Seven Qirats of The Qur’an

Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

‫إنّ هذا القران اُنزل على سبعة أحرف فأقرءُوا ما ت ّيسّر منه‬

“Indeed the Qur’an was revealed in seven (types of ) Haroof or words

(or Qirats), so read (the way) that is easier to you”. (Sahih Bukhari
)

In Sahih Muslim there is a Hadith which states that once Rasulullah

(Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) was sitting near a pond which belonged to
Bani Gifar clan and Angel Jibra’eel (AS) came to him and asked him to
order his Ummah to recite Al-Qur’an as per a single Harf (word) or
Qirat. Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) told him that his Ummah
was not capable of doing it, then Jibra’eel (AS) came again and asked
Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) to order his Ummah to recite
Al-Qur’an as per two haroof (words) or Qirats. Rasulullah (Sallallahu
Alaihi Wasallam) repeated the same words which he had said on first
occasion, this process continued and in the end Jibre’aal (AS) asked
Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) to order his Ummah to recite
the Qur’an as per seven Haroof or (words) or Qirats. This permission
to recite Al-Qur’an as per seven Haroof was to make it easy for the
Ummah.

What is meant by Haroof? There are many schools of thought about it,
some say that these mean seven different types of words, some say
seven different types of Qirats while others say that these mean seven
different dialects of different clans of Arabs.

Imam Tahawi’s opinion: He says that Al-Quran was revealed in the same
dialect which was used by Quraish, since Arabs were living in
different tribes to follow the Quraish dialect, so in the initial days
of Islam, these tribes were allowed to recite the Qur’an in their own
dialect, choosing an equivalent word and Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi
Wasallam) himself had chosen these equivalent words, e.g., word
‘Halumma’ instead of ‘T’aal’, both meaning the same thing. But this
permission was only in the early days of Islam and later it became
easy for other tribes also to follow Quriash dialect and this
permission was lifted. (Mushkilul Aathar Lil Tahawi; Uloom-Ul-Qur’an)

Difference in Seven Types of Qirats:

1. Difference in nouns: In this there is difference either in number
or gender. In one, word ‫ كلمة‬is recited and in other ‫كلمات‬.

2. Difference in verb: In this there is difference of present, past or

future tenses.

3. Difference of Aerab (diacritical marks): In which there is

difference of Zabr (Fateh), Zer (Kasrah) and Pesh (Zammah).

4. Difference in number of words: In this there is difference of a

word i.e., in one type of recitation (Qirat) a word is used and in
other the same word is missing.

5. Substitutions of a word: In this an equivalent of a word is recited

in other Qirat.

6. Difference in sequence: In this one type of word is preceding a

particular word and in other the same word is succeeding that
particular word

7. Difference in recitation: In this same word is recited differently

in different Qirats.

Sahih Muslim narrates a Hadith on the authority of Hadhrat Ubai bin

ka’b (RA): “While I was in the Masjid, someone entered and offered
Salah in which he recited the Qur’an to which I objected (as he
recited differently), then another person entered and he recited the
Qur’an yet differently than his earlier friend. After they completed
Salah, we all went to Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and I
said, “This person recited the Qur’an to which I objected and then his
friend also recited yet in a different way. Rasulullah (Sallallahu
Alaihi Wasallam) asked both of them to recite the Qur’an and (once
they recited), Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) admired their
recitation. This created a great doubt (about the truthfulness of
Islam) in my mind and I felt as if I have again reached towards the
period of Jahilliya. Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) sensed
that and gave a (gentle) blow on my chest, I went all in perspiration
and I felt as I was seeing Allah in this state that I could
distinguish between right and wrong. Then he (Sallallahu Alaihi
Wasallam) told me, “O! Ubai, the Qur’an was sent to me and I was told
to recite in one Harf (word), I recited by saying, O Allah, make it
easy for my Ummah, then it was returned to me and I was told to recite
in two Harf (words), I repeated the same till I was told to recite it
in seven Haroof (words)”.

From this Hadith and those quoted earlier we understand that the
Qur’an was revealed in seven Haroof. Now, here a few questions arise
which need to be discussed viz;

1- Do these seven Qir’ats still exist?

