The Second Canonization of The Qur An

The Second Canonization of the Qurʾān (324/936)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Downloaded from Brill.com10/20/2020 09:05:54PM
via Leiden University
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
The Second Canonization
of the Qurʾān (324/936)
Ibn Mujāhid and the Founding of the Seven Readings
By
Shady Hekmat Nasser
LEIDEN | BOSTON
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Cover illustration: Courtesy of The Walters Art Museum.
The Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available online at http://catalog.loc.gov
Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface.
isbn 978-90-04-40197-6 (hardback)

isbn 978-90-04-41290-3 (e-book)
Copyright 2021 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi,
Brill Sense, Hotei Publishing, mentis Verlag, Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh and Wilhelm Fink Verlag.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without prior written permission from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided
that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910,
Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change.
This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

To Wolfhart Heinrichs (1941–2014), and
Shahab Ahmed (1966–2015)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
Contents
Acknowledgements xi
Preface xii
1 Preliminaries. The Second Canonization of the Qurʾān 1

1 Introduction 1
2 The Second Canonization 5
3 Definitions and Terminology 9
4 Transliteration 12
5 Abbreviations and Notes 14
2 Survival of the Fittest 16

1 The Irregular Readings of the Canonical Readings 16
1.1 Shawādhdh al-Sabʿa 21
1.2 What is Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim? 25
1.2.1 Divergence: Abū ʿUmar Hubayra al-Tammār 27
1.2.2 Geography and Mentorship: al-Mufaḍḍal al-Ḍabbī and
Abān al-ʿAṭṭār 31
1.2.3 Conflict of Interests: al-Kisāʾī as a Transmitter (rāwī) 38
1.2.4 Specialization: al-Ḥulwānī 47
1.2.5 Dissemination and Association: the Transmitters of Abū
ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ 50
1.2.5.1 Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī (d. 277/890) and Aḥmad b. Mūsā
l-Luʾluʾī 50
1.2.5.2 ʿAlī b. Naṣr (d. 188–9/804–5) 50
1.2.5.3 Hārūn al-Aʿwar; ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl; Hārūn → ʿUbayd;
Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr 51
1.2.5.4 ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl (d. 186/802) 52
1.2.5.5 Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī (d. 215/830) 53
1.2.5.6 ʿAbd al-Wārith (d. 180/796) and ʿAbd al-Wahhāb b.
ʿAṭāʾ al-Khaffāf (d. 204–207/819–822) 54
1.2.5.7 Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ibn al-Yazīdī 54
1.2.5.8 Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim b. Sallām (d. 224/838); Shujāʿ
b. Abī Naṣr (d. 190/805) → Abū ʿUbayd 54
1.2.6 Discipline Specialism: the Transmitters of Nāfiʿ 55
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

viii Contents
2 Summary and Notes 57

3 Sixty-Six Problematic Transmissions in Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa 60
3.1 Forgetfulness, Lying, and Growing Senile 60
3.2 Sixty-Six Problematic Transmissions 63
3.3 Summary Table 88
3.4 The Weakest Link 89
3.5 Conclusion 91
3 Ḥadīth and Qurʾān rijāl Criticism 100

1 The Men of Ḥadīth: ṣifat al-rāwī 104
1.1 Ḍabṭ (Academic Proficiency) 104
1.2 ʿAdāla (Moral Integrity) 105
2 Qirāʾāt and isnād Criticism 107
2.1 The Importance of isnād 108
2.2 ittiṣāl al-sanad: The isnād of the Qirāʾāt 109
3 The Mythical Ancestry of Qirāʾāt 115
3.1 Al-Ṭabarī: Tawātur, isnād and the Regional Consensus 122
3.2 Did waḍʿ (Forgery) Occur in Qirāʾāt? 125
4 Ḥadīth Terminology in Qirāʾāt 128
5 Applying jarḥ and taʿdīl in Qirāʾāt 131
6 Observations and Conclusion 135
4 Orality Revisited. The Written Transmission of Qirāʾāt 137

1 The Regional Codices 137
1.1 The Case of Ibn Shanabūdh (d. 328/939) 141
1.2 Ibn Mujāhid and the Regional Codices 143
1.2.1 The Account of Abū ʿUbayd 144
1.2.2 The Accounts of Ibn Abī Dāwūd 148
1.2.3 The Textual Variants in Kitāb al-Sabʿa 150
1.2.4 Observations 161
1.3 Adhering to the rasm of the muṣḥaf 163
1.4 Waṣl, waqf, and yāʾāt al-iḍāfa 165
2 Early Different Forms of Qirāʾāt Transmission 167
2.1 Notebooks 169
2.2 Doubt and Uncertainty 172
2.3 Retraction of Readings 175
2.4 Lost and Extinct Traditions 176
2.5 Prayers 180
3 Concluding Remarks 181
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Contents ix
5 The Nature of the Qurʾānic Variants 183

1 Standardization of Arabic and the Qurʾānic Text through the Principles
of Qurʾānic Recitation (uṣūl al-Qirāʾa) 183
1.1 Disconnected Variants 184
1.2 Familiar Notions and Proper Nouns 187
1.3 Uṣūl al-Qirāʾa (The Principles of Qurʾānic Readings) 189
1.3.1 The 2nd and 3rd Person Masculine Plural Pronominal
Suffix (ṣilat mīm al-jamʿ wa-ḍamīr al-hāʾ) 191
1.3.2 Hāʾ al-kināya: Third Person Singular Masculine
Pronoun Suffix 193
1.3.3 Assimilation (al-idghām) 194
1.3.3.1 Assimilating Identical Consonants (idghām
al-mutamāthilayn) 195
1.3.3.2 Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ and the Assimilation of Identical
Consonants 200
1.3.3.3 Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ and the Assimilation of Similar
Consonants 201
1.3.4 The Articulation of hamza (al-Hamz) 206
1.3.5 Omitting the hamza in waqf Mode 206
1.3.6 Al-nabiyyīn, al-nubuwwa, al-anbiyāʾ, and al-nabiyy 207
1.3.7 Lengthening and Shortening of Long Vowels Preceding
hamza (al-madd wa-l-qaṣr) 207
1.3.8 Two Consecutive hamzas in One Word (al-hamzatān
al-mujtamiʿatān fī kalima) 210
1.3.9 Consecutive hamza-interrogatives 211
1.3.10 Two Consecutive hamzas in Two Words (al-hamzatān
al-mutalāṣiqatān fī kalimatayn) 212
1.3.11 The Passive of Hollow (Second-Weak) Verbs 214
1.3.12 Al-fatḥ wa-l-imāla (a>e Shift) 214
1.3.12.1 Imālat dhawāt al-yāʾ 216
1.3.12.2 Imālat dhawāt al-rāʾ 217
1.3.12.3 aḥyā 218
1.3.13 The Sakt (Pause) of Ḥamza 219
1.3.14 Naql ḥarakat al-hamza 219
1.3.15 The Subject Pronouns: huwa and hiya 219
1.3.16 Yāʾāt al-iḍāfa 220
1.3.17 Ikhtilās Abī ʿAmr 221
1.3.18 (n-z-l) 222
1.3.19 al-rīḥ vs. al-riyāḥ 223
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

x Contents
1.3.20 Unvocalized Consonants Preceding alif al-waṣl 223

1.3.21 lām al-amr 224
1.3.22 Bu/iyūt, shu/iyūkh, ʿu/iyūn, ghu/iyūb, and ju/iyūb 225
1.3.23 The alif of anā 226
1.3.24 al-hāʾ al-muttaṣila bi l-fiʿl al-majzūm (hāʾ-pronoun Suffix of
Verbs in the Jussive Mood) 226
1.3.25 Ithbāt al-hāʾ fī l-waṣl (Retaining the hāʾ-suffix) 228
1.3.26 rusul 229
1.4 Conclusion 229
1.5 uṣūl Audio Index 230
2 The Individual Variants ( farsh) of the Qurʾān 245
2.1 Variant Types 247
2.2 Distribution of the Variant Types throughout the Whole Qurʾān 251
6 Conclusion and Future Research 257
Appendix: Comprehensive Table of Quranic Variants 261

Biography 887
Bibliography 900
Index 912
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Acknowledgements
I wrote this book over a period of five years during which I immensely benefit-
ed from discussions directly and indirectly related to Qirāʾāt. I also gave several
talks and lectures pertaining to different sections and chapters of the book,
for which I received valuable feedback and comments from friends, colleagues
and students. I cannot name all those who helped me in conceptualizing clear
and well-defined ideas in this project, but I am truly indebted to all their com-
ments, questions, criticisms, and encouragement. I want to especially thank
James E. Montgomery and Amira Bennison from Cambridge University, both
of whom patiently put up with my endless chatter on Qirāʾāt, in particular
Amira whose office was next to mine and had to hear loud audio recordings of
the Qurʾān, which I was playing all day. I had several excellent discussions with
François Déroche back in the UK, and I was constantly discussing my progress
with Alba Fedeli in every chapter I wrote. Both Aziz al-Azmeh and Nadia al-
Bagdadi were generous for inviting me to CEU-Budapest, during which time I
presented some of this research. Both Yasushi Kosugi and Maria Kosugi invited
me to give several lectures in Kyoto university and Kansai university in Japan,
in front of an audience who has a very different and refreshing perspective on
the transmission of scriptures. Last but not least, my colleagues—both faculty
and students—at Harvard University with whom I had stimulating and fruit-
ful discussions. Special thanks to Sheza Alqera, Hacı Gündüz, and the English
Sībawayhi, Conor Dube, all graduate students of Arabic and Islamic studies
at NELC-Harvard who helped me copy-edit this book, and gave me excellent
feedback and comments on the draft of its manuscript.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Preface
This book builds on the research I have been conducting on Qirāʾāt in the
past few years, both in my first monograph and the group of articles I have
published on the subject so far. The book is not dependent on these studies;
however, it requires an advanced knowledge of the Qurʾān and Qirāʾāt, since
several introductory notions, concepts, historical narratives that were already
discussed in detail elsewhere will not be reintroduced. Thus, no recapitula-
tions or summaries will be given on the narratives of the collection and codi-
fication of the Qurʾān, the ‘seven aḥruf ’ tradition, the concept of shudhūdh
(irregular and anomalous readings), tawātur, or the biography of Ibn Mujāhid
and his Seven Eponymous Readers. Since 2013, several publications relevant to
Qirāʾāt have appeared, but they were not directly related to the study of Qirāʾāt
and its transmission. Nonetheless, I will be referring to these studies when nec-
essary, particularly those by Mustafa Shah, Yasin Dutton, Alain George, Devin
Stewart, Omar Hamdan and other studies related to codices and codicology
such as those by Alba Fedeli, François Déroche, Nicolai Sinai and Asma Hilali.
I will not recapitulate the state-of-the-art scholarship on the subject, which
I have already accounted for in my earlier work, and which has been further
complemented by the works of other scholars I reference and cite.
The book is divided into an introductory chapter followed by four main
chapters. The first chapter will present the main arguments of the book and its
contribution to Qurʾānic studies in general and to the Qirāʾāt discipline in spe-
cific. The concept of the Second Canonization will be explained vis-à-vis the
new chronology I am proposing for the standardization of the Qurʾānic text.
The chapter will also introduce key concepts in Qirāʾāt terminology utilized by
Ibn Mujāhid, important acronyms, and a detailed explanation of the translit-
eration system I am using throughout the book.
Chapter Two will discuss the concept of shawādhdh al-sabʿa, i.e., the non-
canonical readings of the canonical Readings. Building on previous scholar-
ship, the chapter will analyze in detail the chains of transmission of important
Qurʾān transmitters in Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa and account for the rise
of the irregular readings in the Qirāʾāt tradition. The second part of the chap-
ter will study in further detail sixty-six transmission errors documented and
recorded by Ibn Mujāhid. The chapter concludes by proposing a framework
within which Qirāʾāt scholars operated to determine the validity and falsity of
Qurʾānic variants, as well as the criteria they might have considered for endors-
ing certain Qurʾān transmitters as representatives of a particular Eponymous
Reading.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Preface xiii
Chapter Three is a comparative study of the mechanisms of transmission in

both Qirāʾāt and Ḥadīth. The criteria of accepting ḥadīth as sound and valid will
be compared to the criteria of deeming a Qurʾānic reading to be authentic and
acceptable among the community of the Qurrāʾ. The conditions of jarḥ and
taʿdīl (cross examination) of transmitters will be explored in Ḥadīth literature,
after which the same criteria will be applied to Qirāʾāt transmission. The chap-
ter concludes with important observations concerning the distinct natures of
both disciplines, and how applying the rules of jarḥ and taʿdīl to Qurʾān trans-
mitters produced different results from those of Ḥadīth. Additionally, the later
interference of Ḥadīth methodology in the discipline of Qirāʾāt suggests that
the latter transformed from a collective performance by the community into
verbatim transmissions authenticated and “transported” by single individuals.
Chapter Four re-examines the notion of orality within the discipline of
Qirāʾāt and offers new insight into the writing culture within the community of
the Qurrāʾ. The textual differences among the regional codices will be studied
and compared with the data provided by Ibn Mujāhid to investigate the extent
to which textual variants emerged over time and to see whether they were a
static corpus of entries fixed since the codification process under ʿUthmān.
Oral vs. written transmissions will be evaluated for their role and importance
within the Qirāʾāt discipline. Besides oral audition (al-qirāʾa ʿalā, tilāwa, samāʿ
al-ḥurūf) as a way of transmitting and authenticating Qurʾānic readings, other
written methods were prevalent as well, such as notebooks, correspondences,
and personal codices. Studying these cases will shed light on the social context
of Qirāʾāt transmission and the interpersonal interactions within the commu-
nity of the Qurrāʾ.
Chapter Five will be dedicated to a comprehensive, thorough and detailed
documentation of the Seven Eponymous Readings, both their principles of rec-
itation (uṣūl) and individual variants (farsh) throughout the whole Qurʾān. The
detailed documentation of these System-Readings will reveal the great num-
ber of discrepancies they incorporated and demonstrate how the Eponymous
Readings crystallized only after a long process of editing, evolution, and natural
selection. The chaotic and volatile principles of recitation attested to a period
where Arabic language, grammar and phonetics had not been fully standard-
ized yet. More than 14,000 entries of variant entries are documented in this
chapter, all of which are accompanied by audio recordings.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
CHAPTER 1
Preliminaries. The Second Canonization

of the Qurʾān
1 Introduction
This is a study of the transmission and reception of the Qurʾānic text during the
lifetime of Abū Bakr Ibn Mujāhid (d. 324/936), best known in the Qirāʾāt tradi-
tion by the name of musabbiʿ al-sabʿa (the founder of the Seven Eponymous
Readings). It is a study concerned with the language, grammar, and phonetics
of the Qurʾān and its transmitters as documented in Ibn Mujāhid’s work, Kitāb
al-Sabʿa fī l-Qirāʾāt. This book will be the first in a project whose overarching
goal is to trace the evolution and development of the Qurʾānic text through
Qirāʾāt literature, from its supposed codification during ʿUthmān’s time down
to its final standardization in the modern period. The main goal of the project
in general, and this volume in particular, is to underscore the scrupulous edit-
ing and revisions the Qurʾān underwent in its recited, oral form through its
1,400-year journey towards a final, static, and systematized text. While schol-
arship on the stabilization of the Qurʾānic text is more attentive to its textual
tradition, i.e. the maṣāḥif (codices) literature, paleography and codicology of
early Qurʾānic manuscripts, my work is more concerned with understand-
ing the process of the stabilization of the oral Qurʾān, the recited scripture.
I argue that this oral Qurʾān developed and evolved at particular junctures in
time; it was never a static corpus that remained unchanged since its revelation
and inception. While many scholars, particularly in the West, believe that the
Qurʾān (like any other scripture) did undergo changes during its canonization
as a liturgical text, my research addresses the mechanisms of this canoniza-
tion process in its oral form, looking at this gradual process of systematization
through the lens of the variant readings of the Qurʾān. In the following pages,
I would like to clarify certain concepts and flesh out some key ideas particu-
lar to the discipline of Qirāʾāt, which I believe are essential for understanding
what I mean by editing, canonization, and stabilization.
Currently, there is no reason or evidence to suggest that the Qurʾān underwent
intentional textual changes as far as word manipulation, additions, or omis-
sions are concerned. Since its codification in the regional codices, the Qurʾān
seems to have been a “closed text”, as Fred Donner has convincingly argued.1
1 Fred M. Donner, Narratives of Islamic Origins (Princeton: The Darwin Press, 1998), 60–1.
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2021 | doi:10.1163/9789004412903_002 Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

2 CHAPTER 1
The question of whether this first canonization/codification process of the

Qurʾān arranged, edited, or manipulated the text contrary to the original rev-
elation that the Prophet received is currently unanswerable, considering the
limited resources and poor documentation we have on this formative and criti-
cal period of Islam. As for the process of editing to which I believe the Qurʾān
was subjected, it was an oral process of correcting and standardizing the defec-
tive script of the early codices through the discipline of Qirāʾāt (i.e., the variant
readings of the Qurʾān). Qirāʾāt in general, and the sophisticated rules of tajwīd
(recitation) in particular, were the tools Qurʾān readers and grammarians used
to standardize and stabilize the Qurʾānic text. Standardizing the Qurʾān meant
editing it, that is, correcting its substandard usages, eliminating its irregulari-
ties, and preparing it for public recitation. Thus, at a fundamental level, my
treatment of the development of Qirāʾāt literature builds on the idea that it
was a process of editing and standardizing.
The premise of this project is to look at Qirāʾāt from a new and different
perspective. The arguments concerning the genesis of Qirāʾāt in modern schol-
arship tend to focus on the “why”, that is, the reason(s) behind the emergence
of the variant readings. While I find most of these arguments to be compel-
ling and collectively true, my approach focuses on the “how”: the mechanisms
through which variants emerged and were transmitted, which, if investigated
thoroughly, may one day allow us to accurately answer the “why”-question.
Variants did indeed emerge because of the ‘defective’ consonantal outline
of the early codices, which caused confusion amongst Muslims and opened
the door for multiple readings of the same word. Variants also emerged due
to faulty memory and intentional manipulation of the voweling of the text to
serve legal and theological arguments. Moreover, the Prophet did acknowledge
different variant readings during his lifetime and accepted multiple readings
of the same verse.2 All these factors together contributed to the emergence of
the variant readings. However, what I hope to achieve in this study is to show
the process through which the variant readings emerged and to account for the
slow, subtle changes the Qurʾānic text underwent over a long period of time.
The main theme of this study is that of the slow evolution of the Qurʾān; it did
not change abruptly nor were there immediate steps of systematization that
took place overnight. In other words, the stabilization of the Qurʾānic text was
a collective, communal process that took place over decades and with multiple
generations of scholars, rather than being conceived of as the final product of
2 Cf. Shady Hekmat Nasser, The Transmission of the Variant Readings of the Qurʾān: The Problem
of tawātur and the Emergence of shawādhdh (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 5–14; Yasin Dutton, “Orality,
Literacy, and the ‘Seven’ Aḥruf Ḥadīth,” Journal of Islamic Studies 23, no. 1 (2012): 1–49.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Preliminaries. The Second Canonization of the Qurʾān 3
one individual or a few committee members who decreed and shaped its cur-
rent form.
Connected with this theme and approach to Qirāʾāt are several arguments
I am making in this book, the first of which is to dismantle the imaginary con-
struct of the static, uniform, and single-authored Eponymous Readings and
their two canonical Riwāyas. I will argue that this construct—namely, a well-
defined Eponymous Reading transmitted through two Rāwīs, such as that of
Warsh ʿan Nāfiʿ or Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim—was retroactively developed in order to
suppress the extent of the variants, unify the Eponymous Readings as much
as possible, and create the illusion of an ideal, unadulterated transmission
of the Qurʾān between the Prophet and the Eponymous Readers. I argue that
there was no single, well-defined System-Reading by ʿĀṣim nor any of the
Eponymous Readers, but that there existed multiple versions and renditions
which were simultaneously circulating amongst the community of the Qurrāʾ.
Similarly, there was no single, well-defined Riwāya or rendition transmitted
by Ḥafṣ on behalf of his master ʿĀṣim, but rather multiple versions of his ren-
dition, all nevertheless attributed to him. What we today call the Reading of
Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim is but one variety among many that Ḥafṣ transmitted. The va-
riety which survives today was selected from among different versions and
became the Canonical Riwāya representative of Ḥafṣ. Thus, neither ʿĀṣim nor
Ḥafṣ, and neither Nāfiʿ nor Warsh, recited and transmitted one version of their
System-Readings.
The second argument I make concerns the concept of shawādhdh and ir-
regularity, an argument I made in my earlier study on the Seven Readings that
is further developed here and supported by an extensive corpus of examples.
Shawādhdh was not confined to variant readings that diverged from the con-
sonantal ʿUthmānic outline. Shawādhdh pertained to the readings which di-
verged from the consensus of the collective community. That community was
the elite Qurʾān readers and grammarians who held the principal agency in
rendering and shaping the Qurʾānic text, which they then disseminated to the
larger Muslim community. Indeed, a huge corpus of shawādhdh readings can
be traced back to the Eponymous Readers themselves. These anomalous read-
ings coexisted with the Canonical readings; both corpuses were soundly attrib-
uted to the same source, the Eponymous Readers.
The third argument I make concerns a re-examination of the notion of the
“oral” transmission of Qirāʾāt. Orality is, and has always been, emphasized as
the dominant feature of transmission in Islamic literature. Furthermore, the
oral transmission of the Qurʾān became part of the Muslims’ belief in the in-
tegrity of the text, where early Muslims reportedly relied only on their memory
to transmit the Eponymous Readings, which were collectively taught by the
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

4 CHAPTER 1
Prophet down to their smallest detail.3 Orality has been a topic of discussion
in both Western and Muslim literatures. While the former is mostly skeptical
of the efficiency of oral transmission and its supposedly fantastic accuracy,
the latter often emphasizes the superiority of oral over written transmission.
I am not postulating a new hypothesis concerning oral as against written
transmission in early Islamic literature, but I will introduce a new element to
the discussion as far as Qirāʾāt is concerned. I will argue that the transmis-
sion of Qirāʾāt was from very early on heavily dependent on written transmis-
sion, such as notebooks, letters, and personal codices, which the community
of the Qurrāʾ relied on as early as the late 1st/7th century to transmit, teach,
edit, re-edit, and document the variant readings of the Qurʾān. Indeed, a size-
able corpus of Qirāʾāt was transmitted only through written means, and the
oral corroboration of these transmissions was applied retroactively. The early
Qurrāʾ and Qurʾān scholars used writing to transmit and authorize Qurʾānic
readings. Ibn Mujāhid relied heavily on such written means in his book, where
he documented many readings that he had no access to except through written
communications.
Another contribution this book will offer is an in-depth study of the vari-
ant readings alongside the transmitters who were responsible for dissemi-
nating them. One will be able to get a closer look at how these transmitters
(the Qurrāʾ) interacted with the Qurʾānic text and how they communicated
with each other. Modern scholars in Qurʾānic studies may be familiar with the
names of ʿĀṣim, Nāfiʿ, Warsh, and Ḥafṣ—and perhaps Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ and
al-Kisāʾī as philologists rather than Qurʾān Readers. However, many scholars
are less familiar with names such as Qālūn, Qunbul, al-Dūrī, Khallād, al-Sūsī,
and Sulaym. Likewise, only those who are specialists in the field of Qirāʾāt may
recognize figures such al-Ḥulwānī, ʿAlī b. Naṣr, al-Qawwās, Hubayra, ʿAmr b.
al-Ṣabbāḥ, and many other crucial figures in the history of Qirāʾāt transmis-
sion. While I do not give biographical information on all these individuals, I
will provide a table in the appendices of most Qurʾān transmitters mentioned
by Ibn Mujāhid, alongside their death dates, geographical affiliation, and the
main biographical sources in which they could be identified.
In addition to the close study of the transmitters of Qirāʾāt, I will compare
the dual mechanisms of transmitting Ḥadīth and Qurʾān. I will investigate
3 “al-iʿtimād fī naql al-Qurʾān ʿalā ḥifẓ al-qulūb wa-ṣ-ṣudūr lā ʿalā khaṭṭ al-maṣāḥif wa-l-kutub”;
Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, ed. ʿAlī Muḥammad
al-Ḍabbāʿ, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya), 1:6. Cf. Muḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAẓīm
al-Zurqānī, Manāhil al-ʿirfān fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān, ed. Fawwāz Zamarlī, 2 vols. (Beirut:
Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1995), 1:197–200.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

the rules of cross examination of transmitters in the discipline of Qirāʾāt, and

how later Ḥadīth scholars evaluated Qurʾān transmitters by using the tools of
Ḥadīth criticism, particularly through the lens of ʿadāla (probity) and ḍabṭ
(scrupulousness/accuracy). The dichotomy between the collective transmis-
sion of the Qurʾān by the umma versus the single sound chains of transmission
of Ḥadīth by a select group of muḥaddithūn (ḥadīth transmitters) will be ac-
counted for and discussed in detail.
Finally, the book will offer a comprehensive and detailed documentation
of all the variant readings of the Qurʾān as recorded by Ibn Mujāhid. First,
the principles of Qurʾānic Reading (uṣūl) of each Eponymous Reader will be
laid out in detail. These principles of recitation offer a rich depository of lin-
guistic and phonetic data, the diversity of which corroborates scholarly argu-
ments concerning the development and normalization of the Arabic language
(al-ʿarabiyya), a process which was manifest in the slow evolution of the
Eponymous Readings. Those Readings passed through several experimental
phases over hundreds of years, with the ultimate objective of standardizing
and systematizing the performed aspect of the Qurʾānic scripture. The second
part of my data constitutes a comprehensive record of the individual variants
( farsh) of the Qurʾān. The transmitters of each variant will be listed in detail
and comprehensive audio recordings will accompany this data. More than
5,000 audio files of Qurʾānic citations from both the uṣūl and farsh will accom-
pany this book. I encourage the reader to consult this audio material in order
to get a better grasp of how variants are pronounced and articulated. Most
of the audio material is taken from official recordings of professional Qurʾān
reciters. I have personally recorded the variant readings for which I was unable
to find audio files, or those which fall under the category of shawādhdh and are
no longer recited liturgically. I will not utilize any mode of recitation in order
to avoid the impression that these variants currently hold any kind of canoni-
cal status.
2 The Second Canonization
The reconstruction I am proposing for the stages through which the oral, re-
cited Qurʾān passed assumes five critical phases of Canonization, contrary to
the general belief that the only Canonization process the Qurʾān experienced
was during ʿUthmān’s time. While ʿUthmān’s collection and codification of the
text was the most momentous event in the history of the Qurʾān, variant read-
ings and different styles of recitation developed exponentially and spread from
that time onward. The measures ʿUthmān took to standardize the Qurʾānic text
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

6 CHAPTER 1
did not bear fruit immediately, due to the community of the Qurrāʾ and gram-
marians who instilled life in the consonantal skeleton of the early Qurʾānic
codices. Thus, I consider the first Canonization process to have taken place in
the period between ʿUthmān and the late 3rd/9th century, when Ibn Mujāhid
emerged. Early grammatical and exegetical works such as those by Sībawayhi
(d. 180/796), al-Farrāʾ (d. 207/822), al-Zajjāj (d. 311/923), and al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923)
contained rich material on the variant readings of the Qurʾān accompanied by
expansive discussions of their grammatical and hermeneutical value.4
The second Canonization, the subject matter of this book, occurred at
the hands of Ibn Mujāhid through his selection of the Seven Eponymous
Readings. During Ibn Mujāhid’s time, a huge corpus of variant readings and
System-Readings—at least fifty according to al-Hudhalī (d. 465/1072–3)5—was
circulating amongst Muslims. Ibn Mujāhid selected Seven Readings, which be-
came the foundation of the Seven Canonical Readings.
Nevertheless, limiting the System-Readings to seven did not stop new vari-
ant readings from emerging along with discrepancies which were reported on
behalf of the Seven Eponymous Readers. Those Readers had several students
(rāwīs), and these students did not transmit a single, unified version of the
System-Reading they studied. Therefore, another round of standardization
was needed to limit the discrepancies documented within one Eponymous
Reading. Ibn Mujāhid’s manual and other Qirāʾāt manuals that were written on
the subject were further filtered and refined by Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī (d. 444/1053)
in his short work, al-Taysīr fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, a simplified and abridged manual
written for students that became the principal source of the Seven Canonical
Readings as we know them today. Al-Dānī’s work was given further momen-
tum by al-Shāṭibī (d. 590/1193) after he wrote Ḥirz al-amānī (al-Shāṭibiyya), a
versified rendition of al-Dānī’s Taysīr. Al-Shāṭibiyya became the standard man-
ual of Qirāʾāt used and memorized by Muslim scholars up to today. Al-Dānī
and al-Shāṭibī’s contribution to the further systematization of Qirāʾāt was
crucial, for they standardized and promulgated the system of two Rāwīs, or
4 Cf. Mustafa Shah, “The Early Arabic Grammarians’ Contributions to the Collection and
Authentication of Qurʾanic Readings: the Prelude to Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa,” Journal
of Qurʾanic Studies 6, no. 1 (2004): 72–102; “Exploring the Genesis of Early Arabic Linguistic
Thought: Qur’anic Readers and Grammarians of the Basran Tradition (Part II),” Journal
of Qur’anic Studies 5, no. 2 (2003): 1–47; Ramzi Baalbaki, “The Treatment of Qirāʾāt by the
Second and Third Century Grammarians,” in The Qurʾan: formative interpretation, ed. Andrew
Rippin (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999), 159–80.
5 Abū l-Qāsim al-Hudhalī (d. 465/1072–3), al-Kāmil fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr wa-l-arbaʿīn al-zāʾida
ʿalayhā, ed. Jamāl b. al-Sayyid b. Rifāʿī l-Shāyib (Cairo: Muʾassasat Samā, 2007), especially
47–92.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

two Riwāyas, per each Eponymous Reader. Thus, the third Canonization of the
Qurʾān at the hands of al-Dānī and al-Shāṭibī promoted the two Rāwī system
and eliminated all other conflicting transmissions attributed to the Eponymous
Readers through other rāwīs.6
The fourth Canonization marked the “official” inclusion of three more
Eponymous Readings in the Canon of the Seven at the hands of Ibn al-Jazarī
(d. 833/1429). His didactic poem al-Durra al-muḍiyya normalized the three ad-
ditional Eponymous Readings of Abū Jaʿfar, Yaʿqūb, and Khalaf. Ibn al-Jazarī’s
addition of these three readings was by no means novel or groundbreaking;
they were documented in Qirāʾāt manuals as early as Ibn Mihrān (d. 381/992),7
and Ibn Mujāhid himself allegedly hesitated over whether to include Yaʿqūb or
al-Kisāʾī in his selection.8 Moreover, it seems that the mashriqī Qirāʾāt schol-
ars (those from the eastern regions of the Islamic world) tended to go beyond
the system of the Seven Readings and their two riwāyas, while the maghribī
(Andalusian and north African) authors generally maintained the system of
Seven Eponymous Readers with two riwāyas.9 That being said, Ibn al-Jazarī’s
rendition of the Ten Readings through his al-Durra al-muḍiyya, and to some
extent his al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, became the standard model of the sys-
tem of the Ten Eponymous Readings, perhaps due to his adamant efforts to en-
force this system through promoting his textbooks and obtaining fatwās that
would sanctify the Ten Readings and condemn those who renounce them.10
Ṭayyibat al-nashr and al-Shāṭibiyya became the main textbooks students
and scholars of Qirāʾāt use today. Despite the efforts of several Qirāʾāt schol-
ars after Ibn al-Jazarī to develop other systems of Qirāʾāt, notably al-Dimyāṭī’s
6 Cf. Shady Hekmat Nasser, “The Two-Rāwī Canon before and after ad-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3):
The Role of Abū ṭ-Ṭayyib Ibn Ghalbūn (d. 389/998) and the Qayrawān/Andalus School in
Creating the Two-Rāwī Canon,” Oriens 41, no. 1–2 (2013): 41–75.
7 Abū Bakr Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn Ibn Mihrān (d. 381/992), al-Mabsūṭ fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr,
ed. Subayʿ Ḥākimī (Damascus: Majmaʿ al-lugha al-ʿarabiyya, 1986); idem., al-Ghāya fī
l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr yalīhi bāb fī l-istiʿādha wa-l-tasmiya wa-imālāt Qutayba ʿan al-Kisāʾī, ed.
Muḥammad Ghiyāth al-Jinbāz (Riyad: Dār al-Shawāf, 1990). On the resistance to the sys-
tem of the Seven Readings adopted by Ibn Mujāhid, and the compilation of Qirāʾāt manu-
als that avoided the number “seven” and advocated for eight, nine, or ten Readings, see
Nasser, Transmission, 63–4.
8 Ibid., 62; Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Munjid al-muqriʾīn wa-murshid al-ṭālibīn,
ed. ʿAlī b. Muḥammad al-ʿImrān (Mecca: Dār al-fawāʾid, 1998), 221.
9 Nasser, “The Two-Rāwī Canon,” especially 63–75.
10 Shady H. Nasser, “Ibn al-Jazarī,” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Third Edition. Brill, Accessed
13 October 2018, available at http://dx.doi.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1163/1573
-3912_ei3_COM_30840.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

8 CHAPTER 1
(d. 1117/1705) Fourteen Eponymous Readings, the prevalent and dominant dis-
course of Qirāʾāt as of today is that of al-Shāṭibiyya and al-Durra al-muḍiyya.
Finally, the 1923 printed edition of the Qurʾān in Egypt under the supervi-
sion of al-Azhar set new standards for the modern printing and circulation of
the Qurʾān, by systematizing the typescript, recitation marks, verse number-
ing, and, of particular relevance for this study, by adopting the Reading of Ḥafṣ
ʿan ʿĀṣim. Although this Reading started to gain prominence with the advance
of the Ottomans, al-Azhar’s adoption of Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim made it the overwhelm-
ingly dominant rendition throughout the Muslim world today. The 1923 Azhar
edition marked the fifth Canonization of the Qurʾān. Since its publication and
promulgation, this edition had an indelible impact on our perception of the
static nature of the Qurʾānic text, particularly in how we (both as scholars
and laity) look at the Qurʾān primarily through the lens of the Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim
Reading and consequently treat all the other versions and renditions of the
Qurʾān as variations and deviations from Ḥafṣ. I am guilty of this practice as
well, but to the extent to which I need a central prototype to work from and
compare other variants to, I will use Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim as it is the most familiar
rendition to the majority of readers, with the hope that one day we may be able
to more freely refer to a prototype(s) other than Ḥafṣ’.
The five-Canonization process I am proposing is what, I believe, gave the
oral, recited Qurʾān its present form. This book, however, is limited to the study
of the second Canonization of the Qurʾān at the hands of Ibn Mujāhid. I would
like to emphasize that this will not be a study of the political, historical, and
social context surrounding Ibn Mujāhid nor a study of Ibn Mujāhid’s life and
work.11 The book is a comprehensive, detailed study of Kitāb al-sabʿa and the
data it includes on the transmitters of Qurʾān, grammatical discussions, vari-
ant readings, and various opinions and anecdotes attributed to scholars and
readers from different time periods up to Ibn Mujāhid. Additionally, as much
as I would like to discuss in depth other works of Qirāʾāt connected to Ibn
Mujāhid or which fall within his time period, such as the works by Ibn Mihrān
(d. 381/992), Ibn Khālawayhi (d. 370/980–1), and Abū ʿAlī l-Fārisī (d. 377/987), I
will have to restrict myself to Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-sabʿa, for these important
authors of Qirāʾāt deserve separate monographs dedicated to detailed analysis
similar to my current treatment of Ibn Mujāhid’s work. Still, I frequently con-
sult other Qirāʾāt manuals before and after Ibn Mujāhid, especially within the
detailed grammatical discussions in the footnotes. It is my hope that through
11 For a brief overview of these topics, see Shady H. Nasser, “Ibn Mujāhid,” Encyclopaedia
of Islam, Third Edition. Brill, Accessed 03 March 2018, available at http://dx.doi.org.ezp
-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1163/1573-3912_ei3_COM_30888.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

The Second The Fourth Canonization:

Canonization: Ibn Ibn al-Jazarī’s systematization of
Muḥammad dies Mujāhid and Founding of the Ten
the Seven
11/632 47/656 324/936 444/1052‒590/1193 833/1429 1923
The First Canonization: The Third Canonization: The Fifth Canonization:

ʿUthmān’s Codification of Al-Dānī and al-Shāṭibī’s promotion Al-Azhar’s 1923 edition of the
the Qurʾān of the Two-Rāwī Canon Qurʾān based on Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim
FIGURE 1 A proposed timeline of the Canonizations of the Qurʾān by Qirāʾāt scholars
the close study of these Qirāʾāt manuals, we will be able to develop a better un-
derstanding of the discipline of Qirāʾāt and its importance to the transmission
of the Qurʾān, its development, and its evolution as an orally recited scripture.
3 Definitions and Terminology
Many technical terms will be repeated throughout the book, most of which are
essential in the discipline of Qirāʾāt. Additionally, some unfamiliar technical
terms used by Ibn Mujāhid fell out of use in later literature (notably, gram-
matical terms that were borrowed from the Kūfan school of grammar). More
importantly, some terms which were later standardized to refer to specific phe-
nomena were used by Ibn Mujāhid in a more general way. For example, while
tafkhīm came later to indicate the emphatic or heavy articulation of sounds,
Ibn Mujāhid used the term both in this sense but also to indicate the sheer ab-
sence of imāla (an a>e shift) even when the adjacent consonant is not known
to be one of the emphatic letters of tafkhīm,12 as in (Q. 23:37) wa-naḥyā and
(Q. 22:66) aḥyākum, where Nāfiʿ was reported to have articulated the alif be-
tween imāla and tafkhīm, i.e. wa-naḥyǣ and aḥyǣkum. In addition to these
technical terms, I use some acronyms and terminology already established in
the scholarship on Qirāʾāt, which need to be defined and clarified from the
outset in order to minimize repetition and re-definitions. A more comprehen-
sive glossary of terms will be included in the index at the end of the book. It is
12 Khāʾ, ṣād, ḍād, ghayn, ṭāʾ, qāf, and ẓāʾ in addition to rāʾ, alif, and lām. Refer to Muḥammad
Qamḥāwī, al-Burhān fī tajwīd al-Qurʾān (Beirut: al-Maktaba al-thaqāfiyya, 1972), 20.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

10 CHAPTER 1
important to note that most of these terms are defined according to how Ibn
Mujāhid used them, and not how they are defined in later standardized and
systematized tajwīd works.
madd: lengthening long vowels beyond their standard duration.

qaṣr: pronouncing long vowels for the standard duration of lengthening.
Qaṣr also meant to not articulate the hamza preceded by a long vowel, e.g.
Zakariyyā vs. Zakariyyāʾ.13
ishbāʿ: giving vowels their due of lengthening without shortening their stan-
dard duration.
maqbū (maqbuww): vocalized with ḍamma; marfūʿ.14
marfūʿ/rafʿ: maḍmūm; vocalized with ḍamma, either as a case ending or an
internal vowel.
naṣb: vocalized with fatḥ, either as a case ending or an internal vowel.15
imāla: a>e shift: making the long vowel ā incline towards the long vowel ī,
thus creating a vowel whose value is in between the two, ā and ī. Imāla was
also used to describe the inclination of one consonant towards another,
e.g., imālat al-ṣād ilā l-sīn (inclining the ṣ toward the s) as a definition for
ishmām.16
iḍjāʿ: mabṭūḥ; performing imāla.17
mabṭūḥ: a full articulation of kasra or yāʾ without devocalization or ikhtilās.18
ikhtilās: slurring or concealing the short vowel of a consonant, such as kabd in-
stead of kabid. An accurate description of this articulation process is as fol-
lows: the consonant (bāʾ in this case) seems to have been devocalized (given
a sukūn), but in reality, it still carries a half-short vowel. My transliteration
for this phenomenon will be kabid.19
munjazim: devocalizing a consonant and stripping it of its vowel.20 This term
was not limited to the jussive mood ( jazm). I use ‘devocalize’ (taskīn) when
the vowel is removed from a consonant, and ‘unvocalized’ (sākin) when a
consonant originally carries no vowel.
13 Abū Bakr Ibn Mujāhid (d. 324/936), Kitāb al-sabʿa fī l-qirāʾāt, ed. Shawqī Ḍayf (Cairo: Dār
al-maʿārif, 1979), 204–5.
14 Ibid., 209.
15 Ibid., 339.
16 Ibid., 108.
17 Ibid., 688, 142.
18 Ibid., 209.
19 Ibid., 155–6.
20 Ibid., 108.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

mawqūf: synonymous with munjazim.21

mudraj: sākin; unvocalized; a consonant stripped of its short vowel.22
al-ʿāmma: the majority of Qurʾān Readers.
ʿilla: reason, justification.
ṣilat mīm al-jamʿ bi-wāw: the mīm suffix attached to the plural masculine form,
e.g. antum, ʿalaykum, innahum.
idghām: assimilation; assimilating a non-vocalized consonant with a vocalized
consonant, thus creating a geminated sound (shadda, mushaddad).
muḍāʿaf: shadda; gemination.
ghunna: nasality. It is also described as concealing the nūn (yukhfī nūna ʿayn—
partial assimilation).23
mutamāthilayn/mithlayn: identical consonants.
mutaqāribayn: consonants similar to one another in the manner of their
articulation.
hāʾ al-kināya: the hāʾ suffix of the third person masculine singular pronoun, e.g.
ʿindahu, ka-mithlihi.
maknī: ḍamīr; pronoun.24
takhfīf and tathqīl: used to refer to different phenomena. Articulating succes-
sive short vowels is described as tathqīl, for example in nudhuran, whereas
the counterpart takhfīf would be the devocalization of one of the conso-
nants to read nudhran. The two terms also meant to read with or without
a vowel, e.g. thumma huwa (tathqīl) vs. thumma hwa (takhfīf ).25 In other
instances, the terms have quite the opposite meaning. Inniya arā is consid-
ered to be a reading in takhfīf while innī arā is the reading in tathqīl, since an
extra lengthening of the yāʾ is required before articulating the hamza, which
is considered to be difficult in pronunciation.26 Assimilation (idghām) was
also referred to as tathqīl or muthaqqal.27
21 Ibid., 109, 578.

22 Ibid., 177, 434.
23 Nelson provided several lengthy definitions of ikhfāʾ: “partial assimilation without
change”, “the pronunciation of a letter between full pronunciation and assimilation, free
of doubling and with nasality of the letter”, “a state between full pronunciation and full
assimilation”, and “the sound between nasalized [n] and the ordinary sharp sound of [n]”;
Kristina Nelson, “Tajwīd,” Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics. Brill, Accessed
14 October 2018, available at http://dx.doi.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1163/1570-
6699_eall_EALL_COM_0335; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 406.
24 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 190.
25 Ibid., 666, 151–2.
26 Ibid., 152.
27 Ibid., 171.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

12 CHAPTER 1
takrīr: badal; substitute, apposition.28

tafkhīm: reading in fatḥ mode; not performing imāla; emphatic or heavy articu-
lation of sounds.29
fāʿil wa-mafʿūl: active and passive voices.30
wāqiʿ/ghayr wāqiʿ: transitive and intransitive.31
ijrāʾ: full declension; ṣarf. Tark al-ijrāʾ is to treat a noun as a diptote.32
mawṣūl: to acknowledge the existence of hamzat al-waṣl rather than hamzat
al-qaṭʿ.33
4 Transliteration
Due to the complexity of transliterating Qirāʾāt and the subtle nuances it en-
tails in terms of the proper articulation of sounds and letters, I was forced to
“innovate” in terms of transliteration practices and implement some new con-
ventions that may better correspond to the precise pronunciation of certain
words and phrases. I followed the normal convention of transliterating Arabic
when the text is not Qurʾānic. However, in most Qurʾānic citations, I followed
a slightly different convention which I explain below. Throughout the book,
when I introduce a new transliteration convention, I give a quick explanation
of the symbols I use and the sounds they correspond to.
1) Main letters and consonants
‫ز‬ ‫ق‬
‫ء‬ � ‫ ط‬ṭ � ‫ �ه�ـ‬h
‫ح‬
ʾ ḥ z q
‫ �خ‬kh ‫ �ظ‬ẓ
�‫ ب‬b ‫ ��س‬s ‫ك‬ k ‫و‬ w
‫ ت‬t ‫ش‬
� ‫ د‬d �� sh ‫ع‬
ʿ ‫ل‬ l �‫�ي‬ y
‫ ث‬th ‫�ذ‬ ‫�غ‬
� dh ‫ �ص‬ṣ gh ‫�م‬ m
‫ف‬ ‫ن‬
‫ �ج‬j ‫ر‬ r �
‫ �ض‬ḍ �� f � n
2) Long and short vowels

– ā = ‫ ا‬ ū = ‫ و‬ ī = �‫�ي‬
‫َ ف�ت�� ة‬
– a = ��‫ح‬
‫ُ �ض ة‬
u = ��‫�� م‬
‫ة‬
i = �‫�ك��سر‬
� ِ
28 Ibid., 112.
29 Ibid., 149–50.
30 Ibid., 319.
31 Ibid., 335.
32 Ibid., 337, 417, 480, 616.
33 Ibid., 422.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

– ē represents the application of imāla (a>e shift): a long vowel with a value in
between ā and ī.
– ǣ is the long vowel resulting from a partial imāla. It has a value in between
ā and ē.
– Half-short vowels due to ikhtilās are transliterated in superscript font.
Half-short vowels are slurred vowels, that is, vowels that are not fully articu-
lated. They have a value which falls between sukūn and a short vowel. Thus,
[u] would be a half-ḍamma, [i] would be a half-kasra, and [a] would be a
half-fatḥa.
– Ishmām literally means to give a consonant the “scent” of another conso-
nant or vowel (articulatory intention, a fleeting smell).34 Thus, when ṣād is
given a faint sound or hint of zāy, it is transliterated as [ṣz], which represents
a ṣād given some of the sound value of zāy.
3) Hamzat al-waṣl
In many Qurʾānic quotations, I wanted to underscore the presence of hamzat
al-waṣl with a symbol because it is indicative in many cases of how different
variants emerged and were pronounced. I used the symbol [‿] to mark hamzat
al-waṣl and encourage the reader to make a connection between the two
words separated by this symbol. Thus, al-raḥman al-raḥīm is transliterated as
‿r-raḥmani ‿r-raḥīmi. Other instances of hamzat al-waṣl include verbs, such as
an iḍrib bi-ʿaṣāka, which I transliterate as ani ‿ḍrib bi-ʿaṣāka.
4) Assimilation (idghām): when it is necessary to showcase assimilation, the
underscore [_] symbol is used between the two assimilated letters. Thus,
man yashāʾ is transliterated as may_yashāʾ. Assimilation will be indicated
only when it is responsible for generating variant readings.
5) Madd (lengthening of vowels): certain cases require an extra lengthen-
ing of the long vowels. [ā] is an alif with the standard value of madd, [ā̄‌]
will be an alif in extra madd mode, while ā̇ will be an alif in partial madd
mode, i.e., a value in between madd and qaṣr. These symbols will be used
only when variant readings are created on account of madd.
6) Lenition of hamza: certain cases require the hamza to be softened or
weakened. For example, softening the second hamza of a-andhartahum
will be transliterated as ȧ-ºandhartahum, which signals a prolonged
hamza (longer than the short vowel a but shorter than the long vowel
ā) followed by a softened hamza. I use this symbol [ȧ] to denote a pro-
longed hamza, a duration longer than a short vowel but shorter than a
34 Thami Benkirane, “Vowel Reduction,” Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics.

Brill, Accessed 14 October 2018, available at http://dx.doi.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.
edu/10.1163/1570-6699_eall_EALL_COM_0374.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

14 CHAPTER 1
long vowel. The symbol [˚] is used to designate a softened hamza, which
is different from hamzat al-waṣl (‿) that completely disappears in pro-
nunciation. Another example would be a-innaka, which is rendered,
according to some Readers, as ȧ-ºinnaka. The second hamza is not
completely dropped, but a faint residue remains, which I signal by the
symbol [˚].
7) Naql ḥarakat al-hamza: this occurs when one drops the hamza and trans-
fers its vowel to the unvocalized consonant preceding it, e.g., lakumu
‿l-arḍa → lakumu ‿la‿rḍa. I use the symbol [‿] to point to this technique,
which is mostly associated with Warsh, the second Canonical Rāwī of
Nāfiʿ. This symbol will only be used when variants resulted due to this
phenomenon.
8) In certain instances, I insert a hyphen within some words to‫ أ‬eliminate
confusion of misreading. For example, in wa-ushrik-hu (‫��ه‬ ‫ )و� �ش��رك‬I put a
hyphen before‫[ أ‬-hu] to eliminate the confusion of reading the word as
ushrikhu ( ‫)� �ش��ر�خ‬. Similarly, nankus-hu (‫ )ن�ن��ك��س�ه‬is better hyphenated so that
it would not be read nankushu (��‫ك‬ ‫(ن�ن�� ش‬.
9) Waṣl and waqf: I use the symbol [｡] to designate a full stop when waqf
mode (pausing) is administered. For example, wa-man ittabaʿanī would
be transliterated differently according to the rules of waṣl and waqf. In
waqf mode it would be read wa-mani ‿ttabaʿan｡ but in waṣl mode it could
either be wa-mani ‿ttabaʿani or wa-mani ‿ttabaʿanī. Thus, the translit-
eration collapses into wa-mani ‿ttabaʿan(｡i/ī), where (｡i/ī) signifies that
what comes after the symbol [｡] are recitation options related to the waṣl
mode. This symbol will only be used when variants were reported due to
difference in waqf and waṣl modes.
10) Nasality (ghunna): I use the symbol [˜] to signal the existence of nasality
(ghunna) only when different practices and techniques related to ghun-
na were reported on behalf of the Eponymous Readers.
5 Abbreviations and Notes
– I avoided using quotation marks for Qurʾānic words and phrases because
of the amount of Qurʾānic citations in the text. Also, as many words start
with ʿayn or end with hamza, quotation marks can render words difficult to
discern, e.g. “ʿarabī” and “samāʾ”.
– The acronyms of the Eponymous Readers are used as follows:
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

IK: Ibn Kathīr, N: Nāfiʿ, IA: Ibn ʿĀmir, AA: Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, A: ʿĀṣim,
H: Ḥamza, K: al-Kisāʾī, Y: Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī, AJ: Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī, and
KH: Khalaf al-Bazzār (al-ʿĀshir). IM stands for Ibn Mujāhid. I used these ac-
ronyms for brevity and to break the monotony of repeating the names mul-
tiple times in a single paragraph, as is often the case when I discuss textual
examples.
– Arrows are used in the following manner: A  B indicates a transmission
that goes from A towards B. Similarly, X  Y indicates a transmission from Y
to X. The direction of the arrow is reversed only to indicate the importance
of the transmission of X on behalf of Y. Thus, the norm would be a transmis-
sion from master A  towards student B.
– I use Reading with a capital R to refer to a System-Reading adopted by and
promulgated by an Eponymous Reader. On the other hand, “reading” with
a small r refers to an individual variant reading. I use Readers with a capital
R and Eponymous Readers interchangeably, whereas “reader” with a small r
refers to a regular Qurʾān reader or transmitter.
– Canonical Readings only refer to the Seven (Nāfiʿ, Ibn Kathīr, Ibn ʿĀmir, Abū
ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, ʿĀṣim, Ḥamza, and al-Kisāʾī) or the Ten (the Seven plus Abū
Jaʿfar, Yaʿqūb, and Khalaf) Eponymous Readers.
– The term ‘anomalous readings’ is used for variants which deviate from the
ʿUthmānic consonantal outline (rasm) while ‘irregular readings’ refers to
those which agree with the rasm but lacked a sound chain of transmission.
Both categories are called shawādhdh in the discipline of Qirāʾāt.
– All translations of the Qurʾān come from Arthur John Arberry, The Koran
Interpreted (New York: Touchstone, 1996); when variant readings are given,
I keep Arberry’s syntax while changing the meaning as appropriate.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

CHAPTER 2
Survival of the Fittest
1 The Irregular Readings of the Canonical Readings
… I saw people lacking in motivation, and I saw the landmarks of this

noble discipline, [Qirāʾāt] vanished. Where have they gone, the great
masters who could recognize the sound transmissions of [Qirāʾāt] and
perfect its recitation? Most of the well-known Readings of the Qurʾān
were abandoned, and most of the soundly transmitted qirāʾāt were for-
gotten, to the extent that people today only consider the Qurʾān to be that
which was written in al-Shāṭibiyya and al-Taysīr …
Ibn al-Jazarī
A critical concept in the discipline of Qirāʾāt literature is shudhūdh (irregularity/

anomaly), which coexists with the notion of the “Canon”. The closest Arabic
concept that roughly corresponds to the concept of the Canon in Qirāʾāt is
tawātur established through ijmāʿ (consensus), although some people have
begun to use the word qawnana or taqnīn.1 How, when, and why were certain
readings considered to be irregular/anomalous, while other readings were
elevated to Canonical status, thus becoming divine revelation? How, when,
and why had the very same readings become shādhdha in different periods
in the history of the transmission of the Qurʾānic text, despite the fact that
these readings were previously recited, taught, and transmitted by the Muslim
community?
In his al-Ibāna ʿan maʿānī l-qirāʾāt, Makkī b. Abī Ṭālib al-Qaysī (d. 437/1045)
classified the variant readings of the first chapter of the Qurʾān, al-fātiḥa,
into three categories. First, the variants recited and transmitted by the Seven
Eponymous Readers, for which Makkī completed the process of audition and
obtained certificates (mimmā qara‌ʾtu bihi). Second, the variants recited and
transmitted by readers other than these Seven that agree with the rasm of the
muṣḥaf. Makkī added that these variants were still taught and transmitted in his
day (wa-yuqra‌ʾ bihi). The third category was the anomalous readings which did
not conform to the rasm and were no longer recited in Makkī’s time ( fa-lā yuqra‌ʾ
1 Shaʿbān Muḥammad Ismāʿīl, al-Qirāʾāt: aḥkāmuhā wa-maṣdaruhā ([n.p.], 1982), 117.

Survival of the Fittest 17
bihi l-yawm).2 The most intriguing category is the second, especially when one
looks at the examples Makkī provided under this group. What later became
“Irregular readings” recited by non-canonical Readers such as al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī
(d. 110/728),3 Ibrāhīm b. Abī ʿAbla (d. 151–3/768–70),4 Abū Ṣāliḥ al-Hamadhānī
(d. 310/922–3),5 Muḥammad b. al-Samayfaʿ al-Yamānī (d. 213/828),6 and most
notably ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661),7 were still being circulated, transmitted,
and taught during Makkī’s time, that is, in the 5th/11th century. It is important
to note here that these readings were not only circulating amongst grammar-
ians and exegetes for “academic purposes”, as several voices within the Islamic
tradition strongly suggest,8 but were also used, studied, and officially transmit-
ted within the circles of the Qurrāʾ community. A quick look at Ibn al-Jazarī’s
(d. 833/1429) Ghāyat al-nihāya shows us that the Qurrāʾ, even as late as the
9th/15th century, were still preserving, circulating, and certifying students in
irregular, non-canonical Readings. This corpus of Qirāʾāt was still performed
orally and had not yet reached the stage of fossilization in notebooks and manu-
als, but nevertheless it was a corpus of literature on the path to becoming purely
bookish knowledge, where Qurʾān reciters started to be certified based on the
content of Qirāʾāt manuals rather than the oral performace of an Eponymous
Reading. The aforementioned Ibn al-Samayfaʿ, for example, had developed his
2 Abū Muḥammad Makkī b. Abī Ṭālib al-Qaysī (d. 437/1045), al-Ibāna ʿan maʿānī l-qirāʾāt, ed.
ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Ismāʿīl Shalabī (Cairo: Dār nahḍat Miṣr, 1960), 118–28.
3 Reading (Q. 1:2) al-ḥamdi li-llāhi; ibid., 120. See Omar Hamdan, Studien zur Kanonisierung des
Korantextes: al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrīs Beiträge zur Geschichte des Korans (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz,
2006), 35–41.
4 Reading (Q. 1:2) al-ḥamdu kulluhu li-llāhi; Makkī l-Qaysī, Ibāna, 120. Ibn Abī ʿAbla was a
Damascene Successor and reader who “developped his own system of Qurʾānic recitation
that contradicted the majority of readers”; Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Ghāyat
al-nihāya fī ṭabaqāt al-qurrāʾ, ed. Gotthelf Bergsträsser, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-
ʿilmiyya, 2006), 1:23–4, no. 72.
5 Abū Ṣāliḥ was mostly a specialist in Ḥamza’s Reading (kāna lā yuḥsin illā qirāʾat Ḥamza); Ibn
al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 2:196, no. 3337.
6 Reading (Q. 1:4) mālika yawmi; Makkī l-Qaysī, Ibāna, 120. Ibn al-Samayfaʿ developped his own
Reading which comprised of shudhūdh. His transmission from Nāfiʿ was contested amongst
the qurrāʾ; Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 2:143–4, no. 3106.
7 Reading (Q. 1:4) malaka yawma; Makkī l-Qaysī, Ibāna, 121.
8 See for example Ṣubḥī al-Ṣāliḥ, Mabāḥith fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān (Beirut: Dār al-ʿilm li-l-malāyīn,
1977), 110–111, 251–8; ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Qāḍī, al-Qirāʾāt al-shādhdha wa-tawjīhuhā min lughat
al-ʿarab (Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1981), 10; Abū ʿUmar Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463/1071),
al-Istidhkār al-jāmiʿ li-madhāhib fuqahāʾ al-amṣār, 30 vols. (Beirut: Dār Qutayba, 1993), 10:190;
Khālid b. ʿUthmān al-Sabt, Qawāʿid al-tafsīr jamʿan wa-dirāsatan (Riyad: Dār Ibn ʿAffān,
2000), 90–4.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

18 CHAPTER 2
own Reading (ikhtiyār)9 which comprised many shawādhdh readings. This fact
did not deter Ibn al-Jazarī’s teacher, Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Ṣāʾigh
(d. 776/1375), from getting certified in Ibn al-Samayfaʿ’s Reading through of-
ficial auditioning (samāʿ) and becoming part of a “live” chain of transmission
that went back to Abū Maʿshar al-Ṭabarī (d. 478/1085),10 author of the celebrat-
ed al-Talkhīṣ fī l-qirāʾāt al-thamāni and the less known Sawq al-ʿarūs.11
This chapter is an attempt to better understand the concept of shudhūdh
in the process of selecting and transmitting variant readings of the Qurʾān.
I have suggested earlier that the concept of anomaly or shudhūdh in the Qirāʾāt
discipline was associated with more than mere divergences from the official
consonantal script (rasm) of the muṣḥaf. Shudhūdh was almost always viewed
in contradistinction to ijmāʿ. The Qurʾān readers who diverged from the jamāʿa
(community) and the consensus, or “a” consensus, were eventually margin-
alised in favour of those who adhered to the standard reading of the communi-
ty, or “a” community.12 The community in this context means either the larger
geographical area (miṣr) or a smaller locality within a particular city, repre-
senting, for example, a group of Qurʾān readers who collectively adhered and
disseminated the teachings of a certain Qurʾān master. A case in point is the
three “agreed upon” Readings of Kūfa, where each Eponymous Reading repre-
sented a unique system that was adopted and followed by a separate group of
readers. A few gifted and versatile readers and collectors of Qirāʾāt were able to
9 Ikhtiyār is the process during which a reader develops his own System-Reading through
amalgamating different individual readings from different Eponymous Readers. Ikhtiyār
does not mean creating new readings based on one’s own ijtihād, or by relying upon
newly discovered chains of transmission; See ʿAbd al-Ḥalīm b. Muḥammad al-Hādī Qāba,
al-Qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya tārīkhuhā thubūtuhā ḥujjiyyatuhā wa-aḥkāmuhā (Beirut: Dār
al-gharb al-islāmī, 1999), 262–7; Ibrāhīm b. Saʿīd al-Dūsarī, Mukhtaṣar al-ʿibārāt li-muʿjam
iṣṭilāḥāt al-qirāʾāt (Riyad: Dār al-ḥaḍāra, 2008), 15–16.
10 Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, ed. Muḥammad Sālim
Muḥaysin, 3 vols. (Cairo: Maktabat al-Qāhira, 1978), 1:142–3.
11 According to Ibn al-Jazarī, Sawq al-ʿarūs, also known as Jāmiʿ Abī Maʿshar, comprised 1500
chains of transmission that were traced back to the Eponymous Readers; Ibn al-Jazarī,
Ghāya, 1:360–1. According to online sources, the manuscript is currently edited by a group
of scholars in Jāmiʿat Umm al-Qurā, Mecca.
12 By pointing to the difference between “the” and “a”, I highlight the importance of local
as against general consensus in the case of Qirāʾāt, where ijmāʿ did not necessarily
mean the consensus of the whole community of the Qurrāʾ. Rather, “a” local consen-
sus was sufficient to establish the authority of a certain reading; Shady Hekmat Nasser,
The Transmission of the Variant Readings of the Qurʾān: The Problem of tawātur and the
Emergence of shawādhdh (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 160–4, 39–47. See also Devin J. Stewart,
“Consensus, Authority, and the Interpretive Community in the Thought of Muḥammad b.
Jarīr al-Ṭabarī,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 18, no. 2 (2016): especially p. 132.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

act as intermediaries between these different groups of the Qurrāʾ, thus facili-
tating communication and promoting different System-Readings within the
Muslim community.13
To better understand the process of the selection of the Seven Eponymous
Readers, it is important to understand how the two Canonical Rāwīs of each
Reader were chosen. I have argued elsewhere that the concept of the Two-Rāwīs
did not exist during Ibn Mujāhid’s time; that this phenomenon began to take
shape at the hands of the North African/Andalusian school of Qirāʾāt, particu-
larly with ʿAbd al-Munʿim Ibn Ghalbūn (d. 389/999), the father; and that it was
finalized and crystallized at the hands of al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3) and al-Shāṭibī
(d. 590/1194).14 This was true in the western part of the Muslim world. However,
there was still some resistance in the mashriq to the Two-Rāwī canon and to
adopting a system of only Seven Readings. Thus, manuals and compendia of
System-Readings beyond the Seven were continuously authored and taught in
the East.15 In order to account for the development of the Canonical Rāwīs and
the emergence of shawādhdh readings, I previously relied on a small corpus
of examples, which consistently drove me to the same conclusion: rāwīs who
diverged from the consensus of their peers and fellow transmitters, were grad-
ually excluded from the Canon, such that over time, their readings and trans-
missions became categorized as shādhdha. Despite the fact that many of these
transmitters were reportedly trustworthy and reliable readers of the Qurʾān,
whereas some of the Canonical Rāwīs and the Eponymous Readers themselves
were considered by many scholars and critics to be weak, untrustworthy, and
unreliable Qurʾān readers,16 the very fact that these Rāwīs and Readers col-
13 This phenomenon will be discussed later in more detail, but examples include instances
in which some readers studied more than one Eponymous Reading, after which they
simultaneously transmitted and promulgated the renditions of different Eponymous
Readers. For example, al-Dūrī was proficient in the Readings of both Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ
and al-Kisāʾī. It goes without saying that the qirāʾāt-collector prototype of scholars like Ibn
Mujāhid, who studied and collected Qurʾānic Readings from multiple sources, fall under
this category as well.
14 Shady Hekmat Nasser, “The Two-Rāwī Canon before and after ad-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3):
The Role of Abū ṭ-Ṭayyib Ibn Ghalbūn (d. 389/998) and the Qayrawān/Andalus School in
Creating the Two-Rāwī Canon,” Oriens 41, no. 1–2 (2013): 41–75.
15 Ibid., 72. For example, al-Bustān fī l-qirāʾāt al-thalātha ʿashra by the Egyptian Ibn al-Jundī
(d. 769/1368), al-Kanz fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr by the ʿIrāqī Ibn al-Wajīh al-Wāsiṭī (d. 740/1340),
al-Mufīd fī l-qirāʾāt al-thamāni by the Yemenite Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥaḍramī (d. 560/1164–
5), al-Ishāra fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr by Abū Manṣūr al-ʿIrāqī (d. circa 450/1058), and several
other titles one finds in the introduction of Ibn al-Jazarī’s Nashr; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr,
1:121–64.
16 See the discussion, for example, on Ḥamza and Ibn ʿĀmir in Nasser, Transmission,
54–61; “Revisiting Ibn Mujāhid’s position on the seven canonical Readings: Ibn ʿĀ mir’s
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

20 CHAPTER 2
lectively agreed on a corpus of Qurʾānic readings was the main driving force
behind forming the Canonical body of Qirāʾāt.
A good case in point, highlighting the complexities of including and exclud-
ing rāwīs from the Canon of standard Qurʾānic Readings, is the frustration Abū
Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344) showed when he responded to those who
claimed that only the Seven Eponymous Readings, transmitted through the
two canonical Rāwīs, were to be recognized as Qurʾānic. He stated that only
those who were uninitiated in the science of Qirāʾāt would make such claims,
but those who truly understood the discipline were well aware of the fact that
there existed more reliable Readers of the Qurʾān than the Seven, as well as
more trustworthy and reliable rāwīs than the Canonical Two.17 The careful
study of Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa would surely confirm Abū Ḥayyān’s state-
ment. Ibn Mujāhid did transmit and document variants from multiple rāwīs,
and he never restricted himself to two Rāwīs per Reader. It is true that he re-
lied more heavily on certain rāwīs than others, and that many of these rāwīs
became later on part of the Two-Canonical Rāwīs.18 Nevertheless, Ibn Mujāhid
did not hesitate to disagree with and criticize these transmitters, and to resort
to other rāwīs for corroboration and authentication.
During the process of documenting and corroborating different variant
readings, it gradually became obvious that some rāwīs, despite their out-
standing reputation as rigorous linguists and qirāʾāt scholars, disagreed with
the majority of their colleagues and fellow transmitters, even when a par-
ticular transmission of an individual variant reading had solid linguistic
grounds and was supported by reliable, sound traditions. The following sec-
tion will flesh out some of these disparities amongst the Qurrāʾ and account
for what I believe was the main impetus behind the rise of the shawādhdh.
One should always keep in mind that the Arabic word shawādhdh does not
differentiate between variants that agree or disagree with the rasm of the
muṣḥaf. Thus, the shawādhdh which agree with the rasm will be called irregu-
lar readings, while the shawādhdh which disagree with the rasm will be called
anomalous readings.19
problematic reading of ‘kun fa-yakūna’,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 17, no. 1 (2015): es-
pecially 89–95; cf. Abū l-Qāsim al-Khūʾī, al-Bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān (Beirut: Muʾassasat
al-Aʿlamī, 1974), 126–47. Refer to Chapter Three for a full discussion on the topic.
17 Quoted in Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Munjid al-muqriʾīn wa-murshid
al-ṭālibīn, ed. ʿAlī b. Muḥammad al-ʿImrān (Mecca: Dār al-fawāʾid, 1998), 102–108.
18 Nasser, “The Two-Rāwī Canon,” 63.
19 Cf. Nasser, Transmission, 16, footnote no. 57.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

1.1 Shawādhdh al-Sabʿa

The expression shawādhdh al-Sabʿa may seem counter-intuitive and self-
contradictory. If the Seven Eponymous Readings were Canonical (mutawātira),
what might one mean by “the irregular/anomalous readings of the Canonical
Readings”? The term shawādhdh al-Sabʿa has been used by Muslim scholars
to refer to either of the following two meanings: the corpus of the shawādhdh
readings which falls outside the corpus of the Seven, or the shawādhdh read-
ings transmitted by the Seven Eponymous Readers themselves. The expression
was often used to denote the latter meaning, and this will be the main subject
of this chapter.
Currently, we know from bibliographic information available to us that
the eminent Qurʾān reader Abū Ṭāhir ʿAbd al-Wāḥid b. ʿUmar al-Bazzār
(d. 349/960) might have written a book titled Shawādhdh al-sabʿa.20 Abū Ṭāhir
was a contemporary of Ibn Mujāhid, and according to the biography given by
Ibn al-Jazarī, he was the most knowledgeable in the discipline of Qirāʾāt after
Ibn Mujāhid passed away. The biography suggests that he developed an affinity
for shawādhdh. He was described as an impatient man who, despite his col-
leagues’ disapproval and condemnation, deviated from the standard reading
of (Q. 114:1) ‿n-nāsi by reading ‿n-nēsi, according to an alleged transmission on
behalf of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ (AA).21 Ghānim Qaddūrī al-Ḥamad understood
the phrase shawādhdh al-Sabʿa to be a reference to Abū Ṭāhir’s alleged author-
ship of a treatise on the corpus of shawādhdh readings in general. Nonetheless,
it is clear to me that the second meaning of the expression was meant here,
namely, the shawādhdh readings which were attributed to and transmitted
on behalf of the Seven Eponymous Readers.22 The statement by Abū Ḥayyān
under the entry of (Q. 19:31) dumtu supports this contention. According to Abū
Ḥayyān, Ibn ʿAṭiyya (d. 546/1151) stated that Ibn Kathīr (IK), AA and the people
of Madīna read dimtu.23 Abū Ḥayyān commented as follows: “… the manuals
of Qirāʾāt documented that all Seven Readers read dumtu. I consulted several
Qirāʾāt manuals but did not find that reading, ‘dimtu’, in either the shawādhdh
al-Sabʿa (the irregular readings of the Canonical Seven) or in the shawādhdh
20 Abū l-Faraj Ibn al-Nadīm (d. 384/1047), Kitāb al-Fihrist, ed. Riḍā Tajaddud (Tehran:
Maktabat al-Asadī, 1971), 35; cf. ʿAlī Shawwākh Isḥāq, Muʿjam muṣannafāt al-Qurʾān
al-karīm, 4 vols. (Riyad: Dār al-Rifāʿī, 1984), 4:101.
21 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 1:423–5.
22 Ghānim Qaddūrī al-Ḥamad, Muḥāḍarāt fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān (Amman: Dār ʿAmmār, 2003),
146–7.
23 Cf. Abū Muḥammad Ibn ʿAṭiyya (d. 546/1151), al-Muḥarrar al-wajīz fī tafsīr al-Kitāb al-
ʿazīz, ed. ʿAbd al-Salām ʿAbd al-Shāfī Muḥammad, 6 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya,
2001), 4:15.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

22 CHAPTER 2
transmitted by others (shawādhdh ghayrihim)”.24 Another statement attribut-

ed to Abū l-Ḥasan Taqī l-Dīn al-Subkī (d. 756/1355), quoted by Ibn al-Jazarī in
his al-Nashr, discusses the prohibition of using the shawādhdh readings during
prayers, including shawādhdh al-Sabʿa. Al-Subkī clarifies this phrase by saying
“… for many shawādhdh readings were also attributed to the Seven Canonical
Readers”.25 In the following section, I will flesh out the concept of shawādhdh
al-Sabʿa and discuss its implications.
We received the Seven Eponymous Readings through selected transmitters,
mostly through two Rāwīs per Reader. Since these two Canonical Rāwīs dis-
agreed with one another on the individual variants ( farsh) and the general
principles (uṣūl) of the Eponymous Reader from whom they transmitted, one
could argue that a single, identical, uniform prototype-Reading by any of the
Eponymous Readers never existed. In addition to these two Canonical Rāwīs,
transmissions from other students of the Seven Readers were also document-
ed in the sources. These transmissions again differed from those of the two-
Canonical Rāwīs. The same observation holds true regarding the transmissions
of the Rāwīs themselves. We do not have a uniform, identical rendition of a
Riwāya on behalf of any Canonical Rāwī. The differences between the various
transmissions attributed to the Rāwī are significantly less than the differences
reported on behalf of the Eponymous Reader. This should not be surprising
when one considers that most of the canonical Ṭarīqs (students/transmitters
of the Rāwī) died in the early 4th/10th century, when the number of Qirāʾāt
manuals increased significantly and the discipline of Qirāʾāt became more
exact and standardized in terms of methodology and terminology. Thus, just as
the concept of the Canonical Rāwī was developed for the Eponymous Readers,
the concept of the Canonical Ṭarīq (path, way) was in turn developed for the
Canonical Rāwīs. Muslim scholars have often emphasized that one should op-
pose the idea that the Qurʾān was transmitted only through these two Rāwīs
and their two Ṭarīqs, but that we limited ourselves to only two renditions for
the sake of brevity and facilitating access to the discipline of Qirāʾāt. However,
the fact that the Qurʾān was transmitted to later Muslim communities princi-
pally through these limited channels caused people to believe that anything
lying outside these channels was not Qurʾān but rather shādhdh. Ibn al-Jazarī
decried the state of Qirāʾāt scholarship during his time, writing:
24 Muḥammad b. Yūsuf Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344), Tafsīr al-baḥr al-muḥīṭ, ed.
ʿĀdil ʿAbd al-Mawjūd and ʿAlī Muʿawwaḍ, 8 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1993),
6:177.
25 Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 1:105.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

… I saw people lacking in motivation, and I saw the landmarks of this

noble discipline, [Qirāʾāt] vanished. Where have they gone, the great
masters who could recognize the sound transmissions of [Qirāʾāt] and
perfect its recitation? Most of the well-known Readings of the Qurʾān
were abandoned, and most of the soundly transmitted qirāʾāt were for-
gotten, to the extent that people today only consider the Qurʾān to be that
which was written in al-Shāṭibiyya and al-Taysīr ….26
The following table is helpful as a reference point to understand the chan-

nels through which we received the Canonical Readings, that is, the recited
form of the muṣḥaf. I collected the data from the introduction of Ibn al-Jazarī’s
al-Nashr.27
TABLE 1 The Transmission of Qirāʾāt through Readers, Rāwīs, and Ṭuruq in Ibn al-Jazarī’s
al-Nashr
Eponymous Canonical Canonical Ṭarīq Transmitters Total

Reader Rāwī from each numbers of
Ṭarīq Transmitters
Nāfiʿ Qālūn Abū Nashīṭ (d. 258/871) 34 83

(d. 169/785) (d. 220/835) Al-Ḥulwānī (d. 250/864) 49
Warsh Al-Azraq (d. 240/854) 35 61
(d. 197/812) Al-Aṣbahānī (d. 296/908) 26
Ibn Kathīr Al-Bazzī Abū Rabīʿa (d. 294/906) 35 41
(d. 120/738) (d. 250/864) Ibn al-Ḥubāb (d. 311/923) 6
Qunbul Ibn Mujāhid (d. 324/936) 18 32
(d. 291/903) Ibn Shanabūdh 14
(d. 328/939)
Abū ʿAmr b. Al-Dūrī Abū l-Zaʿrāʾ (d. 280/893) 82 126
al-ʿAlāʾ (d. 246/861) Ibn Faraḥ (d. 303/916) 44
(d. 154/771) Al-Sūsī Ibn Jarīr (d. 316/928) 23 28
(d. 261/874) Ibn Jumhūr (d. 300/912) 5
26 Ibid., 1:117.
27 Note that only Ḥamza did not conform to the two-Rāwī-two-Ṭarīq classification. In fact,
Ibn al-Jazarī added an extra level of standardization to the chains of transmission by cre-
ating Canonical sub-ṭarīqs. I will not consider this category now, as it will be discussed in
detail in a future monograph on the fourth Canonization of the Qurʾān.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

24 CHAPTER 2
TABLE 1 The Transmission of Qirāʾāt through Readers, Rāwīs, and Ṭuruq (cont.)
Eponymous Canonical Canonical Ṭarīq Transmitters Total

Reader Rāwī from each numbers of
Ṭarīq Transmitters
Ibn ʿĀmir Hishām Al-Ḥulwānī (d. 250/864) 28 51

(d. 118/736) (d. 245/860) Al-Dājūnī (d. 324/936) 23
Ibn Dhakwān Al-Akhfash (d. 292/905) 57 79
(d. 202/818) Al-Ṣūrī (d. 307/919) 22
ʿĀṣim Shuʿba Yaḥyā b. Ādam 58 76
(d. 127/744) (d. 193/809) (d. 203/818)
Al-ʿUlaymī (d. 243/857) 18
Ḥafṣ ʿUbayd b. al-Ṣabbāḥ 24 52
(d. 180/796) (d. 235/849)
ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ 28
(d. 221/836)
Ḥamza Khalaf Idrīs al-Ḥaddād 53 53
(d. 156/772) (d. 229/843) (d. 292/904)
Khallād Ibn Shādhān (d. 286/899) 18 70
(d. 220/835) Ibn al-Haytham 10
(d. 249/863)
Al-Wazzān (d. 250/864) 38
Al-Ṭalḥī (d. 252/866) 4
Al-Kisāʾī Abū l-Ḥārith Al-Kisāʾī l-Ṣaghīr, Ibn 31 40
(d. 189/804) (d. 240/854) Yaḥyā (288/901)
Salama b. ʿĀṣim 9
(d. 270/883)
Al-Dūrī Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad 6 24
(d. 246/861) (d. 307/919)
Abū ʿUthmān 18
(d. 310/922)
The issue I will be investigating is the criteria of selection, and the likely reasons
why only a select few rāwīs survived the selection process by Qirāʾāt scholars. So
far, my findings show that the process was one of natural selection; the trans-
mitters who were excluded (intentionally or inadvertently) from the Canon
did not meet the expectations of the Qurrāʾ community. Even though some
of these transmitters were exceptionally talented, and they fulfilled several
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

criteria and requirements which were “vaguely” formulated by the Qurrāʾ, they
unfortunately lacked other circumstantial elements that lead eventually to the
termination, and therefore extinction, of their teachings. These circumstantial
elements will be discussed at length, but they generally fall under the follow-
ing heads:
1) Divergence from the standard reading of the group
2) Short-term study with the Eponymous Reader
3) Not specializing in one System-Reading
4) Lack of students
The most important element was perhaps the first one, whereas the other three
were subsidiary factors that could have converged to lead to the first one. In the
following pages, I will demonstrate with a plethora of examples how transmit-
ters diverged from the consensus of their colleagues. Throughout my study of
Ibn Mujāhid’s work, certain names were repeatedly mentioned, which made
them more conspicuous than others because of their frequent divergences
from the consensus of their group. Nonetheless, in several other instances,
these transmitters did agree with their fellow Qurʾān readers. Indeed, they
probably concurred with them on the majority of the Qurʾān, but the frequen-
cy at which they disagreed with this majority was striking. I believe that this
frequent divergence was the main impetus behind gradually abandoning their
transmissions and adhering to the renditions of those who consistently fol-
lowed the consensus. I will restrict my discussion to several individuals, anal-
yse the examples they were associated with in Kitāb al-sabʿa, and investigate
how they diverged from the consensus of their colleagues. The comprehensive
database of the Qurʾānic variants I provide at the end of the book documents
the names of all the transmitters listed in Ibn Mujāhid’s work. One could do
the same exercise with any of the non-canonical transmitters mentioned in
Kitāb al-sabʿa and most likely draw conclusions similar to those I have reached.
1.2 What is Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim?

The two Canonical Rāwīs of ʿĀṣim were Ḥafṣ and Abū Bakr Shuʿba.28 Despite
the fact that several other rāwīs studied and transmitted from ʿĀṣim, these
two became our main source for documenting his Eponymous Reading. Thus,
what we received in Qirāʾāt manuals were different versions and renditions of
ʿĀṣim’s Reading through different transmitters, the most important of whom
were these two apprentices, Ḥafṣ and Shuʿba. Consequently, one can speak
of the transmission of Ḥafṣ from ʿĀṣim (ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ) and ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba,
28 Abū Bakr Ibn ʿAyyāsh is often referred to as Abū Bakr. Nevertheless, I chose to refer to him
by the name Shuʿba to eliminate any confusion by using the common epithet Abū Bakr.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

26 CHAPTER 2
but one cannot speak of the transmission of ʿĀṣim alone, for his Reading did
not exist on its own without the renditions transmitted by his students. If this
was true in the case of ʿĀṣim’s transmission, then what about the renditions of
both of his Rāwīs? Did we receive a single, unified prototype rendition from
Ḥafṣ? The answer is no. Just as ʿĀṣim’s students disagreed amongst one another
and transmitted his Reading in different forms and variations, the renditions
of both Ḥafṣ and Shuʿba were also transmitted in multiple forms and differ-
ent variations through several students they had. Consequently, there was no
single, unified rendition of ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ, but in actuality there were several
versions of ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ, despite the fact that the differences amongst these
versions were small and relatively inconsequential. What we today understand
as ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ is only one rendition from al-Shāṭibiyya and al-Taysīr, selected
from several other renditions, some of which were documented in the sources
but others of which were either ignored or lost. As a matter of fact, another
round of standardization was carried out to produce a unified rendition by
Ḥafṣ and limit the many transmitters from him who disagreed with and con-
tradicted one another. Thus, two transmitters were chosen for Ḥafṣ, and for
every Canonical Rāwī of the Eponymus Readings. The Qirāʾāt tradition called
these transmitters ṭuruq (sing. ṭarīq). The example of ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ applies to
the rest of the Eponymous Readers and their Rāwīs. Accordingly, just as a pro-
totype of ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ did not exist, uniform prototypes of Nāfiʿ → Warsh or
Nāfiʿ → Qālūn, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → al-Dūrī, Ḥamza → Khalaf, and so forth, did
not exist either.
The diagram below shows the full and partial transmissions of ʿĀṣim’s
Reading through Ḥafṣ, as documented by Ibn Mujāhid. The data of this stemma
and all subsequent stemmata are scattered throughout Kitāb al-sabʿa. I collect-
ed this data from the entire book and consolidated them in these diagrams.29
One can see that the rendition of Ḥafṣ reached Ibn Mujāhid through differ-
ent chains of transmissions (ṭuruq), at least nine30 as the diagram shows. As I
have argued previously, I believe that the shawādhdh readings were mainly
transmitted through SST (Single strands of transmission).31 We can see that out
of these nine transmitters only one student of Ḥafṣ was actively teaching and dis-
seminating his rendition, namely ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ (d. 221/836). Subsequently,
it should not be surprising to find ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ becoming a Canonical
29 Compare these stemmata with the ones I previously created based on the isnād docu-
mentation Ibn Mujāhid provided at the beginning of his book. The new stemmata are
more comprehensive and inclusive; Nasser, Transmission, 139, 148, 155, 159.
30 Including the incomplete A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmara l-Aḥwal.
31 Nasser, Transmission, 160–3.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

FIGURE 2 Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim (from Kitāb al-sabʿa)
Ṭarīq of Ḥafṣ, through whom the rendition of ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ reached us. This is
confirmed by referring to Table #1 above, which shows ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ as a
Canonical Ṭarīq of ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ with 28 chains of transmission documented in
Ibn al-Jazarī’s al-Nashr. The other ṭuruq of Ḥafṣ were single chains of transmis-
sion, which, as a matter of fact, gave rise to several shawādhdh readings, such
as Ḥafṣ → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī, Ḥafṣ → Hubayra, Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra al-Aḥwal, and
others. What kind of variant readings did these SST transmit on behalf of Ḥafṣ,
and how did Ibn Mujāhid record and respond to their transmissions?
1.2.1 Divergence: Abū ʿUmar Hubayra al-Tammār32

I will start with Hubayra al-Tammār and list several examples of his transmis-
sions which were documented in Kitāb al-sabʿa. I grouped the examples in
clusters that share similar themes in terms of the nature of the variants and
how they differ from the other standard readings.
– (Q. 2:102) ishtarāhu: According to Ibn Mujāhid, most transmitters of A →
Ḥafṣ read ishtarāhu, without performing imāla (a>e shift). However, Ḥafṣ
→ Hubayra transmitted ishtarēhu, with imāla. Ibn Mujāhid added the fol-
lowing comment: “the known transmission from ʿĀṣim is to read without
32 [ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra].
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

28 CHAPTER 2
performing an a>e shift” (wa-l-maʿrūf ʿan ʿĀṣim al-tafkhīm).33 Other cases

of a>e shift, which Hubayra transmitted on behalf of Ḥafṣ but were unfa-
miliar to the majority of Ḥafṣ’s transmitters, included: (Q. 10:1) alif lām re,34
(Q. 26:61) tarēʾā—with an emphasis from Ibn Mujāhid that the well-known
reading of ʿĀṣim is tarāʾā—35 and (Q. 27:2) wa-bushrē.36
– (Q. 7:148) ḥuliyyihim: ʿĀṣim’s transmitters unanimously read ḥuliyyihim, but
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra read ḥiliyyihim, which was the reading of Ḥamza (H)
and al-Kisāʾī (K).37 Similarly, ʿĀṣim read (Q. 7:186) wa-yadharuhum, where-
as A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra read wa-yadharhum, which was also the reading of
Ḥamza and al-Kisāʾī.38
– (Q. 3:81) la-mā: this entry will be discussed at length in the second half
of this chapter.39 It suffices to note here that all the eponymous Readers
read la-mā, except for Ḥamza and A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra who read li-mā. Ibn
Mujāhid commented that the well-known transmission from ʿĀṣim through
Ḥafṣ was la-mā, whereas li-mā was an unfamiliar transmission (ghayr
maḥfūẓ ʿan Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim).40
– (Q. 16:19–20) tusirrūna … tuʿlinūna … tadʿūna: in this verse, Hubayra dis-
agreed not only with other transmitters from Ḥafṣ but also with the rest of
the Eponymous Readers and their Rāwīs. A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra was the only
transmission to report yusirrūna … yuʿlinūna … yadʿūna, a reading that was
later classified as shādhdha (irregular).41
– (Q. 2:177) laysa ‿l-birra: all Eponymous Readers read laysa ‿l-birru, except
Ḥamza and A → Ḥafṣ, both of whom read laysa ‿l-birra. A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra
was reported to have read both ways: laysa ‿l-birra and laysa ‿l-birru (al-
wajhayn bi-r-rafʿ wa-n-naṣb).42
33 Abū Bakr Ibn Mujāhid (d. 324/936), Kitāb al-Sabʿa fī l-qirāʾāt, ed. Shawqī Ḍayf (Cairo: Dār
al-maʿārif, 1979), 168.
34 Ibid., 322.
35 Ibid., 471–2.
36 Ibn Mujāhid commented by saying that all the other transmitters from Ḥafṣ read
wa-bushrā; ibid., 478.
37 Ibid., 294.
38 Ibid., 299.
39 See below, transmission error #17.
41 Ibid., 371; cf. Raḍī l-Dīn al-Kirmānī (d. circa. 535/1140), Shawādhdh al-qirāʾāt, ed. Shimrān
al-ʿIjlī (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-balāgh, 2001), 270; Abū l-Baqāʾ al-ʿUkbarī (d. 616/1219),
Iʿrāb al-qirāʾāt al-shawādhdh, ed. Muḥammad al-Sayyid Aḥmad ʿAzzūr, 2 vols. (Beirut:
ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1996), 1:760.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

– (Q. 28:32) mina ‿r-rahbi: this entry will be discussed later in this chapter.43
Even though A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra read mina ‿r-rahabi, concurring with the
readings of IK, N, and AA, this transmission diverged from the standard
reading of A → Ḥafṣ, known to be mina ‿r-rahbi. Interestingly, A → Ḥafṣ was
alone in reading mina ‿r-rahbi, whereas the rest of the Eponymous Readers
and their Rāwīs had either read mina ‿r-rahabi or mina ‿r-ruhbi.44
Other examples of the divergences of Hubayra from Ḥafṣ are listed in the
footnote below.45 We do not find much information about Hubayra in the
biographical dictionaries except that he studied with Ḥafṣ, and that he had
three students: Ḥasnūn b. al-Haytham (d. 290/902), Aḥmad b. ʿAlī l-Khazzāz
(d. 286/889), and al-Khaḍir al-Ṭūsī (d. 310/922).46 The examples listed above
exhibit themes similar to the other examples that will be discussed shortly in
connection to other non-canonical rāwīs. These themes can be summarized
as follows:
1) The transmitter implemented a phonetic or linguistic feature not usually
associated with the master’s principles of recitation (uṣūl), such as imāla
(a>e shift), assimilation (idghām), hamza articulation or lenition, etc.
2) The transmitter diverged from the consensus of his colleagues and trans-
mitted a variant unfamiliar to the majority of the master’s students. This
variant, however, was commonly transmitted through other channels on
behalf of other Eponymous Readers, with whom the divergent transmit-
ter was, in one way or another, associated, either as a transmitter of their
Reading or as a resident in the same geographical locale.
3) As in #2, the transmitter diverged from the consensus of his peers and
transmitted an unfamiliar variant on behalf of the common Master.
However, the variant in question was not commonly transmitted by mul-
tiple Eponymous Readers and was rather known to be a unique, unusual
reading adopted by one Eponymous Reader or one canonical Rāwī.
4) Similar to #2 and #3, the divergent transmitter reported a variant that was
not disseminated by either the Eponymous Readers or their canonical
43 See below, transmission error #50.

