Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
critical edition of the text of the Qur'an."" Jeffery, in fact, intended to pub-
lish a critical edition featuring one column of Kon script facing a critical-
ly edited I;laf$ text on the opposite page."
In his attempt to introduce "rival codices"" to the Uthmanic Codex on
the basis of variant readings mentioned in works by Muslim scholars, he
produced approximately fifteen "primary" codices and thirteen "sec-
ondary" codices. The fifteen primary codices are ascribed to 'Abd Allah
ibn Mas'Od, Ubayy ibn Ka'b, 'An ibn Abu Talib, 'Abd Allah ibn 'Abbas,
Abu. Musa, J;Iaf~ah, Ana.<;ibn Malik, 'Umar ibn al Kha.tJab, Zayd ibn
Thabit, 'Abd 'Allah ibn Zubayr, Ibn 'Amr, 'A'ishah, Salim, Umm Salamah,
and 'Ubayd ibn 'Umayr. He also ascribed some secondary codices to mem-
bers of the next generation, among them al Aswad 'Alqamah, iji.t.tan, Sa'Jd
ibn Jubayr, Tall;tah, 'lkrimah, Mujahid, 'A.ta' ibn Ab-jRahal), al Rabi' ibn
Khuthaym, al A'mash, Ja'far al ~adiq, ~aJjJ~ibn Kaysan, and all;larith ibn
Suwayd. In addition, he lists some unnamed codices with a number of
variant readings. It should be remembered that not every person purported
to have a certain codex actually possessed a personal copy of the Qur'an.
However, based on some variant readings ascribed to these individuals
that differ from the reading of the 'Uthmanic Codex, Jeffery assigns to
each of them a rival codex, regardless of whether or not the person con-
cerned claimed or insisted upon a particular reading ascribed to him!her
after the appearance of the official recension. It is also worthy of mention
that none of these rival codices, some of which were said to exist in the
Kit&b al Ma$&l;if" and other sources'.before the time of (he official recen-
sion, have survived until our own time. As Jeffery says: "It is unfortunate
that not sufficient [material] has survived to enable us to get a real picture
of the text of any one of them.""Nevertheless, "in some cases, Jeffery was
able to detennine the primary codex from which a secondary one was
derived.""
Sab'at Abruf
When analyzing the above-mentioned variant readings in the opening
swah of the Qur"an, it seems imperative to discuss how they arose. This
subject has been discussed abundantly in the Kitdb 01 Mo~ii1)if, the
Muqaddimatiin, and other books on variant readings. These are also the
sources used by Jeffery in his studies. The Prophet is reported to have said
that the Qur'an was revealed to him in seven ways (in seven al)ruf. plural
of l)arj), by which he meant dialects or seven different ways of recitation."
h is narrated by Ibn .AbbAs that the Prophet said: "Gabriel recited the
Qur'an to me in one way. Then I requested him (to read it another way),
and continued asking him to recite it in other ways. He recited it in sever-
al ways till he ultimately reciled it in seven different ways (al}rufJ.'~ To
make it easier for the elderly, the illiterate, and the nomadic people 10
recite die Que'an, the Prophet allowed them to recite various dialectal vari-
ants in their own way, which eventually led to diversification in reading
176 The American Journal oflslamic Social Sciences 12:2
styles. The books on variant readings show that the Companions used this
concession fully and continued to do so until 'Uthm!n finalized the codex
and issued an official recension that abrogated all other readings and
dialectal usages and maintained the readings used by the Prophet.
It is reported that Anas ibn Milikrecited IOi."a ~,.1I
(94:1-2). When this was objected to, he said "~';,j,QJ.o..i.Ji;.. all the various
different readings [diaJects] from the same:" On the authority ofIbn S"tfin,
it is narrated that Ibn 'Abbas said that J"'-r1' and J,il
are one and the same.'-' II is said that Ubayy ibn Ka'b was teaching a
Persian Siirah 44:44 ";'~I,.W., )li~'" . The man said repeatedly
,..;.I',.1.oJ" . When the Prophet learned of this, he asked him to recite
,.HIIII,.W. instead of H''''''',.I.oJ", which was easier for him."