2- Did Hadhrat Uthmaan (RA) abrogate six Qir’ats when he compiled the Qur’an?

3- The Qur’an is a word of Allah and has been promised everlasting

protection, then how come some of the Qir’ats can be abrogated?

4- What is meant by the fact that Hadhrat Uthamaan (RA) asked the
Sahabah to follow his compilation alone and that he unified all the
seven Qir’ats in his one compilation?

Alaama Zarqani (RA) in Manaahil-ul-Irfan writes:

“All the seven Qir’ats or Haroof exist in the Qur’an that Hadhrat
Uthmaan’s (RA) compiled. There was consensus amongst all the Sahabah
about the fact that Hadhrat Uthmaan’s (RA) compilation contained all
the seven Qir’ats (Haroof) and they all agreed to abandon their own
compilations and follow the compilation of Hadhrat Uthmaan (RA).
Hadhrat Uthmaan (RA) actually copied that copy of the Qur’an which was
compiled by Hadhrat Abu Bakr (RA) which again contained all the seven
Qir’ats or Haroof.”

Alaama Zarqani (RA) further writes:

“Their is a consensus amongst the most of earlier and later Ulema of

Muslim Ummah that Hadhrat Uthmaan’s (RA) compilation contained all the
seven Qir’ats or Haroof and it was same as was presented to Rasulullah
(Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) by Hadhrat Jibraeel (AS) in his last
presentation in the last Ramadhan of Rasulullah’s (Sallallahu Alaihi
Wasallam) life .”

Imam Ahmad has quoted a Hadith in his Musnad that:

Hadhrat Jibraeel (AS) used to recite the Qur’an to Rasulullah

(Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) once during every Ramadhan. During the
last Ramadhan of Rasulullah’s (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) life,
Jibraeel (AS) recited Al-Qur’an (whole of it) twice. As quoted earlier
from Imam Tahawi (RA), that in early days of Islam different tribes
were allowed to follow their dialects and when the Qur’anic revelation
got completed and the time of departure of Rasulullah (Sallallahu
Alaihi Wasallam) came near, Hadhrat Jibraeel AS) recited Al-Qur’an to
Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) which was as per the dialect
of Quraish and which contained all the seven Qir’ats. Alama
Zikariya(RA) says that Haztrat Uthmaan (RA) completed the Qur’an as
per this last recitation of Hadhrat Jibraeel (AS).

Alama Ibne-al-Jazri says that I have studied these differences in the

Qir’ats and have observed that they do not exceed three states, viz;

1. Difference of words and not meaning. For example the words like
Maalik and Malik, both having same meaning.

2. Difference between these words with the possibility of

incorporating them in a single word.

3. Difference between these words without the possibility of

incorporating them in a single word, but they coincide in meaning with
each other by some other reason, so no difference. (Manahil-ul-Irfan).