45 (Q. 18:98) dakkāʾa—Hubayra read dakkan; (Q. 19:90) and (Q. 42:5) takādu … yatafaṭṭarna—
Hubayra read takādu … yanfaṭirna; (Q. 23:44) tatrā—Hubayra read tatrē in waqf mode;
(Q. 38:41) bi-nuṣbin—Hubayra read bi-naṣbin; (Q. 54:26) sa-yaʿlamūna—Hubayra read
sa-taʿlamūna; (Q. 74:27) adrāka—Hubayra read adrēka; (Q. 36:68) nunakkis-hu—
Hubayra read nankus-hu; ibid., 402, 412–3; 446; 554; 618; 659; 543. See also a short treatise
compiled by Ibrāhīm Ḍamra, in which he compiled a list of the divergences of Hubayra
from Ḥafṣ; Ibrāhīm Tawfīq Ḍamra, Kashf al-astār ʿan ṭarīq Hubayra al-tammār (Amman:
Dāʾirat al-maktaba al-waṭaniyya, 2013), especially 16–42.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

30 CHAPTER 2
Rāwīs. The transmitted variant technically belongs to the category of

shawādhdh.
On multiple occasions, Hubayra clearly diverged from the consensus of the
transmitters of Ḥafṣ. Ibn Mujāhid was keen on highlighting the fact that only
Hubayra from amongst Ḥafṣ’s students read the variants at issue differently.
Hubayra seemed to have violated “a” consensus established by the transmitters
of A → Ḥafṣ, for which reason Ibn Mujāhid deliberately called attention to his
divergences using comments such as “this is unheard of amongst Ḥafṣ’s stu-
dents,” or “the well-known, established reading of A→ Ḥafṣ is such and such.”
Secondly, even though Hubayra transmitted readings which not only diverged
from an alleged, standard rendition by Ḥafṣ but which also had no parallel or
corroborative transmissions from other Eponymous Readers, other transmis-
sions by him often did intersect with verified, agreed-upon transmissions by
the Seven Eponymous Readers. Occasionally, Hubayra agreed with his ʿIrāqī
companions while contradicting his teacher, Ḥafṣ, especially in the instances
where Ḥafṣ himself diverged from the consensus of the ʿIrāqīs. Hubayra’s diver-
gence might have been more acceptable within the larger community of the
Qurrāʾ, say the ʿIrāqīs in this example, but the fact that he was not completely
faithful to the transmission of his master could have been a reason behind
excluding him as an authority for representing the rendition of Ḥafṣ. During
this period (late 2nd–3rd/8th–9th century) of transmitting and documenting
Qirāʾāt, the Qurrāʾ community was more concerned with verbatim, faithful,
and precise transmission between master and disciple. By “contaminating”
the rendition of Ḥafṣ with variants and transmissions from other Readers,
either due to Hubayra’s imprecision or exercising his own ijtihād, Hubayra
risked getting excluded as a reference and source for the sought-after, stan-
dard, original rendition of Ḥafṣ. Nothing escaped the scrupulous investigation
of the Qurrāʾ community, for they were always vigilant as to what their peers
were reciting and disseminating within the community. Qunbul, a Canonical
Rāwī of Ibn Kathīr, reported hearing his colleague al-Bazzī recite (Q. 33:49)
taʿtadūnahā instead of taʿtaddūnahā. Qunbul conferred with their common
teacher al-Qawwās and enquired about that reading. Al-Qawwās responded:
“Go to Abū l-Ḥasan [al-Bazzī] and ask him: what is this reading? We are not fa-
miliar with it.” After Qunbul discussed the variant with his colleague, al-Bazzī,
the latter retracted his original reading and adopted the “standard” reading of
his Meccan colleagues.47 Thus, it is important to take into consideration that
the Qurrāʾ community during this period was not an enclosed bubble, where
reciters could “do away” with unfamiliar transmissions without being noticed
47 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 522–3.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

and scrutinized by their peers. This phenomenon will be discussed in further

detail in Chapter Four.48
The last point I want to make concerns what figure #2 above can show us
in terms of the students to whom Hubayra passed on the rendition of Ḥafṣ.
Out of the three transmitters who studied with Hubayra, only Aḥmad b. ʿAlī
al-Khazzāz features in the above stemma.49 This scant number of transmitters
suggests that the Qurrāʾ were probably not keen on studying the rendition of
Ḥafṣ through Hubayra. On the other hand, if we consider the case of ʿAmr b.
al-Ṣabbāḥ, who became a Canonical Ṭarīq of Ḥafṣ, figure #2 shows that three
students transmitted from him, whereas the biographical dictionaries attrib-
uted more than thirteen students to him.50
1.2.2 Geography and Mentorship: al-Mufaḍḍal al-Ḍabbī and Abān

al-ʿAṭṭār51
Both Abān al-ʿAṭṭār and al-Mufaḍḍal al-Ḍabbī were direct transmitters from
ʿĀṣim, which meant that they were both colleagues of Ḥafṣ and Shuʿba, ʿĀṣim’s
two canonical Rāwīs. It is intriguing to run across the name of al-Mufaḍḍal—
author of the celebrated poetry anthology al-Mufaḍḍaliyyāt—as an imme-
diate transmitter of ʿĀṣim. Sources preserved for us an extensive biography
for al-Mufaḍḍal as a philologist and scholar of poetry.52 In this context, he
was depicted as a trustworthy, honest authority who possessed extensive
knowledge (ʿallāma) of poetry, language, and akhbār.53 However, al-Mufaḍḍal’s
portrayal was considerably different in Qirāʾāt and Ḥadīth biographical dic-
tionaries. Ibn al-Jazarī introduced him as a trustworthy Imām (muwaththaq)
48 Refer to Section 2 of Chapter 4.

49 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 2:307–8; Muḥammad Sālim Muḥaysin, Muʿjam ḥuffāẓ al-Qurʾān ʿabr
al-tārīkh (Beirut: Dār al-jīl, 1992), 593–4; Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Maʿrifat
al-qurrāʾ al-kibār ʿalā l-ṭabaqāt wa-l-aʿṣār, ed. Ṭayyār Ạltīqūlāg, 4 vols. (Istānbūl: Türkiye
Diyanet Vakfı, İslâm Araştırmaları Merkezi, 1995), 1:413.
50 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 1:530–1; Muḥaysin, ḥuffāẓ, 466; Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:410–11.
51 [ʿĀṣim → al-Mufaḍḍal; ʿĀṣim → Abān]. In al-Sabʿa, there are references to two individuals
named Abān: Abān al-ʿAṭṭār and Abān b. Taghlib, both of whom directly studied with
ʿĀṣim.
52 Fihrist, 75; Abū Bakr al-Zubaydī (d. 379/989), Ṭabaqāt al-naḥwiyyīn wa-l-lughawiyyīn,
ed. Muḥammad Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm (Cairo: Dār al-maʿārif, 1973), 193; Abū l-Barakāt Ibn
al-Anbārī (d. 577/1181), Nuzhat al-alibbāʾ fī ṭabaqāt al-udabāʾ, ed. Muḥammad Abū l-Faḍl
Ibrāhīm (Cairo: Dār al-fikr al-ʿarabī, 1998), 57–8, Jamāl al-Dīn al-Qifṭī (d. 646/1249), Inbāh
al-ruwāt ʿalā anbāh al-nuḥāt, ed. Muḥammad Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm, 4 vols. (Cairo: Dār al-
fikr al-ʿarabī, 1986), 298–305.
53 Ilse Lichtenstädter, “al-Mufaḍḍal b. Muḥammad b. Yaʿlā b. ʿĀmir b. Sālim b. al-Rammāl
al-Ḍabbī,” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Accessed 17 October 2017, availabe at
http://dx.doi.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_5314.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

32 CHAPTER 2
who studied and transmitted from ʿĀṣim and al-Aʿmash (d. 147–8/764–6)
and with whom al-Kisāʾī studied and transmitted from. That being said, Abū
Ḥātim al-Sijistānī (d. 250/864) indicated that al-Mufaḍḍal was trustworthy in
the transmission of poetry but not the Qurʾān (thiqa fī l-ashʿār ghayr thiqa fī
l-ḥurūf). Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī (d. 277/890) added that al-Mufaḍḍal’s transmis-
sions of Qurʾān and Ḥadīth were abandoned and not to be sought (matrūk
al-Ḥadīth matrūk al-Qirāʾa). Notwithstanding the reports that ʿĀṣim would
personally visit al-Mufaḍḍal in his house and give him private, one-on-one les-
sons in recitation, al-Mufaḍḍal still transmitted a great deal of shawādhdh on
behalf of ʿĀṣim. Be that as it may, Ibn al-Jazarī had an audition of the Qurʾān
based on al-Mufaḍḍal’s rendition through Ibn Siwār’s (d. 496/1103) al-Mustanīr
and al-Qalānisī’s (d. 521/1127) al-Kifāya “notwithstanding the shudhūdh of
this Qirāʾa.”54
Figure #3 below shows the transmission of al-Mufaḍḍal from ʿĀṣim, as doc-
umented by Ibn Mujāhid. What I have just related concerning al-Mufaḍḍal’s
expertise as a Qurʾān reader corresponds to the data of this stemma.
Al-Mufaḍḍal’s only disciple in Qirāʾāt was the famous grammarian, Abū Zayd
al-Anṣārī (d. 215/830), which suggests that the latter’s interest in studying with
and transmitting from al-Mufaḍḍal was driven by grammatical and linguistic
curiosity rather than a genuine interest in the recitation itself or the rendi-
tion al-Mufaḍḍal was transmitting on behalf of ʿĀṣim. In any event, Abū Zayd
al-Anṣārī was also a transmitter of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ’s (AA) Reading, which
should not be surprising since both were Baṣrans. Having said that, it is im-
portant to note that AA, besides being an eminent Qurʾān Reader, was also an
illustrious linguist, philologist and poetry collector, on a par with al-Mufaḍḍal.
Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī, al-Mufaḍḍal, and several other individuals fall into the cat-
egory of intellectuals and scholars who did not take up Qurʾānic recitation as
a profession but as a means to enrich their scholarship and strengthen their
academic credentials. I will now examine some of the entries transmitted by
al-Mufaḍḍal in Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa.
– (Q. 2:7) ghishāwatun: all Eponymous Readers and their Rāwīs read
ghishāwatun except for A → al-Mufaḍḍal who read ghishāwatan,55 mak-
ing his transmission an irregular shawādhdh.56 Similarly, all Readers read
54 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 2:268.

55 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 140–1. Refer to the justification of this reading in Abū ʿAlī l-Fārisī
(d. 377/987), al-Ḥujja li-l-qurrāʾ al-sabʿa, ed. Badr al-Dīn Qahwajī and Bashīr Juwayjānī,
7 vols. (Damascus: Dār al-Ma‌ʾmūn li-l-turāth, 1984), 1:309–12.
56 ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 1:117; Abū ʿAbd Allāh Ibn Khālawayhi (d. 370/980–1), Mukhtaṣar
fī shawādhdh al-Qurʾān min Kitāb al-Badīʿ, ed. G. Bergesträsser (Baghdad: Maktabat
al-Muthannā, 1968), 10; Kirmānī, Shawādhdh, 49.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

ʿĀṣim
Ḥafṣ al-Mufaḍḍal
Abū l-Rabīʿ al-Zahrānī Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī
al-Quṭaʿī
Aḥmad b. ʿAlī l-Khazzāz
Ibn Mujāhid
FIGURE 3 Al-Mufaḍḍal ʿan ʿĀṣim (from al-Sabʿa)
(Q. 2:230) yubayyinuhā, except A → al-Mufaḍḍal,57 who read nubayyinuhā,

also making his transmission shādhdh (irregular).58 Other instances where
al-Mufaḍḍal, alone or along with other non-canonical rāwīs, transmitted
shawādhdh variants include (Q. 2:279) lā taẓlimūna wa-lā tuẓlamūna—
read lā tuẓlamūna wa-lā taẓlimūna;59 (Q. 4:36) wa-l-jāri ‿l-junubi—read
wa-l-jāri ‿l-janbi;60 (Q. 9:123) ghilẓatan—read ghalẓatan;61 (Q. 56:82)
tukadhdhibūna—read takdhibūna;62 (Q. 58:2) ummahātihim—read
ummahātuhum;63 (Q. 70:38) yudkhala—read yadkhula.64
– (Q. 19:51) mukhlaṣan: ʿĀṣim concurred in the reading of this variant with
his Kūfan colleagues, Ḥamza and al-Kisāʾī, both of whom read mukhlaṣan.
However, A→ al-Mufaḍḍal read mukhliṣan, concurring instead with IK, N,
AA, and IA.65 In (Q. 35:33) wa-luʾluʾan, different transmitters from ʿĀṣim read
wa-luʾluʾan, in the accusative alongside other variations in the articulation
of the hamza such as wa-lūluʾan and wa-luʾluwan. However, al-Mufaḍḍal
57 In addition to A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī → Ibn Ḥayyān → IM,
which is also an irregular chain of transmission.
58 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 183; Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 21.
59 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 192; ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 1:284; Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 24.
60 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 233; cf. Transmission error #19 below; Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 33;
ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 1:386.
61 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 320; ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 1:634–5; Kirmānī, Shawādhdh, 223.
62 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 624; ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 2:558.
63 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 628; ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 2:567; Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 154.
64 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 651; Kirmānī, Shawādhdh, 485.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

34 CHAPTER 2
read wa-luʾluʾin, in the genitive, similar to the readings of IK, IA, AA, H
and K.66 Other instances where al-Mufaḍḍal diverged from the consensus
of the transmitters of A while concurring with other Canonical Readers
and Rāwīs included (Q. 36:19) a-in dhukkirtum—read ayna dhukkirtum;67
(Q. 37:94) yaziffūna—read yuziffūna;68 (Q. 38:84) fa-l-ḥaqqu wa-l-ḥaqqa—
read fa-l-ḥaqqa wa-l-ḥaqqa;69 (Q. 43:19) a-shahidū—read a-ºushhidū
(a-wushhidū);70 (Q. 43:88) wa-qīlihi—read wa-qīlahu.71
These two groups of examples support my argument concerning the rise of
shawādhdh, namely, that transmitters (rāwīs) who diverged from the jamāʿa
(community) were excluded from the later Canon of the Qurʾānic Readings.
Al-Mufaḍḍal’s linguistic and philological aptitude and his venerated status in
Kūfa as a master of Arabic were overlooked on account of his divergence from
the commonly transmitted variants of ʿĀṣim, and on several occasions his di-
vergence from the rest of the Canonical Readers and their Rāwīs. As a result,
al-Mufaḍḍal put himself in the precarious situation of being labeled as an un-
reliable Qirāʾāt scholar (ghayr thiqa fī l-ḥurūf) despite the grammatical valid-
ity of most of the shawādhdh readings he had transmitted. Two comments by
Ibn Mujāhid deserve mention here. Under one of the entries transmitted by
al-Mufaḍḍal, Ibn Mujāhid remarked: “He was the only one to transmit this vari-
ant” (wa-lam ya‌ʾti bihā ghayruhu). In the other instance al-Mufaḍḍal violated
a consensus established by ʿĀṣim’s transmitters. Ibn Mujāhid underscored this
divergence and observed that the other transmitters of ʿĀṣim had read differ-
ently (wa-rawā ghayruhu ʿan ʿĀṣim).72
Figure 4 below shows a slightly different instance of transmission and dis-
semination. Al-Mufaḍḍal’s rendition of the variant readings of ʿĀṣim came
through one chain of transmission only: A → al-Mufaḍḍal → Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī
→ al-Quṭaʿī → al-Khazzāz → Ibn Mujāhid. On the other hand, Abān al-ʿAṭṭār
seems to have been an active transmitter of the teachings of ʿĀṣim with six
66 Ibid., 534–5.
67 Ibid., 540.
68 Ibid., 548.
69 Ibid., 557.
70 Ibid., 585.
71 Ibid., 589. Other examples include (Q. 56:22) wa-ḥūrun—read wa-ḥūrin; (Q. 60:3) yafṣilu—
read yufṣalu; (Q. 63:4) khushubun—read khushbun; (Q. 63:5) lawwaw—read lawaw;
(Q. 64:9) yukaffir … wa-yud-khilhu—read nukaffir … wa-nud-khilhu; (Q. 65:11) yudkhilhu—
read nudkhilhu; (Q.74:50) mustanfira—read mustanfara; (Q. 76:21) ʿāliyahum—read
ʿālīhim; (Q. 78:36–7) rabbi … ‿r-raḥmāni—read rabbu … ‿r-raḥmānu; (Q. 85:15) ‿l-majīdu—
read ‿l-majīdi; (Q. 89:25–6) yuʿadhdhibu … yūthiqu—read yuʿadhdhabu … yūthaqu; ibid.,
622, 633, 636, 636, 638, 639, 660, 664, 669, 678, 685.
72 Ibid., 233, 624.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

ʿĀṣim
Abān al-ʿAṭṭar
Shaybān b. Muʿāwiya Bakkār b. ʿAbd

Allāh al-ʿŪdī ʿAlī b. Naṣr Ḥaramī b. ʿAmāra ʿAbbās ʿAbd al-Wahhab
b. al-Faḍl b. ʿAṭaʾ
Bishr b. Hilāl Naṣr b. ʿAlī Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
Aḥmad b. ʿAlī Muḥammad b.

Mūsā b. Hārūn al-Khazzāz ʿĪsā l-ʿAbbāsī ʿUbayd Allāh b.
Al-Ushnānī
ʿAlī l-Hāshimī
Ibn Mujāhid
FIGURE 4 Abān ʿan ʿĀṣim (from al-Sabʿa)
chains of transmission, albeit still short of Ḥafṣ and Shuʿba who amassed nine
and thirteen transmitters respectively.73 This pattern of dissemination through
multiple chains of transmission is at odds with the other cases I have discussed
so far, where a non-canonical rāwī would only have a few students through
whom his rendition was transmitted. What could be the possible reasons be-
hind excluding Abān al-ʿAṭṭār and other rāwīs who seemingly were active trans-
mitters of a certain Qirāʾa from the Canon of ʿĀṣim or the other Eponymous
Readers? Let us first examine a list of problematic transmissions attributed to
Abān as documented in Kitāb al-Sabʿa.
– (Q. 76:21): ʿāliyahum: In addition to Nāfiʿ and Ḥamza’s Eponymous Readings,
only Abān and al-Mufaḍḍal from the students of ʿĀṣim read ʿālīhim.74 Also,
in (Q. 36:68) nunakkis-hu, the majority of ʿĀṣim’s transmitters read nunakkis-
hu except for A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra, A → Abān, and A → al-Mufaḍḍal, who read
nankus-hu.75 Other examples include (Q. 39:29) salaman, unanimously read
73 Refer to figures #2 and #5.

75 Ibid., 543.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

36 CHAPTER 2
as such by ʿĀṣim’s other transmitters—but Abān reads sāliman;76 (Q. 48:10)

fa-sayuʾtīhi—read fa-sanuʾtīhi;77 (Q. 69:9) qablahu—read qibalahu;78
(Q. 84:12) wa-yaṣlā—read wa-yuṣlā;79 (Q. 75:7) bariqa—read baraqa.80
– (Q. 2:259): nunshizuhā: This is a very interesting example. The main disagree-
ment amongst the Eponymous Readers was whether to read nunshizuhā (A,
IA, H, and K) or nunshiruhā (IK, N, and AA). Abān read nanshuruhā, using
form I ( faʿala-nashara) of the verb rather than form IV (afʿala-anshara).
Abān was not alone in transmitting this variant. Ibn Mujāhid commented
by saying that Abān’s reading was the same as that of al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī.81 An
example where Abān alone transmitted a unique variant was (Q. 99:7–8)
yarahu … yarahu, for which he read yurahu … yurahu.82
– (Q. 23:106) shiqwatunā: IK, N, AA, IA and A read shiqwatunā, whereas both
H and K read shaqāwatunā. Under this entry, Ibn Mujāhid documented
the following information: Abān personally asked ʿĀṣim about the read-
ing of this variant, to which ʿĀṣim responded, “you are free to read either
shiqwatunā or shaqāwatunā”.83
The first two groups of examples are consistent with the patterns I discussed
earlier. Divergence from the consensus of the rāwīs of the Eponymous Reader,
compounded by a divergence from the rest of the Eponymous Readers and
their transmitters, would have probably made the Qurrāʾ community cautious
regarding Abān. Cases similar to the last example where a rāwī directly asks his
master how to read the variant in question will be encountered frequently.84 It
is a common motif throughout Kitāb al-Sabʿa, where certain transmitters were
known to have directly inquired from their teachers about certain problem-
atic variants. While this process of formal—letter correspondences or samāʿ
sessions—and informal—study groups or house visits—enquiry, whose par-
ticulars were documented in writing, indicates meticulousness and honesty
on behalf of the transmitters, it nonetheless created a situation where multiple
variants were reported on behalf of the Eponymous Readers. In addition to
portraying the Eponymous Reader as being nonchalantly indifferent toward an
“official” adoption of a particular variant, such questions and inquiries suggest
76 Ibid., 562.
77 Ibid., 603.
78 Ibid., 648.
79 Ibid., 677.
80 Ibid., 661.
81 Ibid., 189; Kirmānī, Shawādhdh, 98; Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 23.
83 Ibid., 448.
84 See also the case of ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl below.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

a weak connection or inadequate mentorship between the Eponymous Reader

and the enquirer, who inquired about a set of controversial variants only
under special circumstances rather than being associated with the Eponymous
Reader for a longer period of time, after which the student would “inherit”
his master’s Reading. A transmitter such as Ḥafṣ, for example, was known to
have lived under the same roof as ʿĀṣim, his teacher, for over two decades.85
Similarly, Qālūn reportedly grew up in Nāfiʿ’s house (rabīb Nāfiʿ).86 These two
transmitters were unlikely to report ambivalent readings on behalf of their
master, let alone feel the need to document a session in which they inquired
about some variants whose recitation they doubted.
I am suggesting that the reason behind this phenomenon of asking ques-
tions, recording answers, and enquiring about the variants was the limited
time these rāwīs spent with the Eponymous Reader. Going back to Abān b.
Yazīd al-ʿAṭṭār, we read that he was a known and, according to some, trust-
worthy Baṣran Ḥadīth transmitter (thiqa, ḍabṭ).87 A very likely scenario was as
follows: Abān travelled to Kūfa to transmit and acquire Ḥadīth, during which
journey he attended Qurʾān auditions with ʿĀṣim, for whom Abān might have
already prepared a list of questions to ask during the audition. The geographi-
cal background of Abān could also explain the peculiar situation of the exis-
tence of several transmitters/students to whom Abān apparently taught the
rendition of ʿĀṣim. Five out of these six transmitters were also Baṣrans: Bakkār
al-ʿŪdī,88 ʿAlī b. Naṣr (d. 189/805),89 Ḥaramī b. ʿUmāra,90 ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl,91 and
ʿAbd al-Wahhāb b. ʿAṭāʾ (d. 204/819) who relocated to Baghdād and died there.92
The sixth transmitter, Shaybān b. Muʿāwiya,93 a grammarian and a muḥaddith,
was also a native of Baṣra, but he moved to Kūfa and settled down there later
in his life. This information suggests that Abān carried his own rendition of
85 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 1:229–30; Muḥaysin, ḥuffāẓ, 210–11; Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ,
1:287–90.
86 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:326–8; Muḥaysin, ḥuffāẓ, 496–9; Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya,
1:542–3.
87 Jamāl al-Dīn al-Mizzī (d. 742/1341), Tahdhīb al-kamāl fī asmāʾ al-rijāl, ed. Bashshār ʿAwwād
Maʿrūf, 35 vols. (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 1992), 2:24–6; Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī
(d. 748/1348), Mīzān al-iʿtidāl fī naqd al-rijāl, ed. ʿAlī Muḥammad al-Bijjāwī, 4 vols. (Beirut:
Dār al-maʿrifa, 1963), 1:130–1.
89 Ibid., 1:514.
90 Ibid., 1:186.
91 Ibid., 1:320–1.
92 Ibid., 1:427.
93 Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī, Siyar aʿlām al-nubalāʾ, ed. Bashshār ʿAwwād Maʿrūf, 25 vols.
(Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 1985), 7:406–8.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

38 CHAPTER 2
ʿĀṣim’s Reading, acquired during his sojourn in Kūfa, back to Baṣra. There he
seems to have transmitted this rendition to his Baṣran students and colleagues,
either fully or partially. It is also important to keep in mind that Abān was an
avid transmitter of Ḥadīth, and that he had a large circle of students studying
and transmitting Ḥadīth and grammar from him.94 The case of Abān al-ʿAṭṭār,
and similar cases that will come up shortly, demonstrate the importance of the
geographical background of the transmitter vis-à-vis the Eponymous Reader
with whom he studied. The nature and duration of the mentorship between
a teacher and his student played a significant role in including and excluding
rāwīs from the Canon of Qirāʾāt.
1.2.3 Conflict of Interests: al-Kisāʾī as a Transmitter (rāwī)

The stemma below represents the collated transmissions of Abū Bakr Shuʿba
on behalf of ʿĀṣim, collected from the whole of Kitāb al-Sabʿa.
At first glance, a few names grab one’s attention. Yaḥyā b. Ādam (d. 203/818)
seems to have been the most active transmitter of Shuʿba’s rendition of ʿĀṣim’s
Reading. Amongst Yaḥyā’s students were the renowned Khalaf al-Bazzār al-
ʿĀshir (d. 229/844), one of the Ten Eponymous Readers in Ibn al-Jazarī’s sys-
tem and, together with Khallād, a Canonical Rāwī of Ḥamza. The illustrious
judge and muḥaddith Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī (d. 248/862) was also one of Yaḥyā’s
students. Other intriguing figures in this stemma include the Eponymous
Reader al-Kisāʾī (K) and Abū Yūsuf al-Aʿshā (d. 200/816), who was a tower-
ing early Kūfan scholar in Qirāʾāt and allegedly one of the best students of
Abū Bakr Shuʿba.95 Based on this stemma, the first assumption one makes is
that Yaḥyā b. Ādam would become a canonical Ṭarīq for Shuʿba’s rendition.
Secondly, despite the distinguished status and importance of al-Kisāʾī, one
would expect him to diverge from the consensus of Shuʿba’s transmitters.
Being the Eponym of his own school of Reading, it should not be unexpected
that when Shuʿba and al-Kisāʾī disagreed on a variant, al-Kisāʾī, the rāwī, would
report readings that concurred with readings transmitted by al-Kisāʾī (K), the
Eponymous Reader, or by other Eponymous Readers with whom K was known
to have been associated, such as Ḥamza, Nāfiʿ, and Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ. The
third assumption is to expect al-Aʿshā to diverge in some of his transmissions
from the well-known rendition of Shuʿba, despite being the second most active
disseminator of his teachings. Finally, one anticipates that some single strands
of transmission (SST) between Shuʿba and Ibn Mujāhid that lacked corrobora-
tion and wider dissemination would include some shawādhdh readings that
94 Ibid., 7:431–3.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shuʿba ʿan ʿĀṣim (from al-Sabʿa)

FIGURE 5
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

40 CHAPTER 2
did not conform to what “a” majority of transmitters had reported on behalf of
Shuʿba. I will consider the examples of Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī, Ibn Jammāz, al-ʿUṭāridī,
and Ibn Abī Umayya to demonstrate this point.
I will start with entries transmitted through Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī and group
these examples in clusters that share similar themes. I underline the names of
some Eponymous Readers who will be relevant to the discussion.
– (Q. 19:51) mukhlaṣan: ʿĀṣim, through both Ḥafṣ and Shuʿba, read mukhlaṣan,
but A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī read mukhliṣan, similar to IK, N, AA, and IA.96
Al-Kisāʾī’s (K) own reading, along with Ḥamza’s (H), were also mukhlaṣan.
Similarly, (Q. 22:59) mudkhalan was read as such by all the Eponymous
Readers and their Rāwīs except for N and A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī, both of
whom read madkhalan.97 Other examples similar to these are: (Q. 4:136)
nazzala … anzala by N, A, H, and K, whereas IK, AA, IA and A → Shuʿba
→ al-Kisāʾī read nuzzila … unzila;98 (Q. 18:16) mirfaqan by IK, AA, A, H
and K—read marfiqan by N, IA, and A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī;99 (Q. 25:67)
yaqturū by A, H, and K—read yuqtirū by N, IA, and A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī;100
(Q. 39:38) kāshifātu … mumsikātu by most Readers including ʿĀṣim—read
kāshifātun … mumsikātun by AA and A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī;101 (Q. 2:271) wa-
yukaffiru by A→ Ḥafṣ and IA, wa-nukaffiru by IK, AA, and A → Shuʿba—read
wa-nukaffir by N, H, K, and A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī.102
– (Q. 10:35) yahiddī: despite diverging from most Readers and Rāwīs, A →
Shuʿba read yihiddī. A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī did not conform to Shuʿba’s
transmission, but instead read yahiddī, which was also the reading of A →
Ḥafṣ.103 Similarly, (Q. 25:10) wa-yajʿal was the reading of A → Ḥafṣ and was
read as such by A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī, who diverged from the seemingly
better known reading of A → Shuʿba, wa-yajʿalu.104 (Q. 16:19–20) tusirrūna …
tuʿlinūna … yadʿūna was the reading of ʿĀṣim through both Shuʿba and Ḥafṣ,
but A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī transmitted tusirrūna … tuʿlinūna … tadʿūna, con-
curring with all the other Readers and Rāwīs.105

97 Ibid., 439–440.
98 Ibid., 239.
99 Ibid., 388.
100 Ibid., 466.
101 Ibid., 562.
102 Ibid., 191.
103 Ibid., 326.
104 Ibid., 462.
105 Ibid., 371.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

– (Q. 53:51) wa-Thamūda: A → Shuʿba was reported to have read wa-Thamūda,

similar to A → Ḥafṣ, but A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī transmitted wa-Thamūdan,
which was al-Kisāʾī’s (K) own reading.106 Also, (Q. 34:23) adhina was the
reading of both A → Shuʿba and A → Ḥafṣ, but A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī read ud-
hina, which was also the reading of K according to his own System-Reading.107
Another example is (Q. 36:5) tanzīla by A → Ḥafṣ, H, K, and A → Shuʿba →
al-Kisāʾī, which was read tanzīlu by A → Shuʿba.108
– (Q. 16:2) yunazzilu ‿l-malāʾikata: A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī diverged from all
the other Readers and Rāwīs, including A → Shuʿba, by reading tanazzalu
‿l-malāʾikatu, which, interestingly, happened to be the reading of Yaʿqūb
al-Ḥaḍramī, the second Eponymous Baṣran Reader in Ibn al-Jazarī’s system.109
Under (Q. 18:76) ladunnī, an irregular reading was transmitted only by A →
Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī in which he read ludnī.110 A similar example would be
(Q. 38:29) li-yaddabbarū—read li-tadabbarū by A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī—
which was the reading of Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī, one of the Ten Eponymous
Readers in the system of Ibn al-Jazarī.111
More combinations similar to the examples above that show how A → Shuʿba
→ al-Kisāʾī diverged from the standard reading of A → Shuʿba are listed in the
footnote below.112 Throughout Kitāb al-Sabʿa, the readings of A → Shuʿba →
al-Kisāʾī agree in only a few instances with the known, standard rendition of
Shuʿba as transmitted by his other students.113 There is a very clear pattern
106 Ibid., 337, 616.

107 Ibid., 529–30.
108 Ibid., 539.
109 Ibid., 370; Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī (d. 444/1053), Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, ed. ʿAbd al-
Muhaymin ʿAbd al-Salām Ṭaḥḥān et al., 4 vols. (PhD diss.: Jāmiʿat Umm al-qurā, 1985–
95), 3:346–7; Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, ed. ʿAlī
Muḥammad al-Ḍabbāʿ, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya), 2:302; Shihāb al-Dīn
al-Dimyāṭī (d. 1117/1705), Itḥāf fuḍalāʾ al-bashar fī l-qirāʾāt al-arbaʿata ʿashar, ed. Anas
Mahra (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1998), 349.
110 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 396; cf. Transmission error #35 below.
111 Ibid., 553; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 361; Dimyāṭī, Itḥāf, 477.
112 (Q. 40:1) ḥa mīm: A → Shuʿba read ḥe mīm whereas A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī read ḥa mīm;
(Q. 66:4) wa-Jibrīlu was read wa-Jabra‌ʾilu by A → Shuʿba, but A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī read
Jabra‌ʾīlu, similar to K’s reading; (Q. 68:1) nūn wa-l-qalami was read nūw_wa-l-qalami by A
→ Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī and K himself; (Q. 99:7–8) yarahū was most probably read as such by
A → Shuʿba in waṣl mode, but A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī read yarah; (Q. 82:17) adrāka was read
adrēka by A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī and K himself; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 567, 640, 166–7, 646,
694, 674.
113 (Q. 7:111) arjih wa-akhāhu: several disagreements were transmitted on behalf of A, but A
→ Shuʿba and A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī agreed on this variant; (Q. 36:1–2) ya sīn wa-l-Qurʾāni:
it is not very clear from the wording of Ibn Mujāhid whether there was an agreement be-
tween Shuʿba and Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī in reading this variant as ye sīw_wa-l-Qurʾāni; (Q. 2:143)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

42 CHAPTER 2
in the four groups of examples I provided above. First, when al-Kisāʾī di-
verged from the standard reading of Shuʿba, he would still agree with other
Eponymous Readers, in particular Nāfiʿ and Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, with whom
he purportedly studied, directly or through intermediaries, and subsequently
transmitted and disseminated certain aspects of their Qirāʾa.114 Second, when
Shuʿba alone transmitted a particular variant that did not concur with the
readings of the other Eponymous Readers and their Rāwīs, al-Kisāʾī’s trans-
mission was brought up by Ibn Mujāhid to either corroborate Shuʿba’s diver-
gence or emphasize that al-Kisāʾī did not follow the standard transmission
known amongst Shuʿba’s students. Third, A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī seems to have
transmitted several shawādhdh readings, which were not documented by any
other Eponymous Reader or Rāwī, although some of these variants were at-
tributed to Readers from outside the system of the Seven, namely, Yaʿqūb and
Abū Jaʿfar. Fourth, in several instances of al-Kisāʾī’s divergences from Shuʿba,
he chose to transmit a reading that coincided with his own System-Reading,
despite the fact that the standard, well-known reading of A → Shuʿba was dif-
ferent, and that K’s reading in those particular cases diverged from the rest of
the Canonical Readers. I will discuss two cases here to demonstrate this point.
The standard reading of most of the Eponymous Readers and their Rāwīs in
(Q. 68:1) was nūn wa-l-qalami, without assimilating the nūn with the wāw. This
was true for IK, N, AA, IA, H, and A, through both Ḥafṣ and Shuʿba. Other trans-
mitters read nūw_wa-l-qalami, by assimilating the nūn with the wāw. These
transmitters, such as N → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar, were not commonly considered by
later scholars as standard Rāwīs, representative of the “official” rendition of the
Reader. Even though IA was reported to have read nūn wa-l-qalami under this
specific entry of (Q. 68:1), IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī was nevertheless reported
to have applied assimilation under the entry of (Q. 36:1).115 What is important
here is that amongst the Eponymous Readers, only K chose to read with assim-
ilation. As a transmitter (rāwī), al-Kisāʾī seems to have “contaminated” the ren-
dition of Shuʿba with his own System-Reading, since the only divergence in the
rendition of Shuʿba was A → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī, which conveniently agreed with
the Eponymous Reading of al-Kisāʾī. The same holds true for (Q. 82:17) adrāka,
where A was known to have read in tafkhīm (emphatic alif) while AA, IA, H,
and K read adrēka, in imāla. Al-Kisāʾī, the rāwī, diverged from the consensus
la-ra‌‌ʾūfun was agreed upon by Shuʿba and Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī to be read la-ra‌‌ʾufun, which
was incidentally the reading of K; ibid., 288, 538, 171.
114 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 1:474–8; cf. figure #12 of al-Kisāʾī’s stemma.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

of A → Shuʿba’s transmitters by documenting adrēka, with imāla, which was

“incidentally” the reading of al-Kisāʾī, the eponymous Reader.116
In addition to divergence from the consensus of the rāwīs and disparate geo-
graphical backgrounds as possible reasons for being excluded from the Canon
of the Qirāʾa, I will identify another factor here, namely, the non-specialization
in the System-Reading. It is not constructive to interpret al-Kisāʾī’s divergences
by readily resorting to how some sources portrayed him as an incompetent
transmitter who inadequately reported variants on behalf of Shuʿba. Indeed,
al-Kisāʾī was described to have occasionally committed errors and laḥn (sole-
cism) in recitation,117 as well as to have been forgetful at times.118 However,
even if we have faith in al-Kisāʾī’s adroitness and skill as a meticulous, skil-
ful Qurʾān reciter who hardly made mistakes in Qurʾānic recitation, one must
keep in mind that the discipline of Qirāʾāt in general, and the tradition of si-
multaneous memorization and transmission of several System-Readings ( jamʿ
al-qirāʾāt) in particular, were still nascent at the time.119 The techniques and
methods of memorizing multiple System-Readings, both their principles (uṣūl)
and individual, unique variants ( farsh), have not been developed yet. In fact,
the eponymous Readings themselves as complete, standardized systems were
not even crystallized by that time. Al-Kisāʾī was still in the process of develop-
ing his own unique style and devising a System-Reading, which took time to
shape.120 The discipline of Qirāʾāt had just begun to establish itself as a science,
and Qurʾān readers had just begun to travel and collect various transmissions
and corroborate one reading with another. Even during Ibn Mujāhid’s time,
the System-Readings, both their farsh and uṣūl, were still not standardized, and
thus one should not expect these Readings to be more methodical and stan-
dardized 150 years earlier during the time of al-Kisāʾī. Subsequently, I suggest
116 Ibid., 674.

117 “One day, al-Kisāʾī was leading Hārūn al-Rashīd in prayers. Instead of reciting (Q. 32:21)
la-ʿallahum yarjiʿūn, he instead read la-ʿallahum yarjiʿīn. When the prayer was over, Hārūn
asked: What is this dialect?—referring to the –īn in yarjiʿīn. Al-Kisāʾī answered: O com-
mander of the believers, even the swift horse stumbles [i.e., even experts make mistakes];”
Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:300.
118 “Al-Kisāʾī was once leading a group of people in prayers. He began reciting Q. 109
(al-kāfirūn), but after reading the first verse qul yā ayyuhā l-kāfirūna, he fell silent and
could not remember the rest of the chapter;” ibid., 1:301.
119 Even if one accepts the traditional Islamic narrative, the first individual to purportedly
memorize and gather several eponymous Readings was Abū ʿAmr al-Dūrī (d. 246/860)
(awwal man jamaʿa l-qirāʾāt) who lived in the mid of the 3rd/9th century; Ibn al-Jazarī,
Ghāya, 1:230–1; Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:387.
120 One should also be mindful of the fact that al-Kisāʾī’s eponymous Reading is generally
known to be an amalgamation of different Systems and readings.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

44 CHAPTER 2
that al-Kisāʾī, as an authority himself, was either interfering and amending

Shuʿba’s variants, or that he was not accurate in transmitting the rendition of
Shuʿba due to the confusion of amassing several transmissions he received. On
the other hand, al-Kisāʾī’s other colleagues, such as Yaḥyā b. Ādam, specialized
in transmitting only Shuʿba’s rendition. Yaḥyā was reported to have spent three
years studying with Shuʿba. On top of that, he regularly visited Shuʿba over a
span of forty years to inquire into the subtle details of the Reading of ʿĀṣim.121
In contrast, al-Kisāʾī was reported to have had travelled extensively122 and ob-
tained several transmissions of different System-Readings from various read-
ers who belonged to different regional traditions. He received (directly and
indirectly) transmissions of the Eponymous Readings of Ḥamza, Abū ʿAmr b.
al-ʿAlāʾ, Nāfiʿ through Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar and Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar (d. 177–200/793–816),
ʿĀṣim through Shuʿba and al-Mufaḍḍal, and al-Aʿmash (d. 148/765) through
Zāʾida b. Qudāma (d. 161/777).123 Finally, it is worth noting that al-Kisāʾī gener-
ally exercised ikhtiyār and ijtihād in his methodology and style of recitation.
He was known to have selected and combined readings from different systems
(yatakhayyar al-qirāʾāt), per the testimony by Abū ʿUbayda (d. 209/824) who
reported that al-Kisāʾī used to pick and choose individual readings from the
System-Reading of Ḥamza.124
Further investigation shows that al-Kisāʾī, the transmitter, followed a similar
pattern to that of Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī by diverging from the “mainstream” read-
ings of other Eponymous Readers whose Systems he studied and transmitted.
(Q. 26:1) ṭa sīm_mīm was recited as such by Nāfiʿ, where the nūn of sīn was
assimilated with the following mīm. The only eponymous Reader who did not
perform assimilation and read sīn mīm was Ḥamza. In addition to Ḥamza, only
one transmitter from Nāfiʿ performed assimilation, namely, N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
→ al-Kisāʾī.125 An important question here is whether we should hold Ismāʿīl b.
Jaʿfar responsible for diverging from the consensus of Nāfiʿ’s transmitters or if
we should ascribe this divergence to al-Kisāʾī, who might have subconsciously
recited this variant according to the teachings and transmissions of his mas-
ter, Ḥamza. The example of (Q. 4:32) wa‿sʾalū may shed light on this question.
wa‿sʾalū was recited either with the articulation of the hamza or with its leni-
tion. AA, A, IA, H, and N articulated the hamza and read wa‿sʾalū, but K and
121 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:343.

122 He travelled to Baṣra and studied with al-Khalīl b. Aḥmad (d. 170/786). He also sought the
Bedouins in the desert and lived with them for a long period of time (kharaja ilā l-bawādī
fa-ghāba mudda ṭawīla); ibid., 1:297.
124 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:298; Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 1:476.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

IK softened the hamza and read wa-salū. Interestingly, one other transmitter
did read wa-salū: Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar. Ibn Mujāhid related that in this particular
transmission, Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar was directly reporting from the two Medinan
authorities: Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī (d. 110–132/728–749) and Shayba b. Niṣāḥ
(d. 130–138/747–755). In any event, the person who reported this transmission
on behalf of Ismāʿīl was none other than al-Kisāʾī.126 Thus, [people of Medina]
→ Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → al-Kisāʾī went against the mainstream reading of the
Medinese and conveniently concurred with al-Kisāʾī’s own System-Reading.
The last case I will discuss here is a matter that concerns the principles of
recitation (uṣūl al-qirāʾa). The consensus of the transmitters of N dictated that
when hāʾ al-kināya (the third person singular masculine pronoun suffix) was
preceded by an unvocalized yāʾ or a long-vowel yāʾ, N vocalized the hāʾ with a
kasra without lengthening it (ishbāʿ) and without making it reach the value
of a full yāʾ, e.g., (Q. 2:2) fīhi hudan [vs. fīhī hudan], (Q. 2:37) ʿalayhi innahu
[vs. ʿalayhī innahu], and (Q. 18:63) ansānīhi illā [vs. ansānīhī illā].127 The only
transmitters from N who were reported to have diverged from this consensus
were N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → al-Kisāʾī and N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān, both of
whom vocalized the hāʾ of ʿalayhi throughout the Qurʾān with a full yāʾ instead
of a kasra, thus reading ʿalayhī.128
A similar case to that of al-Kisāʾī, in which an accomplished Qurʾān Reader
diverged from the standard reading of other transmitters, was that of al-Aʿmash
(d. 148/765) (Figure #7 below). In (Q. 58:11) ‿nshuzū fa‿nshuzū,129 significant
confusion was reported as to how ʿĀṣim vocalized this verb, namely, ‿nshuzū
or ‿nshizū. Shuʿba said that he could not remember how ʿĀṣim recited it, and
thus, he resorted to al-Aʿmash and inquired about the matter. Al-Aʿmash re-
sponded by saying that ʿĀṣim’s reading was ‿nshizū fa‿nshizū,130 which was
incidentally how he read it according to his System-Reading.131 We see here
the same pattern as with al-Kisāʾī, and cannot but wonder whether al-Aʿmash
was faithful in his transmission of ʿĀṣim’s Reading in this particular variant
or whether he was disseminating, deliberately or inadvertently, a variant that
126 Ibid., 232.

127 Ibid., 130–2.
128 Al-Dānī added al-Musayyabī → Khalaf; Dānī, Jāmiʿ, 1:435; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 130.
129 This will be discussed in more detail under transmission error #58.
131 Abū Muḥammad ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAlī Sibṭ al-Khayyāṭ (d. 541/1146), al-Mubhij fī l-qirāʾāt
al-thamāni wa-qirāʾat al-Aʿmash wa-Ibn Muḥayṣin wa-ikhtiyār Khalaf wa-l-Yazīdī, ed.
ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz b. Nāṣir al-Sabr, 2 vols. (Ph.D. diss., Jāmiʿat al-Imām Muḥammad b. Suʿūd
al-islāmiyya, 1984–5), 2:772; Dimyāṭī, Itḥāf, 536; Ibrāhīm Tawfīq Ḍamra, Naẓm al-Jumān fī
qirāʾat al-Aʿmash b. Mahrān (Amman: al-Maktaba al-waṭaniyya, 2011), 251.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

46 CHAPTER 2
FIGURE 6 al-Kisāʾī ʿan Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar ʿan Nāfiʿ (from Kitāb al-Sabʿa)
belonged to his own System-Reading but that he attributed to ʿĀṣim. Either

way, despite al-Aʿmash’s reputable status as a Qurʾān Reader,132 and despite
being directly asked by Shuʿba about the accurate reading of this word, his pro-
fessional opinion was not strong enough to be maintained against the “partial”
consensus established by ʿĀṣim’s pupils to read ‿nshuzū.
132 On multiple occasions, the eponymous Reading of al-Aʿmash was documented in manu-
als of Qirāʾāt alongside the other seven canonical Readings in an attempt to canonize
his Reading. There have always been attempts to bridge the gap between that which
had already become canonical and other eponymous Readings the community of the
Qurrāʾ were trying to include as part of the Canon. Such manuals include al-Mubhij fī
l-qirāʾāt al-thamāni wa-qirāʾat al-Aʿmash wa-Ibn Muḥayṣin wa-ikhtiyār Khalaf wa-l-Yazīdī
by Sibṭ al-Khayyāṭ (d. 541/1146), al-Rawḍa fī l-qirāʾāt al-iḥdā ʿashrata by Abū ʿAlī l-Mālikī
(d. 438/1047), and Itḥāf fuḍalāʾ al-bashar fī l-qirāʾāt al-arbaʿata ʿashar by Shihāb al-Dīn
al-Dimyāṭī (d. 1117/1705).
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

FIGURE 7 ʿĀṣim’s transmitters (from Kitāb al-Sabʿa)
1.2.4 Specialization: al-Ḥulwānī

Aḥmad b. Yazīd al-Ḥulwānī (d. 250/864) was an eminent Qirāʾāt scholar and
a prolific transmitter of various eponymous Readings, which he studied with
several masters of Qirāʾāt. According to the stemma below, he seems to have
received transmissions of all Seven Eponymous Readings. Out of the various
transmissions he received, two survived and became canonical Ṭarīqs, name-
ly, IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī, by way of al-Shāṭibiyya,133 and H → Khallād →
al-Ḥulwānī, by way of al-Taysīr.134 Nonetheless, this particular ṭarīq of H →
Khallād → al-Ḥulwānī from al-Taysīr did not survive in al-Shāṭibiyya, but was
rather replaced there by H → Khallād → Ibn Shādhān.135 The following exam-
ples demonstrate some of the problematic transmissions reported on behalf
of al-Ḥulwānī.
– (Q. 109:3–5) ʿābidūna, ʿābidun, ʿābidūna: AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar
→ al-Ḥulwānī was reported to have performed imāla and read ʿēbidūna,
ʿēbidun, ʿēbidūna. The standard reading of AA and the rest of the epony-
mous Readers and their Rāwīs was ʿābidūna, ʿābidun, ʿābidūna, except for
IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī, who also performed imāla and read ʿēbidūna,
ʿēbidun, ʿēbidūna. This was more than a simple coincidence, since the
only transmitter responsible for executing and documenting imāla in this
verse was al-Ḥulwānī, firstly through IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī, which be-
came a canonical Ṭarīq, and secondly through AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū
Maʿmar → al-Ḥulwānī, which fell into the category of irregular transmissions
133 Abū l-Ḥasan al-Ṣafāqisī (d. 1118/1706), Ghayth al-nafʿ fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, ed. Sālim al-Zahrānī,
3 vols. (Ph.D. diss., Jāmiʿat Umm al-qurā, 2005), 1:291.
134 Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī (d. 444/1053), al-Taysīr fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, ed. Otto Pretzl (Beirut: Dār
al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1984), 15; idem., ed. Ḥātim al-Ḍāmin (Cairo: Maktabat al-tābiʿīn, 2008),
120.
135 Ṣafāqisī, Ghayth, 1:293.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

48 CHAPTER 2
FIGURE 8 al-Ḥulwānī’s transmissions in Kitāb al-Sabʿa
(shawādhdh al-sabʿa) reported on behalf of AA.136 Another case of an ir-

regular transmission of imāla propagated by al-Ḥulwānī was (Q. 114:1)
‿n-nāsi, where K → al-Dūrī → al-Ḥulwānī read ‿n-nēsi, an irregular transmis-
sion reported on behalf of al-Kisāʾī. Additionally, only AA → al-Dūrī—the
same al-Dūrī, the canonical Rāwī of al-Kisāʾī—was reported to have read
with imāla, thus making one suspect that the transmission of al-Ḥulwānī
from K was confused with the transmission from AA.137 (Q. 36:1–2) ya sīn
wa-l-Qurʾāni: this was an instance of disparity in performing assimilation.
Nāfiʿ’s standard reading was to not assimilate and read ya sīn wa-l-Qurʾāni,138
but N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī was reported to have assimilated and read
ya sīw_wa-l-Qurʾāni, which was the standard reading of IA → Hishām →
al-Ḥulwānī. This is another instance of possible confusion between two
transmissions attributed to al-Ḥulwānī. Another interesting case is (Q. 33:10,
66, 67) ‿ẓ-ẓunūn(a/ā) … ‿r-rasūl(a/ā) … ‿s-sabīl(a/ā),139 where al-Ḥulwānī,
despite agreeing with several of AA’s transmitters, still went against the

137 Ibid., 703.
138 Ibid., 538.
139 By reading ‿ẓ-ẓunūna in waṣl mode and ‿ẓ-ẓunūnāₒ in waqf mode, ‿r-rasūla in waṣl mode
and ‿r-rasūlāₒ in waqf mode, etc.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

mainstream reading of AA per al-Yazīdī’s rendition, namely, ‿ẓ-ẓunūnₒ

… ‿r-rasūlₒ … ‿s-sabīlₒ. As expected, the former reading by al-Ḥulwānī
on behalf of AA concurred with the standard reading of IA → Hishām →
al-Ḥulwānī, the rendition which al-Ḥulwānī was more familiar with and
accustomed to.140 (Q. 13:9) ‿l-mutaʿālₒi: the standard reading of AA was
‿l-mutaʿālₒi except for AA → Abū Zayd → Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī and AA → ʿAbd
al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar → al-Ḥulwānī, both of whose transmissions report-
ed ‿l-mutaʿālīₒ.141
– (Q. 70:33) bi-shahādātihim: all Readers and Rāwīs read bi-shahādatihim
except for A → Ḥafṣ. However, AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar →
al-Ḥulwānī was also reported to have read bi-shahādātihim, similar to A →
Ḥafṣ. Al-Ḥulwānī, once more, diverged from the consensus of the transmit-
ters of AA.142 (Q. 19:19) li-ahaba: except for Warsh, Nāfiʿ’s transmitters read
li-ahaba, but N → Warsh read li-ºahaba (hamza lenition). In addition to N →
Warsh, only N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī read li-ºahaba, which, unsurprisingly,
was also the reading of IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī.143
– (Q. 69:12) wa-taʿiyahā: all Readers and Rāwīs unanimously read wa-taʿiyahā
except for two irregular transmissions reporting wa-taʿyahā through IK
→ Qunbul → Abū Rabīʿa144 and IK → al-Ḥulwānī [IK → Shibl → al-Qawwās
→ al-Ḥulwānī].145 Al-Ḥulwānī diverged here from both the consensus of
IK → al-Qawwās’s transmitters and from the broader consensus of most
eponymous Readers by transmitting a shawādhdh variant.146 (Q. 13:4)
ṣinwān: all Readers and Rāwīs read ṣinwān except for A → Ḥafṣ → Abū
Shuʿayb al-Qawwās → al-Ḥulwānī who transmitted ṣunwān. Ibn Mujāhid
commented by saying that this chain of transmission was alone in reporting
this variant on behalf of Ḥafṣ.147
Besides the transmissions of al-Ḥulwānī from IA → Hishām, which conformed
to the later standardized rendition of IA → Hishām through al-Taysīr and
al-Shāṭibiyya, I only noted a few places in al-Sabʿa where al-Ḥulwānī concurred
140 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 519–20; Dānī, Jāmiʿ, 4:85–7.

142 Ibid., 651.
143 Ibid., 408.
144 Abū Rabīʿa is the canonical Ṭarīq of al-Bazzī in both al-Taysīr and al-Shāṭibiyya; Ṣafāqisī,
Ghayth, 1:290; Dānī, Taysīr, 11–12.
146 ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 2:612–13; Kirmānī, Shawādhdh, 483.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

50 CHAPTER 2
with the majority of the transmitters of the other eponymous Readers, in par-
ticular A, N, AA, and IK.148
1.2.5 Dissemination and Association: the Transmitters of Abū ʿAmr b.

al-ʿAlāʾ
In line with my practice so far of listing problematic transmissions of variants
and underscoring the divergences of certain rāwīs from the majority of their
colleagues, I will quickly enumerate a few examples that demonstrate how cer-
tain notable transmitters of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ (AA) diverged from the stan-
dard consensus of the other rāwīs, or more accurately, the standard rendition
promulgated by al-Yazīdī through al-Dūrī and al-Sūsī (d. 261/874), which was
adopted later on by the Qurrāʾ community.
1.2.5.1 Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī (d. 277/890) and Aḥmad b. Mūsā l-Luʾluʾī149
(Q. 103:3) bi-ṣ-ṣabri: AA → Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī and AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā l-Luʾluʾī
→ Rawḥ → al-Ḥulwānī read bi-ṣ-ṣabiri.150 AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā l-Luʾluʾī → Rawḥ
→ al-Ḥulwānī also transmitted an irregular reading on behalf of AA in (Q. 77:17)
‿l-ākhirīna, by softening the hamza and reading ‿lºākhirīna (‿lākhirīna).151
1.2.5.2 ʿAlī b. Naṣr (d. 188–9/804–5)

(Q. 88:4) taṣlā: AA was reported to have read tuṣlā, but AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr trans-
mitted taṣlā.152 (Q. 47:38) hā-antum: AA’s standard reading was hā-ºantum
by softening the hamza of antum, but AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr reported hā-antum.153
(Q. 29:50) āyātun: AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr transmitted āyatun.154 (Q. 18:4, 34)
thamarun: AA read thumrun, but AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr transmitted thumurun.155
(Q. 16:112) wa-l-khawfi: it was unanimously read as such, but AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr,
AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl, and AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl transmitted wa-l-khawfa.156
(Q. 16:96) wa-la-najziyanna: it was read as such by AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr, but the
148 (Q. 99:7–8) yarahū … yarahū; (Q. 76:4) salāsila (salāsilā); (Q. 39:7) yarḍahu; (Q. 27:28) fa-
alqihi; ibid., 694, 663, 560, 481.
150 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 696; cf. Transmission Error #65.
151 Ibid., 666. Aḥmad b. Mūsā l-Luʾluʾī also diverged in: (Q. 43:68) yā ʿibādī, where he transmit-
ted yā ʿibād; (Q. 18:19) bi-waraqikum: AA read bi-warqikum, but Aḥmad b. Mūsā l-Luʾluʾī
reported bi-warḵḵum, with assimilation; ibid., 588, 389.
152 Ibid., 681.
153 Ibid., 602.
154 Ibid., 501.
155 Ibid., 390.
156 Ibid., 376.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

mainstream reading of AA was wa-la-yajziyanna.157 (Q. 2:85) taẓāharūna: this

was also the transmission of AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr, but the known reading of AA was
taẓẓāharūna.158 (Q. 6:63, 64) yunajjīkum … yunajjīkum: AA read yunajjīkum …
yunjīkum, but AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr transmitted yunjīkum … yunjīkum.159 (Q. 17:16)
amarnā: it was unanimously read as such by most Readers and Rāwīs except
for a few, including ʿAlī b. Naṣr, who nevertheless reported this variant on be-
half of IK and not AA. The transmission was reported through IK → Ḥammād
b. Salama → ʿAlī b. Naṣr by reading āmarnā. Interestingly, this variant reading,
āmarnā, belongs to the Eponymous Reading of the Baṣran Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī
(d. 205/821), one of Ibn al-Jazarī’s ten Readers.160 The variant ammarnā was
another transmission attributed to AA through AA → Khatan Layth → Hārūn b.
Ḥātim → Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-Qāḍī.
1.2.5.3 Hārūn al-Aʿwar; ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl; Hārūn → ʿUbayd; Hārūn → ʿAlī b.

Naṣr
(Q. 88:11) tasmaʿu fīhā lāghiyatan: read by AA as yusmaʿu fīhā lāghiyatun.
AA → Hārūn and AA → ʿAbd al-Wahhāb b. ʿAṭāʾ read tasmaʿu fīhā lāghiyatan.161
(Q. 83:36) hal thuwwiba: AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr read with assimilation,
hath_thuwwiba. AA was not known to have applied assimilation.162 (Q. 69:41–
2) tuʾminūna … tadhakkarūna: AA → ʿUbayd → Hārūn read yuʾminūna …
yadhdhakkarūna.163 (Q. 27:62) tadhakkarūna: AA was reported to have read
yadhdhakkarūna, but AA → ʿUbayd transmitted tadhakkarūna.164 AA read
the verse endings of chapter 53 (al-najm) with partial imāla, but AA → ʿUbayd
reported (Q. 53:7) ‿l-aʿlē and (Q. 53:8) fa-tadallē in full imāla.165 (Q. 50:36)
fa-naqqabū: read fa-naqabū by AA → ʿUbayd,166 which was classified as a
shawādhdh reading.167 (Q. 35:11) ʿumurihi: transmitted as ʿumrihi by AA →
ʿUbayd and AA → ʿAbd al-Wahhāb b. ʿAṭāʾ.168 (Q. 25:13) ḍayyiqan: AA → Hārūn
→ ʿUbayd transmitted ḍayqan.169 (Q. 22:71) yunazzil: AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd
157 Ibid., 375.

158 Ibid., 163.
159 Ibid., 259.
160 Ibid., 379; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:306; Dimyāṭī, Itḥāf, 356.
162 Ibid., 676.
163 Ibid., 648–9.
164 Ibid., 484.
165 Ibid., 614.
166 Ibid., 607.
167 ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 2:508; Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 145.
169 Ibid., 462, cf. (Q. 6:125) on page 403.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

52 CHAPTER 2
transmitted yunzil.170 (Q. 20:78) fa-atbaʿahum: AA → ʿUbayd transmitted

fa‿ttabaʿahum. (Q. 20:87) bi-milkinā: AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd read bi-malkinā.171
(Q. 20:64) fa-ajmiʿū: read as such by AA → Hārūn and AA → ʿUbayd, but AA’s
mainstream reading was fa‿jmaʿū.172 (Q. 3:194) ʿalā rusulika: AA → Hārūn →
ʿAlī b. Naṣr and AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr (samiʿtu Abā ʿAmr) transmitted ʿalā ruslika.173
(Q. 3:156) taʿmalūna: AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr reported yaʿmalūna.174
1.2.5.4 ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl (d. 186/802)

(Q. 79:18) tazakkā: transmitted by AA → ʿAbbās as tazzakkā.175 (Q. 76:9)
nuṭʿimukum: AA → ʿAbbās read nuṭʿimkum.176 (Q. 37:1–3) wa-ṣ-ṣāffāti ṣaffan
fa-z-zājirāti zajran fa-t-tāliyāti dhikran: AA → ʿAbbās did not perform assimila-
tion in any of these variants, in contrast to the known transmission of AA who
reportedly read wa-ṣ-ṣāffāṣ_ṣaffan fa-z-zājirāz_zajran fa-t-tāliyādh_dhikran.177
(Q. 36:68) yaʿqilūna: AA → ʿAbbās transmitted taʿqilūna.178 (Q. 34:22) quli ‿dʿū:
transmitted by AA → ʿAbbās as such, but AA’s standard recitation was qulu
‿dʿū.179 (Q. 31:29) taʿmalūna: AA → ʿAbbās transmitted yaʿmalūna, a shawādhdh
reading on which Ibn Mujāhid commented by saying that only ʿAbbās trans-
mitted this reading.180 (Q. 30:52) and (Q. 27:80) tusmiʿu ‿ṣ-ṣumma: AA → ʿAbbās
transmitted yasmaʿu ‿ṣ-ṣummu.181 (Q. 30:11) turjaʿūna: transmitted as such
by AA → ʿAbbās, but the standard reading of AA was yurjaʿūna.182 (Q. 21:35)
turjaʿūna: AA → ʿAbbās transmitted yurjaʿūna while AA’s mainstream read-
ing was turjaʿūna.183 (Q.27:18) wādi: transmitted by AA → ʿAbbās with imāla,
i.e. wēdi.184 (Q. 14:42) yuʾakhkhiruhum: AA → ʿAbbās transmitted a shawādhdh
reading by documenting nuʾakhkhiruhum on behalf of AA. Ibn Mujāhid com-
mented by saying that no one except ʿAbbās transmitted this variant.185
170 Ibid., 440.

171 Ibid., 422.
172 Ibid., 419.
173 Ibid., 195.
174 Ibid., 217.
175 Ibid., 671.
176 Ibid., 663.
177 Ibid., 546.
178 Ibid., 543.
179 Ibid., 529.
180 Ibid., 514; Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 118; Kirmānī, Shawādhdh, 379.
181 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 508, 486.
182 The text of al-Sabʿa has ʿAyyāsh, which is a misprint of ʿAbbās; ibid., 506.
183 Ibid., 429.
184 Ibid., 478.
185 Ibid., 363; Kirmānī, Shawādhdh, 262; Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 73.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

1.2.5.4.1 The Enquiries of ʿAbbās

On multiple occasions, ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl was reported to have asked Abū ʿAmr
b. al-ʿAlāʾ how precisely to read certain variants. Occasionally, Abū ʿAmr would
decidedly endorse a particular reading, and at times he would show no pref-
erence for either reading. For example, it was reported that ʿAbbās asked AA
whether to read (Q. 71:6) duʿāʾiya or duʿāʾī186 and whether to read (Q. 56:56) nu-
zuluhum or nuzluhum.187 In (Q. 83:14) bal rāna, ʿAbbās asked AA if this variant
was to be read with imāla, and whether the lām ought to be assimilated with
the rāʾ or not (bar_rāna; bar_rēna). ʿAbbās then reported that AA executed
partial assimilation, a pronunciation along the lines of bal_rāna.188 (Q. 79:45)
mundhiru man: after ʿAbbās enquired about the accurate reading of this vari-
ant, he confirmed that AA recommended mundhirun man, despite the fact that
the rest of the transmitters of AA transmitted mundhiru man.189 Both ʿAbbās
and Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī reported on behalf of AA that (Q. 4:1) might be read
as tassāʾalūna or tasāʾalūna.190 Similarly, both ʿAbbās and ʿAlī b. Naṣr claimed
that AA was ambivalent concerning (Q. 18:81), allowing one to read ruḥuman
or ruḥman.191 Also, according to ʿAbbās, AA was indifferent whether one read
(Q. 90:13–14) fakku raqabatin aw iṭʿāmun or fakka raqabatan aw aṭʿama.192
1.2.5.5 Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī (d. 215/830)

(Q. 72:20) qul: read as such by AA → Abū Zayd, but AA’s standard reading was
qāla.193 (Q. 39:53) yā ʿibādiya: it was the transmission of AA → Abū Zayd, but
the mainstream reading of AA was yā ʿibādī.194 (Q. 29:66) wa-li-yatamattaʿū:
AA → Abū Zayd transmitted wa-l-yatamattaʿū.195 (Q. 29:32) la-nunajjiyannahu:
AA → Abū Zayd transmitted la-nunjiyannahu.196

187 Ibid., 623.
188 Ibid., 675.
189 Ibid., 671.
190 Ibid., 226.
191 Ibid., 397.
192 Ibid., 686.
193 Ibid., 657.
194 Ibid., 563.
195 Ibid., 502.
196 Ibid., 500.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

54 CHAPTER 2
1.2.5.6 ʿAbd al-Wārith (d. 180/796) and ʿAbd al-Wahhāb b. ʿAṭāʾ al-Khaffāf
(d. 204–207/819–822)
(Q. 41:51) wa-na‌‌ʾā: transmitted by AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith with imāla, i.e. wa-na‌‌ʾē.197
(Q. 7:138) yaʿkufūna was AA’s standard reading, but AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith trans-
mitted yaʿkifūna.198 (Q. 35:11) ʿumurihi: read as such by AA, but AA → ʿAbd
al-Wahhāb b. ʿAṭāʾ transmitted ʿumrihi.199
1.2.5.7 Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ibn al-Yazīdī

Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ibn al-Yazīdī was the son of the principal Rāwī of AA,
Yaḥyā b. al-Mubārak al-Yazīdī (d. 202/817–7), from whom we received the two
main renditions of al-Sūsī and al-Dūrī. (Q. 39:7) yarḍahu (yarḍahū) was trans-
mitted as such through AA → al-Yazīdī → Ibn al-Yazīdī, but the standard read-
ing of al-Yazīdī through both al-Dūrī and al-Sūsī was yarḍah, by devocalizing
the hāʾ.200
1.2.5.8 Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim b. Sallām (d. 224/838); Shujāʿ b. Abī Naṣr
(d. 190/805) → Abū ʿUbayd
(Q. 39:7) yarḍahu: read as such by AA→ Shujāʿ → Abū ʿUbayd, but the standard
reading of AA was yarḍah.201 (Q. 97:5) maṭlaʿi: read maṭliʿi by AA → Abū ʿUbayd,
similar to al-Kisāʾī, of whom Abū ʿUbayd was also a transmitter. This reading,
however, deviated from the consensus of AA’s transmitters.202 This example
clearly shows how transmitters might have attributed the wrong variant to an
eponymous Reader, especially when they were known to have had studied and
transmitted readings from other eponymous Readers. Abū ʿUbayd might have
wrongly attributed the variant to AA, which he—Abū ʿUbayd—had probably
trasnsmitted from al-Kisāʾī.
Finally, two interesting cases are worth mentioning here. (Q. 25:17)
naḥshuruhum seems to have been the standard reading of AA, despite the fact
that four other transmitters from AA reported yaḥshuruhum, namely, ʿAbbās
b. al-Faḍl,203 Hārūn → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl, Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī, and ʿAbd al-Wahhāb
al-Khaffāf.204 The second case is (Q. 24:64) yurjaʿūna. AA’s standard reading
197 Ibid., 577.

198 Ibid., 292.
199 Ibid., 534.
200 Ibid., 560–1.
201 Ibid., 561, 211–2.
202 Ibid., 693.
203 As above, there is a misprint in the edition of al-Sabʿa where the name is printed as
ʿAyyāsh.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

through al-Yazīdī was yurjaʿūna, but his two transmitters ʿAlī b. Naṣr and Hārūn
→ ʿUbayd transmitted yarjiʿūna.205 Interestingly, yarjiʿūna was the standard
reading of the other Baṣran eponymous Reader, Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī,206 which
is an indication of how transmitters were influenced by other Readings that
were circulating within their geographical cluster.
1.2.6 Discipline Specialism: the Transmitters of Nāfiʿ

So far, I have provided a plethora of examples that would make a strong case
concerning the rise of the irregular readings and the potential reasons behind
excluding transmitters from the canon of an eponymous Reader. The examples
I provided in connection with the transmitters of ʿĀṣim, Ibn ʿĀmir, al-Kisāʾī,
and Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ are applicable in every way to the transmitters of Nāfiʿ,
Ibn Kathīr, and Ḥamza. In the following section, I will briefly list a few other
examples in which some notable transmitters of Nāfiʿ diverged from the con-
sensus of their colleagues.
Khārija b. Muṣʿab (d. 168/784) stands out in Kitāb al-Sabʿa as one of the most
frequent names who almost always diverged from ‘a’ mainstream reading by
Nāfiʿ. (Q. 88:11) tusmaʿu fīhā lāghiyatun was transmitted by Khārija as tasmaʿu
fīhā lāghiyatan.207 Other examples include (Q. 71:21) wa-waladuhu, read wa-
wulduhu by Khārija. This was the reading of AA, of whom Khārija was also a
direct transmitter. (Q. 66:8) naṣūḥan, read nuṣūḥan by Khārija, and (Q. 66:12)
wa-kitābihi, read wa-kutubihi also by Khārija—with an emphasis from Ibn
Mujāhid in the last two examples that only Khārija reported these variants
on behalf of N (ghayr Khārija ʿan Nāfiʿ). (Q. 52:21) bihim dhurriyyātihim, read
bihim dhurriyyatahum by Khārija. This was the reading of H, from whom
Khārija transmitted some variant readings.208 As a result, Ibn al-Jazarī com-
mented under the biographical entry of Khārija that he transmitted a great
deal of shudhūdh from Nāfiʿ and Abū ʿAmr, and that he was not followed by his
students/colleagues in transmitting these shawādhdh readings.209
Another case of problematic transmissions from Nāfiʿ would be those at-
tributed to Isḥāq al-Musayyabī (d. 206/821–2),210 one transmission of which I
would like to pay special attention to. (Q. 20:1) ṭa-ha was read in different ways
205 Ibid., 459.

206 Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:333; Dimyāṭī, Itḥāf, 414.
208 Ibid., 652–3, 641, 612. See also (Q. 23:111) annahum → innahum; (Q. 7:10) maʿāyisha →
maʿāʾisha; (Q. 8:65–6) takun … takun → yakun … yakun; ibid., 448–9, 278, 308.
210 (Q. 67:28) ahlakaniya → ahlakanī by N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf; (Q. 27:36) a-tumiddūnanī
→ a-tumiddūni by N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān; (Q. 19:1–2) kāf-hæ-yæ-ʿayn-ṣād dhikru →
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

56 CHAPTER 2
by Nāfiʿ’s transmitters; ṭa-ha, ṭe-he, and ṭǣ-hǣ were all reported on N’s behalf.
One interesting report concerning a transmission by N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn
Saʿdān (d. 231/845) related the following: “Ibn Saʿdān described the recitation
of al-Musayyabī in this verse to be ṭǣ-hǣ (yushimmuhā l-kasr). He cautioned
al-Musayyabī and told him: ‘You are reading [the verse] with imāla (qad kasar-
ta)’. Ibn Saʿdān continued: ‘Despite drawing his [al-Musayyabī’s] attention, he
denied that he was performing imāla. Instead, he stubbornly insisted that he
was reading in full fatḥ mode ( fa-ya‌ʾbā illā l-fatḥ)’ ”.211
A case related to the rāwī Ibn Jammāz (d. 170/786) (N → Ibn Jammāz) is
(Q. 52:28) annahu, which he transmitted as innahu.212 Ibn Jammāz seems to
have transmitted variant readings from A → Shuʿba as well. In one instance,
he diverged in the transmission from Shuʿba’s standard rendition of (Q. 22:45)
ahlaknāhā, for which he reported ahlaktuhā.213
The last case I will discuss concerns the great philologist and poetry col-
lector al-Aṣmaʿī (d. 216/831), who was a transmitter of Nāfiʿ’s Reading.214 The
few instances where Ibn Mujāhid introduced his transmissions on behalf of N
were examples of al-Aṣmaʿī’s divergence from the mainstream transmission of
N’s students. Due to confusion and disagreements amongst N’s students as to
whether one should read (Q. 22:25) wa-l-bādī or wa-l-bādi, al-Aṣmaʿī reported
the following: “Nāfiʿ read with a long vowel yāʾ, wa-l-bādī, and I asked him: ‘Is
it written as such in the muṣḥaf [i.e., with a yāʾ: ‫ ’?]وا �لب��ا د �ى‬He replied: ‘No, it
is not [i.e., without a yāʾ: ‫” ’]وا �لب��ا د‬.215 Similarly, (Q. 14:40) was commonly read
duʿāʾi by N’s transmitters, but al-Aṣmaʿī reported duʿāʾī.216 An interesting an-
ecdote was recorded under (Q. 12:31 and 51) where Nāfiʿ read ḥāsha. Al-Aṣmaʿī,
however, heard Nāfiʿ reciting ḥāshā. Ibn Mujāhid interjected and commented,
“this is according to the report” (ka-dhā fī l-ḥadīth),217 which suggests that the
information Ibn Mujāhid received concerning this particular transmission
was taken from a book or a notebook. This will be explored in more detail in
Chapter Four when I discuss the written transmission of Qirāʾāt.
kāf-ha-ya-ʿayn-ṣādh_dhikru by N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 645,

481–2, 406.
211 Ibid., 416.
212 Ibid., 613.
213 Ibid., 438.
216 Ibid., 363.
217 Ibid., 348.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

2 Summary and Notes
The examples I provided so far, in addition to the examples in the following

part of this chapter, show that a rāwī’s divergence from the consensus or the
mainstream transmission of his colleagues was a strong factor behind exclud-
ing him from representing the standard rendition of the eponymous Reader
or the canonical Rāwī. Several reasons account for this divergence, and they
could be summarized as follows:
1) Professionalism: the transmitter was not a professional Qurʾān reader.
There existed many amateur, undistinguished reciters who were fortu-
nate to have had the chance to study with acclaimed, professional Qurʾān
masters. The names of these amateur reciters were recorded in Qirāʾāt
manuals and biographical dictionaries, but we barely know anything
about them. They were mentioned in these sources only because of the
association they had with those eminent masters of Qirāʾāt. A certain
ʿUryān b. Abī Sufyān,218 for example, who was mentioned by Ibn Mujāhid
as a rāwī receiving transmissions from AA, can hardly be identified in
the biographical dictionaries. A quick look at Ibn al-Jazarī’s Ṭabaqāt dic-
tionary shows many names about whom nothing was recorded or known
except that they received a transmission from a well-known reader. The
numerous one-line biographical entries in Ghāyat al-nihāya is indicative
of the lack of information about these transmitters.219
2) Discipline specialism: the transmitter might have been an eminent schol-
ar of Ḥadīth or poetry or grammar or the Qurʾān itself, but he was not
specialized in the discipline of Qirāʾāt. One assumes that distinguished
names in Arabic grammar and language such as al-Aṣmaʿī, al-Mufaḍḍal,
and al-Khalīl b. Aḥmad would readily be considered trustworthy referenc-
es, especially when these authoritative figures on al-ʿarabiyya addressed
variants that exhibited grammatical or phonetic peculiarities. One might
also feel inclined to trust transmissions from meticulous and diligent
Ḥadīth scholars such as Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī (d. 277/890), ʿAbd Allāh b. Abī
Ḥanbal (d. 290/903), and Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī, or to endorse the opin-
ions of renowned Qurʾān scholars such as Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim b. Sallām
218 Ibid., 106.

219 For example, #2610 Qāsim al-Ḥaddād: he transmitted from Sulaym. Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad
al-Wazzān transmitted from him. #2608 al-Qāsim b. Hāshim Abū Muḥammad al-Simsār
al-Kūfī: he transmitted from Ḥamza, but his transmissions were infrequent/scarce (muq-
ill). Abū Ṭāhir mentioned him [in his book]. #1214 Khālid b. Jabala Abū l-Walīd al-Yashkurī
l-Madanī: He transmitted from Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ. Ḥammād b. Shuʿayb al-Bazzāz trans-
mitted from him; Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 2:24, 1:243.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

58 CHAPTER 2
and Abū ʿUbayda Maʿmar b. al-Muthannā (d. 209/824). Nevertheless,

specialization in the Qirāʾāt discipline was what distinguished first-rate,
professional Qurʾān readers from other scholars, just as specialization in
the disciplines of grammar or exegesis or Ḥadīth was what distinguished
scholars such as al-Mufaḍḍal, al-Khalīl, and Abū Ḥātim in their own dis-
ciplines. Despite their prominence in their own fields, their fame and
expertise did not help to establish them as authorities in the discipline
of Qirāʾāt. On the contrary, their opinions and transmissions were often
ignored, dismissed, and used as a reference for divergence and anomaly.
3) Vertical specialism: the transmitter might have been a professional Qurʾān
reader, but he did not specialize in a single Eponymous Reading. The
transmitter studied several System-Readings, though he did not dedi-
cate his professional career to perfecting and transmiting one particular
Qirāʾa. Naturally, this caused confusion and error when variants were at-
tributed to their original source/Eponym, especially when the methods
and techniques of studying, memorizing, and teaching multiple epony-
mous Readings had not been developed yet in the early, formative period
of Qirāʾāt scholarship. That being said, a handful of professional readers
did manage to become authorities in more than one System-Reading,
such as al-Dūrī and Khalaf al-Bazzār. Nonetheless, these individuals were
the exception and not the norm. Even first-class Readers, like al-Kisāʾī
and al-Aʿmash, confused variants and misattributed them to their origi-
nal transmitter.
4) Mentorship: the transmitter might have completed one or multiple full
auditions of the Qurʾān with his teacher, but he was not closely associ-
ated with that teacher for a considerable period of time. Thus, a strong
mentorship did not develop between master and student. A mentorship
such as that between ʿĀṣim and Ḥafṣ, Nāfiʿ and Qālūn, or Ḥamza and
al-Kisāʾī made the transmission of the eponymous Reading into some-
thing like an inheritance passed down from master to student. On the
other hand, readers who studied with a Qurʾān master for a short period,
or who joined his classes to be quickly certified for a samāʿ audition, were
expected to be less precise and thorough in their transmissions. It was a
common practice for scholars and Qurʾān readers to travel from one city
to another in order to obtain a “crash course” in one or more eponymous
Readings. Some of these scholars prepared a list of questions beforehand,
afterwards documenting the answers they received directly from the
readers with whom they studied.
5) Dissemination: the transmitter was a trustworthy, professional, special-
ized, and meticulous reader of the Qurʾān who could have passed on a
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

faithful rendition of the eponymous Reading he studied; however, the

transmitter did not dedicate his time to teaching, public recitation, and
private tutoring. Such transmitters were either occupied with other pro-
fessions and official positions, or they were simply not good at or interest-
ed in teaching. Ibn Mujāhid asserted in a statement that the reason which
drove him to rely on al-Yazīdī’s rendition of AA’s System-Reading was the
fact that al-Yazīdī dedicated his professional career to teaching and dis-
seminating the Reading of AA, even though other transmitters from AA
were more prominent and distinguished than al-Yazīdī. More important-
ly, al-Yazīdī, according to Ibn Mujāhid, did not occupy himself with any
other eponymous Reading except that of AA’s,220 a statement that sup-
ports the third aspect discussed above (vertical specialism). Another case
would be ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl, who was described as one of the most impor-
tant companions of AA (min akābir aṣḥāb Abī ʿAmr). Al-Dhahabī, how-
ever, said that the reason ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl did not gain fame in Qurʾānic
recitation and transmission of readings was due to his not dedicating his
professional career to public recitation and teaching (lam yajlis li-l-iqrāʾ).
ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl moved to Mosul where he was appointed its chief judge
and where he lived until he died. Al-Dhahabī stated the following: “I am
not familiar with anyone who studied with ʿAbbās except for ʿĀmir b.
ʿUmar al-Mawṣilī Ūqiyya (d. 250/864)”.221 Even if one considers ʿAbbās
b. al-Faḍl to have been more accurate in his transmissions than al-Yazīdī,
the fact that he did not dedicate time to teaching drove his transmissions
to be forgotten and to eventually become extinct.
6) Geographical affiliation: with very few exceptions, the transmitter’s back-
ground and geographical affiliation played an important role in deter-
mining his association with a particular eponymous Reading. In the
formative period of Qirāʾāt transmission, documentation, and dissemina-
tion, eponymous Readings were locally bound to their geographical tra-
dition. Thus, Baṣrans who wanted to study the Reading of the Medinans
might have either travelled to Medina and temporarily sojourned there,
or else looked for Baṣran readers who had already travelled to Madīna
and obtained credentials in one of the renditions attributed to Nāfiʿ or
Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī or Shayba b. Niṣāḥ. This temporary arrangement
prevented the “foreign” readers from mastering the local Reading of the
city they visited, notwithstanding the fact that having already been pre-
disposed to the local Reading they grew up studying and learning, it was
220 Ibid., 2:328.

221 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:337; Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 1:318, 320–1.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

60 CHAPTER 2
natural to subconsciously resist the newly acquired system Reading, to

which they were unaccustomed.
The following part of this chapter will further focus on the transmission prob-
lems documented in Kitāb al-Sabʿa. What do these transmission problems and
errors tell us about the early period of Qirāʾāt documentation? What was the
nature of these errors and who was responsible for propagating them? Most
importantly, who held the authority to determine the veracity or falsity of
these transmissions?
3 Sixty-Six Problematic Transmissions in Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa
… and didn’t Nāfiʿ know any Arabic?!

