another ans

 Another answer:

My question is:
I am confused in the book Fath Al-Qadir by Al-Shawkani, may Allah have mercy on him. This is the text of the statement: It was narrated on the authority of Aisha that she was asked about: “Al-Muqeemeen” in this verse, and about His statement: “Indeed, these two are magicians.” And about His statement: “And the Sabians.” In Al-Ma’idah? She said: “O son of my brother, the scribes made a mistake.

” It was narrated on their authority by Abu Ubaid in his Fadhail, Saeed bin Mansour, Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ibn Jarir, and Ibn Al-Mundhir. Abaan bin Othman said: The scribe would be dictated to and he would write, so he wrote: “But those firmly rooted in knowledge among them and the believers.” Then he said: “What should I write?” He was told: “Write: “And those who establish prayer.” From there this happened. It was narrated on his authority by Abd bin Hamid, Ibn Jarir, and Ibn Al-Mundhir.
Al-Qushayri said: This is false because those who compiled the book were role models in the language, so it is not thought that they were like that. Al-Qushayri is answered by saying that it was narrated on the authority of Uthman that when he finished the Mushaf, it was brought to him and he said: I see in it some errors that the Arabs will correct with their tongues. Ibn Abi Dawud narrated it through various chains of transmission. So I do not understand the story of our mother Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, and the rest?

As for the other, in the book Al-Ihkam fi Usul Al-Ihkam by Ibn Hazm, may Allah have mercy on him:
If the one who mentions the confirmed narration with strange readings that were authenticated from a group of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, such as what was narrated on the authority of Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq: And the intoxication of death will come in truth. That is what you were avoiding. And such as what was authenticated on the authority of Umar regarding the reading: The path of those upon whom You have bestowed favor, not of those who have incurred wrath, nor of those who have gone astray. And that Ibn Masoud did not count the two Mu’awwidhat as part of the Qur’an. And that Ubayy, may Allah be pleased with him, used to count the Qunut as part of the Qur’an and the like.

We said: All of that is restricted to whoever narrated something from him that was not from the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) at all, and we do not deny the error of those below the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family), for we have called out to him loudly, and there is no argument in what was narrated from anyone below him (peace be upon him), and Allah the Most High did not charge us with obedience to him, nor did He command us to act upon it nor did He undertake to preserve it, so the error in it occurs in what is from the companion and those below him who narrated from the companion and the follower, and we have no opposition to anything of that. And Allah the Most High is the Grantor of success.

This opposition is only required of those who say that the companion is imitated based on what is authentically reported from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family) and based on the Qur’an, for they are the ones who must be freed from this humiliation, but as for us, no, and praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds.

I do not understand: are some of the readings restricted to the companions? And are they to be taken? And how is that?

And who does he mean by his word (may Allah have mercy on him): they are the ones who must be freed from this humiliation, but as for us, no, and praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds? And I would like a quick translation of the two Imams, may Allah have mercy on them?
I would like a detailed answer?
 
The answer:
 
Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be  upon the Messenger of Allah, his family and companions. As for what follows :
Al  -Shawkani  mentioned before this statement here and in other places the correct interpretation that shows the absence of errors in these words. Then he said here after a statement  : It was narrated on the authority of  Aisha that she was asked about the residents in this verse, and about the Almighty’s saying: “Indeed, these two are magicians.” And about  His saying: “And the Sabians.” in Al-Ma’idah? She said: O my nephew, the scribes  made a mistake . So

his saying here: And it was narrated in the passive voice indicates his weakening of the narration on her authority, and the weakening is supported by the fact that this trace was narrated on the  authority of Hisham by Abu Mu’awiyah   Al-Dharee’,  whose name is Muhammad  bin Khazim  Al-Tamimi .