"Wherever there are more words to give the same meaning, there is
every likelihood that those words are representing different dialects [and
linguistic units]."" He also cites, on the authority of al A$ma'!, an inter-
esting controversy between two men over the word $aqr. One pronounced
it with a $ad whi1e the other used a sin. They decided to ask for a third
opinion. The third man, who pronounced it with a zi1', differed from both
of them. What this shows is that each individual was using his own dialect
to pronounce the word in queslion. "
Jeffrey's claim that "the mass of variant readings that has survived to
us from the codices of Ubayy and Ibn Mas'od shows that they were real tex-
tual variants and not mere dialectal peculiarities"'. indicates that the substi-
tution of one word with a synonym" from another dialect in the rival
codices 1ed him to the above conclusion. He does not seem to have under-
stood the Prophet's permission for new Muslims, many of whom were
elderly, illiterate, bedouin, and without any background in Arabic, to use
variant readings. It is also evident from the above-mentioned examp!e of
Ubayy and the Persian who could not pronounce a certain word. In an oft-
178 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 12:2
In order to equate the Qur'an with the Bible, Jeffery suggests that some
of the Companions made "changes and improvements" in the Qur'anic text
based on "motives of piety." Unfortunatelyfor him, he seems 10 have
missed the fact that any addition or deletion to the Qur'an is such a heinous
crime that one cannol imagine that a Companion would do such a Ihing. It
also would not have been lolerated by hisJher fellow Companions.
ChlIdIary: Orlenlal18l11on Vll'lint RMdinp 179
Conclusion
We can swn up the discussion in lite following points:
3. While dcalin& with Ihc variant rcadiop. Jeffery has I8ftORd com-
pIeIdy the im a...t factor of the Qur'an'. oral Innsmis.sion. The
'Uthmlnie rcc:ension wu not just another ol'ficial document 10be shelved
aftu lite committee bad completed IL The canonical version was avail-
able 10everyone. One copy of the otrlCial recension (al MIlII)aj tJ/lmiim)
was kept in Madinah. while copiel were lent to 0Iher cities in the Islamic
stale of that lime, Thousands of Companions who had memorized moSt,
if not all, of the Qur'an and who had lirsl-hand knowledge of how the
Propbel had recited the Qur'an. were in Madinah. It musl also be remem-
180 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 12:2
bered !bat all of the Companions, despite the fact that the scribes and
many Companions had written materials with them, approved the
'UthmAnic recension as the recitation of the Prophet and accepted its
authenlicity and accuracy.
5. Despite his admission that many variant readings have been invent-
ed by later theologians, philologers, and grammarians and then ascribed to
early authorities in order to gain prestige," Jeffery is stiU interested in
restoring the .'original reading" of the Qur'an.1o More recently, two other
orientalisl:s-John Burton and John Wansbrough-have concluded that all
of the accounts about "Companion codices," "metropolitan codices," and
individual variants were fabricated by later jurists and philologers.1'
Jeffery has also ignored the fact that the earliest basic sources for variant
readings are the reports of Ibn Abl Diwlid (d. 316 A.H.),Ibn al Anbir'i (d.
328 H.), and Ibn al Ash,tah (d. 360 A.H.).Howevet, their reportS do not
have pOpel narration chains and are not supported by genuine b'ansmis-
sion chains.
6. As was the case with his predecessor Bell, Jeffery has failed to
camouflage his prejudice against Islam and the Qur'an when dealing
with its compilation. Following BeIl,1J,he declares that the recension of
Abu Bake was his own purely private affair."" It is very surprising to note
that he accepts as valid all of the variants indicated in the MlUladdimaran
and the Kittih al Maia~if but ignores (without explaining why) these
same sources' assertion about Abn Bakr's collection of the Qur'an, a facl
that has been supported powerfully by early sources of history and
hadith." Nevertheless, it is indubitable that the Qur'anic recension pre-
pared by Abu Bake served as the principal basis for the 'U!hmAnic recen-
sIOn.
Cliaudhlry; Orienillilm on Varilnl Readings 181
7. Jeffery has also failed to understand 'Ulhmln's reasons for under-
taking his recension and to acknowledge the factors of propagating
dialectal varianls and 'Uthmln's concern with complaints stemming
from variant readings. Aba Mubammad Makb, like Other MusJim
exegetes, makes il clear that 'Ulhman soughl to deat with this issue by
codifying the Qur'anic text (the Prophet's reading) and abrogating all
other readings, even if they had been permitted by the Prophet during his
lifetime." AI QaySJ.also mendoos that a team of ..least twelve Ihousand
Companions and Followers (Tdbi1n) worked 00 Ihe official recension
and destroyed the uncanonical vcrsiona.1aII is inconceivable that such a
large team of eminent Muslims could enforce a recension containing
reading.s that, although asaibcd 10 the Prophd:, were of a doublful
naIure.