(wa-lam yakun yadrī mā l-ʿarabiyyatu?!)
Al-Māzinī
3.1 Forgetfulness, Lying, and Growing Senile

When Ibn Mujāhid embarked upon the project of collecting the Seven
Eponymous Readings, he wanted not only to limit the System-Readings to a
specific number, which happened to be seven, but also to standardize the ren-
ditions of these Seven Readings. The process was that of canonization within
canonization. The first step was to create a canon made up of seven systems
that were selected from several other existing Eponymous Readings. The next
step was to systematize the content of each of these Eponymous Readings,
since discrepancies and multiple transmissions for individual variants were
common within each System-Reading. Transmitters of the same Eponymous
Reading did not agree on all its particulars.222 The community of the Qurrāʾ tried
to emulate the system of isnād authentication developed by the muḥaddithūn.
As a result, Qirāʾāt collectors travelled to distant places in order to acquire
other transmissions of the Qurʾān, or even a handful of its ḥurūf (individual
variants), some of which were preserved by the professional Qurrāʾ. Some
Qurʾān readers travelled extensively simply to corroborate and authenticate
222 The two-Rāwī canon is a manifestation of this phenomenon of disagreement amongst

the transmitters of the Eponymous Reader. As we have seen earlier, in addition to the
standard two riwāyas per Reader, Qirāʾāt manuals are replete with transmissions that are
attributed to the eponymous Readers, albeit not through the two canonical Rāwīs. For
example, both A → Shuʿba and A → Ḥafṣ read (Q. 2:230) yubayyinuhā, but A → al-Mufaḍḍal
read nubayyinuhā. Another example would be (Q. 27:79) where N → al-Musayyabī and
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar were reported to have read ḍīqin, contrary to the standard reading by
N → Warsh and N → Qālūn, both of whom read ḍayqin; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 183, 485.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

a certain transmission from a System-Reading, or some of its individual vari-

ants, and to compare them to other transmissions attributed to different rāwīs.
The relationship between Qirāʾāt and Ḥadīth transmissions will be explored
in more depth in Chapter Three, but it is sufficient for now to state that the
more transmissions the Qurrāʾ acquired for a System-Reading, the more vari-
ants and discrepancies this eponymous Reading showcased. Variant readings
did not emerge only as an outcome of different interpretations or intelligent
deciphering of the ʿUthmānic consonantal outline (rasm), as Goldziher and
Nöldeke, and centuries before them al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1143), Ibn ʿAṭiyya
(d. 546/1151), and Ibn Khaldūn (d. 808/1406), had suggested;223 or as a conse-
quence of the deliberate modification of variants in order to accommodate cer-
tain local fiqh rulings, as Burton has proposed;224 or as a result of phonetic and
syntactical differences amongst various Arabic dialects (lughāt), as the Islamic
tradition argues.225 Variant readings also emerged due to transmission errors.
Ascribing transmission errors to the seven Eponymous Readers became un-
fathomable in later Muslim scholarship, since each Reading was in its entirety
authenticated beyond doubt (kull wāḥida min al-sabʿa mutawātira).226 Even
worse would be to attribute errors and oversights to the Companions, who
were all ʿudūl,227 (trustworthy) and scrupulous in their transmission, teach-
223 Ignác Goldziher, Die Richtungen der Islamischen Koranauslegung (Leiden: Brill, 1920),
4–20; Gotthelf Bergsträsser and Theodor Nöldeke, Geschichte des Qorâns: Die Geschichte
des Qorāntexts, 3 vols. (Leipzig: Dieterich’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1926), 3:116–56; Abū
l-Qāsim al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1143), al-Kashshāf ʿan ḥaqāʾiq ghawāmiḍ al-tanzīl wa-
ʿuyūn al-aqāwīl fī wujūh al-ta‌ʾwīl, ed. ʿĀdil ʿAbd al-Mawjūd and ʿAlī Muḥammad ʿAwaḍ,
6 vols. (Riyad: Maktabat al-ʿUbaykān, 1998), 2:400–1, 4:412; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Tafsīr, 1:48; ʿAbd
al-Raḥmān Ibn Khaldūn (d. 808/1406), al-Muqaddima, ed. ʿAbd al-Salām al-Shaddādī,
5 vols. (al-Dār al-Bayḍāʾ: Bayt al-funūn wa-l-ʿulūm wa-l-ādāb, 2005), 2:315–6; cf. Nasser,
Transmission, 6–15, 112.
224 John Burton, The Collection of the Qurʾān (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977),
165–86.
225 Muḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAẓīm al-Zurqānī, Manāhil al-ʿirfān fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān, ed. Fawwāz
Zamarlī, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1995), 1:130–58, 378–84.
226 Abū Zakariyyā l-Nawawī (d. 676/1277), al-Majmūʿ sharḥ al-Muhadhdhab li-l-Shīrāzī ed.
Muḥammad Najīb al-Muṭīʿī, 23 vols. (Jedda: Maktabat al-irshād, 1980), 3:358–9.
227 James Robson, “al-Ḏj̲arḥ wa ‘l-Taʿdīl,” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second edition. Brill
Online, Accessed 19 March 2013, available at http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/
entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/al-djarh-wa-l-tadil-SIM_2006. According to al-Khaṭīb
al-Baghdādī (d. 463/1069), the Companions were pure and flawless. Their ʿadāla was abso-
lute and needed not to be proven since God the Almighty proclaimed their trustworthiness
and reliability. The Companions were and will always be better than any individual evalu-
ated by Ḥadīth critics (innahum afḍalu min jamīʿ al-muʿaddalīn wa-l-muzakkīn al-ladhīna
yajīʾūna baʿdahum abada l-ābidīn); Abū Bakr al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī (d. 463/1069),
al-Kifāya fī ʿilm al-riwāya (Hyderabad: Dāʾirat al-maʿārif al-ʿuthmāniyya, 1938), 48–9.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

62 CHAPTER 2
ing, and copying of the ʿUthmānic codices, to the extent that some believed
that the Companions intentionally left out the voweling and dotting of the
rasm so that it could accommodate multiple readings.228 On the other hand,
the Islamic tradition was generally more open to the idea that Qurʾān read-
ers and transmitters could have committed transmission errors due to factors
such as forgetfulness, unscrupulousness, and senility (takhlīṭ). A few examples
from al-Dhahabī’s ṭabaqāt work may illustrate this point. Abū ʿAlī l-Wāsiṭī, also
known as Ghulām al-Harrās (d. 468/1075), was one of the prominent readers of
Iraq (shaykh al-qurrāʾ) noted for having had a full audition of the Qurʾān with
one of Ibn Mujāhid’s students. Ghulām al-Harrās was one-eyed, and he be-
came completely blind later in his life. When he grew older, he started confus-
ing the variants of different System-Readings with one another, and he claimed
the acquisition of some isnāds for which he never had auditions. He ended up
reporting bizarre variants or accounts (rawā ʿajāʾiba).229 Abū Jaʿfar al-Ḥassār
(d. 609/1212) was an Andalusian master Qurʾān reader, with whom both
al-Dhahabī and his father studied Qirāʾāt. By the age of eighty, al-Ḥassār grew
senile and began to incorrectly cite his isnāds.230 As for Abū Aḥmad al-Sāmirī
(d. 386/996), despite his negligence (ʿalā ḍaʿf minhu), he was the leading Qurʾān
reader of Egypt during his time. He studied with illustrious Qurʾān readers
such as Ibn Mujāhid, Ibn Shanabūdh (d. 328/939), and al-Ushnānī (d. 307/919).
Al-Sāmirī was an accurate, trustworthy, honest, and well-known individual.
“Unfortunately”, he lived long, and the quality of his memorization declined
(ikhtalla ḥifẓuhu). He also became delusional (laḥiqahu l-wahm). Al-Dhahabī
commented by saying that his best isnāds were in actuality through al-Sāmirī;
however, he was forced to discard them in order to maintain his integrity, as
several scholars had accused al-Sāmirī of plain forgery and lying (qabbaḥa
Allāh al-kadhiba wa-dhawīhi).231 A fourth example is Jamāl al-Dīn al-ʿAsqalānī
(d. 692/1292), a prominent Qurʾān reader of his time, who, despite being in-
flicted with hemiplegia ( fālij), continued to teach recitation. His memory de-
teriorated with time, to the extent that he used to execute impermissible waqf
228 Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3), al-Muḥkam fī naqṭ al-maṣāḥif, ed. ʿAzza Ḥasan (Beirut:
Dār al-fikr, 1997), 2–3; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 1:33; Taqī l-Dīn Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328),
Majmūʿat al-fatāwā, ed. ʿĀmir al-Jazzār and Anwar al-Bāz, 37 vols. (al-Manṣūra: Dār
al-wafāʾ, 2005), 12:316; Abū l-Faḍl (d. 454/1062) al-Rāzī, Maʿānī l-aḥruf al-sabʿa, ed. Ḥasan
Ḍiyāʾ al-Dīn ʿItr (Qatar: Wizārat al-awqāf wa-l-shuʾūn al-islāmiyya, 2011), 484–5; Abū Bakr
Ibn al-ʿArabī (d. 543/1148), al-ʿAwāṣim min al-qawāṣim, ed. ʿAmmār Ṭālibī (Cairo: Dār
al-turāth, 1974), 358. Cf. François Déroche, Qurʾans of the Umayyads (Leiden: Brill, 2014),
2–15; Alain George, “Coloured Dots and the Question of Regional Origins in Early Qur’ans
(Part I),” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 17, no. 1 (2015): 1–4.
229 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 2:813–15.
230 Ibid., 3:1152–4.
231 Ibid., 2:634–9; Dhahabī, Siyar, 14:226–7.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(pause) while performing the Reading of Ḥamza. A last example would be Abū
l-Ḥusayn al-Lawātī (d. 496/1102), who was a great scholar and Qurʾān reader
during his time in al-Andalus. He studied with two acclaimed figures, Makkī
l-Qaysī and al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3). Nevertheless, al-Lawātī was accused of
lying, fabricating isnāds and claiming to have had met renowned Qurʾān read-
ers whom he had never met.232
Besides the uncontrollable factors of faltering memory and old age, one
must acknowledge that the Qurʾān reciters, including the early generation of
the eponymous Readers, their rāwīs (transmitters), and their ṭuruq (channels),
were indeed humans, who could have erred in some of their transmissions.
Moreover, these qurrāʾ did challenge and reconsider certain variants they had
studied and taught, amending these variants accordingly. Ibn Mujāhid had
no qualms about pointing out the shortcomings and errors of the readers and
transmitters he documented in his book, including some of the eponymous
Readers and their canonical Rāwīs. Even Ibn Mujāhid’s own teacher, Qunbul
(d. 291/904), did not escape the scathing criticism and scrutiny of his appren-
tice, as we will see later.
3.2 Sixty-Six Problematic Transmissions

The following sixty-six examples comprise most of the cases in Kitāb al-Sabʿa
where Ibn Mujāhid openly disagreed with the readers regarding the validity
and correctness of the variants they transmitted. I documented all the cases
where Ibn Mujāhid deemed the variant itself to be erroneous or the transmis-
sion of the variant to be faulty. I avoided ambivalent statements in which Ibn
Mujāhid’s position was not pronounced. For example, in (Q. 2:102) la-mani
‿shtarāhu, Ibn Mujāhid stated that A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra transmitted la-mani
‿shtarēhu, with an a>e shift (imāla). He then commented, saying that ʿĀṣim
was not known to have performed imāla in this particular verse, and that he
used to read it with emphatic alif (tafkhīm).233 Even though this remark could
undoubtedly be interpreted as a transmission error on behalf of Hubayra—
and indeed it was an error that followed the pattern of other errors attributed
to Hubayra—234 I avoided referring to these instances in the examples below
in order to limit myself to the clear, unequivocal critical statements given by
Ibn Mujāhid. Note that in the previous part of this chapter, most of the exam-
ples I discussed were of the former category, where Ibn Mujāhid is silent about
the validity of the transmissions he documents.

234 Refer to the discussion on Hubayra on page 27.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

64 CHAPTER 2
Further, amongst the sixty-six transmission errors listed below, there are
instances where the Eponymous Readers or their Rāwīs were reported to
have abandoned certain variant readings and integrated new ones into their
System-Reading. This phenomenon caused conflicting transmissions between
the younger transmitters, who were educated in the “updated” version of the
System-Reading, and their senior colleagues, who were taught the older vari-
ants and continued transmitting an “outdated” version of the Eponymous
Reading.235 Most of the following examples reveal transmission errors and
discrepancies that emerged due to a human factor, such as doubt, inaccuracy,
forgetfulness, and even stubbornness, due to which some readers adamantly
adhered to certain variants which were rejected by most of their colleagues.
When Ibn Mujāhid judged a variant reading to be wrong, it did not necessar-
ily mean that he objected to the variant itself. The variant in question could
have been a standard entry in the system of another Eponymous Reading.
Therefore, Ibn Mujāhid was objecting in these cases to the channels through
which these variants were transmitted. The grammatical details and nuances
of many variants will be given in the footnotes below.236
1. (Q. 1:7) ghayri ‿l-maghḍūbi was read ghayra ‿l-maghḍūbi,237 through:
Ibn Kathīr → al-Khalīl b. Aḥmad al-Farāhīdī → Bakkār b. ʿAbd Allāh → Naṣr

b. ʿAlī → Abū Ḥamza al-Anasī.238
2. (Q. 2:256) qad tabayyana was read without assimilating the dāl with the
tāʾ,239 through:
235 Refer to Chapter four under the section of ‘Doubt and Retraction of Readings’,
pages 172–76.
236 Compare my analysis and findings with an unpublshed article I found online by al-Sālim
Muḥammad Maḥmūd Aḥmad, “al-Qirāʾāt allatī ḥakama ʿalayhā Ibn Mujāhid bi-l-ghalaṭ
wa-l-khaṭa‌ʾ” [np; nd].
237 Ghayra in the accusative is justified as a ḥāl when the verse is paraphrased to read ṣirāṭa
‿lladhīna anʿamta ʿalayhim lā maghḍūban ʿalayhim. Another possibility is the istithnāʾ
when the verse is paraphrased as illā ‿l-maghḍūba ʿalayhim. A third possibility is to consid-
er ghayra to be the direct object of an omitted verb aʿnī; thus, rephrasing the verse to say:
ṣirāṭa ‿lladhīna anʿamta ʿalayhim, aʿnī: ghayra ‿l-maghḍūbi ʿalayhim”; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 1:142–6.
238 Ibn Mujāhid was not satisfied with ghayra, read in the accusative, and objected to al-
Akhfash’s reasoning that ghayra could be justified as mustathnā; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 112.
239 The general rule of assimilation states that whenever two identical (mithlān) or simi-
lar ( jinsān) consonants follow one another, and the first of them is unvocalized (sākin),
the reader “must” assimilate it with the following consonant (lughatan wa-qirāʾatan); Ibn
al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:159. A whole section is designated in al-Shāṭibiyya to the rules of as-
similation of the dāl of qad; ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Qāḍī, al-Wāfī fī sharḥ al-Shāṭibiyya fī l-qirāʾāt
al-sabʿ (Jedda: Maktabat al-Sawādī li-l-tawzīʿ, 1999), 134–5.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Nāfiʿ → Isḥāq al-Musayyabī (the father) → al-Musayyabī (the son).240
3. (Q. 2:71) musallamatul_lā shiyata was recited without assimilating the

nūn of musallamatun241 with the following lām (musallamatun lā),
through:
N → al-Musayyabī.242
4. (Q. 2:31) hāʾulāʾi in and (Q. 46:32) awliyāʾu ulāʾika: these variants are ex-
amples that pertain to the principles of recitation concerning the articu-
lation and lenition of hamza.243 Both variants were read as hāʾulāyi in
and awliyāwu ulāʾika, through:
N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf,
N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī, and
N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī.244
5. (Q. 2:33) anbiʾhum was read anbiʾhim,245 through:
240 According to Ibn Mujāhid, to not assimilate the dāl with the tāʾ is bad Arabic (radīʾ) since
both sounds are articulated in a similar manner; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 115.
241 Cf. Dānī, Jāmiʿ, 1:720. The general rule of assimilation states that if the unvocalized nūn
of the tanwīn is followed by lām, assimilation takes place either with or without ghunna
(nasality). Refer to the uṣūl section in this book, item #6 of the subheading ‘Unvocalized
nūn and tanwīn’ on page 196. See also Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:23. The cause of the confusion
in the reading of musallamatun lā was perhaps the ghunna, which signalled the presence
of the nūn. Consequently, the Qurrāʾ gradually dispensed with the ghunna upon assimi-
lating the nūn with the lām to avoid such confusion.
242 This was also attributed to N → Qālūn, but other transmitters from Qālūn emphasized
that the latter did in fact perform assimilation (N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ al-Miṣrī). Ibn
Mujāhid stated that not performing assimilation in this case is difficult to realize (shadīd).
He expressed his doubts concerning the non-assimilation reading, postulating that the
transmitter might have performed partial assimilation (wa-lā aḥsibuhu arāda al-bayān
kullahu); Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 126.
243 Refer to the uṣūl section in this book, item #2 under the subheading ‘Two consecutive
hamzas in two words (al-hamzatān al-mutalāṣiqatān fī kalimatayn)’ on page 212.
244 Ibn Mujāhid stated that replacing a kasra-vocalized hamza with yāʾ and a ḍamma-vocalized
hamza with wāw is more difficult to pronounce than articulating the hamza in the first
place. Readers would not avoid an onerous articulation of letters and resort to a more
onerous pronunciation. Softening the first hamza to become wāw-like or yāʾ-like while
articulating the second (awliyāºu ulāʾika, hāʾulāºi in) is superior to replacing the hamza
with either yāʾ or wāw (ajwad al-wajhayn); Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 138.
245 There are two phonetic justifications for reading anbiʾhim, with a kasra on the hāʾ of the
third person object pronoun -hum. First, one could assume that the hāʾ follows the vowel
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

66 CHAPTER 2
Ibn ʿĀmir → Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith → Ibn Dhakwān → al-Akhfash

(al-Dimashqī).246
6. (Q. 2:36) fa-azallahumā ‿sh-shayṭānu247 was read fa-azēlahumā248 with

imālah (a>e shift), through:
Ḥamza → Abū ʿUbayd.249
7. (Q. 2:117) and (Q. 19:35) kun fa-yakūnu was read fa-yakūna by Ibn ʿĀmir.250
of the preceding bāʾ (itbāʿ) despite being separated by the hamza. This is similar to what
was reported on behalf of some Arabs: hādhā l-murʾu, wa-ra‌ʾaytu l-marʾa, wa-marartu
bi-l-mirʾi. Furthermore, a man from the tribe of Bakr allegedly said: akhadhtu hādhā
minhi wa-minhimā wa-minhimi. The same person was reported to have said: lam aʿrifihi
wa-lam aḍribihi … lam aḍribihimā. The second justification is similar to the first one, with
the exception that the speaker/reader simply ignores the existence of the hamza that
separates the two consonants. Consequently, the vowel of the hāʾ follows the vowel of
the bāʾ without considering that a hamza separates the two, as if one is saying ‘anbihim’.
This justification makes this case similar to the standard case of itbāʿ in bihi (vs. bihu) and
bihim (vs. bihum); Fārisī, Ḥujja, 2:11–12.
246 Ibn Mujāhid maintained that one cannot vowel the hāʾ with a kasra while articulating
the hamza. That being said, anbīhim, with the lenition of the hamza, would be perfectly
justified; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 153.
247 All seven and ten eponymous Readers read fa-azallahumā except Ḥamza, who read
fa-azālahumā; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:398. The reading of Ḥamza is hermeneutically
justified. (Q. 2:35) reads: “And We said, Adam, dwell thou, and thy wife, in the Garden,
and eat thereof easefully where you desire”. Dwell (uskun) could be understood to mean
uthbut (secure yourself, adhere to), where Satan “removed” them afterwards from the
Garden (azālahumā). Thus, the contrast between thabāt and zawāl makes the variant
fa-azālahumā justified and even favorable; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 2:15. Al-Akhfash (d. 215/833)
stated that fa-azallahumā, read with taḍʿīf (gemination), is more acceptable and the
common reading of his day (wa-bihā naqra‌ʾ); Abū l-Ḥasan al-Akhfash (d. 215/833), Maʿānī
l-Qurʾān, ed. Hudā Qurrāʿa (Cairo: Maktabat al-Khānjī, 1990), 1:73–4.
248 The imāla in fa-azēlahumā is compatible with Ḥamza’s general principles of imāla if one
considers the middle radical of the verb to be yāʾ. Thus, azālahumā would have the roots
zāy, yāʾ, and lām by assuming that the yāʾ is originally a wāw (munqaliba ʿan al-wāw).
Nonetheless, this particular reading with imāla entered the corpus of shawādhdh; ʿUkbarī,
Shawādhdh, 1:150–1; Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 12. On the general rules of imāla, refer to
Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:171–216. On shawādhdh al-Sabʿa, refer to the first half of this chapter.
249 Ibn Mujāhid objected to the transmission on behalf of Ḥamza and not to the variant
itself; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 154–5.
250 This verse and its variant readings were discussed in detail in Nasser, “Revisiting Ibn
Mujāhid”, 89–96. Ibn Mujāhid objected to Ibn ʿĀmir’s reading of the subjunctive
fa-yakūna, deeming this variant to be wrong; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 169, 409.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

8. (Q. 2:128) and (Q. 41:29) arinā251 was read arnā,252 through:
Ibn ʿĀmir → Ibn Dhakwān.253
9. (Q. 2:185) wa-li-tukmilū used to be read wa-li-tukammilū254 by Abū ʿAmr

b. al-ʿAlāʾ. However, he revised his reading and adopted the lightened
form tukmilū. As a result, both variants were transmitted on his behalf.255
10. (Q. 2:189) buyūt, (Q. 40:67) shuyūkh, (Q. 36:34) ʿuyūn, (Q. 5:109) ghuyūb,
and (Q. 24:31) juyūb were all the standard readings of ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ.256
Nevertheless, only (Q. 40:67) shuyūkh was read shiyūkh,257 through:
251 Nāfiʿ, Ḥamza, and al-Kisāʾī read arinā consistently throughout the whole Qurʾān. ʿĀṣim →
Shuʿba and Ibn ʿĀmir also read arinā except in (Q. 41:29) where they read arnā. There was
confusion as to how Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ vocalized the rāʾ; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:418–20.
252 arnā and (Q. 7:142) arnī are the standard readings of Ibn Kathīr and Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī,
of the Ten; ibid., 2:418–9. Al-Zajjāj (d. 311/923) considered the variant arnā to be repul-
sive. The case of devocalization (taskīn) here is different from other common cases such
as fakhdh (originally fakhidh) or ʿaḍd (originally ʿaḍud) since the original form of the
word is arʾinā, where the kasra must be kept on the rāʾ of arinā to signal the omission of
the hamza; Abū Isḥāq al-Zajjāj (d. 311/923), Maʿānī l-Qurʾān wa-iʿrābuh, ed. ʿAbd al-Jalīl
Shalabī, 5 vols. (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1988), 1:209. Al-ʿUkbarī discredited the variant
arnā and attributed it to a possible flaw in transmission (wa-qīla lam yaḍbiṭ al-rāwī ʿan
al-qāriʾ); Abū l-Baqāʾ al-ʿUkbarī (d. 616/1219), Imlāʾ mā manna bihi l-Raḥmān min wujūh
al-iʿrāb wa-l-qirāʾāt fī jamīʿ al-Qurʾān, ed. Ibrāhīm ʿAṭwa ʿAwaḍ, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub
al-ʿilmiyya, 1979), 1:63.
253 The standard reading of Ibn ʿĀmir is arinā. Hishām b. ʿAmmār, the second canonical Rāwī
of Ibn ʿĀmir, stated that arnā was wrongly attributed to Ibn ʿĀmir (khaṭa‌ʾ); Ibn Mujāhid,
Sabʿa, 170, 576.
254 wa-li-tukammilū is the standard reading of Yaʿqūb and ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba. All the other
Readers read wa-li-tukmilū in the lightened form; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:427.
255 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 176–7; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 2:274–5; Zajjāj, Maʿānī, 1:354.
256 Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, Yaʿqūb, Nāfiʿ → Warsh, and ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ con-
sistently read buyūt throughout the Qurʾān. Ḥamza, ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba consistently read
ghiyūb. Ibn Kathīr, Ḥamza, al-Kisāʾī, and Ibn ʿĀmir → Ibn Dhakwān consistently read
ʿiyūn, shiyūkh, and jiyūb. There is confusion whether ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba read jiyūb or juyūb:
Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Shuʿayb and Shuʿba → al-ʿUlaymī read juyūb, whereas Shuʿba →
Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Abū Ḥamdūn read jiyūb; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:427–8.
257 Ibn Mujāhid described these discrepancies in more detail: Ibn Kathīr, Ibn ʿĀmir, and
al-Kisāʾī consistently read ghuyūb, biyūt, and ʿiyūn. Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, Nāfiʿ → Warsh,
Nāfiʿ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar, Nāfiʿ → Ibn Jammāz, and ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ regularly
read ghuyūb, buyūt, ʿuyūn, juyūb, and shuyūkh. Nāfiʿ → al-Musayyabī read biyūt, ghuyūb,
ʿuyūn, juyūb, and shuyūkh. Nāfiʿ → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways and Ḥamza read ghiyūb, biyūt,
ʿiyūn, jiyūb, and shiyūkh. Nāfiʿ → al-Wāqidī read buyūt. ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam
read biyūt, ʿiyūn, ghiyūb, shiyūkh, and juyūb. ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra read shiyūkh,
ghuyūb, buyūt, ʿuyūn, and juyūb; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 178–9; cf. Fārisī, Ḥujja, 2:281–2. The
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

68 CHAPTER 2
ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra.258
11. (Q. 2:214) ḥattā yaqūla used to be read yaqūlu259 by al-Kisāʾī for a long
standard plural form of the singular nouns which belong to the patterns faʿil, faʿl, fiʿl, fuʿl,
and faʿal is fuʿūl. According to al-Fārisī, some might find the fiʿūl form to be repulsive since
it is inharmonious (qabīḥ) to have a ḍamma—the ū sound of fiʿūl—following a kasra.
However, there is always a tendency to replace the short vowels with others that are more
harmonious with the ensuing short or long vowel (itbāʿ), e.g. to say righīf, shiʿīr, and shihīd
instead of raghīf, shaʿīr, and shahīd. Al-Zajjāj said that fuʿūl was the more standard and
common plural form whereas fiʿūl was repulsive (radīʾa fī l-ʿarabiyya) and did not exist
in Arabic (laysa bi-aṣlin fī l-kalām wa-lā min amthilati l-jamʿ); Raḍī l-Dīn al-Istarābādhī
(d. 686/1287), Sharḥ Shāfiyat Ibn al-Ḥājib, ed. Muḥammad Muḥyī l-Dīn ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd
et al., 4 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1982), 2:90–3; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 2:282–4; Zajjāj,
Maʿānī, 1:480, 5:87.
258 Ibn Mujāhid objected to the transmission by Hubayra and not to the variant shiyūkh
because the standard transmission on behalf of Ḥafṣ was believed to be shuyūkh; Ibn
Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 179.
259 (Q. 2:214) reads “wa-zulzilū ḥattā yaqūl(a/u) ‿r-rasūlu wa-lladhīna āmanū maʿahu matā
naṣru ‿llāhi”. Generally speaking, there are four modes of ḥattā followed by the imperfect.
I will summarize them based on Talmon’s translation and study of the cases of ḥattā as
discussed in Sībawayhi’s (d. 180/796) al-Kitāb. The four modes of ḥattā are divided into
two categories: The imperfect-naṣb and the imperfect-rafʿ. In the naṣb category, ḥattā
denotes: 1) the end or the terminal point (ghāya) with no implication of purpose, and it
could be replaced by ilā an (until, the point to which); for example, “sirtu ḥattā adkhulahā”
(I travelled up to the point of entry into it). The second mode of ḥattā in the naṣb category
2) denotes an intention and could be replaced by kay (in order to). In the same example
above, “sirtu ḥattā adkhulahā” would translate to (I travelled in order to enter it). In the
rafʿ category, ḥattā 3) precedes the verb which is an immediate consequence to the event
expressed by the main verb; thus, “sirtu ḥattā adkhuluhā” would translate to (I travelled,
then I entered it). Finally, ḥattā 4) precedes the verb which describes an event simultane-
ous with the speaker’s utterance, and the same example above would translate to (I have
travelled and I am entering it now). Even though these four modes of ḥattā precede the
verb in the imperfect, the actual tense of the verb could be in the past, present (ḥāl), and
future. Taking (Q. 2:214) “wa-zulzilū ḥattā yaqūl(a/u) ‿r-rasūlu wa-lladhīna āmanū maʿahu
matā naṣru ‿llāhi” as an example, one should expect the following four shades of mean-
ing: 1) [ḥattā yaqūla (past) = ilā an qāla] “and they were agitated until/to the point that
the apostle said, and those who believed with him, ‘When will the help of God come?’ ”
2) [ḥattā yaqūla (future)=kay yaqūla] “and they were agitated that the apostle might
say …” 3) [ḥattā yaqūlu (ḥāl in the past [ḥikāyat ḥāl māḍiya]) = fa-qāla) “and they were ag-
itated. Then the apostle said …” 4) [ḥattā yaqūlu (present/ḥāl) = yaqūlu al-āna] “and they
were agitated until the apostle is saying now …”; Zajjāj, Maʿānī, 1:285; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 2:305–
7; ʿUkbarī, Imlāʾ, 1:91; Abū ʿAbd Allāh Ibn Khālawayhi (d. 370/980–1), al-Ḥujja fī l-qirāʾāt
al-sabʿ, ed. ʿAbd al-ʿĀl Sālim Mukarram (Beirut: Dār al-shurūq, 1979), 95–6; cf. William
Wright, A Grammar of the Arabic Language, 2 vols. (Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1996), 2:29–
31; Rafael Talmon, “Ḥattā + Imperfect and Chapter 239 in Sībawayhī’s Kitāb: a Study in the
Early History of Arabic Grammar,” Journal of Semitic Studies XXXVIII, no. 1 (Spring 1993):
71–95. Al-Kisāʾī, al-Farrāʾ, and al-Ṭabarī further break down the categorization of ḥattā
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

time, but he modified his reading later on to yaqūla.260

12. (Q. 2:230) yubayyinuhā261 was read nubayyinuhā,262 through:
ʿĀṣim → al-Mufaḍḍal, and

ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī → Ibn Ḥayyān.263
13. (Q. 2:273) yaḥsabuhum264 used to be read as such by ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ, but
Ḥafṣ changed his reading to yaḥsibuhum,265 through:
according to the nature of the verb preceding it, namely, if the verb is mutaṭāwil (dura-
tive/prolonged) or ghayr mutaṭāwil (punctual/non-durative). If the verb preceding ḥattā
is ghayr mutaṭāwil, then the most eloquent usage in Arabic (al-faṣīḥ min kalām al-ʿarab)
is using rafʿ with the following verb, e.g. “qumtu ilā fulānin ḥattā aḍribuhu” since the verb
qāma is not durative or repetitive. However, if the main verb is mutaṭāwil, proper (Arabic)
speech necessitates naṣb in the second verb, e.g. “mā zāla fulānun yaṭlubuka ḥattā yu-
kallimaka” or “jaʿala yanẓuru ilayka ḥattā yuthbitaka” since mā zāla and jaʿala are dura-
tive/repetitive (mutaṭāwil al-mudda). According to al-Ṭabarī, the verb zulzilū in (Q. 2:214)
means to be agitated or apprehensive of the enemy; thus, the verb is repetitive and pro-
longed. Therefore, the correct and more eloquent reading is “ḥattā yaqūla” in the naṣb
mode ( fa-ṣ-ṣaḥīḥu min al-kalām alladhī lā yaṣiḥḥu ghayruhu, al-naṣb bi-ḥattā); Abū Jaʿfar
al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923), Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān, ed. ʿAbd Allāh al-Turkī, 26 vols.
(Cairo: Dār Hajar, 2001), 3:638–9. According to al-Farrāʾ, the anomalous reading of Ibn
Masʿūd confirms the meaning of the naṣb reading: “wa-zulzilū thumma zulzilū wa-yaqūlu
‿r-rasūlu” where the repetition of zulzilū indicates the durative/prolonged nature of the
verb; Abū Zakariyyā l-Farrāʾ (d. 207/822), Maʿānī l-Qurʾān, ed. Muḥammad ʿAlī al-Najjār
and Aḥmad Najātī, 3 vols. (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1983), 1:132–3; Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī,
Tafsīr, 2:149.
260 ḥattā yaqūlu is the standard reading of Nāfiʿ; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 181–2.
261 This is the standard reading of all the ten eponymous Readers.
262 (Q. 2:230) reads “wa-tilka ḥudūdu ‿llāhi yu/nubayyinuhā li-qawmin yaʿlamūna”. The read-
ing nubayyinuhā is justified when considered to be an instance of iltifāt (pronominal
shift), which is regarded as an eloquent rhetoric technique when used properly. The vari-
ant of (Q. 2:230) was not thoroughly discussed in Qirāʾāt and tawjīh (justification; ʿilal)
manuals; Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 2:213.
263 Ibn Mujāhid objected to the transmission of the variant and not to its morphological
form; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 183. Al-Dānī documented that Nāfiʿ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Ibn
Jubayr read nubayyinuhā, but al-Dānī stated that this was an error on behalf of Ibn Jubayr;
Dānī, Jāmiʿ, 2:140.
264 yaḥsabuhum and (Q. 3:278) taḥsabanna are the standard readings of Ibn ʿĀmir, ʿĀṣim and
Ḥamza.
265 yaḥsibuhum and (Q. 3:278) taḥsibanna are the standard readings of Ibn Kathīr, Nāfiʿ, Abū
ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, and al-Kisāʾī. According to al-Fārisī, the imperfect of ḥasiba could either
be yaḥsabu or yaḥsibu (ḥasibtu l-shayʾa aḥsabuhu wa-aḥsibuhu). However, yaḥsabu, and
consequently the reading yaḥsabuhum are more standard (aqyas) because the imperfect
form of faʿila is usually yafʿalu, e.g. fariqa—yafraqu and shariba—yashrabu. Nonetheless,
faʿila could also take the imperfect form of yafʿilu in rare cases (shadhdha fa-jāʾa ʿalā
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

70 CHAPTER 2
14. (Q. 2:283) fa-l-yuʾaddi ‿lladhī ‿ʾtumina was read fa-l-yuʾaddi ‿lladhī
uʾutumina,267 through:268
ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba/Ḥafṣ → Yaḥyā b. Ādam.269
It was also read fa-l-yuʾaddi ‿lladhī ʾutumina,270 through:
yafʿilu). The imperfect form yafʿilu of faʿila is valid (ḥasan) since it was transmitted and
recorded aurally (samʿ/samāʿ) despite violating the standard form (wa-in kāna shādhdhan
ʿan al-qiyās); Fārisī, Ḥujja, 2:402–3.
266 The standard reading of Ḥafṣ is yaḥsabuhum; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 191.
267 I use the superscript u to denote a phonetic value of ḍamm less/shorter than the com-
monly known full value of ḍamma. This phonetic phenomenon is due to either ikhtilās or
ishmām. In this verse, readers and grammarians contended whether the hamza may be
subject to ishmām or not. Here, ishmām could either mean giving the hamza a trace or a
slight value (literally, the scent) of ḍamma, or bringing the lips of the reader together to
signal a silent/fake ḍamma without actually producing its sound, only as a reminder to
the listener/viewer that even though the generated sound is a devocalized hamza, there
exists an invisible ḍamma that should have otherwise been pronounced. It is a reminder
that a grammatical or phonetic reason disturbed the conventional way of pronunciation
and forced the ḍamma to be dropped. A standard example of ishmām is (Q. 12:11) “qālū yā
abānā mālaka lā ta‌ʾmannā” where the ten Readers, except Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī, execut-
ed ishmām in ta‌ʾmaṉṉā. Originally, ta‌ʾmannā is derived from ta‌ʾmanunā where the two
nūns are assimilated together. In order to not confuse lā al-nāfiya before ta‌ʾmannā with
lā al-nāhiya (prohibitive), Qurʾān readers bring their lips together in order to simulate a
ḍamma. They articulate the double nn without producing a ḍamm-sound, and only to sig-
nal the omitted ḍamma; Abū l-Qāsim al-Nuwayrī (d. 857/1453), Sharḥ Ṭayyibat al-Nashr fī
l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, ed. Majdī Bāslūm, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 2002), 1:357–8.
268 The problem with this reading is two-fold. First, is it acceptable to articulate hamzat
al-waṣl of uʾtumina in the non-pausal mode (idrāj or istiʾnāf)? Naturally, in the pausal
mode this poses no problem, since we cannot begin the sentence with ʾtumina; hence
the need to vocalize hamzat al-waṣl and say uʾtumina. However, in the idrāj mode, it is
absolutely unacceptable to articulate hamzat al-waṣl, although in the pausal mode it is
possible to say ūtumina. That being said, al-Kisāʾī was reported to have allowed ʾtumina;
ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 1:293. The second problem will be discussed below.
269 Ibn Mujāhid refused to articulate hamzat al-waṣl and vocalize the second hamza with any
value of ḍamm, be it regular or ishmām (wa-hādhihi al-tarjama lā tajūz lughatan aṣlan).
He insisted that the second original hamza must be articulated with sukūn (wa-hādhā
khaṭa‌ʾun lā yajūz illā taskīn al-hamza); Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 195. Most grammarians and
Qirāʾāt scholars agree with Ibn Mujāhid. Ibn Khālawayhi described the reading with
ishmām to be a wahm (misinterpretation/oversight); Ibn Khālawayhi, Ḥujja, 105.
270 The problem with this second variant reading is executing ishmām to signal for the
ḍamma carried by the omitted alif al-waṣl. Abū ʿAlī l-Fārisī provided a lengthy explanation
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Ḥamza → Sulaym → Khalaf [and others].271
15. (Q. 3:59) kun fa-yakūnu was read fa-yakūna by Ibn ʿĀmir.272 However,
it was reported that Ibn ʿĀmir [→ Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith] → Ayyūb b. Tamīm
used to read fa-yakūna but modified his reading later on to fa-yakūnu.273
as to how ishmām could not possibly be performed in this case. In short, the vowel that is
signalled with the hamza should 1) originally belong to the hamza, 2) belong to the con-
sonant preceding the hamza, or 3) belong to the consonant following the hamza. 1) The
hamza of the verb uʾtumina carries no vowel since the verb belongs to form uftuʿila whose
first radical fāʾ is unvocalized. 2) There is no instance in the Arabic language where the
vowel of the preceding consonant is given to the one following it. 3) When the second
consonant gives its vowel to the one preceding it, the original vowel is removed or ex-
changed with another one (ibdāl). However, in the case of uʾtumina, the following radical,
tāʾ, maintains its ḍamma, which means that it is not given to the preceding consonant,
the hamza. Since none of these possibilities is viable in the case of uʾtumina, performing
ishmām at the hamza to signal for an omitted ḍamma is wrong and unjustified; Fārisī,
Ḥujja, 2:450–4. There are several other readings of this verse and they are all attributed
to the seven Readers. For example, Nāfiʿ → Warsh, ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā, and Abū
ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ read ‿lladhī-tumina. [N →] Warsh → Ismāʿīl al-Naḥḥās read ‿lladhī iʾtumina,
which was deemed to be wrong by al-Dānī, in addition to ‿lladhī itumina by Ibn Kathīr →
al-Khuzāʿī, Ibn ʿĀmir → Hishām b. ʿAmmār → al-Ḥulwānī, ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Ibn Jubayr, and
Ibn ʿĀmir → Ibn Dhakwān → al-Akhfash → al-Anṭākī, by performing an unusual lengthen-
ing of the yāʾ of alladhī, which is considered to be unacceptable. ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā
b. Ādam → Khalaf was also reported to have read both ‿lladhī itumina and ‿lladhī itumina.
Also regarded to be a wrong reading was ‿lladhī ūtumina by Ibn Kathīr → al-Bazzī → Abū
Rabīʿa and Ibn Kathīr → al-Bazzī → Ibn al-Ḥubāb. Another reading deemed to be wrong
by al-Dānī was ‿lladhī uʾtumina through Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → al-Yazīdī → ʿAbd Allāh b.
Yaḥyā l-Yazīdī. In addition to the two aforementioned transmissions in ishmām (‿lladhī
ʾutumina) on behalf of Ḥamza and ʿĀṣim, al-Dānī added Ibn ʿĀmir → Ibn Dhakwān/
Hishām → al-Dājūnī. Furthermore, the reading ‿lladhī uʾtumina by ʿĀṣim → Yaḥyā b. Ādam
→ al-Wakīʿī/Ibn Shākir/al-ʿIjlī/Mūsā b. Ḥizām, ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya, and
ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → al-Ushnānī was also considered to be wrong. Likewise, ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ →
ʿAmr [b. al-Ṣabbāḥ?] → Ibn al-Yatīm read ‿lladhī utumina, which was also deemed to be
wrong and unacceptable; Dānī, Jāmiʿ, 2:172–8.
272 Refer to (Q. 2:117) in transmission Error #7.
273 The report indicates that Ayyūb b. Tamīm modified his reading independently. We do
not know if he attributed the change to himself or to Ibn ʿĀmir → Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith; Ibn
Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 206–7.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

72 CHAPTER 2
16. (Q. 26:36) and (Q. 7:111) qālū arjih wa-akhāhu274 was read arjiʾhi275 by Ibn
ʿĀmir → Ibn Dhakwān.276
274 Ibn Kathīr read arjiʾhū. Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, Ibn ʿĀmir → Hishām b. ʿAmmār, ʿĀṣim →
Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Hārūn b. Ḥātim, and probably (rubbamā) ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba →
Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf read arjiʾhu. Nāfiʿ → al-Musayyabī/Qālūn read arjihi. Al-Kisāʾī,
Nāfiʿ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar/Warsh and Nāfiʿ → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf/Ibn Saʿdān read arjihī.
Ibn ʿĀmir → Ibn Dhakwān read arjiʾhi. ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya → Muḥammad
b. al-Jahm, ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Aḥmad al-Wakīʿī → Ibrāhīm b. Aḥmad
al-Wakīʿī read arjiʾh. Ḥamza, ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī
→ Mūsā b. Isḥāq, ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf/Ibn Shākir, ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba
→ al-Kisāʾī/al-Aʿshā, and ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → [all but Hubayra]/ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ read arjih.
ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra read arjih in (Q. 7:111), nevertheless, he read arjihi in (Q. 26:36);
ibid., 207–212; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:57–60.
275 Ibn Mujāhid refused to vocalize the hāʾ with a kasra and deemed the reading to be wrong
(hādhā ghalaṭun. Lā yajūz kasr al-hāʾ maʿa al-hamz); Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 210. Al-Fārisī
agreed with Ibn Mujāhid and stated as much (kasr al-hāʾ maʿa l-hamz ghalaṭun lā yajūz).
It would have been acceptable if the hāʾ were preceded by yāʾ or kasra. If the hamza is
articulated, the only reading al-Fārisī accepts is arjiʾhu without prolonging the ḍamma
into becoming a wāw (arjiʾhū), similar to how Ibn Kathīr read it, as this hāʾ is almost
silent (khafiyya), and as generating a long wāw afterwards would result in bringing two
sukūns, one after the other, creating the illusion of reading arjiʾh-ū; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:60–3.
Al-ʿUkbarī agreed with al-Fārisī and said that lengthening the ḍamma to become a wāw
(ishbāʿ) was weak (ḍaʿīf), and that arjiʾhu was the better reading; ʿUkbarī, Imlāʾ, 1:281.
276 Al-Ṭabarī explained that articulating the hamza of the verb arja‌ʾtu was a dialectal fea-
ture of some tribes from Qays. However, hamza lenition was characteristic of Tamīm and
Asad, who used to say arjaytu. Al-Ṭabarī’s preferred reading of (Q. 7:111) was arjihi because
it was the most eloquent and dominant usage among the most eloquent Arabs (afṣaḥ
al-lughāt wa-aktharuhā ʿalā alsun fuṣaḥāʾi l-ʿarab); al-Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ al-bayān, 10:349–50.
As for the reading of arjih by Ḥamza and ʿĀṣim, al-Zajjāj said that this was a reading
the expert grammarians (al-ḥudhdhāq bi-l-naḥw) were not familiar with. Even though
some grammarians claimed that it might be possible to devocalize the hā, vocalizing it
is more proper; Zajjāj, Maʿānī, 2:365. Al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī (d. 756/1355) commented on all
these readings and said that all six variants of the verse were known and mutawātira.
The opinions of those who rejected and denied the validity of some of these readings
carry no weight; Aḥmad b. Yūsuf al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī (d. 756/1355), al-Durr al-maṣūn fī
ʿulūm al-kitāb al-maknūn, ed. Aḥmad al-Kharrāṭ, 11 vols. (Damascus: Dār al-qalam, 1985),
5:409–12.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

17. (Q. 3:81)277 lamā278 was read limā,279 through:
277 The full verse reads: “wa-idh akhadha ‿llāhu mīthāqa ‿n-nabiyyīna la/limā ātaytukum min
kitābin wa-ḥikmatin thumma jāʾakum rasūlun muṣaddiqun limā maʿakum la-tuʾminunna
bihi wa-la-tanṣurunnahu”.
278 Grammarians and exegetes have struggled to find a proper interpretation for the function
and meaning of lamā in this verse. There are five different interpretations of lamā, which
could be categorized under two main sets, based on which the translation of the verse
would differ slightly. The first set considers lamā to be a relative pronoun that could be re-
placed with alladhī. The lām of lamā is lām al-ibtidāʾ and the mā functions as the subject
of a nominal sentence, where the oath clause “la-tuʾminunna bihi” would function as the
predicate. The verse would translate to, according to the standard translation by Arberry:
“And when God took compact with the Prophets: ‘That I have given you of Book and
Wisdom; then there shall come to you a Messenger confirming what is with you—you
shall believe in him and you shall help him’ ”. The second set considers mā to be a condi-
tional particle/noun and the direct object of the verb ātaytukum. The lām of lamā is called
lām al-muwaṭṭiʾa, whose function is to introduce an oath clause. The verse would translate
to say: “And when God took compact with the Prophets: ‘Whatever I give you of Book and
Wisdom; then there shall come to you a Messenger confirming what is with you—you
shall believe in him and you shall help him’ ”; Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Qurṭubī (d. 671/1273),
al-Jāmiʿ li-aḥkām al-Qurʾān, ed. ʿAbd Allāh al-Turkī, 24 vols. (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla,
2006), 5:189–91; Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 2:531–5; Zajjāj, Maʿānī, 1:436–7; ʿUkbarī,
Imlāʾ, 1:141–2; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 3:284–95; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 5:535–8; Fārisī, Ḥujja,
3:62–8. Al-Ṭabrisī (d. 548/1154) ended his discussion of these variants by saying that this
verse was one of the problematic verses of the Qurʾān (min mushkilāt āyāt al-Qurʾān) and
that the grammarians delved into various ways to interpret it and understand its com-
plex iʿrab. They were so diligent and comprehensive that they were capable of splitting a
hair with their scrupulous and thorough analysis; Abū ʿAlī l-Ṭabrisī (d. 548/1154), Majmaʿ
al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān, 10 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-ʿulūm, 2005), 2:268–70.
279 This is also the standard reading of Ḥamza. In addition to the two main sets of interpreta-
tions of lamā discussed above, limā also has two interpretations. The first, which most
scholars agree on, considers the lām to be for justification (lām al-taʿlīl), which could be
replaced with min ajl. Thus, the verse would translate to: “And when God took compact
with the Prophets: ‘because of what I have given you of Book and Wisdom; then there
shall come to you a Messenger confirming what is with you—you shall believe in him
and you shall help him’ ”. The second interpretation of the lām could have the meaning
of baʿda (after), and the verse would translate to: “And when God took compact with the
Prophets: ‘after what I have given you of Book and Wisdom; then there shall come to you
a Messenger confirming what is with you—you shall believe in him and you shall help
him’ ”; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 3:287–90. See the sources mentioned in the preceding
footnote.
280 Even though limā was Ḥamza’s standard reading, Ibn Mujāhid objected to the transmis-
sion of this variant on behalf of Hubayra, emphasizing that lamā was the known and
standard transmission of ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 213.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

74 CHAPTER 2
18. (Q. 3:97) ḥijju ‿l-bayti was read as such by Ḥamza, al-Kisāʾī, and ʿĀṣim →
Ḥafṣ. The other Readers read ḥajju instead of ḥijju. Ḥafṣ was reported to
have said: ḥajj is a common noun (ism) where as ḥijj is a verbal noun. Ibn
Mujāhid objected to the justification of Ḥafṣ.281
19. (Q. 4:36) wa-l-jāri ‿l-junubi282 was read wa-l-jāri ‿l-janbi,283 through:
ʿĀṣim → al-Mufaḍḍal → Abū Zayd.284
20. (Q. 6:90) fa-bi-hudāhumu ‿qtadih qul285 was read fa-bi-hudāhumu ‿qta-
dihi qul286 by Ibn ʿĀmir.
281 Ibn Mujāhid stated that this justification was wrong (ghalaṭ) and that ḥajj is the verbal
noun, whereas ḥijj is the common noun; ibid., 214; Ibn Khālawayhi, Ḥujja, 112; Fārisī, Ḥujja,
3:70–3.
282 This is the standard reading of all Ten Eponymous Readers.
283 Junub is an adjective of the pattern fuʿul, often used for the masculine, feminine, dual,
and plural without agreement with the modified noun; for example, suruḥ, kufuʾ, furuṭ,
etc. On the other hand, janb is an adjective of the pattern faʿl, such as rajul ʿadl; al-Samīn
al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 3:675–6.
284 Ibn Mujāhid was not content with al-Mufaḍḍal’s transmission. He commented by say-
ing that none but al-Mufaḍḍal came up with/transmitted this variant (wa-lam ya‌ʾti bihā
ghayruhu); Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 233.
285 This is the reading of Ibn Kathīr, Nāfiʿ, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlā, and ʿĀṣim where they articu-
lated an unvocalized hāʾ during waṣl (non-pausal) mode. Ḥamza and al-Kisāʾī articulated
the hāʾ in the pausal mode (waqf) but read fa-bi-hudāhumu ‿qtadi qul in the waṣl mode.
286 Ibn Mujāhid refused to vocalize the hāʾ of iqtadih. The hāʾ is hāʾ al-sakt, which is suffixed
to certain words during waqf mode and ought not carry any vowel. Ibn Mujāhid deemed
the reading by Ibn ʿĀmir to be wrong; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 262. Al-Fārisī prefered the waqf
mode at all accounts and defended Ibn ʿĀmir’s reading only if the hāʾ did not function
as hāʾ al-sakt but was rather treated to be a pronoun hinting at the maṣdar of the verb to
which the hāʾ was attached to. Thus, the hāʾ in iqtadihi would refer to iqtidāʾ. This is simi-
lar to “hādhā Surāqatu li-l-Qurʾāni yadrusuhu” where the hāʾ in yadrusuhu does not refer
to the Qurʾān but to the maṣdar, al-dars, thus, the sentence could be paraphrased to say
“hādhā Surāqatu yadrusu al-darsa li-l-Qurʾāni”; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 3:351–3; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī,
Tafsīr, 5:31–3.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

21. (Q. 6:109) wa-mā yushʿirukum annahā.287 Yaḥyā b. Ādam claimed that
Shuʿba did not memorize from ʿĀṣim288 whether he read innahā289 or
annahā.290
22. (Q. 7:10) maʿāyisha291 was read maʿāʾisha,292 through:
287 The full verse reads: “wa-aqsamū bi-llāhi jahda aymānihim la-in jāʾat-hum āyatun
la-yuʾminunna bihā; qul innamā ‿l-āyātu ʿinda ‿llāhi wa-mā yushʿirukum a/innahā idhā
jāʾat lā yuʾminūna”.
289 ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī, ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā, ʿĀṣim → Dāwūd al-Awdī, Ibn
Kathīr, and Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ read innahā. This reading necessitates a disassociation
between “mā yushʿirukum” and “innahā”, which would render the verse to say: “They have
sworn by God the most earnest oaths if a sign comes to them they will believe in it”. Thus,
if we use punctuation in this verse and read innahā, the verse becomes: “… qul innamā
l-āyātu ʿinda ‿llāhi. Wa-mā yushʿirukum? Innahā idhā …”.
290 Nāfiʿ, ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ, Ḥamza, al-Kisāʾī, and Ibn ʿĀmir read annahā. Arberry’s interpreta-
tion considered annahā and translated the verse to say: “They have sworn by God the
most earnest oaths if a sign comes to them they will believe in it. Say: ‘Signs are only with
God.’ What will make you realize that, when it comes, they will not believe?” However,
grammarians and the exegetes considered this interpretation to be improbable. They ar-
gued that annahā could not be understood as a conjunction “that” which introduces an
independent nominal sentence, otherwise the verse would be misunderstood. Sībawayhi
asked al-Khalīl why he preferred reading innahā, and why the verse could not be read
with annahā. Al-Khalīl answered that if the verse were to be read as such, then God was
defending the non-believers by stating that they “will” believe when the signs come. This
is similar to the following example: someone says “Zayd does not believe”, “inna Zaydan lā
yuʾminu”, but you then ask, “how would you know that he does not believe?” (mā yudrīka
annahu lā yuʾminu?). The underlying meaning here is that Zayd “does actually” believe
( fa-l-maʿnā annahu yuʾminu). Nonetheless, annahā could be justified in two ways; first, it
has the meaning of laʿalla, and the verse would be translated as: “They have sworn by God
the most earnest oaths if a sign comes to them they will believe in it. Say: ‘Signs are only
with God.’ And what/how would you know? Maybe when it comes, they will not believe”.
Second, annahā could be the normal conjunction “that” which precedes an independent
nominal sentence, only if lā in lā yuʾminūna is treated as accessorial (zāʾida) and thus
has no negation function. Therefore, the verse would be translated as “They have sworn
by God the most earnest oaths if a sign comes to them they will believe in it. Say: ‘Signs
are only with God.’ What will make you realize that, when it comes, they will believe?”
This means that when the signs come, the addressed people will not believe; Fārisī, Ḥujja,
3:375–82; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 5:101–7; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 9:484–9.
291 Maʿāyisha is the plural of maʿīsha, a maṣdar of the verb ʿāsha—yaʿīshu. Therefore, the
yāʾ is a radical and not incidental. Thus, it should be retained rather than replaced by a
hamza.
292 According to grammarians, those who read maʿāʾisha and articulated the hamza made
a mistake in analogy (qiyās). The pattern of maʿīsha is mafʿila or mafʿula—according to
Sībawayhi and al-Khalīl—or mafʿala—according to al-Farrāʾ. One is allowed to articulate
the hamza when the long vowel is incidental in the word and not an original radical, such
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

76 CHAPTER 2
Nāfiʿ → Khārija.293
23. (Q. 7:123) qāla Firʿawnu āmantum294 was read qāla Firʿawnu wa-
āmantum295 by
IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul → IM.
24. (Q. 7:128) yūrithuhā296 was read yuwarrithuhā,297 through:
as ṣaḥāʾif and madāʾin (sing. ṣaḥīfa and madīna both in which the yāʾ is additional and
not a radical). As for maʿīsha, the yāʾ is an original radical since maʿīsha comes from ʿaysh.
Al-Fārisī discussed this reading with al-Māzinī and confirmed that it was transmitted
on behalf of Nāfiʿ. Al-Māzinī replied: “… and didn’t he [Nāfiʿ] know any Arabic? (wa-lam
yakun yadrī mā l-ʿarabiyyatu?); Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:6–9; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 5:257–60.
Al-Ṭabarī said that this reading, i.e. maʿāʾisha, was not faṣīḥ Arabic and one should read
the Qurʾān using the most eloquent and articulate language without resorting to irregular
and renounced usages in the language (wa-laysa dhālika bi-l-faṣīḥ fī kalāmihā [i.e. Arabs].
Wa-awlā mā quriʾa bihi kitāb Allāh min al-alsun afṣaḥuhā wa-aʿrabuhā wa-aʿrafuhā dūna
ankarihā wa-ashadhdhihā); Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 10:73–5. Al-Zajjāj emphasized that all Baṣran
grammarians agreed that articulating the hamza in maʿāyisha was wrong. He continued
by saying that he could not justify this reading by Nāfiʿ; Zajjāj, Maʿānī, 2:320–1. Abū Ḥayyān
responded by saying that those who transmitted the reading maʿāʾisha were trustworthy
(thiqāt) and should not be dismissed. Moreover, Abū Ḥayyān continued, one should not
worship the words of the Baṣran grammarians (wa-lasnā mutaʿabbidīna bi-aqwāl nuḥāt
al-Baṣra) and should care less for their disapproval of this reading (wa-lā mubālāta
bi-mukhālafati nuḥāt al-Baṣra fī mithl hādhā); Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 4:271.
293 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 278. In addition to Nāfiʿ → Khārija, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Aʿraj, a
Medinese, Zayd b. ʿAlī, al-Aʿmash, and probably Ibn ʿĀmir through one anonymous trans-
mission had allegedly read maʿāʾisha and articulated the hamza; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 10:73–5;
Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 48; Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 4:271.
294 IK → al-Bazzī and IK → Ibn Fulayḥ read qāla Firʿawnu a-ºāmantum. IK → Abū l-Ikhrīṭ
Wahb b. Wāḍiḥ → al-Bazzī read qāla Firʿawnu wāmantum (wa-ºȧmantum).
295 The noncontroversial reading through Abū l-Ikhrīṭ Wahb b. Wāḍiḥ → al-Bazzī read
Firʿawnu wāmantum (wa-ºȧmantum), where the hamza of āmantum was softened and
replaced by wāw in accordance with the ḍamma preceding it on the nūn of Firʿawnu.
However, the reading Firʿawnu wa-āmantum maintained the hamza in addition to insert-
ing a wāw. The reading is justified by realizing that the verse orginially reads a-āmantum,
where the first hamza is interrogative while the second one is part of the verb. Thus, read-
ing Firʿawnu wa-āmantum assumes that the interrogative hamza was altered into becom-
ing a wāw. Ibn Mujāhid disapproved of the reading (wa-aḥsabuhu wahm); Ibn Mujāhid,
Sabʿa, 290; Fārisī, Ḥujja.
296 This is the standard reading of all Seven Readers.
297 Form I of the verb waritha “to inherit [the property of]” is transitive; e.g. “waritha al-rajulu
abāhu” (the man inherited [the property of] his father”. Form IV of the verb awratha is
doubly transitive; e.g. “awratha al-rajulu ibnahu mālan” (the man made his son to in-
herit money). Form II of the verb warratha is also doubly transitive but it provides an
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra → al-Khazzāz.298
25. (Q. 7:165) bi-ʿadhābin ba‌ʾīsin.299 Shuʿba, through Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam
→ Abū l-Bukhturī and Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya → Muḥammad b. al-Jahm
said that he had memorized bayʾasin300 from ʿĀṣim. He became doubt-
ful about this reading and then abandoned it, after which he adopted
the reading of al-Aʿmash, ba‌ʾīsin, which was Ḥamza’s standard reading
as well.301
26. (Q. 7:196) inna waliyyiya ‿llāhu302 was read waliyya,303 through:
additional shade of meaning; e.g. “warratha al-rajulu banī fulānin mālahu” does not mean
that the man readily made “banī fulān” inherit money upon his death, it rather means
that “banū fulān” were not originally the natural heirs of the man, and that he deliberately
included them in his will. According to al-Fārisī, this meaning in the verse is farfetched,
and the reading yuwarrithuhā is improbable; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:72–3.
298 Ibn Mujāhid objected to the transmission of this reading, as it was well known that
Ḥafṣ had read yūrithuhā (bi-l-takhfīf); Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 292. It was also reported that
al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī read yuwarrithuhā. Another variant recorded by Abū Ḥayyān was
yūrathuhā; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 5:424–5; Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 4:367.
299 Ba‌ʾīsin is the standard reading of Ibn Kathīr, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, Ḥamza, al-Kisāʾī, and
ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ. Nāfiʿ read bīsin; however, Nāfiʿ → Abū Qurra reported ba‌ʾīsin, and Nāfiʿ →
Khārija transmitted baysin. It was also reported that Nāfiʿ read ba‌ʾsin. Ibn ʿĀmir read biʾsin.
ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī reported bayʾasin; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 296–7.
300 Bayʾas is an adjective of the pattern fayʿal, such as ḍaygham, ḥaydar, and ṣayqal. This read-
ing was fairly accepted even though al-Ṭabarī prefered ba‌ʾīs. Other Kūfans, such as ʿĪsā b.
ʿUmar and some reported transmissions on behalf of al-Aʿmash read bayʾis, which was
rejected by the grammarians; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 10:525–7; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:98–102.
301 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 296–7; Abū Ḥayyān and al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī listed twenty-seven differ-
ent readings and variations for this verse: bīsin, biʾsin, bayʾasin, ba‌ʾīsin, ba‌ʾisa, ba‌ʾasa, ba‌ʾsa,
biʾisin, baysin, bayʾisin, ba‌ʾasin, ba‌ʾisin, bayyisin, ba‌ʾʾasa, ba‌ʾasa, bāsin, biʾīsin, biʾyasin, biʾsa,
bīsa, bayasa, biʾaysa, bīʾisin, bayisin, bayasin, ba‌ʾyasin, and bayʾāsin; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī,
Tafsīr, 5:496–500; Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 4:410–1.
302 Waliyy + the yāʾ of the first-person possessive pronoun becomes waliyyiya. This is the
reading of all the Eponymous Readers.
303 This reading assumes the assimilation of two specific yāʾs together according to which the
justification of the reading could be right or wrong. Waliyyiya comprises three yāʾs: the
first is additional and not a radical since it is the yāʾ of the pattern faʿīl. The second yāʾ is
the third radical of waliyy, while the third yāʾ is the first-person possessive pronoun. Ibn
Mujāhid said it was wrong to assimilate the first yāʾ into the second one because the first
yāʾ had a sukūn while the second was vocalized. In other words, the order of the original
three yāʾs is: y-yi-ya where as the final outcome is y-ya; thus, y-yi-ya → y-ya. According to
Ibn Mujāhid, y-yi cannot assimilate and become “y”. However, the plausible justification
would be the following: when the second yāʾ (yi) is omitted, the first yāʾ (of faʿīl) goes
back to being a long vowel ī (originally, waliyy comes from walīy where the long vowel ī
is assimilated into the third radical y to become waliyy) and therefore y-yi-ya → ī-ya → yya
([wali]yya). Al-Fārisī added that the second and third yāʾs cannot be assimilated: yi-ya ⇸
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

78 CHAPTER 2
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → al-Yazīdī → Ibn Saʿdān.304
27. (Q. 8:35) wa-mā kāna ṣalātuhum ʿinda l-bayti illā mukāʾan wa-
taṣdiyatan305 was read wa-mā kāna ṣalātahum ʿinda l-bayti illā mukāʾun
wa-taṣdiyatun,306 through:
ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Hārūn b. Ḥātim → Mūsā b. Isḥāq, and

ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Khallād
When al-Aʿmash recited the verse according to ʿĀṣim’s Reading in the presence
of Sufyān al-Thawrī, the latter told him: ‘Even if ʿĀṣim spoke bad Arabic, will
you do the same?!’ (wa-in laḥana ʿĀṣimun talḥanu anta?).307
ya because, as explained above, the second yāʾ has already been assimilated into the first
yāʾ, originally a long ī of the faʿīl pattern. Thus, performing a second assimilation would
require dissimilating the first one; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 300; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:116–20.
304 Another reading reported for this verse was waliyyi by al-Jaḥdarī who also read inna wali-
yya ‿llāhi with Allāhi in the genitive; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 5:542–5.
305 This is the standard reading of all Eponymous Readers. The verse translates: “And their
prayer at the House is nothing but a whistling and a clapping of hands”. Al-Fārisī stated
that ṣalātuhum, being definite, should be the subject of kāna, and consequently, this out-
ght to be the proper reading of the verse; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:144–5.
306 This reading assumes ṣalātahum to be the predicate of kāna, and mukāʾun to be the sub-
ject. Al-Fārisī regarded this reading to be an error and miscalculation by the reader: “the
reader had committed to this reading because he identified ṣalāt as feminine while the
verb kāna did not take a feminine ending. Thus, the reader wanted the subject of kāna to
be masculine and assumed it to be mukāʾun. Still, this reading is not fitting”; ibid., 4:145.
Ibn Jinnī was of the same opinion that construing the subject of kāna to be indefinite and
the predicate to be definite was repulsive (qabīḥ). One should always opt for the reading
that agrees with the eloquent Arabic usage. Ibn Jinnī suggested that the reading might still
be possible if mukāʾ and taṣdiya were to be treated as genus nouns (ism jins) according to
which their definite and indefinite states are equal in meaning. Therefore, the verse could
be paraphrased to say: “wa-mā kāna ṣalātahum ʿinda ‿l-bayti illā ‿l-mukāʾu wa-t-taṣdiyatu”
meaning that their prayer was of that sort of action; Abū l-Fatḥ Ibn Jinnī (d. 392/1002),
al-Muḥtasab fī tabyīn wujūh shawādhdh al-qirāʾāt wa-l-īḍāḥ ʿanhā, ed. ʿAlī al-Najdī Nāṣif
and ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Shalabī, 2 vols. (Cairo: al-Majlis al-aʿlā li-l-shuʾūn al-islāmiyya, 1966),
1:278–9.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

28. (Q. 8:66) and (Q. 30:54) ḍaʿfan.308 ʿĀṣim read ḍaʿfan, but Ḥafṣ disagreed
with him and read ḍuʿfan.309 Ḥafṣ did so on his own authority and with-
out directly attributing it to ʿĀṣim.310
29. (Q. 9:61) wa-raḥmatun li-lladhīna āmanū311 was read wa-raḥmatin,312
through:
Nāfiʿ → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUmāra → Abū l-Ḥārith → al-Kisāʾī l-ṣaghīr.313
30. (Q. 10:5), (Q. 21:48) and (Q. 28:71) ḍiyāʾan. Ibn Kathīr → Qunbul read
ḍiʾāʾan,314 but the other two prominent rāwīs of Ibn Kathīr, al-Bazzī and
308 Ḍaʿfan and ḍaʿfin are the standard readings of Ḥamza, ʿĀṣim, and Khalaf of the Ten; Ibn
al-Jazarī, Nashr, 3:92; ed. al-Ḍabbāʿ, Nashr, 2:77.
309 This is the standard reading of the rest of the Eponymous Readers. Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī
read ḍuʿafāʾa. ʿĪsā b. ʿUmar read ḍuʿufan. Ḍuʿf and ḍaʿf are two attested maṣdars just like
fuqr and faqr. Al-Khalīl claimed that ḍaʿf is weakness in the mental state and that ḍuʿf
is weakness in the physical state. Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ said that ḍuʿf is in the dialect of
Ḥijāz while ḍaʿf is in the dialect of Tamīm; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:161–2; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr,
5:636–7.
311 The full verse reads “wa-minhumu ‿lladhīna yuʾdhūna ‿n-nabiyya wa-yaqūlūna huwa ud-
hunun qul udhunu khayrin lakum yuʾminu bi-llāhi wa-yuʾminu li-l-muʾminīna wa-raḥmatun
li-lladhīna āmanū minkum” (And some of them hurt the Prophet, saying, ‘He is an ear!’
Say: ‘An ear of good for you; he believes in God, and believes the believers, and he is a
mercy to the believers among you’). In this reading, raḥmatun and udhunun are connect-
ed by the coordinating conjunction wa.
312 In this reading, raḥmatin and khayrin are connected by the coordinating conjunction wa,
and the verse would be translated as: “… An ear of good for you; he believes in God, and
believes the believers, and he is an ear of mercy to the believers among you”. In addition
to Ḥamza, al-Aʿmash was also reported to have had read wa-raḥmatin. Ibn Abī ʿAbla read
wa-raḥmatan; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 6:74; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:203–5. Al-Ṭabarī prefered the
reading in the nominative, wa-raḥmatun; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 11:538–9.
314 Al-Fārisī justified this reading using the following logic: The final hamza of ḍiyāʾ switches
position with the middle radical, yāʾ (which was originally a wāw but became a yāʾ due
to vowel harmony), to result in ḍiʾāw or ḍiʾāy. Consequently, this wāw or yāʾ turns into
a hamza since now it is situated after a long vowel ā resulting in ḍiʾāʾ. This is similar to
how words like shaqāʾ and ghalāʾ are formed (shaqāʾ → shaqāw and ghalāʾ → ghalāw);
Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:258–9. Abū Shāma said that this reading, ḍiʾāʾ, was weak because a founda-
tional principle in Arabic encourages one to move towards easier pronunciation and not
to articulate two consecutive hamzas one after the other through constructing compli-
cated and illogical swap of vowels and hamzas. Abū Shāma added that this went against
the wisdom of the language (hādhā khilāf ḥikmat al-lugha); Shihāb al-Dīn Abū Shāma
al-Maqdisī (d. 556/1267), Ibrāz al-maʿānī min Ḥirz al-amānī fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, ed. Ibrāhīm
ʿAṭwa ʿAwaḍ (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1982), 504–5.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

80 CHAPTER 2
Ibn Fulayḥ, denied ḍiʾāʾan and emphasized that Ibn Kathīr had only read
ḍiyāʾan.315
31. (Q. 12:14) akalahu ‿dh-dhiʾbu316 was read akalahu ‿dh-dhību,317 through:
Nāfiʿ → Ibn Jammāz.318
32. (Q. 12:19, 33) yā bushrāya, mathwāya, (Q. 20:18) ʿaṣāya, [and (Q. 6:162)
maḥyāya].319 In some transmissions attributed to Nāfiʿ → Warsh, all these
words were recited with sukūn on the yāʾ: bushrāy, mathwāy, ʿaṣāy, and
maḥyāy.320
315 Ibn Mujāhid refused Qunbul’s reading and transmission, and deemed it wrong; Ibn
Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 323, 429, 495. Al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī condemned Ibn Mujāhid for criticizing
his teacher and said, “on several occasions Ibn Mujāhid dared to criticize and accuse his
teacher [Qunbul] of committing mistakes … this is inappropriate because Qunbul’s status
is beyond impeachment and criticism”; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 6:152.
316 This is the reading of Nāfiʿ, Ibn Kathīr, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, ʿĀṣim, Ibn ʿĀmir, and Ḥamza;
Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 346.
317 This is the reading of al-Kisāʾī, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → al-Sūsī, Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī, Khalaf,
and Nāfiʿ → Warsh. Ḥamza did not articulate the hamza during pausal mode; al-Samīn
al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 6:452. Al-Aṣmaʿī was reported to have had asked Nāfiʿ about articulating
the hamza in dhiʾb and biʾr. Nāfiʿ answered: “in kānat al-ʿarab tahmizuhā fa‿hmizhā” (if the
Arabs articulated it with a hamza, do so [too]); Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:407–9.
318 Ibn Mujāhid rejected the transmission and not the variant reading itself. Ibn Jammāz
said that Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī, Shayba b. Niṣāḥ and Nāfiʿ did not articulate the hamza
in al-dhīb. Ibn Mujāhid said that Ibn Jammāz was misinformed because only Abū Jaʿfar
and Shayba did not articulate the hamza. On the other hand, Nāfiʿ did articulate it; Ibn
319 Yā bushrāya is the reading of Ibn Kathīr, Nāfiʿ, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, and Ibn ʿĀmir. This
reading assumes the addition of the first-person possessive pronoun to the noun bushrā.
Thus, the verse translates to “good news for me”. ʿĀṣim read yā bushrā while Ḥamza and
al-Kisāʾī read yā bushrē. The latter reading disregards the yāʾ. Consequently, the vocative
construction could have two interpretations. First, Bushrā could be a proper noun and
the verse would be translated as “O Bushrā!” Second, the substantive noun bushrā could
be in a genitive construction implying an omitted first person possessive pronoun, which
is common in Arabic speech; e.g., yā nafsu iṣbirī/yā nafsi iṣbirī (originally yā nafsī iṣbirī)
and yā bunayyu lā tafʿal/yā bunayyi lā tafʿal (originally yā bunayya lā tafʿal); Ṭabarī, Tafsīr,
13:45–6; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:410.
320 Ibn Mujāhid said that Warsh’s companions were not familiar with these variants and that
they all transmitted these words with fatḥa on the yāʾ; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 347. These
readings attributed to Warsh were inevitably criticized for combining two consecutive
sukūns during non-pausal mode, i.e. to read “yā bushrāy-hādhā ghulāmun” in (Q. 12:19). It
seems that these readings with sukūn on the yāʾ were originally attributed to Nāfiʿ himself,
who, according to al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, abandoned them later on and read with fatḥa on
the yāʾ; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 5:238–9, 6:459–60. Abū Shāma and al-Dānī, however, at-
tributed the adjustment of the reading to Warsh and not Nāfiʿ, by emphasizing that it was
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

33. (Q. 12:110) and (Q. 21:88) fa-nujjiya man nashāʾu321 were read fa-nujjī,322
through:
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → ʿAlī b. Naṣr al-Jahḍamī → Naṣr b. ʿAlī.323
fa-nunjiya324 was another contested variant transmitted through:
Warsh only who transmitted the readings with sukūn on the yāʾ. Alternatively, Warsh read
with fatḥa on the yāʾ, but on his own authority, and claimed that it was more proper
grammatically: “fa-innahu aqyas fī l-naḥw”; Abū Shāma, Ibrāz, 470. The other documented
readings for these verses are bushrayya, mathwayya, ʿaṣayya, and maḥyayya, all of which
demonstrate a feature of the dialect of Hudhayl and Ṭayyiʾ; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 13:45; al-Samīn
al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 5:460.
321 fa-nujjiya is the reading of Ibn ʿĀmir, Yaʿqūb and ʿĀṣim, which translates to “and who-
soever We willed was delivered”. Even though all the maṣāḥif copies of Makka, Madīna,
Kūfa, Baṣra, and Damascus had the word written with one nūn only, the standard reading
of Ibn Kathīr, Nāfiʿ, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, Ḥamza, and al-Kisāʾī was fa-nunjī according to
which the verse translates to “and whosoever We willed We will deliver”. During formal
recitation, the second nūn is almost silent; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 3:129–30. Al-Fārisī under-
lined the silent nature of the nūn in a statement attributed to Abū ʿUthmān [al-Māzinī]
who emphasized that the second nūn must be concealed within the jīm (mukhfātun maʿ
al-jīm), otherwise articulating this nūn would result in laḥn (solecism); Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:445.
322 In the edition of Kitāb al-Sabʿa the word is vocalized as fa-nnujjiya, which is the wrong in-
terpretation of what Ibn Mujāhid described to be the reading of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → ʿAlī
b. Naṣr. The misprint was corrected in the edition of al-Fārisī’s al-Ḥujja, whose qirāʾāt en-
tries always start by quoting Ibn Mujāhid’s original text, and was changed to read fa-nujjī.
Ibn Mujāhid commented by saying that this transmission claimed to have performed
idghām, but this was wrong. This is not a case of assimilation: The vocalized initial nūn
cannot assimilate into the non-vocalized second nūn. Also, nūn cannot assimilate into the
jīm. Therefore, whoever claimed that there was assimilation in this word was wrong. The
correct interpretation is to say that the second nūn was dropped and omitted. Al-Ṭabarī
attributed the same reading to some Kūfīs, and al-Dānī added a transmission by [N →]
Qālūn → Abū Nashīṭ → Ibn Shanabūdh; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:445–6; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 13:400; Dānī,
Jāmiʿ, 3:306–8.
324 Al-Fārisī asserted the error of this reading and said that there was no ground to read the
verb in the subjunctive (lā shayʾa hā hunā yantaṣib bihi al-yāʾ), confirming that the verb
must be in the indicative mood; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 4:446. Ibn ʿAṭiyya supported this position
and stated that this was an error on Hubayra’s behalf. However, al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī de-
fended Hubayra’s reading, and claimed that Ibn ʿAṭiyya (and al-Fārisī) were misinformed.
The verse displayed a conditional structure “ḥattā idhā ‿stayʾasa ‿r-rusulu … fa-nunjiya”,
where the verb following the fāʾ could be in the subjunctive mood if governed by an omit-
ted an; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 6:567–8, 8:191–4. Nāfiʿ → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān read
fa-nujī. Ibn Muḥayṣin, Mujāhid, Naṣr b. ʿĀṣim, al-Ḥasan b. Abī al-Ḥasan, Ibn al-Samayfaʿ,
and Abū Ḥaywa read fa-najā. Ibn Muḥayṣin was reported to have had read fa-najjā; Dānī,
Jāmiʿ, 3:306–7; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Tafsīr, 3:288–9.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

82 CHAPTER 2
34. (Q. 16:127) and (Q. 27:70) ḍayqin326 were read ḍīqin,327 through:
Nāfiʿ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUbayd, and

Nāfiʿ → Khalaf → al-Musayyabī.328
35. (Q. 18:76) min ladunnī329 was read ludnī,330 through:
325 This transmission was not mentioned in Kitāb al-Sabʿa; however, in al-Fārisī’s Ḥujja, the
original quote from Ibn Mujāhid’s book incorporated this transmission in addition to an-
other transmission attributed to ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → Ibn al-Yatīm, which
reported the standard variant by ʿĀṣim, fa-nujjiya; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 352; Fārisī, Ḥujja,
4:444–5.
326 This is the standard reading of all Ten Readers except Ibn Kathīr. According to Abū ʿUbayda,
ḍayq is the lightened form of ḍayyiq. One could say “amrun ḍayyiqun wa-ḍayqun”. Abū
l-Ḥasan, however, said that ḍayq and ḍayyiq were two alternative maṣdars and that ḍayq
should not be treated as an adjective since the verse meant “lā taku fī ḍayqin” and not “lā
taku fī amrin ḍayyiqin”; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 7:303; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 5:80. Al-Ṭabarī pref-
ered ḍayq over ḍīq since this was the more proper form Arabs used in their speech; e.g.
“fī ṣadrī min hādhā l-amr ḍayqun”; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 14:408.
327 This is the standard reading of Ibn Kathīr.
329 This is the reading of Ibn Kathīr, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, Ibn ʿĀmir, Ḥamza, al-Kisāʾī, and ʿĀṣim
→ Ḥafṣ. Nāfiʿ read ladunī. ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba was reported to have read ladunī and ladnī, both
of which were justified by analogy to nouns such as sabuʿ and ʿaḍud where the omission
of the ḍamma in sabʿ and ʿaḍd is commonly exercised; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 3:167; Fārisī,
Ḥujja, 5:161. Ladunnī is a combination of ladun and the protective nūn (nūn al-wiqāya).
Thus, ladunnī is similar in construction to minnī and ʿannī. Ladunī is justified by suffixing
the yāʾ of the first-person possessive pronoun directly to ladun without the intervention
of the protective nūn, in a similar fashion to what has been transmitted concerning drop-
ping the protective nūn in minī and ʿanī; hence ladunī. Sībawayhi rejected ladunī, claiming
that one could not suffix the yāʾ of the first person possessive pronoun to ladun without
the intervention of nūn al-wiqāya; Abū Bishr ʿAmr b. ʿUthmān Sībawayhi (d. 180/796),
al-Kitāb, ed. ʿAbd al-Salām Hārūn, 5 vols. (Cairo: Maktabat al-Khānjī, 1988), 2:370–3. As
expected, al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī defended this reading and stated that it was proof against
Sībawayhi’s flawed argument (wa-hādhihi al-qirāʾa ḥujjatun ʿalayhi); al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī,
Tafsīr, 7:531.
330 Ibn Mujāhid did not specify if the error here (wa-huwa ghalaṭ) was related to the trans-
mission or the variant reading. Al-Fārisī claimed that Ibn Mujāhid might have alluded
to an error in transmission since the reading ludnī could be justified linguistically. This
category of nouns, i.e. of the pattern faʿul, are lightened in two ways. First, by omitting the
ḍamma on the fāʾ, thus saying faʿl, such as ʿaḍd and sabʿ. Second, by omitting the fatḥa on
the ʿayn and moving the ḍamma of the fāʾ backward to the ʿayn, thus saying fuʿl, such as
ʿuḍd and subʿ. Kabid, kabd, and kibd follow the same reasoning; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 5:162.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → al-Kisāʾī → Abū ʿUbayd.331
36. (Q. 18:97) fa-mā ‿sṭāʿū332 was read fa-mā ‿sṭṭāʿū333 by Ḥamza.
37. (Q. 20:64) thumma ‿ʾtū ṣaffan334 was read thumm-ītū [or thummi ytū],335
through:
Ibn Kathīr → Shibl b. ʿAbbād → ʿUbayd → Khalaf.
38. (Q. 20:12) bi-l-wādi ‿l-muqaddasi. The yāʾ of al-wādī is usually dropped
during both modes, waṣl and waqf. Al-Kisāʾī → Khalaf expressed a prefer-
ence to pause on al-wādī while pronouncing a long yāʾ.336

332 This is the standard reading of all canonical Readers except Ḥamza. ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba →
al-Aʿshā read fa-mā ‿sṭāʿū, and al-Aʿmash read fa-mā ‿staṭāʿū; Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī,
Tafsīr, 6:156.
333 Ibn Mujāhid rejected this reading by Ḥamza and suggested that the latter wanted to read
fa-mā ‿staṭāʿū but he assimilated the tāʾ with the ṭāʾ, which was not permissible because
the sīn is unvocalized and so does the newly assimilated tāʾ/ṭāʾ; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 401.
Al-Fārisī considered this reading to be weak, and al-Zajjāj confidently stated that those
who read fa-mā ‿sṭṭāʿū were wrong and grammatically incompetent (lāḥinun mukhṭiʾ);
Zajjāj, Maʿānī, 3:312; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 5:178–82.
334 Ibn Kathīr → Shibl b. ʿAbbād → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī, Ibn Kathīr → Shibl b. ʿAbbād → al-Ḥasan
b. Muḥammad b. ʿUbayd Allāh b. Abī Yazīd, and Ibn Kathīr → Ismāʿīl al-Makkī → Maḥbūb
read thumma ytū. Ibn Kathīr → al-Qawwās al-Nabbāl read thumma ‿ʾtū; Ibn Mujāhid,
Sabʿa, 420.
335 Ibn Mujāhid rejected vocalizing the mīm of thumma with a kasra, thummi, because thum-
ma must always be read with a fatḥa (wa-lā wajha li-kasrihā). Ibn Mujāhid justified Ibn
Kathīr’s reading, thumma ytū, by saying that he probably wanted to follow the rasm of the
muṣḥaf, and thus, he articulated a yāʾ instead of a hamza (wa-innamā arāda Ibn Kathīr an
yattabiʿ al-kitāb fa-lafaẓa bi-l-yāʾ baʿda fatḥat al-mīm allatī khalafat al-hamza). Al-Fārisī
rejected this justification and emphasized that thumma ytū was a blatant mistake (khaṭa‌ʾ
bayyin). The imperative of the verb atā—ya‌ʾtī is ʾīti (originally ʾti, which becomes iʾti with
hamzat al-waṣl, which in turn becomes ʾīti because of two hamzas following one anoth-
er). When ʾīti is preceded by a vowel—from a preceding word—hamzat al-waṣl must be
dropped and ʾīti goes back to ʾti according to the following combinations: 1) ʾīti/ʾti is pre-
ceded by a ḍamma: the hamza becomes a wāw, e.g. yā Zaydu wti, (Q. 7:77) yā Ṣāliḥu wtinā,
and (Q. 9:49) wa-minhum man yaqūlu wdhan lī wa-lā. 2) ʾīti/ʾti is preceded by a kasra: the
hamza becomes a yāʾ, e.g. yā ghulāmi yti. 3) ʾīti/ʾti is preceded by a fatḥa: the hamza be-
comes an alif, e.g. yā ghulāma-ati. Therefore, according to that transmission by Ibn Kathīr,
the verse should have been read thumma-atū because the hamza was preceded by a fatḥa;
Fārisī, Ḥujja, 5:234.
336 Ibn Mujāhid rejected this variant and said that one cannot pause on al-wādī while pro-
nouncing a long yāʾ because it was written without one in the rasm of the muṣḥaf; Ibn
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

84 CHAPTER 2
39. (Q. 22:23) wa-luʾluʾan337 was read luʾluwan,338 through:
ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → al-Muʿallā b. Manṣūr.339
40. (Q. 23:110) and (Q. 38:63) sikhriyyan340 were read sukhriyyan,341 through:
41. (Q. 57:27) ra‌‌ʾfatun was read ra‌‌ʾafatun343 by [IK →] al-Bazzī. Qunbul said
that al-Bazzī was deluded (wahima) when he read both (Q. 24:2) and
337 The full verse reads “yuḥallawna fīhā min asāwira min dhahabin wa-luʾluʾan”. Ibn Kathīr,
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, Ibn ʿĀmir, Ḥamza, and al-Kisāʾī read wa-luʾluʾin. Nāfiʿ and ʿĀṣim read
wa-luʾluʾan; ibid., 435. Al-Ṭabarī considered both readings to be grammatically and se-
mantically equal. However, al-Fārisī preferred the reading in the genitive (wa-luʾluʾin) be-
cause it was stronger, semantically, for “they shall be adorned with bracelets of gold and
pearls”, i.e. the adornment is made of gold and of pearls. On the other hand, one cannot
wear pearls unless they are made into jewelry (ḥilya); Fārisī, Ḥujja, 5:268; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr,
16:499–500. There is also disagreement as to how this word was written in the Medinan
codex (al-muṣḥaf al-Imām): al-Aṣmaʿī claimed that it was not written with alif while
al-Jaḥdarī confirmed that it was written with an alif; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 8:254.
338 ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam read wa-lūluʾan, while al-Muʿallā in the transmission
above read wa-luʾluwan by articulating the first hamza and softening the second. Ibn
Mujāhid objected to al-Muʿallā’s transmission and said it was wrong (ghalaṭ). Al-Fārisī
confirmed that the error was in transmission only. It is permissible in Arabic to articulate
any of the hamzas or soften them altogether; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 5:268. Other reported readings
were wa-lūliyan by al-Fayyāḍ, wa-līliyan by Ibn ʿAbbās, and wa-lūlin by Ṭalḥa; Abū Ḥayyān
al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 6:335.
340 This is the standard reading of Ibn Kathīr, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, ʿĀṣim and Ibn ʿĀmir.
341 This is the standard reading of Nāfiʿ, Ḥamza, and al-Kisāʾī. According to some linguists,
sikhriyyan implies mockery and belittlement, while sukhriyyan conveys the meaning of
slavery. Al-Ṭabarī considered both readings to be semantically equal. Al-Zajjāj stated that
both variants were acceptable (kilāhumā jayyid) even though he, and Abū ʿAlī l-Fārisī, pre-
ferred sikhriyyan for phonetic considerations where the kasra on the sīn phonetically cor-
responds to the kasra on the rāʾ (itbāʿ); Zajjāj, Maʿānī, 4:24; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 17:126–7; Fārisī,
Ḥujja, 5:302–7. Makkī l-Qaysī gave preference to sikhriyyan because it expressed a more
proper meaning, and because it was the reading of the majority (li-ṣiḥḥat maʿnāhu … wa-
li-anna al-akthar ʿalayhi); Abū Muḥammad Makkī b. Abī Ṭālib al-Qaysī (d. 437/1045), al-
Kashf ʿan wujūh al-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ wa-ʿilalihā wa-ḥujajihā, ed. Muḥyī l-Dīn Ramaḍān, 2 vols.
(Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 1997), 2:131. Al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī defended both readings and
rejected al-Fārisī and Makkī’s arguments for preferring sikhriyyan; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī,
Tafsīr, 8:371.
342 Ibn Mujāhid rejected the transmission from Hubayra and not the variant itself, for it was
known that ʿĀṣim had read sikhriyyn; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 448.
343 Al-Fārisī considered this reading by Ibn Kathīr to be a lugha (dialectal variation); Fārisī,
Ḥujja, 5:310. Ibn Jurayj and some transmissions on behalf of both ʿĀṣim and Ibn Kathīr
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(Q. 57:27) ra‌‌ʾafatun, with a fatḥa on the hamza. Qunbul cautioned al-Bazzī
that only (Q. 24:2) was to be read ra‌‌ʾafatun, while the other (Q. 57:27)
was to be read ra‌‌ʾfatun. Accepting Qunbul’s recommendation, al-Bazzī
retracted his reading.344
42. (Q. 24:15) idh talaqqawnahu was read it_talaqqawnahu by assimilating
the dhāl with the tāʾ, through:
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → Hārūn → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī.345
43. (Q. 24:31) wa-l-yaḍribna was read wa-li-yaḍribna, through:
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl.346
44. (Q. 24:31) ayyuhā ‿l-muʾminūna was read ayyuhā｡ al-muʾminūna in waqf
mode, through:
Al-Kisāʾī → Muḥammad b. Saʿdān → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā l-Warrāq.347
45. (Q. 25:30) inna qawmī ‿ttakhadhū. Qunbul claimed that al-Bazzī used to
read qawmiya. Al-Qawwās asked Qunbul to go and check this verse in the
muṣḥaf of Wahb b. Wāḍiḥ—who taught both al-Bazzī and al-Qawwās—
and see how qawmī was vocalized. After checking it, Qunbul found a
fatḥa that was effaced from above the yāʾ of qawmī.348
46. (Q. 25:68–9) yuḍāʿaf lahu ‿l-ʿadhābu yawma ‿l-qiyāmati wa-yakhlud was
read wa-yukhlad, through:
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī.349
47. (Q. 27:18) lā yaḥṭimannakum was read lā yaḥṭimankum”, through:
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → ʿUbayd.350
read ra‌‌ʾāfatun; Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 6:394; al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī, Tafsīr, 8:380.
345 Ibn Mujāhid stated that not articulating the dhāl in this case was bad Arabic (radīʾ);
ibid., 453.
346 Ibn Mujāhid was completely astounded by this variant. He remarked: ‘wa-lā adrī mā
hādhā’ (I do not know what this is); ibid., 454. For a comprehensive discussion of this
verse and its variants, see Nasser, “Revisiting Ibn Mujāhid”, 96–9.
347 Ibn Mujāhid refused to perform waqf on ayyuhā; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 455.
348 Ibid., 465.
349 Ibn Mujāhid deemed the transmission to be wrong; ibid., 467.
350 Ibn Mujāhid objected to the transmission but not to the variant itself; ibid., 479.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

86 CHAPTER 2
48. (Q. 27:22) and (Q. 34:15) min saba‌‌ʾin and li-saba‌‌ʾin were read saba‌‌ʾ,
through:
[IK →] al-Qawwās → Qunbul, and

Ibn Kathīr → Shibl b. ʿAbbād → Abū Muḥammad al-Makkī.351
49. (Q. 27:88) bi-mā tafʿalūna was read yafʿalūna, through:
Nāfiʿ → Abū ʿUbayd.352
50. (Q. 28:32) mina ‿r-rahbi was read ‿r-rahabi, through:
51. (Q. 30:41) li-yudhīqahum was read li-nudhīqahum by [IK →] Qunbul. Ibn
Mujāhid indicated that no one followed Qunbul’s reading in this trans-
mission, and that the rest of Ibn Kathīr’s transmitters unanimously read
li-yudhīqahum.354
52. (Q. 31:29) taʿmalūna was read yaʿmalūna, through:
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl.355
53. (Q. 33:4) ‿l-lāʾī tuẓāhirūna was read ‿l-lāyyi, through:
Ibn Kathīr → al-Bazzī → Ibn Makhlad.356
54. (Q. 33:49) taʿtaddūnahā. Qunbul claimed that al-Bazzī was deluded when
he read taʿtadūnahā in the lightened form. Al-Qawwās asked Qunbul to go
and question al-Bazzī: “What on earth is this reading that you have been
reciting [recently]? We [the Qurrāʾ community or Ibn Kathīr’s transmit-
ters] are not familiar with it!” After Qunbul confronted al-Bazzī, the lat-
ter said: “I will change my reading” (rajaʿtu ʿanhā). Qunbul observed that
al-Bazzī made two similar mistakes in (Q. 14:17) wa-mā huwa bi-mayyitin
351 Ibn Mujāhid deemed the transmission to be wrong; ibid., 480.

352 This was a transmission error according to Ibn Mujāhid; ibid., 487.
353 Ibn Mujāhid rejected this transmission; ibid., 493.
354 Ibid., 507.
355 Ibn Mujāhid was not satisfied with this transmission and commented by saying that
ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl was the only transmitter who introduced this variant; ibid., 514.
356 Ibn Mujāhid objected to this transmission but not to the variant itself; ibid., 518.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

and (Q. 81:4) wa-idhā ‿l-ʿishāru ʿuṭṭilat by reading the lightened forms bi-
maytin and ʿuṭilat.357
55. (Q. 38:33) bi-s-sūqi. Even though al-Bazzī transmitted the variant reading
from Wahb b. Wāḍiḥ in its articulated hamza-form, bi-s-suʾqi, he admit-
ted that he would never articulate the hamza.358
56. (Q. 38:41) bi-nuṣbin was read bi-naṣbin, through:
ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra. It was also read bi-nuṣubin, through:

ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra.359
57. (Q. 58:11) wa-idhā qīla ‿nshuzū fa‿nshuzū. Yaḥyā b. Ādam → al-Wakīʿī →
Khalaf/Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī maintained that Shuʿba did not memorize
this variant from ʿĀṣim.360
58. (Q. 68:14) an kāna was read ān kāna, through:
Ḥamza → Abū ʿUbayd.361
59. (Q. 70:10) wa-lā yasʾalu was read yusʾalu, through:
Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī/Shayba b. Niṣāḥ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUbayd.362
60. (Q. 71:23) waddan was read wuddan, through:
ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Burayd → Abū l-Rabīʿ al-Rashdīnī, and

ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir → Ibn
Saʿdān → al-Marwazī.363
61. (Q. 76:30) tashāʾūna. Abū Khulayd ʿUtba b. Ḥammād confronted Ayyūb
b. Tamīm and told him that he was mistaken in reading yashāʾūna, and
should instead read tashāʾūna. Ayyūb answered: “By God, I am certain
that it is yashāʾūna. I can prove it just as I can prove that you are ʿUtba b.
Ḥammād”.364
357 Ibid., 522–3.

