “Tasbih” with the feminine ending and Warsh read it with the masculine ending . And the Almighty’s saying: ( And shun the abomination. ) Hafs read “Wilajzina” with a “damma” on the “ra” meaning the idol. And he read Warsh and others said: “Rajaz” with a kasra means torment , and the meaning of the words is to abandon what leads you to torment. Al-Zajjaj said: They are two languages ​​with the same meaning.. And the Almighty’s saying: (And how many a prophet was killed along with him many devout men.....) Hafs read it (qāṭala) and Warsh read it (qāṭil) meaning why didn’t you do as the people of virtue and knowledge among the followers of the prophets before you did when their prophet was killed, by continuing on the path of their prophet and fighting for his religion the enemies of God’s religion in the same way they used to fight with their prophet.. And there are many examples of that.. And this doubt and its likes were not cast in the Holy Quran except out of hatred from the people of distorted books and religions, as a rash response from them to the mention of God Almighty in His Preserving Book of the news of the distortion of their books and their alteration of them according to their whims,,, and the reliance of their predecessors on manuscripts in transmitting these books which they tampered with according to interests and whims, generation after generation. And they still do, as for our great nation, it does not rely in carrying this Qur’an from the time of Muhammad, may the best prayers and peace be upon him, except on receiving and hearing... so the children memorize it and the people of Islam inherit its memorization and teaching, and the reason for the difference in readings and diversity in it, is due to the difference in transmission and hearing nothing else... and praise be to God for the blessing of our great Islam in which there is nothing and no defect.

He told me that there is a difference in the rulings in the readings, and he provided evidence for that:
((So wash your faces and your hands to the elbows and wipe over your heads and your feet to the ankles)) ( ) where ((and your feet)) was read in the accusative case in apposition to ((your faces)), which requires washing the feet, in apposition to what is washed, which are the faces. And ((and your feet)) was read in the genitive case in apposition to ((your heads)), and this reading requires wiping the feet, in apposition to what is wiped, which is the heads.
He also cited another doubt and said to me
regarding Hafs’s reading:

“Those who are miserly and enjoin miserliness on people. And whoever turns away, then indeed, Allah is the Rich, the Praiseworthy.”


In Warsh’s reading, an entire word was deleted: “

Those who are miserly and enjoin miserliness on people. And whoever turns away, then indeed, Allah is the Rich, the Praiseworthy.” So there is a difference in the word “He.” And
he said to me, “Aren’t the readings taken from one copy of the Qur’an? So why is this difference
? And did Uthman copy the copies of the Qur’an according to one letter and one copy? So why does there remain a difference?
I hope to clarify this issue so that I can answer him, hoping that he will return to the truth .
This is the answer, God willing
. There is no doubt or problem in what I have conveyed, but rather they are illusions and fabrications that have formed in the mind of this atheist due to his intellectual shallowness and scarcity of Islamic culture. Let us not also forget the closed mind and the black, inverted heart that does not recognize good and does not denounce evil except what it has imbibed from its desires.

His saying:
Quotation:
((So wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows and wipe over your heads and your feet up to the ankles)) ( ) where ((and your feet)) was read in the accusative case in apposition to ((your faces)) and it requires washing the feet, because it is in apposition to what is washed, which are the faces. And ((and your feet)) was read in the genitive case in apposition to ((your heads)) and this reading requires wiping the feet, because it is in apposition to what is wiped, which is the heads.
This is from the difference in diversity, and it is known to those who have read the readings, and there are many examples of it in the Holy Qur’an. Al-Zarqani mentioned some of them in Al-Manahil, then commented on their importance and benefits, saying:
(The diversity of readings is equivalent to the multiplicity of verses, and that is a type of eloquence, beginning with the beauty of this brevity and ending with the perfection of the miracle.
Add to that what is in the diversity of readings of clear proofs and conclusive evidence that the Qur’an is the word of God, and of the truth of the one who brought it, who is the Messenger of God. These differences in reading, despite their abundance, do not lead to contradiction and conflict in what is read, nor to incoherence and weakness. Rather, the entire Qur’an, despite its diversity of readings, confirms some of it with others, clarifies some of it with others, and testifies to some of it with one pattern in the loftiness of style and expression and one goal of the sublimity of guidance and education.
This undoubtedly indicates the multiplicity of the miracle with the multiplicity of readings and letters.)