8. Despite his claim, Jeffery could Dot observe the principles or high..
er ailicism while dealing with the Qur"an and its V8riant readings. In his
lecture on ''The Textual History of the Qur'an." delivered in Jerusalem
(1946) and published in his Th~ Qur'Qn as &riplllr~ (1952). he fails 10
mention the Archive's conclusion regarding the colleclion of Ihe Qur'an
and the textual differences in various versions. Dr. f;lamldullah. who had
met Dr. Pretzl when the laucr came to Paris to collecl pholocopies of the
Qur'anic scriptures availab1e in Ihe libraries !here..:! says that PretzJ lo1d
him: "Our institute (Archive) has collected the?otographs of 42.000
copies of !he Qur'an and we are collating them' and that. after accom-
plishing this task before its destruction, issued a '"provisional repon" that,
acconIing to him, reads:
Endnotes
I. Arlhur Jeffery. Ma/erialsfor 1M HisloryoflMTotoflM Qur'on (London: E. J.
Brill. 1937). This book. edited by Jefft'fY. appcaml in one volume with the Kitab al
MO$iH;ifby AM Bakr 'Abel Allah ibn Alii DiwOd Sulayman II Sijistln1 (d. 316 K.).
Jeffery also edited IWO0IIter manusaiprs under the tille of Muqaddimoldn jI 'Ulum 01
Qu,'dn. 2d ed (Cairo: Maktabat al Khinji, 1972). This book deals with the colleClion and
variant readingsof the Qur'an. One portion contains the MlIqIlddimalrXi/db 01Mobani,
whose author is unknown (the manusaipllacks the essential rlnl. folio). However, on the
seeondpageofthemanuscripl:,theauthormenriOllllhMhestanedwritinghisbookin42S
"'.H. and entitled it Xildb al Mabini fi Hapl! al "'a'dnl. The second portion, entilled 01
Jd"u'aIMu~o""ar,isbylbn'Myah{d.c.S43".H.),whowroleitasaninlroductionto
his Qur'anie commenlary. Both Noeldete and his pupil Schwally have based their
research on these worts. Tbe language, Slyle, and chains of IransmiS$ionemployed there.
in~vealthattheauthorsoflheseworksbelon&edIOMualimSpain.
2. For details, see Jaurnal ofBib/ieal SllIdiu, 19(MardJ 19(0): l:viii.Ix..
3. Arthur Jefft'fY.TMKortIn. Se/«tN SamJ (New York: Heritage Press, 1958). 20.
4. For a detailed account of orientalists. see 'Abdur Ral)min Momin. "Islamic Fun-
damentalism," Hamdard Islamic/U 10, no. 4 (Winle£ 1981): 35-40.
5. Anhur Jeffery. TM Qlll"tlll OJ ScriplJUr (New York: Russell F. Moore Co.,
1952).1.
6. Ibid.
7. Jeffery, Koran. 14-15.
8. Ibid., 15. See also Jeffery, Qlll"ollosSt:rip1ure, 93--97.
9. Jeffery. Mo/eriofs.viii.
10. Jeffery, Koran, 21.
11. Jeffery.Moleriofs.viii.
12. Jeffery, Qur'on os Scripture. 103.
13. Ibid.
14. Jeffery calls lhe personal coUections of someCompanions "rival codices." These
collections were sum:tldered 10 'UIhmin after !he official m;ension had been oompiled.
Some details can be seen in !he worIt edited by Jeffery himself: Ibn Mas'Od sunmdered his
codex 10'UthmAn.SeeJeffery,Muqoddimol<in. 95. Pean;ooalsoclusif~ the personal C<:II.
leclions of the CompaniOlll in !he preofflCiai recension period as "rivals." He has relied
mainly on Jeffery'sMtI/erials when dealing with varianl readings in his essay ~AI.Kur'an,"
in Th~ EII'J,ropedia of Is/om (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1981). 5:406-8.
15. According 10 Ibn Alii D6wM. AM Bakr was the fll'St 10 collect Ihe Qut'an. He
mentions the names of len Companions said by Jeffery as having "primary codices."
Althougllibn AbI DlW\!d never implies thai all of them had wrilten copies of the Qur'an,
he mentions varianl readinp ascribed 10them under the liI1eofMIII~of. He also uses sueh
pltrases asjama'a 01QIt,'on{liI., Mhecollected d1eQur'an") forone woo has memorized it.