358 Ibid., 553.
359 The standard reading by Ḥafṣ is bi-nuṣbin; ibid., 554.
360 Ibid., 629.
361 Ḥamza’s standard reading is a-an kāna. Ibn Mujāhid objected to the transmission but not
to the reading itself; ibid., 646.
362 Ibn Mujāhid objected to the transmission but not to the variant reading; ibid., 650.
363 Ibid., 653.
364 Ibn Kathīr and Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlā’s standard reading is yashāʾūna; ibid., 665.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

88 CHAPTER 2
62. (Q. 89:4) idhā yasri. Abū ʿUbayd reported that al-Kisāʾī, for a long time
(dahran), used to read yasrī with a long yāʾ. Later in his life, al-Kisāʾī
amended his reading to yasri with a short-vowel kasra, instead of the long
yāʾ.365
63. (Q. 90:19) aṣḥābu ‿l-mashʾama was read ‿l-mashʾamma, through:
ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Abū l-Rabīʿ → al-Dabbāgh.366
64. (Q. 96:7) an ra‌‌ʾāhu was read an ra‌‌ʾahu by Qunbul.367

65. (Q. 103:3) bi-ṣ-ṣabri was read bi-ṣ-ṣabiri, through:
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī → Salmān b. Yazīd al-Baṣrī, and
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ → Aḥmad b. Mūsā l-Luʾluʾī → Rawḥ → Aḥmad b. Yazīd
→ al-Jammāl, and
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ + ʿĀṣim → Sallām Abū l-Mundhir → ʿAffān → ʿAlī b.
Sahl.368
66. (Q. 106:1) li-īlāfi … ilāfihim. Shuʿba said that ʿĀṣim used to read li-iʾlāfi …
iʾlāfihim, but he changed his reading later on to li-īlāfi … ilāfihim follow-
ing Ḥamza’s reading.369
3.3 Summary Table

The table below summarizes and classifies the sixty-six cases discussed above.
I created three main categories of errors. First, faulty transmissions due to
transmitters’ error. Second, readings attributed to the eponymous Readers or
their canonical Rāwīs, which Ibn Mujāhid rejected. Third, problematic trans-
missions on which readers disagreed, or transmissions that caused confusion
and doubt, ultimately leading some readers to abandon older readings in fa-
vour of new ones.
365 Ibid., 683.

366 Ibn Mujāhid rejected the variant reading and said that it could not be justified (laysa lahu
wajh); ibid., 686–7.
367 Ibn Mujāhid rejected Qunbul’s reading; ibid., 692. For a detailed discussion on this vari-
ant, see Nasser, “Revisiting Ibn Mujāhid”, 99–104.
369 Ibid., 698.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

TABLE 2 Sixty-sixy transmission errors
Category Transmission Error Disagreement Disagreement among

with the the readers. Readers
Eponymous amending their
Reader reading
Total Number 44 6 16
Case # 1,2,3,4,5,6,10,12,13,14 7,16,20,36,38,64 8,9,11,15,18,25,28,30,
17,19,21,22,23,24,26 32,41,45,54
27,29,31,33,34 55,61,62,66
35,37,39,40,42,43
44,46,47,48,49,50
51,52,53,56,57,58
59,60,63,65
3.4 The Weakest Link

Ibn Mujāhid showed no hesitation about openly disagreeing with an epony-
mous Reader or Rāwī whose reading did not satisfy the criteria he formulated
for a valid Qurʾānic transmission. This contrasts with how Muslim scholars
in later periods accepted every individual reading in the system of the seven
and ten eponymous Readings without contention. The critical remarks issued
by Ibn Mujāhid against Ibn ʿĀmir, Ḥamza, and some canonical Rāwīs such as
Qunbul are generally absent in later Qirāʾāt scholarship.370 Notwithstanding
Ibn al-Jazarī’s eight hundred and fourteen (814) unique channels through which
the ten eponymous Readings were transmitted and documented, the Qurʾān is
recited today through 40 channels (28 channels for the seven Readings): each
eponymous Reader has two Rāwīs and each Rāwī has two Ṭarīqs. Out of the
sixty-six problematic transmissions I discussed above, how many channels
survived the canonization process of the Rāwīs and their Ṭarīqs, and how
many channels entered the domain of shawādhdh? The degree of adherence
to and divergence from the Canon of Qirāʾāt will be measured against al-Taysīr
and al-Shāṭibiyya, the two works that generally systematized Qirāʾāt scholar-
ship and normalized the recitation and rendition of the Qurʾān as we know
it today.371
370 Nasser, Transmission, 52–61; “Revisiting Ibn Mujāhid”, 104–5.

371 Angelika Neuwirth, “al-Shāṭibī”, Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān. Accessed 07 November
2017, availabe at http://dx.doi.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1163/1573-3912_islam_
SIM_6866; Bergsträsser, GdQ, 3:219–24.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

90 CHAPTER 2
The 44 cases of transmission errors listed above can be divided into three
broad categories: A) transmissions attributed to the immediate transmitters
of the eponyomous Readers who did not become canonical Rāwīs, B) trans-
missions attributed to non-canonical rāwīs who belonged to a generation later
than that of the immediate transmitters, and C) transmissions attributed to
students of the canonical Rāwīs. Note that in these cases Ibn Mujāhid did not
object to the variants themselves, most of which were reported to have been
transmitted through other channels. He rather disapproved of the transmit-
ters who reported variant readings on behalf of a Reader or Rāwī, who were
generally known to have read those variants differently. For example, when
Ibn Mujāhid protested against ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra for reading (Q. 40:67)
shuyūkh as shiyūkh,372 he did not reject shiyūkh as a valid variant reading, but
rather objected to the fact that Ḥafṣ read shiyūkh, when he was more known
to have read shuyūkh, according to many of his students. Indeed, shiyūkh was
soundly transmitted and attributed to ʿĀṣim through Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam.
Going back to the chains of transmission listed above, one can easily notice
the presence of many immediate transmitters who did not enter the literature
of Qirāʾāt as trustworthy Qurʾān transmitters. We can posit the same question
to which I dedicated the first half of this chapter: what could the possible rea-
sons have been behind distinguishing Shibl b. ʿAbbād from the other immedi-
ate transmitters of Ibn Kathīr, to the extent that the Qurrāʾ community sought
out his rendition of the Reading of IK, rather than that of al-Khalīl b. Aḥmad?
In addition to the possible reasons discussed earlier, one may add al-Khalīl’s
committing blatant transmission errors that professional Qurʾān readers were
supposed to avoid. Al-Khalīl from Ibn Kathīr, Abū ʿUbayd from Ḥamza, ʿAlī b.
Naṣr, Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī, ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl, Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī, and al-Luʾluʾī from
Abū ʿAmr, Sallām Abū l-Mundhir and al-Mufaḍḍal from ʿĀṣim, al-Musayyabī,
Khārija, Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar, Ibn Jammāz, and Abū ʿUbayd from Nāfiʿ—all these
immediate transmitters had at least one thing in common: they were blamed
for transmission errors on behalf of their masters. The same logic holds true
for the transmitters of the Rāwīs (ṭuruq). Hubayra from Ḥafṣ, Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī,
al-Kisāʾī, al-Muʿallā b. Manṣūr, and Burayd from Shuʿba, ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl from
Shibl b. ʿAbbād—all these transmitters had the same aspect in common: dis-
seminating erroneous transmissions of the Qurʾān on behalf of their masters.
Additionally, the charts below show another common aspect amongst these
transmitters, namely, they were all part of a single strand of transmission
(SST). In other words, the Qurrāʾ community was not keen on carrying their
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

transmissions, and it was left to the “academics” and scholars amongst the
Qurrāʾ to seek their transmissions for matters related to documentation and
corroboration.
3.5 Conclusion
I have previously studied the important role the number of the immediate
transmitters of an eponymous Reader played in determining the identity and
generation of the two canonical Rāwīs. In the cases of Nāfiʿ, ʿĀṣim, and al-Kisāʾī,
the two canonical Rāwīs belonged to the generation of the immediate trans-
mitters, where the process of authentication and corroboration was feasible
and possible due to the ample number of transmitters. However, in the cases
of Ibn Kathīr, Ibn ʿĀmir, and Ḥamza, the insufficient number of their immedi-
ate transmitters could have been the reason behind choosing their canonical
Rāwīs from the generations that followed the immediate transmitters. The case
of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ was slightly problematic. Even though he had numerous
immediate transmitters, only al-Yazīdī seems to have been closely associated
with him and trusted to represent a faithful rendition of his Reading. Therefore,
the two canonical Rāwīs of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ were determined from amongst
al-Yazīdī’s students.373 I have also studied the role of al-Dānī and al-Shāṭibī in
creating and standardizing the two-Rāwī Canon,374 and so far, I believe that the
criteria for selecting all the Rāwīs were similar, regardless of the generation to
which they belonged; adhering to “a” consensus of the transmitters was of the
utmost importance.
On the other hand, one cannot speak of a single, unified, coherent, and
systematic rendition of any eponymous Reader. The more transmissions col-
lected by the immediate transmitters, the rāwīs, and the ṭuruq, the more vari-
ants the eponymous Readings showcased. By the time that the discipline of
Qirāʾāt emulated that of Ḥadīth by applying similar methods of authentica-
tion, it was already too late to realize that the outcome was undesirable, for
the huge corpus of Qirāʾāt had been already transmitted, recorded, and cir-
culating among Mulsims. What was thought to be a single, unified, and static
“Qurʾān” transmitted through tawātur became an organic text whose readings
and renditions kept multiplying and “mutating” with every new transmission.
Corroborating and authenticating the Qurʾānic text through multiple chains
and ṭuruq to prove its tawātur via a multitude of transmitters who could not
possibly collude on error and forgery succeeded as far as the general structure

374 Nasser, “The Two-Rāwī Canon”.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

92 CHAPTER 2
FIGURE 9 Nāfiʿ’s transmissions from Kitāb al-Sabʿa

A full version of this figure is available on our online platform, which can be accessed
with this QR code.
and arrangement of the Qurʾān, but failed when it came down to the details of
its individual words, let alone the “Arabic” performed aspect of the text.
In this chapter, I have established what I believe to be crucial elements
concerning the selection process of the transmitters of Qirāʾāt. An epony-
mous Reader did not transmit and disseminate a single, unified, systematic
System-Reading. Regardless of whether it was the Reader's intention to teach
and transmit multiple renditions of his teachings, his students' inaccuracy in
their transmission, the eponymous Reader's failure to be systematic and metic-
ulous, or a combination of some or all of these, one should be aware of the fact
that the students of the eponymous Readers and the students of the canonical
Rāwīs did not transmit an identical rendition of the System-Reading they were
taught. Instead, they disagreed with one another about details, both minor and
major, of that System-Reading. Seven factors were important in determining
the inclusion of rāwīs in the canon of the Qirāʾāt:
1) Professionalism: to be a learned scholar and not an amateur who is study-
ing the Qurʾān without academic training.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

2) Discipline Specialism: to be a scholar of the Qurʾān, and particularly a

scholar specialized in Qirāʾāt. Any scholar should naturally be versed in
several disciplines such as Ḥadīth, poetry, grammar, etc. However, the
rāwī’s main specialty is Qurʾānic recitation.
3) Vertical specialism: the rāwī should specialize in one System-Reading and
not spread himself thin over several System-Readings, which would result
in confusion and misattribution of variants to their proper originators.
4) Mentorship: the long association between master and disciple. Through
strong mentorship, a professional and personal bond between the two
parties is developed, which ultimately leads to the student’s “inheriting”
of the System-Reading of the master.
5) Dissemination: the rāwī becomes a teacher, whereupon he systematically
and actively teaches and disseminates the Reading of his master.
6) Geographical affiliation: Rāwīs who belong to the same geographical area
as the Eponymous Reader are more likely to have a longer association
with him, in addition to already being familiar with the local recitation
and tradition of a particular city.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

94 CHAPTER 2
FIGURE 10 Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ’s transmissions from Kitāb al-Sabʿa

with this QR code.
7) Errors: to not commit frequent errors in transmission. Rāwīs who repeat-

edly commit errors in transmission are generally recognized as such by
the Qurrāʾ community, who gradually become more careful and attentive
to these Rāwīs’ transmissions. These errors comprise misattributions, in-
accuracy in recitation, confusion, forgetfulness, or indecisiveness when
faced with multiple variants, all of which are reported on behalf of the
eponymous Reader or canonical Rāwī.
Having derived the professional criteria of the Qurʾān transmitters from tex-
tual analysis, we may ask, were there explicit criteria mentioned by the Qirāʾāt
critics? How did they apply jarḥ and taʿdīl (cross examination, deeming one
to be weak or trustworthy) in the biographical dictionaries? The next chapter
will explore this aspect in detail. If the mechanism of transmitting and validat-
ing Qirāʾāt was influenced by Ḥadīth scholarship, how were the Qurʾān readers
judged by the critics? What were the conditions of ʿadāla (trustworthiness) in
Qirāʾāt scholarship? Could one accept a Qurʾān transmission from a liar, or an
innovator, or someone who consumes alcohol?
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
FIGURE 11 Ḥamza’s transmissions from Kitāb al-Sabʿa
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

96 CHAPTER 2
FIGURE 12 al-Kisāʾī’s transmissions from Kitāb al-Sabʿa
FIGURE 14 Ibn Kathīr’s transmissions from Kitāb al-Sabʿa

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
with this QR code. Downloaded from Brill.com10/20/2020 09:05:54PM
FIGURE 13 Ibn ʿĀmir’s transmissions from Kitāb al-Sabʿa
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

98 CHAPTER 2
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ

al-Aʿmash
Muḥammad b. Abān
Hārūn al-Aʿwar
Mūsā al-Zābī
ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl
Dāwūd al-Awdī
al-Quṭaʿī Shaybān b. Muʿāwiya

al-Qāḍī Sharīk al-Farrāʾ al-Ḍaḥḥāk b.
Sufyān al-Thawrī Maymūn
ʿUbayd Allāh b. Mūsā

Aḥmad
b. Jubayr
Ibn Abī Ḥammād
Ibn Abī
al-Ḥusayn b. ʿAlī Umayya al-Kisāʾī Hārūn b. Ḥātim
b. al-Aswad
Muʿallā b. Manṣūr
Muḥammad b. Abū Tawba
Muḥammad
ʿUmar al-Kindī
b. al-Mundhir
Abū l-Asbāṭ
Ibn Saʿdān
Minjāb b. al-Ḥarith al-Marwazī? Idrīs b. ʿAbd

lbn Shahrayār Muḥammad b.
ʿAlī b. al-ʿAbbās Muḥammad b. al-Karīm
al-Jahm
Ibn Ṣadaqa al-Bajalī Aḥmad b. Wāṣil ʿAbd Allāh b.
Mūsā b. Hārūn Shākir
al-Firyābī
FIGURE 15 ʿĀṣim’s transmissions from Kitāb al-Sabʿa
with this QR code.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Kūfa
ʿĀṣim
Shuʿba Abān al-ʿAṭṭār

Ḥafṣ al-Mufaḍḍal ʿAbbās
Ḥammād b. Bakkār b. ʿAbd
Burayd Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī Abū ʿUmāra Hubayra Abū l-Rabīʿ al-Zahrānī Salama
Ibn al-aḥwal Allāh al-ʿŪdī
Jammāz al-Aʿshā Khallād Abū ʿAmr Sahl Saʿd al-ʿŪfī ʿAbd
ʿAbd al-Jabbār (b. Zanjala?) Abū Zayd al-Wahhāb ʿAlī b. Naṣr
Yaḥyā b. Muḥammad al-Anṣārī b. ʿAṭāʾ
b. Ādam al-ʿUṭāridī Abū Amr b. Abū Muslim
ʿAbd Allāh b. Shuʿayb al-Ṣabbāḥ
Ṣāliḥ al-ʿIjlī al-Qawwās ʿUbayd b. al-Ṣabbāḥ
Abū Bakr al-Narsī al-Quṭaʿī
Abū Hishām Bishr b. Hilāl
Khalaf
al-Rifāʿī al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak
al-Shammūnī Ḥaramī b. ʿUmāra
Aḥmad b. ʿUmar
al-Wakīʿī al-Ḥulwānī Naṣr b. ʿAlī
Aḥmad b. Abī Abū l-ʿAbbās
Khaythama Ibn Ḥayyān Abū Muḥammad
al-Muqriʾ Aḥmad b. Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
Muḥammad al-Khayyāṭ
Wahb/Wuhayb Ibn Abī Muḥammad b. ʿAlī al-Khazzāz al-Dabbāgh
b. ʿĪsā al-Ḥasan al-Jammāl al-Marwazī Muslim Saʿd al-ʿŪfī
Ibrāhīm
b. Aḥmad Mūsā b. Isḥāq Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā l-ʿAbbāsī
al-Wakīʿī al-Qāḍī
al-Ushnānī
ʿUbayd Allāh b.
ʿAlī al-Hāshimī
Ibn Mujāhid
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

CHAPTER 3
Ḥadīth and Qurʾān rijāl Criticism
Anyone whose name is ʿĀṣim has an awful memory

Ibn ʿUlayya
⸪
Al-Mizzī (d. 742/1341) introduced an intriguing account in the biography of
Ḥamza, which recounted an incident that took place between him, al-Kisāʾī,
and the great Kūfan muḥaddith and judge, Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī (d. 248/862).
Al-Kisāʾī was preparing for a Qurʾān audition with Ḥamza when Abū Hishām
joined the session as a spectator and leaned against one of walls of the mosque
right next to Ḥamza. Al-Kisāʾī started to shiver and tremble. Ḥamza asked him:
‘What is wrong with you? Are you more intimidated by him [Abū Hishām]
than me?’ Al-Kisāʾī answered: ‘No. When I make mistakes in front of you, you
correct me, but if I make a mistake in front of him, he will defame me (shannaʿa
ʿalayya)’.1 This account highlights a sharp contrast between Ḥadīth and Qurʾān
transmissions, and gives us a fair understanding of the dynamics and norms
amongst the Qurrāʾ on the one hand, and amongst the muḥaddithūn on the
other. This contrast between the two professions is crucial for our understand-
ing of 1) how in its infancy the discipline of Qirāʾāt developed independently
from that of Ḥadīth, 2) the discipline began to slowly adopt Ḥadīth methodol-
ogy and implement it into the study of Qirāʾāt, and finally how 3) the disci-
pline was almost overtaken by the rules and methods of Ḥadīth scholarship.
Nowhere in the early works of Qirāʾāt does one find terms and concepts such
as mutābaʿāt, shawāhid, wijāda, irsāl, mukātaba,2 and other Ḥadīth terms: they
were foreign to the craft of Qurʾānic recitation. How Ḥadīth methodology was
taken up by Qirāʾāt scholarship is not difficult to picture. Ḥadīth and isnād
criticism permeated most disciplines of the Islamic religious sciences, includ-
ing secular disciplines such as poetry and adab. It was common for scholars
to be “literate” in several disciplines before specializing in one particular field,
1 Jamāl al-Dīn al-Mizzī (d. 742/1341), Tahdhīb al-kamāl fī asmāʾ al-rijāl, ed. Bashshār ʿAwwād
Maʿrūf, 35 vols. (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 1992), 7:317.
2 The terms will be defined later in the chapter.

Ḥadīth and Qur ʾ ān rijāl Criticism 101
and it is not surprising to find that the Qurrāʾ became involved in transmitting
Ḥadīth. Melchert has discussed this phenomenon and begun investigating the
relationship between the qurrāʾ and the ḥadīth transmitters by examining the
contributions of the eponymous Readers in the six canonical books of Ḥadīth.
After observing the similarities and differences between the two disciplines,
especially in the process of transmission, he concluded that the experts who
had developed the disciplines of Qirāʾāt and Ḥadīth did not overlap.3
I have argued previously that the discipline of Qirāʾāt moved from the do-
main of fiqh—or more accurately, a domain similar to fiqh in its methodology
and criteria of authentication—into the domain of Ḥadīth. The most salient
feature of this shift was abandoning the previous condition for accepting a
valid Qurʾānic Reading and implementing a new one. Ijmāʿ, a fiqh concept,
initially determined the validity and strength of one Qurʾānic reading over
another. However, it was later replaced by the criterion of a sound isnād, or
chain of transmission, a concept which belongs to the domain of Ḥadīth.
I have also argued that the treatment of Qirāʾāt as Ḥadīth material was the
main impetus behind the proliferation of variants, especially when scholars
began to follow the ways of the muḥaddithūn and travel throughout Muslim
lands to study different eponymous Readings, seek individual variants, ac-
quire shorter isnāds, and enquire about unclear, ambiguous transmissions.4
Ibn Mujāhid was harshly criticized for staying in his comfort zone in Baghdād
and not travelling to other cities to document and collect Qirāʾāt from other
masters of the craft.5 On the other hand, an early scholar who followed in
the footsteps of the muḥaddithūn in his Qirāʾāt scholarship was Ibn Mihrān
(d. 381/991), who, in addition to being a professional Qurʾān reader and qirāʾāt
collector, was also a professional muḥaddith from whom al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī
(d. 405/1014) transmitted ḥadīth.6 Ibn Mihrān travelled to Damascus, Baghdād,
Egypt, Khurāsān, Bukhārā, and Iṣbahān in order to study the Qurʾān accord-
ing to different System-Readings with the prominent qurrāʾ of his time.7 This
process of collecting and “hoarding” Qirāʾāt was against the spirit of how the
3 Christopher Melchert, “Ibn Mujāhid and the Establishment of Seven Qurʾanic Readings”,
Studia Islamica 91 (2000): 5–17.
4 Shady Hekmat Nasser, The Transmission of the Variant Readings of the Qurʾān: The Problem of
tawātur and the Emergence of shawādhdh (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 110–12.
5 Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Munjid al-muqriʾīn wa-murshid al-ṭālibīn, ed. ʿAlī b.
Muḥammad al-ʿImrān (Mecca: Dār al-fawāʾid, 1998), 215.
6 Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ al-kibār ʿalā l-ṭabaqāt wa-l-aʿṣār, ed.
Ṭayyār Ạltīqūlāg, 4 vols. (Istānbūl: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, İslâm Araştırmaları Merkezi, 1995),
2:663.
7 Ibid., 2:662–4. See also Ibn Mihrān’s isnād documentation in al-Mabsūṭ or al-Ghāya, where
he lists the places to which he travelled in his quest to seek an ijāza from specific readers;
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

102 CHAPTER 3
early Muslim communities viewed and practiced reciting the Qurʾān through
a localized limited network of reciters. The System-Readings were geographi-
cally and linguistically bound to the eponymous Readers. Each geographical
cluster followed a Qurʾānic Reading with which the locals were familiar, at
least insofar as the principles of recitation were concerned, several of which
were unique to each Reader. It was neither accidental nor frivolous that many
people expressed their disapproval of Ḥamza’s Reading and did not want to
recite it publicly. Yazīd b. Hārūn (d. 206/821) requested that Ḥamza’s Reading
not be recited in the central mosque of Wāsiṭ, while ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Mahdī
(d. 198/814) stated that if he had the power, he would have inflicted pain
upon anyone who read the Qurʾān using Ḥamza’s techniques of recitation.8
Al-Dhahabī said that the reason scholars disliked Ḥamza’s Reading was the
frequent pauses (sakt) he executed, the exaggeration in lengthening the vow-
els ( farṭ al-madd), and the imāla. Jokes were also made about Ḥamza. A man
came to him one day and said: ‘O Abū ʿUmāra [Ḥamza], I have just come across
one of your companions [i.e., followers]; he articulated the hamza so strongly
that the button of his shirt came off’.9 Nevertheless, Kūfans who were familiar
with Ḥamza’s Reading and techniques did not find them outlandish. Sufyān
al-Thawrī (d. 161/778) emphasized that Ḥamza never read a single verse of the
Qurʾān unless his recitation was supported by sunna and athar (practice of the
Prophet and his Companions).10
Transferring a Qirāʾa tradition from one region to another did not bear the
same fruits as collecting ḥadīth from different areas. We can picture the early
Qurʾān readers in a way similar to early Muslim jurists, in terms of being bound
to the practice and customs of their geographical vicinity. Just as legal schools
developed locally, where they generally became associated with particular cit-
ies and regions,11 Qirāʾāt schools also developed locally. When a legal madhhab
became well-established in a certain region, bringing in a foreign madhhab
Abū Bakr Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn Ibn Mihrān (d. 381/992), al-Mabsūṭ fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, ed.
Subayʿ Ḥākimī (Damascus: Majmaʿ al-lugha al-ʿarabiyya, 1986), 8–85.
8 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, 7:317.
9 Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Siyar aʿlām al-nubalāʾ, ed. Bashshār ʿAwwād
11 N. J. Coulson, A History of Islamic Law (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1964), 21–
52, especially 30–3; Yasin Dutton, The Origins of Islamic Law: The Qurʾan, the Muwaṭṭa‌ʾ and
Madinan ʿAmal (London: Routledge, 2002), 32–54; Hishām Yusrī al-ʿArabī, Jughrāfiyyat
al-madhāhib al-fiqhiyya (Cairo: Dār al-Baṣāʾir, 2005), 4–83; Ayman Shabana, “Custom, as a
source of law,” Encyclopaedia of Islam, third edition. Accessed 10 January 2018, availabe at
http://dx.doi.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1163/1573-3912_ei3_COM_24632.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

from the outside could not have been met with general acceptance. Ḥadīth
was not susceptible to such geographical and cultural disparities.
What made Ḥadīth and Qurʾān transmissions different from one another,
and how did the criteria of ʿadāla (integrity) of Ḥadīth transmitters come to be
applied to Qurʾān/Qirāʾāt readers? In Ḥadīth, no matter how different the word-
ing of an account was or how many times it underwent paraphrasing, editing,
and restructuring, what was ultimately important for the final product was the
content (maʿnā) of the transmission. There was a general agreement among
Ḥadīth scholars to accept traditions that have been transmitted by maʿnā, not-
withstanding a minority from the early generation of the muḥaddithūn who
insisted on transmitting traditions by lafẓ (verbatim). Some of these ḥadīth
transmitters were so strict that they prohibited adding or omitting a single let-
ter, even if it had no effect on the meaning. Nor were they keen on correcting
the Arabic of the matn, wanting to keep the ḥadīth in its pure, original form.12
That being said, the case of the Qurʾān was obviously different, for the inimi-
table word of God could not and should not be transmitted by maʿnā, not-
withstanding some reports on behalf of Companions such as Ibn Masʿūd, who
did not object to replacing some Qurʾānic words with their synonyms,13 and
some early Ḥanafites, who found it permissible to recite the Qurʾān in Persian
and manipulate its syntax so long as the meaning was unchanged.14 The most
important difference between the transmission of Qirāʾāt and that of Ḥadīth
is that the latter tolerated textual variants; the more transmissions and ḥadīth
variants one acquired on a particular topic or Prophetic dictum, the better cor-
roborated and validated the ḥadīth was (e.g. iʿtibār, mutābaʿa, and shawāhid;
follow up and confirmation).15 Nevertheless, the mechanism of transmission
within Ḥadīth was considerably different from that of the Qurʾān. This is what
I aim to explore in this chapter.
12 Abū Bakr al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī (d. 463/1069), al-Kifāya fī ʿilm al-riwāya (Hyderabad:
Dāʾirat al-maʿārif al-ʿuthmāniyya, 1938), 171–211; Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), Tadrīb
al-rāwī fī sharḥ Taqrīb al-Nawāwī, ed. Ṣalāḥ ʿUwayḍa, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-
ʿilmiyya, 1996), 2:58–66.
13 Muḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAẓīm al-Zurqānī, Manāhil al-ʿirfān fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān, ed. Fawwāz
Zamarlī, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1995), 1:132–4, 154–6; Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī
(d. 911/1505), al-Durr al-manthūr fī l-tafsīr bi-l-ma‌ʾthūr, ed. ʿAbd Allāh al-Turkī, 17 vols.
(Cairo: Markaz Hajar li-l-buḥūth wa-l-dirāsāt al-ʿarabiyya wa-l-islāmiyya, 2003), 13:285.
14 Shady Hekmat Nasser, “The Grammatical Blunders of Qurʾān Reciters: Zallat al-qāriʾ by
Abū Ḥafṣ al-Nasafī (d. 537/1497)”, Journal of Abbasid Studies 2 (2015): 1–37; Travis E. Zadeh,
The Vernacular Qur’an: Translation and the Rise of Persian Exegesis (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2012), 53–145.
15 Suyūṭī, Tadrīb, 1:128–30.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

104 CHAPTER 3
1 The Men of Ḥadīth: ṣifat al-rāwī
Without delving into the details of what established the overarching ʿadāla
of Ḥadīth transmitters, I will lay out the generally agreed upon conditions of
what constituted a thiqa or ʿadl (trustworthy) muḥaddith. But more than trust-
worthiness, I am interested in the situations where a muḥaddith was deemed
weak and consequently his ḥadīth was rejected. Note that the sources I am
relying on are later Ḥadīth manuals post Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ (d. 643/1245) when the
discipline became already crystallized and its methodology and terminology
already standardized. Early Ḥadīth rijāl criticism might prove to have different
standards than those which were developed in later periods. However, since
Qirāʾāt as a formal discipline was also developed later, and since isnād criticism
in Qirāʾāt was nearly absent in the early literature, confining myself to later
Ḥadīth scholarship makes the investigation more consistent. Critics have gen-
erally formulated four conditions upon which the transmission of a rāwī was
accepted: 1) Islām, 2) taklīf (reaching the age of legal responsibility), 3) ḍabṭ
(academic proficiency), and 4) ʿadāla (moral integrity). The first two condi-
tions are self-evident, since the transmission of a non-believer (kāfir) is not
accepted, nor is that of a minor (ṣabī), as he has no moral restraint to refrain
from lying.16
1.1 Ḍabṭ (Academic Proficiency)

In general, Ḥadīth critics require the transmitter to be accurate and meticulous
in his transmissions. Ḍabṭ entails two categories: memorization (in ḥaddatha
ḥifẓan) and attentive literacy (yaḥwī kitābahu). For the first, the rāwī should be
able to quote and recite from memory at any moment and under any circum-
stances. For the second, he should be familiar with the contents of his note-
books and able to recognize the slightest changes which people, intentionally
or inadvertently, may introduce to them. Critics also discuss a rawī’s yaqaẓa, or
his state of “academic” alertness in the discipline, wherein he is supposed to
16 One must distinguish between two forms of transmission. The first is taḥammul (to re-
ceive the ḥadīth) and the second is adāʾ (to deliver the ḥadīth). In the case of taḥammul,
Muslim scholars have accepted reception by both the non-believer and the boy, so long
as, by the time they deliver or transmit the ḥadīth, the first has become a Muslim and
the second has become legally responsible. Many Companions were either nonbeliev-
ers or still young boys when they heard the ḥadīth of the Prophet. Once they embraced
Islam or became legally responsible, transmitting ḥadīth from them became acceptable;
Shams al-Dīn al-Sakhāwī (d. 902/1497), Fatḥ al-mughīth bi-sharḥ Alfiyyat al-Ḥadīth, ed.
ʿAbd al-Karīm al-Khuḍayr and Muḥammad Fuhayd, 5 vols. (Riyad: Dār al-minhāj, 2005),
2:302–24.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

fully comprehend the content of his material and avoid the mistakes that are
usually committed by amateur transmitters.17 Two states must be observed in
the individual rāwī: the first is attentiveness during the reception of knowledge
(taḥammul, wuqūʿ al-ʿilm ʿind al-samāʿ) and the second is during committing
to memory that which he learned (al-ḥifẓ baʿd al-ʿilm). It is imperative that the
rāwī comprehends what he is receiving during the samāʿ process, otherwise it
would be similar to one listening to loud, unintelligible screaming. Thus, if the
rāwī does not understand the meaning of the words he is receiving/learning,
he would not qualify as ḍabṭ. Moreover, if after the process of reception and
comprehension (al-ʿilm wa-l-samāʿ) the rāwī has doubts about the materials he
committed to memory, he would not qualify as ḍabṭ.18 Since it is permissible to
transmit only the content of the ḥadīth (maʿnā), the rāwī must also maintain
an excellent knowledge of Arabic so that he is able to accurately convey the
meaning of the ḥadīth, even if he changes its wording.19
1.2 ʿAdāla (Moral Integrity)

The moral integrity of the rāwī is comprised by several elements related to his
virtuous conduct and reputation as a righteous Muslim. These elements in-
clude things such as avoiding the vicious behavior known to be associated with
unbelieving, polytheism, and innovation. Perpetrating a major sin (kabīra) or
frequently committing minor sins would also jeopardize one’s ʿadāla. Ḥadīth
critics also require a certain degree of social propriety (murūʾa) and frown
upon frivolous actions that could become valid and justifiable reasons to im-
pugn one’s moral integrity (such as urinating in public while standing up, tug-
ging one’s own beard in front of an audience, speaking ill of others, and eating
or drinking on the streets).20
The next step is to determine how a rāwī is deemed to be ʿadl. The first
method is through taʿdīl or tazkiya, during which other transmitters who were
already considered to be ʿudūl (sing. ʿadl) would vouch for the rāwī.21 The sec-
ond method is through corroboration and authentication, where the content
17 For example, making a mawqūf ḥadīth (whose isnād stops at a Companion) a marfūʿ one
(directly attributed to the Prophet), or making a mursal ḥadīth (whose isnād is missing a
Companion between a Successor and the Prophet) a muttaṣil one (soundly connected),
or misreading names and proper nouns; ibid., 2:156–7. Cf. Muḥammad b. Idrīs al-Shāfiʿī
(d. 204/820), al-Risāla, ed. Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir (Cairo: Maktabat dār al-turāth,
1979), 370–2.
18 Majd al-Dīn Abū l-Saʿādāt Ibn al-Athīr (d. 606/1210), Jāmiʿ al-uṣūl fī aḥādīth al-rasūl, ed.
ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Arnāʾūṭ, 11 vols. (Damascus: Maktabat al-Ḥalwānī, 1969), 1:72.
19 Sakhāwī, Fatḥ al-mughīth, 2:157–8.
20 Ibid., 2:159; Ibn al-Athīr, Jāmiʿ al-uṣūl, 1:75.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

106 CHAPTER 3
transmitted by the rāwī in question is compared with material transmitted by

other rāwīs whose ʿadāla was unanimously established and agreed upon by
the critics. If the transmissions of the rāwī under investigation agree with the
unanimously agreed-upon transmissions of the other rāwīs, this individual
would be deemed ḍabṭ. The opposite is also true (wa-ʿaksuhu ʿaksuhu); namely,
if the transmissions of the rāwī contradict those of the trustworthy individu-
als, the rāwī is deemed weak.22 According to the first method, taʿdīl, one is not
obliged to mention the reason for deeming someone trustworthy; thus, it is
acceptable to issue a statement of taʿdīl without enumerating the reasons for
ʿadāla. However, for jarḥ (impeaching, impugning), the reasons for deeming
someone to be weak must be stated clearly, especially if there are contradic-
tory statements about the rāwī according to which he is deemed trustworthy
by some critics but untrustworthy by others.23
The last point I want to bring up in the context of Ḥadīth is matn vs. isnād
criticism. To what degree did Muslim scholars criticize the content of the tradi-
tions? By criticism I mean evaluating the soundness or weakness of a ḥadīth
based solely on its content, which includes justifying the apparent and subtle
contradictions with other ḥadīths and Qurʾānic references. Although the pri-
mary criticism employed by Ḥadīth critics was directed at the various aspects
of the isnād and the individuals who made up these isnāds, some Ḥadīth crit-
ics did engage in limited matn criticism. According to Brown, criticisms related
to historical anachronism, logical impossibility, and incompatibility with legal
dogma were reasons for rejecting some ḥadīths. The subjectivity of content
criticism, where what may seem logical to one could be illogical and incompre-
hensible to another, was what led Muslim scholars to employ more objective
methods for evaluating and authenticating ḥadīths: namely, isnād criticism
and cross examination of transmitters.24 Thus, the attempts made at the level
of matn criticism were mainly concerned with forgery, in particular blatant
forgery. Some of the criteria proposed by Ḥadīth critics as indications of forg-
ery in the content of a tradition included the presence of impossible notions;
contradictions with the Qurʾān; opposition to widely transmitted sunna and
ijmāʿ; and crucial issues or momentous events transmitted by a few transmit-
ters only, the importance and gravity of which should have been reported by
22 Abū l-Fidāʾ ʿImād al-Dīn Ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373), al-Bāʿith al-ḥathīth sharḥ ikhtiṣār ʿulūm
al-Ḥadīth, ed. Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir (Riyad: Maktabat al-maʿārif, 1996), 284.
23 Ibid., 285–7. Cf. Eerik Dickinson, The Development of Early Sunnite Ḥadīth Criticism
(Leiden: Brill, 2001), 85–104.
24 Jonathan Brown, “How We Know Early Ḥadīth Critics Did Matn Criticism and Why It’s So
Hard to Find”, Islamic Law and Society 15:2 (2008): 143–84.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

more transmitters.25 To conclude, it suffices to say that Ḥadīth scholarship

paid more attention to the isnād than the matn, despite some documented
attempts to not completely ignore the latter.26
I will now turn to Qirāʾāt scholarship and examine the sort of criticism
Qirāʾāt critics applied to the isnād of Qirāʾāt. Matn criticism of the variant read-
ings is best exemplified by the literature on ʿilal and tawjīh,27 several examples
of which were encountered in the previous chapter. Scholars such al-Ṭabarī
and al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1143) are examples of critics who rejected variant
readings based on matn criticism.28 That is to say, they studied the variants
grammatically, phonetically, and hermeneutically, and were then inclined to
reject certain readings. Later Qirāʾāt scholarship parted ways with matn criti-
cism and accepted the entire corpus of the Seven Canonical Readings without
questioning their contents: a sound isnād and an alleged tawātur were suffi-
cient to establish the validity and divine nature of these Readings.
2 Qirāʾāt and isnād Criticism29
Did Qirāʾāt scholars perform isnād criticism on the chains of transmissions of

the Eponymous Readings, and did they carry out a sophisticated and engaged
process of jarḥ and taʿdīl with regards to the rāwīs and readers of the Qurʾān?
The short answer is no. A survey of ṭabaqāt dictionaries of both disciplines,
Ḥadīth and Qirāʾāt, gives us a clear indication that the processes of taʿdīl and
tazkiya, of deeming readers to be reliable or not, did not take place as methodi-
cally in Qirāʾāt as it did in Ḥadīth. This is evident through the sheer number
of biographical compilations we have on the muḥaddithūn as compared to
25 Idem, “The Rules of Matn Criticism: There Are No Rules”, Islamic Law and Society 19:4
(2012): 362; cf. al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī, Kifāya, 432.
26 Aḥmad Amīn, Fajr al-Islām (Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1969), 217.
27 Shady Hekmat Nasser, “Revisiting Ibn Mujāhid’s position on the seven canonical Readings:
Ibn ʿĀ mir’s problematic reading of ‘kun fa-yakūna’”, Journal of Qur’anic Studies 17:1 (2015):
88–9.
28 I would like to make a correction in my earlier discussion of al-Ṭabarī’s opinion on (Q. 1:4)
māliki vs. maliki, in which al-Ṭabarī clearly favored maliki (awlā l-qirāʾatayni bi-l-ṣawāb …
maliki); however, I mistakenly read the following passage on mālika—in the accusative—
to be māliki—in the genitive. Thus, al-Ṭabarī prohibited “mālika” and not “māliki”, yet he
still favored “maliki” over “māliki”; Nasser, Transmission, p. 43; cf. al-Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 1:152–9.
29 See the recent publication on this topic by al-Muṭayrī, who gave a good historical, al-
beit traditional, survey of isnād criticism in Qirāʾāt; Aḥmad b. Saʿd al-Muṭayrī, Asānīd
al-Qirāʾāt wa-manhaj al-qurrāʾ fī dirāsatihā (Riyad: Jāmiʿat al-Imām Muḥammad b. Suʿūd,
2013), especially 69–392.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

108 CHAPTER 3
the scanty number of books we have on the qurrāʾ. Besides the two major ex-
tant works on the Qurrāʾ by al-Dhahabī and Ibn al-Jazarī, bibliographic sourc-
es list a few more titles which are now lost. Khalīfa b. Khayyāṭ (d. 240/854)
was credited with a work titled Ṭabaqāt al-qurrāʾ, and Abū l-Ḥusayn Ibn
al-Munādī (d. 336/947) reportedly wrote a book called Afwāj al-qurrāʾ.30 In ad-
dition to a ṭabaqāt work attributed to the great Qurʾān reader al-Bāṭarqānī (or
al-Bāṭirqānī) (d. 460/1068), a better known work of ṭabaqāt al-qurrāʾ was au-
thored by al-Dānī, which was a source for Ibn al-Jazarī’s Ghāyat al-nihāya.31 Ibn
Mihrān (d. 381/992) allegedly wrote a book in this genre, as did Abū Maʿshar
al-Ṭabarī (d. 478/1085) and Abū l-ʿAlāʾ al-Hamadhānī (d. 569/1173), under the
title al-Intiṣār fī maʿrifat qurrāʾ al-mudun wa-l-amṣār.32 These are the titles
known to us that were solely dedicated to presenting biographies of the Qurʾān
readers, starting with the Companions as the first generation of the Qurrāʾ.
That being said, al-Dhahabī and Ibn al-Jazarī’s two works are still the main
sources for the biographies of the Qurrāʾ.
2.1 The Importance of isnād

How important was the isnād in the transmission of Qirāʾāt, and why didn’t
Muslim scholars compile more books in the genre of Qirāʾāt isnād criticism
like they did with Ḥadīth? Moreover, to what extent were these books utilized
in the process of establishing the authenticity of the transmission of a certain
Qirāʾa? Since the established criterion for accepting a Qurʾānic Reading as ca-
nonical was its sound isnād (ṣiḥḥat al-sanad)—a Ḥadīth parameter—the next
task is to investigate the criteria for accepting a sound Ḥadīth, after which I will
inquire into the applicability of these criteria to Qirāʾāt transmission.
1) The chain of transmission must be connected (ittiṣāl al-sanad): each
transmitter in the chain of transmission must have received his transmis-
sion directly from the person preceding him and so forth, until the chain
reaches the Prophet without interruptions. The reception process could
have been direct from a master or through one of the validated forms of
ijāzas.
2) The ʿadāla of the transmitters: as discussed above.
30 Ṭalāl al-Daʿjānī, Mawārid Ibn ʿAsākir fī Tārīkh Dimashq, 3 vols. (Riyad: al-Jāmiʿa al-Islāmiyya,
2003), 1:439–442; Kamāl al-Dīn Ibn al-ʿAdīm (d. 660/1262), Bughyat al-ṭalab fī tārīkh Ḥalab,
ed. Suhayl Zakkār, 12 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr, 1988), 2:596.
31 Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Ghāyat al-nihāya fī ṭabaqāt al-qurrāʾ, ed. Gotthelf
Bergsträsser, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 2006), 1:9.
32 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:72–4; Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn al-Munajjid, “Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ al-kibār
ʿalā l-ṭabaqāt wa-l-aʿṣār li-l-Dhahabī”, Majallat majmaʿ al-lugha al-ʿarabiyya bi-Dimashq
49:1 (1974): 133–47.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

3) The ḍabṭ of the transmitters: as discussed earlier.33

4) Being free from shudhūdh: shādhdh is defined as that which deviates
from the consensus (al-munfarid ʿan al-jumhūr). However, it is important
to note that describing a transmitter as dhū l-shudhūdh did not necessar-
ily mean he was untrustworthy. On the contrary, in Ḥadīth terminology,
shādhdh is an attribute given to a trustworthy transmitter who neverthe-
less deviated from the consensus of other transmitters of a given ḥadīth
either in additions or omissions to the text, or in the isnād, such as trans-
mitting on behalf of someone who was not known to have transmitted
that particular ḥadīth. One important thing to note in the definition is
that combining both a shādhdh transmission and a transmission via the
consensus of the jumhūr is not possible (lā yumkin al-jamʿ baynahumā).34
5) Being free from ʿilla: ʿilla is defined as a subtle flaw (ʿilla khafiyya) in the
transmission of a ḥadīth that cannot be detected except by masters of
the craft. The reasons behind rejecting a flawed ḥadīth (muʿallal) are not
clear to those uninitiated in the discipline of Ḥadīth. After studying the
different paths and isnāds of a particular ḥadīth, the masters of Ḥadīth
criticism may detect a flaw that leads them to reject it (ʿilla qādiḥa).35
Except for the last element, ʿilla, all four criteria are clearly relevant and ap-
plicable in the discipline of Qirāʾāt. That being said, even the concept of ʿilla
does have some applicability, although ʿilal al-Ḥadīth and ʿilal al-Qirāʾāt are
methodologically distinct and serve different purposes. The former tries to
find faults with a certain ḥadīth, while the latter tries to prove the veracity of
an alternative variant reading. Indeed, the correspondence between these five
conditions and the notions we have discussed earlier with regards to the au-
thenticity and verification of a variant reading of the Qurʾān are uncanny. I will
further flesh out these aspects in the following pages.
2.2 ittiṣāl al-sanad: The isnād of the Qirāʾāt

As mentioned earlier, a shift took place in the way the validity of the Qirāʾāt
was determined: ijmāʿ as an element of a sound Qirāʾa was “nominally”
dropped and replaced later on by the criterion of a sound chain of transmis-
sion. Moreover, it became commonly held that the seven and ten Eponymous
Readings of the Qurʾān were transmitted via tawātur. However, this claim was,
and still is, problematic, leading some Muslim scholars to rethink this notion
of tawātur as far as Qirāʾāt were concerned, and resort instead to the argument

34 Ibid., 2:5–11.
35 Ibid., 2:47–9.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

110 CHAPTER 3
that a sound chain of transmission is enough to establish the validity of an

Eponymous Reading.36 Let us now consider what is meant by a sound chain
of transmission and how this Ḥadīth parameter may apply to the isnād of
the Qirāʾāt.
It is commonly believed that the transmission of the Qurʾān/Qirāʾāt can
only be validated through oral attestation, where a trustworthy Imām would
transmit from another (thiqa ʿan thiqa, imām ʿan imām).37 The main point of
contention in the isnād of the Qirāʾāt is the period before their collection. One
can take a leap of faith and trust the thorough, meticulous, and industrious
scholarship and documentation carried out by the Qirāʾāt scholars of the late
2nd/8th century. Indeed, the proliferation of isnād and the ample number of
transmitters from the generation of the rāwīs (Ḥafṣ, Warsh, Qālūn, etc.) onward
to the collectors of the Qirāʾāt (Ibn Mujāhid, Ibn Mihrān, Ibn Ghalbūn, al-Dānī,
etc.) instill confidence in us in terms of the meticulousness and academic in-
tegrity of these scholars. They were impartial and scrupulous insomuch as to
record the slightest changes of sounds, articulation, and even hand gestures
and body language.38 Nevertheless, the problematic aspect of Qirāʾāt trans-
mission lies in two areas: the first is the generations between the Eponymous
Readers and their Rāwīs, and the second is the generation between the Prophet
and the Eponymous Readers.
While the theory of tawātur necessitates that tawātur must take place
in every single generation of the transmitters, the fact remains that all the
Eponymous Readings were transmitted via single strands of transmissions
(āḥād) between the Prophet and the seven Readers, which rendered the
tawātur of these Readings questionable and problematic. The Islamic tradition
emphasizes that all the Eponymous Readings were taught and approved by the
Prophet; qirāʾa is sunna: no Eponymous Reader exercised ijtihād in decipher-
ing the consonantal outline of the muṣḥaf. Therefore, each Eponymous Reader
possessed an isnād that connected him to the Companions, and eventually to
the Prophet. But what then was the full isnād of the Eponymous Readings be-
tween the Prophet and the Seven Readers? Qirāʾāt manuals were often silent
on this point. The documentation of the isnād usually started with the author
of the Qirāʾāt manual and ended at the Eponymous Reader. The isnād be-
tween the Seven Readers and the Prophet was either assumed or non-existent.
This portion of the isnād was often separately augmented from biographical
36 Nasser, Transmission, 65–73, 98–111.

37 Zurqānī, Manāhil, 1:238.
38 Refer to Chapter Four for the cases related to performing hand and face gestures during
recitation.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

dictionaries and projected onto the documentation of asānīd at the beginning

of Qirāʾāt manuals. For example, all the isnād documentation of the Seven
Readings in Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa stops at the Seven Readers. Yet in the
section dedicated to their biographies, several didactic accounts are recorded.
One man asked another:
– Which Qirāʾa do you read/follow?
– I follow the Reading of Nāfiʿ.
– With whom did Nāfiʿ read/study?
– Nāfiʿ informed us that he read with [ʿAbd al-Raḥmān] al-Aʿraj, who said that
he read with Abū Hurayra, who said that he read with Ubayy b. Kaʿb, who
said that the Prophet recited the Qurʾān before him, for Jibrīl commanded
the Prophet to recite (ʿaraḍa—aʿriḍ) the Qurʾān in front of him [Ubayy].39
Apparently, Nāfiʿ claimed that he read the Qurʾān with seventy Successors.
Al-Musayyabī, one of Nāfiʿ’s close students, named only five of those Successors
because he forgot the names of the rest. In describing how he “compiled”
(allaftu) and put together his System-Reading, Nāfiʿ stated that when [two]
readers agreed on (ijtamaʿā) a variant he adopted it, but when one deviated
(shadhdha) from the rest, he abandoned it. It is obvious from this account how
Ḥadīth methodology and terminology were employed in this statement. Below
is a stemma that shows how Nāfiʿ received his Reading from the Prophet, which
seems to have been mainly attributed to Ubayy b. Kaʿb.
Moving to Ibn Kathīr we notice a less sophisticated isnād that connected
him to the Prophet. Note that this Reading was also attributed to Ubayy b. Kaʿb.
As for ʿĀṣim, he reportedly studied with Zirr b. Ḥubaysh (d. 81/700–1) and
Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī (d. 74/693–4). Notwithstanding the reports
that al-Sulamī studied with Zayd b. Thābit, Ubayy, and ʿUthmān, it was gener-
ally presumed that al-Sulamī’s chief master was ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib. Thus, ʿĀṣim’s
Reading was commonly attributed to ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib and Ibn Masʿūd.
The isnād documentation of the other Kūfan, Ḥamza, was slightly more
problematic. First, the narratives stated that Ḥamza was more inclined to-
wards the Reading of Ibn Masʿūd as inherited by al-Aʿmash, with whom Ḥamza
reportedly studied. Second, as one notices in the other stemmata, there were
two or three generations separating the Eponymous Reader from the Prophet.
The isnād of Ḥamza stands out in that regard, since in some of its strands five
individuals separated him from the Prophet. Interestingly, it was the Reading
that was least accepted amongst the seven, and which several early Muslim
authorities even denounced as bidʿa (innovation), which developed the most
al-maʿārif, 1979), 54–5.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

112 CHAPTER 3
FIGURE 16 The transmission between the Prophet and Nāfiʿ
Prophet
Ubayy b. Kaʿb
Ibn ʿAbbās
Mujāhid b. Jabr Dirbās mawlā Ibn ʿAbbās
Ibn Kathīr
FIGURE 17 The transmission between the Prophet and

Ibn Kathīr
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

FIGURE 18 The transmission between the Prophet and ʿĀṣim
FIGURE 19 The transmission between the Prophet and Ḥamza
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

114 CHAPTER 3
Prophet
Ubayy b. Kaʿb
Ibn ʿAbbās
Mujāhid b. Jabr
Saʿīd b. Jubayr
Ibn Kathīr Ḥumayd b. Qays
Yaḥyā b.
Yaʿmur
Abū Amr b. al-ʿAlāʾ

FIGURE 20 The transmission between the Prophet and Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ
sophisticated and detailed isnād between Ḥamza and the Prophet, by connect-
ing him to several Companions and thereby bestowing upon the Reading more
legitimacy. That being said, the general consensus amongst the Qurrāʾ believed
that the Reading of Ḥamza was mainly connected to ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib through
Ibn Abī Laylā (d. 148/765–6), and to Ibn Masʿūd through al-Aʿmash.
The Reading of the third Kūfan, al-Kisāʾī, did not call for a separate isnād
documentation, since it was assumed that his System-Reading was an amalga-
mation of Ḥamza’s and other Readers, just like the Reading of Khalaf al-ʿĀshir
in Ibn al-Jazarī’s system was considered to be an amalgamation of the Readings
of Ḥamza and al-Kisāʾī. Al-Kisāʾī was often reported to have asked Ḥamza about
his isnād rather than supplying his own. As for the Baṣran Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ,
his Reading was also attributed to Ubayy b. Kaʿb. There is an emphasis through
the accounts that AA adopted his Reading from the Ḥijāz, despite studying
with several Baṣran masters, most probably to eliminate doubts concerning
the development of his unique style of recitation, and to highlight its approval
through Ḥijāzī authorities.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Prophet
ʿUthmān b. ʿAffān
al-Mughīra b. Abī Shihāb

al-Makhzūmī
FIGURE 21
The transmission between
Ibn ʿĀmirʾ the Prophet and Ibn ʿĀmir
Lastly, the Reading of Ibn ʿĀmir has the least detailed isnād documentation,
directly connecting him to ʿUthmān through only one person.
3 The Mythical Ancestry of Qirāʾāt
It is important to note that the above chains of transmissions were presented

by Ibn Mujāhid in his introduction to the biographies of the seven Readers,
and not as part of the complete chain of transmission between him and the
Prophet. In other words, the process of isnād documentation was not uti-
lized at the generation of the seven Readers, which roughly corresponds to
the first quarter of the 2nd/8th century. According to written records, the
Eponymous Readers were “later” asked by their students how they learned
their Qirāʾa, and with whom they studied. Naturally, later Qirāʾāt manuals de-
veloped more sophisticated isnāds, where complete and continuous chains of
transmission were introduced as full-fledged isnāds that connected the Qurrāʾ
community directly to the Prophet. Ibn Mihrān, in his eighty-page documen-
tation of the chains of transmission of the ten Readings, connected each one
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

116 CHAPTER 3
of them directly to the Prophet through a continuous uninterrupted isnād,40

unlike Ibn Mujāhid whose isnād documentation stopped at the Eponymous
Readers, after which he listed possible connections between each Reader and
the Prophet. Nevertheless, while documenting the isnād of the Reading of
Ibn Kathīr, Ibn Mihrān stopped at Ubayy b. Kaʿb without directly connecting
him to the Prophet. Then, he adduced a statement by Qunbul on behalf of his
teacher al-Qawwās al-Nabbāl saying: “We are certain that Ubayy received his
recitation directly from the Prophet”.41 In another instance, Ibn Mihrān intro-
duced a statement by Ibn Dhakwān concerning the master with whom Ibn
ʿĀmir studied: “Ibn ʿĀmir read the Qurʾān with a certain man, and that man
read the Qurʾān with ʿUthmān b. ʿAffān (wa-qara‌ʾa ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿĀmir ʿalā rajul,
wa-qara‌ʾa l-rajul ʿalā ʿUthmān)”. Ibn Mihrān added a statement attributed to al-
Akhfash al-Dimashqī (d. 292/904): “Ibn Dhakwān did not name the man with
whom Ibn ʿĀmir studied, but Hishām b. ʿAmmār determined his identity to be
al-Mughīra b. Abī Shihāb al-Makhzūmī”.
This particular case of Ibn ʿĀmir is very important in terms of understand-
ing how isnād might have been retroactively projected onto a Qirāʾa in order to
legitimize it by connecting it to the Companions and eventually to the Prophet,
for the Eponymous Readings were not believed to be the product of fallible
human reasoning but rather a sound and direct transmission from the Prophet
down to the later generation of the Qurrāʾ. Who was al-Mughīra b. Abī Shihāb
al-Makhzūmī, the only connection Ibn ʿĀmir had to ʿUthmān b. ʿAffān, and
what do we know about him? Al-Dhahabī wrote five lines about al-Mughīra
and stated the following: “It reached us that he [al-Mughīra] read the Qurʾān
with ʿUthmān b. ʿAffān. Ibn ʿĀmir mentioned that he read the Qurʾān with him
[al-Mughīra]. I think (aẓunnuhu) that he used to recite the Qurʾān in Damascus
during the caliphate of Muʿāwiya. Nothing is known about al-Mughīra except
for his connection to Ibn ʿĀmir. God knows best. I previously read in the notes/
notebook of Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Qaṣṣāʿ that al-Mughīra was ninety years old
when he died in the year 91/709–10”.42 This suspicious connection between
Ibn ʿĀmir, al-Mughīra, and ʿUthmān b. ʿAffān did not escape the critical eye of
al-Ṭabarī, who launched an attack on the alleged attribution of this Reading to
the third caliph. Al-Ṭabarī said in a statement attributed to him by al-Sakhāwī:
40 Ibn Mihrān, Mabsūṭ, 8–85.

41 Thus, elevating the transmission of the Qirāʾa from the status of mawqūf to that of
muttaṣil; Ibid., 23.
42 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:136; Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī, Tārīkh al-Islām wa-wafayāt
al-mashāhīr wa-l-aʿlām, ed. ʿAbd al-Salām Tadmurī, 53 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī,
1990), 6:484.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Some people claimed that Ibn ʿĀmir received his Qirāʾa from al-Mughīra
b. Abī Shihāb al-Makhzūmī, and that the latter studied the Qurʾān with
ʿUthmān. However, such a matter was not known about ʿUthmān, and
we are not familiar with anyone who claimed to have read/studied the
Qurʾān with him. Indeed, we only know of a few [individual variant]
readings reported on behalf of ʿUthmān. Moreover, had al-Mughīra dedi-
cated time and effort to study the Qurʾān with ʿUthmān, as the transmit-
ter of that report claimed, other Muslims would have also studied with
ʿUthmān, especially some of his relatives and close ones, for they had
priority and precedence over al-Mughīra. Thus, it is erroneous to claim
that al-Mughīra read the Qurʾān with him. On top of that, the transmitter
of that report was an unknown individual who went by the name of ʿIrāk
b. Khālid. He is considered to be an unknown entity within the Ḥadīth
community (ahl al-āthār), where the only person who transmitted from
him was Hishām b. ʿAmmār.43
Naturally, Muslim scholars criticized al-Ṭabarī for this statement, which could
ultimately lead to depriving the Reading of Ibn ʿĀmir of its sanctity by casting
doubts on its allegedly connected isnād to the Companions and, ultimately,
the Prophet. Al-ʿAlam al-Sakhāwī (d. 643/1245), and later on Ibn al-Jazarī, criti-
cized al-Ṭabarī harshly, condemning his statement as absurd and preposter-
ous ( fa-unẓur ilā hādhā l-qawl al-sāqiṭ).44 How did the Muslim scholars who
believed in the tawātur and divine provenance of the eponymous Readings
in general, and that of Ibn ʿĀmir in particular, respond to al-Ṭabarī’s claim?
First, they argued that ʿUthmān did teach the Qurʾān to people other than
al-Mughīra. Other “reliable” accounts bear witness to the fact that ʿUthmān
taught his Qirāʾa to Zirr b. Ḥubaysh, Abū l-Aswad al-Duʾalī, and Abū ʿAbd
al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī. The second response concerned ʿIrāk b. Khālid being an
unknown individual who could not be trusted as a muḥaddith. Al-Sakhāwī’s so-
lution to this dilemma was easier than one may think. Since Hishām b. ʿAmmār
was established to be thiqa and ʿadl, by accepting a transmission from ʿIrāk and
trusting him, Hishām readily testified to the ʿadāla of ʿIrāk by means of the
aforementioned Ḥadīth mechanism of taʿdīl and tazkiya.45
43 ʿAlam al-Dīn al-Sakhāwī (d. 643/1245), Jamāl al-qurrāʾ wa-kamāl al-iqrāʾ, ed. ʿAlī Ḥusayn
al-Bawwāb, 2 vols. (Mecca: Maktabat al-turāth, 1987), 432–3.
44 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 2:267. Cf. Labīb al-Saʿīd, Difāʿ ʿan al-qirāʾāt al-mutawātira fī muwājahat
al-Ṭabarī al-mufassir (Cairo: [n.p.], 1978), 12–27.
45 Refer to the previous section on ʿadāla (moral integrity).
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

118 CHAPTER 3
Another intriguing aspect of the aforementioned asānīd was the attribu-

tion of the Eponymous Readings to what I am calling a mythical ancestry rep-
resented by Companions who were known “historically” to have been closely
associated with the Qurʾān. First, by associating the Eponymous Readings with
the Companions, the controversy stemming from the exercise of reason and
ijtihād in Qurʾānic recitation was eliminated. Ḥadīth scholarship, especially
through uṣūl al-fiqh, and as early as al-Shāfiʿī,46 had already established that all
the Companions were ʿudūl.47 Thus, posing the Companions as the originators
and main source of all the Eponymous Readings, naturally through the instruc-
tion of the Prophet, eliminated all doubts concerning the validity and sanctity
of the Qurʾānic Readings. While the choice behind some of these Companions
seems logical, it is nevertheless puzzling. Ubayy b. Kaʿb became the princi-
pal originator of three out of the seven Readings: those of Nāfiʿ, Ibn Kathīr,
and Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ. Fortuitously, it was also Ubayy to whom a Ḥadīth on
the Sabʿat aḥruf was attributed, wherein he expressed his doubts about the
Prophet acknowledging different readings of the same verse.48
Although Abū ʿAmr’s Reading was categorized as Baṣran—and rightly so,
for it has always been associated with Baṣran authorities, grammarians, and
philologists49—there was an emphasis in the biographical dictionaries and
Qirāʾāt manuals that Abū ʿAmr followed the Ḥijāzīs in his recitation. Without
46 Read the statements attributed to al-Shāfiʿī in Abū Bakr al-Bayhaqī (d. 458/1066), al-
Madkhal ilā l-sunan al-kubrā, ed. Muḥammad Ḍiyāʾ al-Raḥmān al-Aʿẓamī, 2 vols. (Riyad:
Aḍwāʾ al-salaf, 1999), 1:43–60, especially 44–7; cf. Shāfiʿī, Risāla, 596–8.
47 Yūsuf al-Marʿashlī, ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth al-sharīf wa-bayān maṣādirihi (Beirut: Dār al-maʿrifa,
2017), 161–7; cf. Abū ʿUmar Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463/1071), al-Istīʿāb fī maʿrifat al-aṣḥāb,
ed. ʿĀdil Murshid (Amman: Dār al-iʿlām, 2002), 15; Shihāb al-Dīn Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī
(d. 852/1449), al-Iṣāba fī tamyīz al-ṣaḥāba, ed. Abū Hājar Zaghlūl, 9 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-
kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1853), 1:6–9; al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī, Kifāya, 46–9; Ibn Kathīr, al-Bāʿith
al-ḥathīth, 498–500; Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1347), al-Ruwāt al-thiqāt al-
mutakallam fīhim bimā lā yūjib raddahum, ed. Muḥammad Ibrāhīm al-Mawṣilī (Beirut:
Dār al-bashāʾir al-islāmiyya, 1992), 24.
48 Abū l-Ḥusayn Muslim b. al-Ḥajjāj (d. 261/875) and Muḥyī l-Dīn al-Nawawī (d. 676/1277),
Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim bi-sharḥ al-Nawawī (al-Minhāj sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim b. al-Ḥajjāj), 18 vols.
(Cairo: al-Maṭbaʿa al-miṣriyya bi-l-Azhar, 1929), 6:101–2; Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal (d. 241/855),
Musnad al-Imām Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, ed. Shuʿayb al-Arnāʾūṭ and ʿĀdil Murshid, 50 vols.
(Beirut: Dār al-risāla, 1995), 35:16–18; cf. Nasser, Transmission, 20.
49 Mustafa Shah, “Exploring the Genesis of Early Arabic Linguistic Thought: Qur’anic
Readers and Grammarians of the Baṣran Tradition (Part II)”, Journal of Qur’anic Studies
5:2 (2003): 1–47. Cf. idem, “Exploring the Genesis of Early Arabic Linguistic Thought:
Qur’anic Readers and Grammarians of the Kūfan Tradition (Part I)”, Journal of Qur’anic
Studies 5:1 (2003): 47–78; Ramzi Baalbaki, “The treatment of Qirāʾāt by the second and
third century grammarians”, in The Qur’an: Formative Interpretation, ed. Andrew Rippin
(Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999), 159–80.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

dismissing the close textual affinity between the Baṣran and Medinan codices,50
the reason behind this geographic emphasis was probably to dismiss the al-
legations that he and the Baṣran grammarians exercised ijtihād and followed
the rules of al-ʿarabiyya instead of following sunna.51 This was all the more
unusual due to several of his unique and unusual techniques in recitation,
such as the major assimilation (al-idghām al-kabīr) and the reduction of vow-
els (ikhtilās).52 Be that as it may, Ubayy b. Kaʿb was seen as the originator of
the Ḥijāzī school, while ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib and Ibn Masʿūd were taken to be the
principal originators of the Kūfan Readings of ʿĀṣim, Ḥamza, and eventually
al-Kisāʾī. As for the Reading of Ibn ʿĀmir, the Damascene, who could have been
a more fitting choice as the mythical founder of this Reading than ʿUthmān
b. ʿAffān, an Umayyad from Quraysh, the father of the codified maṣāḥif and
a Companion of Umayyad ancestry, whose alleged Reading and rendition of
the Qurʾān became the commonly recited Qirāʾā of the people of Damascus
under the Umayyad Caliphate throughout the 1st/7th century? Indeed, after
the fall of the Umayyads, official support for this particular Reading seems to
have gradually subsided, leading to its dwindling popularity, which may ex-
plain its poor documentation in later sources and the relatively small number
of its transmitters.53 In Ibn al-Jazarī’s words, the Reading of Ibn ʿĀmir was the
commonly recited Qirāʾā in Syria up to the year 500/1106–7.54 Ibn al-Jazarī was
perplexed as to why Syrians, including himself, were no longer reciting accord-
ing to the Reading of Ibn ʿĀmir: “today, the widely used Reading in Syria, the
Ḥijāz, Yemen, and Egypt is that of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ. Most Qurʾān teachers
today instruct people according to the System-Reading of Abū ʿAmr, only in-
asmuch as the farsh (individual variants) are concerned, for they often make
mistakes when it comes to the principles of recitation (uṣūl). Up until the year
500, people in Syria recited only the Reading of Ibn ʿĀmir, after which they
abandoned it, for a man came from Iraq and began instructing people in the
Umayyad mosque according to the System of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ. This man
50 Refer to Chapter Four for a detailed discussion on this issue.

51 Muḥammad Samīr Najīb al-Labadī, Athar al-Qurʾān wa-l-qirāʾāt fī l-naḥw al-ʿarabī (Kuwait:
Dār al-kutub al-thaqāfiyya, 1978), especially 63–170, 350ff.
52 This will be briefly discussed in the next chapter. On the controversy surrounding ikhtilās
and al-idghām al-kabīr, see Jonathan Owens, A Linguistic History of Arabic (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2006), 119–136; ʿAbd al-Ṣabūr Shāhīn, Athar al-qirāʾāt fī l-aṣwāt wa-l-naḥw
al-ʿarabī: Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ (Cairo: al-Khānjī, 1987), especially 120–60, 309–400.
54 Al-Ṭabarī was probably the first important figure known to have publicly criticized and
condemned many aspects of Ibn ʿĀmir’s Reading; Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429),
al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, ed. ʿAlī Muḥammad al-Ḍabbāʿ, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub
al-ʿilmiyya), 2:264.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

120 CHAPTER 3
acquired many followers, and because of him the Reading of Abū ʿAmr gained
fame. This is what I heard, but I am not really certain why the Syrians aban-
doned the Reading of Ibn ʿĀmir and adopted the Reading of Abū ʿAmr.”55
The last point I want to note here is the discrepancy one may notice between
the narrative of attributing the Eponymous Readings to certain Companions,
and the late reconstructed narrative that recounted the events in the wake
of the codification process by ʿUthmān. The Islamic tradition acknowledged
the textual differences among the five codices ʿUthmān dispatched to the re-
gional capitals of Medina, Mecca, Kūfa, Damascus, and Baṣra.56 Additionally,
the Islamic narratives dealt extensively with the controversy concerning the
actual number of these codices, which ranged from four to nine.57 That being
so, there is hardly any information in the historical records about the process
of dispatching these codices, including the identity of the messengers with
whom ʿUthmān sent them. Later Muslim scholarship reconstructed these
narratives and sketched a more coherent, idealized picture of what had “ac-
tually” happened. Relying on the biographical information imbedded in later
Qirāʾāt manuals and Ṭabaqāt works, the restructured narrative was as fol-
lows: ʿUthmān chose trustworthy transmitters whom he dispatched to the
different regional capitals. He sent a Companion with each muṣḥaf to teach
the people of each region how to read the Qurʾān according to the particu-
lar ḥarf in which that muṣḥaf was written. Thus, he sent ʿAbd Allāh b. al-Sāʾib
to Mecca with the Meccan codex, al-Mughīra b. Shihāb al-Makhzūmī to Syria
with the Damascene codex, Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Sulamī to Kūfa with the
Kūfan codex, ʿĀmir b. ʿAbd al-Qays to Baṣra with the Baṣran codex, and he
asked Zayd b. Thābit to remain in Medina and read the Qurʾān according to the
55 This man was identified either to be Sabīʿ b. al-Muslim b. ʿAlī b. Hārūn Abū l-Waḥsh, known
as Ibn Qīrāṭ (d. 508/1115) or Hibat Allāh b. Aḥmad b. Ṭāwūs al-Baghdādī al-Dimashqī
(d. 536/1141), or it could have been simply both of them since they were teacher and stu-
dent; Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 1:265, 274, 381, 2:304.
56 Refer to Chapter Four for more details.
57 According to Muslim tradition, the number of the codices ranged from four to nine. See
the lengthy footnote by the editor of al-Dānī’s Muqniʿ, where she documents the opin-
ions of different Muslim scholars and authorities concerning the number of the codices
which could have ranged from four to eight; Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3), al-Muqniʿ fī
maʿrifat marsūm maṣāḥif ahl al-amṣār, ed. Nūra bint Ḥasan bin Fahd al-Ḥumayyid (Riyad:
Dār al-Tadmuriyya, 2010), 163; cf. Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), al-Itqān fī ʿulūm
al-Qurʾān, ed. Markaz al-dirāsāt al-qurʾāniyya, 7 vols. (Medina: Mujammaʿ al-malik Fahd
li-ṭibāʿat al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf, 2005), 393; Abū Bakr Ibn Abī Dāwūd al-Sijistānī (d. 316/928),
Kitāb al-Maṣāḥif, ed. Muḥibb al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Sabḥān Wāʿiẓ, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-bashāʾir
al-islāmiyya, 2002), 2:238. Al-Yaʿqūbī believed they were nine codices; Abū l-ʿAbbās
Aḥmad b. Isḥāq al-Yaʿqūbī (d. 284/897), Tārīkh al-Yaʿqūbī, ed. ʿAbd al-Amīr Muhannā,
2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-Aʿlamī, 2010), 2:66.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Medinan codex.58 It goes without saying that this reconstructed narrative is

inaccurate and unsupported by solid references from early historical sources.
It was largely popularized by Ibrāhīm al-Mārghanī (d. 1349/1931), the Tunisian
scholar and chief Qurʾān reciter of al-Zaytūna mosque, in his well-known trea-
tise Dalīl al-ḥayrān,59 and by Muḥammad al-Zurqānī (d. 1367/1948) in his cel-
ebrated Manāhil al-ʿirfān, which became a main source for modern Muslim
scholarship on the Qurʾān. Unfortunately, contemporary Muslim scholarship
adopted this narrative as the standard view of the codification process, pre-
sented in several influential works and textbooks on ʿulūm al-Qurʾān and the
history of its collection and transmission. These textbooks are widely read and
taught throughout the Arab and Muslim world at the higher education level
and include Ṣubḥī l-Ṣāliḥ’s Mabāḥith,60 al-Hararī’s al-Qirāʾāt al-mutawātira,61
al-Qāḍī’s Tārīkh al-Muṣḥaf,62 and several others,63 including Shīʿī works.64 The
earliest source in which I was able to find this narrative was in al-Jaʿbarī’s
(d. 732/1332) commentary on ʿAqīlat atrāb al-qaṣāʾid, al-Shāṭibī’s famous di-
dactic poem on the orthography of the Qurʾān.65 Al-Jaʿbarī attributed the
statement to a certain Abū ʿAlī, whom I could not identify,66 and the same
58 Zurqānī, Manāhil, 1:330.

59 Ibrāhīm b. Aḥmad al-Mārghanī (d. 1349/1931), Dalīl al-ḥayrān ʿalā mawrid al-ẓamʾān
(Tunisia: [n.p.], 1907), 15–16.
60 Ṣubḥī l-Ṣāliḥ, Mabāḥith fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān (Beirut: Dār al-ʿilm li-l-malāyīn, 1977), 86.
61 Muḥammad al-Hararī, al-Qirāʾāt al-mutawātira allatī ankarahā Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī fī
tafsīrihi (Riyad: [n.p.], 1986), 115.
62 ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Qāḍī, Tārīkh al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf (Cairo: Maktabat al-Jundī, [n.d]), 34–5;
cf. Muhammad Mustafa Al-Aẓamī, The history of the Qur’ānic text: from revelation to com-
pilation: a comparative study with the Old and New Testaments (Leicester: UK Islamic
Academy, 2003), 94–5.
63 Khālid al-Jundī, al-Minaḥ al-rabbāniyya li-l-shakhṣiyya al-Muḥammadiyya fī l-radd ʿalā
l-Ruṣāfī (Beirut: Dār al-maʿrifa, 2016), 109; Muḥammad b. ʿAlī b. Khalaf al-Ḥaddād, al-Aʿmāl
al-kāmila li-l-ʿallāma al-muqriʾ Muḥammad b. ʿAlī b. Khalaf al-Ḥusaynī al-Ḥaddād shaykh
ʿumūm al-maqāriʾ al-miṣriyya, ed. Ḥamad Allāh al-Ṣaftī (Damascus: Dār al-Ghawthānī,
2010), 325.
64 Ḥusayn Ṣāliḥ Ḥamāda, Mabāḥith fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-maḥajja
al-bayḍāʾ, 2008), 2:241; Fahd b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Rūmī, Dirāsāt fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān al-karīm
(Riyad: Maktabat al-malik Fahd, 2005), 99; Muḥammad Abū Shuhba, al-Madkhal li-dirāsat
al-Qurʾān al-karīm (Riyad: Dār al-Liwāʾ, 1987), 280–1; ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Qāḍī, al-Qirāʾāt fī
naẓar al-mustashriqīn wa-l-mulḥidīn (Medina: [n.p.], 1981), 48. See also the introduction
by ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Abū Sinna, the editor of Abū l-Qāsim al-Nuwayrī (d. 857/1453), Sharḥ
Ṭayyibat al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, 3 vols. (Cairo: al-Maṭābiʿ al-amīriyya, 1986), 1:4.
65 Burhān al-Dīn al-Jaʿbarī (d. 732/1332), “Jamīlat arbāb al-marāṣid fī sharḥ ʿAqīlat atrāb
al-qaṣāʾid,” ([n.d.]), folio #32a.
66 The work has been edited as a Ph.D. dissertation and published in Syria. The editor iden-
tifies Abū ʿAlī as Abū ʿAlī l-Ahwāzī (d. 446/1055), the famous Qirāʾāt scholar who wrote
al-Wajīz. The editor asserts that his death date was the year 646, which is a mistake. The
editor does not explain how he arrives at this conclusion. Although he lists the sources
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

122 CHAPTER 3
statement was quoted by Ibn al-Qāṣiḥ (d. 801/1399) in his own commentary
on al-Shāṭibī’s poem.67 Whether we consider this “ideal” narrative, or the more
practical, fragmented narrative apparent from the isnād documentation of
the Qirāʾāt, the same conclusion can be drawn, namely, that the Eponymous
Readings were retroactively connected through fictitious narratives and isnāds
to their mythical founders, represented by the first generation of the Qurrāʾ,
i.e. the Companions. Based on the textual, linguistic, and phonetic differences
that exist among the Eponymous Readings,68 including the shawādhdh read-
ings, it is difficult if not impossible to assume that each codex, and subsequent-
ly each Regional Reading, was associated with the Companions mentioned
in the asānīd. If this were so, it would, for example, make Ubayy b. Kaʿb the
master teacher of three regional codices (Baṣra, Madīna, and Makka) and ulti-
mately challenge the “historical notion” of the muṣḥaf al-Imām that ʿUthmān
allegedly kept in Medina.69 This important notion of the regional codices will
be discussed in detail in the next chapter, but to further highlight the role of
isnād’s connectedness in Qirāʾāt literature, two issues need to be discussed.
3.1 Al-Ṭabarī: Tawātur, isnād and the Regional Consensus

It is important to take note of the dichotomy between tawātur and isnād, and
how Muslim scholarship oscillated between the two terms to authorize the
transmission of the System-Readings. While the two terms are not necessar-
ily mutually exclusive, tawātur does not require any kind of isnād criticism in
which the identity and background of the transmitters would be scrupulously
investigated. In other words, when the conditions of a sound isnād were diffi-
cult to realize, tawātur stepped in to fill the gap and cover for the shortcomings
of isnād criticism. By the time of Ibn Mujāhid, the dominant local tradition of
a city, i.e. the general consensus of that geographical locale, was one standard
by which a Qurʾānic Reading was judged and validated. Al-Ṭabarī’s treatment
of Qirāʾāt in his tafsīr revolved around this notion of local geographic tradi-
tions rather than emphasizing the efforts of a handful of Qurʾān Readers who
could have been responsible for proliferating these variants. Al-Ṭabarī tried
al-Jaʿbarī used in his introduction, along with the authorities on whom he relied and
whom he cited, Abū ʿAlī l-Ahwāzī is not amongst them; Jamīlat arbāb al-marāṣid fī
sharḥ ʿAqīlat atrāb al-qaṣāʾid, ed. Muḥammad Khuḍayr Muḍḥī l-Zawbaʿī (Damascus: Dār
al-Ghawthānī, 2010), 236, 53–61.
67 Abū l-Baqāʾ Ibn al-Qāṣiḥ (d. 801/1399), Sharḥ Talkhīṣ al-fawāʾid wa-taqrīb al-mutabāʿid
ʿalā ʿAqīlat atrāb al-qaṣāʾid, ed. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Qāḍī (Cairo: Muṣṭafā al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī,
1949), 16.
68 Refer to Chapter Five for the grammatical and phonetic differences among the variants.
69 Refer to Chapter Four for more details.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

as much as possible to attribute the Qurʾānic variants not to individuals but

rather to the whole community. Occasionally, he did mention some Readers
by name, such al-Kisāʾī, al-Aʿmash, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, ʿĀṣim, and a few oth-
ers, but only to emphasize how these individuals transmitted peculiar variants
which diverged from the general consensus of the other Readers. Based on the
indices of al-Ṭabarī’s commentary edited by ʿAbd Allāh al-Turkī, Ibn ʿĀmir, for
example, was mentioned only twice.70 In (Q. 18:28), al-Ṭabarī references Ibn
ʿĀmir to criticize his reading bi-l-ghudwati, and emphasized that the correct
reading was that of the majority of the Qurʾān readers, namely, bi-l-ghadāwati.71
Another instance is (Q. 23:14) ʿiẓāman, which was read ʿaẓman by Ibn ʿĀmir
and ʿĀṣim. Al-Ṭabarī preferred ʿiẓāman because it was the reading of the major-
ity of the Qurrāʾ.72 A further example is (Q. 2:83), where al-Ṭabarī stated that
most Kūfans (ʿāmmat) read ḥasanan, except ʿĀṣim and most of the Medinans,
who read ḥusnan. Some readers—or one reader (baʿḍ)—read ḥusnā. After giv-
ing linguistic and hermeneutical justification for both ḥusnan and ḥasanan,
al-Ṭabarī preferred ḥasanan. The editor notes in a footnote that “the Readings
of the Qurʾān cannot be justified as such, since they can only be validated
through tawātur and sound transmission on behalf of the Prophet”.73 Al-Ṭabarī
continued to emphasize that the reading ḥusnā was utterly wrong. The only
justification needed to prove its falsity—even if nothing was wrong with it lin-
guistically or hermeneutically—was that it diverged from the accepted read-
ing amongst all Muslims (ahl al-Islām). This is in line with Devin Stewart’s
elaborate discussion on al-Ṭabarī’s conception of the interpretive commu-
nity where “the interpretation of the community prevents it from staying far
from the correct view”.74 Another example is (Q. 19:19), commenting on which
al-Ṭabarī stated: “Most readers from the Ḥijāz and Iraq read li-ahaba, except
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, who read li-yahaba. The correct reading ought to be the
one adopted by the majority of the readers of the amṣār, namely, li-ahaba, for
this is how it was written in the codices (maṣāḥif al-muslimīn), and this is how
early and late Muslims have read it, except for Abū ʿAmr. It is not permissible
70 Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923), Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān, ed. ʿAbd Allāh al-Turkī,
26 vols. (Cairo: Dār Hajar, 2001), 26:1231. Ibn Kathīr was mentioned 14 times, Nāfiʿ was
mentioned 12 times, Ḥamza was mentioned 11 times, and ʿĀṣim was mentioned 55 times.
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ and al-Kisāʾī were often mentioned as authorities in grammar, lan-
guage, and poetry. Abū ʿAmr was mentioned 71 times while al-Kisāʾī was mentioned
44 times; ibid., 26:1235, 1229, 1219, 1237, 1248, 1232.
71 Ibid., 15:236–7.
72 Ibid., 17:21.
73 Ibid., 2:195–6.
74 Devin J. Stewart, “Consensus, Authority, and the Interpretive Community in the Thought
of Muḥammad b. Jarīr al-Ṭabarī,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 18, no. 2 (2016): 167.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

124 CHAPTER 3
for him to disagree with the majority of Muslims”.75 Al-Ṭabarī almost always
attributed the variant readings to the Qurrāʾ communities each in their respec-
tive geographical area. When he disagreed with a reading that was known to
have been attributed to a certain individual, he would use phrases such as baʿḍ
al-qara‌ʾa or baʿḍuhum, trying as much as possible to avoid the attribution of
variant readings to particular individuals.
To further demonstrate the difference between al-Ṭabarī’s approach to
Qirāʾāt and that of Ibn Mujāhid, consider the entry, selected at random, of
(Q. 37:153), where al-Ṭabarī comments on its variant readings as follows: “It
was mentioned that one Medinan (baʿḍ) read it as ‿ṣṭafā (iṣṭafā) by dropping
the interrogative particle [the hamza]. The Readers of Kūfa and Baṣra read
it aṣṭafā,76 in the interrogative. This is the reading that I choose since it was
agreed upon by the authoritative Qurʾān readers (ijmāʿ al-ḥujja min al-qara‌ʾa
ʿalayhā)”.77 Al-Ṭabarī said no more, but the same entry in Ibn Mujāhid’s al-Sabʿa
reads as follows: “There was disagreement amongst Nāfiʿ’s students concern-
ing this variant. Al-Musayyabī, Qālūn, and Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways transmitted
aṣṭafā. Ibn Jammāz and Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar—both on behalf of Nāfiʿ and Abū Jaʿfar
al-Madanī—transmitted ‿ṣṭafā. I [Ibn Mujāhid] heard some [or one] of Warsh’s
students (aṣḥāb) transmitting it ‿ṣṭafā, just like Ismāʿīl [b. Jaʿfar]. The person
who informed me of this was Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Raḥīm al-Iṣbahānī.”78 The
difference in approach between the two authors is clear. Al-Ṭabarī was trying to
suppress the variations and their attribution to different individual authorities.
The emphasis was always on the consensus of the community rather than the
expertise of single transmitters. On the other hand, Ibn Mujāhid’s focus shifted
towards detailing the discrepancies amongst the students of the Eponymous
Readers, something that al-Ṭabarī completely ignored, at least in his Tafsīr. The
names Ḥafṣ, Qālūn, Qunbul, Warsh, al-Sūsī and the other Canonical Rāwīs do
not feature at all in al-Ṭabarī’s commentary.
One could argue, however, that al-Ṭabarī’s work is a Qurʾān commentary and
thus may not occupy itself with details concerning subtle discrepancies amongst
the Qurrāʾ and their transmitters. Had al-Ṭabarī’s Qirāʾāt work reached us, we
would probably have encountered detailed chains of transmissions and dis-
crepancies just like any other Qirāʾāt work. This is certainly true. Nevertheless,
one should also consider the following points. First, other Qurʾān commentar-
ies did not follow the same limited approach with regards to documenting the
75 Ibid., 15:488.
76 As a contraction of a-iṣṭafā.
77 Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 19:642.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

variant readings of the Qurʾān. For example, al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī (d. 756/1355),
Ibn ʿAṭiyya (d. 546/1151), Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344), and al-Qurṭubī
(d. 671/1273) documented the variant readings and their transmitters in detail.
In their commentaries the same entry, (Q. 37:153), mentioned above was dis-
cussed in similar terms to those mentioned by Ibn Mujāhid in his al-Sabʿa.79
Even a commentary more concerned with philosophical and theological dis-
cussions such as that of al-Fakhr al-Rāzī’s (d. 604/1207) delved into the gram-
matical subtleties of aṣṭafā vs. ‿ṣṭafā, as well as the transmitters responsible
for proliferating both variants.80 Second, it is known that al-Ṭabarī was exhaus-
tive in his tafsīr when it came to isnād documentation of ḥadīths/āthār and
narratives.81 This fact suggests that al-Ṭabarī’s treatment of Ḥadīth and Qirāʾāt
were different, and that the isnād played a different function in the case of
Ḥadīth than in Qirāʾāt, even when both disciplines were presented side by side
in a single work of tafsīr. Similarly, al-Ṭabarī’s meticulous documentation of
grammatical justifications and poetry citations diminishes the possibility that
he omitted the subtle details of transmission and discrepancies in Qirāʾāt for
the sake of brevity. One might further consider a third point, albeit speculative
and lacking firm evidence. Having authored a Qirāʾāt manual on twenty-five
Eponymous Readings of the Qurʾān, al-Ṭabarī might have realized the weak
isnād documentation of the System-Readings and, subsequently, avoided inte-
grating them into his authoritative commentary on the Qurʾān. Since, for ex-
ample, he dismissed the possibility of Ibn ʿĀmir being connected to ʿUthmān,
how could he have presented this Reading as authoritative when it lacked any
isnād that might have linked it to individuals beyond Ibn ʿĀmir himself?
3.2 Did waḍʿ (Forgery) Occur in Qirāʾāt?