This difference is not a contradiction as those who lack understanding understand, but rather it is a matter of expansion and diversity, which undoubtedly has great benefit that returns to the nation with ease and mercy.
Here is what some scholars have said about these two readings:
Ibn Jarir al-Tabari said:
(Abu Ja`far said: The correct statement in our view on this is that Allah, the Exalted, commanded the general wiping of the feet with water in ablution,
just as He commanded the general wiping of the face with earth in tayammum. If the person performing ablution does that with them, he deserves the name “washer and washer.”
Because “washing them” means passing water over them or touching them with water.
And “wiping them” means passing the hand or what takes the place of the hand over them.
If someone does that with them, then he is a “washer and wiper.”)

Al-Zamakhshari - who is an imam of language - mentioned a rhetorical point about this, saying:
(I said: The feet are among the three washed limbs, they are washed by pouring water on them, so they were a source of blameworthy extravagance that is forbidden, so it was connected to the third one that was wiped not to wipe, but to draw attention to the necessity of moderation in pouring water on it).

As for his saying:
Quotation:
In the reading of Hafs:
Those who are miserly and enjoin miserliness on people. And whoever turns away - then indeed, Allah is the Free of need, the Praiseworthy.
In the reading of Warsh, the entire word was deleted:
Those who are miserly and enjoin miserliness on people. And whoever turns away - then indeed, Allah is the Free of need, the Praiseworthy. So there is a difference in the word “He.”
Yes, it is a mutawatir reading, but it is not from Warsh, rather it is from Nafi’ and Ibn ‘Amir, and they are among the seven famous readers.
Imam Al-Shatibi mentioned this reading in his famous poem, saying:
And He has given you, so be brief, a guardian. And say, “He is the… Rich.” Delete “‘Amma” and connect it .
It is known to those who are familiar with this poem that the Imam uses the word “‘Amma” as a symbol for Nafi’ and Ibn ‘Amir.

Quote:
He said to me, aren’t the readings taken from one copy of the Qur’an, so why is this difference?
Did Uthman copy the copies of the Qur’an according to one letter and one copy, so why does there remain a difference?
I hope to clarify this issue so that I can answer him, hoping that he will return to the truth.
It is true that scholars have stipulated that the acceptance of a reading must be in accordance with the script, whether by estimation or investigation, but this rule is not without exceptions, and all of them are transmitted and accepted by all the investigating scholars, including, for example, but not limited to:
(And Abraham enjoined it upon his sons and Jacob) Nafi’, Ibn ‘Amir and Ja’far read (And Abraham enjoined it upon his sons and Jacob)
(And He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow) Ibn Kathir read (And He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow) (Underneath it are rivers)
(And those who believe will say, “Are these the ones who swore by God with their most solemn oaths?”) Nafi’, Ibn Kathir, and Ibn ‘Amir read (Those who believe will say, “Are these the ones who swore by God with their most solemn oaths?”)
The reason for not writing what is in excess of the Uthmanic writing is that it is not conceivable for the word to exist or not exist in the writing, because the verse is read sometimes with this word deleted and sometimes with it present, so how can the two be combined in the writing?
The problem disappears, my brother, when you learn that the basis for accepting a reading is that it is from what was received from the Prophet. By continuous transmission, which as you know requires definitive knowledge rationally, and not as some ignorant people imagine who have not understood the truth of this science, including the orientalist "Goldziher",
who claimed that the origin of the Quranic readings is due to the specificity of the Arabic script, which presents different phonetic values ​​from the structure of the word.
This statement is very weak, because if what agrees with the script was accepted in the reading without stopping at the reception, the number of readings would have to be many times what they are now.
And sufficient for us as evidence for that is what was mentioned from the rejected readings that the scholars rejected despite their agreement with the script, including:
(And the companions of the heights will call out to men whom they will recognize by their mark. They will say, "Your gathering has not availed you, nor was it that you were arrogant." So it was read (you were accumulating a lot).
Likewise (And Abraham's asking forgiveness for his father was only because of a promise he had made to him) was read (his father) and both are indefinite.

on the differences in readings,
their causes, types, benefits, and warding off doubts about them.