#577041">Revelation of the Qur"an in Seven

Ahrûf M S M Saifullah
It is a well-known fact that there are seven different ahrûf in which the Qur"an was revealed. In
the Islamic tradition, this basis can be traced back to a number of hadith concerning the
revelation of the Qur"an in seven ahrûf (singular harf). Some of the examples of these hadiths are
as follows:
From Abû Hurairah: The Messenger of God said: "The Qur"an was sent down in seven ahruf.
Disputation concerning the Qur"an is unbelief" - he said this three times - "and you should put
into practice what you know of it, and leave what you do not know of it to someone who
does."[1]
From Abû Hurairah: The Messenger of God (P) said: "An All-knowing, Wise, Forgiving,
Merciful sent down the Qur"an in seven ahruf."[2]
FromcAbdullah Ibn Mas"ud: The Messenger of God said: "The Qur"an was sent down in seven
ahruf. Each of these ahruf has an outward aspect (zahr) and an inward aspect (batn); each of the
ahruf has a border, and each border has a lookout."[3]
The meaning of this hadith is explained as:
As for the Prophet"s (P) words concerning the Qur"an, each of the ahruf has a border; it means
that each of the seven aspects has a border which God has marked off and which no one may
overstep. And as for his words each of the ahruf has an outward aspect (zahr) and an inward
aspect (batn), its outward aspect is the ostensive meaning of the recitation, and its inward aspect
is its interpretation, which is concealed. And by his words" each border has a lookout "he means
that for each of the borders which God marked off in the Qur"an - of the lawful and unlawful,
and its other legal injunctions - there is a measure of God"s reward and punishment which
surveys it in the Hereafter, and inspects it ...... at the Resurrection ...... [4]
And in another hadith"Abdullâh Ibn Mas"ud said: The Messenger of God(P) said: "The first
Book came down from one gate according to one harf, but the Qur"an came down from seven
gates according to seven ahruf: prohibiting and commanding, lawful and unlawful, clear and
ambiguous, and parables. So, allow what it makes lawful, proscribe what it makes unlawful, do
what it commands you to do, forbid what it prohibits, be warned by its parables, act on its clear
passages, trust in its ambiguous passages." And they said: "We believe in it; it is all from our
Lord."[5]
And Abu Qilaba narrated: It has reached me that the Prophet (P) said: "The Qur"an was sent
down according to seven ahruf: command and prohibition, encouragement of good and
discouragement of evil, dialectic, narrative, and parable."[6]
These above hadiths serve as evidence that the Qur"an was revealed in seven ahruf. The
definition of the term ahruf has been the subject of much scholarly discussion and is included in
the general works of the Qur"an. The forms matched the dialects of following seven tribes:
Quraysh, Hudhayl, Thaqîf, Hawâzin, Kinânah, Tamîm and Yemen. The revelation of the Qur"an
in seven different ahruf made its recitation and memorization much easier for the various tribes.
At the same timethe Qur"an challenged them to produce a surah like it in their own dialect so
that they would not complain about the incomprehensibility.
For example, the phrase "alayhim (on them) was read by some "alayhumoo and the word siraat
(path, bridge) was read as ziraat and mu"min (believer) as moomin. [7]

Difference between Ahrûf & Qirâ"ât

It is important to realize the difference between ahruf and Qirâ"ât. Before going into that it is
interesting to know why the seven ahruf were brought down to one during"Uthmân"s time.
The Qur"an continued to be read according to the seven ahruf until midway through Caliph
"Uthman"s rule when some confusion arose in the outlying provinces concerning the Qur"an"s
recitation. Some Arab tribes had begun to boast about the superiority of their ahruf and a rivalry
began to develop. At the same time, some new Muslims also began mixing the various forms of
recitation out of ignorance. Caliph "Uthman decided to make official copies of the Qur"an
according to the dialect of the Quraysh and send them along with the Qur"anic reciters to the
major centres of Islam. This decision was approved by Sahaabah and all unofficial copies of the
Qur"an were destroyed. Following the distribution of the official copies, all the other ahruf were
dropped and the Qur"an began to be read in only one harf. Thus, the Qur"an which is available
through out the world today is written and recited only according to the harf of Quraysh. [8]