The second point concerning the isnād’s connectedness in Qirāʾāt literature
is fabrication and forgery (waḍʿ). Fabrication usually occurs on two levels,
79 Aḥmad b. Yūsuf al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī (d. 756/1355), al-Durr al-maṣūn fī ʿulūm al-kitāb
al-maknūn, ed. Aḥmad al-Kharrāṭ, 11 vols. (Damascus: Dār al-qalam, 1985), 9:333; Abū
Muḥammad Ibn ʿAṭiyya (d. 546/1151), al-Muḥarrar al-wajīz fī tafsīr al-Kitāb al-ʿazīz, ed.
ʿAbd al-Salām ʿAbd al-Shāfī Muḥammad, 6 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 2001),
4:488; Muḥammad b. Yūsuf Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344), Tafsīr al-baḥr al-muḥīṭ,
ed. ʿĀdil ʿAbd al-Mawjūd and ʿAlī Muʿawwaḍ, 8 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya,
1993), 7:361; Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Qurṭubī (d. 671/1273), al-Jāmiʿ li-aḥkām al-Qurʾān, ed. ʿAbd
Allāh al-Turkī, 24 vols. (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 2006), 18:109.
80 Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 604/1207), Mafātīḥ al-ghayb, 32 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-fikr, 1981),
26:168.
81 Cf. Akram b. Muḥammad Ziyāda al-Fālūjī l-Atharī, Muʿjam shuyūkh al-Ṭabarī (Cairo: Dār
Ibn ʿAffān, 2005), especially the introduction; Harald Motzki, Analysing Muslim Traditions
(Leiden: Brill, 2010), Chapter 5 (“The Origins of Muslim Exegesis. A Debate”), 231–99.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

126 CHAPTER 3
content and isnād. Did the Qurrāʾ fabricate chains of transmission, create
imaginary transmitters, engage in tadlīs, and forge or fabricate material con-
tent, like Ḥadīth transmitters did? There were indeed instances of reported
forgery, fabrication, and tadlīs in the Qirāʾāt tradition, but they were far from
the wide scale phenomenon of waḍʿ that took place in Ḥadīth. Al-Suyūṭī clas-
sified the Qurʾān Readings into six categories:
1) mutawātira: these Readings comprise the [seven/ten] Eponymous
Readings [through their two Canonical Rāwīs].
2) mashhūra: these Readings have sound isnāds but do not reach the degree
of tawātur. They are attributed to the seven Eponymous Readers, but not
through their Canonical Rāwīs.
3) āḥād: these Readings have sound isnāds but do not follow the rasm of the
codices or the rules of Arabic Grammar.
4) shādhdha: these Readings do not have sound isnāds.
5) mawḍūʿa: these readings are similar to those attributed to al-Khuzāʿī.
They will be discussed shortly.
6) mudraja: these readings integrate exegetical comments by the Com
panions into the Qurʾānic verses. They are also known as al-Qirāʾa
al-tafsīriyya.82
From the perspective of the Qirāʾāt discipline, I believe that al-Suyūṭī’s clas-
sification was too contrived and unnecessary, similar to his artificial classifica-
tion of the Qurʾānic sciences into eighty categories in his Itqān. In theory, the
Qirāʾāt discipline would not differentiate between the pairs of mutawātir and
mashhūr, āḥād and shādhdh, and mawḍūʿ and mudraj. These categories, along-
side the terminology itself, are foreign to the craft of Qirāʾāt, both in terms of
its historical development and the very nature of the discipline. The objec-
tive of Ḥadīth was to determine what the Prophet said, while the objective of
Qirāʾāt was to determine how God/the Prophet said something. By definition, a
ḥadīth mudraj is one in which the narrator’s words were added to the body of
the ḥadīth, such that one might assume that the Prophet himself uttered these
additional words.83 To classify as qirāʾā mudraja the exegetical readings of
Ibn Masʿūd, Ibn ʿAbbās,84 or any other Companion whose codex significantly
82 Suyūṭī, Itqān, 502–7.

83 Ibn Kathīr, al-Bāʿith al-ḥathīth, 224.
84 Such as the reading of Ibn ʿAbbās of (Q. 2:238) ḥāfiẓū ʿalā ‿ṣ-ṣalawāti wa-ṣ-ṣalāti l-wusṭā
ṣalāti l-ʿaṣr, with the addition of “ṣalāti l-ʿaṣr”, the reading of Saʿd b. Abī Waqqāṣ of (Q. 4:12)
wa-lahu akhun aw ukhtun min ummin, with the addition of “min ummin”, and the read-
ing of Ubayy b. Kaʿb of (Q. 18:80) wa-ammā l-ghulāmu fa-kāna kāfiran wa-kāna abawāhu
muʾminayni, with the addition of “fa-kāna kāfiran”; Abū Jaʿfar al-Naḥḥās (d. 338/949),
Iʿrāb al-Qurʾān, ed. Zuhayr Ghāzī Zāhid, 5 vols. (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1985), 1:320–1; Ibn
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

deviated from the codified consonantal outline of ʿUthmān was to assume that
the commentary of a Companion could not be distinguished from the word of
God, hence the need to develop isnād criticism for Qirāʾāt in order to isolate
those readings labeled as mudraja. In fact, al-Bāqillānī (d. 403/1013) did not
dismiss the possibility that the anomalous readings of the Companions could
have been a revealed Qurʾān (munazzala) at one point, but added that they
were later abrogated by the ʿUthmānic codex.85
As for waḍʿ (forgery), scholars mentioned very few examples in this catego-
ry. Ibn Miqsam (d. 354/965) was a case in point, since he accepted readings as
long as they conformed to Arabic grammar and agreed with the consonantal
rasm, without necessarily being supported by a sound isnād.86 Subsequently,
Ibn Miqsam was denounced as an innovator who could have jeopardized Islam
and the integrity of the Qurʾān, for he opened the door to the invention of new
variants through personal opinion and ijtihād without any regard to tradition.87
Another example would be the aforementioned Abū l-Faḍl Muḥammad b.
Jaʿfar al-Khuzāʿī (d. 408/1017), who compiled a System-Reading and attributed
it to Abū Ḥanīfa (d. 150/767). This Reading contained the well-known variant
of (Q. 35:28) innamā yakhshā ‿llāha min ʿibādihi l-ʿulamāʾu, allegedly read by
Abū Ḥanīfa as innamā yakhshā ‿llāhu min ʿibādihi l-ʿulamāʾa”. The famous
Ḥadīth scholar al-Dāraquṭnī (d. 385/995) accused al-Khuzāʿī of forgery and
denounced his book on the Reading of Abū Ḥanīfa as baseless fabrication
(mawḍūʿ lā aṣla lahu).88
Other forms of fabricating Qurʾānic readings were mentioned anecdotally
and did not carry any weight within the discipline of Qirāʾāt. These readings
were often mentioned as amusing incidents of taṣḥīf (scribal error, misspell-
ing). For example, one day ʿUbāda al-Mukhannath (the effeminate) was com-
manded by al-Mutawakkil (r. 232–47/847–61) to recite the Qurʾān publicly.
Instead of reading (Q. 22:34) wa-bashshir al-mukhbitīn (�‫ح�ى�ىي�� ن‬
��‫‘( )ا لم‬and give good
tidings to the humble’), he read (wa-bashshir al-mukhannathīn (‘and give good
al-Jazarī, Nashr, 1:28; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Tafsīr, 3:536. Cf. Abū ʿUbayd al-Harawī l-Qāsim b. Sallām
(d. 224/838), Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān, ed. Aḥmad b. ʿAbd al-Wāḥid al-Khayyāṭī, 2 vols. (Morocco:
Maṭbaʿat Faḍāla, 1995), 2:146–55.
85 Abū Bakr al-Bāqillānī (d. 403/1013), al-Intiṣār li-l-Qurʾān, ed. Muḥammad ʿIṣām al-Quḍāt
(Beirut: Dār Ibn Ḥazm, 2001), 426.
86 Arthur Jeffery, “The Qurʾān Readings of Ibn Miqsam”, in Ignace Goldziher Memorial
Volume, ed. Samuel Löwinger and Joseph Somogyi (Budapest and Jerusalem: [n.p.], 1948,
1958), 1–38; Melchert, “Ibn Mujāhid”, 20–22.
87 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 2:597–600; Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 2:110–11.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

128 CHAPTER 3
tidings to the effeminate).89 Another form of fabricating or inventing new

readings was done by grammarians within the framework of linguistic experi-
mentation. Al-Kirmānī (d. circa. 535/1140), for example, gave more than ten
different possibilities for reading bi‿smi in the basmala, e.g. bi‿sumu, bi‿suma,
bu‿sumu, bu‿smu, bi‿sumu, and others, all of which were considered to be
grammatically sound and correct, but which had no basis within the discipline
of Qirāʾāt.90
4 Ḥadīth Terminology in Qirāʾāt
The second aspect concerning waḍʿ is isnād fabrication. I have already dis-
cussed the problematic nature of the connection between the Prophet and
the Eponymous Readers. Even if we assume that the isnād was fabricated at
that level to connect the Readings to their mythical originators, there seems
to be no isnād proliferation to further connect the Eponymous Readers to
more Companions. In other words, Qirāʾāt scholars did not try to attribute
the poorly documented Readings to more Companions and Successors, as oc-
curred in Ḥadīth, where new isnāds emerged that linked certain traditions to
the Prophet via more Companions and Successors.91 Based on the principles
I postulated in the previous chapter concerning the survival and selection
process of certain Rāwīs, and taking into account the uniqueness of the craft
of Qirāʾāt in terms of its reception (taḥammul) and transmission (adāʾ), the
reason for the limited proliferation of fabricated isnāds could lie in the differ-
ent nature of the two disciplines along with their disparate objectives, distinct
content, and unique methods of transmissions.92 To become a trustworthy
master of Qirāʾāt, one needed to study with a teacher for a longer period of
time. Students of Qirāʾāt sojourned for weeks, months, or years to study and
master a single System-Reading. Moreover, the methods of teaching and learn-
ing a Qirāʾa were unique. We are often told that the master Readers taught their
students only a limited number of verses each day. Shuʿba described how he
studied the Qurʾān with ʿĀṣim: “I learned the Qurʾān from him just like a boy
learns from a school teacher (al-ṣabī min al-muʿallim). He only taught me five
89 Ḥamza b. al-Ḥasan al-Iṣfahānī (d. 360/971), al-Tanbīh ʿalā ḥudūth al-taṣḥīf, ed. Muḥammad
Asʿad Ṭalas (Beirut: Dār Ṣādir, 1992), 159.
90 Raḍī l-Dīn al-Kirmānī (d. circa. 535/1140), Shawādhdh al-qirāʾāt, ed. Shimrān al-ʿIjlī (Beirut:
Muʾassasat al-balāgh, 2001), 39.
91 G. H. A. Juynboll, Muslim tradition: studies in chronology, provenance, and authorship of
early ḥadīth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 9–23.
92 Cf. Melchert, “Ibn Mujāhid”, 7–18.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

verses a day. I would come to him frequently, [irrespective of] whether it was
hot, cold, or raining. I [visited him so often that I] felt embarrassed [due to my
intrusion and frequent visits] before the people who frequented the mosque
of banū Kāhil”.93 Nāfiʿ was known for teaching only 30 verses at a time, while
Ḥamza used to teach 50 verses per session to jurists such as Sufyān al-Thawrī
(d. 161/777) and Wakīʿ b. al-Jarrāḥ (d. 197/812) but only 30 verses to professional
Qurʾān readers such as al-Kisāʾī and Sulaym.94
On top of that, the craft of Qirāʾāt required repetition, reiteration, and ac-
curacy in both memorization and delivery. Consider the following Ḥadīth
mechanisms in certification which are difficult, if not impossible, to apply in
the discipline of Qirāʾāt.
a) Ijāza li-l-majhūl: the teacher may certify a group of people altogether at
once. All the individuals in the group could be named in one single ijāza,
without necessarily knowing every individual by his name or face.
b) Ijāza li-l-maʿdūm: many Ḥadīth scholars allow certifying someone who is
not born yet to transmit a book or a specified set of traditions.
c) Ijāzat mā lam yataḥammalhu al-mujīz: some Ḥadīth scholars discussed
the permissibility of someone giving an ijāza for material for which he
did not yet have an ijāza, on the premise that in the future he would be
certified in it.
d) Ijāzat al-mujāz: this occurs when a student certifies his own teacher for
the same material the latter transmitted to him.
e) Al-munāwala: a form of purely written transmission, where the teacher
certifies the student in the content of a notebook without reading it to
him, or when the student gives his notebook to the teacher, who after
looking at it, certifies the student in its content. Neither the teacher nor
the student would read the content in front of one another.
f) Al-kitāba: this is another form of written transmission where the teacher
writes down or dictates the material in a notebook and gives or sends it
to the student.
g) Al-waṣiyya: this is another form of written transmission where one may
specify in his will that a person should be certified in the contents of one
of his books.
h) Al-wijāda: if one finds written traditions that he is not certified to trans-
mit, he is allowed to transmit them so long as he specifies that this was
done through wijāda, such as by saying: wajadtu or qara‌ʾtu, etc.95

94 Al-ʿAlam al-Sakhāwī, Jamāl al-qurrāʾ, 2:447.
95 Suyūṭī, Tadrīb, 2:36; Sakhāwī, Fatḥ al-mughīth, 2:465–530.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

130 CHAPTER 3
Our understanding of the discipline of Qirāʾāt makes us hesitate before accept-

ing the above mechanisms of ijāza and certification as applicable within the
Qirāʾāt tradition, especially when one considers the emphasis on orality, the
long period of association between master and disciple, and the fact that Qirāʾa
was a cultural or “school” inheritance, rather than a content-transmission.
However, just as the terms of isnād criticism (tawātur, shuhra, āḥād, waḍʿ,
mudraj, etc.) became used in Qirāʾāt, some of the aforementioned methods of
certification and taḥammul did find their way into the discipline of Qirāʾāt. For
example, in al-Dānī’s Jāmiʿ al-bayān we read of the following cases:
– Upon documenting a certain transmission for the Reading of Abū ʿAmr b.
al-ʿAlāʾ, the isnād ended as follows: “via Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b. Wāṣil from
his father’s notebook (ʿan kitāb abīhi) via al-Yazīdī from Abū ʿAmr”.96
– In another isnād used to document the Reading of ʿĀṣim, the following was
stated: “Ibn Saʿīd told us: ‘I read in a notebook that belonged to Muḥammad
b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥīrī: ‘I read [the Qurʾān] with Muḥammad b. Ḥabīb who
mentioned that he read with Abū Yūsuf [al-Aʿshā] who read with Abū Bakr
[Shuʿba] who read with ʿĀṣim’ ’ ”.97
Transmitting Qirāʾāt via written records can even be traced back to Ibn
Mujāhid, as I will show with detailed examples in the following chapter.
Since the two examples above suggested a written transmission of Qirāʾāt, Ibn
al-Jazarī considered them to be transmissions by wijāda.98 In a recent study
dedicated to the chains of transmissions in Qirāʾāt, the author emphasized
that he did not find any other instance of wijāda in Qirāʾāt transmission be-
fore the 3rd/9th century.99 This observation agrees with my suggestion that
the discipline of Qirāʾāt started to shift towards the methodology of Ḥadīth
in the late 3rd/9th century. Indeed, later Qirāʾāt terminology was heavily in-
spired by Ḥadīth, and we begin to see terms such as wijāda,100 mutābaʿāt and
shawāhid,101 ṣīghat al-tamrīḍ,102 kitāba,103 jahāla,104 tadlīs,105 and naturally the
usual Ḥadīth jargon of ṣaḥīḥ, shādhdh, tawātur, ḥaddatha, rawā, etc.
96 Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī (d. 444/1053), Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, ed. ʿAbd al-Muhaymin
ʿAbd al-Salām Ṭaḥḥān et al., 4 vols. (Ph.D. diss.: Jāmiʿat Umm al-qurā, 1985–95), 1:275.
97 Ibid., 1:299.
99 Muṭayrī, asānīd al-Qirāʾāt, 226.
100 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 1:321, 2:140, 156.
101 Ibid., 2:144.
102 Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:151. Al-tamrīḍ is to cast doubts on the ḥadīth by using expressions
such as ruwiya, yuqāl, qīla, etc.
103 Ibid., 1:170.
104 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 2:312, 1:50.
105 Ibid., 2:70, 96, 127, 302.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

5 Applying jarḥ and taʿdīl in Qirāʾāt
As mentioned earlier, when Qirāʾāt began treating the recitation of the Qurʾān
as if it were similar to Ḥadīth in content, the number of variants increased
exponentially by way of simulating the Ḥadīth model to allow for corrobora-
tion (mutābaʿāt and shawāhid). This was true with regards to the matn, i.e. the
System-Reading itself. What happened when Muslim scholars tried to apply
the criteria of jarḥ and taʿdīl to the transmitters of the Qurʾān? How did the
Qurrāʾ feature in the biographical dictionaries in terms of their ḍabṭ (academic
proficiency) and ʿadāla (moral integrity)? Surprisingly, many illustrious readers
did not fare well, in both criteria. In his attempt to systematically undermine
the value of the Canonical Readings of the Qurʾān, the Shīʿī scholar al-Khūʾī
(d. 1413/1992) gathered an abundance of data on the Canonical Readers from
Sunnī biographical dictionaries. He concluded that the weakness and untrust-
worthiness of these Readers cast doubts on the credibility of the Canonical
Readings, and subsequently their tawātur. Al-Khūʾī was not the first to criti-
cize the Qurrāʾ through their ʿadāla. Medieval Muslim scholars had already
paid attention to this problem and devised a counterargument in defense of
the Qurrāʾ. First, I will summarize and list the negative information only ( jarḥ,
qadḥ) about the seven Readers and their Rāwīs documented in biographical
dictionaries.
1) Ibn ʿĀmir: He claimed to be from Ḥimyar, but his true genealogy was
questionable (yughmaz fī nasabihi). There existed nine different state-
ments concerning his isnād up to the Prophet. Some people/someone
claimed that it was not known with whom he studied the Qurʾān.106
1-a) Hishām b. ʿAmmār: When he got older he became senile
(taghayyara) and started to read/recite anything that was given to
him. He would repeat and transmit anything people told him [with-
out inquiring about its truth], but he was more trustworthy when he
was younger. Hishām transmitted 400 baseless ḥadīths (laysa lahā
aṣl) all with [apparently] good isnāds. A man by the name of Faḍlak
[Faḍlak al-Rāzī] used to give these ḥadīths to Hishām, who did not
hesitate to transmit them; [in doing so] he almost created a rupture
in Islām. Hishām was dictating ḥadīth one day when he was asked:
“Who gave you this ḥadīth? He answered: ‘One of my teachers (baʿḍ
mashāyikhinā)’”. When he was asked again, he yawned/closed his
106 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, 15:145; Shihāb al-Dīn Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 852/1449), Tahdhīb
al-Tahdhīb, ed. Ibrāhīm al-Zaybaq and ʿĀdil Murshid, 4 vols. (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla,
1995), 2:363; Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 1:380.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

132 CHAPTER 3
eyes from sleepiness (fa-naʿasa). Muḥammad b. Muslim al-Rāzī

said: “I decided to stop narrating the ḥadīths of Hishām because he
used to sell ḥadīth/get paid for teaching ḥadīth”. Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal
said: “Hishām was fickle and frivolous”. One day, he was sitting in
public while his private parts were visible. A man told him: “Cover
yourself”! Hishām responded: “Have you seen it [i.e., my penis]?
God willing your eyes will never suffer from ramad (ophthalmia)”.
Ibn Ḥanbal purportedly said: “One must repeat the prayer if it was
led by Hishām”.107
1-b) ʿAbd Allāh b. Dhakwān: There were no derogatory comments re-
corded about him, except that his father was the brother of Abū
Luʾluʾa, the assassin of ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb.108
2) Ibn Kathīr: Confusion was recorded in his isnād as to whether he studied
the Qurʾān with ʿAbd Allāh b. al-Sāʾib al-Makhzūmī or Mujāhid [b. Jabr].109
2-a) al-Bazzī: Abū Ḥātim said that al-Bazzī’s ḥadīth was weak and that he
would never accept it. Al-ʿUqaylī stated that his ḥadīth was munkar.110
2-b) Qunbul: He became chief of the Police (shurṭa) in Makka but grew
corrupt (kharubat sīratuhu). He lived long and became senile. He
stopped teaching the Qurʾān seven years before his death. Ibn
al-Munādī narrated that he performed pilgrimage together with Ibn
Mujāhid and Ibn Shanabūdh. When they met Qunbul in Makka he
was mentally unstable. Ibn Mujāhid started a Qurʾān audition with
him, but Qunbul was making so many mistakes in his recitation
that Ibn Mujāhid was forced to leave the session.111
3) ʿĀṣim: Ibn Saʿd said that he made many mistakes in his ḥadīth. He was not
good at memorization, to the extent that Ibn ʿUlayya said: “Anyone whose
name was ʿĀṣim had bad memory”. According to Ibn Khirāsh, ʿĀṣim trans-
mitted munkar traditions in his ḥadīth, whereas al-ʿUqaylī said: “There
was nothing wrong with him except his bad memory”. Al-Dāraquṭnī
stated that something was wrong with ʿĀṣim’s memory, and Ḥammad b.
Salama said that he became senile before he died.112
3-a) Ḥafṣ: Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal said that his ḥadīth was not to be transmit-
ted. Ibn Maʿīn stated he was not trustworthy, while al-Madīnī said
107 Mizzī, Tahdhīb al-kamāl, 30:242–55; Ibn Ḥajar, Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb, 4:276–7.
108 Ibn Ḥajar, Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb, 2:329.
109 Ibid., 2:408.
110 Lisān al-Mīzān, ed. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Abū Ghudda and Salmān ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Abū Ghudda,
10 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-bashāʾir al-islāmiyya, 2002), 1:631–3.
111 Ibid., 7:284–5.
112 Ibn Ḥajar, Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb, 2:250–1.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

that his ḥadīth was weak and should be abandoned. Al-Bukhārī said
that the Ḥadīth transmitters abandoned Ḥafṣ’s ḥadīth (tarakūhu),
and al-Nasāʾī confirmed that his ḥadīth must neither be learned nor
written down. Other critics said that all his ḥadīths were manākīr
and bawāṭīl (false, invalid). Not only was he untrustworthy in ḥadīth,
but it was reported that Shuʿba (ʿĀṣim’s second Rāwī) was more reli-
able than him in Qurʾān. Shuʿba complained once that Ḥafṣ took a
book/notebook from him and never returned it, and that he used
to take people’s books and copy them (an allusion to the criticism
that Ḥafṣ used to take knowledge from books and claim it as his
own). Some reported that Ḥafṣ was a better reciter than Shuʿba, but
that he was a liar (kadhdhāb). Ibn Ḥibbān said that he used to forge
and fabricate isnāds. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Mahdī stated that it was
not permissible to transmit ḥadīth from him (mā taḥill al-riwāya
ʿanhu).113
3-b) Abū Bakr Shuʿba: there were nine different statements about his
real name. Consequently, he was listed under bāb al-kunā: man kun-
yatuhu Abū Bakr (those known as Abū Bakr) in Ibn Ḥajar’s Tahdhīb.
Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal said that he was trustworthy, but that he made
mistakes. Shuʿba used to boast and say: “I am one half of Islam” (anā
niṣf al-Islām), in reference to his excellence in Qurʾānic recitation.
Yaḥyā l-Qaṭṭān and Ibn al-Madīnī did not think highly of him, es-
pecially because he became senile and his memory deteriorated.
He often made mistakes in ḥadīth, and his memory was not reli-
able when he delivered ḥadīth. Abū Nuʿaym stated that amongst his
teachers, Abū Bakr Shuʿba was the most likely to make mistakes.114
4) Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ: There were almost no derogatory statements about
Abū ʿAmr except the uncertainty surrounding his real name and his
boasting that he had never met anyone who was more knowledgeable
than himself. Abū Khaythama said that he could be trusted but he did not
memorize much ḥadīth.115
4-a) Al-Dūrī: Statements about him were generally positive, except
for al-Dāraquṭnī, who stated that he was weak, without further
specification.116
113 Ibid., 2:450–1.

114 Ibid., 4:492–4.
115 Ibid., 4:562.
116 Ibid., 1:454.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

134 CHAPTER 3
4-b) Al-Sūsī: Statements about him were also positive, except for
Maslama b. Qāsim, who deemed him to be weak without proof
(bi-lā mustanad).117
5) Ḥamza: al-Sājī said that he was trustworthy, but his memorization was
bad, and that he was not meticulous in transmitting ḥadīth. Some Ḥadīth
scholars criticized his Reading and prohibited praying behind him, but
Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal resented it without prohibiting such prayer. Abū Bakr
Shuʿba said that the Reading of Ḥamza was considered to be bidʿa (inno-
vation) amongst the community of the Qurrāʾ. Ibn Durayd stated: “I wish
that Kūfa would be purified from the Reading of Ḥamza”.118
5-a) Khalaf: Ibn Ḥanbal was asked about Khalaf and his consumption
of alcohol. He answered that he was aware of this allegation but
Khalaf was still a trustworthy, honorable individual. Khalaf alleged-
ly said: “I repeated 40 years of prayers during which I had consumed
alcohol according to the legal school of the Kūfans”. Yaḥyā b. Maʿīn
said that Khalaf had no clue what Ḥadīth was.119
5-b) Khallād: No negative statements were mentioned about him, and
he did not feature in the major Ḥadīth biographical dictionaries I
have consulted.120
6) Nāfiʿ: Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal said that one could learn the Qurʾān from Nāfiʿ
but not Ḥadīth. In another statement Aḥmad said that his ḥadīth was
munkar.121
6-a) Qālūn: He was trustworthy in Qirāʾa, but not very much in Ḥadīth.
Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ was asked about Qālūn’s trustworthiness in ḥadīth;
he laughed and said: “Do you write down ḥadīth from anyone?
Qālūn was deaf, but he was able to read people’s lips and correct
their mistakes”.122
6-b) Warsh: He did not feature in Ḥadīth biographical dictionaries and
there were no negative statements about him.123
7) Al-Kisāʾī: Ibn al-Aʿrābī praised al-Kisāʾī’s knowledge and said: He was the
most knowledgeable of people, despite being a liar/impudent (rahaq).
He used to consume alcohol and accompany young beautiful boys, yet
he was a great Qurʾān reciter. It was related that one day he led some
117 Ibid., 2:194.

118 Ibid., 1:488–9.
119 Ibid., 1:549.
121 Ibn Ḥajar, Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb, 4:207–8.
122 Ibn Ḥajar, Lisān, 6:286–7.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

people in prayers and recited using Ḥamza’s System of recitation. After

he finished the prayer, the people in the mosque beat him up with their
fists and shoes. When asked why, he replied that it was because of the
decadent/lowly Reading of Ḥamza (Qirāʾat Ḥamza al-radīʾa).124
7-a) Abū l-Ḥārith al-Layth b. Khālid: No negative statements were men-
tioned about him.
7-b) al-Dūrī: Mentioned above in 4-a).
6 Observations and Conclusion
It goes without saying that my examination of the ʿadāla of the Qurrāʾ as pre-
sented in the biographical dictionaries was selective. Indeed, for every Reader
and Rāwī there was equal and often even more information about their trust-
worthiness and honesty. Some of the anecdotes resemble hagiographies, el-
evating the Readers’ piety to an almost saintly level. It was reported that they
witnessed the Prophet in dreams and visions, that they occupied their days
with prayers and Qurʾān recitation,125 and that some of them demonstrated
a form of a miracle (karāma): for example, it was said that upon death, Abū
Jaʿfar al-Madanī’s chest resembled a page/leaf from the muṣḥaf, emanating
the light of the Qurʾān.126 However, it is worth noting that several Eponymous
Readers and Rāwīs did not hold a secure position when it came to their moral
integrity. We may agree with how Muslim scholarship tried to separate Qurʾān
from Ḥadīth in terms of the criteria of their transmitters’ ʿadāla. One could be
trustworthy in Ḥadīth but weak in Qirāʾāt and vice versa. Specialization ne-
cessitated applying different standards of scrupulousness to each discipline.
Nonetheless, how can we accept that the moral integrity and character of the
individual were judged according to different standards based on the disci-
pline? The aforementioned descriptions of lying, corruption, selling ḥadīth,
consuming alcohol, and fabricating isnāds are at the core of a transmitter’s
moral integrity, be it in Ḥadīth, Qurʾān, or court testimony. Take the case of
Ḥafṣ, for example, whose rendition of the Qurʾān is the most widely accepted
Qirāʾā today in most Muslim countries. In addition to the statements men-
tioned about him earlier, Ibn al-Jawzī listed him in his al-Ḍuʿafāʾ wa-l-matrūkīn,
124 Abū ʿAbd Allāh Yāqūt al-Ḥamawī (d. 626/1229), Muʿjam al-udabāʾ, ed. Iḥsān ʿAbbās, 7 vols.
(Beirut: Dār al-gharb al-islāmī, 1993), 4:1740–1.
125 Omar Hamdan, “Ẓāhirat al-manāmāt fī kutub al-qirāʾāt wa-tarājim al-qurrāʾ”, Majallat
maʿhad al-Imām al-Shāṭibī 4 (2007): 259–316. Cf. Amīn al-Dīn Ibn al-Sallār (d. 782/1380),
Ṭabaqāt al-qurrāʾ al-sabʿa, ed. Aḥmad ʿAzzūr (Beirut: al-Maktaba al-ʿaṣriyya, 2003).
126 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:176.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

136 CHAPTER 3
describing him as kadhdhāb (liar) who fabricated ḥadīth (yaḍaʿ al-ḥadīth).

Appalled by these statements, the editor notes the following in a footnote:
“being accused of lying must be thoroughly investigated, but God forbid, he
[Ḥafṣ] would not do such a thing”.127 With the Qurrāʾ subjected to such harsh
criticism, applying the rules of jarḥ and taʿdīl in the same way they were ap-
plied to Ḥadīth would have meant the exclusion of a large number of Qurrāʾ,
including some of the Canonical Readers and their Rāwīs. As an alternative,
tawātur and the collective memory of the community were needed as a shield
to compensate for and overcome the shortcomings of the individual Readers.
In conclusion, the introduction of Ḥadīth methodology into the discipline of
Qirāʾāt created conflicts and discrepancies within it. Qirāʾāt began as a commu-
nity or regional practice, but later transformed into a content (matn) transmis-
sion rather than a performative transmission, a content transmission that was
validated and authenticated through single chains of transmission rather than
the collective performance of the community. The novel concepts of Ḥadīth
transmission—terminology, ʿadāla, and corroboration—were almost non-
existent in the formative period of Qirāʾāt; however, by the time Ibn Mujāhid’s
Kitāb al-Sabʿa was published, the influence and impact of Ḥadīth scholarship
on Qirāʾāt had become irreversible. Another line of defense used to vindicate
Qirāʾāt from error and fabrication was its “pure” orality that was, and still is, the
main channel of its transmission and reception within the collective Muslim
community. This is in contrast to Ḥadīth, which eventually lost the battle of
orality, and became more vulnerable to forgery. In the next chapter, this aspect
of the orality of Qirāʾāt will be thoroughly investigated and tested against the
textual evidence we have in the classical sources.
127 Abū l-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597/1200–1), al-Ḍuʿafāʾ wa-l-matrūkīn, ed. ʿAbd Allāh al-Qāḍī,
3 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1986), 1:222.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

CHAPTER 4
Orality Revisited. The Written Transmission

of Qirāʾāt
1 The Regional Codices
… thus, the scripts of the maṣāḥif differed; some scribes used to write the
words according to how they are pronounced, while others added or omitted
[letters] according to their spelling system, which they had developed and to
which they were accustomed
al-Bāqillāni, al-Intiṣār li-l-Qurʾān
Textual variants in the Qurʾān were accepted and integrated into the Islamic
tradition very early on. Various interpretations were given to the genesis of
these variants, ranging from mere scribal errors to divine providence. Early
Muslim scholarship accepted the existence of errors and discrepancies that
resulted during the process of copying the maṣāḥif in the time of ʿUthmān.
Indeed, the proto-narratives of the collection of the Qurʾān displayed an acute
awareness of the defective script of Arabic, the disparities between the spo-
ken and written forms of Arabic, the instability of the rules of standard Arabic
grammar, and the multiplicity of dialects (lughāt). Dozens of narratives in early
works such as al-Sijistānī’s Maṣāḥif, Abū ʿUbayd’s Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān, Qurʾānic
commentaries, and Ḥadīth collections questioned the discrepancies found in
the regional codices, as well as the codification process mandated by ʿUthmān.
Several narratives noted and openly criticized the scribal errors of the early
codices, which were tantamount to the so-called laḥn (solecism) or alḥān al-
ʿarab. ʿĀʾisha, for example, featured in a few of these traditions. When asked
about the grammar and syntax of (Q. 20:63) in hādhāni la-sāḥirāni, (Q. 4:162)
wa-l-muqīmīna ‿ṣ-ṣalāta wa-l-muʾtūna ‿z-zakāta, and (Q. 5:69) inna ‿lladhīna
āmanū wa-lladhīna hādū wa-ṣ-ṣābiʾūna, ʿĀʾisha responded: “This was a blunder
by the scribes; they made spelling mistakes”.1
1 Abū ʿUbayd al-Harawī l-Qāsim b. Sallām (d. 224/838), Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān, ed. Aḥmad b. ʿAbd
al-Wāḥid al-Khayyāṭī, 2 vols. (Morocco: Maṭbaʿat Faḍāla, 1995), 2:103; Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭabarī
(d. 310/923), Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān, ed. ʿAbd Allāh al-Turkī, 26 vols. (Cairo: Dār

138 CHAPTER 4
When ʿUthmān’s committee showed him their final product, he reportedly

looked at the codices and said: “I see laḥn [mistakes, grammatical errors, scrib-
al errors] which the Arabs will fix in due course”.2 The standard narratives of
the codification of the Qurʾān3 called attention to an important detail regard-
ing the spelling system of the time. When the members of ʿUthmān’s commit-
tee disagreed with Zayd b. Thābit, a Medinan, on the spelling of tābūt vs. tābūh,
ʿUthmān instructed them to follow a spelling system that reflected the dialect
of Quraysh, for the Qurʾān was revealed in the Qurashī dialect.4 The possibil-
ity that Zayd b. Thābit used to recite al-tābūhu in (Q. 2:248) and al-tābūhi in
(Q. 20:39) is rather high, and this variant was documented in several sources.
In addition to Zayd, Ubayy b. Kaʿb also read al-tābūh,5 which seemed to be
the pronunciation some Medinan Companions adopted for this foreign word,
an articulation somehow closer to the Hebrew pronunciation. Jeffery studied
the etymology of the word, and its possible derivations from Hebrew, Aramaic,
or Ethiopic.6 Whether Zayd and Ubayy read tābūh, tābūt, tībūt, or tabūt,7 the
most intriguing aspect, in my view, is how different and conflicting variants
of the very same word were attributed to the same “mythical” figures, that is,
Hajar, 2001), 7:681; Abū Zakariyyā l-Farrāʾ (d. 207/822), Maʿānī l-Qurʾān, ed. Muḥammad ʿAlī
l-Najjār and Aḥmad Najātī, 3 vols. (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1983), 1:106.
2 Abū Bakr Ibn Abī Dāwūd al-Sijistānī (d. 316/928), Kitāb al-Maṣāḥif, ed. Muḥibb al-Dīn ʿAbd
al-Sabḥān Wāʿiẓ, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-bashāʾir al-islāmiyya, 2002), 1:228; Abū Muḥammad
Ibn Qutayba (d. 276/828), Ta‌ʾwīl mushkil al-Qurʾān, ed. Aḥmad Ṣaqr (Cairo: Dār al-turāth,
1973), 50–1.
3 Cf. Herald Motzki, “The Collection of the Qurʾān: A Reconsideration of Western Views in
Light of Recent Methodological Developments”, Der Islam 78:1 (2001): 1–34.
4 Abū ʿĪsā l-Tirmidhī (d. 279/892), al-Jāmiʿ al-kabīr, ed. Bashshār ʿAwwād Maʿrūf, 6 vols. (Beirut:
Dār al-gharb al-Islāmī, 1996), 5:181–2; Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3), al-Muqniʿ fī maʿrifat
marsūm maṣāḥif ahl al-amṣār, ed. Nūra bint Ḥasan bin Fahd al-Ḥumayyid (Riyad: Dār al-
Tadmuriyya, 2010), 142–3.
5 Muḥammad b. Yūsuf Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344), Tafsīr al-baḥr al-muḥīṭ, ed. ʿĀdil
ʿAbd al-Mawjūd and ʿAlī Muʿawwaḍ, 8 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1993), 2:270;
Abū ʿAbd Allāh Ibn Khālawayhi (d. 370/980–1), Mukhtaṣar fī shawādhdh al-Qurʾān min Kitāb
al-Badīʿ, ed. G. Bergesträsser (Baghdad: Maktabat al-Muthannā, 1968), 22; Abū l-Baqāʾ al-
ʿUkbarī (d. 616/1219), Iʿrāb al-qirāʾāt al-shawādhdh, ed. Muḥammad al-Sayyid Aḥmad ʿAzzūr,
2 vols. (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1996), 1:261; Aḥmad b. Yūsuf al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī (d. 756/1355),
al-Durr al-maṣūn fī ʿulūm al-kitāb al-maknūn, ed. Aḥmad al-Kharrāṭ, 11 vols. (Damascus: Dār
al-qalam, 1985), 2:523.
6 Arthur Jeffery, The Foreign Vocabulary of the Qurʾān (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 88–9.
7 Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Qurṭubī (d. 671/1273), al-Jāmiʿ li-aḥkām al-Qurʾān, ed. ʿAbd Allāh al-Turkī,
24 vols. (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 2006), 4:235; Abū Jaʿfar al-Naḥḥās (d. 338/949), Iʿrāb
al-Qurʾān, ed. Zuhayr Ghāzī Zāhid, 5 vols. (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1985), 1:326; cf. ʿAbd al-Laṭīf
al-Khaṭīb, Muʿjam al-qirāʾāt, 11 vols. (Damascus: Dār Saʿd al-Dīn, 2000), 1:351.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Orality Revisited. The Written Transmission of Qirāʾāt 139
Companions who constituted the first generation of the Qurʾān Readers. By

“mythical” I do not mean that they did not exist historically but rather that
they were the venerable masters of the discipline of Qirāʾāt, both its principles
of recitation (uṣūl) and individual variants ( farsh). If forgery and fabrication
took place within Muslim society by retroactively and indiscriminately attrib-
uting variants to the Companions, it would have been more logical to attribute
conflicting variants to different Companions. What was the purpose behind
attributing multiple variants to the same Companion, especially when some
of these Companions—such as Zayd and Ubayy—were considered to be the
most important, and possibly the only, link connecting the Canonical Readings
to the Prophet? Were the discrepancies reported on behalf of Zayd and Ubayy
(that is, how they might have recited the Qurʾān) similar to the discrepancies
attributed to the Eponymous Readers?8 If this was so, what does this tell us
about the state of the oral transmission of the Qurʾān, particularly the numer-
ous narratives about the excellent memory of the Companions and the early
Muslims who were said to have memorized the Qurʾān word by word, exactly
as the Prophet communicated it to them? More importantly, how “marginal”
was the written transmission of the Qurʾān/Qirāʾāt when contrasted with the
only valid mechanism acknowledged by the Islamic tradition, namely memory
and orality?
The dichotomy of written and oral in the Islamic tradition has stimulated
rich scholarship and intense debate in the domains of poetry, Ḥadīth, and
Qurʾān.9 My contribution to this debate will only be related to Qirāʾāt, and
thus my findings do not aim at formulating new theories or views concerning
the oral and written transmission of the different sciences in early Islam. This
discussion is primarily based on the data I have collected from Ibn Mujāhid’s
Kitāb al-Sabʿa, the analysis of which encouraged me to pose questions and un-
derscore some of the problems and contradictions which have long existed in
8 Refer to Chapter Two, especially to the section on the transmission errors.

9 Refer to the following works for the state-of-the-art discussion on the oral and written trans-
mission within these disciplines: for Ḥadīth: Herbert Berg, The Development of Exegesis in
Early Islam (Richmond: Curzon, 2000), 6–64; for poetry: Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Asad, Maṣādir al-shiʿr
al-jāhilī (Beirut: Dār al-Jīl, 1988), 23–220; for the Qurʾān and early Qurʾānic manuscripts:
François Déroche, Qurʾans of the Umayyads (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 1–35; “Written Transmission,”
in The Blackwell Companion to the Qurʾān, ed. Andrew Rippin (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing,
2006), 172–86; Muḥammad Muṣṭafā al-Aʿẓamī, The History of the Qurʾānic Text (Leicester: UK
Islamic Academy, 2003), 41–150. On orality and the written transmission in all these different
disciplines, refer to the excellent work by Gregor Schoeler: The Oral and the Written in Early
Islam, ed. James E. Montgomery, trans. Uwe Vagelpohl (New York: Routledge, 2006), espe-
cially 28–110.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

140 CHAPTER 4
the Qirāʾāt tradition. I am not suggesting solutions to these contradictions or al-

ternatives to the mechanisms of transmission in the formative period of Islam,
but rather exploring different possibilities and scenarios for what I believe was
a complex, multifaceted system of transmission. One is often confronted with
the incessant emphasis on orality in the Islamic and Qirāʾāt tradition, such as
the ubiquitous slogan “knowledge is preserved within the hearts of men, not
in notebooks” (al-ḥifẓ fī l-ṣudūr lā fī l-suṭūr). Moreover, the Qurʾān was held to
be protected from corruption and falsification by the oral tradition, contrary
to the scriptures of Jews and Christians. Under the commentary of (Q. 15:9)
“innā naḥnu nazzalnā ‿dh-dhikra wa-innā lahu la-ḥāfiẓūna” (Lo! We, even We,
reveal the Reminder, and lo! We verily are its Guardian), al-Qurṭubī mentioned
the following anecdote: a well-spoken, eloquent Jewish man entered the court
of al-Ma‌ʾmūn (r. 198–218/813–833), who was impressed by his demeanor and
diction. Al-Ma‌ʾmūn asked him to convert to Islam, but the man refused. After a
year, the Jew paid another visit to al-Ma‌ʾmūn, but as a Muslim this time. When
asked about the reason for his conversion, he said: “I wanted to put the differ-
ent religions to the test. I made copies of the Torah, the Bible, and the Qurʾān,
but I added and omitted words and phrases. The Jews and Christians bought
my copies without noticing the changes I introduced. On the other hand, the
Muslims recognized them [in the Qurʾān] and refused to buy my copies. I then
realized that the Qurʾān was a preserved and protected scripture. Thus, I con-
verted to Islam”.10
The objective of this chapter is not to challenge the notion of the Qurʾān’s
orality, but to flesh out some important aspects related to the written transmis-
sion of Qirāʾāt. By written transmission I do not mean a codicological study
of the extant corpus of the Qurʾānic manuscripts, which, in recent years, has
been subject to active and excellent scholarship.11 I will question the extent
to which Qirāʾāt literature, as a performed discipline, was purely oral, and ex-
plore the relevance of writing and note-taking within the discipline itself. Was
10 Qurṭubī, Tafsīr, 12:180–1.

11 François Déroche, La transmission écrite du Coran dans les débuts de l’Islam: le codex
Parisino-petropolitanus (Leiden: Brill, 2008); Yasin Dutton, “Two ‘Ḥijāzī’ Fragments of the
Qurʾan and Their Variants, or: When Did the Shawādhdh Become Shādhdh?”, Journal of
Islamic Manuscripts 8:1 (2017): 1–56; Alain George, “Coloured Dots and the Question of
Regional Origins in Early Qur’ans (Part II)”, Journal of Qur’anic Studies 17:2 (2015): 75–102;
“Coloured Dots and the Question of Regional Origins in Early Qur’ans (Part I),” Journal
of Qur’anic Studies 17:1 (2015): 1–44; Asma Hilali, The Sanaa Palimpsest: The Transmission
of the Qur’an in the First Centuries AH (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2017); Behnam
Sadeghi and Mohsen Goudarzi, “Ṣan‘ā’ 1 and the Origins of the Qur’ān”. Der Islam 87:1
(2012): 1–129.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

written transmission a medium for the variant readings that was accepted and
relied on as a valid, verified source? Were the Eponymous Readings, both their
principles (uṣūl) and individual variants ( farsh), transmitted from master to
student solely through audition and oral instruction, or were there instances
when the transmission of variants was accepted, interpreted, and subsequent-
ly performed based on notebooks and written documents?
1.1 The Case of Ibn Shanabūdh (d. 328/939)

The incident between Ibn Mujāhid and Ibn Shanabūdh has been frequently
discussed in scholarship, making it unnecessary to go into it in much detail. In
short, Ibn Shanabūdh advocated for the liturgical use of the shawādhdh read-
ings attributed to Ibn Masʿūd and Ubayy b. Kaʿb. He recited these anomalous
readings in public and argued that he was in possession of sound chains of
transmission, which would readily give these readings legitimacy. Nevertheless,
Ibn Mujāhid brought him to trial, after which he was flogged, forced to repent,
and pledged that thereafter he would adhere to the rasm of the ʿUthmānic
codex.12 The first observation to be made about this incident is the importance
of adhering to the written ʿUthmānic recension, which obviously superseded
the sound oral transmission for which Ibn Shanabūdh and other Qurʾān read-
ers argued. This does not come as a surprise, for the consensus to adhere to the
ʿUthmānic rasm was established very early on.13
The second observation I want to make concerns the ʿadāla of Ibn
Shanabūdh. Scholars held him in high regard as a Qurʾān reader. Al-Dhahabī
described him as trustworthy and meticulous in his scholarship (itqānihi wa-
ʿadālatihi). He was thiqa, pious, righteous, and possessed immense knowl-
edge in the discipline of Qirāʾāt (mutabaḥḥir). That being said, the trial and
humiliation to which Ibn Shanabūdh was subjected, and his denunciation by
the Qurrāʾ community, contradicted how a ʿadl, trustworthy individual should
have been treated. Ibn Shanabūdh was allegedly stripped naked, flogged, put
in a “breaking wheel” (i.e., a Catherine wheel), tortured, and ostracized from
12 R. Paret, “Ibn S͟hanabūd͟h”. Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Brill, Accessed
13 January 2018, available at http://dx.doi.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1163/1573
-3912_islam_SIM_3373.
13 Cf. Shady Hekmat Nasser, The Transmission of the Variant Readings of the Qurʾān: The
Problem of tawātur and the Emergence of shawādhdh (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 35–47, 117–20;
Arthur Jeffery, Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’ān: the Old Codices (Brill: Leiden,
1937), Introduction; Gotthelf Bergsträsser and Theodor Nöldeke, Geschichte des Qorâns:
Die Geschichte des Qorāntexts, 3 vols. (Leipzig: Dieterich’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung,
1926), 3:1–56.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

142 CHAPTER 4
Baghdād; all this took place under the nose of his colleagues, the Qurrāʾ.14 Ibn
Shanabūdh was not another Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (d. 241/855), who after resist-
ing the miḥna (inquisition) emerged a hero. Rather, Ibn Shanabūdh was con-
tinuously condemned by later Muslim scholars, who called him a fool and
an innovator.15
The last observation concerns the legacy of Ibn Shanabūdh. Condemned
by the Qurrāʾ community, Ibn Shanabūdh became a representative of a “devi-
ant” school in Qirāʾāt. Qurʾān Readers who remained insistent that their oral
tradition took supremacy over the ʿUthmānic recension were often labelled as
those who followed the path of Ibn Shanabūdh. In their biographical entries
(tarjama), they were associated with Ibn Shanabūdh, “the one known for his
shawādhdh.”16 The Islamic tradition relegated the Reading of Ibn Shanabūdh
to that of the shawādhdh, and only a few examples from his Reading survived
in the sources as quotes from the debate that took place between him and his
rival, Ibn Mujāhid.17 On the other hand, if we look back at Table #1 in Chapter 2,
which is a summary of the sound, canonical paths through which Ibn
al-Jazarī documented the Eponymous Readings of the Qurʾān, we see that Ibn
Shanabūdh is a Canonical Ṭarīq for the Reading of Ibn Kathīr (with 14 trans-
mitters) on par with Ibn Mujāhid (with 18 transmitters).18 In other words, our
only authentic, valid, and “mutawātir” sources for the Reading of Ibn Kathīr
through Qunbul were the transmissions of two rivals, Ibn Mujāhid and Ibn
Shanabūdh, the latter of whom was tried and denounced by the former and
by the rest of the Qurrāʾ community thereafter. Astonishingly, Ibn Shanabūdh
14 Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ al-kibār ʿalā l-ṭabaqāt wa-l-aʿṣār,
ed. Ṭayyār Ạltīqūlāg, 4 vols. (Istānbūl: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, İslâm Araştırmaları Merkezi,
1995), 2:546–53.
15 Shihāb al-Dīn Abū Shāma al-Maqdisī (d. 665/1267), al-Murshid al-wajīz ilā ʿulūm tataʿallaq
bi-l-kitāb al-ʿazīz, ed. Ibrāhīm Shams al-Dīn (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 2003), 142–3;
Jamāl al-Dīn al-Qifṭī (d. 646/1249), Inbāh al-ruwāt ʿalā anbāh al-nuḥāt, ed. Muḥammad
Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm, 4 vols. (Cairo: Dār al-fikr al-ʿarabī, 1986), 3:205.
16 Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), Bughyat al-wuʿāt fī ṭabaqāt al-lughawiyyīn wa-l-nuḥāt,
ed. Muḥammad Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-fikr, 1979), 1:90; Khayr al-Dīn
al-Ziriklī, al-Aʿlām, 8 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-ʿilm li-l-malāyīn, 2002), 5:309; Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn
al-Ṣafadī (d. 764/1363), al-Wāfī bi-l-wafayāt, ed. Aḥmad al-Arnāʾūṭ and Turkī Muṣṭafā,
29 vols. (Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-turāth al-ʿarabī, 2000), 2:28; Abū Bakr al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī
(d. 463/1069), Tārīkh Madīnat al-Salām wa-akhbār muḥaddithīhā wa-dhikr quṭṭānihā
l-ʿulamāʾ min ghayr ahlihā wa-wāridīhā, ed. Bashshār ʿAwwād Maʿrūf, 17 vols. (Beirut: Dār
al-gharb al-islāmī, 2001), 2:103–4.
17 Sāmī al-Māḍī, “Ibn Shanabūdh wa-maẓāhir qirāʾatihi bayn al-qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya”,
Majallat kulliyyat al-ādāb 102 (n.d.): 1–44.
18 Refer to Chapter Two, p. 23.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

was considered a “trustworthy” transmitter insofar as his transmission agreed

with the ʿUthmānic recension. He was characterized as a reliable and standard
Ṭarīq, not only by Ibn al-Jazarī, but by several scholars, including al-Dānī,19 Ibn
al-Faḥḥām (d. 516/1122),20 and Sibṭ al-Khayyāṭ (d. 541/1146).21
This standard of ʿadāla and trustworthiness is reminiscent of Ḥadīth, where
one might be trustworthy in his transmissions from one individual, but could
be deemed weak and unreliable in his transmissions from another person.22
But the case of Ibn Shanabūdh was different, for his shawādhdh transmis-
sions were technically sound and reliable. What superseded and abrogated
Ibn Shanabūdh’s sound, “oral” transmission was the consensus that was estab-
lished in the Muslim community, which dictated that one must adhere to the
ʿUthmānic recension and abandon any reading that violated the rasm, regard-
less of the soundness of its isnād. This situation highlights the question of the
orality of Qirāʾāt and the overruling authority of written transmission vis-à-vis
oral transmission.
1.2 Ibn Mujāhid and the Regional Codices

The variant readings of the Qurʾān that were not accommodated by a single
consonantal outline were still accepted as canonical so long as they conformed
to other consonantal outlines in other official codices. According to one nar-
rative, when ʿUthmān collected and codified the Qurʾān, he made four cop-
ies and dispatched them to Makka, Baṣra, Kūfa, and Damascus. He reportedly
kept the master copy in Madīna. Consequently, Muslim scholars have long ac-
cepted additions to and omissions from the Qurʾānic rasm, granted that these
19 Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī (d. 444/1053), Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, ed. ʿAbd al-Muhaymin
ʿAbd al-Salām Ṭaḥḥān et al., 4 vols. (PhD diss.: Jāmiʿat Umm al-qurā, 1985–95), 1:250.
20 Abū l-Qāsim Ibn al-Faḥḥām al-Ṣiqillī (d. 516/1122), al-Tajrīd li-bughyat al-murīd, ed. Ḍārī
al-Dūrī (Amman: Dār ʿAmmār, 2002), 98, 101.
21 Abū Muḥammad ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAlī Sibṭ al-Khayyāṭ (d. 541/1146), al-Mubhij fī l-qirāʾāt
al-thamāni wa-qirāʾat al-Aʿmash wa-Ibn Muḥayṣin wa-ikhtiyār Khalaf wa-l-Yazīdī, ed.
ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz b. Nāṣir al-Sabr, 2 vols. (PhD diss., Jāmiʿat al-Imām Muḥammad b. Suʿūd
al-islāmiyya, 1984–5), 1:10.
22 It is common to find in biographical dictionaries and works on jarḥ and taʿdīl expressions
such as “so-and-so is thiqa from X but not thiqa from Y”. Moreover, certain chains of trans-
mission were considered to be sounder than others, despite having several transmitters
in common. Transmitters who were known to have been associated more closely with
a particular teacher were considered more trustworthy in their transmission from that
teacher. On the other hand, they could be classified as weak if they were transmitting
from individuals with whom they did not have close association; Abū l-Fidāʾ ʿImād al-Dīn
Ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373), al-Bāʿith al-ḥathīth sharḥ ikhtiṣār ʿulūm al-Ḥadīth, ed. Aḥmad
Muḥammad Shākir (Riyad: Maktabat al-maʿārif, 1996), 545–555.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

144 CHAPTER 4
additions and omissions existed in another official codex. Mistakes and mis-
prints were not accepted as the raison d’être of the variant readings, since there
was no room for human error in the process of compiling and delivering the
sacred text. The consensus of the Muslim community is infallible, and only an
infallible entity is eligible to convey the divine word of God.23
The textual differences amongst the official codices were mentioned in
many sources, particularly later exegetical works and manuals of Qirāʾāt. One
of the earliest and most comprehensive accounts for documenting these dif-
ferences were mentioned by Ibn Abī Dāwūd’s (d. 316/928) Kitāb al-Maṣāḥif, a
contemporary of Ibn Mujāhid. Less than a century before Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Abū
ʿUbayd al-Qāsim b. Sallām (d. 224/838) recorded three accounts in his Faḍāʾil
al-Qurʾān, which recounted the differences amongst the regional, official codi-
ces. Abū ʿUbayd concluded the discussion about these differences with strong
emphasis on the sacredness and divine nature of all the ʿUthmānic codices,
including these textual variations: “… all these variants were copied in/from
( fī/min) the original muṣḥaf of ʿUthmān (al-Imām) … no Muslim rejects or
denies any of these variants. They are all the word of God, and using them in
prayer is valid.”24
1.2.1 The Account of Abū ʿUbayd

Abū ʿUbayd mentions three accounts concerning the textual variations
amongst the official codices. I summarized the contents of these accounts into
the following tables, which makes them easier to follow and compare with
later accounts. The first account mentions twelve differences amongst the co-
dices of Madīna and ʿIrāq (Kūfa and Baṣra).25 The added or omitted letters and
particles are highlighted in bold.
23 For a more detailed and in-depth arguments about this creed and principle, one should
refer to al-Bāqillānī’s Intiṣār, whose arguments represented the standard position of
Muslims concerning the intact and divinely mandated transmission of the Qurʾān; Abū
Bakr al-Bāqillānī (d. 403/1013), al-Intiṣār li-l-Qurʾān, ed. Muḥammad ʿIṣām al-Quḍāt
(Beirut: Dār Ibn Ḥazm, 2001), especially 53–70.
24 Abū ʿUbayd, Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān, 2:162. On the permissibility and impermissibility of
using shawādhdh and other dialectical variations in prayers, see: Shady Hekmat Nasser,
“The Grammatical Blunders of Qurʾān Reciters: Zallat al-qāriʾ by Abū Ḥafṣ al-Nasafī
(d. 537/1142)”, Journal of Abbasid Studies 2:1 (2015): 1–37.
25 Abū ʿUbayd, Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān, 2:156–7.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

TABLE 3 Abū ʿUbayd: differences between the codices of Madīna and ʿIrāq
Madīna ʿIrāq
(Q. 2:132) wa-awṣā wa-waṣṣā

(Q. 3:133) sāriʿū wa-sāriʿū
(Q. 5:53) yaqūlu wa-yaqūlu
(Q. 5:54) yartadid yartadda
(Q. 9:107) ‿lladhīna wa-lladhīna
(Q. 18:36) minhumā minhā
(Q. 26:217) fa-tawakkal wa-tawakkal
(Q. 40:26) wa-an aw an
(Q. 42:30) bi-mā fa-bi-mā
(Q. 43:71) tashtahīhi tashtahī
(Q. 57:24) ‿llāha ‿l-ghaniyyu ‿llāha huwa ‿l-ghaniyyu
(Q. 91:15) fa-lā wa-lā
The next account listed the differences amongst the codices of Syria and ʿIrāq
(Kūfa and Baṣra). Twenty-eight instances were mentioned in total.26
TABLE 4 Abū ʿUbayd: differences between the codices of Syria and ʿIrāq
ʿIrāq Syria
(Q. 2:116) wa-qālū qālū

(Q. 3:133) wa-sāriʿū sāriʿū
(Q. 3:184) wa-z-zuburi wa-bi-z-zuburia
(Q. 4:66) qalīlun qalīlan
(Q. 5:53) wa-yaqūlu yaqūlu
(Q. 5:54) yartadda yartadid
(Q. 6:32) wa-la‿d-dāru wa-la-dāru
(Q. 6:137) shurakāʾuhum shurakāʾihim
(Q. 7:3) tadhakkarūna tatadhakkarūna
(Q. 7:43) wa-mā kunnā ma kunnā
(Q. 7:75) qāla wa-qāla
(Q. 7:90) wa-qāla qāla
26 Ibid., 2:157–61.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

146 CHAPTER 4
TABLE 4 Abū ʿUbayd: differences between the codices of Syria and ʿIrāq (cont.)
ʿIrāq Syria
(Q. 7:141) anjaynākum anjākum

(Q. 9:107) wa‿lladhīna ‿lladhīna
(Q. 10:22) yusayyirukum yanshurukum
(Q. 10:96) kalimatu kalimātu
(Q. 17:93) qul qāla
(Q. 18:36) minhā minhumā
(Q. 23:85, 87, 89) li‿llāhi … ‿llāhu … ‿llāhu li‿llāhi … li‿llāhi … li‿llāhi
(Q. 26:217) wa-tawakkal fa-tawakkal
(Q. 27:67) a-innā inna-nā
(Q. 40:21) minhum minkum
(Q. 40:26) aw an wa-an
(Q. 42:30) fa-bi-mā bi-mā
(Q. 55:12) dhū dhā
(Q. 55:78) dhī dhū
(Q. 57:24) ‿llāha huwa ‿l-ghaniyyu ‿llāha ‿l-ghaniyyu
(Q. 91:15) wa-lā fa-lā
a See the discussion below on the rest of the verse regarding the bāʾ in wa-bi-l-kitābi.
Combining Tables 3 and 4, we end up with the following data. The highlighted
readings under the Syrian codex heading are unique and do not occur in other
codices. The empty cells under the Madinan codex heading are identical to the
ʿIrāqī codex.
TABLE 5 Abū ʿUbayd: differences amongst the codices of Madīna, Iraq and Syria
Madīna ʿIrāq Syria

(Q. 2:132) wa-awṣā wa-waṣṣā wa-awṣā
(Q. 3:133) sāriʿū wa-sāriʿū sāriʿū
(Q. 3:184) wa-z-zuburi wa-bi-z-zuburi
(Q. 5:53) yaqūlu wa-yaqūlu yaqūlu
(Q. 5:54) yartadid yartadda yartadid
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

TABLE 5 Abū ʿUbayd: differences amongst the codices of Madīna, Iraq and Syria (cont.)
Madīna ʿIrāq Syria

(Q. 9:107) ‿lladhīna wa-lladhīna ‿lladhīna
(Q. 18:36) minhumā minhā minhumā
(Q. 23:85, 87, 89) li‿llāhi … ‿llāhu … li‿llāhi … li‿llāhi …
‿llāhu li‿llāhi
(Q. 26:217) fa-tawakkal wa-tawakkal fa-tawakkal
(Q. 27:67) a-innā inna-nā
(Q. 40:26) wa-an aw an wa-an
(Q. 42:30) bi-mā fa-bi-mā bi-mā
(Q. 43:71) tashtahīhi tashtahī tashtahīhi
(Q. 55:12) dhū dhā
(Q. 55:78) dhī dhū
(Q. 57:24) ‿llāha ‿l-ghaniyyu ‿llāha huwa ‿llāha ‿l-ghaniyyu
‿l-ghaniyyu
(Q. 91:15) fa-lā wa-lā fa-lā
The last account mentioned by Abū ʿUbayd listed five differences amongst the
ʿIrāqī codices, i.e. Kūfa and Baṣra.27
27 Abū ʿUbayd, Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān, 2:161–2.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

148 CHAPTER 4
TABLE 6 Abū ʿUbayd: differences between the codices of Baṣra and Kūfa
Kūfa Baṣra
(Q. 6:63) anjānā anjaytanā

(Q. 21:4) qāla qul
(Q. 46:15) iḥsānā ḥusnā
There are several observations to be made, which I will discuss shortly after
listing the other variations mentioned in later accounts by Ibn Abī Dāwūd and
al-Dānī. One important observation to note for now is that Abū ʿUbayd did not
mention any textual variations in the Meccan codex. If we defer to al-Dānī’s
opinion in al-Muqniʿ that ʿUthmān did not send a codex to Mecca,28 and follow
Michael Cook’s conclusions concerning the Meccan codex being a contami-
nated text of a later origin,29 these views could correspond to the absence of
Meccan textual variations from the early account provided by Abū ʿUbayd, and
cast doubts concerning the traditional account of ʿUthmān sending a codex
to Makka.
1.2.2 The Accounts of Ibn Abī Dāwūd

In order to avoid unnecessary repetition, I will merge all of the data in one table
that summarizes the previously mentioned variations in addition to new ones
listed by Ibn Abī Dāwūd and a few more mentioned by al-Dānī in his al-Muqniʿ.
The shaded entries are common between Abū ʿUbayd and Ibn Abī Dāwūd’s ac-
counts. The entries with red color were mentioned by the latter only.
The first obvious observation is that variations in the Meccan codex have
been introduced. Additionally, Ibn Abī Dāwūd’s account lists approximately
fifteen more entries. Also, (Q. 7:90) qāla ⟷ wa-qāla, (Q. 10:96) kalimatu ⟷
kalimātu, and (Q. 27:67) a-innā ⟷ innanā are not mentioned by Ibn Abī
Dāwūd in this section of the book. Nevertheless, (Q. 27:67) a-innā ⟷ innanā
was mentioned in another section in the book, under the chapter titled ‘ikhtilāf
khuṭūṭ al-maṣāḥif ’ (spelling variations of the codices). Placed under that sec-
tion, it was assumed that these variations were due to different spelling rules
rather than a mandated “divine” textual variation that purposefully existed
amongst the regional codices.
28 Dānī, al-Muqniʿ, 163.

29 Michael Cook, “The stemma of the regional codices of the Koran”: Graeco-Arabica 9–10
(2004): 104.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
TABLE 7 The collated accounts of Abū ʿUbayd and Ibn Abī Dāwūd concerning the
differences amongst the regional codicesa
Madīna Kūfa Syria Baṣra Makka

(Q. 2:132) wa-awṣā wa-waṣṣā
(Q. 3:133) sāriʿū wa-sāriʿū sāriʿū
(Q. 3:184) wa-z-zuburi wa-bi-z-zuburi
(Q. 4:36) wa-l-jāri dhī wa-l-jāri dhā
(Q. 4:171) wa-rusulihi wa-rasūlihi
(Q. 5:53) yaqūlu wa-yaqūlu yaqūlu
(Q. 5:54) yartadid yartadda yartadid
(Q. 6:63) anjānā anjaytanā
(Q. 7:195) kīdūnī kīdūni kīdūnī
(Q. 8:67) li-nabiyyin li-n-nabiyyi
(Q. 9:100) taḥtahā min taḥtihā
(Q. 9:107) ‿lladhīna wa-lladhīna ‿lladhīna
(Q. 13:42) ‿l-kāfiru ‿l-kuffāru ‿l-kuffāru
(Q. 17:93) qul qāla qul qāla
(Q. 18:36) minhumā minhā minhumā
(Q. 18:95) makkannī makkananī makkannī
(Q. 21:4) qāla qul
(Q. 21:112) qul qāla qul
(Q. 22:23) wa-luʾluʾan wa-luʾluʾan wa-luʾluʾin wa-luʾluʾin
(Q. 21:30) a-wa-lam a-lam
(Q. 23:85, li‿llāhi … ‿llāhu … li‿llāhi …
87, 89) ‿llāhu li‿llāhi … li‿llāhi
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

150 CHAPTER 4
TABLE 7 The collated accounts of Abū ʿUbayd and Ibn Abī Dāwūd (cont.)
Madīna Kūfa Syria Baṣra Makka

(Q. 25:25) nuzzila nunzilu
(Q. 26:217) fa-tawakkal wa-tawakkal fa-tawakkal
(Q. 27:21) la-ya‌ʾtiyannī la-ya‌ʾtiyannanī
(Q. 27:67) a-innā annanā
(Q. 35:33) wa-luʾluʾan wa-luʾluʾan/in wa-luʾluʾin
(Q. 36:35) ʿamilat-hu ʿamilat
(Q. 39:64) ta‌ʾmurūnnī ta‌ʾmurūnnī
(Q. 40:26) wa-an aw an wa-an
(Q. 42:30) bi-mā fa-bi-mā bi-mā
(Q. 43:68) yā-ʿibādī yā-ʿibādi yā-ʿibādī yā-ʿibādī
(Q. 43:71) tashtahīhi tashtahī
(Q. 46:15) iḥsānā ḥusnā
(Q. 47:18) ta‌ʾtiyahum ta‌ʾtihim ta‌ʾtiyahum ta‌ʾtihim
(Q. 55:12) dhū dhā
(Q. 55:78) dhī dhū
(Q. 57:10) wa-kullan wa-kullun
(Q. 57:24) ‿llāha ‿llāha huwa ‿llāha
‿l-ghaniyyu ‿l-ghaniyyu ‿l-ghaniyyu
(Q. 72:20) qāla qul qāla qāla
(Q. 76:15,16) qawārīran … qawārīran … qawārīran …
qawārīran qawārīran qawārīra
(Q. 91:15) fa-lā wa-lā fa-lā
a Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 2:253–82; Dānī, Muqniʿ, 537–615. Cf. Ghānim Qaddūrī al-Ḥamad,
Rasm al-Muṣḥaf: dirāsa lughawiyya tārīkhiyya (Baghdād: Jāmiʿat Baghdād, 1982), 693–701.
1.2.3 The Textual Variants in Kitāb al-Sabʿa

When one studies the above entries on the textual differences amongst the
official, regional codices, the most noticeable aspect would be the existence
of some discrepancies and irregularities when attributing variants to their
regional codex. For example, Ibn Abī Dāwūd said that in the Madīnan codex
(al-Imām), (Q. 43:71) was written tashtahīhi while the codices of Kūfa and
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Baṣra had tashtahī. He repeated this remark three different times.30 On the
other hand, Abū ʿUbayd reported that tashtahī was written as such only in the
Medinan codex, while the rest of the codices had tashtahīhi.31 Al-Dānī con-
firmed Abū ʿUbayd’s account and added: “Abū ʿUbayd said: “I saw it written
with two hāʾs in the Imām, but in the rest of the codices it was written with
one hāʾ: tashtahī”.32 Nevertheless, according to al-Dānī’s account, tashtahīhi
with two hāʾs, was written in both the Medinan and Syrian codices. Moreover,
al-Dānī mentioned an account to the effect that tashtahīhi was also written
in the codices of Kūfa, but he believed that this information was incorrect
(ghalaṭ). I disagree with al-Dānī’s observation, and I will explain why shortly.
How do we understand some of these discrepancies in the aforementioned
accounts? Were they merely caused by inaccurate reports transmitted by Abū
ʿUbayd and Ibn Abī Dāwūd on behalf of the authorities they relied on? Should
we take for granted the notion of the existence of “only” four or five regional,
official codices from which textual and oral variants originated? How practical
is it to follow Michael Cook’s approach and try to establish a stemma for the
regional codices, first by principally relying on al-Dānī’s mid-5th/11th century
accounts of the “finalized” textual differences amongst the codices, and sec-
ond, by assuming that these codices were the only codices that existed and
were used by the early Muslim community?33
Let us go back to (Q. 43:71) tashtahī ⟷ tashtahīhi and examine its variant
readings according to Ibn Mujāhid. Nāfiʿ, Ibn ʿĀmir, and ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ read
tashtahīhi, with a hāʾ after the yāʾ, while the other Readers, including ʿĀṣim
→ Shuʿba, read tashtahī.34 Why did the ʿIrāqī/Kūfan Ḥafṣ read tashtahīhi
if the ʿIrāqī/Kūfan codices, according to al-Dānī, only had tashtahī, without
a hāʾ? Moreover, if we currently follow the Kūfan codex of the Qurʾān based
on the Kūfan “Imām” as rendered by Ḥafṣ, why do our copies of the Qurʾān
have tashtahīhi, written with the hāʾ, which allegedly did not exist in the
Kūfan codex? As Muslims today have decided to print and copy the Qurʾān
using different textual variations from different official, attested regional co-
dices, what would have stopped the early Muslims from doing the same thing,
namely, from making different copies of the Qurʾān and using different com-
binations of spelling conventions or regional textual variants according to the
30 Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 2:248, 2:250, 2:255.

31 Abū ʿUbayd, Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān, 2:157.
32 Dānī, Muqniʿ, 589–590.
33 Cook, “Stemma”, 89–91.
al-maʿārif, 1979), 588–9.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

152 CHAPTER 4
various traditions through which they had learned, recited, and transmitted
the Qurʾān? Scholarship has generally fixated on the notion of static regional
codices, a natural product of the ʿUthmānic account of the “historical” codifi-
cation event. However, it is perhaps time to be open to other possibilities con-
cerning the nature of the early codices and to extend the notion of a singular
Imām bound to a particular city/region to include several codices, complete
or partial, which were circulating in the same geographical locale. Moreover, I
would further argue that the later standardization of an Eponymous, regional
Reading (Qirāʾa) led to the survival of one codex amongst others—the survival
of the codex that was the most compatible with the reading of the majority—
while the other codices from the same city and region slowly went extinct.
The possibility that there were several “Imāms” in Kūfa could explain why Ḥafṣ
read tashtahīhi, with hāʾ, while his colleague Shuʿba read tashtahī, without hāʾ.
This possibility could also explain the discrepancies and variations in the ac-
counts cited by Abū ʿUbayd and Ibn Abī Dāwūd. That being said, do we have
other examples to support this claim?
Take the example of (Q. 40:26) aw an ⟷ wa-an. Michael Cook called this
variant “a fly in the ointment”, since it broke the structural relationships which
he was trying to establish between the Kūfan and Baṣran codices.35 According
to the account of Abū ʿUbayd, both Baṣrans and Kūfans (ʿIrāqīs) had “aw an”
in their codices. Moreover, when listing the differences between the codi-
ces of the Kūfans and the Baṣrans, Abū ʿUbayd did not mention (Q. 40:26).36
Furthermore, Ibn Abī Dāwūd emphasized that both the Kūfans and the Baṣrans
had “aw an” written in their codices.37 However, when we consult al-Dānī’s ac-
count in al-Muqniʿ, only the Kūfans were described to have “aw an” written in
their copies of the Qurʾān; the other regional codices had “wa-an”.38 Not sur-
prisingly, Ibn Mujāhid reported the following: ʿĀṣim, Ḥamza, and al-Kisāʾī read
“aw an”, for this is how it was written in the Kūfan codices. Ibn Kathīr, Nāfiʿ,
Abū ʿAmr, and Ibn ʿĀmir read wa-an.39 Do we have records of Baṣran Readers
who could have possibly read “aw an”, just like the Kūfans did? Ibn al-Jazarī’s
tenth Canonical Reader, Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī, did indeed read “aw an”, which,
if we believe that there was only one Imām-codex in Baṣra, would mean that
Yaʿqūb deviated from the main codex of his city. However, if we consider the
possibility that there might have been different codices in Baṣra—the oldest of
35 Ibid., 569; 1:255; Cook, “Stemma,” 95–6.

37 Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 2:255.
38 Dānī, Muqniʿ, 587.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

which was probably used by Yaʿqūb since, according to the oldest accounts by
Abū ʿUbayd and Ibn Abī Dāwūd, his copy agreed with that of the Kūfans—then
the discrepancies and conflicting accounts of the regional variations could be
better explained and accounted for.
How did the textual variants of the regional codices appear in Qirāʾāt works,
which were in theory primarily oral in nature? I gathered most of the instances
in the Kitāb al-Sabʿa in which Ibn Mujāhid referred to a textual variation in
the codices which was responsible for a variant reading. The unnumbered ex-
amples below were not mentioned by Ibn Mujāhid, but I listed them to show
the textual variants mentioned by Abū ʿUbayd and Ibn Abī Dāwūd which were
nevertheless later ignored in Qirāʾāt scholarship. I elaborate on some problem-
atic examples, especially those which illuminate the possible existence of mul-
tiple official codices circulating simultaneously in one geographical region.
1) (Q. 2:116) qālū by IA, per the codices of Syria; wa-qālū per the codices of
Madīna, Makka, Kūfa and Baṣra.40
2) (Q. 2:132) wa-waṣṣā, except N and IA: wa-awṣā.41
3) (Q. 3:133) wa-sāriʿū, except N and IA: sāriʿū.42
4) (Q. 3:184) wa-z-zuburi, except IA: wa-bi-z-zuburi.43
According to Ibn Abī Dāwūd, wa-bi-z-zuburi was also written in the Imām-
codex of Ḥijāz. On top of that, we have interesting information recorded in
the sources concerning the rest of the verse, which reads “wa-bi-l-bayyināti
wa-z-zuburi wa-l-kitābi” where all the Canonical Readers, including IA, read
wa-l-kitābi. However, Hishām b. ʿAmmār, the second Canonical Rāwī of IA, read
wa-bi-l-kitābi, with the addition of “bi”. This information was not recorded by
Ibn Mujāhid or Ibn Abī Dāwūd. On the other hand, Abū ʿUbayd wrote that
the three words in the verse (bi-l-bayyināti wa-bi-z-zuburi wa-bi-l-kitābi) were
all prefixed with a bāʾ (kulluhunna bi-l-bāʾ).44 Hishām’s reading, wa-bi-l-kitābi,
was transmitted through his Canonical Ṭarīq, al-Ḥulwānī, and was recorded in
many sources, including al-Shāṭibiyya and al-Nashr.45 Ibn al-Jazarī wrote that
al-Ḥulwānī transmitted wa-bi-l-kitābi via multiple channels from Hishām. This
was also how al-Dānī read and received this individual reading, similar to how
40 Ibid., 169.
41 Ibid., 171; Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 1:253.
42 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 216; Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 253–4.
43 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 221; Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 1:267.
45 Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 3:138; ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Qāḍī, al-Wāfī fī sharḥ al-Shāṭibiyya
fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ (Jedda: Maktabat al-Sawādī li-l-tawzīʿ, 1999), 241; Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī
(d. 444/1053), al-Taysīr fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, ed. Otto Pretzl (Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī,
1984), 92.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

154 CHAPTER 4
it was read by most subsequent Qurʾān reciters who performed the rendition of
Hishām via al-Ḥulwānī, namely, by reading wa-bi-l-kitābi.46 Al-Dānī mentioned
in his Jāmiʿ that when al-Ḥulwānī had doubts about this variant, he wrote to
Hishām and asked him to double check the bāʾ in wa-bi-l-kitābi. Hishām wrote
back to him and said that the bāʾ was written in both words: wa-bi-z-zuburi and
wa-bi-l-kitābi. Furthermore, al-Dānī transmitted another account on behalf of
Abū Ḥātim al-Sijistānī to the effect that the bāʾ of wa-bi-l-kitābi was written
in the Ḥimṣī codex, which ʿUthmān sent to Syria.47 Ibn al-Jazarī confirmed
that he saw it with his own eyes in the Umayyad mosque. On the other hand,
other transmissions were also reported on behalf of Hishām in which he read
wa-l-kitābi, without the bāʾ. This transmission was documented through an
important ṭarīq, al-Dājūnī. Ibn al-Jazarī added that if it were not for the trust-
worthy transmissions on behalf of Hishām that said to read without the bāʾ,
he would not have documented this variant in his book, especially given that
in his own records of the transmissions he received, Hishām’s reading was au-
thenticated and soundly transmitted without the bāʾ (wa-lawlā thubūt al-ḥadhf
ʿindī ʿanhu min ṭuruq kitābī hādhā lam adhkurhu).48 This example is another
case of the possible co-existence of two different copies of a Syrian codex,
both of which were authoritative and in circulation at the same time. The fact
that the two canonical Rāwīs of IA read the same word differently, and that
Hishām was switching back and forth between wa-bi-l-kitābi and wa-l-kitābi,
suggests the possibility that there were multiple Imām-codices in Syria, and
not only one, unique Imām-codex that formed the only basis of the Reading
of Ibn ʿĀmir. Finally, the wording of Ibn Abī Dāwūd concerning “wa-z-zuburi”
was clear: “It was written with bāʾ, wa-bi-z-zuburi, in both, the Syrian and the
Medinan/Ḥijāzī codices”. What happened to that Ḥijāzī codex in which the ad-
ditional bāʾ was written? Was it lost or destroyed? Could it have been relocated
to Syria at some point and become part of the Syrian tradition?
– (Q. 4:36) wa-l-jāri dhī. According to Ibn Abī Dāwūd, the Kūfan codices
had wa-l-jāri dhā.49 This entry was not mentioned by Ibn Mujāhid since it
was unanimously read dhī by all seven Readers. Several accounts empha-
sized that “some” Kūfan codices did have dhā written in them. Ibn Abī
Dāwūd reported that he had not met anyone in his time who read dhā,
even though some readers in the past used to read it as such. In another
46 Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, ed. ʿAlī Muḥammad
al-Ḍabbāʿ, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya), 2:245–6.
47 Dānī, Jāmiʿ al-bayān, 2:230; cf. Intisar Rabb, “Non-Canonical Readings of the Qur’an:
Recognition and Authenticity (The Ḥimṣī Reading)”, Journal of Qur’anic Studies 8:2 (2006):
especially 84–88.
48 Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 245–6.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

account, someone asked Ḥamza: “It is written dhā in our [Kūfan] codices;
should I read it as such?” Ḥamza replied: “No. You should read it as dhī
only”.50
5) (Q. 4:66) qalīlun, except IA: qalīlan.51
– (Q. 4:171) wa-rusulihi. According to Ibn Abī Dāwūd, it was written
wa-rasūlihi in the Meccan codex.52 This variation was not mentioned by
Ibn Mujāhid, but the variant entered the shawādhdh literature and was
attributed to a certain Ibn Munādhir (d. 198/813).53
6) (Q. 5:53) wa-yaqūlu/a, except IK, N, and IA: yaqūlu.54
7) (Q. 5:54) yartadda, except N and IA: yartadid.55
8) (Q. 6:32) wa-la‿d-dāru, except IA: wa-la-dāru.56
9) (Q. 6:63) anjānā, except IK, N, IA, and AA: anjaytanā.57
10) (Q. 6:137) shurakāʾuhum, except IA: shurakāʾihim.58
11) (Q. 7:3) tadhakkarūna/tadhdhakkarūna, except IA: yatadhakkarūna/
tatadhakkarūna.59
For this variant, Ibn Abī Dāwūd counted the codex of the Ḥijāz together with
the Syrian codex.
12) (Q. 7:43) wa-mā, except IA: mā.60
Once more, Ibn Abī Dāwūd counted the codex of the Ḥijāz together with the
Syrian codex.
13) (Q. 7:75) qāla, except IA: wa-qāla.61
Both the codices of the Ḥijāz and Syria were considered together by Ibn Abī
Dāwūd.
14) (Q. 7:141) anjaynākum, except IA: anjākum.62
Ibn Abī Dāwūd grouped the codex of the Ḥijāz together with the Syrian codex.
50 Ibid., 2:258, 260. See the intriguing note by al-Dimyāṭī on this problem and al-Jaʿbarī’s
criticism of al-Dānī in Shihāb al-Dīn al-Dimyāṭī (d. 1117/1705), Itḥāf fuḍalāʾ al-bashar fī
l-qirāʾāt al-arbaʿata ʿashar, ed. Shaʿbān Muḥammad Ismāʿīl, 2 vols. (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub,
1987), 1:527.
53 ʿUkbarī, Shawādhdh, 1:423; al-Khaṭīb, Muʿjam al-qirāʾāt, 2:207.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

156 CHAPTER 4
15) (Q. 7:195) kīdūni, except AA, N → Ibn Jammāz, N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar, and IA:
kīdūnī.63
According to Ibn Abī Dāwūd, in both the Syrian and Ḥijāzī codices, kīdūnī was
written with yāʾ. The records of Ibn Mujāhid indicated that Ibn ʿĀmir read in
both ways, but without naming the transmitter of each variant. Ibn al-Jazarī
identified the cause of this discrepancy to be IA’s Canonical Rāwī, Hishām,
whose transmitters reported both readings on his behalf: kīdūnī and kīdūni.64
Additionally, the same discrepancy was attributed to Nāfiʿ, whose transmitters
documented both variants on his behalf.
– (Q. 8:67) li-nabiyyin. According to Ibn Abī Dāwūd, it was written li-n-
nabiyyi in the Syrian codex (Imām al-Shām).65 It is worth mentioning
that the reading li-n-nabiyyi was considered to be anomalous (shādhdha),
and that sources attributed it to Abū l-Dardāʾ (d. 32/652), Abū Ḥaywa
(d. 112/730), and Abū Baḥriyya (d. 53/673), all of whom were Syrians.66
16) (Q. 9:100) tajrī taḥtahā, except IK: tajrī min taḥtihā.67
17) (Q. 9:107) wa‿lladhīna, except N and IA: ‿lladhīna.68
18) (Q. 10:22) yusayyirukum, except IA: yanshurukum.69
19) (Q. 10:33, 96) kalimatu, except N and IA: kalimātu.70
20) (Q. 13:42) ‿l-kuffāru, except IK, N, and AA: ‿l-kāfiru.71
According to Ibn Abī Dāwūd, the ʿIrāqīs had ‿l-kuffāru written with an alif,
while the Medinans had ‿l-kāfiru written without an alif. However, Abū ʿAmr
b. al-ʿAlāʾ’s reading was reported to be ‿l-kāfiru, which means that Abū ʿAmr’s
Baṣran codex must have had the word written in it without an alif. Upon con-
sulting the reading of the other Canonical Reader of Baṣra, Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī,
we do find that he read ‿l-kuffāru,72 in accordance with Ibn Abī Dāwūd’s ac-
count. Again, this suggests that Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ and Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī, the
two Canonical Readers of Baṣra, were perhaps using different codices, both
of which were characterized as Baṣran, though with different scribal/textual
variations.
21) (Q. 17:93) qul, except IK and IA: qāla.73

65 Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 1:266, 271.
66 Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī, Tafsīr, 4:513; al-Khaṭīb, Muʿjam al-qirāʾāt, 3:328.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

22) (Q. 18:36) minhā, except IK, N, and IA: minhumā.74

23) (Q. 18:95) makkannī, except IK: makkananī.75
Ibn Abī Dāwūd reported that in the codices of Syria and Ḥijāz, it was written
makkannī, with one nūn only. In a statement attributed to a certain Mubashshir
[b. ʿUbayd al-Qurashī (d.?)], the word was written as makkananī, with two
nūns, in the Imām of ʿIrāq. Ibn Abī Dāwūd commented that he never heard
anyone claiming that, except for Mubashshir. Interestingly, this variant with
two nūns did exist, but in the Meccan codices, where it was reported by Ibn
Mujāhid and the later Qirāʾāt tradition.
24) (Q. 21:4) qāla, except IK, N, AA, IA, and A→ Shuʿba: qul.76
This is another apparent example of a textual variation amongst the same re-
gional codices where two Rāwīs of one Eponymous Reader read differently. By
reading qāla, ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ seems to have followed the same codex of his Kūfan
colleagues, Ḥamza and al-Kisāʾī, while ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba read qul, the rasm of
which was not written with alif according to the Kūfan tradition.
25) (Q. 21:30) a-wa-lam, except IK: a-lam.77
The account was mentioned in al-Dānī’s Muqniʿ, but it was not reported in
either Abū ʿUbayd’s Faḍāʾil or Ibn Abī Dāwūd’s Maṣāḥif.78 It is worth mention-
ing that al-Mahdawī (d. 440/1048) recorded this variation in his Hijāʾ maṣāḥif
al-amṣār.79
26) (Q. 21:112) qul, except A → Ḥafṣ: qāla.80
According to Ibn Abī Dāwūd, in the Baṣran codex it was written qul, while the
Kūfan codex had it written as qāla. Out of all the Kūfan readers, only A → Ḥafṣ
read qāla and deviated from the Kūfan Imām.
27) (Q. 22:23) wa-luʾluʾan, except IK, AA, IA, H, and K: wa-luʾluʾin.81 Refer to
(Q. 35:33) below.
28) (Q. 23:87, 89): li‿llāhi … li‿llāhi, except AA: ‿llāhu … ‿llāhu.82
29) (Q. 23:112, 114): qāla … qāla, except IK → al-Bazzī: qul … qāla; IK → Qunbul,
H, and K: qul … qul.83

78 Dānī, Muqniʿ, 582; cf. al-Ḥamad, Rasm al-Muṣḥaf, 699.
79 Abū l-ʿAbbās al-Mahdawī (d. 440/1048), Hijāʾ maṣāḥif al-amṣār, ed. Ḥātim al-Ḍāmin
(Sharjah: Dār Ibn al-Jawzī, 2009), 100.
80 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 431–2; Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 1:277.
83 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 449; Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 1:256–7.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

158 CHAPTER 4
According to Abū ʿUbayd’s account, the Baṣrans had qāla … qāla in their co-
dices. The Rāwīs of Ibn Kathīr disagreed and read differently. Al-Bazzī chose
qul … qāla, while Qunbul adopted qul … qul. Moreover, the two Kūfans, Ḥamza
and al-Kisāʾī, read qul … qul, while the third Kūfan, ʿĀṣim, read qāla … qāla.
Once more, the intra-regional disagreements amongst the Kūfan and the
Meccan readers suggest that different copies of the Qurʾān were being con-
sulted and that more than one single Imām-codex was used by the Eponymous
Readers and their Rāwīs.
30) (Q. 25:25) wa-nuzzila, except IK: wa-nunzilu.84
This textual variant was neither mentioned by Abū ʿUbayd nor Ibn Abī Dāwūd.
Al-Dānī reported it in al-Muqniʿ.85
31) (Q. 26:217) wa-tawakkal, except N and IA: fa-tawakkal.86
32) (Q. 27:21) la-ya‌ʾtiyannī, except IK: la-ya‌ʾtiyannanī.87
Again, this case was neither mentioned by Abū ʿUbayd nor Ibn Abī Dāwūd. It
was reported by al-Dānī.88
33) (Q. 27:67) a-innā, except IA and K: innanā.89
Another example of a textual difference amongst the Kūfans, where ʿĀṣim and
Ḥamza read a-inna, while al-Kisāʾī read innanā.
34) (Q. 28:37) wa-qāla, except IK: qāla.90
The case was mentioned by al-Dānī, but it was not reported by Abū ʿUbayd and
Ibn Abī Dāwūd.91
35) (Q. 35:33) wa-luʾluʾan, except IK, AA, IA, H, and K: wa-luʾluʾin.92
Ibn Abī Dāwūd stated that the ʿIrāqīs read wa-luʾluʾin in accordance with their
codices. This did not correspond entirely to Ibn Mujāhid’s data, according to
which ʿĀṣim read wa-luʾluʾan and thus deviated from the Imām-codex of Kūfa.
Additionally, another variant was attributed to ʿĀṣim via al-Mufaḍḍal, who
read wa-luʾluʾin. Paradoxically, even though this transmission by al-Mufaḍḍal
was deemed anomalous (shādhdh) on behalf of ʿĀṣim, it actually agreed with
the consensus of the Kūfans and the alleged rasm of the Kūfan codex.
36) (Q. 36:35) ʿamilat-hu, except: A → Shuʿba, H, and K: ʿamilat.93

90 Ibid., 494.
92 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 435; Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 1:259, 265.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

This is another instance in which Ḥafṣ and Shuʿba read differently, each based
on a different textual rendition of the variant in question. According to Ibn
Abī Dāwūd, the Kūfans had ʿamilat in their codex, which corresponded to the
fact that the Kūfans H, K, and A → Shuʿba read ʿamilat. However, Ḥafṣ followed
the other textual tradition, ʿamilat-hu. Similar to the aforementioned case
of (Q. 43:71) tashtahīhi, today’s copies of the Qurʾān follow Ḥafṣ’s rendition,
where ʿamilat-hu is written instead of ʿamilat, notwithstanding the rasm of the
Kūfan codex.
37) (Q. 39:64) ta‌ʾmurūnnī, except IA: ta‌ʾmurūnī; N: ta‌ʾmurūniya; IA → Ibn
Dhakwān and IA → Hishām: ta‌ʾmurūnanī.94
This is an intriguing case of how written and oral transmissions were inter-
twined, and how the exact mechanisms of Qirāʾāt transmission are more com-
plex than we think. The entry at stake, (Q. 39:64), appeared (in both editions by
‫أ ن‬
Jeffrey and Wāʿiẓ) as follows: in the Imām of Syria and in the Imām of Ḥijāz, it
was written “ta‌ʾmurūnnī/ta‌ʾmurūnī �‫”ت�� مرو �ي‬. In the Imām of ʿIrāq, it was written
in the same way”.95 If there were no differences amongst the codices of Ḥijāz,
Syria, and ʿIrāq as far as (Q. 39:64) was concerned, why did Ibn Abī Dāwūd men-
tion this entry? Ibn Mujāhid described the variations as follows: Both N and IA
read with one nūn: N read ta‌ʾmurūniya while IA read ta‌ʾmurūnī. Ibn Mujāhid
related the following on behalf of Ibn Dhakwān: “This is how I found it in my
book/notebook (i.e. with one nūn), but I recall ta‌ʾmurūnanī from my memory,
with two nūns”. Ibn Mujāhid related another account on behalf of Hishām,
the other Canonical Rāwī of IA, to the effect that the word was written with
two nūns. Ibn Mujāhid concluded with Ibn Kathīr, who was reported to have
read ta‌ʾmurūnnī. What seems to have happened in this example is the coexis-
tence of two readings in Syria, each based on a different textual tradition. One
reading was similar in its written form to the Medinan tradition, probably an
older codex, while the other reading was based on an amended spelling of the
word. Ibn Dhakwān was puzzled by what he had memorized, a reading with
two nūns, and what at that moment his notebook/codex had, i.e. a reading
with one nūn only. Hishām, on the other hand, who was approximately twenty
years younger than Ibn Dhakwān, seems to have been certain of the “new”
reading with two nūns, which became the standard reading of IA in the later
Qirāʾāt tradition.
38) (Q. 40:21) minhum, except IA: minkum.96

95 Jeffrey, Materials for the History of the Text of the Qurʾān : the Old Codices, 46; Ibn Abī
Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 2:273.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

160 CHAPTER 4
Ibn Abī Dāwūd reported that this variation also existed in the Ḥijāzī codex.
39) (Q. 40:26) aw an, except IK, N, AA, and IA: wa-an.97
40) (Q. 42:30) fa-bi-mā, except N and IA: bi-mā.98
41) (Q. 43:68) yā-ʿibādi, except N, IA, AA, A → Shuʿba: yā-ʿibādī.99
Ibn Abī Dāwūd wrote that the reading of the ʿIrāqīs was yā-ʿibādi, without a
yāʾ at the end of the word, which corresponded to the readings of the Kūfans
in Ibn Mujāhid’s records, except for ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba, who read yā-ʿibādī, with
yāʾ. This is another example of the possible existence of different textual tradi-
tions within Kūfa, which lead to disagreements amongst Kūfans as far as tex-
tual variations were concerned.
42) (Q. 43:71) tashtahīhi, except IK, AA, H, K, and A → Shuʿba: tashtahī.100
43) (Q. 46:15) iḥsānan, except IK, N, AA, and IA: ḥusnan.101
– (Q. 47:18) ta‌ʾtiyahum. According to Ibn Abī Dāwūd, it was written as
ta‌ʾtihim in the Kūfan and Meccan codices.102 The variant was not
mentioned by Ibn Mujāhid since he believed it was unanimously
read ta‌ʾtiyahum. Khalaf and al-Kisāʾī reportedly said that they never
heard any Kūfan read ta‌ʾtihim. The reading was discussed in Ibn Jinnī’s
(d. 392/1002) Muḥtasab as a textual variant attributed to the Meccans,
for which a grammatical justification was provided.103 Al-Farrāʾ also
emphasized that ta‌ʾtihim was written in some Kūfan codices.104
44) (Q. 55:12) dhū, except IA: dhā.105
Ibn Abī Dāwūd mentioned that this variation existed in the Ḥijāzī codex as
well.
45) (Q. 55:78) dhī, except IA: dhū.106
46) (Q. 57:10) wa-kullan, except IA: wa-kullun.107
Ibn Abī Dāwūd stated that wa-kullun was written in both, the Ḥijāzī and Syrian
codices.