Readings is the plural of reading, and reading in the language is the source of reading.
In terminology: a school of thought of the pronunciation of the Qur’an, which one imam follows, differing from another, whether this difference is in the pronunciation of the letters or in the pronunciation of their shapes.
The science of readings:
is the science by which one knows how to pronounce the words of the Qur’an, and the way to perform them, whether in agreement or difference, with each aspect attributed to its transmitter. The subject of the science of readings is the words of the Holy Quran in terms of the conditions of pronunciation and how to perform them. ( )
The origin of readings:
The time in which the Quranic readings originated is the same time of the revelation of the Holy Quran. It is necessary that these readings are a Quran that was revealed from Allah, so they were not the result of anyone’s own efforts, but rather they are a revelation that Allah revealed to His Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. His noble companions, may Allah be pleased with them, transmitted them from him until they reached the Imams who were reciters. They established their principles and laid down their foundations in light of what reached them, transmitted from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Accordingly, what is relied upon in readings is only receiving them by way of continuous transmission, collected from a group that ensures that they do not collude in lying, all the way to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Or receiving them by way of trustworthy transmission from trustworthy people, all the way to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Two other restrictions are added to this restriction, which will be mentioned in their place when discussing the conditions for correct reading or the criteria for accepting readings.
Based on this, and based on it, adding these readings to specific individuals, namely the readers who read them, is not because they are the ones who created them or worked hard to compose them, but rather they are a link in a chain of trustworthy men who narrated these narrations and transmitted them from their ancestors, ending with the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, who received these readings as a revelation from his Lord - may He be glorified and exalted. Rather, the readings were attributed to the readers because they are the ones who took care of them, controlled them, and established rules and principles for them.

What is the reason for the difference in readings?
We have previously known that these readings were transmitted from the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and this means that the revelation came down with them from God.
The answer to the question is that the companions experienced it at the time of the revelation of the Qur’an in reality, not in theory. The companions - may Allah be pleased with them - were from many tribes and different places. As is well known, just as customs and dispositions differ according to environments, so does language. Each environment has some unique words that may not be found in the dialects of other environments, even though all of these environments fall within the framework of one language. This is how it was. The companions were pure Arabs, but the differences in their tribes and homelands led to each tribe having some unique words that other tribes may not know, even though they were all Arabs. The Holy Qur’an came to address everyone, so the Holy Qur’an took this into consideration, so its multiple readings were suitable for all those who received the Qur’an. Making things easy for the nation and making things easier for them is the reason for the multiple readings.
The successive hadiths about the revelation of the Qur’an in seven letters indicate this:
It was narrated in the two Sahihs - on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with them - that the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: “Gabriel taught me to recite the Qur’an in one harf, so I repeated it to him, and I kept asking him for more and he kept giving me more until he reached seven harfs.” ( ) Muslim added: “Ibn Shihab said: It has reached me that those seven are in a matter that is one and does not differ in what is lawful or unlawful.” ( )
Muslim narrated with his chain of transmission on the authority of Abi bin Ka’b that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, was with the people of Banu Ghaffar. ( ) He said: “Gabriel, peace be upon him, came to him and said: God commands you to recite the Qur’an to your nation in one harf. He said: I ask God for His pardon and forgiveness, for my nation cannot bear that. Then he came to him a second time and said: God commands you to recite the Qur’an to your nation in two harfs. He said: I ask God for His pardon and forgiveness, for my nation cannot bear that. Then he came a third time and said: God commands you to recite the Qur’an to your nation in three harfs. He said: I ask God for His pardon.” And His forgiveness, and my nation cannot bear that, then he came to him a fourth time and said: God commands you to recite the Qur’an to your nation in seven letters. Whichever letter they recite it in, they have done right.” ( )