A few words on Qirâ"ât

A Qirâ"ât is for the most part a method of pronunciation used in the recitations of the Qur"an.
These methods are different from the seven forms or modes (ahruf) in which the Qur"an was
revealed. The seven modes were reduced to one, that of the Quraysh, during the era of Caliph
"Uthman, and all of the methods of recitation are based on this mode. The various methods have
all been traced back to the Prophet (P) through a number of Sahaabah who were most noted for
their Qur"anic recitations. That is, these Sahaabah recited the Qur"an to the Prophet (P) or in his
presence and received his approval. Among them were the following: Ubayy Ibn K"ab, "Ali Ibn
Abi Taalib, Zayd Ibn Thabit, "Abdullah Ibn Mas"ud, Abu al-Dardaa and Abu Musaa al-
Ash"aree. Many of the other Sahaabah learned from these masters. For example: Ibn "Abbas, the
master commentator of the Qur"an among the Sahaabah, learned from both Ubayy and Zayd. [9]
The transmission of the Qur"an is amutawâtir transmission, that is, there are a large number of
narrators on each level of the chain. Dr. Bilaal Philips gives a brief account of the history of
recitation in his book:
Among the next generation of Muslims referred to as Tabe"un, there arose many scholars who
learned the various methods of recitation from the Sahaabah and taught them to others. Centres
of Qur"anic recitation developed in al-Madinah, Makkah, Kufa, Basrah and Syria, leading to the
evolution of Qur"anic recitation into an independent science. By mid-eighth century CE, there
existed a large number of outstanding scholars all of whom were considered specialists in the
field of recitation. Most of their methods of recitations were authenticated by chains of reliable
narrators ending with the Prophet (P). Those methods which were supported by a large number
of reliable narrators on each level of their chain were called Mutawaatir and were considered to
be the most accurate. Those methods in which the number of narrators was few or only one on
any level of the chain were referred to as shaadhdh. Some of the scholars of the following period
began the practice of designating a set number of individual scholars from the pervious period as
being the most noteworthy and accurate. By the middle of the tenth century, the number seven
became popular since it coincided with the number of dialects in which the Qur"an was revealed.
[10]
The author went on to say:
The first to limit the number of authentic reciters to seven was the Iraqi scholar, Abu Bakr Ibn
Mujâhid (d. 936CE), and those who wrote the books on Qirâ"ah after him followed suit. This
limitation is not an accurate representation of the classical scholars of Qur"anic recitation. There
were many others who were as good as the seven and the number who were greater than them.
[11]
Concerning the seven sets of readings, Montgomery Watt and Richard Bell observe:
The seven sets of readings accepted by Ibn-Mujâhid represent the systems prevailing in different
districts. There was one each from Medina, Mecca, Damascus and Basra, and three from Kufa.
For each set of readings (Qirâ"a), there were two slightly different version (sing. Riwaya).The
whole may be set out in tabular form: [12]
District Reader First Rawi Second Rawi
Medina Nafîc Warsh Qâlûn
Mecca Ibn Kathîr al-Bazzî Qunbul
Damascus Ibn Amir Hisham Ibn Dhakwân
Basra AbucAmr ad-Dûrî al-Sûsî
Kûfa cAsim Hafs Shcuba
Kûfa Hamza Khalaf Khallad
 Kûfa al-Kisâ"i ad-Dûrî Abul-Harîth
Other schools of Qirâ"ât are of:
Abû Jacfar Yazîd Ibn Qacqâc of Madinah (130/747)
Yacqûb Ibn Ishâq al-Hadramî of Basrah (205/820)
Khalaf Ibn Hishâm ofBaghdad (229/848)
Hasan al-Basrî of Basrah (110/728)
Ibn Muhaisin of Makkah (123/740)
Yahyâ al-Yazîdî of Basrah (202/817)

Conditions for the Validity of Different Qirâ"ât

Conditions were formulated by the scholars of the Qur"anic recitation to facilitate critical
analysis of the above mentioned recitations. For any given recitation to be accepted as authentic
(Sahih), it had to fulfill three conditions and if any of the conditions were missing such a
recitation was classified asShâdhdh (unusual).
The first condition was that the recitation has an authentic chain of narration in which the chain
of narrators was continuous, the narrators were all known to be righteous and they were all
known to possess good memories. It was also required that the recitation be conveyed by a large
number of narrators on each level of the chain of narration below the level of Sahaabah (the
condition of Tawaatur). Narrations which had authentic chains but lacked the condition of
Tawaatur were accepted as explanations (Tafseer) of the Sahaabah but were not considered as
methods of reciting the Qur"an. As for the narrations which did not even have an authentic chain
of narration, they were classified as Baatil (false) and rejected totally.
The second condition was that the variations in recitations match known Arabic grammatical
constructions. Unusual constructions could be verified by their existence in passages of pre-
Islamic prose or poetry.
The third condition required the recitation to coincide with the script of one of the copies of the
Qur"an distributed during the era of CaliphcUthmân. Hence differences which result from dot
placement (i.e., ta"lamun and ya"lamun) are considered acceptable provided the other conditions
are met. A recitation of a construction for which no evidence could be found would be classified
Shaadhdh. This classification did not mean that all aspects of the recitation were considered
Shaadhdh. it only meant that the unverified constructions were considered Shaadhdh.[13]