See Ibn Alii DAwl1d,Ki,db of Ma$41Jif,ed. by Arthur Jeffery I. ed. (Cairo: 1936),5, 10,
50.87. Ibn Ab1DIwod has made iI even clearer by saying !hat he uses the word mlq~flO
mean 1).orforqirltoh {re:ading)lO!hallhevariantaheqUOleli need IlOl:be teganled u com.
ing from aclUalwrillell codices. SecJeffery,MalHials, 15.
16. For a detailed 8CCOIInI of !he recensiona of AbO BUr and 'Uthmln. see Mu~am'
mad f:lam1dullail, Kh,,!ubd/+BaIuw.'tIlpur {Bahawalpur, PakiSlan: Islamic University,
1401 AH),3-29.
17.1effery,Mo/erio/J,x.
18.Pearson,~AI-Kur'an."407.
19. Jeffery, Malerials. 1-3.
20. These seven s)"Slemsare I$O'ibed 10Nitti' of Madinalt (d. 169 11.),Ihn Kathlr of
Makkah (d. 120 "'.K.).lbn 'Amir of Damascus {d. 118 H.), Abu 'Amr of Ba~rah {d. 154
A.H.),'A"imofKMah(d. 128 ".11.).T:Jamza\IofKilfah (d. 158 II.),andal Kisa"i of Knfah
(d. Ja9 H.).
Chaudhary: Orientalism on Variant Readings 183
21.Jeffery,Qur'lIlIlIsS€riptlU~,101).102,
22. For ",ails, see Lamb al Sa'ld, Tht Rtcirtd KOIWI,trans. Bernard Weiss. M. A.
Raut. and Mon'oe Berger (Prinoeton: The Darwin Press, 1975),45-50,
23.lbid,49-50,139.
24. Jdfay, Milier/a/s. 15.
25. While enlisting tt:e variants, Jeffury has read iI incorrectly: ~! 4 at.
for ~...:.!:r.iiliG. See Je.ffery, Malerials. 111. As Jeffery never-gives lhe
sourcesofhisentriesinMaterials.ilcannotbedelmninedfrocnwherehehastakenthe
phrase CiJoj:.l'''!I.if"" ,which obviously seems ro be incorJeC1.
26.11rid
21. Ibid.. 185,
2&.lbid..195,
29. Ibid.. 220.
30. Ibid., 233.
31.1bid..,281.88.
32.1bid..,314-15.
33. Abil Mul;1ammadal QayA, Kifiib II/ /biil1f1hfiMa'ii,ii al Qirii'iif. Isl ed. (Damas.
cus:I919):94,
34. Ibid,. 96.
3S.lbid..,94.
36. 100 Khllawayh, frob TfuJlt'JlhillSurah min al Q.u6n a/ Karim (Cairo: Oir al
KurubaIMis(lyah,l94t).2&-30.
31.Ar1hur Jeffery. "A VarianI:Text of the Faliha." The Moslem Worfd.29 (1939):
t58. Jeffery. although he included the translation ofal Fiti1)ah andal Mu'..- adhatiln
(Two Charms) in The Koran - Srlecfed Sumhs, doe!!:not COlL'Iiderthem to be pan oflhe
Qur'an: '"The form in which we !lave it [i.e" al-Qur'anl comprising one hUlldro:l and
eleven SUfU"and says in the introduction to the tnmslation ofal Fltil;1ah:"'This.bon Sura
does not be)ona 10 tlte Qw'an proper, but (is] a liule pra)'U, .lr.ind of cenlO msde up of
Koranic phnIses, placed as an introduction to the Book. and commonly reciled before the
resdingofanyportioo thereof."Jeffery,Koran, 15,23.
38. Published in Mul;1ammadBiqir Majlis-I,TlldhkirullllA'jmmol! (Tehran: 1331A.H.)
p.18.khasnotbeenascribedro'AnibnAb""LTAlib.
39. .Jeffery, "A Variant Ten." 159,
40. Ibid... 159.
41.Ibid., 160.62.
42. MuhammadMuhsinKhan.URns.,$(1/.11/.1aI8..kMr/ (Riyldh: Malr.tabalII Riyldlt
al Had1dtah, 1981), 6:483: Ibn In al Tabar;, T"lsir "I TIIlHtrr(Cairo: DIr al Ma,'lrif,
1946),1:32:Jeffery(ed.),MuqaddimafQII,201,234.