102 Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 1:258, 279.
103 Abū l-Fatḥ Ibn Jinnī (d. 392/1002), al-Muḥtasab fī tabyīn wujūh shawādhdh al-qirāʾāt
wa-l-īḍāḥ ʿanhā, ed. ʿAlī l-Najdī Nāṣif and ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Shalabī, 2 vols. (Cairo: al-Majlis
al-aʿlā li-l-shuʾūn al-islāmiyya, 1966), 2:270–1.
104 Farrāʾ, Maʿānī, 3:61.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

47) (Q. 57:24) ‿llāha huwa ‿l-ghaniyyu, except N and IA: ‿llāha ‿l-ghaniyyu.108
48) (Q. 72:20) qul, except IK, N, AA, IA, and K: qāla.109
Ibn Abī Dāwūd recorded this textual variation amongst the codices without
specifying the details. He said that the codices differed from one another either
by writing qāla or qul. Al-Kisāʾī diverged from his Kūfan colleagues and read
qāla, in accordance with the Ḥijāzī and Baṣran codices.
49) (Q. 76:15,16) qawārīran … qawārīran, except A → Ḥafṣ, IA, and AA:
qawārīrā … qawārīra; H: qawārīra … qawārīra; IK: qawārīran … qawārīra.110
Ibn Abī Dāwūd stated that the reading of the ʿIrāqīs was qawārīrā … qawārīra
or qawārīran … qawārīra, i.e. the first was written with an alif, while the second
lacked one. On the other hand, the Medinans read qawārīran … qawārīran,
both with an alif. ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba and al-Kisāʾī read qawārīran … qawārīran,
both with an alif, similar to the Medinans, which meant that they followed
Kūfan codices that were different from the ones Ḥamza and A → Ḥafṣ used.
50) (Q. 91:15) wa-lā, except N and IA: fa-lā.111
1.2.4 Observations
As we have seen from the different accounts presented by Abū ʿUbayd, Ibn
Abī Dāwūd, and al-Dānī, the corpus of the textual variants amongst the re-
gional codices were, to a certain degree, limited, acknowledged, and meticu-
lously documented. If we adopt the traditional view that there was one main
codex (Imām) in each city/region, it is difficult to explain the discrepancies
and variations we find in these accounts, in particular the continuously chang-
ing number of scribal variations, which differed from one account to another.
The above data does not support the notion that every textual variant within
the five “Imāms” was known, documented, and unchanging from the point
they came into existence. Further, the variant readings which emerged due
to these scribal variations raise the following observation: other variants from
109 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 657; Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 1:256, 1:279.
111 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 689; Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Maṣāḥif, 1:255–6. The following entries were
allegedly the changes which al-Ḥajjāj (d. 95/714) made into the muṣḥaf. (Q. 2:259): lam
yatasanna → lam yatasannah, (Q. 5:48) sharīʿatan → shirʿatan, (Q. 10:22) yanshurukum →
yusayyirukum; (Q. 12:45) ātīkum → unabbiʾukum; (Q. 23:87–89) li‿llāhi … li‿llāhi … li‿llāhi →
li‿llāhi … ‿llāhu … ‿llāhu; (Q. 26:116) al-mukhrajīn → al-marjūmīn (Q. 26:167) al-marjūmīn
→ al-mukhrajīn; (Q. 43:32) maʿāyishahum → maʿīshatahum; (Q. 47:15) yāsinin → āsinin;
(Q. 57:7) wa‿ttaqū → wa-anfiqū; (Q. 81:24) bi-ẓanīn → bi-ḍanīn; ibid., 1:280–2. Cf. Omar
Hamdan, “The Second Maṣāḥif Project: A Step Towards the Canonization of the Qur’anic
Text”, in The Qurʾān in Context, ed. Angelika Neuwirth et al. (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 821–30,
795–805.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

162 CHAPTER 4
the Qirāʾāt literature could very likely have emerged due to similar scribal and
orthographical differences,112 but they were not mentioned in the sources as
being part of the textual variations amongst the codices. For instance, one no-
tices that several examples of the variations between qāla vs. qul were listed
in detail. Also, examples of the interchange between the wāw and fāʾ particles,
their addition, and their omission were also listed comprehensively through-
out different chapters of the Qurʾān. On the other hand, entries such as ka-
lima vs. kalimāt and rasūl vs rusul stand out from the rest of the examples.
Therefore, one wonders if textual variations amongst the codices played a role
in the one hundred other instances of variant readings which were a direct
result of an added or omitted long vowel alif (±ā), and in particular the thirty
instances where the variants alternated between the singular and plural forms
of a noun,113 similar to kalima ⟷ kalimāt and rasūl ⟷ rusul. One would not
think that (Q. 47:15) asinin ⟷ āsinin is a scribal variation from one codex to
another, but Ibn Mujāhid noted the following: Only Ibn Kathīr read asinin. In
the codices/books ( fī kitābihim) of the Meccans, the alif was marked with fatḥ
(maftūḥat al-alif), although there was no indication of madd or any other par-
ticular way of pronunciation.114 Lastly, the fact that Readers of the same region
adopted different readings that were based on different scribal traditions sug-
gests that multiple codices were circulating in the same area. The paradigm of
associating one codex with one city based on the codification accounts should
be modified to a picture wherein multiple official and local copies of the
Qurʾān were used and consulted. Moreover, the data suggests that it was pos-
sible for copies and codices of the Qurʾān to move from one region to another
and for them to be edited or copied again based on different spelling conven-
tions. These observations are supported by Alba Fedeli’s recent codicological
findings, promoting the idea of exemplars in some early Qurʾānic manuscripts
that show more than one reading at the same time. These manuscripts show
multiple readings with equal value, which means that they were not following
one single reading but in fact utilizing multiple readings.115 These manuscripts
112 Refer to Sinai’s study on the development of the ʿUthmānic consonantal rasm and the
different scholarly opinions he canvassed concerning the final fixed form of the script vis-
à-vis its continuous development; Nicolai Sinai, “When did the consonantal skeleton of
the Quran reach closure? Part I”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 77:2
(2014): 273–292; idem, “When did the consonantal skeleton of the Quran reach closure?
Part II”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 77:3 (2014): 509–521.
113 See the tabulated data in the next chapter.
115 Alba Fedeli and Andrew Edmondson, “Early Qur’anic Manuscripts and their Networks: a
Phylogenetic Analysis project’, paper presented at the Conference “Qur’anic Manuscript
Studies: State of the Field”, Budapest May 2017.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

or fragments could very well show an amalgamation of different readings that

were simultaneously circulating in one geographical locale.
1.3 Adhering to the rasm of the muṣḥaf

The oral tradition that governed the reception and transmission of the Qurʾān
was, and still is, extremely important. Nevertheless, adhering to the rasm, i.e.
the written transmission of the muṣḥaf, was just as important, especially when
there was a conflict between the written and oral forms of variants. That being
said, there was still some flexibility in matters related to the articulation of
letters and how words were syntactically and phonetically connected to one
another in waṣl and waqf modes,116 so long as the oral performance did not
directly contradict the written form. While investigating the different options
of (Q. 1:6)—namely, sirāṭ, ṣirāṭ, zirāṭ, and ṣzirāt, with ishmām—Ibn Mujāhid
stated that the latter reading in which ṣz was articulated as a combination
of ṣād and zāy could not be transcribed in writing (lā yaḍbiṭuhā l-kitāb).117
Another interesting example that highlights the performative aspect of Qirāʾāt
is (Q. 12:11) lā ta‌ʾmannā, which should have been written with two nūns (lā
ta‌ʾmanunā) since the verb is in the indicative (marfūʿ) and not the jussive
(majzūm). To overcome the problem of the missing case ending—the ḍamma
on the nūn—Readers developed a special gesture: one would inaudibly hint
at the missing ḍamma by bringing the lips together to simulate the shape of
a ḍamma without uttering any sound.118 Similarly, in (Q. 2:14) mustahziʾūn,
Ḥamza paused and read mustahzūna, but he would hint at the omitted hamza
by simulating the shape of a kasra without uttering any sound (yushīr ilā l-zāy
bi-kasr). Naturally, these gestures could not be indicated nor identified through
the rasm, and thus, oral auditioning was necessary to accurately record these
phonetic peculiarities (lā yuḍbaṭ illā bi-l-lafẓ).119 There were several other cases
which clearly showcase this crucial role of talaqqī (oral reception) of the text
directly from a master. Indeed, some phonetic phenomena were difficult to
transcribe and document exactly. In (Q. 24:31) juyūbihinna/jiyūbihinna, Ḥamza
might have given the jīm a ḍamma-like value, but at the same time he would
simulate the shape of a silent kasra—i.e. producing the shape of a kasra with
his lips without uttering any sound. It was such a complicated and contrived
116 ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Jamal, “Athar ikhtilāf al-qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya fī l-waqf wa-l-ibtidāʾ”,
Majallat Jāmiʿat al-Najāḥ li-l-Abḥāth 18:1 (2004): 285–308; Musāʿid b. Sulaymān al-Ṭayyār,
Wuqūf al-Qurʾān wa-atharuhā fī l-tafsīr (Riyad: Mujammaʿ al-Malik Fahd, 2010), 20–32.
118 Ibid., 345; Muḥammad ʿIṣām al-Quḍāt, al-Wāḍiḥ fī aḥkām al-tajwīd (Amman: Dār
al-nafāʾis, [n.d]), 129–30.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

164 CHAPTER 4
way of articulation that Ibn Mujāhid commented, “it cannot be accurately con-
veyed in writing” (shayʾ lā yuḍbaṭ).120
On the other hand, there were several other instances where Readers were
forced to adopt readings due to the constrains of the rasm. According to
al-Kisāʾī, the better reading of (Q. 1:5) was ‿s-sirāṭa rather than ‿ṣ-ṣirāṭa, but
since it was written in the muṣḥaf with ṣād, he was forced to follow the rasm
and read ‿ṣ-ṣirāṭa.121 In a similar case, Hishām b. ʿAmmār arrived at a different
conclusion. In (Q. 52:37), he said that even though ‿l-muṣayṭirūn was written
with ṣād, it ought to be pronounced with sīn, ‿l-musayṭirūn.122 This was actu-
ally a rare instance of deviating from the rasm; in other cases, the Eponymous
Readers would disrupt their own system and principles of recitation in order
to not violate the rasm. According to Abū ʿAmr’s rules of assimilation, he would
not assimilate two consecutive consonants when they occur in a single word,
except in specific locations such as (Q. 74:42) salakakum → salaḵḵum, (Q. 2:200)
manāsikakum → manāsiḵḵum.123 Yet, he was forced to assimilate in instanc-
es where the rasm of the muṣḥaf dictated that, such as (Q. 18:95) makkaṉṉī
and (Q. 39.64) ta‌ʾmurūṉṉī, both of which he would have preferred to read
makkananī and ta‌ʾmurūnanī.124
Undoubtedly, several unusual, problematic readings came about due to
faithful adherence to the rasm. I have already discussed the case of (Q. 12:110)
‫ف‬
fa-nujjiya ⟷ fa-nunjī ⟷ fa-nnujjiya,125 where the omission of the second nūn
from the rasm (‫ )� ن��جى‬caused the Readers to disagree with one other and read
according to these different combinations.126 The same word caused similar
‫ث‬
problems in (Q. 21:88) and created the variants of nujjī and nunjī.127 Another
example is (Q. 20:64)128 thumma ‿ʾtū (‫ )� ا ي�ت�وا‬for which different transmissions
‫م‬
were reported on behalf of Ibn Kathīr due to his unwavering faithfulness to
abide by the rasm (arāda an yattabiʿ al-kitāb). By preferring to articulate a yāʾ
instead of a hamza, some of his transmitters reported thummi-ītū on his behalf,
a reading that Ibn Mujāhid readily rejected.129
120 Ibid., 179.

121 Ibid., 107.
122 Ibid., 613.
123 Refer to the uṣūl section in the next chapter.
125 Refer to Transmission Error #33 in Chapter Two.
127 Ibid., 430.
128 Refer to Transmission Error #37 in Chapter Two.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

1.4 Waṣl, waqf, and yāʾāt al-iḍāfa

Even when it came to instances of pausing (waqf) and resuming (waṣl and
ibtidāʾ) the recitation, the rasm played an important role in determining these
intervals, as well as articulating the variants. In (Q. 2:67), (Q. 2:260), (Q. 43:15),
and (Q. 112:4) Ḥamza read huzʾan, juzʾan, and kufʾan in waṣl mode, but he read
analogy, but rather juzan. The reason was the spelling of juzʾan (‫)�ج�ز ا‬, which was
huzwan and kufwan in waqf mode. Nevertheless, he would not read juzwan, by
‫ف‬
not written with wāw, unlike the other two words (‫ )�ه�ز وا‬and (‫��وا‬‫) ك‬.130 This un-
relenting adherence to the rasm reached a pietistic level: ʿĀṣim was reported to
have said that whenever he articulated the hamza (of a wāw or yāʾ), he feared
that he would lose ten good deeds (ḥasanāt) for not articulating the actual let-
ter he left out, i.e. the yāʾ or the wāw.131
Moreover, the Qurrāʾ observed and abided by the smallest scribal nuances.
In most Qirāʾāt manuals, authors include a separate section at the end of each
chapter of the Qurʾān called yāʾāt al-iḍāfa and yāʾāt al-zawāʾid. The former
stands for the first-person object pronoun with verbs, as in tabiʿanī and ʿaṣānī,
or the first-person possessive pronoun with nouns, as in niʿmatī. Readers often
disagreed on the exact pronunciation of yāʾāt al-iḍāfa, namely, whether to treat
the yāʾ as a consonant and vocalize it with fatḥa, e.g. niʿmatiya, or to treat it
as a long vowel, e.g. niʿmatī. The case of yāʾāt al-zawāʾid was somehow puz-
zling: the yāʾ was not written in the muṣḥaf, but readers articulated it, e.g. ‫ا �ل�د ا‬
‫ع‬
which was read ‿d-dāʿī with a yāʾ that was omitted from the rasm. Faced with
the dilemma of whether or not one could articulate the omitted yāʾ, Readers
gave themselves some latitude through the modes of waqf and waṣl. Thus, in
waṣl mode one is entitled to articulate a yāʾ—as if it were a vowel—but in waqf
‫خ ف ن‬
mode one must follow the rasm and drop it. Consider the example of (Q. 3:175)
�‫و��ا �و‬: AA read wa-khāfūnī in waṣl mode whereas the rest of the Readers
read wa-khāfūni. However, all the Readers read wa-khāfūn in waqf mode. In
the very few instances where they agreed to not disagree, the yāʾ was written
in the rasm. Accordingly, there was no reported disagreement on (Q. 36:61)
‿ʿbudūnī, about which Ibn Mujāhid explained that it was written with a yāʾ in
all the codices.132 Ibn Khālawayhi (d. 370/980–1) confirmed this observation in
his commentary and said: “The yāʾ is to be articulated in both waqf and waṣl
modes because it is written in the rasm (maktūba fī l-sawād)”.133
130 Ibid., 158–160.

131 Ibid., 159.
132 Ibid., 542.
133 Abū ʿAbd Allāh Ibn Khālawayhi (d. 370/980–1), al-Ḥujja fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, ed. ʿAbd al-ʿĀl
Sālim Mukarram (Beirut: Dār al-shurūq, 1979), 299.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

166 CHAPTER 4
Along these lines, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ reportedly said that one could read
(Q. 89:15, 16) either akramani/ahānani or akramanī/ahānanī in waṣl mode, but
in waqf mode one must read akraman and ahānan. Similarly, AA read (Q. 2:186)
both as daʿāni and daʿānī, but according to al-Yazīdī, in waqf mode AA read it
without yāʾ, i.e. daʿān, simply because it was not written with yāʾ (al-sakt bi-
ghayr yāʾ ʿalā l-kitāb).134 This phenomenon is further demonstrated with the
example of (Q. 20:93) tattabiʿan/tattabiʿani/tattabiʿanī. Nāfiʿ, through the ma-
jority of his transmitters, read tattabiʿan in waqf mode and tattabiʿanī in waṣl
mode; nevertheless, Ibn Jammāz and Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar reported tattabiʿaniya, to
which Ibn Mujāhid objected since the yāʾ was not written in the rasm (laysat
fī l-kitāb).135 In another example, (Q. 20:12) bi-l-wādi ‿l-muqaddasi, there was
an agreement amongst the Readers to drop the final yāʾ from al-wādī in both
modes, waṣl and waqf. Nevertheless, Khalaf claimed that al-Kisāʾī preferred
to pause on al-wādī and articulate a long yāʾ, a statement which Ibn Mujāhid
decried for one must not pause on al-wādī because the final yāʾ was dropped
from the rasm. Thereupon, al-wādī must always be read in its waṣl-mode-form,
al-wādi ‫ا �لوا د‬.136 In a similar fashion, all Readers paused on (Q. 24:31) ayyuh with-
out articulating an alif. But a report on behalf of K and AA maintained that
both Readers would at times pause and read ayyuhā, with an alif. Again, Ibn
Mujāhid objected and emphasized that one must avoid waqf in this case be-
cause the alif was omitted from the rasm. In other words, the additions and
omissions of the final yāʾ and alif were akin to instructions given by the scribes
to indicate when one may or may not pause on a word.137
Lastly, despite the fact that the Qurrāʾ trusted the integrity and accuracy of
the Eponymous Readers and their Rāwīs—despite the fact that Ibn Mujāhid
frequently distrusted his teacher Qunbul138—they occasionally asked for writ-
ten proof when they doubted certain transmissions. The rāwīs of Nāfiʿ dis-
agreed on (Q. 22:25) and reported both wa-l-bādī and wa-l-bādi. Al-Aṣmaʿī said:
“I heard Nāfiʿ recited wa-l-bādī, with yāʾ, and then I asked him: Is it written
[in the muṣḥaf] as such? Nāfiʿ answered: No, it is not”. Unsurprisingly, the two

135 Ibid., 423.
136 Ibid., 426.
137 Ibid., 455.
138 Ibn Mujāhid often criticized his teacher, Qunbul, and deemed several of his transmis-
sions to be wrong. Al-Samīn often condemned Ibn Mujāhid for his audacity in criticizing
Qunbul: “kathīran mā yatajarra‌ʾ Abū Bakr ʿalā shaykhihi wa-yughalliṭuhu … wa-hādhā lā
yanbaghī an yakūn, fa-inna Qunbulan bi-l-makān alladhī yamnaʿ an yatakallam fīhi aḥad”
(Ibn Mujāhid often criticized his teacher, Qunbul … this is unacceptable, for Qunbul
held a position that forbids anyone from talking [negatively] of him); al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī,
Tafsīr, 6:152.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Canonical transmissions from Nāfiʿ reported both variants in waṣl mode; Warsh
read wa-l-bādī, while Qālūn read wa-l-bādi.139 I have already mentioned the
episode reported by al-Dānī concerning the uncertainty surrounding (Q. 3:184)
wa-bi-z-zuburi wa-bi-l-kitābi, and how al-Ḥulwānī wrote to Hishām b. ʿAmmār
asking him to check his copy of the Qurʾān. More examples of this kind will
be mentioned soon under the section of correspondence and communication
amongst the Qurrāʾ.
2 Early Different Forms of Qirāʾāt Transmission
… wa-qara‌ʾa Ḥafṣ ʿan nafsihi, lā ʿan ʿĀṣim, bi-ḍamm al-ḍād [min ḍuʿf ]
Abiding by the rasm of the regional codices and adhering to the orthographic
rules the script dictated—no matter how underdeveloped it was—were not
the only forms of written transmission to whose authority the Qirāʾāt were
subjected. The Qurrāʾ community communicated with one another; they were
well aware of who was reading what, and they corresponded with each other
to enquire about and validate certain readings. Moreover, readers had their
own personal notebooks. It is rather clear that some readers and rāwīs had
personal copies of the Qurʾān, which they used in teaching and in which they
included some annotations and diacritical marks. We know that as early as
al-Kisāʾī (d. 189/805) people would gather in the mosque and annotate/dot
their own copies of the Qurʾān.140 Biographical and Bibliographical diction-
aries include plenty of information about early Qirāʾāt compilations, which,
unfortunately, cannot be used directly to argue for or against early evidence of
writing and authorship within the discipline of Qirāʾāt. Claiming that people
such as Yaḥyā b. Yaʿmur (d. 90/709), Abān b. Taghlib (d. 141/758–9), Abū ʿAmr
b. al-ʿAlāʾ (d. 154/770–1) and others had compiled works on Qirāʾāt cannot be
used as evidence for the early written transmission of Qirāʾāt when these works
were lost—assuming they existed in the first place.141 It was unlikely that the
Eponymous Readers themselves wrote full-fledged manuals on one Qirāʾa,
let alone different Qirāʾāt, as the early prototypes of the seven Eponymous
Readings still abounded with discrepancies, contradictions, and insufficient,
139 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 436; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:327.

140 Al-Dhahabī commented that this was before the establishment of diacritical marks, and
that people were dotting their notebooks using colours; Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:298.
Cf. George, “Coloured Dots (I)”.
141 ʿAbd al-Hādī l-Faḍlī, al-Qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya: tārīkh wa-taʿrīf (Beirut: Dār al-qalam, 1985),
p. 28.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

168 CHAPTER 4
incomplete data. However, it is possible that their students and rāwīs compiled
personal manuals or notebooks registering the general characteristics and in-
dividual variants of the Eponymous Reader’s System-Reading.142 One needs to
refer to the discussion of transmission errors in Chapter Two and to the ex-
tensive tabulated data in the next chapter to grasp the degree of variation and
uncertainty exhibited in the early systems of the Seven Readings, a fact that
reduces the possibility that there were full-fledged works on Qirāʾāt written by
the Eponymous Readers or their immediate rāwīs, especially given that early
Qirāʾāt scholars like Ibn Mujāhid had no access to such works. That being said,
I do believe that these individuals exercised a certain form of authorship in the
form of personal notes, notebooks, private copies of the Qurʾān, letters, and
correspondence. How this rudimentary material was collected, preserved, lost,
and circulated is beyond the scope of the current work.
Ibn Mujāhid’s observations and comments concerning his first-hand ex-
perience with such notebooks and correspondence are thought-provoking.
Bibliographic sources tell us that Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim b. Sallām authored
a book on Qirāʾāt—lost to us since al-Dhahabī’s (d. 748/1348) time143—that
Ibn Mujāhid seems to have consulted, fully or partially.144 Moreover, the in-
formation we have in Ibn al-Jazarī’s Ghāya regarding early Qurrāʾ who pos-
sessed some kind of written records, notes, and personal Qurʾān copies may
be trusted, since this information can be verified through Ibn Mujāhid’s work.
Ibn al-Jazarī’s source for this information could have been Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb
al-Sabʿa, and had we lost this book like we lost Ibn Mujāhid’s other works,
it might have cast more doubts on the authenticity of such reports and on
whether or not early forms of notebooks and personal copies of the Qurʾān
could have existed. For example, according to al-Dānī via Ibn al-Jazarī, Aḥmad
b. Yūsuf al-Taghlibī (d. 264/878) possessed a copy (nuskha) of the rendition
of Ibn Dhakwān of the Reading of Ibn ʿĀmir that differed from the standard
Reading of the Damascenes.145 As one is able to see very shortly, this infor-
mation is corroborated by the data Ibn Mujāhid collected through Aḥmad b.
Yūsuf. Thus, other, similar accounts which speak of the existence of written
notebooks on Qirāʾāt might well be true. Ismāʿīl b. Isḥāq (d. 282/895) possessed
142 Refer, for example, to the biographies of Ḥamza, al-Kisāʾī, ʿĀṣim, and Abū ʿAmr b. al-
ʿAlāʾ; Abū l-Faraj Ibn al-Nadīm (d. 384/1047), Kitāb al-Fihrist, ed. Riḍā Tajaddud (Tehran:
Maktabat al-Asadī, 1971), 30–3.
143 Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Siyar aʿlām al-nubalāʾ, ed. Bashshār ʿAwwād
145 Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Ghāyat al-nihāya fī ṭabaqāt al-qurrāʾ, ed. Gotthelf
Bergsträsser, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 2006), 1:139.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

a written copy (nuskha) of the rendition of Qālūn.146 Qālūn (d. 220/835) him-
self reportedly wrote down the particulars of Nāfiʿ’s Reading in his own copy/
notebook (katabtuhā fī kitābī).147 Two frequent transmitters from Nāfiʿ, Ismāʿīl
b. Abī Uways (d. 226–7/841–2) and Abū Khulayd (d. ?), had their own nuskha
(copy) authorized by Nāfiʿ.148 A certain ʿUbayd Allāh b. Mūsā (d. 213/828)
transmitted some ḥurūf (individual variants) directly from Ḥamza. Allegedly,
he heard the book/manual of the Reading of Ḥamza directly from the master
himself. When asked if he had auditioned the Qurʾān with Ḥamza, he replied
by saying that he had only read his [Ḥamza’s] manual with him (qara‌ʾtu ʿalayhi
kitābahu).149 Abū l-Rabīʿ Sulaymān b. Dāwūd (d. 234/849) purportedly com-
piled a book on individual variants (ḥurūf) that he used in teaching.150 In an
interesting account on note taking, Yaḥyā b. Ādam, the canonical Ṭarīq of Abū
Bakr Shuʿba, reported the following: I asked Abū Bakr b. ʿAyyāsh [Shuʿba] about
these individual variants (ḥurūf), and he instructed me how to read them. After
I recited them back to him, I wrote them down (qayyadtuhā).151 This informa-
tion from the biographical dictionaries may not be enough to make an argu-
ment concerning the spread of writing within the Qirāʾāt tradition, but when
corroborated by the data Ibn Mujāhid collected, it could make a strong case in
favor of the existence of a written tradition side by side with the oral tradition
within the discipline of Qirāʾāt.
2.1 Notebooks
The relationship between Qirāʾāt and Ḥadīth was explored in detail in the pre-
vious chapter. One of the topics I discussed was Ḥadīth terminology that was
retroactively applied to the Qirāʾāt discipline. The mechanisms of transmission
could have co-existed simultaneously in both disciplines, but the characteris-
tics of each mechanism ought to be looked at and evaluated differently. The
word of a trustworthy muḥaddith was usually binding in terms of the value and
implications of the ḥadīth he was transmitting. Whether he taught the ḥadīth
in a study session, wrote it in a letter, or was asked about it on the street and
recounted it, a muḥaddith was responsible for the ḥadīth he was transmitting.
The ḥadīth was to be recorded and used; it was binding in terms of its authority
so long as the conditions of its soundness were met. Did the same hold true in
the case of Qirāʾāt?
146 Ibid., 1:147.

147 Ibid., 1:542.
148 Ibid., 1:147, 443.
149 Ibid., 1:439.
150 Ibid., 2:120.
151 Ibid., 2:317.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

170 CHAPTER 4
Upon discussing the disagreements regarding the articulation of the hamza

in (Q. 12:14) ‿dh-dhiʾbu vs. ‿dh-dhību, Ibn Mujāhid related an account on behalf
of al-Aṣmaʿī, who asked Nāfiʿ about words containing hamza, such as al-dhiʾb
and al-biʾr. Nāfiʿ told him: “If [you hear the] Arabs articulate the hamza, then
articulate it”. Shortly after this account, the disagreement on (Q. 12:31, 51)
ḥāsha vs. ḥāshā came up and Ibn Mujāhid reported the following on behalf of
al-Aṣmaʿī: “I heard Nāfiʿ read ḥāshā, with a long alif”. Ibn Mujāhid ended the
phrase as follows: ka-dhā fī l-ḥadīth (according to this account/per the verba-
tim account).152 The emphasis behind Ibn Mujāhid’s intent to validate the con-
tents of this “ḥadīth” was its deviation from what was known to be the standard
reading of Nāfiʿ, namely, ḥāsha without an alif. This “ḥadīth” could have been
an oral account, but the frequency with which al-Aṣmaʿī was cited in Kitāb
al-Sabʿa may suggest otherwise. Al-Aṣmaʿī was mentioned twice in al-Baqara
(Q. 2) for discussions related to hamz and madd, i.e. general phonetic phenom-
ena. Between al-Baqara (Q. 2) and Yūnus (Q. 10), al-Aṣmaʿī was not mentioned.
Then he was cited once in Yūnus (Q. 10), twice in Yūsuf (Q. 12), twice in Ibrāhīm
(Q. 14), once in al-Kahf (Q. 18), once in Ṭāhā (Q. 20), and twice in al-Ḥajj (Q. 22).
After that, al-Aṣmaʿī was neither mentioned nor cited.153 If one looks at the
range of the pages in the printed edition of al-Sabʿa in which al-Aṣmaʿī was
cited, the numbers range from 139–160, 328–96, and 416–38. While this could
be a sheer coincidence, it may suggest another possibility: that al-Aṣmaʿī did
not necessarily have a complete audition and transmission of the Qurʾān from
Nāfiʿ. The transmissions of al-Aṣmaʿī of which Ibn Mujāhid had written records
might have been concentrated on selected selections from the Qurʾān. The fol-
lowing examples will demonstrate this phenomenon more clearly and show
that Ibn Mujāhid and the early Qurrāʾ often relied on notebooks and written
communications.
ʿĀṣim was known to have lengthened the long vowels (madd) in an unusual
manner (kāna ṣāḥib hamz wa-madd).154 Generally speaking, madd has differ-
ent values: long, medium, and short.155 Abū Yūsuf al-Aʿshā reported a technique
of madd on behalf of ʿĀṣim, which seems to not have been in use anymore:
ʿĀṣim would give only one value for madd, and when the long vowel preceded
a hamza, he would pause after which he would articulate the hamza. Since
this technique was no longer used in oral auditions, Ibn Mujāhid accessed this

153 Ibid., 139, 158, 160, 328, 346, 348, 362, 363, 396, 416, 436, 438.
154 Abū ʿAbd Allāh Yāqūt al-Ḥamawī (d. 626/1229), Muʿjam al-udabāʾ, ed. Iḥsān ʿAbbās, 7 vols.
(Beirut: Dār al-gharb al-islāmī, 1993), 4:1475.
155 Refer to the uṣūl section in the following chapter; Muḥammad Qamḥāwī, al-Burhān fī
tajwīd al-Qurʾān (Beirut: al-Maktaba al-thaqāfiyya, 1972), 24–8.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

information through a written record. His source was a letter from al-Qāsim b.
Aḥmad al-Khayyāṭ (d. 291/904) ( fī kitābihi ilayya) in which he substantiated
his audition of the Qurʾān with al-Shammūnī (d. after 240/854), who studied
this technique with the aforementioned al-Aʿshā.
Ibn Mujāhid had his own notes as well. On the variants of (Q. 2:245) wa-yabsuṭ
vs. wa-yabṣuṭ, he noted that ʿĀṣim’s students/companions read wa-yabṣuṭ, with
ṣād. Ibn Mujāhid reiterated that this information was not written in his notes
from Yaḥyā [b. Ādam] who reported that from Shuʿba ← ʿĀṣim (wa-laysa fī
kitābī dhālika). Indeed, one of Ibn Mujāhid’s important sources for document-
ing the Reading of Ibn ʿĀmir was written records and notebooks. On the vari-
ants of yaʿmalūna vs. taʿmalūna and how Ibn ʿĀmir read them throughout the
Qurʾān, Ibn Mujāhid’s source was a written record (kitābī) from the aforemen-
tioned Aḥmad b. Yūsuf, who recorded this information from Ibn Dhakwān. In
addition to the notes from Aḥmad b. Yūsuf, Ibn Mujāhid possessed another
written record or a personal copy of the Qurʾān (kitāb Mūsā b. Mūsā l-Khuttalī/
l-Khuttulī) which was authorized by Ibn Dhakwān. These two written records
were often consulted when discrepancies were reported on behalf of Ibn ʿĀmir.
For example, (Q. 27:59) yushrikūna vs. tushrikūna were both documented in
these notebooks and personally examined by Ibn Mujāhid. Similarly, (Q. 7:146),
(Q. 18:66) rushudan vs. rushdan, (Q. 27:62) yadhdhakkarūna vs. tadhakkarūna,
(Q. 33:68) kathīran vs. kabīran, and (Q. 49:10) akhawaykum vs. ikhwatikum
were all documented by Ibn Mujāhid through these two written records from
Aḥmad b. Yūsuf and Mūsā b. Mūsā.156 Two more intriguing examples related to
Ibn ʿĀmir’s Reading call attention to the tense interaction between written and
oral transmissions. The first example was mentioned under the textual vari-
ance #37 above, where Ibn Dhakwān reported that he memorized (Q. 39:64)
ta‌ʾmurūnanī ( fī ḥifẓī), but the notes he took from Ayyūb [b. Tamīm] or his
personal copy of the Qurʾān endorsed by the latter ( fī kitābi ʿan Ayyūb) had
ta‌ʾmurūnī written in it. In the second example, Ibn Mujāhid referenced his
own written notes ( fī kitābī) concerning the disagreement amongst Ibn ʿĀmir’s
transmitters on (Q. 7:195) kīdūni vs. kīdūnī:157 Ibn Dhakwān had kīdūnī in his
notebook/copy of the Qurʾān even though what he memorized was kīdūni
( fī kitābī bi-l-yāʾ wa-ḥifẓī bi-ghayr yāʾ).158
We have seen in the earlier example of al-Dājūnī how the Qurrāʾ used to
correspond with one another via written communications. Concerning the
discrepancy in (Q. 13:9) ‿l-mutaʿāl vs. ‿l-mutaʿālī, Ibn Mujāhid received a letter
156 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 134–5, 186, 161, 488, 668, 324, 293–4, 394, 484, 523–4, 606.
157 Refer to textual variant #15, page 156.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

172 CHAPTER 4
from Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī (d. 279/892) ( fī kitābihi ilayya) to the effect that AA →
Abū Zayd al-Naḥwī read ‿l-mutaʿālī, both in waṣl and waqf modes.159 It seems
that it was the same letter in which Abū Ḥātim informed Ibn Mujāhid that
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, according to his transmitter Abū Zayd al-Naḥwī, read
(Q. 76:15–16) qawārīrā … qawārīrā,160 with an alif whose existence al-Dānī con-
firmed in the codices of the Baṣrans.161 Furthermore, Abū Ḥātim informed Ibn
Mujāhid through the same written communication that Abū Zayd al-Naḥwī
claimed that Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ read (Q. 89:4) yasrī in waqf mode and yasri in
waṣl mode.162
When in doubt, the Qurrāʾ often referred to written records and personal
copies of the Qurʾān. I discussed the case of (Q. 25:28) qawmī vs. qawmiya under
transmission Error #45 in Chapter Two.163 Ibn Kathīr’s transmitters were famil-
iar with qawmī, but al-Bazzī was reported to have read qawmiya. Al-Qawwās
asked his student Qunbul to go and check Wahb b. Wāḍiḥ’s (d. 190/805) copy
of the Qurʾān (muṣḥaf Abī l-Ikhrīṭ), who taught both al-Qawwās and al-Bazzī.
Upon checking it, Qunbul reported that it used to be vocalized with fatḥa,
which was erased or rubbed out.164
2.2 Doubt and Uncertainty

The vast majority of the Qurʾān was agreed upon and transmitted with cer-
tainty. Even the variant readings themselves were, to a large extent, associated
with certain Eponymous Readers or Canonical Rāwīs or even regional schools
of recitation. The theory of tawātur, or the verbatim oral transmission of the
Qurʾān from master to student, assumed an intact, absolutely verified text that
was known down to its smallest detail by the professional circle of the Qurrāʾ,
let alone the larger Muslim community. Nonetheless, Qirāʾāt literature tells
us another story. The disagreements amongst the rāwīs and the discrepancies
in the transmission of the “performed” text of the Qurʾān on the level of the
Eponymous Readers, their Rāwīs, and their Ṭuruq, suggest that the formative
period of Qirāʾāt literature was a time of robust deciphering of the text of the
Qurʾān, its meaning, and its performance. Readers of the Qurʾān were human
beings and not mechanical audio recorders; they forgot, hesitated, made mis-
takes, and modified their system-Reading(s) accordingly.
159 Ibid., 358.

160 Ibid., 664.
161 Dānī, Jāmiʿ, 4:312; cf. Textual Variant #49, page 161.
163 Transmission Error #45, page 85.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

The multiple readings reported on behalf of the same Eponymous Reader

or Canonical Rāwī were not only due to transmission errors, inaccuracies, the
“flexibility” of the consonantal rasm, and the existence of a depository of differ-
ent, yet acceptable traditions from the previous generations of Qurʾān masters.
These multiple readings were also generated because Qurʾān Readers occasion-
ally modified and changed their reading over time, retracted certain readings,
corrected others, and struggled to remember how precisely some variants were
performed. Al-Ḥulwānī reported the following: “The first time I auditioned the
Qurʾān with Qālūn he taught me (Q. 80:22) shā ānsharah (shāʾa ansharah) and
(Q. 6:61) jā āḥadakum ( jāʾa aḥadakum). The second time I auditioned with him
he taught me something else: shā ansharah and jā aḥadakum, in agreement
with the madd and hamz techniques of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ.165 Which of the
two recitational techniques should one associate with Qālūn, the former or the
latter? Several accounts show that Readers were sometimes ambivalent about
certain readings and as a result might have allowed multiple ways of recita-
tion, although it is not easy to tell whether it was the Reader’s or his transmit-
ters’ ambivalence and indecisiveness. Hārūn al-Aʿwar reported that Abū ʿAmr
b. al-ʿAlāʾ would sometimes read ‿s-sirāṭa and in others ‿ṣ-ṣirāṭa. ʿAbbās b.
al-Faḍl also reported that Abū ʿAmr gave his students the choice to read either
(Q. 27:28) fa-alqihī or fa-alqih.166 Several other instances were recorded on be-
half of Abū ʿAmr where he allegedly considered multiple readings (lā yubālī, in
shiʾta) to be valid: (Q. 6:145) takūna/yakūna, (Q. 3:15) yafʿalū/tafʿalū, (Q. 13:17)
yūqidūna/tūqidūna, (Q. 19:65) hal taʿlamu/hat_taʿlamu, (Q. 25:48) nushuran/
nushran, (Q. 28:32) fa-dhānika/fa-dhānnika, (Q. 29:25) mawaddatu baynikum/
mawaddatan baynakum, (Q. 33:9)/(Q. 4389) yaʿmalūna/taʿmalūna, (Q. 36:55)
shughlin/shughulin, and (Q. 48:10) fa-sa-nuʾtīhi/fa-sa-yuʾtīhi.167 Similar ac-
counts of ambivalence and indecisiveness were reported on behalf of other
Readers: ʿĀṣim read both (Q. 2:279) fa‿ʾdhanū and fa-ādhinū, Qālūn did not
object whether one read (Q. 2:247) basṭa or baṣṭa, and Nāfiʿ was satisfied with
both (Q. 25:27) yā-laytanī and yā-laytaniya.168
While one might accept the possibility that the Readers intentionally
propagated multiple readings, it was also the case that Readers, Rāwīs and
Qirāʾāt scholars were not completely confident about some readings. Ibn
Mujāhid expressed his doubts and uncertainties concerning a few variants
he documented, and this is evident from his word choice when recording and
165 Ibid., 138–9.

166 Ibid., 105, 212, 481.
167 Ibid., 215, 272, 358–9, 410, 465, 493, 498, 519, 541, 589, 603.
168 Ibid., 292, 185–6, 464.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

174 CHAPTER 4
listing the entries, a fact that testifies to his academic integrity and meticu-
lous scholarship. For example, (Q. 83:14) bal rāna was also read bar_rāna, by
way of assimilation. Ibn Mujāhid was unsure whether Qunbul performed as-
similation or not (ashukku fī idghāmihā ʿan Qunbul).169 On several occasions,
Ibn Mujāhid expressed his uncertainty regarding transmissions reported on
behalf of Ibn ʿĀmir; he seems not to have possessed a complete, verified, and
well-memorized version of this System-Reading. Regarding whether Ibn ʿĀmir
read (Q. 2:219) ‿l-ʿafwu or ‿l-ʿafwa, Ibn Mujāhid suggested the reading in the
accusative (arā Ibn ʿĀmir naṣaba al-wāw ayḍan).170 Other instances include
(Q. 6:109) annahā vs. innahā (aḥsabu Ibn ʿĀmir), (Q. 2:233) tuḍārru vs. tuḍārra
(aḥsabu al-Akhfash), (Q. 11:105) ya‌ʾti vs. ya‌ʾtī ( fīmā aḥsab), (Q. 12:4) abah vs.
abat ( fīmā arā), (Q. 18:43) takun vs. yakun ( fīmā arā), (Q. 19:30) ātinī vs. ātiniya
( fīmā aẓunn), (Q. 43:58) ālihatunā vs. a-ālihatunā (urānī samiʿtu), and (Q. 90:4)
fa-tanfaʿahu vs. fa-tanfaʿuhu (aḥsabu).171 As for (Q. 2:282) tijāratan ḥāḍiratan
vs. tijāratun ḥāḍiratun, Ibn Mujāhid could not substantiate the reading from
Ibn ʿĀmir because he was uncertain of it (ashukku fī Ibn ʿĀmir).172 In another
instance, Ibn Mujāhid was more forthright about his lack of information: on
(Q. 2:233) tuḍārru vs. tuḍārra, he stated that he did not have any information
on how this variant was read by Ibn ʿĀmir via Ibn Dhakwān (wa-laysa ʿindī ʿan
Ibn ʿĀmir fī hādhā shayʾ min riwāyat Ibn Dhakwān).173 As for (Q. 16:27) shurakāʾī
vs. shurakāʾiya, Ibn Mujāhid interjected after mentioning Ibn ʿĀmir’s reading
by saying, “God willing this is the accurate reading”.174 Another instance of
tension between previously memorized variants and newly memorized ones
was (Q. 42:51) yursilu, reported as the standard reading of Ibn ʿĀmir. However,
Ibn Dhakwān stated that he previously memorized it as yursila (naṣban).175
Occasionally, certain expressions (e.g. Allāhu aʿlam176 or zaʿama) are used to
convey doubt.177 Ibn Mujāhid was also careful to report the doubts of other
readers. On (Q. 7:111) arjiʾhu vs. arjihi, Ibn al-Jahm expressed his doubts about
how A → Shuʿba recited the variant. Ibn Mujāhid was careful to explain that the
uncertainty did not come from him but from Ibn al-Jahm (shakk Ibn al-Jahm).178
169 Ibid., 675.

170 Ibid., 182.
171 Ibid., 265, 183, 338–9, 344, 392, 414, 587–8, 672.
172 Ibid., 193.
173 Ibid., 183.
174 Ibid., 371.
175 Ibid., 582.
176 Ibid., 210.
177 Ibid., 138.
178 Ibid., 288.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

2.3 Retraction of Readings

There were recorded instances where Readers retracted a reading they had
previously endorsed and decided for one reason or another to adopt a new
reading. One could think of different possible reasons for retracting readings
or amending them, but I believe that the most important aspect of this phe-
nomenon is understanding that certain segments of the Qurʾān were textu-
ally unstable in the formative period of Qirāʾāt literature, and that the Qurrāʾ
community went through painstaking efforts to stabilize and perfect the
performed/oral aspect of the text. There were several cases of these retrac-
tions or amendments of readings, which I will quickly discuss. Two students
of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, al-Yazīdī and ʿAbd al-Wārith, stated that Abū ʿAmr used
to read (Q. 2:185) wa-li-tukammilū (yuthaqqiluhā—geminated/energetic form)
but later on he changed his reading to wa-li-tukmilū (al-takhfīf—lightened
form).179 Interestingly, another transmitter, Abū Zayd, reported that Abū ʿAmr
used to read in both ways, which echoes the role of indifference or multiplicity
of readings I discussed in the previous section. In (Q. 2:214), al-Kisāʾī was said
to have read ḥattā yaqūlu for a long time (dahran) but to have later changed his
reading to ḥattā yaqūla.180 Hubayra reported that Ḥafṣ used to read (Q. 2:273)
yaḥsabuhum and (Q. 3:178) yaḥsabanna but that he later changed his reading
to yaḥsibuhum and yaḥsibanna.181 All the following examples follow the same
pattern of retracting a reading and adopting a new one:
– [IA →] Ayyūb b. Tamīm used to read (Q. 3:59) fa-yakūna but changed his
reading to fa-yakūnu.182
– Warsh reported that Nāfiʿ used to read (Q. 6:162) wa-maḥyāy but changed his
reading to wa-maḥyāya.183
– A → Shuʿba used to read (Q. 106:2) li-iʾlāfi but changed his reading to li-īlāfi.184
– For a long time (dahran) al-Kisāʾī used to read (Q. 89:4) yasrī but changed
his reading to yasri.185
– Abū l-Ḥārith reported that al-Kisāʾī used to read (Q. 79:11) nakhiratan but
changed his reading to nākhiratan.186
I find the following two examples to be indicative of showcasing the flexibil-
ity of the early Qurrāʾ community concerning the oral nature of the Qurʾānic
179 Ibid., 177.

180 Ibid., 181.
181 Ibid., 191.
182 Ibid., 206–7.
183 Ibid., 275.
184 Ibid., 698.
185 Ibid., 683.
186 Ibid., 671.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

176 CHAPTER 4
text. Qunbul told Ibn Mujāhid that al-Bazzī used to read both (Q. 24:2) and
(Q. 57:27) as ra‌‌ʾafa, which was wrong. According to Qunbul, Ibn Kathīr read
only (Q. 24:2) as ra‌‌ʾafa, while reading (Q. 57:27) as ra‌‌ʾfa (sākinat al-hamza).
When Qunbul cautioned al-Bazzī for his oversight, the latter retracted his for-
mer reading and followed Qunbul’s recommendation.187 In the second exam-
ple, Shuʿba reported the following: I memorized from ʿĀṣim (Q. 7:165) bayʾasin,
on the pattern of fayʿal. Over time, I became skeptical of this reading ( jāʾanī
minhā shakk). Hence, I abandoned reading it as such from ʿĀṣim and adopted
the reading of al-Aʿmash, ba‌ʾīsin.188 The flexibility these Qurʾān reciters dem-
onstrated and their collective effort to properly read and stabilize the Qurʾānic
text invite us to reconceptualize our picture of orality in the case of Qirāʾāt as
a kind of collective memory rather than as the efforts of some individuals who
were endowed with fantastical, unfaltering memory of the miniscule details of
Qurʾānic readings.
2.4 Lost and Extinct Traditions

Several System-Readings and individual variants are evidently lost to us now.
Be it the lost ʿUthmānic codices or the codices of the Companions that were
destroyed and slowly forgotten, the lack of physical evidence from the early pe-
riod of Islam poses serious challenges to scholars who are trying to reconstruct
the intellectual endeavors of the early Qurrāʾ community. How the Prophet
recited the Qurʾān and which System-Reading he was most associated with are
difficult questions to answer. There exists a tradition within the discipline of
Qirāʾāt called “the Qurʾānic readings of the Prophet”, several of which, surpris-
ingly, fall under the category of shawādhdh.189 If the Prophet was reported to
have read (Q. 108:1) anṭaynāka instead of aʿṭaynāka,190 why was this tradition
not picked up by the System-Readings and integrated into at least one of them,
especially when all the Canonical Readings were supposedly transmitted from
Prophet? We have lost to history both a corpus of shawādhdh readings that
violated the rasm and a separate group that did not violate the rasm but that
lacked sound transmission. A significant proportion of this irregular corpus
was readings attributed to the Eponymous Readers (shawādhdh al-sabʿa),191
several of which were recorded, taught, and performed for some time, but
which were later abandoned by the Qurrāʾ community in favor of other
187 Ibid., 452.

188 Ibid., 297; cf. Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:272–3.
189 ʿAṭiyya al-Kishkī, Qirāʾāt al-nabī dirāsa qurʾāniyya ḥadītha (Riyad: al-Nashr al-ʿilmī
wa-l-maṭābiʿ, 2011), especially the index, 379–90.
190 Ibn Khālawayhi, Mukhtaṣar, 182.
191 Refer to Chapter Two.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

readings. While some of these abandoned readings were recorded in written

form, the fact that they were not performed combined with the oral nature of
the discipline of Qirāʾāt means that the precise way of executing the reading
was questionable.
Different readings were recorded for (Q. 40:1) ḥā mīm, some of which in-
cluded imāla, as in ḥē mīm reported on behalf of AA. Even so, there were
other readings attributed to him, such as giving the ḥāʾ a fatḥa-like or kasra-
like vowel (ikhtilās), thus reading ḥa mīm. Another method of articulation was
reported on behalf of AA: to strip the ḥāʾ of any vowel at all ( jazman), thus
reading ḥ mīm. An interesting comment was adduced in a report attributed to
ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl [← AA] who said that ḥā mīm was read with a kasra on the ḥāʾ.
Ibn Mujāhid added: shaklan bi-lā tarjama, meaning that ʿAbbās’s rendition of
the word was to vocalize the ḥāʾ with a kasra, but the precise way of pronun-
ciation was not known.192 The aforementioned case of al-Aʿshā falls into the
same category: he used to perform long madd after which he would pause and
articulate a hamza.193 This technique of recitation was discontinued and no
longer performed.
Some features of the System-Readings and some peculiar recitational tech-
niques were forgotten or simply never existed at all. For example, performing
ghunna (nasality) by assimilating nūn with wāw seems to have been known
and practiced amongst some Readers, including al-Kisāʾī, Ḥamza, Abū ʿAmr,
and Nāfiʿ. However, the tradition from ʿĀṣim seems to be uncertain and am-
biguous. Ibn Mujāhid stated that there was no tradition through Shuʿba con-
cerning this practice of ghunna, i.e. when nūn directly preceded wāw (maʿdūm
al-riwāya). As for the tradition through Ḥafṣ, there were some transmissions to
that effect, but none of Ḥafṣ’ students/companions were keen on perpetuating
the practice (lam aḥfaẓ ʿan aḥad minhum taḥṣīl dhālik).194 Another example
was the extent of imāla performed by Nāfiʿ. Qālūn and Warsh performed a
slight imāla in words such as bi-l-hudā → bi-l-hudǣ, l-hawā → l-hawǣ, etc., an
imāla with a phonetic value between ā and ē. After al-Shāṭibiyya, the rendition
of Warsh continued this tradition, but the rendition of Qālūn shifted to read
with full fatḥ.195 We are left wondering when, how, and why did the tradition of
partial imāla reported via Qālūn disappear?196

193 Ibid., 134.
194 Ibid., 127.
195 Muḥammad Khalīl al-Zawraq, Uṣūl riwāyat Qālūn min ṭarīq al-Shāṭibiyya (Libia: Dār al-
kutub al-waṭaniyya, 2004), 71.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

178 CHAPTER 4
When precise information was missing, the Qurrāʾ resorted to qiyās (anal-
ogy). There was no recorded transmission from ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba on (Q. 36:1) Yā
Sīn and whether or not he performed imāla. Ibn Mujāhid concluded that it was
read with imāla, since the qiyās of Shuʿba’s system of recitation suggested so.197
Similarly, when Ḥafṣ violated his and ʿĀṣim’s principles of recitation by reading
(Q. 48:10) ʿalayhu instead of ʿalayhi, Ibn Mujāhid had no direct corroboration
of this reading from Shuʿba, and so, concluded that the latter’s reading, accord-
ing to qiyās, must have been ʿalayhi.198 Thus, readings were sometimes verified
and authenticated through qiyās rather than a mutawātir transmission widely
attested within the Muslim community.
It was not just obscure recitational practices and techniques that fell out
of common usage and were subsequently forgotten; individual variants also
escaped people’s memory. Ibn ʿĀmir → Ibn Dhakwān’s standard reading of
(Q. 46:15) became known as kurhan … kurhan. Nevertheless, Ibn Dhakwān
was reported to have said: “What I have memorized was karhan … karhan”.199
In (Q. 6:109), Readers disagreed whether to read annahā or innahā. Yaḥyā b.
Ādam reported the following on behalf of his teacher Shuʿba: “I did not mem-
orize from ʿĀṣim how he read it.”200 Similarly, (Q. 9:109) was read hārin and
hērin by different Readers. As for Ibn ʿĀmir and how he read it, Ibn Mujāhid
stated that he had no information on his reading.201 The same held true for
(Q. 25:17) fa-yaqūlu vs. fa-naqūlu. At first, Ibn Mujāhid stated that he had no
records on this variant by way of ʿĀṣim → Shuʿba. A few lines later after this
passage, Ibn Mujāhid inserted a transmission through A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b.
Ādam → Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir → Ibn Saʿdān to the effect that the vari-
ant was read fa-yaqūlu. Was this latter statement inserted later by Ibn Mujāhid
himself after enquiring about the transmission from Shuʿba, or was it added
by later copyists?202 An additional phrase in al-Fārisī’s Ḥujja (a commen-
tary on Ibn Mujāhid’s work) that is missing from the printed edition of Kitāb
al-Sabʿa suggests that the additional riwāya traced back to Shuʿba might have
been inserted later and was not given by Ibn Mujāhid. It states that some of
Shuʿba’s companions/students asserted that al-Aʿshā transmitted fa-yaqūlu
from Shuʿba.203 This addition implies that Shuʿba’s students were aware of the
197 Ibid., 538.

198 Ibid., 603.
199 Ibid., 229.
200 Ibid., 265.
201 Ibid., 319.
202 Ibid., 463.
203 Abū ʿAlī l-Fārisī (d. 377/987), al-Ḥujja li-l-qurrāʾ al-sabʿa, ed. Badr al-Dīn Qahwajī and
Bashīr Juwayjānī, 7 vols. (Damascus: Dār al-Ma‌ʾmūn li-l-turāth, 1984), 5:337.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

absence of that particular transmission from him and that they were trying to
complete the System-Reading of their master. The following examples follow
the same pattern as the previous ones, emphasizing the theme of forgotten
readings and missing information:
– (Q. 58:11) ‿nshuzū vs. ‿nshizū. Shuʿba told his student Yaḥyā b. Ādam that he
did not memorize how to read this variant from ʿĀṣim.204
– (Q. 10:89) wa-lā tattabiʿānni. IA → Ibn Dhakwān read wa-lā tatbaʿānni. IA →
Hishām read wa-lā tattabiʿānni. Ibn Mujāhid did not have an exact, verified
oral transmission of this variant. He might have had a written record or just
a description of how Ibn Dhakwān read. He wrote: Ibn Dhakwān stated that
it was khafīfa (lightened form). But Ibn Mujāhid was not sure what exactly
was lightened, the tāʾ or the nūn. He then added: I believe Ibn Dhakwān
meant the tāʾ of tabiʿa.205
– In (Q. 12:23), IA → Hishām read hiʾta/hiʾtu. In regard to IA → Ibn Dhakwān,
Ibn Mujāhid stated that he had no information from Ibn Dhakwān about
the articulation of the hamza in this word.206
One cannot but also wonder about the extent of interference from copyists
and editors in the process of producing and presenting a work on Qirāʾāt. The
discipline is complex and very vulnerable to errors and misprints. Sometimes,
it is difficult to be certain of the vocalization Ibn Mujāhid intended. According
to the printed edition of al-Sabʿa, in (Q. 17:31) Ibn ʿĀmir read khaṭa‌ʾan (naṣb
al-khāʾ wa-l-ṭāʾ wa-bi-l-hamz min ghayr madd). As the editor, Shawqī Ḍayf, in-
dicated in a footnote, four manuscripts of al-Sabʿa instead read “naṣb al-khāʾ
wa-sukūn al-ṭāʾ” (i.e., it should be read khaṭʾan). Yet Ḍayf decided that this
was a scribal error in all four manuscripts, because the “known” reading of Ibn
ʿĀmir according to al-Dānī’s Taysīr was khaṭa‌ʾan; thus, khaṭʾan was a scribal
error.207
Finally, one also wonders if there really was a unique rendition for each
Eponymous Reader and to what extent the transmitters’ agency played a role
in interfering with and shaping their master’s Reading. Discussing whether or
not the hamza was articulated in sa‌ʾqayhā and bi-s-suʾqi, al-Bazzī declared that
he did not articulate the hamza in either of these words. He attributed the de-
cision of articulation to himself rather than to Ibn Kathīr.208 Indeed, al-Bazzī
stated more clearly in another occasion that even though he heard his teacher,

205 Ibid., 329.
206 Ibid., 347.
207 Ibid., 379.
208 Ibid., 483.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

180 CHAPTER 4
Abū l-Ikhrīṭ, articulating the hamza of ‿s-suʾqi and sa‌ʾqayhā, he decided to not
follow him and to lighten the hamza by reading ‿s-sūqi and sāqayhā.209
Another example would be (Q. 30:52) ḍaʿf vs. ḍuʿf, where Ḥafṣ decided to
read ḍuʿf on his own authority and not on ʿĀṣim’s (qara‌ʾa Ḥafṣ ʿan nafsihi lā
ʿan ʿĀṣim).210 This statement naturally agitated the editor, Shawqī Ḍayf, who
decried it in a footnote: “According to the Egyptian codex today, Ḥafṣ read
ḍaʿfan following (mutābiʿan) his teacher ʿĀṣim”. Ḍayf’s motive here and in
similar comments throughout the edition of al-Sabʿa is obvious: the Qurʾān/
muṣḥaf and its recitation go back in their current form to Ḥafṣ on the authority
of ʿĀṣim. Neither Ḥafṣ nor any other transmitter or Rāwī was given license to
read on his own authority, even if his reading agreed with another one of the
Canonical systems. The matter in question here is authority, not the content of
the transmission.
2.5 Prayers
The oral instruction between master and student has always been emphasized
as the main medium through which Qirāʾāt was transmitted, whether through
one-on-one tutoring or small groups and study sessions. The sub-culture of
ʿarḍ (present/deliver) and talaqqī (reception), and the fact that Qirāʾāt stu-
dents were often taught only a few verses of the Qurʾān in every session, reflect
the unique culture of Qurʾān teaching and Qirāʾāt transmission.211 That being
said, we have already seen how an admittedly small percentage of Qirāʾāt was
transmitted, collected and recorded via other means, including letters, writ-
ten notes, qiyās, and personal ijtihād. Ritual prayer was an additional medium
through which Qirāʾāt were heard, practiced, transmitted, and recorded. Due
to the unique circumstances of reciting the Qurʾān during prayers, in particu-
lar the speed and volume of recitation, different variants and techniques of
articulation were noted, making their way into the corpus of Qirāʾāt literature.
For example, it was noted during prayer that Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ would soften
the unvocalized hamza when he was reciting with speed (idrāj), except for
particular words whose specific location in the Qurʾān Ibn Mujāhid identified.
Similarly, it was reported through some transmitters that Ḥamza did not ar-
ticulate the hamza when he was praying.212 (Q. 11:27) was an unusual variant
209 Ibid., 553.

210 Ibid., 508.
211 ʿAlam al-Dīn al-Sakhāwī (d. 643/1245), Jamāl al-qurrāʾ wa-kamāl al-iqrāʾ, ed. ʿAlī Ḥusayn
al-Bawwāb, 2 vols. (Mecca: Maktabat al-turāth, 1987), 2:446–60.
212 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 133. Review the uṣūl section in the next chapter.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

transmitted on behalf of AA during prayers: all the Eponymous Readers ar-

ticulated the hamza and read ‿r-ra‌ʾyi, except Abū ʿAmr who read ‿r-rāyi. The
reading was confirmed by al-Yazīdī, who emphasized that AA did not articu-
late the hamza during prayers, but under normal circumstances he would read
‿r-ra‌ʾyi. The difference between the two readings went beyond this simple as-
pect of hamza articulation. Things developed as follows: AA’s first Canonical
Rāwī, al-Sūsī, transmitted ‿r-rāyi in his rendition of Abū ʿAmr’s Reading, while
the second Canonical Rāwī, al-Dūrī, transmitted ‿r-ra‌ʾyi.213 Could al-Sūsī have
heard and recorded the variant from AA → al-Yazīdī while the latter was pray-
ing? A similar situation applies to (Q. 12:47) da‌ʾban, where all the Readers ar-
ticulated the hamza except for AA, who read dāban. Again, al-Sūsī transmitted
dāban, while al-Dūrī transmitted da‌ʾban. Despite the emphasis that Abū ʿAmr’s
lenition of the hamza took place during prayer, al-Sūsī seems to have adopt-
ed the version without a hamza.214 The last example I have is (Q. 24:2) and
(Q. 57:27) ra‌ʾafa/ra‌ʾfa, where all the Readers articulated the hamza except for
AA, who softened it during prayers. Once more, al-Sūsī’s later rendition of AA’s
System-Reading transmitted rāfa, while al-Dūrī’s rendition reported ra‌ʾfa.215
Finally, in the discrepancies reported on (Q. 1:6) sirāṭ, ṣirāṭ, and zirāṭ,
Khallād stated that his teacher Sulaym, who was one of the main transmit-
ters of Ḥamza, consistently read ṣirāṭ with ṣād. Nevertheless, and only during
prayers, he would give it the “scent” of a zāy (yushimm).216 As a result, this
phonetic value of the ṣād, which falls in between pure ṣād and pure zāy, be-
came the standard reading of Ḥamza: the medium through which it was “audi-
tioned” and reported was ritual prayers.
3 Concluding Remarks
Qurʾān Readers obviously read in multiple ways over a long period of time.
They changed older readings and adopted new ones accordingly. We are fortu-
nate, thanks to works like Ibn Mujāhid’s and al-Dānī’s Jāmiʿ al-bayān, to be able
to get a glimpse into the social dynamics of the Qurrāʾ and how they interacted
and corresponded with one another. Unfortunately, what was lost is more than
213 Ibid., 332; Ibrāhīm Tawfīq Ḍamra, Aḥlā durūsī fī riwāyat al-Sūsī (Amman: al-Maktaba
al-waṭaniyya, 2007), 129; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 390–408.
214 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 349; Ḍamra, Riwāyat al-Sūsī, 139; Ghāyat surūrī fī riwāyat al-Dūrī
(Amman: al-Maktaba al-waṭaniyya, 2007), 90.
215 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 452; Ḍamra, Riwāyat al-Sūsī, 196, 292.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

182 CHAPTER 4
what was preserved. The examples I provided to demonstrate the importance

of the written transmission of Qirāʾāt and the other mediums through which
authentication of readings took place were not necessarily representative of
the state of Qirāʾāt transmission. These diverse forms of transmission were cer-
tainly not the norm—oral transmission dominated—but taking all these as-
pects together could perhaps give us a different picture of the formative period
of Qirāʾāt transmission and a more natural, humane, textured impression of
early Muslim society, whose members, driven by sincere piety and admiration
for the Qurʾānic revelation, went to extreme measures to preserve, perform,
and stabilize this text.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

CHAPTER 5
The Nature of the Qurʾānic Variants
1 Standardization of Arabic and the Qurʾānic Text through the

Principles of Qurʾānic Recitation (uṣūl al-Qirāʾa)
Qurʾānic recitation is a Prophetic practice that is followed. It includes good

( faṣīḥ) and better (afṣaḥ) Arabic … We pay no attention to [the arguments/
statements by] Abū ʿAlī [al-Fārisī] and al-Zamakhsharī
Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī
As the previous chapters have shown, seeing only one main reason behind the
emergence of Qirāʾāt is not sensible. It was not only the underdeveloped con-
sonantal rasm, the disparate Arabic dialects, let alone divine revelation that
caused the production, reproduction, and promulgation of the variant read-
ings of the Qurʾān. The process was far more complicated than that, and it was
a combination of several factors that lead to the development of Qirāʾāt, both
as an “instruction manual” to read the Qurʾānic text and as an academic dis-
cipline standing on its own, on par with Ḥadīth, grammar, or fiqh. In addition
to these three factors—rasm, dialectal variations, and the Prophet’s alleged li-
cense to recite the divine revelation in various forms—several other reasons
contributed to the emergence of variants, including transmission errors, for-
getfulness, personal interpretation (ijtihād), and doubt. Another major factor
that contributed greatly to the emergence of variants was the standardization
of Arabic, or rather its non-standardization within the fields of grammar, mor-
phology, and phonetics. The important question to be asked is the following:
had Arabic and the Qurʾānic text been fully standardized and systematized in
the 7th century, would vowels and diacritics be needed to read the text consis-
tently without variations? In other words, why did variants stop emerging after
the 4th/10th century? Were we to give the contemporary text of the Qurʾān,
stripped of vowels and diacritics, to a trained, professional Qurʾān reciter,
would he be as confused as the early Muslim reciters and read ‫( �م�ل�ك‬mlk) as
malīki or mallāki or milki or malki, or would there be no doubt in his mind that
it is either maliki or māliki?
With many variants it is difficult to ascertain which form is “better”, “more
correct”, or “more grammatical”, especially when it comes to matters that con-
cern pronunciation and recitational techniques (uṣūl al-qirāʾa). Moreover, it is

184 CHAPTER 5
almost inevitable in certain contexts to think simultaneously of at least two

variants which fit the context, such as the second person and third person pro-
noun prefixes yāʾ and tāʾ (e.g. yaʿlamūn and taʿlamūn or yaghfir and naghfir),
cases of hamza such as inna and anna, or certain verb forms such as yunzil and
yunazzil. Additionally, it is important to note, as I have discussed in the last
chapter, that most of the time Readers were broadly familiar with each other’s
readings and practices. This is evident from the Data included at the end of the
chapter, where it is often the case that at least two Readers share the same vari-
ant. In the following pages, I will explore certain unique aspects regarding the
nature of the variant readings and then present comprehensive data extracted
from Ibn Mujāhid’s work showing each Reader’s principles of recitation and
the individual variants he documented in his book.
1.1 Disconnected Variants

Regardless of how and when variant readings emerged, there is no denying
that the differences among these variants are miniscule, to the extent that
they could often be inconsequential at the hermeneutical level.1 That is to
say, matters of pronunciation and performance hardly have any impact on
the meaning of the word, and subsequently, the interpretation of the verse.
The major problem that “phonetic” variants raise is authority and authorship,
where, on the theological level at least, we are obligated to re-investigate the
notions of (1) tawātur, (2) the divine nature of the Qurʾānic text down to the
particulars of its articulation, and (3) the word/speech of God vis-à-vis the in-
terference of human agency in standardizing the text. Many variants look simi-
lar, and they “sound” almost identical to one uninitiated in the discipline of
Qirāʾāt. Orality could be the reason behind many of these permutations, espe-
cially in cases such as short and long vowels, case endings, vowel harmony, and
assimilation. However, consider the following examples where the differences
between the variants of one form are significant and to a certain degree render
the variations disconnected and incoherent, semantically and/or phonetically.
1 For the impact of the variant readings on legal rulings, see Mustafa Shah, “The Case of
variae lectiones in Classical Islamic Jurisprudence: Grammar and the Interpretation of
Law,” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 29:2 (2016): 285–311; Ramon Harvey, “The
Legal Epistemology of Qur’anic Variants: The Readings of Ibn Masʿūd in Kufan fiqh and the
Ḥanafī madhhab,” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 19:1 (2017): 72–101; Khayr al-Dīn Sīb, al-Qirāʾāt
al-qurʾāniyya wa-atharuhā fī ikhtilāf al-aḥkām al-fiqhiyya (Beirut: Dār Ibn Ḥazm, 2008).
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

The Nature of the Qur ʾ ānic Variants 185
– (Q. 7:57) wa-huwa ‿lladhī yursilu ‿r-rīḥa/‿r-riyāḥa nushuran/nushran/

nashran.2 All Readers read nushuran or nushran or nashran (to bring forth
clouds) except A, who read bushran (to bring good tidings). Al-Ṭabarī com-
mented that although the meaning of the verse was still convincing, he
preferred to not adopt it for its deviation from the majority of the other
Readers.3
– (Q. 6:94) laqad taqaṭṭaʿa baynakum.4 All Readers read taqaṭṭaʿa baynukum
except N, K, and A → Ḥafṣ, who read baynakum. The variance is the differ-
ence of a case ending but between understanding bayn either as an adverb
(bayna; amongst you) or a noun (al-bayn; connection, relationship).5
– (Q. 7:105) ḥaqīqun ʿalā vs. ʿalayya.6 Only N read ḥaqīqun ʿalayya (worthy
‫ ا ��ه خ‬are indicative of confusion con-
for me to say) instead of ḥaqīqun ʿalā (worthy to say).
– Variants such as that of (Q. 7:111) ‫ا��ا ه‬
‫رج و‬
cerning the proper articulation of ‫ا ر ج��ه‬. There are more than seven combina-
tions for this reading,7 which one can find in the tabulated Data at the end
of the book.
– (Q. 6:111) wa-ḥasharnā ʿalayhim kulla shayʾin qubulan vs. qibalan.8 Qubul
could mean face to face, group by group, or guarantors (qabīl pl. qubul =
kafīl pl. kufalāʾ).9 On the other hand, qibal means in person (muʿāyana,
mujāhara).
– (Q. 9:12): all Readers read lā aymāna (they have no sacred oaths) whereas IA
read lā īmāna (they have no faith).10
– (Q. 10:22) huwa ‿lladhī yusayyirukum fī l-barri wa-l-baḥri. All Readers read
yusayyirukum (It is He who conveys you [on the land and the sea]) except
for IA who read yanshurukum (It is He who spreads/scatters you).11
al-maʿārif, 1979), 283. A similar case is (Q. 25:48) bushran vs. nushran; ibid., 465.
3 Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923), Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān, ed. ʿAbd Allāh al-Turkī,
26 vols. (Cairo: Dār Hajar, 2001), 10:253.
5 Bayn belongs to the category of aḍdād (words with opposing meanings; homo-
polysemous opposites), meaning both bond/connection and distance/remoteness; Abū
Bakr Ibn al-Anbārī (d. 328/940), al-Aḍdād, ed. Muḥammad Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm (Beirut:
al-Maktaba al-ʿaṣriyya, 1987), 75–6.
7 Ibid., 287–9.
8 Ibid., 266, 648.
9 Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 9:494.
11 Ibid., 325.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

186 CHAPTER 5
– (Q. 10:30): All Readers read tablū kullu nafsin mā aslafat (there every soul
shall prove its past deeds) except H and K who read tatlū (there every soul
shall recite/read its past deeds).12
– (Q. 11:46) innahu ʿamalun ghayru ṣāliḥin (it is a deed not righteous) was read
by K as innahu ʿamila ghayra ṣāliḥin (he did not do a righteous deed).13
– Similar to (Q. 7:111), (Q. 12:23) ‫� �ل�ك‬‫ �ه�ى� ت‬was read in five different combina-
tions (see the data at the end of the book), indicating confusion and uncer-
tainty concerning the reading of this word.14
– (Q. 15:78) aṣḥābu ‿l-aykati (dwellers in the Thicket). IK, N, and IA read
aṣḥābu Laykata to mean the dwellers of Layka, as a village’s name.15
– The different permutations of (Q. 17:23) uffin, uffa, and uffi indicate differ-
ent dialectical and grammatical possibilities, although according to Abū ʿAlī
l-Fārisī, uffi is the best reading grammatically.16
– The “mysterious”, disjointed letters ṭā hā in (Q. 20:1) were read in five differ-
ent combinations, again, a possible implication of uncertainty and confu-
‫ق‬
sion as to how the letters ought to be articulated.17
– (Q. 24:35) ‫ د ر �ى ىو��د‬was read in six different ways, again, an indication of a
certain unreliability in the verse’s transmission.18
– All Readers read (Q. 27:25) allā yasjudū li-llāhi (‫( )الا ى��س�� ج��د وا‬so that they pros-
trate not themselves to God) except K, who read alā-yā! ‿sjudū li-llāhi, in
the imperative, which would translate to: O People: prostrate yourselves to
God!19
– All Readers read (Q. 29:58) la-nubawwiʾannahum mina ‿l-jannati (We shall
surely lodge them in lofty chambers of paradise) except H and K who read
la-nuthwiyannahum, which has the same root meaning of lodging, except
that it was not favorable, grammatically.20 It is a good example that show-
cases how K and H were working together closely, or perhaps using the same
codex, which was vocalized differently from that of ʿĀṣim.
12 Ibid. 325.
13 Ibid., 334.
14 Ibid., 347.
15 Ibid., 368, 473; Abū ʿAlī l-Fārisī (d. 377/987), al-Ḥujja li-l-qurrāʾ al-sabʿa, ed. Badr al-Dīn
Qahwajī and Bashīr Juwayjānī, 7 vols. (Damascus: Dār al-Ma‌ʾmūn li-l-turāth, 1984), 5:52;
Abū Muḥammad Makkī b. Abī Ṭālib al-Qaysī (d. 437/1045), al-Kashf ʿan wujūh al-qirāʾāt
al-sabʿ wa-ʿilalihā wa-ḥujajihā, ed. Muḥyī l-Dīn Ramaḍān, 2 vols. (Beirut: Muʾassasat
al-risāla, 1997), 2:32.
16 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 379, 430; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 5:95.
18 Ibid., 455–6.
19 Ibid., 480; Fārisī, Ḥujja, 5:383.
20 Fārisī, Ḥujja, 5:439–40; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 502.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

– (Q. 43:19) ‫ �ع�ى�د‬is a very interesting case of disconnected variants. A, AA, H, and
K read wa-jaʿalū ‿l-malāʾikata ‿lladhīna hum ʿibādu ‿r-raḥmāni (and they
have made the angels, who are themselves servants of the All-merciful …).
On the other hand, IK, N, and IA read wa-jaʿalū ‿l-malāʾikata ‿lladhīna hum
ʿinda ‿r-raḥmāni (and they have made the angels, who are in the company
of/with the All-merciful …).
1.2 Familiar Notions and Proper Nouns

Some variants raise the question of the standardization of the Arabic language
and the Qurʾānic text, rather than the extent of dialectical variations and the
impact of the script’s deficiency. While it might be acceptable to argue that
variations in articulation and vocalization occurred due to differences in the
Arabic dialects,21 it would be difficult to accept that the same process hap-
pened in variations of proper nouns and common notions, especially those
whose pronunciation was systematized later on in the Islamic tradition. I
believe that the most important word in this regard would be ‘Qurʾān’ itself.
All Readers articulated the hamza of Qurʾān except Ibn Kathīr, the Meccan,
who read Qurān.22 Was this a dialectal variation of the word “Qurʾān” that we
can assume only existed in the time the Prophet? Should one not assume that
the word itself was well-known amongst Muslims, that there was no need to
introduce a particular pronunciation just to conform to a Reader’s own style
of recitation? Even the Readers who were notorious for softening the hamza,
such as Abū ʿAmr, always articulated the hamza of the Qurʾān. Was “Qurān”
the actual reading of the Prophet and the Meccans to whom the Qurʾān was
first revealed? Similar proper nouns and common notions raise the same ques-
tion. Most Arabs and Muslims are familiar with the name of Gabriel as Jibrīl
or Jibrāʾīl, which were also the forms in which the name generally appears
in Islamic sources. However, the name has many more variants, all of which
are “canonical”: Jabrīl, Jabra‌ʾīl, and Jabra‌ʾil. It seems that mispronouncing the
name of Gabriel, a quintessential figure in Islam, was controversial and un-
settling enough that a dream was attributed to Ibn Kathīr in which he alleg-
edly saw the Prophet reciting wa-Jibrīla, contrary to the Ibn Kathīr’s standard
reading, transmitted as wa-Jabrīla.23 The variant readings of these impor-
tant names and common notions are intriguing. They invite us to investigate
21 ʿAbduh al-Rājiḥī, al-Lahajāt al-ʿArabiyya fī l-Qirāʾāt al-Qurʾāniyya (Alexandria: Dār

al-maʿrifa al-jāmiʿiyya, 1996).
22 Ibrāhīm Tawfīq Ḍamra, al-Ṭarīq al-munīr ilā qirāʾat Ibn Kathīr (Amman: al-Maktaba
al-waṭaniyya, 2006), 19; refer to the uṣūl index and the accompanying audio with refer-
ence to (Q. 2:185); cf. Suyūṭī, Itqān, 339–41.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

188 CHAPTER 5
the significance of these variations, particularly when, how, and in what con-
text they permeated the Islamic tradition. Were Muslims in the 1st/7th century
well-educated in terms of the terminology of the Qurʾān, its concepts, and the
Islamic narrative itself, including its essential concepts and key figures?24 The
following examples indicate the opposite:
– (Q. 2:62) and (Q. 5:69) wa-ṣ-ṣābiʾīna and wa-ṣ-ṣābiʾūna (the Sabaeans). All
the Readers articulated the hamza except N, who read wa-ṣ-ṣābīna and
wa-ṣ-ṣābūna.25
– Similar to Jibrīl in (Q. 2:98), three different pronunciations were recorded
for Michael: Mīkāl, Mīkāʾīl, and Mīkāʾil.26
– Throughout (Q. 2, al-baqara), Ibn ʿĀmir read Ibrāhām, while the rest of the
Readers read Ibrāhīm.27
– Nabī (Prophet): none of the Readers articulated the hamza of nabī ‫ ن�ب�ى‬and
its variant forms (al-nabiyyīn, al-nubuwwa, al-anbiyāʾ) except Nāfiʿ who read
nabīʾ, al-nabīʾīn, al-nubūʾa, al-anbiʾāʾ, etc., as in (Q. 2:61), (Q. 3:79), (Q. 3:113),
and (Q. 3:68).28
– Zakariyyā (Zechariah): a hamza was articulated in some variants, reading
either Zakariyyāʾu or Zakariyyāʾa in (Q. 3:37).29
– Abrogation: the “abrogation verse” (Q. 2:106) reads mā nansakh min āyatin
aw nunsihā (And for whatever verse We abrogate or cast into oblivion). IK
and AA read nansa‌ʾhā (to delay) instead of nunsihā, which stirred an ex-
egetical debate about abrogation and whether God would make the Prophet
forget previously revealed verses or merely delay their revelation.30
– The Mysterious Letters: despite the general agreement to recite these let-
ters as disjoint from one another, a considerable amount of variation was
reported on behalf of each Reader. In particular, refer to the ten different
combinations of (Q. 19:1) k-h-ʿ-y-ṣ.31
– (Q. 4:163) All Readers read Zabūr (Psalms), except H, who read Zubūr.32
24 Cf. Patricia Crone, “Two Legal Problems Bearing on the Early History of the Qur’ān,”
Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 18(1994): 1–37.
25 Ibid., 158.
26 Ibid., 166–7.
27 Ibid., 169–70.
28 Ibid., 157–8; refer to the uṣūl section.
29 Ibid., 204.
30 Ibid., 168; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 388–98.
31 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 406; Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī (d. 444/1053), Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ,
ed. ʿAbd al-Muhaymin ʿAbd al-Salām Ṭaḥḥān et al., 4 vols. (Ph.D. diss.: Jāmiʿat Umm
al-qurā, 1985–95), 3:423.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

– Elisha: all Readers read al-Yasaʿ, as in (Q. 6:86) wa-l-Yasaʿa, except H and K,
who read his name as al-Laysaʿ: wa-l-Laysaʿa ( ‫)وا �ل��ي��س‬.33
‫ع‬
– Diptotes: some nouns had not been properly categorized as diptotes yet,
and thus some Readers treated them as such, while other Readers vocalized
them as regular triptotes. Examples include (Q. 9:30) ʿUzayrun vs. ʿUzayru,
(Q. 11:68) Thamūda vs. Thamūdan, and (Q. 27:15) Saba‌ʾa, Saba‌ʾin, and Saba‌ʾ.34
– Al-nasīʾ (The month postponed/Postponing): a pre-Islamic practice which
continued shortly after Islam until year 9 after the hijra. The word was pro-
nounced differently by the Readers (nasīʾ, nasʾ, nasiyy, and nasy),35 perhaps
indicating unfamiliarity with both the concept and the term itself.
– Gog and Magog: all Readers read (Q. 18:94) Yājūj and Mājūj without articu-
lating the hamza, except ʿĀṣim, who read Ya‌ʾjūj and Ma‌ʾjūj.36
– Sinai: It was read either Sīnāʾ or Saynāʾ in (Q. 23:20).37
– Elias: It was read with and without the articulation of hamza; all Readers
read (Q. 37:123) wa-inna Ilyāsa, except IA, who read wa-inna ‿l-Yāsa.38
Similarly, another variation appears a few verses later in (Q. 37:130), where
N and IA read salāmun ʿalā āli Yāsīna (Peace be upon the followers of Elias)
whereas the rest of the Readers read salāmun ʿalā il Yāsīna (Peace be upon
Elias).39
– The name of the pre-Islamic idol Manāt was read Manāʾata by Ibn Kathīr in
(Q. 53:20). Similarly, Wadd was read as Wudd in (Q. 71:23) by Nāfiʿ only; A →
Shuʿba → Burayd → Abū l-Rabīʿ also read Wudd, but Ibn Mujāhid deemed the
transmission to be wrong.40
– The last example would be (Q. 111:1) Abī Lahab, the name of the Prophet’s
uncle, where it was read Abī Lahb only by the Meccan Ibn Kathīr.41
1.3 Uṣūl al-Qirāʾa (The Principles of Qurʾānic Readings)

The above examples reveal issues related to the standardization of proper
nouns and common notions rather than dialectal and scribal variations. Such
variations show a certain level of unfamiliarity of these important nouns and
notions by the early Muslim community, an unfamiliarity resulting from a
33 Ibid., 262, 554–5.