The hadiths that have been reported in this regard are many, but I will suffice with what I have mentioned, and more is in its proper place, and the following can be taken from that:
1. All seven letters are Qur’an revealed from God, and there is no room for ijtihad in them.
2. The reason for this expansion is to make it easier for the nation and make it easy for them to recite the Noble Qur’an.
What is meant by the seven letters:
There are many statements that scholars have put forward about the concept of the seven letters, which the hadiths have repeatedly proven that the Qur’an was revealed in, which made some scholars flee from the battlefield and say: The hadith is problematic.
I say: The statements mentioned in this position, most of them do not deserve to be relied upon in this position due to their weakness. It is sufficient for us here to point out what is worth mentioning and worthy of being considered, and this is available in two opinions:
One of them is what Abu al-Fadl al-Razi mentioned, and Ibn Qutaybah and Ibn al-Jazari approached him in this.
The gist of it is that the seven letters are seven aspects from which the difference in readings does not depart, and they are:
1- The difference in nouns in singular, dual, plural, masculine, and feminine.
2- The difference in the conjugation of verbs in the past, present, and imperative.
3- The difference in the aspects of inflection.
4- The difference in deficiency and excess.
5- The difference in advancement and delay.
6- The difference in substitution.
7- The difference in languages ​​- i.e. dialects - such as opening and inclination, emphasis, softening, idhhar, and assimilation.
The author of Al-Manahil was biased towards this opinion and cited examples for each of the mentioned aspects, and preferred it over others, stating that it is the opinion supported by the hadiths mentioned in this position, and that it is the opinion based on complete induction and no other………( ), and he defended it in the best possible way by responding to every objection directed at him, even though he appeared to be forced in some of these responses, including his response to the third objection directed at him.
The gist of the objection is that the permission to make things easy for the nation based on this opinion is not clear, so where is the ease in reading the verb in the passive or active form? Here the sheikh appeared forced in the response ( ) - from my point of view.
The second: which is what Sufyan ibn Uyaynah, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Wahb, and Al-Qurtubi went to, and Ibn Abd al-Barr attributed it to most scholars ( ).
The gist of it is: What is meant by the seven letters are seven languages ​​in one word in which the words differ but the meanings agree and are close, such as: come, come, come, to, my purpose, towards me, and my proximity. These are seven different words that express one meaning, which is the request for acceptance. This does not mean that every meaning in the Qur’an is expressed by seven words from seven languages, but rather what is meant is that the maximum number of words expressing one meaning is seven.
The proponents of this opinion supported their words by saying that the facilitation stipulated in the hadiths is available in this opinion. The proponents of this opinion also responded to the objections directed at their opinion with acceptable responses.
I cannot elaborate more on this issue so that we do not stray from the topic of our intended research. ( ) But what I want to say after this presentation is that based on this first opinion, the readings that the reciters narrated in various ways go back to the seven letters. Based on the second opinion, they go back to one letter, which is the letter of Quraysh, on which the Uthmanic copies of the Qur’an were copied.
The ratio between the seven letters and the seven readings ( )
The ratio of the seven readings to the seven letters is the ratio of the specific to the general, so the seven letters include all readings including the seven.
Whoever believes that the seven readings are the seven letters has revealed his ignorance and uncovered his lack of understanding; because these seven readers are: Ibn Amir, Ibn Kathir, Asim, Abu Amr, Hamza, Nafi, and Abu al-Hasan al-Kisa’i.
I say: These seven readers were not born when the Prophet - may God bless him and grant him peace - mentioned the seven letters, so does that mean that the hadith of the Prophet - may God bless him and grant him peace - “The Qur’an was revealed in seven letters” was devoid of benefit and far from reality, until these readers appeared, and what did the companions understand from the hadith then?
How far from reality is this statement, and how ignorant are those who said it!!