O.Khan,JjolJii),481-S2.
44.Jeffcry,Mllqaddimalii..,129.
45. Ibid..
46.1bid.,229.30.
41. 'Abel.al Wal;1'ldWan, Fiqh al LII~h"h, 8th ed. (Cairo: n.d.), 108; Ibrihlm Anls,Fi
al Ltlhajiil "I 'Arab1yah(Cairo: 1965),40, For characteristics of common Arabic, see
'~rGr Takawwunal 'Arablyah al Fu$1;1AWI Kha~'i$UhI,"in 'Abd al Tawwlb Ram&\lin,
Fiq;;lfi Fi4h al 'Arab1yab (Cairo: 1913),62.78,
4S.There are disclIssionson Ihis topic scaueredthmughout the variousbooks 011Ihe
Arabic:language. AI SuyQ.fihas a detaiJed chapter on il in his 01 lIqiillfl 'Uliima/Qur'ii" .
49. 'AbdAllah ibn 'Abbas.K.7tJbal LughiitflaIQu,.'an. ed..Salal) al Din alMunaijid
(Cairo: 1946).
5O.1bid..S.7.
SI. Fordetails,see Jeffery (ed.).MuqqadimatiJn. 229-30,
S2.Anls,FiaILahaj6lal'Arabiyah,117:S!lbblal$llib,Dirasl1lftFiq!laILM/lhah
(Sew: 1913).300,
53. 'Ab.hl f:iamid al Shalqini,Rilo'liyat 0/ LugfuJh(Cairo: 1971). 336-37: l:Iasan ?J.~,
Kalam a/'Arab mill QUifayiial LugfuJh al'Araliiyah (Beirut: 1916), 104.
184 The American Journal of IsI~ic Socilll Sciences 11:1
54.lbnJinn1,tllKhuf'!'ii,l:374
55. Ibid.
56,Jeffery,QIlr'tlntlsSr:riplurt,91.
57. In a number of cases, variants in the old codices Me merely synonyms for words
used in Ihe 'Uthmanic !eJIOl. Jeffery,MOlerio/s, 16-
58. Khan,$tllfl~,6:482-83.
59. Pearson,YAI-Kur'an."408.
60. Ibid., 409.
61. Forde!ails. see Jeffery, MWftlddimoriin, 218-30.
62.Jeffery,Maleriols,l6.
63. Ibid.
64. Ibid.
6S.Jeffery, Qiu'onu.lScriplure.I.
66. Robert W, Funk, RoyW. Hoover,and the Jesus Seminar,The Five Gospds (New
York:Macmillan,I993}.20.
67. Jeffery, Mtl/eritl/s, 49. See also Ibn Man~Or, of Lisan (BeiRII: DIr SAdir, n.d.),
14:163-64.
68. For uample, in Sarah 17:JI, uqqital is read as waqqiffJIby Ibn Mu'CId. Jeffery,
Malerials. 101. In the SIIR1eway. w4w and alijare imerchangeabIe, as in wujiih and 'ujUh.
SeelbnMan~,tlIUsiJn,2:107-8(w.q-t).
69. ThnManti)r,aIUsiin.SeeAl-Afifall.JJyyinah andaya.15:421,438-441.
7Q.Jeffery,Ml«jaddimofiin,220.
71. Ibn KMJawayh,l'riJh.22-24.
72. FOI"de!ails.lice Jeffery, MllqQddimOliin,38;
. al QaySI, allbanah, 73.
73. Jeffery.MllqaddimaliJn,9S.
74.lbn Abl DiwOd. Kiliih 01MOfii~if. 23.
75. Jeffery, MOleriols. 1. 15.
76. Ibid.. 16. -
77. Pearson, MAI-Kur'ln," 401408. For details, see also John Bunon, TM Co/leel;OIT
of /he Qar'tln (Cambridge: 1977), 199-112: John W;msbrougb, Qur'all Studies; Sources
and Methods o[Saiplurol/nterprntJtion(Oxford: 1977),44-46,102.7-
78. See, for example, W. Mon/&omery Wan. Belfsllllroductioll 10 Ihe Qur'an {Edin-
burgh: 1917),43.
79. Jeffery, Maleriols. 6-7,
80. See, for eJIOample,Khan,$ahih,6:476-80.
8J. al Qays1. al/h6"oh. 96.97.
R1.lbid.,21-13.
83.ijamldlillah,KhUlIl00t.15-16.
84.lbid.,l6.
85.lbitt.15-16.