The Chain of Narration of Different Qirâ"ât

In this section, the chain of narration or isnad of each Qirâ"ât will be presented. It is worth noting
that the chains of narration here aremutawâtir.
Qirâ"a from Madinah: The reading of Madinah known as the reading of Nâfi" Ibn Abî Na"îm
(more precisely Abû"Abd ar-Rahmân Nâfi" Ibn"Abd ar-Rahmân).
Nâfi"died in the year 169 H. He reported from Yazîd Ibn al-Qa"qâ" and"Abd ar-Rahmân Ibn
Hurmuz al-"Araj and Muslim Ibn Jundub al-Hudhalî and Yazîd Ibn Român and Shaybah Ibn
Nisâ". All of them reported from Abû Hurayrah and Ibn"Abbâs and"Abdallâh Ibn "Ayyâsh Ibn
Abî Rabî"ah al-Makhzûmî and the last three reported from Ubayy Ibn Kacb from the Prophet(P).
[14]
From Nâfi", two major readings came to us : Warsh and Qâlûn.
Qirâ"a from Makkah: The reading of Ibn Kathîr ("Abdullâh Ibn Kathîr ad-Dârî):
Ibn Kathîr died in the year 120 H. He reported from"Abdillâh Ibn Assa"ib al-Makhzûmî who
reported from Ubayy Ibn Ka"b (The companion of the Prophet (P)).
Ibn Kathîr has also reported from Mujâhid Ibn Jabr who reported from his teacher Ibn"Abbâs
who reported from Ubayy Ibn Ka"b and Zayd Ibn Thâbit and both reported from the Prophet (P).
[15]
Qirâ"a from Damascus: From ash-Shâm (Damascus), the reading is called after"Abdullâh
Ibn"Aamir.
He died in 118 H. He reported from Abû ad-Dardâ" and al-Mughîrah Ibn Abî Shihâb al-
Makhzûmî from"Uthmân.[16]
Qirâ"a from Basrah: The reading of Abû"Amr from Basrah:
(According to al-Sab"ah, the book of Ibn Mujâhid page 79, Abû"Amr is called Zayyan Abû"Amr
Ibn al-"Alâ". He was born in Makkah in the year 68 and grew up at Kûfah.) He died at 154 H. He
reported from Mujâhid and Sa"îd Ibn Jubayr and "Ikrimah Ibn Khâlid al-Makhzûmî and "Atâ"
Ibn Abî Rabâh and Muhammad Ibn"Abd ar-Rahmân Ibn al-Muhaysin and Humayd Ibn Qays
al-"A"raj and all are from Makkah.
He also reported from Yazîd Ibn al-Qa"qâ" and Yazîd Ibn Rumân and Shaybah Ibn Nisâ" and all
are from Madinah.
He also reported from al-"Assan and Yahyâ Ibn Ya"mur and others from Basrah.
All these people took from the companions of the Prophet (P). [17]
From him came two readings called as-Sûsi and ad-Dûrî.
Qirâ"a from Basrah: From Basrah, the reading known as Ya"qûb Ibn Ishâq al-Hadramî, the
companion of Shu"bah (again). He reported from Abû"Amr and others. [18]
Qirâ"a from Kûfah:The reading of"Aasim Ibn Abî an-Najûd ("Aasim Ibn Bahdalah Ibn Abî an-
Najûd):He died in the year 127 or 128 H. He reported from Abû"Abd ar-Rahmân as-Solammî
and Zirr Ibn Hubaysh.
Abû"Abd ar-Rahmân reported from"Uthmân and"Alî Ibn Abî Tâlib and "Ubayy (Ibn Kacb) and
Zayd (Ibn Thâbit).
And Zirr reported from Ibn Mas"ud. [19]
Two readings were repoted fromcAasim: The famous one is Hafs, the other one is Shu"bah.
Qirâ"a from Kûfah: The reading of Hamzah Ibn Habîb (from Kûfah as well)
Hamzah was born in the year 80 H and died in the year 156 H. He reported from Muhammad
IbncAbd ar-Rahmân Ibn Abî Laylâ (who reads the reading ofcAlî Ibn Abî Tâlib (RA), according
to the book of Ibn Mujâhid called al-Sab"ah - The Seven - page 74) and Humrân Ibn A"yan and
Abî Ishâq as-Sabî"y and Mansur Ibn al-Mu"tamir and al-Mughîrah Ibn Miqsam and Jacfar Ibn
Muhammad Ibn" Ibn Abî Tâlib from the Prophet (P). [20]
Qirâ"a from Kûfah: The reading of al-"Amash from Kûfah as well:
He reported from Yahyâ Ibn Waththâb from "Alqamah and al-"Aswad and "Ubayd Ibn Nadlah
al-Khuzâ"y and Abû"Abd ar-Rahmân as-Sulamî and Zirr ibn Hubaysh and all reported from Ibn
Mas"ud.[21]
Qirâ"a from Kûfah: The reading of"Ali Ibn Hamzah al-Kisâ"i known as al-Kisâ"i from Kûfah.
He died in the year 189 H. He reported from Hamzah (the previous one) and"Iesâ Ibn"Umar and
Muhammad Ibn"Abd ar-Rahmân Ibn Abî Laylâ and others. [22]
Now our discussion will be on Hafs and Warsh Qirâ"ât:

Hafs & Warsh Qirâ"ât: Are They Different Versions of the Qur"an?
Jochen Katz had claimed that Hafs and Warsh Qirâ"ât are different "versions" of the Qur"an*. A
concise and interesting article that the missionary had used to reach such a conclusion can be
found in the book Approaches of The History of Interpretation of The Qur"an. Ironically, it
contained an article by Adrian Brockett, titled "The Value of Hafs and Warsh Transmissions for
the Textual History of the Qur"an", which sheds some light on various aspects of differences
between the two recitations. It is also worth noting that, in contrast to Katz, Brockett used the
word transmission rather than text for these two modes of recitations. Some highlights from the
article are reproduced below.
Brockett states: In cases where there are no variations within each transmission itself, certain
differences between the two transmissions, at least in the copies consulted, occur consistently
throughout. None of them has any effect in the meaning. [23]
The author demarcates the transmissions of Hafs and Warsh into differences of vocal form and
the differences of graphic form. According Brockett:
Such a division is clearly made from a written standpoint, and on its own is unbalanced. It would
be a mistake to infer from it, for instance, that because "hamza" was at first mostly outside the
graphic form, it was therefore at first also outside oral form. The division is therefore mainly just
for ease of classification and reference. [24]
Regarding the graphic form of this transmission, he further states:
On the graphic side, the correspondences between the two transmissions are overwhelmingly
more numerous than differences, often even with oddities like ayna ma and aynama being
consistently preserved in both transmissions, and la"nat allahi spelt both with ta tawila and ta
marbuta in the same places in both transmissions as well, not one of the graphic differences
caused the Muslims any doubts about the faultlessly faithful transmission of the Qur"an. [25]
And on the vocal side of the transmission the author"s opinion is:
On the vocal side, correspondences between the two transmissions again far and away
outnumber the differences between them, even with the fine points such as long vowels before
hamzat at-qat having a madda. Also, not one of the differences substantially affects the meaning
beyond its own context....All this point to a remarkably unitary transmission in both its graphic
form and its oral form. [26]
He also discusses the Muslims" and orientalists" attitude towards the graphic transmission:
Many orientalists who see the Qur"an as only a written document might think that in the graphic
differences can be found significant clues about the early history of the Qur"an text - if"Uthmân
issued a definitive written text, how can such graphic differences be explained, they might ask.
For Muslims, who see the Qur"an as an oral as well as a written text, however, these differences
are simply readings, certainly important, but no more so than readings involving, for instances,
fine differences in assimilation or in vigor of pronouncing the hamza. [27]
Brockett goes so far as to provide examples with which the interested reader can carry out an
extended analysis. Thus, he states:
The definitive limit of permissible graphic variation was, firstly, consonantal disturbance that
was not too major, then inalterability in meaning, and finally reliable authority.
In the section titled, "The Extent to Which the Differences Affect the Sense", the author repeats
the same point:
The simple fact is that none of the differences, whether vocal or graphic, between the
transmission of Hafs and the transmission of Warsh has any great effect on the meaning. Many
are the differences which do not change the meaning at all, and the rest are differences with an
effect on the meaning in the immediate context of the text itself, but without any significant
wider influence on Muslim thought. [28]
The above is supported by the following:
Such then is the limit of the variation between these two transmissions of the Qur"an, a limit well
within the boundaries of substantial exegetical effect. This means that the readings found in these
transmissions are most likely not of exegetical origin, or at least did not arise out of crucial
exegetical dispute. They are therefore of the utmost value for the textual history of the Qur"an.
[29]
And interestingly enough the author went on to say:
The limits of their variation clearly establish that they are a single text.[30]
Furthermore, we read:
Thus, if the Qur"an had been transmitted only orally for the first century, sizeable variations
between texts such as are seen in the hadith and pre-Islamic poetry would be found, and if it had
been transmitted only in writing, sizeable variations such as in the different transmissions of the
original document of the constitution of Medina would be found. But neither is the case with the
Qur"an. There must have been a parallel written transmission limiting variation in the oral
transmission to the graphic form, side by side with a parallel oral transmission preserving the
written transmission from corruption. [31]