Types of readings
and what is acceptable and what is not

Al-Suyuti narrated from Ibn Al-Jarzi that there are six types of readings:
The first: Mutawatir: which is what was transmitted by a group who cannot collude to lie, from their likes to the end, until they conveyed it to the Prophet - may God bless him and grant him peace - and an example of it is what the paths agreed to transmit from the seven - or others - and this is the most common in readings. The
second: Mashhour: which is what its chain of transmission is authentic, such that it was narrated by a just and precise person from his like, and so on, and it agrees with the Arabic language even in one way, and agrees with the script of the Uthmanic Mushaf, and it is well-known among the readers so they did not consider it a mistake or an anomaly, except that it did not reach the level of Mutawatir. An example of it is what the paths differed in transmitting from the seven, so some narrators narrated it from them and not others, and many of this low type were mentioned in At-Taysir and Ash-Shatibi in Ash-Shatibiyyah, and others. These two types are what are recited with, with the obligation to believe in them and it is not permissible to deny any of them.
Third: That which has a sound chain of transmission, but contradicts the orthography or the Arabic language, or is not as well known as mentioned. This type should not be recited and should not be believed. An example of this is the reading ((reclining on green cushions and beautiful geniuses)) and the reading ((Indeed a messenger from among yourselves has come)) with the opening of the fa.
Fourth: The anomalous, which is that which has not a sound chain of transmission, the reading of Ibn al-Sameefa ((So today we will remove you with your body)) with the silent ha ((so that you may be a sign to those who come after you)) with the opening of the lam of the word ((khalafak)).
Fifth: The subject, which is what is attributed to its speaker without origin, such as the readings collected by Muhammad ibn Ja`far al-Khuza`i, and attributed to Abu Hanifa.
Sixth: What resembles the types of hadith, which is what was added to the readings for the sake of interpretation, such as the reading of Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas ((and he has a brother or sister from the mother)) with the addition of the word ((from the mother)).
Ibn al-Jazari said: Perhaps they would include interpretation in the readings for the sake of clarification and explanation; because they were certain of what they received from the Prophet - may God bless him and grant him peace - as the Qur’an, so they were safe from confusion, and perhaps some of them would write it with him. End quote.
Through this transmission we concluded that the first two types are the ones that are recited, but not the others. The first type, which is the mutawatir, is definitely Qur’anic without dispute. As for the second type, which is the well-known one, in which the three aforementioned criteria are agreed upon, which are the authenticity of the chain of transmission, agreement with the Arabic language, even if only in one way, and agreement with the Uthmanic script, even if only possibly, I say:
Some scholars did not agree with this type, rather they stipulated mutawatir without the authenticity of the chain of transmission - i.e. they were not satisfied with the authenticity of the chain of transmission - as stated in Al-Itqan in a commentary on that.
This is something that is not hidden, for if mutawatir is proven, then the last two pillars of Arabic and script are not needed, since whatever is proven from the letters of disagreement is mutawatir from the Prophet - may God bless him and grant him peace - it must be accepted and it must be certain that it is the Qur’an, whether it agrees with the script or not. End quote ( ).
Hence, some scholars said, commenting on this opinion in an attempt to bring the point of view closer about accepting this reading or not, that this section - meaning the one that has gathered the three aforementioned pillars - is divided into two types:
The first: a type or kind, the transmission of which has become widespread and the nation has accepted it, and it is related to mutawatir in terms of its acceptance and acting upon it; Because even though it is from the category of the individual, it is surrounded by indications that make it useful for knowledge and not conjecture.
The author of Al-Manahil said: The pillar of authenticity in the well-known rule of the Qur’an, what is meant by authenticity in it is not absolute authenticity, but rather what is meant is excellent authenticity, which reaches the level of widespread and famous recitation, and the nation’s acceptance of it so that this pillar, with the indication of the other two pillars, is as strong as the continuous transmission that is necessary for the realization of the Qur’an. ( )
The second type: which is what the nation did not accept and did not become widespread, and there is a difference of opinion among the scholars regarding its acceptance and recitation or not, and the majority are in favor of its acceptance. ( )
The differences between the established readings
We have previously decided that the reference of the readings is the established transmission from the Prophet - may God bless him and grant him peace - and therefore, the differences between them were not by way of contradiction in meanings, but rather the reading either confirms another, or clarifies, or adds a new meaning to it, so each reading is in relation to the other, like a verse with a verse, and just as the differences between these readings were not by way of contradiction in meanings, it was also not by way of variation in words, and some of them limited the differences between the readings to the following aspects:
First: The difference in the form of the last words, or their structure, which makes them all within the circle of classical Arabic, indeed the most eloquent of this language, consistent in its words, the brotherhood of its expressions, the resonance of its music, and the harmony between its words and meanings.
Second: The difference in the length of the letters, in terms of length and shortness, and whether the length is necessary or not, and all of that with the brotherhood in pronunciation in the same reading, so every reading is consistent in its words in terms of the structure of the word, and in terms of the length of the length or shortness of the length.
Third: The difference in terms of inclination, or the lack thereof in the letters, such as stopping with inclination in the tied taa, or the lack of inclination in it.