Scholars have authenticated his hadith from  Al-A'mash , but they criticized his hadiths from other than  Al-A'mash  and said: They are confused  . Ibn Kharash said :  He is trustworthy regarding Al-A'mash, but there is  confusion regarding others. Imam Ahmad stated   that his hadiths from  Hisham bin Urwah  specifically are confused . This indicates the weakness of this narration, and makes it unsuitable for use as evidence . Al-Suyuti mentioned   in Al-Itqan:  The meaning of her saying they made a mistake is in choosing the first of the seven letters to gather people around it, not that what they wrote of that was a mistake that is not permissible. He said: The evidence for that is that which is not permissible and is rejected by consensus of all, even if a long period of time has passed since its occurrence .  End quote . As for the narration  of Abaan , Al-Qushayri  rejected it  , and  it is not correct to object to it based on the narration narrated from  Uthman ,  as we have explained in Fatwa No.  96034  that it is fabricated, and we have mentioned those scholars who said that . Al-Suyuti said   in Al-Itqan fi Ulum Al-Quran : These narrations are very problematic. How can it be thought that the Companions would make mistakes in speech, let alone the Qur’an, when they were the most eloquent of people? Then how can they be thought of, secondly, regarding the Qur’an that they received from the Prophet as it was revealed and memorized, corrected, and mastered? Then how can they be thought of , thirdly, that they all agreed on the mistake and wrote it down? Then how can they be thought of, fourthly, that they did not notice it and return from it? Then how can they be thought of, Uthman, that he would forbid changing it? Then how can they be thought that the reading continued according to that mistake when it was transmitted by continuous transmission from one generation to the next? This is impossible according to reason, the Shari’ah, and custom. Scholars have responded to this with three answers : First: That this is not authentic from Uthman, as its chain of transmission is weak, confused and disconnected. And because Uthman appointed an imam for the people to follow, how could he see a mistake in it and leave it for the Arabs to correct with their tongues? If those who were in charge of collecting and writing it did not correct that , and they were the best, how could others correct it? Also, he did not write one copy of the Qur’an, but rather wrote several copies of the Qur’an. If it is said that the mistake occurred in all of them, then it is far-fetched that they agreed on that, or in some of them , then it is an admission of the authenticity of some of them. No one mentioned that the mistake occurred in one copy of the Qur’an rather than another, and the copies of the Qur’an never came that differed except in aspects of reading, and that is not a mistake  . The second aspect: Assuming the narration is authentic , that is based on symbols, allusions and places of deletion, such as Al-Kutub, Al-Sabireen and the like . Third: It is interpreted based on things whose wording differs from their spelling as they wrote and did not place, and “nor do I slaughter him” with an alif after “no,” and “the recompense of the wrongdoers” with a waw and an alif, and with two hands, so if it was read according to the apparent writing, it would be a mistake, and with this answer and what preceded it, Ibn Ashtah was certain in the book of the Qur’ans . Ibn al-Anbari said in the book of the response to those who differed from the Qur’an of Uthman regarding the hadiths narrated from Uthman in that: It does not constitute evidence because it is…

  



   





      

      

 
   

  It is disconnected and not connected, and what the mind testifies to is that Uthman, who is the Imam of the nation, who is the Imam of the people in  his time and their role model, gathers them around the Mushaf, which is the Imam, and a defect is revealed in it and  a slip is seen in his handwriting, but he does not correct it. No, by God, this is not what a fair-minded and discerning person would imagine, and he does not believe that he delayed  the error in the book for someone to correct it after him. The way for those who come after him is to build on his writing and adhere  to his ruling. And whoever claims that Uthman meant by his saying, “I see a mistake in it,” that he saw  a mistake in his handwriting, if we establish it with our tongues,  the mistake in the handwriting would not be corrupt or distorted in terms of distorting the words and corrupting the grammar, then he has refuted and is not correct, because the handwriting is indicative of the pronunciation, so whoever makes a mistake in his books is a mistake in his pronunciation, and  Uthman would not delay corruption in the spelling of the words of the Qur’an in terms of books or pronunciation, and it is known that he was  continuing to study the Qur’an, mastering its words, agreeing with what was written in the Qur’ans that were sent to  the regions and regions, then he supported that. Narrated by Abu Ubaid: Abdurrahman bin Mahdi narrated to us on the authority of  Abdullah bin Mubarak, Abu Wa’il, a sheikh from the people of Yemen, narrated to us on the authority of Hani’ al-Barbari, the client of Uthman  , who said: I was with Uthman while they were presenting the copies of the Qur’an, so he sent me with a shoulder of a sheep to Ubayy bin Ka’b, in which was written: lam  yasna, and in it: la tadbil li-khalaq, and in it: fa aml al-kafirun. He said: So he called for an inkwell and erased one of  the two lams and wrote: l-khalaq Allah, and erased fa amlaq, and wrote fa amlaq, and wrote lam yasna, and added a ha’ to it .  Ibn al-Anbari said: So how can it be claimed that he saw a corruption and approved it, while he is the one who reviews what he wrote and refers  to him the disagreement that occurred from the copyists so that he may rule with the truth and compel them to prove what is correct  and perpetuate it .  End quote .