The investigation led to another conviction:

The transmission of the Qur"an after the death of Muhammad was essentially static, rather than
organic. There was a single text, and nothing significant, not even allegedly abrogated material,
could be taken out nor could anything be put in. [32]
Finally, we would like to establish Adrian Brockett"s conclusion on this matter:
There can be no denying that some of the formal characteristics of the Qur"an point to the oral
side and others to the written side, but neither was as a whole, primary. There is therefore no
need to make different categories for vocal and graphic differences between transmissions.
Muslims have not. The letter is not a dead skeleton to be refreshed, but is a manifestation of the
spirit alive from beginning. The transmission of the Qur"an has always been oral, just as it has
been written. [33]

* Jochen Katz wrote:How many "versions" of the holy Qur"an is there today? At least two,
probably more (I am pretty sure about the third one, but can"t prove it yet, so I am not going to
say where and what just yet), but it is common knowledge that the Hafs text and the Warsh text
(mainly used in Northwest Africa) are different not only in the vowels but also in some
consonants.The differences are small, but they are there. And both of them are for sale and in use
today. Hafs is the much more common one. The third version I have heard about has by far more
substantial differences in comparison to the other two.

References
[1] Abû Jacfar Muhammad bin Jarîr al-Tabarî (Translated & Abridged by J Cooper, W F
Madelung and A Jones),Jamic al-Bayân "an Tâ"wil ay al-Qur"an, 1987, Volume 1, Oxford
University Press & Hakim Investment Holdings (M.E.) Limited, p. 16.
[2]Ibid.
[3]Ibid.
[4]Ibid., p. 31.
[5]Ibid., p. 29.
[6]Ibid.
[7] Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips,Tafseer Soorah Al-Hujuraat, 1990, Tawheed Publications,
Riyadh, p. 27.
[8]Ibid., pp. 28-29.
[9]Ibid., pp. 29-30.
[10]Ibid., p. 30.
[11]Ibid.
[12] W M Watt & R Bell,Introduction To The Qur"an, 1994, Edinburgh at University Press, p.
49.
[13] Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips,Tafseer Soorah Al-Hujuraat,Op. Cit., p. 32.
[14] Abû MuhammadcAlî Ibn Ahmad Ibn Sacîd IbnHazm al-Andalûsî (384-456 H),Ar-Rasâ"il
al-Khamsah (A Booklet In MagazineAl-Azhar), 1993, p. 7.
[15]Ibid.
[16]Ibid., pp. 9-10.
[17]Ibid., p. 9.
[18]Ibid.
[19]Ibid., pp. 7-8.
[20]Ibid., p. 8.
[21]Ibid.
[22]Ibid., pp. 8-9."
[23] Adrian Brockett, "The Value of Hafs And Warsh Transmissions For The Textual History Of
The Qur"an" in Andrew Rippin"s (Ed.),Approaches of The History of Interpretation of The
Qur"an, 1988, Clarendon Press, Oxford, p. 33.
[24]Ibid., pp. 33-34.
[25]Ibid., p. 34.
[26]Ibid.
[27]Ibid., p. 35.
[28]Ibid., p. 37.
[29]Ibid., p. 43.
[30]Ibid.
[31]Ibid., p. 44.
[32]Ibid.
[33]Ibid., p. 45.