Fourth: The difference in terms of dots and in terms of the form of the structure in such as the Almighty’s saying: ((O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, verify it)) ( ) where it was read in succession like this ((Fatathbatu)) and despite that the two readings meet in meaning, so the first demanded absolute verification, and the other clarified the path of verification, which is verification by seeking proof.
Fifth: Adding some letters in one reading and subtracting them in another, such as the reading of Ibn Amir - who is one of the seven readers - ((They said Allah has taken a son)) without a waw before ((They said)) while others read with a waw like this ((And they said Allah has taken a son)) ( ). Similar to that is the reading of Ibn Kathir - who is also one of the seven readers - ((The rivers flow beneath it)) with the addition of ((from)) while others read ((The rivers flow beneath it)) ( ).
If it is said: What is proven from the two readings in the Uthmanic Mushaf?
I say: The Uthmanic Mushafs - and their number is six or seven - have proven in them everything that the script can bear in one way ( ). As for what the script cannot bear, such as additions and subtractions in our case here, it was proven in some Mushafs by one reading and in some by another reading.
Al-Qurtubi said about this: What was found among these seven readers of differences in letters that some of them added and some of them omitted, that is because each of them relied on what he received in his copy of the Qur’an and narrated, since Uthman wrote those places in some copies and did not write them in others, indicating that all of that is correct and that reading with each of them is permissible. A.H. ( )
Benefits of the differences in readings
The issue of the differences in readings and their multiplicity was and still is a matter of interest to scholars, and among their interest in it is their research into the rulings and benefits resulting from it, and they are numerous. We will now mention some of them. I say - and Allah is the Grantor of success - that among the rulings resulting from the differences in readings are the following:
1) Making things easier for the Islamic nation, and we specifically mention the Arab nation that was exposed to the Qur’an, for the Noble Qur’an was revealed in the Arabic language, and the Arabs at that time were many tribes with different dialects. The Noble Qur’an took that into consideration, in what the dialects of these tribes differed in, so it revealed in it - that is, among its readings - what was in keeping with these tribes - despite their multiplicity - to remove hardship from them, and to provide ease and relief for them.
2) Combining two different rulings, such as the Almighty’s saying: ((So keep away from women during menstruation and do not approach them until they are pure)) ( ), where ((يطهرن)) was read with a lightened and stressed taa, and the combination of the two readings indicates that a menstruating woman is not permitted to be approached by her husband unless she is purified by two things: a- the cessation of bleeding, b- bathing.
3) Indicating two legal rulings in two different situations, an example of which is the Almighty’s saying: ((So wash your faces and your hands to the elbows and wipe over your heads and your feet to the ankles)) ( ), where ((ورجكم)) was read in the accusative case in apposition to ((وجهكم)), which requires washing the feet, because it is in apposition to what is washed, which is the faces. And ((ورجكم)) was read in the genitive case in apposition to ((رأسكم)), and this reading requires wiping the feet, because it is in apposition to what is wiped, which is the heads. And in that there is confirmation of the ruling on wiping over the socks.
4) Refuting the illusion of what is not intended: An example of this is the Almighty’s saying: ((O you who have believed, when the call is made for the prayer on the day of Jumu’ah, then proceed to the remembrance of Allah)) ( ) where it was read ((then proceed to the remembrance of Allah)), and in that it repels the illusion of the obligation to walk quickly to the Friday prayer understood from the first reading, as the second reading showed that what was intended was merely to go. ( )
5) Demonstrating the perfection of the miracle with the utmost brevity, as each reading with the other is like a verse with a verse, and this is from the evidence of the miracle in the Holy Quran, as each reading indicates what an independent verse indicates.
6) The connection of the chain of transmission of these readings is a sign of the connection of the nation to the divine chain of transmission, as the reading of a single word with different readings, with the unity of its script and its absence of dots and diacritics, depends on hearing, reception and narration, and even after the dots and diacritics of the Qur’an; because the words were dotted and diacritical in the Qur’an in one way only, and the rest of the ways depend on the chain of transmission and narration to this day. (7) In the multiplicity of readings , there is a great virtue for this Muhammadan nation because of its attribution to the Book of its Lord, and the connection of this chain of transmission to the divine chain of transmission, so that this was a specialization of merit for this nation. ( )
7) In the multiplicity of readings, there is a magnification of the reward of the nation in preserving it and taking care to collect it and transmitting it faithfully to others, and transmitting it with its precision with complete care for this precision to the extent that it gained admiration. ( )
Warding off the doubts raised about the difference in readings.
The malicious ones continue to seize opportunities to diminish the value of the Noble Qur’an, by trying to prove the contradiction in the Qur’an through some of what proves it or denies it. They try to do that with the verses of the Noble Qur’an, some with others, or they claim the existence of a contradiction between the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and all of that is returned to them by the grace of God, as I indicated in the introduction to this book, and you will see something of that in the last section of it, God willing.
In the matter of the difference in readings that we are dealing with, or what the spiteful ones claimed and the ignorant ones followed them from the followers of this religion, and they are more dangerous to this religion as it was said:
The enemies of the ignorant cannot reach what the ignorant one can reach from himself
. I say: These and those claimed that the difference in readings proves the lie of the Qur’an and establishes the existence of contradiction in it.
We said: How did you reach this decision and dare to say this statement that ((The heavens almost burst from it and the earth splits open and the mountains collapse in ruin)) ( ) from the horror of what it carries?
They said: Is it not stated in the Qur’an - the Most High’s saying: ((Do they not then consider the Qur’an carefully? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy)) ( ) We said: Yes.