34 Ibid., 313, 337, 464, 480.
35 Ibid., 314.
36 Ibid., 399, 431.
37 Ibid., 444–5.
38 Ibid., 548.
39 Ibid., 548–9.
40 Ibid., 615, 653; refer to transmission Error #60.
41 Ibid., 700.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

190 CHAPTER 5
period prior to the standardization of the Arabic language and the Islamic nar-
rative itself. A more fundamental aspect of standardization is the technique
of recitation, which varied greatly from one Reader to another. The principles
of reading (uṣūl al-qirāʾa) are not only sets of aesthetic rules about how one
ought to perform the Qurʾānic text; according to the Islamic tradition, they
form an integral part of the revelation, inseparable from the individual vari-
ants ( farsh).42 However, what interests me at the moment in the literature
of uṣūl al-qirāʾa is the standardization process of reciting and performing the
Qurʾānic text. Just as Readers disagreed about individual variants in terms of
vocalization and dotting, they also disagreed in matters of pronunciation and
performance (adāʾ). In the following section, I extract the information given by
Ibn Mujāhid on how each Reader developed his own System of recitation and
the universal rules they created to be applied throughout the whole Qurʾān. My
objectives are threefold; first, to present a comprehensive summary of these lin-
guistic, grammatical, and phonetic rules, which varied from Reader to another.
Second, to showcase the huge variations and complexities of these systems, as
well as the intra-contradictions and inconsistencies within one Eponymous
Reading. I consider such inconsistencies to be signs of a robust standardiza-
tion process that was taking place in the formative period of Qirāʾāt. Third, to
complement the data on the individual variants that I will present at the end
of this chapter, since the discipline of Qirāʾāt considers farsh and uṣūl to be
complementary to one another. What applies to farsh in terms of canonicity
or irregularity applies to the uṣūl as well. One must keep in mind that the main
difference between uṣūl and farsh is that once a principle (aṣl) is established, it
is automatically applied throughout the Qurʾān and will not be mentioned by
the author again under specific verse entries unless there is an exception. Thus,
when one does not find every single case of imāla in the tabulated data at the
end, it is because this principle is applied methodically by some Readers to the
whole Qurʾān, without mentioning each individual variant prone to imāla. I
prepared a comprehensive audio index for all the examples that will be men-
tioned in the following section on uṣūl. The discussion is very technical and
complex, and I recommend that the reader listen to how the variants are pro-
nounced while reading this section. Throughout my explanation of these pho-
netic phenomena, I try as much as possible to avoid the technical vocabulary
42 Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), al-Muqaddimah fī-mā yajib ʿalā qāriʾ al-Qurʾān an
yaʿlamah, ed. Ayman Rushdī Suwayd (Jaddah: Dār Nūr al-maktabāt, 2006), 3; cf. Shady
Hekmat Nasser, “(Q. 12:2) We have sent it down as an Arabic Qurʾān: Praying behind the
Lisper,” Islamic Law and Society 23:1–2 (2016): 27.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

of academic phonetics and linguistics,43 because the standardized nature of

these modern fields may lead the reader to think of later notions while reading
how these early Qurrāʾ were struggling with terminology and with executing
complicated phonetic phenomena. As I mentioned in the Introduction, today
we understand tafkhīm as an indication of the emphatic or heavy articulation
of sounds with letters such as khāʾ, ṣād, ḍād, etc.; however, the early Qurrāʾ
and Ibn Mujāhid used the term in both this sense and also to indicate a com-
plete absence of imāla (an a>e shift), even when the adjacent consonant is not
known to be one of the emphatic letters of tafkhīm.44 Another example would
be the classifications of madd (lengthening of vowels) associated with each
Reader. The later standardized vocabulary and mechanisms of madd, particu-
larly its different durations (ḥaraka; beat), were not used by Ibn Mujāhid, and
thus reproducing this vocabulary while interpreting Ibn Mujājid’s description
of how madd was performed would be anachronistic and inaccurate.
1.3.1 The 2nd and 3rd Person Masculine Plural Pronominal Suffix (ṣilat
mīm al-jamʿ wa-ḍamīr al-hāʾ)45
The first principle Ibn Mujāhid discusses is the vocalization of the third person
masculine plural pronominal suffix, -hum, specifically, the vowels on the hāʾ
and mīm.
– Ḥamza vocalized the hāʾ with ḍamma46 but only in three words, ʿalayhum,
ilayhum, and ladayhum, e.g., (Q. 1:7) ʿalayhum ghayri ‿l-maghḍūbi ʿalayhum.
Except for these three words,47 when the mīm is followed by a vocalized
43 One can refer to several of these phonetic phenomena, described and analyzed in terms
of modern linguistics, in Janet C. E. Watson, The Phonology and Morphology of Arabic
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) and Jonathan Owens, A Linguistic History of
Arabic (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006). One may also consult Brill’s Encyclopedia
of Arabic Language and Linguistics for many entries that will be mentioned in this chapter.
44 As in (Q. 23:37) wa-naḥyā and (Q. 22:66) aḥyākum, also read as wa-naḥyǣ and aḥyǣkum.
Khāʾ, ṣād, ḍād, ghayn, ṭāʾ, qāf, and ẓāʾ in addition to rāʾ, alif, and lām. See Muḥammad
Qamḥāwī, al-Burhān fī tajwīd al-Qurʾān (Beirut: al-Maktaba al-thaqāfiyya, 1972), 20.
46 The ḍamma on the hāʾ of ʿalayhum is the original vowel of the pronoun, -hum. Those who
read ʿalayhum simply kept the vowel of the hāʾ as is; ibid., 110.
47 Ḥamza treated these three prepositions differently because when they were not followed
by/suffixed to pronouns, their yāʾ—i.e. the alif maqṣūra—was pronounced as a regular
alif (e.g., ʿalā l-qawm, ladā l-qawm, and ilā l-qawm). Ḥamza did not want to pronounce the
yāʾ/alif maqṣūra in �‫ ع��ل�ى�ه‬as ʿalāhim because it was not acceptable to vocalize the hāʾ with
‫م‬
a kasra when preceded by an alif. Therefore, when suffixed to pronouns, Ḥamza treated
these three prepositions as if they were followed by substantives (ẓāhir) and he kept the
original vowel of the pronoun -hum as if it were a substantive noun and not a pronoun;
ibid., 111.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

192 CHAPTER 5
consonant, Ḥamza vocalized the hāʾ with a kasra, e.g., (Q. 8:16) wa-man yu-
wallihim yawma-idhin, and (Q. 6:1) bi-rabbihim yaʿdilūna. When the mīm is
followed by an unvocalized consonant, Ḥamza vocalized both the mīm and
the hāʾ with ḍamma, e.g., (Q. 2:142) ʿan qiblatihumu ‿llatī.
– Ibn Kathīr vocalized the mīm of -hum and -him with a long-vowel wāw,
e.g., (Q. 1:7) ʿalayhimū, and (Q. 2:7) ʿalā qulūbihimū wa-ʿalā samʿihimū
wa-ʿalā abṣārihimū ghishāwatun.48 This was also true for the 2nd person
masculine plural pronominal suffix, e.g., (Q. 2:270) anfaqtumū and (Q. 4:1)
khalaqakumū.
– Nāfiʿ’s transmitters disagreed over how he vocalized the mīm. Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar,
Ibn Jammāz, Qālūn, and al-Musayyabī claimed that one was free to vocalize
the mīm with ḍamma or sukūn, e.g., ʿalayhim or ʿalayhimu. Aḥmad b. Qālūn
reported on behalf of his father, Qālūn, that Nāfiʿ did not consider ʿalayhimu
to be wrong. Ibn Mujāhid took this statement as evidence that Nāfiʿ’s read-
ing was ʿalayhim, with sukūn on the mīm. Warsh confirmed that the hāʾ was
vocalized with a kasra and that the mīm was with a sukūn. Nevertheless,
when the mīm was followed by hamza, it was suffixed to a long-vowel wāw,
e.g., (Q. 2:6) sawāʾun ʿalayhimū a-andhartahumū am lam tundhirhum lā
yuʾminūna.
– Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, ʿĀṣim, Ibn ʿĀmir, and al-Kisāʾī read –him, e.g., ʿalayhim.49
However, they disagreed on how to vocalize the mīm when it was followed by
an unvocalized consonant (sākin): ʿĀṣim and Ibn ʿĀmir, in addition to Nāfiʿ
and Ibn Kathīr, vocalized the mīm with a ḍamma, e.g., (Q. 2:61) ʿalayhimu
‿dh-dhillatu, and (Q. 28:23) min dūnihimu ‿mra‌ʾatayni,50 whereas Abū ʿAmr
b. al-ʿAlāʾ vocalized the mīm with kasra, e.g., (Q. 2:61) ʿalayhimi ‿dh-dhillatu,
48 A ḍamma on the hāʾ, its original vowel, is difficult to pronounce when preceded by yāʾ
(ʿalayhum). Therefore, the ḍamma is replaced by a kasra due to its proximity in pronun-
ciation to the yāʾ (ʿalayhim). As for the wāw (ʿalayhimū), it is the suffix marker of plurality,
wāw al-jamʿ, which corresponds to the alif in ʿalayhimā, being the marker of the dual. This
is similar to how one conjugates qāma for the singular, qāmā for the dual, and qāmū for
the plural; ibid., 109–10.
49 Those who read ʿalayhim did not feel the need to keep the wāw as the plurality marker.
Since the alif distinguishes the dual form (ʿalayhimā), and since the singular form lacks
the mīm (ʿalayhi), the mīm in the plural form and the latter’s lack of an alif distinguish it
from both the singular and dual forms. Thus, the final suffix wāw was omitted since no
confusion (labs) would arise from mistaking ʿalayhim as singular or dual; ibid., 110.
50 Since the unvocalized mīm needs to be vocalized, those who read ʿalayhimu gave the mīm
back its original vowel, the wāw or the ḍamma, and left the hāʾ as is without giving back its
original vowel, the ḍamma. Thus, the vowel harmony is maintained between the yāʾ and
the kasra on the hāʾ following it.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(Q. 28:23) min dūnihimi ‿mra‌ʾatayni, and (Q. 36:14) ilayhimi ‿thnayni.51 On
the other hand, Ḥamza and al-Kisāʾī vocalized both the hāʾ and the mīm with
ḍamma, e.g., (Q. 2:61) ʿalayhumu ‿dh-dhillatu, and (Q. 28:23) min dūnihumu
‿mra‌ʾatayni.52
– The aforementioned disagreements on vocalizing the hāʾ with either kasra
or ḍamma occurred when the hāʾ was preceded by a kasra or yāʾ. Otherwise,
the hāʾ was always vocalized with a ḍamma, e.g., minhum, ʿanhum, and
lahum. Moreover, if the pronominal suffix was not a third person masculine
plural -hum, the consonant preceding the mīm might only be vocalized with
a ḍamma or sukūn, e.g., minkum and antum.
– If the mīm was preceded by a consonant other than hāʾ, the consonant only
accepted ḍamma and sukūn, e.g., minkum, and antum, though minkim was
attested in some rare dialects.
1.3.2 Hāʾ al-kināya: Third Person Singular Masculine Pronoun Suffix

This section is similar to the previous one, but it only governs the third person
singular masculine pronoun marker, the hāʾ suffix. The discussion was trig-
gered by the variants reported for (Q. 2:2) fīhi hudan.
Nāfiʿ
1) When the hāʾ was preceded by an unvocalized or long vowel yāʾ, N vo-
calized the hāʾ with kasra without lengthening it (ishbāʿ) and without
reaching the value of a full yāʾ, e.g., (Q. 2:2) fīhi hudan (vs. fīhī hudan),
(Q. 2:37) ʿalayhi innahu (vs. ʿalayhī innahu), and (Q. 18:63) ansānīhi illā (vs.
ansānīhī illā).
2) N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → al-Kisāʾī (K) vocalized the hāʾ of ʿalayhi with a full
yāʾ instead of a kasra throughout the Qurʾān, i.e., alayhī. Similarly, N →
al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān read ʿalayhī, but it was not clear from Ibn
Mujāhid’s wording whether or not this was restricted to ʿalayhi when fol-
lowed by a word that started with hamza, e.g., (Q. 22:4) ʿalayhī annahu.53
3) Like (1), if the hāʾ was preceded by a long vowel wāw or alif, N vocalized
the hāʾ with ḍamma without lengthening it and without reaching the
51 Those who read ʿalayhimi found the ḍamma following a kasra (ʿalayhimu) to be difficult
in pronunciation. Thus, they vocalized the mīm with a kasra to maintain vowel harmony
between the yāʾ, the hāʾ, and the mīm.
52 Since the unvocalized mīm needs to be vocalized, it was given back its original vowel, the
ḍamma (ʿalayhimu). However, the hāʾ was also given back its original vowel, ḍamma, in
order to maintain vowel harmony between the hāʾ and the mīm (ʿalayhumu).
53 Al-Dānī made it clear that this reading, ʿalayhī, was applied throughout the Qurʾān regard-
less of what followed it; Dānī, Jāmiʿ, 1:434.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

194 CHAPTER 5
value of a full wāw, e.g., (Q. 52:28) nadʿūhu a/innahu (vs. nadʿūhū a/in-
nahu) and (Q. 16:121) ‿jtabāhu wa-hadāhu (vs. ‿jtabāhū wa-hadāhū).
4) Likewise, when the hāʾ was preceded by an unvocalized consonant,
N vocalized the hāʾ with ḍamma without lengthening it and without
reaching the value of a full wāw, e.g., minhu and ʿanhu (vs. minhū and
ʿanhū). The only exception was reported on behalf of N → al-Musayyabī
who read (Q. 20:32) wa-ashrik-hū, unlike the rest of N’s transmitters who
read wa-ashrik-hu.
5) If the hāʾ was preceded by kasra, N vocalized the hāʾ with a full long
vowel yāʾ, e.g., (Q. 80:35–6) wa-ummihī … wa-ṣāḥibatihī and (Q. 2:285)
wa-malāʾikatihī wa-kutubihī wa-rusulihī.
6) Similarly, when the hāʾ was preceded by ḍamma or fatḥa, N vo-
calized the hāʾ with a full long vowel wāw, e.g., (2:270) yaʿlamuhū,
(Q. 34:39) yukhlifuhū, (Q. 80:18–23) khalaqahū, fa-qaddarahū, yassarahū,
fa-aqbarahū, ansharahū, and amarahū (when recited in waṣl mode).
7) The cases in which the hāʾ was suffixed to a verb in the jussive mood
(majzūm) will be discussed under farsh al-ḥurūf (individual entries), e.g.,
(Q. 3:75) yuʾaddihi, (Q. 4:115) nuwallihi … nuṣlihi, (Q. 7:111) arjih, (Q. 24:52) wa-
yattaqhi, (Q. 27:28) fa-alqih, (Q. 39:7) yarḍah, and (Q. 99:7–8) yarah … yarah.
ʿĀṣim, Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, Ḥamza, al-Kisāʾī, and Ibn ʿĀmir

The approach of these five Readers concerning hāʾ al-kināya was similar to N
except in three variants read differently by A → Ḥafṣ. AA, H, K, IA, and A →
Shuʿba followed N and read (Q. 18:63) ansānīhi, (Q. 48:10) ʿalayhi, and (Q. 25:69)
fīhi. However, A → Ḥafṣ deviated from the consensus and read ansānīhu, ʿalayhu
(both with ḍamma on the hāʾ instead of kasra), and (Q. 25:69) fīhī (with a long
yāʾ instead of kasra on the hāʾ).
Ibn Kathīr
IK vocalized the hāʾ with either a full yāʾ or wāw when preceded by an unvocal-
ized or long vowel yāʾ, long vowel wāw, alif, vocalized or unvocalized conso-
nants, e.g., fīhī hudan, ilayhī, ʿalayhī, ladayhī, ‿jtabāhū wa-hadāhū, ansānīhī,
nadʿūhū, minhū, and ʿanhū.
1.3.3 Assimilation (al-idghām)54

Idghām is the assimilation of one consonant with another, or in a more literal
sense to insert one consonant into another consonant to form one geminated
54 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 113–127. See Watson, Phonology, 216–34; cf. Karl Vollers, Volkssprache
und Schriftsprache im alten Arabien (Straßburg: Verlag von Karl J. Trübner, 1906), pp. 60 ff.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

sound. The first consonant must be unvocalized (sākin) otherwise assimilation

cannot (usually) be applied. This common form of assimilation in the Qirāʾāt
discipline came to be known as al-idghām al-ṣaghīr (minor assimilation) so
that one would not confuse it with the major assimilation (al-idghām al-kabīr),
a hallmark of Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ, in which the first vocalized consonant would
be stripped of its vowel or case ending to facilitate its assimilation by the con-
sonant that follows it.
1.3.3.1 Assimilating Identical Consonants (idghām al-mutamāthilayn)

When a vocalized consonant is preceded by an identical unvocalized con-
sonant, assimilation is compulsory. The geminate double-consonant sound
within one word (shadda, mushaddad) is the familiar phenomenon known
to any Arabist, but it is only one straightforward example of assimilation. To
fully understand idghām, it is important to realize that the geminate double-
consonant sound is not merely a repetition of consonants but is in fact a rep-
etition that aspires to conserve energy through exerting less physical effort on
the part of the speaker to produce the sound. In the case of geminates (mu-
shaddad), the concept of “exerting less effort” is maintained by keeping the
articulatory organ needed for producing the sound of the consonant in the
same place of articulation until the speaker begins articulating the second
sound, that is, without repositioning the tongue, lips, or teeth. For example,
to properly pronounce the word shadda, after one articulates the first dāl, the
tongue must remain in contact with the upper alveolar ridge while one begins
to articulate the second dāl. Assimilation cannot be realized if one repositions
the tongue after which one places it again against the upper alveolar ridge to
articulate the second dāl. The faint vowel-like sound or breath produced after
releasing the tongue upsets the process of idghām. This mechanism of assim-
ilation is the same whether it takes place within or across words. Compare,
for example, the pronunciation in the audio of (Q. 2:16) rabiḥat tijāratuhum
vs. rabiḥat_tijāratuhum, and (Q. 2:282) wa-l-yaktub baynakum vs. wa-l-yaktub_
baynakum. It is very difficult to demonstrate the difference between the as-
similated and unassimilated forms in writing or transliteration, but one could
use the symbol “∿” to represent the reverberations of the tāʾ and bāʾ that follow
the short pause of the unassimilated rabiḥat and wa-l-yaktub. Thus, the unas-
similated forms would be written as rabiḥat∿ tijāratuhum and wa-l-yaktub∿
baynakum, while the assimilated forms eliminate the short pause/reverbera-
tion “∿” and read rabiḥat_tijāratuhum and wa-l-yaktub_baynakum. Other ex-
amples of assimilation are (Q. 4:78) yudrik_kumu, (Q. 21:87) idh_dhahaba, and
(Q. 7:160) ani ‿ḍrib_bi-ʿaṣāka.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

196 CHAPTER 5
1.3.3.1.1 Unvocalized nūn and tanwīn

1) All Seven Readers articulated/did not conceal the sound of the unvocal-
ized nūn and tanwīn when followed by hamza, hāʾ, ḥāʾ, khāʾ, ʿayn, and
ghayn.
2) N → al-Musayyabī concealed the sound of the unvocalized nūn and
tanwīn when followed by khāʾ and ghayn, e.g., (Q. 35:3) min khāliqin ghay-
ri → miñ khāliqiñ ghayri.55 The assimilation or slurring/concealing of the
sound (ikhfāʾ) is applied here with ghunna (nasality), represented by the
symbol .̃ Other transmitters from N did not assimilate the unvocalized
nūn and tanwīn when followed by khāʾ and ghayn.
3) The unvocalized nūn and tanwīn assimilated into rāʾ, lām, mīm, yāʾ, and
wāw.
4) Readers unanimously assimilated nūn into rāʾ without applying ghunna,
e.g., (Q. 2:105) min rabbikum → mir_rabbikum.
5) Nūn → yāʾ: some Readers assimilated nūn into yāʾ without applying
ghunna, while others did apply it. AA and K were known to have ap-
plied ghunna upon assimilating nūn into yāʾ, while H’s transmitters dis-
agreed whether or not he applied nasality. E.g., (Q. 20:75) wa-man ya‌ʾtihi
→ wa-may_ya‌ʾtihi (without ghunna) or wa-maỹ_ỹa‌ʾtihi (with ghunna),
(Q. 8:16) wa-man yuwallihim → wa-may_yuwallihim (without ghunna)
or wa-maỹ_ỹuwallihim (with ghunna), and (Q. 2:19) wa-barqun yajʿalūna
→ wa-barquy_yajʿalūna (without ghunna) or wa-barquỹ_ỹajʿalūna (with
ghunna).
6) Nūn → lām: The transmitters of IK and N did not apply ghunna upon
assimilating nūn into lām, e.g., (Q. 4:40) min ladunhu → mil_ladunhu
and (Q. 2:71) musallamatun lā → musallamatul_lā. N → Qālūn and N →
al-Musayyabī allegedly did not apply assimilation but articulated the un-
vocalized nūn when it preceded lām. Ibn Mujāhid took issue with this
practice and stated that it was inconvenient to articulate an unvocal-
ized nūn followed by lām. He tried to interpret this articulation (iẓhār)
of nūn to be partial (wa-hādhā shadīdun idhā rumtahu wa-lā aḥsibuhu
arāda l-bayān kullahu). N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ al-Miṣrī, N → Qālūn
→ Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ al-Miṣrī, AA, H, and K applied assimilation without
ghunna. Ibn Mujāhid confirmed that the readers with whom he stud-
ied the Reading of IK did not apply ghunna upon performing this kind
of assimilation. It is worth mentioning here that none of the standard
Readings today apply ghunna when assimilating nūn into lām. This tradi-
tion, like other traditions, practices, and variant readings, seems to have
55 This is the standard reading of AJ (Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī).
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

slowly died out after the propagation of al-Taysīr and al-Shāṭibiyya. Ibn
al-Jazarī asserted that the majority of the professional Qurʾān reciters of
his time (the 9th/15th century) did not apply ghunna when assimilating
nūn into lām or rāʾ. The practice was also maintained by the Maghāriba
(North Africans and Andalusians) as indicated in works such as al-Taysīr,
al-Shāṭibiyya, al-ʿUnwān, al-Kāfī, al-Hādī, al-Tabṣira, al-Hidāya, Talkhīṣ al-
ʿibārāt, al-Tajrīd, and al-Tadhkira. On the other hand, there were several
professional readers who applied ghunna when assimilating nūn into
lām or rāʾ based on transmissions attributed to N, IK, AA, IA, A, AJ (Abū
Jaʿfar), and Y (Yaʿqūb) among others. Indeed, Ibn Mihrān emphasized that
the correct practice of AA was to apply ghunna when assimilating nūn
into lām or rāʾ.56 This is another example of how some Qurʾānic readings
and practices vanished from memory in certain regions and periods of
time, but continued to exist in books and manuals of Qirāʾāt as testimony
of how the early generations of the Qurrāʾ used to recite the Qurʾān.57
7) Nūn → mīm: an unvocalized nūn assimilated to mīm accompanied by
ghunna, e.g., min man → mim˜_˜man and ʿan man → ʿam˜_˜man.
8) Nūn → wāw: nūn assimilated with the wāw with disagreements among
the Readers over whether or not this assimilation was accompanied by
ghunna. K, H → Sulaym → Khallād, AA, N applied assimilation with ghun-
na, while H → Sulaym → Khalaf assimilated without ghunna. E.g., (Q. 13:11)
min wālin → miw_wālin (without ghunna) or miw̃ _w̃ ālin (with ghunna),
and (Q. 80:28–9) wa-ʿinaban wa-qaḍban wa-zaytūnan wa-nakhlan → wa-
ʿinabaw_wa-qaḍban wa-zaytūnaw_wa-nakhlan (without ghunna) or wa-
ʿinabaw̃ _w̃ a-qaḍban wa-zaytūnaw̃ _w̃ a-nakhlan (with ghunna). As for
A, there was no recorded tradition whatsoever of his ghunna practice
(maʿdūm al-riwāya) through his Rāwī Shuʿba. The same was true for A’s
other major transmitter; Ibn Mujāhid emphasized that he did not en-
counter any of Ḥafṣ’ students who applied ghunna when assimilating
nūn with wāw ( fa-lam aḥfaẓ ʿan aḥadin minhum taḥṣīl dhālika).
56 Abū l-Khayr Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, ed. ʿAlī Muḥammad
al-Ḍabbāʿ, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya), 2:22–5; Abū Bakr Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn
Ibn Mihrān (d. 381/992), al-Mabsūṭ fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr, ed. Subayʿ Ḥākimī (Damascus:
Majmaʿ al-lugha al-ʿarabiyya, 1986), 103.
57 See the additional text, not originally in al-Sabʿa, supplied by its editor, Shawqī Ḍayf,
who took it from al-Nashr, which states that IA performed assimilation with ghunna; Ibn
Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 126. Refer also to Chapter Four, under the section “Lost and Extinct” tradi-
tions, page 176.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

198 CHAPTER 5
The following is a breakdown of each Reader’s individual practice of idghām as

described by Ibn Mujāhid. I tried to avoid repetition as much as possible unless
it was necessary to highlight certain differences from one Reader to another.
Nāfiʿ: N only assimilated the combinations of letters whose assimilation was
compulsory; in other words, those whose non-assimilation would have devi-
ated from the standard norms of Arabic.
1) N assimilated an unvocalized dhāl when followed by tāʾ within the
same word, e.g., (Q. 2:51) ‿ttakhaṯṯum, (Q. 3:81) akhaṯṯum, and (Q. 18:77)
la‿ttakhaṯṯa.
2) N’s transmitters disagreed on (Q. 40:27) ʿudhtu: Ibn Jammāz and Ismāʿīl b.
Jaʿfar assimilated and read ʿuṯṯu,58 while al-Musayyabī, Abū Bakr b. Abī
Uways, Warsh and Qālūn read ʿudhtu, without assimilation.
3) N’s transmitters disagreed on assimilating the dāl of qad when followed
by ḍād. N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ, N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ, and
N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī [Ismāʿīl b. Isḥāq] assimilated and read (Q. 6:56)
qaḍ_ḍalaltu, (Q. 4:167) qaḍ_ḍallū, and (Q. 30:58) wa-la-qaḍ_ḍarabnā.
On the other hand, N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → al-Dūrī → Ibn ʿAbdūs → IM
and N → al-Musayyabī did not apply assimilation (bi-l-iẓhār). Amongst
al-Musayyabī’s transmitters, only Abū ʿUmāra (Ḥamza b. al-Qāsim)
claimed that assimilation was applied.
4) N’s transmitters unanimously agreed to assimilate the lām of qul with
a rāʾ that followed it, e.g., (Q. 23:93) qur_rabbi. However, N → Qālūn →
al-Ḥulwānī → Abū ʿAwn b. ʿAmr b. ʿAwn was reported to not have applied
assimilation. Without any reported disagreements, N assimilated the lām
of bal into the rāʾ that followed it, e.g., (Q. 4:158) bar_rafaʿahu. On the
other hand, there was a disagreement over (Q. 83:14) bal rāna: N → Ismāʿīl
b. Jaʿfar and N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf applied assimilation and read
bar_rāna, while N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī did not assimilate.
5) As for the dāl of qad followed by either dhāl or ẓāʾ, Warsh → Aḥmad b.
Ṣāliḥ and Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ applied assimilation, e.g., (Q. 7:179) wa-
la-qadh_dhara‌ʾnā and (Q. 38:24) la-qaẓ_ẓalamaka. Other transmitters of
N did not apply assimilation, including al-Musayyabī and Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar.
6) There were instances in which assimilation should have been applied to
a certain combination of letters, e.g., (Q. 2:256) qat_tabayyana, (Q. 29:35)
wa-la-qat_taraknā, (Q. 3:72) wa-qālaṭ_ṭāʾifatun, and (Q. 3:122) hammaṭ_
ṭāʾifatāni; nevertheless, it was not applied. Thus, N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn
al-Musayyabī did not apply assimilation in qad tabayyana, which Ibn
Mujāhid described as poor Arabic (radīʾ) that deviated from the norms
58 This is the standard recitation of Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

of proper Arabic speech. Similarly, an unvocalized tāʾ should assimilate

into a dāl that followed it, e.g., (Q. 7:189) (athqalat) athqalad_daʿawā and
(Q. 10:89) (ujībat) ujībad_daʿwatukumā, yet some of N’s transmitters did
not assimilate and rather read ujībat daʿwatukumā.
Ibn Kathīr: IK’s approach to assimilation was similar to N’s. He applied assimi-
lation only when the articulation of certain combinations of letters deviated
from proper Arabic speech.
1) IK assimilated the unvocalized lām of bal and qul when followed by rāʾ,
e.g., bar_rāna, qur_rabbi, and bar_rafaʿahu.
2) Just like all the other Readers—except for N → al-Musayyabī as men-
tioned above—IK assimilated dāl with tāʾ and tāʾ with ṭāʾ, e.g., qat_ta-
bayyna and wa-qālaṭ_ṭāʾifatun.
3) In all the other instances where N applied assimilation (cases 1, 2, 3, and
5 under Nāfiʿ above), IK did not assimilate.
ʿĀṣim: A’s approach to applying assimilation was similar to N and IK’s.
1) A → Shuʿba applied assimilation in bar_rāna59 whereas Ḥafṣ did not, but
rather read bal｡ rāna, with a short pause after bal. Similarly, Ḥafṣ did not
perform assimilation in (Q. 75:27) man rāqin but instead read man｡ rāqin,
where he paused briefly after man, unlike Shuʿba who assimilated and
read mar_rāqin.
2) Like N, Shuʿba assimilated dhāl with tāʾ and read ‿ttakhaṯṯum, akhaṯṯum,
and la‿ttakhaṯṯa. On the other hand, Ḥafṣ articulated the dhāl in all of
these examples.
Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ: AA’s approach to assimilation was complex, elaborate, and
controversial. AA was notorious for his al-idghām al-kabīr (major assimilation),
a sophisticated and elaborate system of al-idghām al-ṣaghīr (minor assimila-
tion), which was the more familiar and common form of idghām. AA’s “major
assimilation” has always been a topic of discussion for Qirāʾāt scholars; they
dedicated lengthy sections in their works to document this phenomenon60 and
some even wrote independent treatises on the topic of al-idghām al-kabīr.61
59 To be more precise, Shuʿba read bar_rēna, with imāla, which will be discussed later.
60 See, for example, Abū l-Qāsim al-Hudhalī (d. 465/1072–3), al-Kāmil fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr
wa-l-arbaʿīn al-zāʾida ʿalayhā, ed. Jamāl b. al-Sayyid b. Rifāʿī l-Shāyib (Cairo: Muʾassasat
Samā, 2007), 339–56; Abū l-Ḥasan Ibn Ghalbūn (d. 399/1009), al-Tadhkira fī l-qirāʾāt
al-thamāni, ed. Ayman Rushdī Suwayd, 2 vols. (Jeddah: Silsilat uṣūl al-Nashr, 1991),
2:72–94; Abū ʿAlī l-Ahwāzī (d. 446/1055), al-Wajīz fī sharḥ qirāʾāt al-qara‌ʾa al-thamāniya
a‌ʾimmat al-amṣār al-khamsa, ed. Durayd Aḥmad (Beirut: Dār al-gharb al-islāmī, 2002),
78–87.
61 See the extensive list of works on idghām and al-idghām al-kabīr in Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī
(d. 444/1053), al-Idghām al-kabīr, ed. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ḥasan al-ʿĀrif (Cairo: ʿĀlam al-
kutub, 2003), 26–34.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

200 CHAPTER 5
Western scholarship has also taken an interest in the phenomenon of idghām

from a phonetic, linguistic, and grammatical perspective, as major assimila-
tion entails the removal of case endings for assimilation to take place. Karl
Vollers, and recently Jonathan Owens, have relied on the concept of al-idghām
al-kabīr to substantiate the claim that a caseless variety of Arabic was one me-
dium through which the Qurʾān was recited, and that both cased and caseless
forms of Arabic coexisted since at least the 2nd/8th century.62 The following is
a breakdown of the examples of assimilation as discussed in al-Sabʿa. Note that
Ibn Mujāhid did not use the term “al-idghām al-kabīr” but simply referred to all
kinds of assimilation as idghām.
1.3.3.2 Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ and the Assimilation of Identical Consonants

1) When two identical vocalized consonants of two separate words follow
one another, AA devocalized the first consonant and assimilated it with
the second one. For example, without assimilation, one reads (Q. 1:3–4)
‿r-raḥīmi maliki, but after assimilation the verse reads ‿r-raḥīm_maliki,
without inducing any pause between the two mīms.
2) Exception: AA applied assimilation in all letters of the alphabet (e.g. l → l,
b → b, t → t, th → th, etc.) except when an unvocalized wāw was preceded
by ḍamma, and an unvocalized yāʾ was preceded by kasra, e.g., (Q. 2:62)
āmanū wa‿lladhīna hādū wa‿n-naṣārā, (Q. 4:127) fī yatāmā, (Q. 12:7) fī
Yūsufa, and (Q. 107:2) ‿lladhī yaduʿʿu.
3) AA applied assimilation when the unvocalized wāw was preceded by a
fatḥa, e.g., (Q. 2:61) ʿaṣaw_wa-kānū, and (Q. 7:95) ʿafaw_wa-qālū.
4) Exception: the alif did not assimilate with any other consonant, and no
consonant was assimilated with it.
5) Exception: if the first consonant was already in an assimilated double-
consonant construct (shadda, muḍaʿʿaf), AA did not apply assimilation,
e.g., (Q. 2:187) uḥilla lakum, (Q. 54:48) massa Saqar, and (Q. 4:11) kunna
nisāʾan.
6) Exception: if the first consonant carried tanwīn, AA did not apply assimi-
lation, since the nūn functioned as a barrier between the two consonants.
7) Exception: AA did not assimilate the tāʾ of anta, e.g., (Q. 10:43) a-fa-anta
tahdī.
8) Exception: AA did not assimilate the lām of Āl in (Q. 15:59) Āla Lūṭin.
9) Exception: AA did not assimilate the tāʾ of kunta and kidta in (Q. 28:86)
kunta tarjū and (Q. 17:74) kidta tarkanu.
62 Owens, History, 135–6; cf. Vollers, Volkssprache Und Schriftsprache, pp. 23–40.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

10) By analogy to case 9, (Q. 19:27) jiʾti shayʾan should not have been as-
similated. This example should have been mentioned under the follow-
ing section, “assimilation of similar consonants”, since it was a case of
tāʾ assimilated with shīn. The wording of Ibn Mujāhid suggested that
AA did not assimilate jiʾti shayʾan.63 However, other sources indicated
that AA applied assimilation and read, after softening the hamza of jiʾti,
jīsh_shayʾan.64
1.3.3.3 Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ and the Assimilation of Similar Consonants

When two consonants of two words were similar in terms of their articulation,
AA applied assimilation as follows:
11) mīm was assimilated with bāʾ so long as the mīm was preceded by a
vowel, e.g., (Q. 6:53) bi-aʿlama bi-sh-shākirīna → bi-aʿlab_bi-sh-shākirīna65
or bi-aʿlam_bi-sh-shākirīna.66 When the mīm was preceded by an un-
vocalized consonant or a long vowel (sākin), AA did not assimilate, e.g.
(Q. 2:132) Ibrāhīmu banīhi, (Q. 2:249) ‿l-yawma bi-Jālūta, and (Q. 2:194)
‿l-ḥarāmu bi-sh-shahri.
12) nūn was assimilated with the lām so long as it was not preceded by sākin,
e.g., (Q. 2:55) nuʾmina laka → nuʾmil_laka (nūmil_laka) and (Q. 14:45)
wa-tabayyana lakum → wa-tabayyal_lakum. Assimilation did not take
place when sākin (long vowel) preceded a nūn, e.g., (Q. 10:78) wa-takūna
lakumā and (Q. 3:13) kāna lakum.
63 Ibn Ghalbūn emphasized that assimilation should not be applied in this example; Ibn
Ghalbūn, Tadhkira, 2:86.
64 Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī, al-Taysīr fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ, ed. Otto Pretzl (Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī,
1984), 26; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 1:297.
65 Note the loss of iʿrāb here.
66 Ibn Mujāhid’s wording was very clear how one should perform this kind of assimilation.
He said that AA assimilated the mīm with the bāʾ (yudghim al-mīm fī l-bāʾ) without speci-
fying any further details concerning nasality (ghunna) or concealing the sound of mīm
(ikhfāʾ) without fully assimilating it into the bāʾ. The later Qirāʾāt tradition, particularly
from al-Dānī onwards, emphasized that the mīm was not fully assimilated and was only
devocalized and concealed. Al-Dānī placed emphasis on this aspect and said that it was
not acceptable to completely assimilate the mīm into the bāʾ due to the former’s nasal
quality, and the fact that the professional reciters (ahl al-adāʾ) were all in agreement to
not assimilate the mīm into the bāʾ. Thus, bi-aʿlama bi-sh-shākirīna was recited bi-aʿlam̃ _
bi-sh-shākirīna and not bi-aʿlab_bi-sh-shākirīna. However, Shujāʿ b. Abī Naṣr, one of AA’s
transmitters, did transmit and recite bi-aʿlab_bi-sh-shākirīna, with full assimilation; Dānī,
Taysīr, 28; Ibn Ghalbūn, Tadhkira, 2:90; Dānī, Jāmiʿ, 1:424–5. Ibn al-Jazarī attributed this
disagreement to an older generation of the Qurrāʾ (baʿḍ al-mutaqaddimīn) who misun-
derstood the process as a full assimilation (idghām) rather than a partial one (ikhfāʾ); Ibn
al-Jazarī, Nashr, 1:303.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

202 CHAPTER 5
13) bāʾ was assimilated with the mīm only in yuʿadhdhibu man yashāʾu
(yuʿadhdhib (majzūm) in other variants) → yuʿadhdhim_man in (Q. 2:284),
(Q. 3:129), (Q. 5:18, 40), (Q. 29:21), and (Q. 48:14).
14) AA assimilated qāf with kāf, and kāf with qāf, when they were preceded
by a vowel and when they belonged to two different words, e.g., (Q. 5:64)
yunfiqu kayfa → yunfik_kayfa, (Q. 6:101) khalaqa kulla → khalak_kulla,
(Q. 25:54) rabbuka qadīran → rabbuq_qadīran, and (Q. 47:16) ʿindika qālū
→ ʿindiq_qālū.
15) When the qāf-kāf or kāf-qāf combination occurred in one single word,
AA did not assimilate one by the other except in four words: (Q. 2:21)67
khalaqakum → khalaḵḵum, (Q. 5:88) razaqakum → razaḵḵum, (Q. 66:5)
ṭallaqakunna → ṭallaḵḵunna, and (Q. 7:80) sabaqakum → sabaḵḵum.
16) Following 15, AA did not apply assimilation in (Q. 18:37) khalaqaka.
17) Exception: AA did not assimilate similar consonants when both were vo-
calized with a fatḥa and were preceded by sākin, e.g., (Q. 10:65) yaḥzunka
qawluhum, (Q. 62:11) wa-tarakūka qāʾiman, and (Q. 7:156) ilayka qāla.
16) Assimilation of dāl with dhāl happened only when dāl carried a kasra
and was preceded by a sākin, e.g., (Q. 2:52) baʿdi dhālika → baʿdh_dhālika.
If dāl carried fatḥa, AA did not apply assimilation, e.g., (Q. 3:82) baʿda
dhālika.
17) Assimilation of dāl in ḍād happened only when dāl carried kasra and was
preceded by a sākin, e.g., (Q. 10:21) baʿdi ḍarrāʾa → baʿḍ_ḍarrāʾa. If dāl car-
ried fatḥa, AA did not apply assimilation, e.g., (Q. 11:10) baʿda ḍarrāʾa.
18) qad: AA assimilated the dāl of qad with tāʾ, dhāl, zāy, sīn, shīn, ṣād, ḍād,
ẓāʾ, and jīm. E.g., (Q. 54:15) wa-la-qat_taraknāhā, (Q. 7:179) wa-la-qadh_
dhara‌ʾnā, (Q. 67:5) wa-la-qaz_zayyanā, (Q. 58:1) qas_samiʿa, (Q. 12:30)
qash_shaghafahā, (Q. 25:50) wa-la-qaṣ_ṣarrafnāhu, (Q. 30:58) wa-la-qaḍ_
ḍarabnā, (Q. 38:24) la-qaẓ_ẓalamaka, and (Q. 4:170) qaj_jāʾakum.
19) idh: AA assimilated the dhāl of idh with tāʾ, zāy, sīn, ṣād, ẓāʾ, dāl, and
jīm. E.g., (Q. 38:21) it_tasawwarū, (Q. 8:48) wa-iz_zayyana, (Q. 24:12) is_
samiʿtumūhu, (Q. 46:29) wa-iṣ_ṣarafnā, (Q. 43:39) iẓ_ẓalamtum, (Q. 18:39)
id_dakhalta, and (Q. 33:10) ij_jāʾūkum. With the exception of AA, no other
Reader assimilated dhāl with jīm.
20) tāʾ al-ta‌ʾnīth (third person singular feminine tāʾ suffix of verbs): AA as-
similated this tāʾ with ṭāʾ, ẓāʾ, ṣād, sīn, jīm, zāy, thāʾ, dāl, ḍād, shīn,
and dhāl. E.g., (Q. 3:72) wa-qālaṭ_ṭāʾifatun,68 (Q. 21:11) (kānat) kānaẓ_
67 (Q. 2:21) is one example of the eighteen occurrences of the word khalaqakum in the
Qurʾān.
68 All Readers applied assimilation in this case.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

ẓālimatan, (Q. 4:90) (ḥaṣirat) ḥaṣiraṣ_ṣudūruhum, (Q. 2:261) (anbatat)

anbatas_sabʿa, (Q. 4:56) (naḍijat) naḍijaj_julūduhum, (Q. 17:97) (khabat)
khabaz_zidnāhum, (Q. 9:25) (raḥubat) raḥubath_thumma, and (Q. 10:89)
(ujībat) ujībad_daʿwatukumā.
21) hal: AA assimilated the lām of hal with a following tāʾ in two locations:
(Q. 67:3) hat_tarā and (Q. 69:8) fa-hat_tarā.69 AA → Hārūn al-Aʿwar → ʿAlī
b. Naṣr applied assimilation in (Q. 19:65) hat_taʿlamu, and AA → Yūnus b.
Ḥabīb in (Q. 83:36) hath_thuwwiba. AA → Hārūn al-Aʿwar → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl
claimed that AA gave one the choice to either apply assimilation in these
cases or articulate both consonants.
22) bal: The lām of bal was assimilated by a following rāʾ, e.g., (Q. 4:158) bar_
rafaʿahu and (Q. 83:14) bar_rāna.
23) qul: The lām of qul was only assimilated by a following rāʾ, e.g., (Q. 20:114)
wa-qur_rabbi, and (Q. 20:50) qār_rabbunā. The lām of qul was different
from the lām of hal and bal because it showcases different case endings
in its other conjugated forms such as qāla and yaqūlu, unlike hal and bal,
whose lām is always unvocalized.70
24) tāʾ jamʿ al-muʾannath (the marker of the sound feminine plural): AA as-
similated this tāʾ with sīn, ṣād, ḍād, zāy, dhāl, thāʾ, and jīm. E.g. (Q. 4:57)
‿ṣ-ṣāliḥās_sa-nudkhiluhum, (Q. 37:1) wa-ṣ-ṣāffāṣ_ṣaffan, (Q. 100:1) wa-l-
ʿādiyāḍ_ḍabḥan, (Q. 37:2) fa-z-zājirāz_zajran, (Q. 51:1) wa-dh-dhāriyādh_
dharwan, (Q. 77:5) fa-l-mulqiyādh_dhikran, (Q. 2:92) bi-l-bayyināth_thum-
ma, and (Q. 5:93) ‿ṣ-ṣāliḥāj_junāḥun.
25) AA assimilated a vocalized or unvocalized rāʾ with lām, e.g., (Q. 11:78)
(aṭhar) aṭhal_lakum, (Q. 16:70) ‿l-ʿumul_li-kaylā, (Q. 71:4) yaghfil_lakum,
(Q. 63:5) yastaghfil_lakum.
26) An unvocalized bāʾ was assimilated with fāʾ, e.g. (Q. 4:74) yaghlif_fa-sawfa.
27) Exception: AA did not assimilate an unvocalized fāʾ with bāʾ, e.g., (Q. 34:9)
nakhsif bihim, unlike al-Kisāʾī who did assimilate and read nakhsib_bihim.
28) Exception: AA did not apply assimilation when two identical consonants
belonged to the same word except for (Q. 74:42) salakakum → salaḵḵum
and (Q. 2:200) manāsikakum → manāsiḵḵum. No assimilation was ap-
plied in cases such as (Q. 3:106) wujūhuhum, (Q. 24:33) ikrāhihinna,
and (Q. 2:139) a-tuḥājjūnanā, unless words were already written in their
“assimilated form” in the muṣḥaf, e.g., (Q. 18:95) makkaṉṉī (instead of
makkananī) and (Q. 39:64) ta‌ʾmurūṉṉī (instead of ta‌ʾmurūnanī).
69 Imāla was applied in tarā → tarē.

70 Ibn Mujāhid was trying to justify why the lām of hal, unlike the lām of qāla, might be as-
similated with a following tāʾ.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

204 CHAPTER 5
29) Only AA → al-Yazīdī → al-Sūsī applied assimilation in (Q. 24:62) li-baʿḍi

sha‌ʾnihim → li-baʿsh_sha‌ʾnihim.
30) Ishmām: Whenever AA performed assimilation and devocalized the first
consonant, he applied ishmām in order to indicate the original, lost case
ending, but only when it was ḍamma or kasra. He did not apply ishmām
when the consonant carried an original fatḥa. Later Qirāʾāt scholarship
differentiated between rawm and ishmām. They defined ishmām to be
animating the lips without producing any audible sound, i.e., to silently
hint at a vowel without audibly articulating it. Rawm is similar although
the reciter is required to faintly vocalize the vowel to the point where
one could barely hear it, but where it would still be considered to be de-
vocalized. Ishmām is restricted to ḍamm/rafʿ and rawm is restricted to
ḍamm/rafʿ and kasr/jarr.71 Ibn Mujāhid did not differentiate between
the two mechanisms and referred to both as ishmām. Shawqī Ḍayf com-
mented in one of his footnotes that what Ibn Mujāhid meant was rawm
and not ishmām, since the latter did not admit consonants in khafḍ/
jarr.72 Regardless of the exact terminology, it is important here to note
AA’s attempt, through al-Yazīdī’s transmission, to alert his audience to the
vowels he was omitting, specifically the ḍamma and kasra. On the other
hand, AA did not apply ishmām when he assimilated the following com-
binations of letters: mīm with mīm, bāʾ with bāʾ, bāʾ with mīm, and mīm
with bāʾ. The reasons behind these exceptions were the bilabial charac-
teristics of the mīm and bāʾ, due to which it was cumbersome for one’s
lips to form the geminated sound of mīm and bāʾ while at the same time
animating the lips without producing any audible sound.73 Nevertheless,
AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl did apply ishmām when mīm was assimilated by
mīm and when bāʾ was assimilated by bāʾ. However, AA did not apply
ishmām when the omitted vowel was fatḥa.
Ḥamza: H’s style of idghām was similar to that of AA’s with regards to the minor
assimilation when the first of the two consonants was unvocalized and with
the exception of dhāl with jīm, which no other Reader besides AA assimilated.
1) H assimilated the lām of bal and hal with tāʾ, thāʾ, sīn, and rāʾ.
2) H’s transmitters disagreed on applying assimilation to the dhāl of
idh when followed by zāy, sīn, and ṣād. H → Sulaym → Khalaf did not
71 ʿAṭiyya Qābil Naṣr, Ghāyat al-murīd fī ʿilm al-tajwīd (Riyadh: [n.p.], 1992), 181–5; Dānī,
Taysīr, 1:91–3; Ibn Ghalbūn, Tadhkira; Abū Bishr ʿAmr b. ʿUthmān Sībawayhi (d. 180/796),
al-Kitāb, ed. ʿAbd al-Salām Hārūn, 5 vols. (Cairo: Maktabat al-Khānjī, 1988), 4:162–72.
73 Ibn Ghalbūn, Tadhkira, 2:92; Dānī, Taysīr, 29; Dānī, Idghām, 87–9.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

assimilate, e.g., (Q. 24:12) idh samiʿtumūhu, (Q. 33:10) wa-idh zāghati and
(Q. 46:29) wa-idh ṣarafnā. On the other hand, only Khallād among the
transmitters of H → Sulaym applied assimilation, e.g., is_samiʿtumūhu,
wa-iz_zāghati, and wa-iṣ_ṣarafnā.
3) Khalaf reported that Sulaym might have applied assimilation in (Q. 4:155)
bal ṭabaʿa and read baṭ_ṭabaʿa, to which H would not have objected.
Al-Kisāʾī: K’s style of assimilation was similar to that of H’s in the aforemen-
tioned cases and went beyond it in the following cases:
1) The lām of bal and hal was assimilated with ṭāʾ, ẓāʾ, ḍād, nūn, and zāy
e.g., (Q. 4:155) baṭ_ṭabaʿa, (Q. 48:12) baẓ_ẓanantum, (Q. 46:28) baḍ_ḍallū,
(Q. 56:67) ban_naḥnu, and (Q. 13:33) baz_zuyyina.
2) Only Abū l-Ḥārith al-Layth b. Khālid assimilated an unvocalized lām with
dhāl, e.g., (Q. 2:231) yafʿadh_dhālika.
Ibn ʿĀmir
1) IA applied assimilation in cases such as ‿ttakhaṯṯum, la‿ttakhaṯṯa,
akhaṯṯum, and so on.
2) IA did not apply assimilation in ʿudhtu.74
3) IA assimilated in (Q. 2:259) labithtu → labiṯṯu, and labithta → labiṯṯa.
4) IA did not apply assimilation in (Q. 7:43) and (Q. 43:72) ūrithtumūhā.75
5) IA did not assimilate in (Q. 20:96) fa-nabadhtuhā.
6) The dāl of qad was assimilated with a following ḍād and ẓāʾ, e.g., (Q. 2:108)
fa-qaḍ_ḍalla and (Q. 38:24) la-qaẓ_ẓalamaka. IA did not assimilate the
dāl with sīn, shīn, ṣād, and jīm, e.g., (Q. 58:1) qad samiʿa, (Q. 12:30) qad
shaghafahā, (Q. 48:27) la-qad ṣadaqa, and (Q. 20:47) qad jiʾnāka.
7) IA’s practice of assimilation was inconsistent in the case of the third
person singular feminine tāʾ suffix of verbs. He assimilated in (Q. 4:56)
naḍijat julūduhum → naḍijaj_julūduhum, (Q. 6:146) ḥamalat ẓuhūruhumā
→ ḥamalaẓ_ẓuhūruhumā. He did not assimilate in (Q. 22:36) wajabat
junūbuhā, (Q. 4:90) ḥaṣirat ṣudūruhum, (Q. 8:38) maḍat sunnatu, (Q. 12:19)
wa-jāʾat sayyāratun, (Q. 17:97) khabat zidnāhum, (Q. 26:141), (Q. 54:23),
(Q. 69:4), (Q. 91:11) kadhdhabat Thamūdu.76 He did not assimilate the tāʾ
with sīn except in (Q. 2:261) anbatat sabʿa → anbatas_sabʿa.
8) Similarly, IA was inconsistent in applying assimilation to the dhāl of
idh. He assimilated it with ẓāʾ, zāy, and dāl, e.g., (Q. 4:64) iẓ_ẓalamū,
(Q. 33:10) wa-iz_zāghat, and (Q. 18:39) id_dakhalat, but he did not apply
74 Cf. Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 2:16–7.

75 IA → Hishām in the later Qirāʾāt tradition did assimilate and read ūriṯṯumūhā; ibid., 2:17.
76 IA applied assimilation in this example according to later Qirāʾāt literature.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

206 CHAPTER 5
assimilation in (Q. 15:52) idh dakhalū. IA did not assimilate the dhāl with
either ṣād or tāʾ, e.g., (Q. 46:29) wa-idh ṣarafnā, (Q. 8:9) idh tastaghīthūna,
(Q. 10:61) idh tufīḍūna, except in (Q. 3:124) idh taqūlu → it_taqūlu.
9) IA did not assimilate fāʾ with bāʾ, e.g., (Q. 34:9) nakhsif bihim.
10) IA assimilated dāl with thāʾ in (Q. 3:145) yurid thawāba → yurith_thawāba.
11) IA did not assimilate the lām of hal or bal except for (Q. 83:14) bar_rāna.
1.3.4 The Articulation of hamza (al-Hamz)

The next principle Ibn Mujāhid discussed was the articulation of hamza. The
discussion was prompted by the variants recorded under (Q. 2:3) yuʾminūna.
– N, IK, A, IA, H, and K articulated both the vocalized and unvocalized hamza,
e.g., (Q. 2:3) yuʾminūna, (Q. 2:174) ya‌ʾkulūna, (Q. 3:21) ya‌ʾmurūna, (Q. 5:55)
yuʾtūna, (Q. 14:10) wa-yuʾakhkhirakum, and (Q. 3:75) yuʾaddihi.
– In waqf mode, only H chose not to articulate the hamza.
– N → Warsh did not articulate the vocalized and unvocalized hamza, e.g.,
yūminūna, wa-yuwakhkhirakum, (Q. 2:225) yuwākhidhukum, and yuwaddihi.
– During prayers and the “fast” mode of recitation (idrāj), AA would often not
articulate the unvocalized hamza, e.g. yūminūna, (Q. 2:232) yūminu, and
(Q. 7:169) yākhudhūna. This practice was confirmed by AA → al-Yazīdī →
al-Sūsī who asserted that during prayers AA did not articulate the unvocal-
ized hamza, except for specific individual variants which will be mentioned
under the farsh section.77 Moreover, when the hamza was devocalized
due to its case ending ( jazm), AA did articulate it, e.g., (Q. 2:106) nansa‌ʾhā,
(Q. 5:101) tasuʾkum, (Q. 18:10) wa-hayyiʾ, (Q. 17:14) ‿qra‌ʾ, (Q. 18:16) wa-yuhayyiʾ,
(Q. 6:39) wa-man yasha‌ʾ, and (Q. 15:51) wa-nabbiʾhum.
– Similarly, H → Sulaym → Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī → Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā b. Ḥayyān
→ IM reported that H did not articulate the hamza during prayers.
– A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā → al-Shammūnī did not articulate the unvocalized
hamza, e.g., yūminūna.
– On the other hand, Ibn Mujāhid reported that A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā → Abū
Hishām al-Rifāʿī → Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā b. Ḥayyān articulated the hamza and
recited yuʾminūna.
1.3.5 Omitting the hamza in waqf Mode78

This principle was unique to H. It was introduced in the previous discussion on
the articulation of hamza under (Q. 2:3) yuʾminūna, but was reintroduced as a
distinct variant of (Q. 2:14) mustahziʾūna. This word is located at the end of the
77 Refer to Chapter Four, under the section on prayers, page 180.

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

verse where pausing (waqf) is applied more naturally than in the previous case
of yuʾminūna, which is located in the middle of the verse. H dropped the hamza
when it was part of a word at which he chose to pause, e.g., mustahziʾūna →
mustahzūn. Since the vowel on the letter preceding the hamza was removed—
in this example -ziʾū → -ziū → -zū—H applied ishmām to hint at the omitted
vowel and signify its loss. Ibn Mujāhid asserted that this practice could not
be inferred from writing, and that it must be administered orally (yushīr ilā
l-zāy bi-l-kasr … wa-lā yuḍbaṭ illā bi-l-lafẓ). Other examples include (Q. 9:37)
li-yuwāṭiʾū → li-yuwāṭū, (Q. 10:53) wa-yastanbiʾūnaka → wa-yastanbūnaka,
(Q. 36:56) muttakiʾūna → muttakūna, (Q. 37:66) fa-māliʾūna → fa-mālūna,
(Q. 69:37) ‿l-khāṭiʾūna → ‿l-khāṭūna, (Q. 5:69) ‿ṣ-ṣābiʾūna → ‿ṣ-ṣābūna, (Q. 2:62)
and (Q. 22:17) ‿ṣ-ṣābiʾīna → ‿ṣ-ṣābīna. The practice of the other Readers in ar-
ticulating the hamza was not affected by waṣl and waqf modes.
1.3.6 Al-nabiyyīn, al-nubuwwa, al-anbiyāʾ, and al-nabiyy79

N articulated the hamza in these words, e.g., (Q. 2:61) ‿n-nabīʾīna, (Q. 3:79)
wa-n-nubūʾata, (Q. 3:112) ‿l-anbiʾāʾa, and (Q. 3:68) ‿n-nabīʾu. The only two cases
in which N did not articulate the hamza of words constituting n-b-ʾ roots were
(Q. 33:50) li-n-nabiyyi in arāda and (Q. 33:53) ‿n-nabiyyi illā. Ibn Mujāhid justi-
fied these two exceptions by the fact that the hamza of al-nabīʾi was followed
directly by another hamza with a similar vocalization, kasra. This transmis-
sion was attributed to Qālūn and al-Musayyabī. On the other hand, Warsh
did articulate the hamza in both of these examples, but he softened the sec-
ond hamza and made up for its loss with a prolonged/lengthened vowel, e.g.,
li-n-nabīʾi in arāda → li-n-nabīʾī‿na‿rāda and ‿n-nabīʾi illā → ‿n-nabīʾī‿llā. The
other Readers did not articulate the hamza in all these cases, e.g., ‿n-nabiyyīna,
wa-n-nubuwwata, ‿l-anbiyāʾa, and ‿n-nabiyyu.
1.3.7 Lengthening and Shortening of Long Vowels Preceding hamza

(al-madd wa-l-qaṣr)
This principle is concerned with lengthening and shortening the long vowels
that are followed directly by hamza. As is often the case, Ibn Mujāhid intro-
duced the concept of madd and qaṣr with the first variant associated with this
phenomenon, namely, (Q. 2:4) bi-mā unzila … wa-mā unzila. Ibn Mujāhid’s
discussion of madd and qaṣr is simple and short compared to the detailed
discussions one encounters in the later Qirāʾāt tradition, particularly in works
such as that of Ibn al-Jazarī (where seven different levels or grades of madd
79 Ibid., 157–158.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

208 CHAPTER 5
were delineated, each of which had a distinct duration of vowel lengthening).80

Moreover, today we are mostly familiar with the fully standardized rules of
tajwīd, which assign rigid numerical values to the duration of long vowels
(ḥaraka, beat) preceding a hamza.81 On the other hand, Ibn Mujāhid’s ac-
count of madd and qaṣr was rather rudimentary and descriptive.
– N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī, IK and AA did not lengthen the long vowels that
immediately preceded a hamza beyond their original duration. The long
vowels yāʾ, wāw, and alif were given their standard value and duration with-
out additional lengthening. This rule applied when the long vowel stood in
the terminal position of one word and the hamza occupied the initial posi-
tion of the next word, e.g., (Q. 51:21) wa-fī anfusikum, (Q. 2:4) bi-mā unzila …
wa-mā unzila, (Q. 2:14) qālū āmannā, and (Q. 2:190) taʿtadū inna.
– On the other hand, when the long vowel immediately preceded a hamza
in the same word, N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī, IK and AA lengthened the long
vowels halfway between madd and qaṣr. Note again that the technical defi-
nition of qaṣr is to give the long vowel its normal value without additional
lengthening, whereas madd is to extend this normal duration by a designat-
ed value that varied according to each Reader’s principles and techniques.
Thus, since I am already representing a regular alif by [ā], in the following
examples [ā] would represent the alif in qaṣr mode, [ā̄‌] would be an alif
in full madd mode, and [ā̇] would be alif in partial madd mode, i.e. a value
that falls in between madd and qaṣr. The same is true for ū and ī. Compare
in each of the following examples (refer to the audio recordings) the par-
tial madd of the long vowels with the full madd, which will be discussed
shortly: (Q. 2:22) ‿s-samā̇‌ʾi mā̇‌ʾan vs. ‿s-samā̄‌ʾi mā̄‌ʾan, (Q. 13:17) jufā̇‌ʾan vs.
jufā̄‌ʾan, (Q. 23:41) ghuthā̇‌ʾan vs. ghuthā̄‌ʾan, (Q. 67:27) sī�ʾat
̇ vs. sī�ʾat,
̄ (Q. 39:69)
wa-jī�ʾa ̄ (Q. 28:76) la-tanū̇ʾu vs. la-tanu̿ ʾu, (Q. 5:29) tabū̇ʾa vs. tabu̿ ʾa,
̇ vs. wa-jī�ʾa,
(Q. 30:10) wa-s-sū̇ʾā vs. wa-s-su̿ ʾā, and (Q. 2:20) aḍā̇‌ʾa vs. aḍā̄‌ʾa.
– Note that when N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī, IK and AA applied madd, they did
not accentuate the articulation of the hamza that followed (lā yahmiz ham-
zan shadīdan). Moreover, they did not pause at the long vowels after which
they articulated the hamza; they articulated the hamza immediately after
applying madd without pausing.
– ʿĀṣim: amongst the transmitters of A → Shuʿba, only al-Aʿshā did not distin-
guish between the different grades of madd. He lengthened the long vowels
equally whether the long vowel and the hamza belonged to the same word or
80 Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 1:321–6.

81 ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Qāḍī, al-Wāfī fī sharḥ al-Shāṭibiyya fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ (Jedda: Maktabat
al-Sawādī li-l-tawzīʿ, 1999), 73–4; Naṣr, tajwīd, 96–9.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

to two different words (yumidd maddan wāḥidan fī kull al-ḥurūf lā yufaḍḍil

ḥarfan ʿalā ḥarf fī madd). Al-Aʿshā’s madd was complete/full (mushbaʿ), after
which he would pause and then articulate the hamza, e.g., bi-mā̄｡ unzila.
This practice was reported by A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā → al-Shammūnī → Abū
Muḥammad al-Qāsim b. Aḥmad al-Khayyāṭ al-Kūfī → al-Ḥasan al-Jammāl
b. Abī Mihrān al-Rāzī → IM (Ibn Mujāhid).82 This practice of pausing at the
madd, after which one articulates the hamza, no longer exists.83 Al-Dānī
described al-Aʿshā’s madd to be long (ṭawīl) and the pause to be long and
abrupt (yaqṭaʿ qaṭʿan shadīdan) whether the long vowel and the hamza be-
longed to the same word (muttaṣil) or to two different words (munfaṣil).84
– A → Shuʿba → ʿAbd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-ʿIjlī lengthened the long vowels preced-
ing hamza for their standard value plus an extra duration of lengthening
(yumidd ḥarfan bi-ḥarf). A → [al-Qāḍī] Sharīk [b. ʿAbd Allāh] → Minjāb b.
al-Ḥārith → Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad al-Firyābī85 → IM and [A → Shuʿba →] ʿAbd
Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-ʿIjlī → al-Ḥulwānī → al-Jammāl → IM reported that ʿĀṣim per-
formed full madd and strongly accentuated the articulation of the hamza
(ṣāḥib hamz wa-madd wa-qirāʾa shadīda).
– H adopted a more elaborate system of madd. He was more discerning with
the various grades of madd, whose duration was contingent upon the short
vowel with which the hamza was vocalized. [H →] Sulaym → Khalaf stated
that the longest madd H applied was when an alif preceded two consecutive
hamzas both vocalized with fatḥa, e.g., (Q. 7:47) tilqā̄‌ʾa aṣḥābi, (Q. 23:99)
jā̄‌ʾa aḥadahum. The same rule applied even when an alif preceded only
one hamza, e.g., (Q. 2:21) yā̄-ayyuhā. A lower grade of madd was observed
when the hamza was vocalized with kasra, e.g., (Q. 2:114) khā͏̇ ʾ‌ifīna, (Q. 2:31)
wa-l-malā̇͏‌ʾikati, and (Q. 2:40) yā-banī�̇ Isrā͏̇ ʾ‌īla. The lowest grade of madd was
applied in instances such as (Q. 2:5) ulāʾika.86
82 Ibn Mujāhid mentioned a similar isnād with the exception of bypassing Ibn Abī Mihrān
through a direct written transmission from Abū Muḥammad al-Khayyāṭ: A → Shuʿba →
al-Aʿshā → al-Shammūnī → Abū Muḥammad al-Qāsim b. Aḥmad al-Khayyāṭ al-Kūfī → IM.
83 According to al-Dānī, some transmitters from Ḥamza, A → Ḥafṣ → al-Ushnānī, and K →
Qutayba [b. Mihrān] seem to have followed this practice; Dānī, Jāmiʿ, 1:442.
84 Ibid., 1:451.
85 Al-Sabʿa has Abū Jaʿfar; Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 135; cf. Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348),
Siyar aʿlām al-nubalāʾ, ed. Bashshār ʿAwwād Maʿrūf, 25 vols. (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla,
1985), 14:96–7.
86 Ibn al-Jazarī objected to this example of a third type of madd, saying that no profession-
al reciter in his time, or even in the past, applied this kind of madd, for it defied logic
and common sense. There ought to be no difference in the madd between ulāʾika and
khāʾifīna. Moreover, the “mutawātir” transmission of Qirāʾāt was unaware of such a prac-
tice; Ibn al-Jazarī, Nashr, 1:317.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

210 CHAPTER 5
– H → Sulaym → Khallād did not distinguish between these various grades

of vowel lengthening and asserted that madd was altogether of one kind
(al-madd kulluhu wāḥid). Sulaym reported on behalf of H that one did not
need to pause after madd in preparation for the articulation of hamza, since
madd substitutes for the pause and fulfils its phonetic purpose (al-madd
yujziʾ ʿan al-sakt).
– K and IA consistently applied partial madd, a grade which was in between
madd and qaṣr. They also did not pause after the long vowel in preparation
to articulate the hamza that follows.
1.3.8 Two Consecutive hamzas in One Word (al-hamzatān

al-mujtamiʿatān fī kalima)87
The discussion of this principle was triggered by the disagreement of the
Readers on (Q. 2:6) a-andhartahum, where two hamzas followed one another
in the same word.
1) N and IK88 read ȧ-ºandhartahum, a prolonged hamza followed by an-
other one which was softened. I use the symbol [ȧ] to denote a prolonged
hamza, whose duration is longer than a short vowel [a] but shorter than
a long vowel [ā]. Also, the symbol [º] signifies a softened hamza, which
is different from hamzat al-waṣl that completely disappears in pronun-
ciation. A softened hamza maintains a faint vowel-like presence. Other
examples include (Q. 5:116) ȧ-ºanta, (Q. 27:60) ȧ-ºilāhun, (Q. 6:19) and
(Q. 41:9) ȧ-ºinnakum.
2) N’s transmitters disagreed on the duration of the prolonged hamza and
whether or not it reached the value of a full alif. N → Abū Qurra, N →
al-Musayyabī → Khalaf, and N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān asserted that
the hamza in these cases was sufficiently prolonged and lengthened (yas-
tafhimuhu jiddan, inna istifhāmahu kullahu kāna bi-l-madd). On the other
hand, Warsh reported that N did not articulate a full alif in between the
two hamzas.
3) If the two hamzas were vocalized differently, N → al-Aṣmaʿī, N →
al-Musayyabī → Khalaf, N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān, and N → Khārija →
ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl prolonged the hamza with ample lengthening of the alif
(kull istifhām bi-l-madd), e.g., ā-ºidhā, ā-ºilāhun, ā-ºinnā and ā-ºinnakum.
On the other hand, N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī, N → Qālūn
→ Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ, N → Qālūn → Ismāʿīl al-Qāḍī did not lengthen the
alif, thus reading ȧ-ºidhā, ȧ-ºilāhun, ȧ-ºinnā, ȧ-ºinnakum, and (Q. 3:15)

88 After al-Taysīr, IK’s reading became closer to a-ºandhartahum.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

ȧ-ºunabbiʾukum. The way to pronounce these two consecutive hamzas is

described as follows: one begins with a fatḥa-vocalized hamza followed
by kasra (ȧ-ºi) or one begins with a fatḥa-vocalized hamza followed by
ḍamma (ȧ-ºu), both pronounced in a single syllable (bi-nabira wāḥida).
N → Warsh described the second hamza to be a softened yāʾ-like or
wāw-like vowel, similar in pronunciation to a-yidhā and a-wunabbiʾukum
(refer to the audio index for exact pronunciation).
4) There were reported disagreements over the proper reading of (Q. 9:12)
a‌ʾimmata, which will be mentioned under the section of farsh al-ḥurūf.89
5) AA’s technique was similar to that of N’s, but he prolonged the hamza
longer than N and IK did, reaching the value of a full alif, i.e., reading
ā-ºandhartahum, ā-ºanta, ā-ºilāhun, and ā-ºinnakum.
6) Disagreements were reported on behalf of AA in three cases. AA → ʿAbbās
b. al-Faḍl, AA → al-Yazīdī → Ibn Saʿdān, and AA → al-Yazīdī → Ibn al-Yazīdī
reported that AA articulated a full alif between the two hamzas in (Q. 3:15)
ā-ºunabbiʾukum, (Q. 54:25) ā-ºulqiya, and (Q. 38:8) ā-ºunzila. However,
AA → al-Yazīdī asserted that AA did not perform madd but rather read
ȧ-ºunabbiʾukum, ȧ-ºulqiya, and ȧ-ºunzila.
7) A and H articulated both hamzas throughout the Qurʾān, e.g., a-
andhartahum, a-anta, a-ilāhun, a-innakum, a-unabbiʾukum, a-ulqiya, and
a-unzila.
8) K had two transmissions (riwāya) attributed to him. The first of which was
similar to N and IK, wherein he softened the second hamza. The second
riwāya was similar to A and H, wherein both hamzas were articulated.
9) IA articulated both hamzas, similar to A and H. This was confirmed by
the transmissions of IA → Ibn Dhakwān and IA → Hishām b. ʿAmmār →
Abū l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Bakr → IM, e.g., a-andhartahum,
and (Q. 13:5) a-idhā … a-innā.
1.3.9 Consecutive hamza-interrogatives90

When two hamza-interrogative clauses followed one another, Readers adopted
different practices as far as the articulation of the interrogative hamza, particu-
larly the second one in the second clause.
– IK, AA, A → Shuʿba and H retained both interrogative hamzas despite dis-
agreeing on how to articulate the second. A → Shuʿba and H articulated both
hamzas, e.g., (Q. 7:80,1) wa-Lūṭan idh qāla li-qawmihi a-ta‌ʾtūna l-fāḥishata …
a-innakum la-ta‌ʾtūna and (Q. 13:5) a-idhā kunnā turāban a-innā la-fī

90 Ibid., 285.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

212 CHAPTER 5
khalqin jadīd. On the other hand, IK and AA articulated the first hamza and
softened the second, e.g., (Q. 7:80,1) wa-Lūṭan idh qāla li-qawmihi a-ta‌ʾtūna
l-fāḥishata … ȧ-ºinnakum la-ta‌ʾtūna and (Q. 13:5) a-idhā kunnā turāban
ȧ-ºinnā la-fī khalqin jadīd.
– N ad K acknowledged the first interrogative only, e.g., a-idhā kunnā turāban
innā la-fī khalqin jadīd, (Q. 37:16) and (Q. 56:47) a-idhā mitnā wa-kunnā
turāban … innā la-mabʿūthūna. Whereas K articulated both hamzas (of the
first clause), N articulated one only and compensated for the loss of the sec-
ond one by a lengthened vowel, e.g., ȧ-ºidhā instead of a-idhā.
– K disagreed with N in some verses. In the story of Lūṭ in the Qurʾān, K ac-
knowledged and retained both interrogatives, e.g., (Q. 7:80,1) wa-Lūṭan
idh qāla li-qawmihi a-ta‌ʾtūna l-fāḥishata … a-innakum la-ta‌ʾtūna and
(Q. 29:28,9) a-innakum la-ta‌ʾtūna l-fāḥishata … a-innakum la-ta‌ʾtūna
r-rijāla. On the other hand, N read wa-Lūṭan idh qāla li-qawmihi a-ta‌ʾtūna
l-fāḥishata … innakum la-ta‌ʾtūna and innakum la-ta‌ʾtūna l-fāḥishata … a-
innakum la-ta‌ʾtūna r-rijāla (by articulating the second hamza-interrogative
and dropping the first one).
– K and N disagreed in (Q. 27:67). N read idhā kunnā turāban wa-ābāʾunā
a-innā la-mukhrajūna while K read a-idhā kunnā turāban wa-ābāʾunā
innanā la-mukhrajūna.
– A → Ḥafṣ read like N in (Q. 7:80,81) and (Q. 29:28–9).
– IA read contrary to how K and N read the aforementioned verses. IA did
not acknowledge the first interrogative and articulated both hamzas of the
second interrogative clause, except in two cases: (Q. 56:47) a-idhā mutnā
wa-kunnā turāban … a-innā and (Q. 79:10) a-innā la-mardūdūna fī l-ḥāfira …
idhā kunnā ʿiẓāman nakhira.
– IA read (Q. 27:67) wa-qāla ‿lladhīna kafarū a-idhā kunnā turāban wa-ābāʾunā
innanā la-mukhrajūna, just like the reading of K.
1.3.10 Two Consecutive hamzas in Two Words (al-hamzatān

al-mutalāṣiqatān fī kalimatayn)
Readers demonstrated different techniques of recitation when two hamzas
followed one another each in separate words, e.g., (Q. 46:32) awliyāʾu ulāʾika.
Several disagreements were recorded on behalf of the Readers on the prop-
er way of reciting this combination of consecutive hamzas, as well as some
uncertainty related to traditions and techniques of recitation which were
no longer practiced. Indeed, there existed several transmissions attributed
to the same Reader and the same rāwī, but they often delineated contradic-
tory conventions concerning the accurate articulation of consecutive hamza-
combinations in two separate words.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

1) N: When both hamzas were vocalized with ḍamma, N softened the first
hamza to become wāw-like and articulated the second, e.g., (Q. 46:32)
awliyāºu ulāʾika. Similarly, if both hamzas were vocalized with kasra, he
softened the first hamza to become yāʾ-like and articulated the second,
e.g., (Q. 2:31) hāʾulāºi in.
2) N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf, N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī, and
N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī accentuated the softened wāw-like and yāʾ-like
hamzas to become full wāw vocalized with ḍamma and full yāʾ vocal-
ized with kasra, e.g., awliyāwu ulāʾika and hāʾulāyi in. Ibn Mujāhid cast
his doubts on the plausibility of this recitation and said that it was more
difficult to pronounce than articulating both hamzas; his principle being
that one should not avoid a challenging pronunciation of a word by re-
sorting to a more challenging way of pronouncing it.
3) Ibn Mujāhid described a third technique he observed from one/some re-
citers where the second hamza was softened, but the ensuing ḍamma-like
or kasra-like vowel was slurred/concealed without being fully vocalized.
Based on the aforementioned examples, this technique of recitation
could be transliterated as awliyāºu ulāʾika and hāʾulāºi in, where the su-
perscripts [u] and [i] stand for the slurred or concealed values of ḍamma
and kasra. Ibn Mujāhid preferred this technique over those described in
(1) and (2).
4) If both hamzas were vocalized with fatḥa, N eliminated the first hamza
completely and articulated the second while lengthening its fatḥa to
reach the value of alif, e.g., (Q. 23:99) jāʾa aḥadahum → jā āḥadahum. This
is quite similar to item (8) below.
5) Al-Ḥulwānī reported that during one audition with Qālūn he read
(Q. 80:22) shā ānsharah (shāʾa ansharah) and (Q. 6:61) jā āḥadakum ( jāʾa
aḥadakum), by applying madd on the alif of ansharah and aḥadakum.
Qālūn authorized his reading. In another audition, al-Ḥulwānī stated that
he read shā ansharah and jā aḥadakum, in line with the Reading of AA.
Qālūn authorized this reading as well.
6) If the two hamzas were vocalized differently, N → Qālūn articulated the
first hamza and softened the second, e.g., (Q. 2:13) ‿s-sufahāʾu ºalā and
(Q. 67:16) ‿s-samāʾi ºan.
7) N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ articulated both hamzas, whether their vow-
els were similar or dissimilar, e.g., ‿s-sufahāʾu alā, ‿s-samāʾi an, shāʾa an-
sharah, and awliyāʾu ulāʾika.
8) Whether the two hamzas were vocalized similarly or differently, N →
Warsh articulated the first hamza, lengthened its vowel, and eliminated
the second one, e.g., (Q. 2:31) hāʾulāʾi in → hāʾulāʾī ‿n, (Q. 24:33) ‿l-bighāʾi
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

214 CHAPTER 5
in → ‿l-bighāʾī ‿n, and (Q. 46:32) awliyāʾu ulāʾika → awliyāʾū ‿lāʾika. This
was more or less similar to item (4) above.
9) IK’s technique was similar to that of N → Warsh described in (8). Qunbul
→ Ibn Mujāhid reported on behalf of al-Qawwās that it was inconsequen-
tial which of the two hamzas one articulated and softened so long as both
of them were not articulated.
10) A, H, K, and IA consistently articulated both hamzas whether both be-
longed to one word or two different words.
11) AA: when the two hamzas were vocalized with the same vowel, AA elimi-
nated the first hamza and articulated the second, e.g., hāʾulā in, awliyā
ulāʾika, and jā amrunā. The hamza was completely dropped without a
trace, that is, it was not softened.
12) AA → Shujāʿ b. Abī Naṣr → Abū ʿUbayd maintained that AA softened
one of the hamzas and transformed it to a yāʾ-like, wāw-like, or alif-like
vowel, e.g., hāʾulāºi in, awliyāºu ulāʾika, and jāºa amrunā. Ibn Mujāhid
commented by saying that the recognized practice of AA was the one
described above in (11).
1.3.11 The Passive of Hollow (Second-Weak) Verbs

This principle concerns the vocalization of the first radical ( fāʾ al-fiʿl) of
hollow/2nd weak verbs, such as qāla (qīla), jāʾa ( jīʾa).
– K and IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī vocalized the first radical with ḍamma be-
fore articulating a long vowel yāʾ. More accurately, the first radical was given
a ḍamma-like sound before pronouncing the yāʾ. For example, qīla was pro-
nounced quīla, a diphthong-like combination of u and ī. Other examples
include (Q. 11:44) ghuīḍa, (Q. 11:77), (Q. 29:33) suīʾa, (Q. 67:27) suīʾat, (Q. 34:54)
ḥuīla, (Q. 39:71,73) suīqa, (Q. 39:69) and (Q. 89:23) wa-juīʾa.
– N and IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl followed the same practice but only in
two instances, suīʾa and suīʾat.
– Similarly, IA → Ibn Dhakwān read suīqa, suīʾa, suīʾat, and ḥuīla, but only in
these four cases.
– IK, A, AA, and H did not introduce this ḍamma-like sound before the yāʾ and
read all these cases with pure long vowel yāʾ, e.g., qīla, ghīḍa, sīʾa, sīʾat, ḥīla,
sīqa, wa-jīʾa.
1.3.12 Al-fatḥ wa-l-imāla (a>e Shift)

The main discussion on imāla came in an independent section (dhikr al-fatḥ
wa-l-imāla) right after recording the variants of (Q. 2:16) bi-l-hudā. The major-
ity of the discussion investigated words whose alif was written as yāʾ according
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

to the ʿUthmānic rasm. In later Qirāʾāt literature this principle came to be

known as imālat dhawāt al-yāʾ. Dhawāt al-yāʾ are those words with a yāʾ radi-
cal, whereas dhawāt al-wāw have a wāw radical instead.
1) Ḥamza: H read (Q. 2:10) fa-zēdahumu in addition to shēʾa, jēʾa, khēba, ṭēba,
ḍēqa, khēfa, and ḥēqa. He also read (Q. 61:5) zēghū and (Q. 83:14) rēna, but
he read (Q. 33:10) zāghat, (Q. 61:5) azāgha, and (Q. 19:23) fa-ajāʾahā.
2) Ibn ʿĀmir: IA applied imāla to fa-zēdahumu, shēʾa, and jēʾa only.
3) Nāfiʿ: N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf, N → Ibn Jammāz, and N → Ismāʿīl b.
Jaʿfar read fa-zǣdahumu. All words similar to zāda (shāʾa, jāʾa, etc.) were
read with a value in between imāla and fatḥ [ǣ] (yushimm al-zāy al-iḍjāʿ).
On the other hand, N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān did not perform imāla
in any of these cases. Ibn Saʿdān reported that when al-Musayyabī used to
enunciate these words, one could hear a faint trace of imāla (ka-annahu
yushīr ilā l-kasr qalīlan). When al-Musayyabī was told of this, he denied it
and affirmed that all these words ought to be read in with fatḥ (without
imāla).
4) N → Ibn Jammāz performed imāla in (Q. 20:61) khēba. This transmission
was supported by N → Khārija → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl → Abū Mūsā l-Harawī →
ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal → IM.
5) N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf and N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān read
(Q. 83:14) rǣna, between imāla and fatḥ. However, N → al-Musayyabī →
Ibn al-Musayyabī read rāna.
6) ʿĀṣim: A did not perform imāla in any of the aforementioned examples,
except for rēna through A → Shuʿba. A → Ḥafṣ read rāna.
7) Al-Kisāʾī: K’s performance of imāla in the instances above was similar to
A’s, including the example of rēna. K → Abū ʿUbayd read shǣʾa and jǣʾa,
i.e., in between imāla and fatḥ. Nevertheless, other transmitters from K,
including K → Nuṣayr b. Yūsuf, read shāʾa and jāʾa with full fatḥ.
8) AA and IK did not perform imāla in any of these instances.91
Another brief mention of imāla was connected to the variants of (Q. 2:15)
ṭughyānihim and (Q. 2:19) ādhānihim, where K → al-Dūrī and K → Nuṣayr b.
Yūsuf al-Naḥwī performed imāla and read ṭughyēnihim and ādhēnihim. On the
other hand, K → Abū l-Ḥārith and other transmitters from K did not perform
imāla in either of these cases. The same held true for the other six Readers.92
91 Ibid., 141–3.
92 Ibid., 144.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

216 CHAPTER 5
1.3.12.1 Imālat dhawāt al-yāʾ

– N → Qālūn93 and N → Warsh performed imāla partially, i.e., the value was
between full fatḥ and full imāla, thus reading (Q. 2:16) bi-l-hudǣ. Other ex-
amples included (Q. 4:135) ‿l-hawǣ, (Q. 41:17) ‿l-ʿamǣ, (Q. 2:29) ‿stawǣ, and
(Q. 53:34) wa-aʿṭǣ … wa-akdǣ, Yaḥyǣ, Mūsǣ, ʿĪsǣ, ‿l-unthǣ, li-l-yusrǣ, li-l-
ʿusrǣ, ra‌ʾǣ, and na‌ʾǣ.
– IK and N → al-Musayyabī did not perform imāla but rather read in full fatḥ
mode.
– AA: if the word under consideration for imāla was located at the end of a
verse (ruʾūs al-āy) AA applied partial imāla, e.g., the verse endings of Ṭā-hā,
al-najm, ʿabasa, and al-ḍuḥā such as (Q. 20:2) li-tashqǣ, (Q. 53:1) hawǣ,
(Q. 80:1) wa-tawallǣ, (Q. 93:1) wa-ḍ-ḍuḥǣ, (Q. 91:1) wa-ḍuḥǣhā, and (Q. 91:6)
ṭaḥǣhā.
– If the word in question was not a verse ending, AA read in full fatḥ mode,
e.g., (Q. 2:16) bi-l-hudā, (Q. 6:2) qaḍā, (Q. 2:29) ‿stawā, (Q. 2:232) azkā, and
(Q. 2:29) fa-sawwāhunna … aḥyā.
– If the word was a feminine substantive on the pattern of fiʿlā, fuʿlā, or faʿlā,
AA applied partial imāla, e.g., (Q. 6:68) ‿dh-dhikrǣ, (Q. 53:22) ḍīzǣ, (Q. 2:85)
‿d-dunyǣ, (Q. 87:8), li-l-yusrǣ, and (Q. 20:53) shattǣ.
– When the consonant rāʾ was followed by hamza which in turn was followed
immediately by yāʾ (alif maqṣūra), AA vocalized the rāʾ with fatḥa and per-
formed imāla, e.g. (Q. 6:76) ra‌ʾē kawkaban and (Q. 11:70) ra‌ʾē aydiyahum.
– When the consonant rāʾ was followed immediately by yāʾ (alif maqṣūra),
AA performed imāla so long as the word in question was not followed by
hamzat waṣl, e.g., (Q. 69:8) tarē lahum, (Q. 5:18) wa-n-naṣārē naḥnu, and
(Q. 20:46) wa-arē.
– However, if the yāʾ (alif maqṣūra) was followed immediately by hamzat
al-waṣl, causing the alif/yāʾ to be dropped, AA did not perform imāla, e.g.,
(Q. 2:55) narā ‿llāha, (Q. 9:30) wa-n-naṣārā ‿l-masīḥu, and (Q. 39:60) tarā
‿lladhīna.
– It was reported that AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl and AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith did
perform imāla, even when the alif/yāʾ dropped due to hamzat al-waṣl. Ibn
Mujāhid emphasized that the well-known practice of AA was to not apply
imāla in these cases.
– A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam performed imāla only in ra‌ʾē, (Q. 8:17) ramē,
ra‌ʾēhu, (Q. 17:72) aʿmē, and (Q. 17:83) na‌ʾē, but he read na‌ʾā in (Q. 41:51). As for
ra‌ʾā, if it was followed by hamzat al-waṣl, A → Shuʿba performed imāla on
the rāʾ and fatḥ on the hamza, e.g., (Q. 6:77) reʾā ‿l-qamara and (Q. 6:78) reʾā
‿sh-shamsa.
93 Qālūn’s reading after al-Taysīr and al-Shāṭibiyya has been in full fatḥ mode.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

– A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf performed imāla on both the rāʾ and
the hamza, thus reading reʾē ‿l-qamara, reʾē ‿sh-shamsa, and (Q. 16:85) reʾē
‿lladhīna.
– A → Ḥafṣ did not perform imāla except in (Q. 11:41) majrāhā, which he read
as majrēhā.
– H performed imāla in words whose alif was originally a yāʾ radical, e.g.,
(Q. 92:5) aʿṭē wa‿ttaqē and ‿stawē. He also performed imāla on proper nouns
such as ʿĪsē, Mūsē, and Yaḥyē.
– For particular words such as aḥyā and aḥyākum, if they were not preceded
by wāw, H did not perform imāla. For example, he read (Q. 53:44) wa-aḥyē
but read (Q. 5:32) wa-man aḥyāhā fa-ka-annamā aḥyā, without imāla.
– H did not perform imāla in words whose alif was originally a wāw radical
(dhawāt al-wāw), e.g., (Q. 93:2) sajā, (Q. 79:30) daḥāhā, (Q. 91:6) ṭaḥāhā, and
(Q. 91:2) talāhā. However, if alif/hamza was prefixed to the word, H did per-
form imāla, e.g., (Q. 24:30) azkē and (Q. 53:7) ‿l-aʿlē.
– K performed imāla in all the aforementioned cases, including aḥyā and
aḥyākum even when not preceded by wāw, and including dhawāt al-wāw so
long as they coexisted with dhawāt al-yāʾ in the same sūra. Thus, K read sajē,
daḥēhā, ṭaḥēhā, and talēhā.
– Both H and K agreed to not perform imāla in (Q. 53:8) danā, (Q. 24:21) zakā,
(Q. 3:38) daʿā, and (Q. 2:187) wa-ʿafā.
– IA did not perform imāla in any of the aforementioned cases.
– AA, K → al-Dūrī, and K → Nuṣayr b. Yūsuf performed imāla in (Q. 2:89)
‿l-kēfirīna and throughout the Qurʾān so long as it was in plural form and in
the accusative or genitive cases. However, if it was in the singular form or a
plural in the nominative case, imāla was not performed, e.g., (Q. 2:41) kāfirin
and (Q. 109:1) ‿l-kāfirūna.
1.3.12.2 Imālat dhawāt al-rāʾ

The discussion of imāla here concerned nouns that had a long vowel alif fol-
lowed by a kasra-vocalized rāʾ (-āri → -ēri) that was the third radical of the word
(lām al-fiʿl). I borrowed the term dhawāt al-rāʾ from the later Qirāʾāt tradition.
– Similar to what has been discussed earlier, N performed partial imāla,
e.g., (Q. 2:39) aṣḥābu ‿n-nāri → aṣḥābu ‿n-nǣri, (Q. 14:26) min qarārin →
min qarǣrin, (Q. 3:193) maʿa ‿l-abrāri → maʿa ‿l-abrǣri (maʿa ‿la‿brǣri94),
(Q. 38:62) mina ‿l-ashrāri → mina ‿l-ashrǣri (mina ‿la‿shrǣri), (Q. 14:28)
dāra ‿l-bawāri → dāra ‿l-bawǣri, (Q. 3:13) li-ulī ‿l-abṣāri → li-ulī ‿l-abṣǣri
(li-ulī ‿la‿bṣǣri), (Q. 3:75) bi-qinṭārin → bi-qinṭǣrin, (Q. 3:75) bi-dīnārin
94 See below on naql ḥarakat al-hamza.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