They said: Do you not say that the readings are divinely revealed and revealed from Allah through revelation? We said: Yes.
They said: Aren’t these readings multiple? We said: Yes. They said
: Is there not in their multiplicity and difference something that contradicts the Qur’anic verse that negates the difference in the Qur’an?
We said: No. They said: How do you refute this contradiction and prove the opposite of the claim? We said: It is easy and feasible, and the statement of the answer is as follows:
The difference that the Qur’an denies is the difference in the Qur’an itself with what its verses carry of meanings, as there is no confusion, conflict, or contradiction in them, and everything that suggests that has been answered by scholars in a way that leaves no room to present it again, and I said in the introduction to this book: The abrogating and abrogated do not respond to that, as the contradiction between them is refuted by proving the abrogating ruling and denying and canceling the abrogated ruling. From that, it is concluded that the contradiction and conflict between the meanings of the Noble Qur’an does not exist, and this is what the noble verse states.
As for the difference in readings, and the fact that the Holy Qur’an was revealed in seven letters, it is a variety of the words of the Qur’an, an expansion in its pronunciation, and a multiplicity in the aspects of performance, without that proving a difference in the Qur’an. Not only that, but the multiplicity of readings has many benefits, which I have mentioned in their place. These benefits do not only negate the readings from being negative, but rather prove many positive aspects for them.
Sheikh Al-Zaqani says:
The revelation of the Qur’an in seven letters - and the multiplicity of its readings - does not necessitate any contradiction, weakness, opposition, opposition, or conflict between the implications and meanings of the Qur’an, its teachings and aims, with each other. Rather, the entire Qur’an is one chain, with connected links, with precise chapters and verses, taking on the same principles and goals, no matter how many ways of reading it, and no matter how diverse the arts of its performance. ( )
The answer to this doubt and the response to it are completed by the answer of Imam Al-Ghazali when he was asked about the meaning of the Almighty’s saying: ((And if it had been from other than Allah, they would have found within it much discrepancy)), so he answered as follows:
Difference is a word shared between meanings, and what is meant is not the denial of difference between people in it, but rather the denial of difference from the Qur’an itself. It is said that this speech is different, meaning: its beginning does not resemble its end in eloquence, as it is different, meaning: some of it calls to religion, and some of it calls to the world, or it is of different composition, some of it is in the meter of poetry, some of it is in a flowing manner, some of it is in a special style of eloquence, and some of it is in a style that differs from it.
The speech of God is free from these differences, for it is on one method of composition, its beginning and end are appropriate, and it is on one level in the utmost eloquence, so it does not include the worthless and the valuable, and it is directed to one meaning, which is calling people to God Almighty, and turning them from the world to religion. A.H. ( )
And close to this is what was reported from Ibn Mas`ud, may God be pleased with him:
“Do not dispute over the Qur’an, for it does not differ, nor does it disappear, nor does it run out due to frequent rebuttal. It is the law of Islam, its limits, and its obligations. If one of the two letters - i.e. the two readings - forbade something that the other commanded, then that would be the difference. But it encompasses all of that, and the limits and obligations do not differ in it, nor any of the laws of Islam.
And I saw us disputing in the presence of the Messenger - may God bless him and grant him peace - and he would command us, so we would recite, and he would inform us that we are all good…” ( )
The summary of this answer is that the difference denied in the verse is the difference in the sense of the difference in organization, the contradiction of facts, the conflict of news, and the clash of meanings. As for the difference in readings, it is the diversity in performance and the expansion in pronunciation within the framework of what was revealed from God.
The second doubt:
They also said:
The difference in readings causes doubt and suspicion about the Qur’an, if we notice in some narrations the meaning of giving the person the choice to bring from himself the wording and what is synonymous with it or the wording and what is not opposite in meaning, and that is like the hadith of Abu Bakra where it says: “All of them are sufficient and sufficient as long as you do not conclude a verse of torment with mercy or a verse of mercy with torment, such as your saying: Come, approach, come, go, hurry, and hasten.” This wording came from the narration of Ahmad with a good chain of narration. It was narrated from Ibn Mas’ud - may Allah be pleased with him - that he taught a man: ((Indeed, the tree of Zaqqum is the food of the sinner)) ( ) and the man said: The food of the sinner, so he repeated it to him but his tongue could not get it right. So he said: Can you say: The food of the wicked? He said: Yes. He said: Then do so.
The answer to this doubt
We do not accept their claim, first of all, that the person had the choice to come up with words of his own choosing to express the verse. All the readings were revealed by God through revelation, and the hadith mentioned does not indicate what they have gone to, and its interpretation will come in the discussion of stopping and starting. If we do not accept this, then we will not accept that these readings were a cause of doubt and suspicion about the Qur’an, because as long as the readings were revealed by God, they cannot be a cause of doubt about the Qur’an, which is also from God.
As for the aforementioned narrations, the most that they indicate, as Sheikh Al-Zarqani says, is that God Almighty made it easy for His servants, especially at the beginning of their covenant with revelation, to recite the Qur’an in a way that would soften their tongues. Among this expansion was the recitation with synonyms of the same word for the same meaning, noting that all of them were revealed from God Almighty. Then God abrogated what He willed to abrogate after that... The nation has agreed that there is no human intervention in the organization of the Qur’an, neither from the perspective of its wording, nor from the perspective of its style, nor the law of its performance.

Another thing I would like to point out that unfortunately many people do not know is
that even with these limited changes in pronunciation and diacritics ,
the spelling of the words in the Qur’an itself did not change !!!!..

As it is known that writing at the time of the Prophet was without diacritics or diacritics : Rather:
and many words were not written with their alif or hamza as well!!!..
As the Arab readers relied on their instinct and unique language in deducing from the context..





Pictures of some of the Prophet’s letters to the kings with his seal on them..

This in itself is a miracle in the stability of the Qur’anic letter itself :
The scandals of the distortions of the books of the Jews and Christians fell around it before !!!..
As their distortions were not limited to deleting or adding:
diacritics : nor a letter : nor a word : nor a sentence : Rather, entire phrases and chapters !!!..



Surat An-Nas in the original Qur’anic script without diacritics, diacritics, or hamza..



The beginning of Surat Al-Buruj in the original Qur’anic script without diacritics, diacritics, or hamza..

And here are the same words that Sister Muslima cited from the two readings of Hafs Warsh : < Noting the absence of punctuation in the Mushaf of Uthman, may God be pleased with him, as we said > < And the rule was the oral recitation of the Qur’an with its readings approved by the Prophet > The Believers / The Believers > The original Mushaf script is The Believers without a hamza , punctuation or vowel marking The Earth / The Earth > The original Mushaf script is The Earth without a hamza, punctuation or vowel marking The Faith / The Belief > The original Mushaf script is The Faith without a hamza, punctuation or vowel marking They lie / They deny > The original Mushaf script is They lie without punctuation or vowel marking Malik / Malik > The original Mushaf script is Malik without an alif or vowel marking Ibad / When > The original Mushaf script is When without an alif, punctuation or vowel marking Al-Barr / Al-Barr > The original Mushaf script is Al-Barr without punctuation or vowel marking We publish it / We publish it > The original Mushaf script is We publish it without punctuation or vowel marking We will expend / We will expend > The original Mushaf script We will expend without punctuation or vowel marking Tusbah / Yusbah > The origin of the Qur’anic script is Tasbeeh without dots or vowels and the Rajaz / and the Rajaz > The origin of the Qur’anic script and the Rajaz without dots or vowels














The origin of the Qur’anic script is Qatal without dots or diacritics

. It is superfluous to mention some authentic hadiths about these readings.

On the authority of Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), he said:
“ I heard Hisham ibn Hakim ibn Hizam reciting Surat al-Furqan in a way other than the way they recited it. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) had taught me it, so I almost rushed him, then I gave him time until he left, then I wrapped him in my cloak and brought him to the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). I said: O Messenger of Allah, I heard this man reciting Surat al-Furqan in a way other than the way you taught me it. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: Send him and recite.” So I recited the recitation that I heard him recite. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “This is how it was revealed.” Then he said to me: “Recite.” So I recited. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “This is how it was revealed. The Qur’an was revealed in seven letters, so recite whatever is easy for you .” Narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim.

On the authority of Ubayy ibn Ka’b (may Allah be pleased with him), he said:
“ I was in the mosque A man entered to pray and recited a reading that I disapproved of, then another entered and recited a reading different from that of his companion. When we finished the prayer, we all entered upon the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. I said, “This one recited a reading that I disapproved of, and another entered and recited a reading different from that of his companion.” The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ordered them to recite, and they were pleased with their conduct. So I fell from my heart from the denial, and I was not in the days of ignorance. When the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, saw what had overtaken me, he struck me in the chest and I began to sweat, and it was as if I was looking at Allah, the Almighty, with fear. Then he said to me, “O my father, he sent for me to recite the Qur’an in one letter.” So I replied to him a second time, “It is easy for my nation.” So he replied to me a third time, “It is easy for my nation.” So he replied to me a third time, “It is easy for my nation.” And he replied to me a third time, “It is easy for my nation.” And he replied to me a question for every time I repeated it, so I asked him a question. So I said, “O Allah, forgive my nation, O Allah, forgive my nation.” And I delayed the third time for a day when all of creation would yearn to me, even Abraham, may Allah bless him and grant him peace .” Narrated by Muslim.

I say:
This is from the great concern of the Prophet to make the Qur’an easy for the tongues of the Arab tribes around him, from differences that do not exist. The essence of the meanings of the readings has changed somewhat .. and as our sister Muslima, may God protect her, explained to us ,

and on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with them both, he said:
“ The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: ‘Gabriel taught me one letter, so I reviewed it, and I kept asking him for more and he kept giving me more until he reached seven letters. ’” Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim. Ibn Shihab
said : “ It has reached me that those seven letters are only one in the matter, and they do not differ in what is permissible or forbidden .” Praise be to God, Lord of the Worlds.