218 CHAPTER 5
→ bi-dīnǣrin, (Q. 2:85) min diyārihim → min diyǣrihim, and (Q. 5:46) ʿalā
āthārihim → ʿalā āthǣrihim.
– IK, A, and IA did not perform imāla in any of these cases and always read in
fatḥ mode.
– There were disagreements on the reading of (Q. 9:109) shafā jurufin hārin,
which will be mentioned under the farsh section in the tabulated Data at
the end.
– K → al-Dūrī performed imāla whenever the alif was followed by a rāʾ vocal-
ized with kasra. However, K → Abū l-Ḥārith applied imāla only when the rāʾ
was repeated in the same word and the second rāʾ was vocalized with kasra,
e.g., mina ‿l-ashrēri, min qarērin, and maʿa ‿l-abrēri.
– H → Sulaym → Khalaf and H → Sulaym → Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī performed
partial imāla in mina ‿l-ashrǣri, (Q. 14:29) wa-biʾsa ‿l-qarǣri,95 (Q. 23:50)
dhāti qarǣrin, dāra ‿l-bawǣri, (Q. 14:48) and (Q. 40:16) ‿l-wāḥidi ‿l-qahhǣri
only.
– AA performed imāla on any alif followed by a kasra-vocalized rāʾ that was
the third radical of the noun, except for (Q. 4:36) wa-l-jāri and (Q. 5:22)
jabbārīna. Nevertheless, AA → Muʿādh → ʿUbayd Allāh b. Muʿādh did perform
imāla and read wa-l-jēri and jabbērīna. AA → al-Yazīdī did not perform imāla
in these two examples, but (Q. 38:28) ka-l-fujjēri, bi-qinṭērin, and (Q. 9:40) fī
‿l-ghēri were read with imāla.
– If the rāʾ was the second radical of the noun, AA did not perform imāla, e.g.,
(Q. 38:42) bāridun, (Q. 59:24) ‿l-bāriʾu, and (Q. 37:7) māridin.
– On behalf of AA, only Maḥbūb (Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan [al-Qawārīrī]),
ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl, and al-Aṣmaʿī transmitted (Q. 2:167) bi-khērijīna, with
imāla. Ibn Mujāhid commented that this transmission contradicted the ma-
jority of AA’s transmitters, who read this variant without performing imāla.
Ibn Mujāhid added that since Qirāʾāt could not be established by analogy
(qiyās), one should not perform imāla in (Q. 26:114) bi-ṭāridi and (Q. 9:60)
‿l-ghārimīna just because, by analogy, imāla was performed in fī ‿l-ghēri and
bi-khērijīna.
1.3.12.3 aḥyā
Performing imāla on this specific verb and its different conjugated forms was
mentioned separately under (Q. 2:28) fa-aḥyākum. The regulations of imāla
here are similar to those mentioned earlier. IK, IA, and A read in fatḥ mode
and did not perform imāla, e.g., fa-aḥyākum, (Q. 53:44) wa-aḥyā, (Q. 23:37)
wa-naḥyā, (Q. 8:42) wa-yaḥyā, (Q. 16:65) fa-aḥyā, and (Q. 22:66) aḥyākum.
95 Imāla was not performed here according to the later Qirāʾāt tradition.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

N performed partial imāla and read fa-aḥyǣkum, wa-aḥyǣ, wa-naḥyǣ,

wa-yaḥyǣ, fa-aḥyǣ, and aḥyǣkum. AA only performed partial imāla when
the word was a verse ending that ought to rhyme with the other verse end-
ings in the same sūra, e.g., (Q. 53:44) wa-aḥyǣ, (Q. 20:74) and (Q. 87:13) yaḥyǣ.
H performed imāla so long as the verb was prefixed to a wāw, e.g., wa-naḥyē,
wa-aḥyē, and wa-yaḥyē. As for K, he performed imāla regardless whether or not
the verb was preceded by wāw, e.g., aḥyēkum.
1.3.13 The Sakt (Pause) of Ḥamza96

This principle was specific to Ḥamza only. When a hamza was preceded by
an unvocalized consonant, H paused shortly at the consonant after which he
articulated the hamza, e.g., (Q. 2:20) shayʾin → shay｡ʾin, (Q. 2:22) lakumu ‿l-arḍa
→ lakumu ‿l｡arḍa, (Q. 2:31) Ādama ‿l-asmāʾa → Ādama ‿l｡asmāʾa, and (Q. 2:94)
‿d-dāru ‿l-ākhiratu → ‿d-dāru ‿l｡ākhiratu.
1.3.14 Naql ḥarakat al-hamza

This technique was particular to N → Warsh.97 In principle, Warsh would drop
the hamza but transfer its original vowel to the unvocalized consonant preced-
ing it, e.g., lakumu ‿l-arḍa → lakumu ‿la‿rḍa (lakumu larḍa), Ādama ‿l-asmāʾa
→ Ādama ‿la‿smāʾa, ‿d-dāru ‿l-ākhiratu → ‿d-dāru ‿lā‿khiratu, (Q. 23:1) qad
aflaḥa → qada‿flaḥa, and (Q. 28:71) man ilāhun → mani‿lāhun. This held so
long as the unvocalized letter preceding the hamza was neither a long vowel
wāw nor a long vowel yāʾ, e.g., (Q. 46:29) qālū anṣitū and (Q. 2:235) wa-fī anfusi-
kum. However, if the wāw or yāʾ were unvocalized consonants, Warsh would
still apply his technique of naql ḥarakat al-hamza, e.g., (Q. 2:14) khalaw ilā
→ khalawi‿lā and (Q. 5:27) ‿bnay Ādama → ‿bnayā‿dama. This principle was
mentioned again under the entries of (Q. 10:51) and (Q. 10:91) a-al-āna where N
→ Warsh read ālā‿na. The different readings of this variant will be listed under
the farsh section.98
1.3.15 The Subject Pronouns: huwa and hiya

When the subject pronouns huwa or hiya were preceded by wāw, fāʾ, lām,
or thumma, Readers disagreed on how to vocalize the hāʾ of the pronoun.
IK, A, IA, and H vocalized the hāʾ of huwa with ḍamma and the hāʾ of hiya

97 It was also attributed to Ḥamza in some transmissions and variants; Abū l-Qāsim Ibn
al-Qāṣiḥ (d. 801/1399), Sirāj al-qāriʾ al-mubtadī wa-tidhkār al-muqriʾ al-muntahī, ed. ʿAlī
Muḥammad al-Ḍabbāʿ (Cairo: Muṣṭafā al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī, 1954), 79.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

220 CHAPTER 5
with kasra, i.e., wa-huwa, fa-huwa, la-huwa, thumma huwa, wa-hiya, and fa-
hiya. K devocalized the hāʾ in all these cases and read wa-hwa, fa-hwa, la-hwa,
thumma hwa, wa-hya, and fa-hya. AA read huwa only in (Q. 28:61) thumma
huwa, otherwise he devocalized the hāʾ in all the other instances throughout
the Qurʾān. Disagreements were reported on behalf of N: N → Ibn Jammāz, N →
Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways, N → Warsh, and N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī
→ Muḥammad b. al-Faraj → IM reported that N read with tathqīl, i.e., he vocal-
ized the hāʾ with either ḍamma (huwa) or kasra (hiya). On the other hand, N →
Qālūn, N → Ismāʿīl b. Abī Uways, N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf, N → al-Musayyabī
→ Ibn Saʿdān, and N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUbayd reported that N read with
takhfīf, i.e., he devocalized the hāʾ in both huwa and hiya (wa-hwa, fa-hya, fa-
hwa, and so forth).
1.3.16 Yāʾāt al-iḍāfa

Yāʾ al-iḍāfa is the first-person pronominal suffix (-ī). The disagreement on how
to read this yāʾ was limited to reading it either as a long vowel yāʾ (-ī) or vocal-
izing it with fatḥa and reading (-iya). There existed some general guidelines
that each Reader followed in order to determine how to vocalize yāʾāt al-iḍāfa.
However, determining the appropriate reading in several cases was seemingly
random and did not follow discernible rules. Ibn Mujāhid introduced some
of these guidelines at the beginning of his book, but since many variants that
comprised yāʾāt al-iḍāfa seem to behave erratically, he decided to conclude
each sūra of the Qurʾān with a section entitled yāʾāt al-iḍāfa, under which he
listed all the yāʾāt the Readers disagreed on vocalizing. Thus, I included these
yāʾāt-variants under the farsh section at the end of each sūra. What follows
are Ibn Mujāhid’s observations concerning the general guidelines each Reader
tried to follow concerning yāʾāt al-iḍāfa.
– AA: When yāʾ al-iḍāfa was followed by a hamza vocalized with either fatḥa
or kasra, AA vocalized the yāʾ with fatḥa so long as the word was short and
did not consist of many letters (mā lam yaṭul al-ḥarf), e.g., (Q. 8:48) in-
niya arā and (Q. 10:72) ajriya illā. If the word comprising yāʾ al-iḍāfa was
long, AA removed the fatḥa, e.g., (Q. 9:49) taftinnī alā, (Q. 3:52) anṣārī ilā,99
(Q. 40:26) dharūnī aqtul, (Q. 15:36) fa-anẓirnī ilā, (Q. 2:152) fa‿dhkurūnī adh-
kurkum, (Q. 12:108) sabīlī adʿū, (Q. 12:100) ikhwatī inna, (Q. 7:143) arinī anẓur,
and (Q. 28:34) yuṣaddiqunī inniya akhāfu. Ibn Mujāhid emphasized that he
would list all the variants related to yāʾ al-iḍāfa at the end of each sūra to
minimize the confusion for those who were not familiar with the specifics
of AA’s Reading.
99 Only these four examples will be mentioned in the uṣūl audio index, since most of the
variants related to yāʾāt al-iḍāfa will be listed in the tabulated farsh section.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

– When yāʾ al-iḍāfa was followed by a hamza vocalized with ḍamma, AA re-
moved the fatḥa from the yāʾ, e.g., (Q. 7:156) ʿadhābī uṣību, (Q. 5:115) fa-innī
uʿadhdhibuhu, and (Q. 5:29) innī urīdu.
– When yāʾ al-iḍāfa was followed by hamzat al-waṣl, AA vocalized the yāʾ
with fatḥa regardless whether the word was short or long, e.g., (Q. 25:27)
yā-laytaniya ‿ttakhadhtu.
– Since IK was never systematic in his vocalization of yāʾ al-iḍāfa, the relevant
variants are listed individually under the farsh section.
– N vocalized yāʾ al-iḍāfa with fatḥa when it was followed by hamzat al-waṣl
or by regular hamza vocalized with fatḥa, kasra, or ḍamma except for
the following verses: (Q. 7:144) innī ‿ṣṭafaytuka, (Q. 20:31) akhī ‿shdud,
and yā-laytanī ‿ttakhadhtu. Nevertheless, N → Abū Khulayd transmitted
yā-laytaniya ‿ttakhadhtu. Other exceptions included fa‿dhkurūnī adhkur-
kum, fa-anẓirnī ilā, (Q. 19:43) fa‿ttabiʿnī ahdika, (Q. 27:19) and (Q. 46:15)
awziʿnī an, (Q. 40:26) dharūnī aqtul, (Q. 40:60) ‿dʿūnī astajib, taftinnī alā,
(Q. 11:47) tarḥamnī akun, arinī anẓur, yuṣaddiqunī innī, and (Q. 18:96) ātūnī
ufrigh. That being said, N’s transmitters reported disagreements in these
cases, which will be mentioned under the farsh section. N → Ibn Jammāz
and N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar reported other exceptions for (Q. 2:40) bi-ʿahdī ūfi,
(Q. 12:59) annī ūfī, (Q. 46:15) dhurriyyatī innī, (Q. 40:41) wa-tadʿūnanī ilā, and
(Q. 40:43) tadʿūnanī ilayhi.
1.3.17 Ikhtilās Abī ʿAmr

This controversial principle was limited to AA. Ikhtilās means vowel reduction
or elision. In some contexts, it is synonymous with taskīn, but grammarians
and linguists tried to differentiate between the two phenomena by saying that
taskīn was the complete omission of vowels whereas ikhtilās was reducing the
value of a vowel and slurring/concealing it to the point where the listener might
mistakenly assume the speaker was applying full taskīn; in fact, the speaker
retained an almost imperceptible trace of that slurred or reduced vowel. The
discussion of ikhtilās was triggered by (Q. 2:54) ilā bāriʾikum, where AA was
reported to have applied ikhtilās and read ilā bāriʾkum, by removing the kasra
from the hamza. One of the transmitters of AA, ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl, asked him
directly: “How do you articulate the hamza in ilā bāriʾikum? Do you vocalize it
with kasra (muthaqqala) or do you devocalize it (mukhaffafa)”? AA responded:
“I read ilā bāriʾkum; the hamza is articulated but unvocalized”. Ibn Mujāhid
cited Sībawayhi, who asserted that AA applied ikhtilās in bāriʾkum, (Q. 2:67)
ya‌ʾmurkum, and similar cases where vowels repeatedly followed one another
(mimmā tatawālā fīhi al-ḥarakāt). Sībawayhi continued, saying that AA cre-
ated the illusion that he was applying taskīn when in fact he was not. To dif-
ferentiate between ikhtilās and taskīn, I insert the reduced vowel in superscript
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

222 CHAPTER 5
format to signal its reduced, slurred value. Thus, ilā bāriʾkum represents taskīn
mode, while ilā bāriʾikum represents ikhtilās mode, where [i] stands for a re-
duced value of a kasra.
Even though some of AA’s transmitters did not apply ikhtilās, such as
al-Yazīdī and ʿAbd al-Wārith, Ibn Mujāhid considered the principle of ikhtilās
to be widely recognized as a signature technique that AA often employed in
his recitation. Other instances in which AA applied ikhtilās were as follows: AA
→ ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī → ʿUbayd Allāh b. ʿAlī l-Hāshimī → IM transmitted
(Q. 2:129) wa-yuʿallimuhumu ‿l-kitāba → wa-yuʿallimuhumu ‿l-kitāba, (Q. 2:159)
yalʿanuhumu ‿l-lāʿinūna → yalʿanuhumu ‿l-lāʿinūna, (Q. 4:102) ʿan asliḥatikum
wa-amtiʿatikum → ʿan asliḥatikum wa-amtiʿatikum. Additionally, AA → ʿUbayd
b. ʿAqīl → Ibrāhīm b. Saʿīd al-Zahrānī → Abū Ṭālib ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad b.
Sawāda → IM transmitted (Q. 2:151) wa-yuʿallimukum → wa-yuʿallimukum, and
(Q. 64:9) yajmaʿukum → yajmaʿukum. ʿAlī b. Naṣr, ʿAbd al-Wārith, al-Yazīdī,
and ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl reported that AA read (Q. 2:128) wa-arinā → wa-arinā,
(Q. 52:32) ta‌ʾmuruhum → ta‌ʾmuruhum, (Q. 7:157) ya‌ʾmuruhum → ya‌ʾmuruhum,
and (Q. 3:160) yanṣurukum → yanṣurukum. On the other hand, ʿAbd al-Wahhāb
b. ʿAṭāʾ and Hārūn al-Aʿwar transmitted wa-arnā, in full taskīn mode. Al-Yazīdī
claimed that in all the aforementioned examples, AA completely devocalized
the third radical of the verb (lām al-fiʿl), but ʿAlī b. Naṣr stated that AA read
(Q. 3:80) wa-lā ya‌ʾmurukum, with a full ḍamma on the rāʾ. Ibn Mujāhid con-
cluded the discussion by reemphasizing that AA was known for promoting
takhfīf (lightening, exerting less physical effort in articulating sounds) in his
recitation, such as softening the unvocalized hamza, dropping both hamzas
in a consecutive hamza-combination, and performing the major assimilation
(al-idghām al-kabīr).
1.3.18 (n-z-l)100
– N read yunazzil, tunazzil, and nunazzil (with shadda on the zāy) whenever
the verb was in the imperfect form prefixed to yāʾ, tāʾ, or nūn. If the verb was
in a participle form with a mīm prefix, N read it in the lightened form, mun-
zil, except in (Q. 5:115) munazziluhā. If the verb was in the perfect form with
a masculine subject and did not have a hamza prefix (i.e. afʿal form), N read
it in the lightened form, e.g., (Q. 26:193) nazala bihi and (Q. 57:16) wa-mā
nazala.
– IK read the imperfect verb form prefixed to yāʾ, tāʾ, or nūn in the lightened
form throughout the whole Qurʾān except in three verses: (Q. 15:21) wa-mā
100 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 164–166. These examples will not be mentioned in the uṣūl audio
index since they are all included under the tabulated farsh section.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

nunazziluhu, (Q. 17:82) wa-nunazzilu, and (Q. 17:93) tunazzila. IK read the
participles in their lightened form in (Q. 5:115) munziluhā, (Q. 6:114) munza-
lun, and (Q. 3:124) munzalīn. As for the perfect form of the verb, he read
(Q. 26:193) nazala bihi, but (Q. 57:16) wa-mā nazzala.
– AA read the imperfect form of the verb in the lightened form except
(Q. 6:37) yunazzila and (Q. 15:21) nunazziluhu. He also read the participles
in the lightened form, but he read the perfect form of the verb in the heavy,
geminated mode except (Q. 26:193) nazala bihi.
– A → Shuʿba, A → Ḥafṣ, and IA read in the geminated mode throughout the
Qurʾān regardless whether the verb was in the perfect, imperfect, or parti-
ciple forms. Nevertheless, A → Ḥafṣ read (Q. 26:193) nazala bihi and (Q. 57:16)
wa-mā nazala in the lightened form.
– Similarly, H and K read in the geminated mode throughout the Qurʾān ex-
cept for (Q. 31:34) wa-yunzilu and (Q. 42:28) yunzilu. They also read the par-
ticiples in the lightened form, e.g., munziluhā, munzilūna, and munzilīna
throughout the Qurʾān.
1.3.19 al-rīḥ vs. al-riyāḥ101

– IK read the plural form ‿r-riyāḥ in five instances: (Q. 2:164), (Q. 15:22),
(Q. 18:45), (Q. 30:46), and (Q. 45:5). Otherwise he read ‿r-rīḥ, in the singular.
– N read ‿r-riyāḥ in twelve verses: (Q. 2:164), (Q. 7:57), (Q. 14:18), (Q. 15:22),
(Q. 18:45), (Q. 25:48), (Q. 27:63), (Q. 30:46), (Q. 30:48), (Q. 35:9), (Q. 42:33), and
(Q. 45:5).
– AA, A, and IA read ‿r-rīḥ in (Q. 14:18) and (Q. 42:33) only.
– H read ‿r-riyāḥ in (Q. 25:48) and (Q. 30:46) only.
– In addition to (Q. 25:48) and (Q. 30:46), K read ‿r-riyāḥ in (Q. 15:22) as well.
– All the Readers read rīḥ, in the singular, when it was not attached to the
definite article al-.
1.3.20 Unvocalized Consonants Preceding alif al-waṣl102

The Readers disagreed on how to vocalize the unvocalized consonant when it
preceded alif al-waṣl.
– IK, N, IA, and K vocalized the consonant with ḍamma, e.g., (Q. 2:173) fa-man
‿ḍṭurra → fa-manu ‿ḍṭurra, (Q. 4:66) anu ‿qtulū … awu ‿khrujū, (Q. 6:10) wa-
laqadu ‿stuhziʾa, (Q. 12:31) wa-qālatu ‿khruj, and (Q. 17:110) qulu ‿dʿū … awu
‿dʿū.
101 Ibid., 172–3.

102 Ibid., 174–6.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

224 CHAPTER 5
– IA followed the same convention, but he diverged from IK, N, and K in a few
cases where tanwīn was involved. While IK, N, IA, and K read (Q. 4:49–50)
fatīlanu ‿nẓur, (Q. 12:8–9) mubīninu ‿qtulū, (Q. 25:8–9) masḥūranu ‿nẓur,
and (Q. 17:20–1) maḥẓūranu ‿nẓur, IA → Ibn Dhakwān read fatīlani ‿nẓur,
mubīnini ‿qtulū, masḥūrani ‿nẓur, and maḥẓūrani ‿nẓur. On the other
hand, IA agreed with IK, N, and K, who vocalized the nūn of the tanwīn
with ḍamma in (Q. 14:26) khabīthatinu ‿jtuththat and (Q. 7:49) bi-raḥmatinu
‿dkhulū.
– A and H vocalized the consonant with kasra, e.g., fa-mani ‿ḍṭurra, ani
‿qtulū … awi ‿khrujū, wa-laqadi ‿stuhziʾa, wa-qālati ‿khruj, quli ‿dʿū … awi
‿dʿū, fatīlani ‿nẓur, mubīnini ‿qtulū, masḥūrani ‿nẓur, maḥẓūrani ‿nẓur,
khabīthatini ‿jtuththat, and bi-raḥmatini ‿dkhulū.
– When the unvocalized consonant was wāw or lām, AA vocalized it with
ḍamma, e.g., awu ‿khrujū, qulu ‿dʿū … awu ‿dʿū, (Q. 73:3) awu ‿nquṣ, and
(Q. 10:101) qulu ‿nẓurū. The transmitters of AA disagreed when the unvocal-
ized consonant was tāʾ or nūn: AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī and
AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī → ʿUbayd Allāh b. ʿAlī → IM vocalized
the tāʾ and nūn with ḍamma, e.g., wa-qālatu ‿khruj and fa-manu ‿ḍṭurra,
whereas al-Yazīdī vocalized both consonants with kasra, e.g., wa-qālati
‿khruj and fa-mani ‿ḍṭurra.
1.3.21 lām al-amr103

All Readers agreed to devocalize lām al-amr throughout the Qurʾān whenever
it was preceded by wāw or fāʾ, e.g., (Q. 2:186) fa-l-yastajībū … wa-l-yuʾminū. They
disagreed, however, when lām al-amr was preceded by thumma.
– AA vocalized the lām with kasra, e.g., (Q. 22:29) thumma li-yaqḍū and
(Q. 22:15) thumma li-yaqṭaʿ.
– N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways and N → Warsh followed the same principle as
AA. On the other hand, al-Musayyabī, Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar, Qālūn, Ibn Jammāz,
and Ismāʿīl b. Abī Uways devocalized the lām and read thumma l-yaqḍū and
thumma l-yaqṭaʿ.
– IK, A, H, and K devocalized the lām. However, it was reported that IK →
al-Qawwās read thumma li-yaqḍū. IK → al-Bazzī asserted that the lām was
devocalized (mudraja).
– IA devocalized lām al-amr throughout the Qurʾān, except in five cases:
thumma li-yaqḍū, thumma li-yaqṭaʿ, fa-li-yanẓur, (Q. 22:29) wa-li-yūfū, and
(Q. 22:29) wa-li-yaṭṭawwafū.
103 Ibid., 177–178.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

1.3.22 Bu/iyūt, shu/iyūkh, ʿu/iyūn, ghu/iyūb, and ju/iyūb104

Readers disagreed on vocalizing the first radical of these five words with either
kasra or ḍamma.
– IK, IA, and K read (Q. 5:109) ‿l-ghuyūbi, (Q. 2:189) ‿l-biyūti, (Q. 36:34) ‿l-ʿiyūni,
(Q. 24:31) jiyūbihinna, and (Q. 40:67) shiyūkhan.
– Some transmitters claimed that K applied ishmām on the first radical and
gave it a ḍamma-like sound before articulating the yāʾ, similar to his articula-
tion of qīla → quīla and ghīḍa → ghuīḍa;105 thus, reading ‿l-buiyūti, (Q. 36:34)
‿l-ʿuiyūni, (Q. 24:31) juiyūbihinna, and (Q. 40:67) shuiyūkhan.
– AA vocalized the first radical of all these words with ḍamma, e.g., ‿l-ghuyūbi,
‿l-buyūti, ‿l-ʿuyūni, juyūbihinna, and shuyūkhan.
– Disagreements were reported on behalf of N. Al-Musayyabī and Qālūn read
‿l-biyūti but read the other words with ḍamma on the first radical. On the
other hand, Warsh, Ibn Jammāz, and Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar read all these words
with ḍamma on the first radical, including al-Wāqidī who also transmitted
‿l-buyūti. Among N’s transmitters, only Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways read all these
words with kasra on the first letter.
– Disagreements were also reported on behalf of A. A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b.
Ādam read juyūbihinna but read the other words with kasra on the first
radical. More accurately, juyūbihinna was reportedly read jiuyūbihinna
( juiyūbihinna?) (yabda‌ʾ bi-l-kasr thumma yushimmuhā l-ḍamm). A → Ḥafṣ
→ Hubayra read shiyūkhan but read the other words with ḍamma on the
first radical. Ibn Mujāhid found this transmission to be wrong (khaṭa‌ʾ) while
approving the transmission by A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ, where all five
words were read with ḍamma on the first radical.
– H vocalized the first radical of all five of these words with kasra. H → Sulaym
→ Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī and H → Sulaym → Khalaf described H’s pronuncia-
tion of juyūbihinna as follows: he gave the first radical a ḍamma-like sound
after which a kasra was articulated (yushimm al-jīma al-ḍamma thumma
yushīr ilā l-kasr). This was probably similar to the aforementioned transmis-
sion attributed to K, i.e. ‿l-buiyūti, ‿l-ʿuiyūni, juiyūbihinna, and shuiyūkhan.
Ibn Mujāhid commented that this kind of enunciation could not be accu-
rately recorded (wa-huwa shayʾ lā yuḍbaṭ). Besides Sulaym, the other trans-
mitters from H read with a clear kasra on the jīm.
104 Ibid., 178–9.

105 See the passive of the hollow verbs, page 214.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

226 CHAPTER 5
1.3.23 The alif of anā106

All Readers dropped the alif of anā so long as they were reading in waṣl mode
and did not pause at anā, e.g., (Q. 2:258) anā uḥyī → ana uḥyī and (Q. 6:163)
wa-anā awwalu → wa-ana awwalu. However, when anā was followed by hamza,
N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways, N → Qālūn, and N → Warsh did not drop the alif.
The only exception was (Q. 26:115) in anā illā → in ana illā, similar to all the
other Readers. The other case of disagreement will be mentioned under the
farsh section of (Q. 18:38) lākinnā huwa.
1.3.24 al-hāʾ al-muttaṣila bi l-fiʿl al-majzūm (hāʾ-pronoun Suffix of Verbs

in the Jussive Mood)107
The disagreement here pertained to the articulation of the hāʾ-pronoun suffix:
whether to devocalize it, vocalize it with kasra or ḍamma, or lengthen its value
to a long yāʾ or wāw. These disagreements occurred in sixteen instances: (Q. 3:75)
yuʾaddihi (twice), (Q. 3:145) nuʾtihi (twice), (Q. 4:115) nuwallihi … wa-nuṣlihi,
(Q. 24:52) wa-yattaqihi (wa-yattaqhi), (Q. 27:28) fa-alqihi, (Q. 39:7) yarḍahu,
(Q. 42:20) nuʾtihi, (Q. 99:7–8) yarahu (twice), (Q. 90:7) yarahu, (Q. 20:75) ya‌ʾtihi,
(Q. 7:111) and (Q. 26:36) arjih.
1) IK and K: both prolonged the vowel of the hāʾ to long yāʾ or long wāw,
e.g., nuʾtihī, nuwallihī, nuṣlihī, yattaqihī, fa-alqihī, yuʾaddihī, yarḍahū, and
yarahū. They disagreed in (Q. 26:36) where IK read arjiʾhū and K read
arjihī.
2) N: several disagreements were reported on behalf of Nāfiʿ.
– N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → al-Kisāʾī, N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → al-Dūrī, N → Ismāʿīl b.
Jaʿfar → Sulaymān b. Dāwūd, N → Warsh, and N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf
lengthened the vowel of the hāʾ to long yāʾ or long wāw. Warsh excluded
yarḍahu and did not read yarḍahū.
– N → Ibn Jammāz vocalized the hāʾ with kasra in fa-alqihi (mukhtalasat
al-ḥaraka).
– Similarly, N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Faraj read yuʾaddihi,
nuwalihi, and wa-nuṣlihi (yushimm al-hāʾ al-iḍjāʿ). On the other hand, he
read arjihī, fa-alqihī, and nuʾtihī with long yāʾ (mabṭūḥa).
– N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān read yarḍahū (mamdūda).
– N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī Ismāʿīl read yuʾaddihi, nuwallihi, wa-nuṣlihi, and wa-
arjihi but he read fa-alqihī (mabṭūḥa).

107 Ibid., 131, 207–212.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

– N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī → Ibn Abī Mihrān → IM read nuwallihi, wa-nuṣlihi,

arjihi, yuʾaddihi, nuʾtihi, fa-alqihi, and yarḍahu (ghayr mushbaʿ) but he read
yarahū and ya‌ʾtihī (yushbiʿ al-ḍamm wa-l-kasr).
– N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ and N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ read yarḍahu
(maqbuwwa—i.e., marfūʿa—maqṣūra ghayr mamdūda), but they read
nuʾtihī (mamdūda).
– Ibn Mujāhid commented that all these transmissions on behalf of N were
contradictory. Nevertheless, he said, the most trustworthy transmission was
that of N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī, in which he vocalized the hāʾ with kasra or
ḍamma without reaching the full value of yāʾ and wāw (ishbāʿ, wa-lā bulūgh
yāʾ wa-lā wāw). This transmission was corroborated by those of N → Warsh
→ Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ and N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ. It was also reported that
N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī → Abū ʿAwn → IM read ya‌ʾtihi (maksūrat al-hāʾ lā
yablugh bi-kasratihā l-yāʾ).
3) IA: through the transmission of Ibn Dhakwān, IA read yuʾaddihi, nuʾtihi,
nuwallihi, wa-nuṣlihi, and fa-alqihi with kasra on the hāʾ. However, he
devocalized the hāʾ and read yattaqih. The report that described the
reading of yarḍahu was confusing. It stated that IA → Ibn Dhakwān
read it by devocalizing the hāʾ and at the same time vocalizing it with
ḍamma. Ibn Mujāhid interpreted this information to mean giving the hāʾ
a ḍamma-like vowel and reading yarḍahu. On the other hand, IA → Ibn
Dhakwān read yarahū (ishbāʿ) and IA → Hishām read yarah. Ibn Mujāhid
deemed the reading arjiʾhi by IA → Ibn Dhakwān to be wrong (ghalaṭ) and
stated that one could not vocalize the hāʾ with kasra and at the same time
articulate the hamza. On the other hand, IA → Hishām read arjiʾhu. Also,
IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī read nuwallihi, wa-nuṣlihi, nuʾtihi, fa-alqihi,
and yuʾaddihi (lā yushbiʿ al-kasr).
4) A: Like N, there existed contradictory transmissions attributed to A con-
cerning the proper voweling of the hāʾ.
– A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam and A → Shuʿba → K → Abū Tawba → Ibn al-Jahm
→ IM devocalized the hāʾ and read yuʾaddih, nuwallih, fa-alqih, nuṣlih, yat-
taqih, yarḍah, yarah, and ya‌ʾtih.
– A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf read yarḍahu.
– A → Ḥafṣ vocalized the hāʾ with a long yāʾ (ishbāʿ). A → Ḥafṣ → Sahl [b.
Zanjala?] → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak read in both ways,
namely, by devocalizing the hāʾ and vocalizing it with long yāʾ, although he
mostly read in the latter mode (akthar qirāʾatihi al-jarr).
– A → Ḥafṣ read fa-alqih and arjih, just like A → Shuʿba, but Ḥafṣ read wa-
yattaqhi (with sukūn on the qāf). A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra read wa-yattaqih,
just like A → Shuʿba. He also read ya‌ʾtihī and yarḍahu (yushimm al-rafʿ).
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

228 CHAPTER 5
– A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra read yuʾaddihī, nuwallihī, wa-nuṣlihī, and yarahū (bi-l-

jarr wa-l-ishbāʿ) but read arjih, alqih, and yarḍah.
– A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ read yarḍahu (yushimm al-ḍamm) and was
also reported to have read yarḍah ( jazm).
4) AA: disagreements were also reported on behalf of AA as follows:
– AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith and AA → al-Yazīdī devocalized the hāʾ, e.g., yuʾaddih,
nuʾtih, nuwallih, and wa-nuṣlih. Al-Yazīdī was reported to have said that
by analogy AA should have read ya‌ʾtih, which signified, according to Ibn
Mujāhid, that AA’s reading was ya‌ʾtihī.
– AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith and AA → Shujāʿ b. Abī Naṣr read fa-alqihī. Al-Yazīdī,
however, emphasized that the hāʾ was devocalized, i.e., fa-alqih (sākina).
– ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl recounted that AA gave one the choice to read either fa-
alqih or fa-alqihī even though he preferred the latter reading. Similarly, he
permitted both yuʾaddih and yuʾaddihī. When asked about yuʾaddih, AA re-
plied that it was not grammatically incorrect (laysa bi-laḥn). On the other
hand, AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl read yarahū (bi-l-ishbāʿ).
– AA → al-Yazīdī → al-Sūsī and AA → al-Yazīdī → al-Dūrī read yarḍah, but AA →
al-Yazīdī → Ibn al-Yazīdī read yarḍahū.
– AA → Shujāʿ b. Abī Naṣr → Abū ʿUbayd → Aḥmad b. Yūsuf → IM read yarḍahu
(ghayr mushbaʿa).
5) H: Ḥamza devocalized the hāʾ in nuwallih, nuʾtih, yuʾaddih, wa-nuṣlih,
arjih, and fa-alqih. On the other hand, he read yattaqhī, ya‌ʾtihī, and
yarahū. Finally, H vocalized the hāʾ with ḍamma in yarḍahu. It was re-
ported that H → al-Kisāʾī → Abū Tawba → Ibn al-Jahm → IM read yarah,
yattaqih, and ya‌ʾtih.
1.3.25 Ithbāt al-hāʾ fī l-waṣl (Retaining the hāʾ-suffix)

The Readers disagreed on retaining or dropping the suffix hāʾ (hāʾ al-sakt)
in waṣl mode. They did not disagree on retaining it in waqf mode. Examples
included instances such as (Q. 2:259) lam yatasannah, (Q. 6:90) ‿qtadih,
(Q. 69:28–9) māliyah … sulṭāniyah, and (Q. 101:10) mā hiyah.
– IK, N, A, AA, and IA retained hāʾ al-sakt in waṣl mode. H, on the other hand,
omitted the hāʾ and read lam yatasanna ‿qtadi, (Q. 69:28–9) māliya …
sulṭāniya, and mā hiya.
– K omitted the hāʾ but only in lam yatasanna and ‿qtadi. He retained it in the
aforementioned examples.
– Again, all Readers retained the hāʾ in waqf mode. They did not disagree on
retaining the hāʾ in both waṣl and waqf modes in (Q. 69:19–20) kitābiyah …
ḥisābiyah.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

1.3.26 rusul108
– When rusul was suffixed to a two-lettered pronoun (-nā, -kum, etc.), AA de-
vocalized the sīn, e.g. (Q. 5:32) rusulunā → ruslunā, (Q. 40:50) rusulukum →
ruslukum, and (Q. 7:101) rusuluhum → rusluhum.
– AA → Hārūn al-Aʿwar → ʿAlī b. Naṣr read (Q. 3:194) ruslika, but ʿAlī b. Naṣr said
that he heard AA recite rusulika.
– All the other Readers read with tathqīl, i.e., (Q. 2:285) wa-rusulihi, rusulunā,
etc.
1.4 Conclusion
Qirāʾāt scholarship and Qurʾān textual criticism have shown greater interest in
textual variants related to diacritics, vowels, and scribal variations, while mat-
ters related to recitation and articulation of letters are often ignored, except in
linguistic and phonetic studies. Insofar as the Qurʾānic and divine status of the
variant readings are concerned, Qirāʾāt as a discipline does not differentiate be-
tween the phonetic aspect of the variants (the principles or the uṣūl) and their
textual or morphological aspect ( farsh). Both the farsh and the uṣūl stand on
an equal footing when it comes to Qirāʾāt as a discipline, particularly its alleg-
edly divine provenance. Despite the complexity of the data I presented above,
I hope it gives a clear indication of a tumultuous process that the Qurʾānic
text went through on the way to achieving its final, standardized form as an
orally performed text. The Eponymous Readers disagreed over both textual/in-
dividual variants and matters of performance and articulation. These disagree-
ments multiplied even within one System-Reading and were compounded by
several factors: contradictory statements of students on behalf of their mas-
ters, linguistic and phonetic traditions that were no longer plausible in later
“standardized” Arabic, demanding phonetic phenomena that were difficult if
not impossible to capture accurately and to reproduce, certain traditions and
practices that died off and were no longer performed, and finally the interfer-
ence of each Reader and Rāwī’s own style and interpretation of how the Arabic
language ought to work in concert with the inherited, regional Qurʾānic tradi-
tion. A careful reading of these principles of recitation shows that the Readers
were trying to figure out how the language of revelation should be recited and
performed. They were developing a system of recitation based on certain rules
of Arabic phonetics and morphology which they tried to integrate into their
inherited System-Reading, but they lacked the standardized and systematized
rules of Arabic grammar, phonetics, and morphology that had been rigorously
108 Ibid., 195.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

230 CHAPTER 5
developed by the end of the 2nd/8th century. It comes as no surprise that the
clash between the grammarians and the Qurrāʾ took place very early on, at
least as early as Sībawayhi.109 It is very important to study these principles of
recitation on their own terms, for they offer rich linguistic data and provide
us with a different perspective on early Arabic phonetics and linguistics prior
to the standardized system of the 2nd/8th century. Moreover, a comparison
between the principles of recitation that Ibn Mujāhid recorded and the prin-
ciples which were crystallized after al-Dānī and al-Shāṭibī could also show the
gradual development and evolution of the Qurʾānic text in terms of its recita-
tion and performance.
1.5 uṣūl Audio Index
(Q. 2:51) ‿ttakhaṯṯum

(Q. 3:81) akhaṯṯum
(Q. 18:77) la‿ttakhaṯṯa
(Q. 40:27) ʿuṯṯu
(Q. 6:56) qaḍ_ḍalaltu
(Q. 4:167) qaḍ_ḍallū
(Q. 30:58) wa-la-qaḍ_ḍarabnā
(Q. 23:93) qur_rabbi
(Q. 4:158) bar_rafaʿahu
(Q. 83:14) bal rāna
(Q. 7:179) wa-la-qadh_dhara‌ʾnā
(Q. 38:24) la-qaẓ_ẓalamaka
(Q. 2:256) qat_tabayyana
(Q. 29:35) wa-la-qat_taraknā
(Q. 3:72) wa-qālaṭ_ṭāʾifatun
(Q. 3:122) hammaṭ_ṭāʾifatāni
(Q. 7:189) athqalad_daʿawā
(Q. 10:89) ujībad_daʿwatukumā
(Q. 75:27) man｡ rāqin
All audio files referred to in this table can be accessed by scanning this QR code or via the
following link: https://qr.brill.com/748fc1.
109 Refer to the transmission errors discussed in Chapter two. Cf. Muḥammad Samīr
Najīb al-Labadī, Athar al-Qurʾān wa-l-qirāʾāt fī l-naḥw al-ʿarabī (Kuwait: Dār al-kutub
al-thaqāfiyya, 1978), 320–44; Ḥāzim Sulaymān al-Ḥillī, al-Qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya bayn
al-mustashriqīn wa-l-nuḥāt (Beirut: Manshūrāt al-Jamal, 2014).
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

The Nature of the Qurʾānic Variants 231
(cont.)
(Q. 75:27) mar_rāqin

(Q. 1:3–4) ‿r-raḥīm_maliki
(Q. 2:61) ʿaṣaw_wa-kānū
(Q. 7:95) ʿafaw_wa-qālū
(Q. 19:27) jīsh_shayʾan
(Q. 6:53) bi-aʿlab_bi-sh-shākirīna
(Q. 6:53) bi-aʿlam̃ _bi-sh-shākirīna
(Q. 2:55) nuʾmil_laka
(Q. 14:45) wa-tabayyal_lakum
(Q. 2:284) yuʿadhdhim_man
(Q. 5:64) yunfik_kayfa
(Q. 6:101) khalak_kulla
(Q. 25:54) rabbuq_qadīran
(Q. 47:16) ʿindiq_qālū
(Q. 2:21) khalakkum
(Q. 5:88) razakkum
(Q. 66:5) ṭallakkunna
(Q. 7:80) sabakkum
(Q. 2:52) baʿdh_dhālika
(Q. 10:21) baʿḍ_ḍarrāʾa
(Q. 54:15) wa-la-qat_taraknāhā
(Q. 7:179) wa-la-qadh_dhara‌ʾnā
(Q. 67:5) wa-la-qaz_zayyanā
(Q. 58:1) qas_samiʿa
(Q. 12:30) qash_shaghafahā
(Q. 25:50) wa-la-qaṣ_ṣarrafnāhu
(Q. 30:58) wa-la-qaḍ_ḍarabnā
(Q. 38:24) la-qaẓ_ẓalamaka
(Q. 4:170) qaj_jāʾakum
(Q. 38:21) it_tasawwarū
(Q. 8:48) wa-iz_zayyana
(Q. 24:12) is_samiʿtumūhu
(Q. 46:29) wa-iṣ_ṣarafnā
(Q. 43:39) iẓ_ẓalamtum
(Q. 18:39) id_dakhalta
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

232 CHAPTER 5
(cont.)
(Q. 33:10) ij_jāʾūkum

(Q. 3:72) wa-qālaṭ_ṭāʾifatun
(Q. 21:11) kānaẓ_ẓālimatan
(Q. 4:90) ḥaṣiraṣ_ṣudūruhum
(Q. 2:261) anbatas_sabʿa
(Q. 4:56) naḍijaj_julūduhum
(Q. 17:97) khabaz_zidnāhum
(Q. 9:25) raḥubath_thumma
(Q. 10:89) ujībad_daʿwatukumā
(Q. 67:3) hat_tarā
(Q. 69:8) fa-hat_tarā
(Q. 19:65) hat_taʿlamu
(Q. 83:36) hath_thuwwiba
(Q. 4:158) bar_rafaʿahu
(Q. 83:14) bar_rāna
(Q. 20:114) qur_rabbi
(Q. 20:50) qār_rabbunā
(Q. 4:57) ‿ṣ-ṣāliḥās_sa-nudkhiluhum
(Q. 37:1) wa-ṣ-ṣāffāṣ_ṣaffan
(Q. 100:1) wa-l-ʿādiyāḍ_ḍabḥa
(Q. 37:2) fa-z-zājirāz_zajran
(Q. 51:1) wa-dh-dhāriyādh_dharwan
(Q. 77:5) fa-l-mulqiyādh_dhikran
(Q. 2:92) bi-l-bayyināth_thumma
(Q. 5:93) ‿ṣ-ṣāliḥāj_junāḥun
(Q. 11:78) aṭhal_lakum
(Q. 16:70) ‿l-ʿumul_li-kaylā
(Q. 71:4) yaghfil_lakum
(Q. 63:5) yastaghfil_lakum
(Q. 4:74) yaghlif_fa-sawfa
(Q. 34:9) nakhsif bihim
(Q. 34:9) nakhsib_bihim
(Q. 74:42) salaḵḵum
(Q. 2:200) manāsiḵḵum
(Q. 18:95) makkananī
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(cont.)
(Q. 18:95) makkaṉṉī

(Q. 39:64) ta‌ʾmurūnanī
(Q. 39:64) ta‌ʾmurūṉṉī
(Q. 24:62) li-baʿsh_sha‌ʾnihim
(Q. 24:12) is_samiʿtumūhu
(Q. 33:10) wa-iz_zāghati
(Q. 46:29) wa-iṣ_ṣarafnā
(Q. 48:12) baẓ_ẓanantum
(Q. 46:28) baḍ_ḍallū
(Q. 56:67) ban_naḥnu
(Q. 13:33) baz_zuyyina
(Q. 2:231) yafʿadh_dhālika
(Q. 2:259) labiṯṯa … labiṯṯu
(Q. 43:72) ūriṯṯumūhā
(Q. 20:96) fa-nabaṯṯuhā
(Q. 2:108) fa-qaḍ_ḍalla
(Q. 2:16) rabiḥat tijāratuhum
(Q. 2:16) rabiḥat_tijāratuhum
(Q. 2:282) wa-l-yaktub baynakum
(Q. 2:282) wa-l-yaktub_baynakum
(Q. 4:78) yudriḵḵumu
(Q. 21:87) idh_dhahaba
(Q. 7:160) ‿ḍrib_bi-ʿaṣāka
(Q. 35:3) min khāliqin ghayri
(Q. 35:3) miñ khāliqiñ ghayri
(Q. 2:105) mir_rabbikum
(Q. 20:75) wa-may_ya‌ʾtihi
(Q. 20:75) wa-maỹ_ỹa‌ʾtihi
(Q. 8:16) wa-may_yuwallihim
(Q. 8:16) wa-maỹ_ỹuwallihim
(Q. 2:19) wa-barquy_yajʿalūna
(Q. 2:19) wa-barquỹ_ỹajʿalūna
(Q. 4:40) mil_ladunhu
(Q. 2:71) musallamatul_lā
(Q. 13:11) miw_wālin
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

234 CHAPTER 5
(cont.)
(Q. 13:11) miw̃ _w̃ ālin

(Q. 80:28–9) wa-ʿinabaw_wa-qaḍban wa-zaytūnaw_wa-nakhlan
(Q. 80:28–9) wa-ʿinabaw̃ _w̃ a-qaḍban wa-zaytūnaw̃ _w̃ a-nakhlan
(Q. 2:2) fīhi hudan
(Q. 2:2) fīhī hudan
(Q. 2:37) ʿalayhi innahu
(Q. 2:37) ʿalayhī innahu
(Q. 18:63) ansānīhi illā
(Q. 18:63) ansānīhī illā
(Q. 18:63) ansānīhu
(Q. 22:4) ʿalayhi annahu
(Q. 22:4) ʿalayhī annahu
(Q. 52:28) nadʿūhu a/innahu
(Q. 52:28) nadʿūhū a/innahu
(Q. 16:121) ‿jtabāhu wa-hadāhu
(Q. 16:121) ‿jtabāhū wa-hadāhū
(Q. 20:32) wa-ashrik-hu
(Q. 20:32) wa-ashrik-hū
(Q. 80:35–6) wa-ummihī … wa-ṣāḥibatihī
(Q. 2:285) wa-malāʾikatihī wa-kutubihī wa-rusulihī
(2:270) yaʿlamuhū
(Q. 34:39) yukhlifuhū
(Q. 48:10) ʿalayhi
(Q. 48:10) ʿalayhu
(Q. 25:69) fīhi
(Q. 25:69) fīhī
(Q. 2:270) anfaqtumū
(Q. 4:1) khalaqakumū
(Q. 2:3) yuʾminūna
(Q. 2:3) yūminūna
(Q. 2:174) ya‌ʾkulūna
Q. 2:174) yākulūna
(Q. 3:21) ya‌ʾmurūna
(Q. 3:21) yāmurūna
(Q. 5:55) yuʾtūna
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(cont.)
(Q. 5:55) yūtūna

(Q. 14:10) wa-yuʾakhkhirakum
(Q. 14:10) wa-yuwakhkhirakum
(Q. 3:75) yuʾaddihi
(Q. 3:75) yuwaddihi
(Q. 2:225) yuʾākhidhukum
(Q. 2:225) yuwākhidhukum
(Q. 2:232) yūminu
(Q. 7:169) yākhudhūna
(Q. 2:22) ‿s-samā͏̇ ʾ‌i mā͏̇ ʾ‌an
(Q. 2:22) ‿s-samā̄‌ʾi mā̄‌ʾan
(Q. 13:17) jufā͏̇ ʾ‌an
(Q. 13:17) jufā̄‌ʾan
(Q. 23:41) ghuthā͏̇ ʾ‌an
(Q. 23:41) ghuthā̄‌ʾan
(Q. 67:27) sī�ʾaṫ
(Q. 67:27) ̄
sī�ʾat
(Q. 39:69) wa-jī�ʾȧ
(Q. 39:69) wa-jī�ʾā
(Q. 28:76) la-tanū̇ʾu
(Q. 28:76) la-tanu̿ ʾu
(Q. 5:29) tabū̇ʾa
(Q. 5:29) tabu̿ ʾa
(Q. 30:10) wa-s-sū̇ʾā
(Q. 30:10) wa-s-su̿ ʾā
(Q. 2:20) aḍā͏̇ ʾ‌a
(Q. 2:20) aḍā̄‌ʾa
(Q. 2:4) bi-mā̄｡ unzila
(Q. 7:47) tilqā̄‌ʾa aṣḥābi
(Q. 23:99) jā̄‌ʾa aḥadahum ( jē̄ʾa aḥadahum)
(Q. 2:21) yā̄-ayyuhā
(Q. 2:114) khā͏̇ʾ‌ifīna
(Q. 2:31) wa-l-malā͏̇ ʾ‌ikati
(Q. 2:40) yā-banī� ̇ Isrā͏̇ ʾ‌īla
(Q. 2:5) ulāʾika
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

236 CHAPTER 5
(cont.)
(Q. 2:6) a-andhartahum

(Q. 2:6) ȧ-ºandhartahum
(Q. 2:6) a-ºandhartahum
(Q. 2:6) ā-ºandhartahum
(Q. 5:116) a-anta
(Q. 5:116) ȧ-ºanta
(Q. 5:116) ā-ºanta
(Q. 27:60) a-ilāhun
(Q. 27:60) ȧ-ºilāhun
(Q. 27:60) ā-ºilāhun
(Q. 6:19), (Q. 41:9) a-innakum
(Q. 6:19), (Q. 41:9) ȧ-ºinnakum
(Q. 6:19), (Q. 41:9) ā-ºinnakum
(Q. 32:10) a-idhā
(Q. 32:10) ȧ-ºidhā
(Q. 32:10) ā-ºidhā
(Q. 37:36) a-innā
(Q. 37:36) ȧ-ºinnā
(Q. 37:36) ā-ºinnā
(Q. 3:15) a-unabbiʾukum
(Q. 3:15) ȧ-ºunabbiʾukum
(Q. 3:15) ā-ºunabbiʾukum
(Q. 54:25) a-ulqiya
(Q. 54:25) ȧ-ºulqiya
(Q. 54:25) ā-ºulqiya
(Q. 38:8) a-unzila
(Q. 38:8) ȧ-ºunzila
(Q. 38:8) ā-ºunzila
(Q. 46:32) awliyāʾu ulāʾika
(Q. 46:32) awliyāºu ulāʾika
(Q. 46:32) awliyāwu ulāʾika
(Q. 46:32) awliyāʾū ºulāʾika
(Q. 46:32) awliyā ulāʾika
(Q. 2:31) hāʾulāºi in
(Q. 2:31) hāʾulāyi in
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(cont.)
(Q. 2:31) hāʾulāʾī ‿n

(Q. 2:31) hāʾulā in
(Q. 23:99) jāʾa aḥadahum
(Q. 23:99) jā āḥadahum
(Q. 23:99) jā aḥadahum
(Q. 23:99) jā̄‌ āḥadahum
(Q. 80:22) shā ānsharahu
(Q. 80:22) shāʾa ansharahu
(Q. 80:22) shā ansharahu
(Q. 2:13) ‿s-sufahāʾu ºalā
(Q. 2:13) ‿s-sufahāʾu alā
(Q. 67:16) ‿s-samāʾi ºan
(Q. 67:16) ‿s-samāʾi an
(Q. 24:33) ‿l-bighāʾi in
(Q. 24:33) ‿l-bighāʾī ºin
(Q. 11:58) jā amrunā
(Q. 11:58) jāºa amrunā
(Q. 11:58) jā āmrunā
(Q. 2:11) qīla
(Q. 2:11) quīla
(Q. 11:44) ghīḍa
(Q. 11:44) ghuīḍa
(Q. 11:77), (Q. 29:33) sīʾa
(Q. 11:77), (Q. 29:33) suīʾa
(Q. 67:27) sīʾat
(Q. 67:27) suīʾat
(Q. 34:54) ḥīla
(Q. 34:54) ḥuīla
(Q. 39:71,73) sīqa
(Q. 39:71,73) suīqa
(Q. 39:69), (Q. 89:23) wa-jīʾa
(Q. 39:69), (Q. 89:23) wa-juīʾa
(Q. 2:14) mustahziʾūna
(Q. 2:14) mustahzūna
(Q. 9:37) li-yuwāṭiʾū
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

238 CHAPTER 5
(cont.)
(Q. 9:37) li-yuwāṭū

(Q. 10:53) wa-yastanbiʾūnaka
(Q. 10:53) wa-yastanbūnaka
(Q. 36:56) muttakiʾūna
(Q. 36:56) muttakūna
(Q. 37:66) fa-māliʾūna
(Q. 37:66) fa-mālūna
(Q. 69:37) ‿l-khāṭiʾūna
(Q. 69:37) ‿l-khāṭūna
(Q. 5:69) ‿ṣ-ṣābiʾūna
(Q. 5:69) ‿ṣ-ṣābūna
(Q. 2:62), (Q. 22:17) ‿ṣ-ṣābiʾīna
(Q. 2:62), (Q. 22:17) ‿ṣ-ṣābīna
(Q. 2:15) ṭughyānihim
(Q. 2:15) ṭughyēnihim
(Q. 2:19) ādhānihim
(Q. 2:19) ādhēnihim
(Q. 2:16) bi-l-hudā
(Q. 2:16) bi-l-hudē
(Q. 2:16) bi-l-hudǣ
(Q. 4:135) ‿l-hawā
(Q. 4:135) ‿l-hawē
(Q. 4:135) ‿l-hawǣ
(Q. 41:17) ‿l-ʿamā
(Q. 41:17) ‿l-ʿamē
(Q. 41:17) ‿l-ʿamǣ
(Q. 2:29) ‿stawā
(Q. 2:29) ‿stawē
(Q. 2:29) ‿stawǣ
(Q. 53:34) wa-aʿṭā … wa-akdā
(Q. 53:34) wa-aʿṭē … wa-akdē
(Q. 53:34) wa-aʿṭǣ … wa-akdǣ
(Q. 20:2) li-tashqā
(Q. 20:2) li-tashqē
(Q. 20:2) li-tashqǣ
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(cont.)
(Q. 53:1) hawā

(Q. 53:1) hawē
(Q. 53:1) hawǣ
(Q. 80:1) wa-tawallā
(Q. 80:1) wa-tawallē
(Q. 80:1) wa-tawallǣ
(Q. 93:1) wa-ḍ-ḍuḥā
(Q. 93:1) wa-ḍ-ḍuḥē
(Q. 93:1) wa-ḍ-ḍuḥǣ
(Q. 91:1) wa-ḍuḥāhā
(Q. 91:1) wa-ḍuḥēhā
(Q. 91:1) wa-ḍuḥǣhā
(Q. 91:6) ṭaḥāhā
(Q. 91:6) ṭaḥēhā
(Q. 91:6) ṭaḥǣhā
(Q. 6:68) ‿dh-dhikrā
(Q. 6:68) ‿dh-dhikrē
(Q. 6:68) ‿dh-dhikrǣ
(Q. 53:22) ḍīzā
(Q. 53:22) ḍīzē
(Q. 53:22) ḍīzǣ
(Q. 2:85) ‿d-dunyā
(Q. 2:85) ‿d-dunyē
(Q. 2:85) ‿d-dunyǣ
(Q. 87:8) li-l-yusrā
(Q. 87:8) li-l-yusrē
(Q. 87:8) li-l-yusrǣ
(Q. 20:53) shattā
(Q. 20:53) shattē
(Q. 20:53) shattǣ
(Q. 6:76) ra‌ʾā kawkaban
(Q. 6:76) ra‌ʾē kawkaban
(Q. 11:70) ra‌ʾā aydiyahum
(Q. 11:70) ra‌ʾē aydiyahum
(Q. 69:8) tarē lahum
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

240 CHAPTER 5
(cont.)
(Q. 5:18) wa-n-naṣārē naḥnu

(Q. 20:46) wa-arē
(Q. 2:55) narā ‿llāha
(Q. 9:30) wa-n-naṣārā ‿l-masīḥu
(Q. 39:60) tarā ‿lladhīna
(Q. 17:83) na‌ʾē
(Q. 41:51) na‌ʾā
(Q. 6:77) reʾā ‿l-qamara
(Q. 6:77) reʾē ‿l-qamara
(Q. 6:78) reʾā ‿sh-shamsa
(Q. 6:78) reʾē ‿sh-shamsa
(Q. 16:85) reʾē ‿lladhīna
(Q. 8:17) ramē
(Q. 17:72) aʿmē
(Q. 11:41) mujrāhā
(Q. 11:41) majrēhā
(Q. 92:5) aʿṭē wa‿ttaqē
(Q. 53:44) wa-aḥyē
(Q. 5:32) wa-man aḥyāhā fa-ka-annamā aḥyā
(Q. 93:2) sajā
(Q. 93:2) sajē
(Q. 79:30) daḥāhā
(Q. 79:30) daḥēhā
(Q. 91:2) talāhā
(Q. 91:2) talēhā
(Q. 24:30) azkē
(Q. 53:7) ‿l-aʿlē
(Q. 2:89) ‿l-kāfirīna
(Q. 2:89) ‿l-kēfirīna
(Q. 2:20) shayʾin
(Q. 2:20) shay｡ʾin
(Q. 2:22) lakumu ‿l-arḍa
(Q. 2:22) lakumu‿l｡arḍa
(Q. 2:22) lakumu ‿la‿rḍa
(Q. 2:31) Ādama ‿l-asmāʾa
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(cont.)
(Q. 2:31) Ādama ‿l｡asmāʾa

(Q. 2:31) Ādama ‿la‿smāʾa
(Q. 2:94) ‿d-dāru ‿l-ākhiratu
(Q. 2:94) ‿d-dāru ‿l｡ākhiratu
(Q. 2:94) ‿d-dāru ‿lā‿khiratu
(Q. 23:1) qad aflaḥa
(Q. 23:1) qad‿aflaḥa
(Q. 28:71) man ilāhun
(Q. 28:71) mani‿lāhun
(Q. 2:14) khalaw ilā
(Q. 2:14) khalawi‿lā
(Q. 5:27) ‿bnay Ādama
(Q. 5:27) ‿bnayā‿dama
(Q. 2:39) aṣḥābu ‿n-nāri
(Q. 2:39) aṣḥābu ‿n-nǣri
(Q. 2:39) aṣḥābu ‿n-nēri
(Q. 14:26) min qarārin
(Q. 14:26) min qarǣrin
(Q. 14:26) min qarērin
(Q. 3:193) maʿa ‿l-abrāri
(Q. 3:193) maʿa ‿l-abrǣri
(Q. 3:193) maʿa ‿la‿brǣri
(Q. 3:193) maʿa ‿l-abrēri
(Q. 38:62) mina ‿l-ashrāri
(Q. 38:62) mina ‿l-ashrǣri
(Q. 38:62) mina ‿la‿shrǣri
(Q. 38:62) mina ‿l-ashrēri
(Q. 14:28) dāra ‿l-bawāri
(Q. 14:28) dāra ‿l-bawǣri
(Q. 14:28) dāra ‿l-bawēri
(Q. 3:13) li-ulī ‿l-abṣāri
(Q. 3:13) li-ulī ‿l-abṣǣri
(Q. 3:13) li-ulī ‿la‿bṣǣri
(Q. 3:13) li-ulī ‿l-abṣēri
(Q. 3:75) bi-qinṭārin
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

242 CHAPTER 5
(cont.)
(Q. 3:75) bi-qinṭǣrin

(Q. 3:75) bi-qinṭērin
(Q. 3:75) bi-dīnārin
(Q. 3:75) bi-dīnǣrin
(Q. 3:75) bi-dīnērin
(Q. 2:85) min diyārihim
(Q. 2:85) min diyǣrihim
(Q. 2:85) min diyērihim
(Q. 5:46) ʿalā āthārihim
(Q. 5:46) ʿalā āthǣrihim
(Q. 5:46) ʿalā āthērihim
(Q. 14:29) wa-biʾsa ‿l-qarǣri
(Q. 23:50) dhāti qarǣrin
(Q. 14:48), (Q. 40:16) ‿l-wāḥidi ‿l-qahhǣri
(Q. 4:36) wa-l-jāri
(Q. 4:36) wa-l-jēri
(Q. 4:36) wa-l-jǣri
(Q. 5:22) jabbārīna
(Q. 5:22) jabbērīna
(Q. 38:28) ka-l-fujjēri
(Q. 38:28) ka-l-fujjǣri
(Q. 38:28) ka-l-fujjāri
(Q. 9:40) fī ‿l-ghāri
(Q. 9:40) fī ‿l-ghǣri
(Q. 9:40) fī ‿l-ghēri
(Q. 2:167) bi-khārijīna
(Q. 2:167) bi-khērijīna
(Q. 2:28) fa-aḥyākum
(Q. 2:28) fa-aḥyǣkum
(Q. 2:28) fa-aḥyēkum
(Q. 28:61) thumma huwa
(Q. 28:61) thumma hwa
(Q. 8:48) inniya arā
(Q. 8:48) innī arā
(Q. 10:72) ajriya illā
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(cont.)
(Q. 10:72) ajrī illā

(Q. 9:49) taftinnī alā
(Q. 3:52) anṣāriya ilā
(Q. 3:52) anṣārī ilā
(Q. 2:54) ilā bāriʾikum
(Q. 2:54) ilā bāriʾkum
(Q. 2:54) ilā bāriʾikum
(Q. 2:67) ya‌ʾmurukum
(Q. 2:67) ya‌ʾmurkum
(Q. 2:129) wa-yuʿallimuhumu ‿l-kitāba
(Q. 2:129) wa-yuʿallimuhumu ‿l-kitāba
(Q. 2:159) wa-yalʿanuhumu ‿l-lāʿinūna
(Q. 2:159) wa-yalʿanhumu ‿l-lāʿinūna
(Q. 4:102) asliḥatikum wa-amtiʿatikum
(Q. 4:102) asliḥatikum wa-amtiʿatikum
(Q. 2:151) wa-yuʿallimukum
(Q. 2:151) wa-yuʿallimukum
(Q. 64:9) yajmaʿukum
(Q. 64:9) yajmaʿukum
(Q. 2:128) wa-arinā
(Q. 2:128) wa-arinā
(Q. 2:128) wa-arnā
(Q. 52:32) ta‌ʾmuruhum
(Q. 52:32) ta‌ʾmuruhum
(Q. 7:157) ya‌ʾmuruhum
(Q. 7:157) ya‌ʾmuruhum
(Q. 3:160) yanṣurukum
(Q. 3:160) yanṣurukum
(Q. 3:80) wa-lā ya‌ʾmurukum
(Q. 3:80) wa-lā ya‌ʾmurkum
(Q. 2:61) ‿n-nabīʾīna
(Q. 2:61) ‿n-nabiyyīna
(Q. 3:79) wa-n-nubūʾata
(Q. 3:79) wa-n-nubuwwata
(Q. 3:112) ‿l-anbiʾāʾa
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

244 CHAPTER 5
(cont.)
(Q. 3:112) ‿l-anbiyāʾa

(Q. 3:68) ‿n-nabīʾu
(Q. 3:68) ‿n-nabiyyu
(Q. 33:50) li-n-nabiyyi in arāda
(Q. 33:50) li-n-nabīʾī‿na‿rāda
(Q. 33:53) ‿n-nabiyyi illā
(Q. 33:53) ‿n-nabīʾī‿llā
(Q. 2:173) fa-manu ‿ḍṭurra
(Q. 2:173) fa-mani ‿ḍṭurra
(Q. 4:66) anu ‿qtulū … awu ‿khrujū
(Q. 4:66) ani ‿qtulū … awi ‿khrujū
(Q. 6:10) wa-laqadu ‿stuhziʾa
(Q. 6:10) wa-laqadi ‿stuhziʾa
(Q. 12:31) wa-qālatu ‿khruj
(Q. 12:31) wa-qālati ‿khruj
(Q. 17:110) qulu ‿dʿū … awu ‿dʿū
(Q. 17:110) quli ‿dʿū … awi ‿dʿū
(Q. 4:49–50) fatīlanu ‿nẓur
(Q. 4:49–50) fatīlani ‿nẓur
(Q. 12:8–9) mubīninu ‿qtulū
(Q. 12:8–9) mubīnini ‿qtulū
(Q. 25:8–9) masḥūranu ‿nẓur
(Q. 25:8–9) masḥūrani ‿nẓur
(Q. 17:20–1) maḥẓūranu ‿nẓur
(Q. 17:20–1) maḥẓūrani ‿nẓur
(Q. 14:26) khabīthatinu ‿jtuththat
(Q. 14:26) khabīthatini ‿jtuththat
(Q. 7:49) bi-raḥmatinu ‿dkhulū
(Q. 7:49) bi-raḥmatinu ‿dkhulū
(Q. 73:3) awu ‿nquṣ
(Q. 73:3) awi ‿nquṣ
(Q. 10:101) qulu ‿nẓurū
(Q. 10:101) quli ‿nẓurū
(Q. 2:186) fa-l-yastajībū … wa-l-yuʾminū
(Q. 22:29) thumma li-yaqḍū
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(cont.)
(Q. 22:29) thumma l-yaqḍū

(Q. 22:15) thumma li-yaqṭaʿ
(Q. 22:15) thumma l-yaqṭaʿ
(Q. 22:29) wa-li-yūfū
(Q. 22:29) wa-l-yūfū
(Q. 22:29) wa-li-yaṭṭawwafū
(Q. 22:29) wa-l-yaṭṭawwafū
(Q. 5:109) ‿l-ghiyūbi
(Q. 5:109) ‿l-ghuyūbi
(Q. 2:189) ‿l-biyūti
(Q. 2:189) ‿l-buyūti
(Q. 2:189) ‿l-buiyūti
(Q. 36:34) ‿l-ʿiyūni
(Q. 36:34) ‿l-ʿuyūni
(Q. 36:34) ‿l-ʿuiyūni
(Q. 24:31) jiyūbihinna
(Q. 24:31) juyūbihinna
(Q. 24:31) juiyūbihinna
(Q. 40:67) shiyūkhan
(Q. 40:67) shuyūkhan
(Q. 40:67) shuiyūkhan
(Q. 2:258) anā uḥyī
(Q. 2:258) ana uḥyī
(Q. 6:163) wa-anā awwalu
(Q. 6:163) wa-ana awwalu
(Q. 59:21) ‿l-Qurʾān
(Q. 59:21) ‿l-Qurān
2 The Individual Variants ( farsh) of the Qurʾān
… mā shāʿa ʿalā alsinati jamāʿatin min muta‌ʾakhkhirī l-muqriʾīn wa-

ghayrihim min anna al-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ mutawātira, wa-naqūlu bihi fīmā it-
tafaqat al-ṭuruq ʿalā naqlihi ʿan al-qurrāʾ al-sabʿa dūna mā ukhtulifa fīhi …
wa-l-ḥāṣil annā lā naltazim al-tawātur fī jamīʿ al-alfāẓ al-mukhtalaf fīhā
bayna al-qurrāʾ
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

246 CHAPTER 5
… a claim has been circulating recently on behalf of some late Qurʾān

reciters, to the effect that the seven Eponymous Readings are mutawātira. I
agree with this claim so long as it pertains to the agreed upon [individual]
readings, but not the variants which were disagreed upon … in conclusion, I
do not necessitate that tawātur is maintained with all the variant readings
which the Qurrāʾ had disagreed upon.
Abū Shāma, al-Murshid al-wajīz
I have previously compiled a partial database of Qurʾānic variants and tried

to understand the nature of these variations through a close textual analysis.110
After categorizing my limited database into different categories, the analysis
and statistics showed that internal vowels and case endings (iʿrāb) occupied
the highest percentage of these variants. I suggested in my conclusion that
since the database was a more or less random selection of verses, a more com-
prehensive database was needed for a better representation of, and more ac-
curate statistics on, the whole Qurʾān. I will now present a complete database
of the Qurʾānic variants as documented by Ibn Mujāhid in his Kitāb al-Sabʿa.
The database is accompanied by complete audio recordings of the aforemen-
tioned variants. My aim is for one to read the transliteration while listening
to the audio recording of the variant in question without the need to listen to
the whole verse in which the variant is located. The sources I used for these
recordings are listed in the footnote below.111 I personally recorded the variants
for which I found no audio material, in addition to the shawādhdh variants
110 Shady Hekmat Nasser, The Transmission of the Variant Readings of the Qurʾān: The Problem
of tawātur and the Emergence of shawādhdh (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 165–227.
111 Most of the recordings I used are available on “Mawqiʿ nūn li-l-Qurʾān wa-ʿulūmihi,” http://
www.nquran.com/. I used the recordings of the following reciters:
Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim: Recordings by Muḥammad Ṣiddīq al-Minshāwī, Muḥammad Ayyūb,
Ibrāhīm al-Akhḍar, Mashārī l-ʿIfāsī, ʿAbd Allāh Baṣfar
Shuʿba ʿan ʿĀṣim: Recordings by ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī and ʿAbd al-Ḥakīm ʿAbd al-Laṭīf
Warsh ʿan Nāfiʿ: Recordings by Maḥmūd Khalīl al-Ḥuṣarī, ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ ʿAbd al-Ṣamad,
and Yāsīn al-Jazāʾirī
Qālūn ʿan Nāfiʿ: Recordings by Maḥmūd Khalīl al-Ḥuṣarī
Qunbul and al-Bazzī ʿan Ibn Kathīr: Recordings by Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Ḥakīm
Al-Dūrī ʿan Abī ʿAmr: Recordings by Maḥmūd Khalīl al-Ḥuṣarī and ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī
Al-Sūsī ʿan Abī ʿAmr: Recordings by ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī
Hishām and Ibn Dhakwān ʿan Ibn ʿĀmir: Recordings by Miftāḥ al-Salṭanī
Khalaf ʿan Ḥamza: Recordings by ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī
Khallād ʿan Ḥamza: Recordings by Miftāḥ al-Salṭanī
Al-Dūrī and Abū l-Ḥārith ʿan al-Kisāʾī: Recordings by ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī
Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī: Recordings by Miftāḥ al-Salṭanī
Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī: Recordings by Yāsir al-Mazrūʿī
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

which are no longer recited by Muslims today.112 Readers and Rāwīs respon-
sible for transmitting each variant will be documented in detail. I was faithful
as to how Ibn Mujāhid reported his data and did not introduce any changes
(except to correct misprints in the text). Additionally, miscellaneous notes and
observations are appended to the variants, along with cross references to other
variants that exhibit similar features throughout the Qurʾān. Finally, the type
of the variants is determined and added to these entries. A short statistical
overview will be provided in order to give a tentative understanding of the
distribution of these variant types across the whole Qurʾān.
2.1 Variant Types

I followed the same categories I created previously for the types of the variant
readings. Even though the current database comprises more than 14,000 en-
tries, most of the variants fell nicely into the same categories. Since I am not
conducting here a comparison with poetry variants or shawādhdh readings
that deviated from the rasm, some variant types do not feature. I will quickly
go over the variant types, provide a brief definition, and clarify the terminology
and acronyms I use for each category.113
1) Case endings (iʿrāb)
Discrepancies in the case endings due to different interpretation of the syntac-
tical function of the word; e.g., fa-yakūna vs. fa-yakūnu.
2) Internal vowels (vowels)
Discrepancies in the internal vowels of the words regardless of its syntactical
position in the sentence; e.g., ḍayq vs. ḍīq.
3) Active and Passive voices (Act ↔ Pass)
Discrepancies in reading verbs in the active or passive voices. This also includes
active and passive participles, whose variant types will be symbolized as Act
Ptcpl ↔ Pass Ptcpl; e.g. nazzala vs. nuzzila and ‿l-mukhliṣīna vs. ‿l-mukhlaṣīna.
4) Gemination (Gemin)
Discrepancies in words that are read with or without a shadda on one of the
radicals; e.g. hādhānni vs. hādhāni. Verbs that become geminate due to chang-
es in forms (wazn), e.g. faʿala ↔ faʿʿala, will be listed under the category of verb-
form discrepancies. Gemination due to idghām (assimilation) will be listed
under Category 6 below.
In addition to these recordings, I used audio lectures and YouTube videos by Ayman
Suwayd and ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Qāḍī, especially their commentaries on al-Shāṭibiyya.
112 I avoided chanting and recitation and only read these variants as they were described in
the sources.
113 The full explanation of each variant type can be referred to in the earlier database.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

248 CHAPTER 5
5) Verb Form Discrepancies (Vrb Frm)

Discrepancies in determining the verb form (wazn). The following Roman nu-
merals are used to designate the verb form they refer to:
I → faʿala, faʿila, faʿula
II → faʿʿala
III → fāʿala
IV → afʿala
V → tafaʿʿala
VI → tafāʿala
VII → ‿nfaʿala
VIII → ‿ftaʿala
IX → ‿fʿalla
X → ‿stafʿala
XI → faʿlala
XII → tafaʿlala
E.g. qadara vs. qaddara will be represented as Vrb frm (I ↔ II)
6) Assimilation (Assim)
Discrepancies in pronunciation due to assimilation; e.g., idh talaqqawnahu vs.
it_ttalaqqawnahu
7) Nūnation (tanwīn)
Discrepancies resulting from the noun being read with or without tanwīn; e.g.,
ukulin vs. ukuli.
8) Hamza (hamz)
Differences and discrepancies in the articulation of the hamza, whether its
loss or its lenition, etc.; e.g., wa-biʾrin vs. wa-bīrin.
9) Long vowels (Long vwl)
Discrepancies in reading nouns with or without the long vowels ā, ī, and ū; e.g.,
malik vs. mālik → Long vwl (±ā). Verbs with long vowel discrepancies will be
mentioned under the verb form category; e.g., faʿala ↔ fāʿala.
10) Imperfect Prefix Conjugation (Imperf)
Discrepancies in determining the pronouns of the imperfect verb form and as-
signing different prefixes to it; e.g., yushrikūna vs. tushrikūna → Imperf (tu↔yu).
11) Perfect suffix conjugation (Perf)
Discrepancies in determining the pronouns of the perfect verb form and as-
signing different suffixes to it; e.g., khalaqtuka vs. khalaqnāka → perf (tu↔nā).
12) Alternation/permutation (ibdāl)
Alternation/permutation occurs with phonologically and semantically related
doublets; a radical is read as/exchanged with a different one, such as the alter-
nation between sīn and ṣād; e.g., sirāṭ vs. ṣirāṭ.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

13) Vowel Omission (taskīn)

Vowel omission occurs due to ikhtilās or obscuring the vowel; it is not a mor-
phological or grammatical variation but a recitational technique; e.g., arnā vs.
arinā and yajmaʿukum vs. yajmaʿukum. I included yāʾāt al-iḍāfa under this cat-
egory as well.114
14) Loss of Consonants (Cons Loss)
Variations in recitation due to loss of consonants which are not radicals, most-
ly hāʾ or tāʾ or yāʾ; e.g. yatasannah vs. yatasanna.
15) Particles (ḥarf)
Discrepancies between variants due to the addition or omission of particles;
e.g. min taḥtihā vs. taḥtahā (ḥarf ±min).
16) Tense discrepancy (tense)
Discrepancies between variants due to assigning different tenses to the verbs
or reading verbs as nouns and vice versa; e.g. qāla vs., qul and ushrik-hu vs.
ashrik-hu.
17) a>e shift (imāla)
Discrepancies between variants due to performing imāla; e.g., hawā vs. hawē.
18) Pronoun (pronoun)
Discrepancies in assigning the correct subject or object pronoun to nouns and
verbs; e.g., yablughanna vs yablughānni.
19) Pausing (waqf)
Variations in the recitation and articulation of sounds due to pausing and re-
suming the recitation (waṣl and waqf); e.g., wa-qīla man rāqin vs. wa-qīla man｡
rāqin.
20) Radicals (Root)
Discrepancies in reading the variants due to differences in more than one
radical. Variants could have a common root letter; e.g. yusayyirukum vs. yans-
hurukum (s-y-ṟ vs. n-sh-ṟ) or no common root at all; e.g. fa-tabayyanū vs.
fa-tathabbatū (b-y-n vs. th-b-th).
21) Lengthening of vowels (madd)
Variations due to the application of madd and qaṣr (lengthening of vowels).
114 Refer to yāʾāt al-iḍāfa under the principles of recitation, page 220.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

250 CHAPTER 5
TABLE 8 Summary of variant types
Variant type Abbreviation Explanation
Addition or omission ± The addition or omission of a

particle, consonant, vowel, etc.
Equivalence ↔ Indicates that the two variants
are equivalent and that neither
variant originated from the other
Case Endings iʿrāb Discrepancies in the case endings
Internal Vowels vowels Discrepancies in the internal
vowels of the variants
Active and Passive voices Act ↔ Pass Interchanges between the active
Act Ptcpl ↔ Pass and the passive forms
Ptcpl
Gemination Gemin The presence or absence of a
shadda in the variants
Verb Form changes Vrb frm Changes in the verb forms of the
variants. (i.e. faʿala, faʿʿala, fāʿala,
etc.)
Assimilation Assim Variations due to assimilating two
letters
Nūnation tanwīn The existence or absence of
tanwīn
Hamza hamza Variants related to different
aspects of articulating the hamza
Long Vowels Long vwl The loss, gain, or exchange of the
long vowels ā, ī, and ū
Imperfect Prefix conjugation Imperf Discrepancies in the prefixes of
the imperfect verb forms
Perfect Suffix Conjugation Perf Discrepancies in the suffixes of
the perfect verb forms
Alternation/permutation ibdāl A consonantal interchange
between two radicals resulting in
two variants
Vowel Omission taskīn Omission and obscuring of vowels
Loss of consonants Cons Loss The loss of consonants due to
phonetic phenomena
Particles ḥarf The usage of different particles
preceding nouns and verbs
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

TABLE 8 Summary of variant types (cont.)
Variant type Abbreviation Explanation
Tense discrepancy tense Tense discrepancy between the

variants including the perfect,
imperfect, future, and imperative
a>e shift imāla Discrepancies due to performing
imāla
Pronoun pronoun Discrepancies in the subject,
object, and possessive pronouns
Pausing waqf Variations due to pausing and
resuming the recitation
Radicals Root Differences in more than one
radical in the variants
Lengthening of vowels madd Variations due to the application
of madd and qaṣr
2.2 Distribution of the Variant Types throughout the Whole Qurʾān

The database I created previously included the last thirty chapters of the Qurʾān
and sūrat Yūsuf. I also added a selection of pre-Islamic poetry in order to com-
pare the nature of variants between the two corpuses, Qurʾān and poetry. As I
mentioned, since my prior work incorporated anomalous readings as well as
poetry, some variant types which I accounted for in the earlier database will
not feature here. These include variations with the definite article (al-), amal-
gamation (when two words are read as one), Derivatives (different morpholog-
ical forms of the word), pattern/wazn (when two variants have different roots
but they share the same pattern), transposition (when two words exchange
places in a sentence), and Metathesis (when two letters exchange places in
a word or show reversed order). The very small percentages of these variant
types (0.6%, 0%, 1.2%, 0%, 0.8%, and 0.6%) in the prior corpus and their ab-
sence in this database that excludes poetry and shawādhdh, suggest that these
variant types resided mostly in anomalous readings and in poetry, and that
even there they were relatively infrequent. Below is a percentage breakdown of
the variant types essentially as they appeared in the older database.115
115 I introduced minor changes to the chart: I added the Act ptcpl ↔ Pass ptcpl percentage to
the Act ↔ Pass and I added the tāʾ marbūṭa category to that of the Consonant loss. Also,
in the original chart there was an error in the percentages of Metathesis (0.8%, which
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

252 CHAPTER 5
TABLE 9 Variant types of poetry and Qurʾān based on partial data
Variant type Qurʾānic Percentage Poetry Percentage

variants variants
Act ↔ Pass 41 8.67% 10 3.39%

Definite article -al 3 0.63% 0 0.00%
Amalgamation 0 0.00% 3 1.02%
ibdāl 23 4.86% 101 34.24%
Assim 5 1.06% 2 0.68%
iʿrāb 62 13.11% 19 6.44%
Cons Loss 12 2.54% 5 1.69%
Derivatives 6 1.27% 6 2.03%
Form (wazn) 0 0.00% 3 1.02%
Gemin 28 5.92% 7 2.37%
hamz 50 10.57% 4 1.36%
vowels 75 15.86% 20 6.78%
Long vwl 50 10.57% 6 2.03%
Meta-Thesis 4 0.63% 3 1.02%
tanwīn 17 3.59% 2 0.68%
Imperf 34 7.19% 17 5.76%
Pronoun 7 1.48% 8 2.71%
ḥarf 24 5.07% 33 11.19%
Root 0 0.00% 11 3.73%
Perf %2 0.42% 12 4.07%
taskīn 8 1.69% 0 0.00%
Transposition 4 0.85% 13 4.41%
Tense 0 0.00% 5 1.69%
Vrb frm 19 4.02% 5 1.69%
Grand total 473 100.00% 295 100.00%
The new database comprises more than 14,000 entries of Qurʾānic variants.
I created three more categories to accommodate new types, namely, imāla (a>e
shift), madd (lengthening of vowels), and waqf (pausing and recommencing
recitation). Note that even though these three categories fall under the prin-
ciples of recitation (uṣūl), the variations they exhibited were part of the farsh
should have been 0.6%) and Transposition (0.6%, which should have been 0.8%); Nasser,
Transmission, 223.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

(individual variants). It is important to note that these statistics and numbers

are relative and by no means represent the actual percentage and proportion
of each variant type in reference to the other variants. Two issues need to be
addressed concerning my attempts to categorize the variants, fit them into des-
ignated categories, and determine the preponderance of their occurrences.
In general, some of these categories intersect with one another. One could
argue that case endings (iʿrāb), internal vowels, and passive/active forms are
all variants that exhibit changes in vowels and that there is thus no need to
categorize them separately. Similarly, assimilation, gemination, and verb form
interchanges between faʿala ↔ faʿʿala all display variations in terms of the dou-
ble consonant (shadda), whereas the long vowel (±ā) in nouns and verb forms
faʿala ↔ fāʿala display variations in terms of the addition or omission of the
long vowel ā. This is true from a textual perspective if we look at the words/
variants separate from of their meaning, pronunciation, and syntactical role
in the sentence. The main reason behind my detailed categorization is to un-
derstand how variants emerged through comprehending and analyzing these
variant types. “Vowel discrepancy,” as a general category that could apply to
nouns, verbs, case endings, and the obscuring of vowels (ikhtilās), would not
give me much granularity to work with. It only demonstrates that the script
was defective and suggests that all these variations in voweling occurred due
to the lack of diacritics. On the other hand, internal vowels as a distinct cat-
egory suggests regional or dialectal variations of pronunciation. It also points
to an early period where linguists and philologists had not yet standardized
the Arabic lexicon and its phonetic system. Similarly, variations in case end-
ings strongly suggest that the Eponymous Readings developed and evolved
before Arabic grammar was standardized and systematized. The percentage of
variations in case endings for Qurʾānic variants (13%), as against half that per-
centage (6.5%) for poetry variants, strongly signals the role grammarians and
philologists played in controlling the corpus of early Arabic poetry and bend-
ing it to obey the rules of al-ʿarabiyya, something that they were less successful
at with the Qurʾānic text. The same holds true for the percentages of internal
vowel variations, 16% for Qurʾānic variants but only 6.5% for poetry, which
again demonstrates that tighter control was exercised over the diction and vo-
cabulary of poetry transmitted by the elite philologists and poetry collectors
of Kūfa and Baṣra as against Qurʾānic readings, which were more vulnerable to
regional dialects and variations.
By the same token, variations between the active and passive voices in-
dicate discord on a semantic level, where the Qurʾān readers had struggled,
hermeneutically, to assign or deny agency to the subject of the sentence.
Similarly, it is an oversimplification to blame the defective undotted script
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

254 CHAPTER 5
for the discrepancies in the imperfect prefix conjugation of verbs and thereby
overlook the ambiguous and multifaceted nature of Qurʾānic language, which
makes it difficult to pinpoint the exact subject of the verb. This is a linguistic
feature shared with poetry, whose variants showed a slight proportional pre-
ponderance for these variant types (5.8% vs. 7% for the Qurʾān). Therefore,
these diverse variant types allow for a better understanding of the nature of
variants, the mechanism of their transmission, and the socio-linguistic history
of the Qirāʾāt tradition.
The second issue I want to address is ratios and percentages, and how repre-
sentative they are of the variant types in comparison with one another. When
I categorized the variant types in the current Database, I assigned multiple
variants of the same type at the same place to a single entry. Even though my
database comprises over 14,000 entries, the number of variant types I gleaned
off these entries was 1942 only. For example, a word could have five different
variant readings, and each one exhibited different case endings, but I con-
sidered all these five variants to be only one occurrence of a variant type, i.e.
iʿrāb. Similarly, if there were multiple variants recorded for one word featuring
different voweling patterns, no matter how many variants were generated on
account of these different vowels, only one occurrence of a variant type was
recorded. Therefore, the numbers and statistics in the following table show
the preponderance of the variant types in terms of the frequency of their oc-
currence, and not their actual number. Additionally, I want to note that the
principles of recitation were not integrated into these numbers. Some cases of
madd and imāla were accounted for, but they were special instances which Ibn
Mujāhid documented within the farsh section of his book. They represented
discrepancies and deviations from the “standard” principles of the Eponymous
Readers, and thus, only a fraction of these principles was integrated into
the database.
It is both gratifying and reassuring to see how close these percentages are,
considering the fact that the full database comprises thousands of entries from
the whole Qurʾān. Vowels (16.2%) and case endings (11.0%) still have high per-
centages as compared to the other variant types, as do verb form discrepancy
(11.50%), long vowels (9.0%), and the imperfect prefix conjugation (12.0%). All
these variant types are indicative of an Arabic language and a Qurʾānic diction
that had not been standardized yet. At first glance, one might assume that long
vowel discrepancies were mainly due to a defective script that did not accom-
modate the alif in writing. This could be true; however, if we consider the fact
that more than 50% of these long vowel variants were due to a singular vs. plu-
ral variation (kitāb vs. kutub, āya vs. āyāt), we may want to attribute these long
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

TABLE 10 Variant types of the whole Qurʾān based on Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa
Variant type Occurrences Percentage %
Act ↔ Pass 122 6.28%

Assim 53 2.73%
Cons Loss 10 0.51%
Gemin 58 2.99%
hamz 125 6.44%
ḥarf 81 4.17%
ibdāl 20 1.03%
imāla 86 4.43%
Imperf 231 11.89%
iʿrāb 215 11.07%
Long vwl 178 9.17%
madd 34 1.75%
Perf 17 0.88%
pronoun 2 0.10%
Root 11 0.57%
tanwīn 46 2.37%
taskīn 59 3.04%
tense 21 1.08%
vowels 315 16.22%
Vrb frm 223 11.48%
waqf 35 1.80%
Grand Total 1942 100.00%
vowel variances to morphological, syntactical, and semantic differences rather

than put all the blame on the flawed script. The same holds true for the im-
perfect prefix conjugation which I discussed earlier, and certainly for the verb
form discrepancy, particularly the high proportion of interchanges between
the causative forms faʿʿala and afʿala, and between the intransitive faʿala and
its transitive forms faʿʿala or afʿala.
The time is ripe for a re-evaluation of the variant readings of the Qurʾān
and their emergence through a detailed linguistic and grammatical analysis
in line with the analysis I performed in the second part of Chapter Two. As far
as the Eponymous Readings are concerned, during the time Ibn Mujāhid re-
corded them, the discrepancies and variations they showed reflected an earlier
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

256 CHAPTER 5
TABLE 11 Complete vs. partial database of Qurʾānic variants
Variant type (Whole) Percentage % (Partial)a Percentage %
Act ↔ Pass 6.28% 8.67%

Assim 2.73% 1.06%
Cons Loss 0.51% 2.54%
Gemin 2.99% 5.92%
hamz 6.44% 10.57%
ḥarf 4.17% 5.07%
ibdāl 1.03% 4.86%
imāla 4.43% N/A
Imperf 11.89% 7.19%
iʿrāb 11.07% 13.11%
Long vwl 9.17% 10.57%
madd 1.75% N/A
Perf 0.88% 0.42%
pronoun 0.10% 1.48%
Root 0.57% 0.00%
tanwīn 2.37% 3.59%
taskīn 3.04% 1.69%
tense 1.08% 0.00%
vowels 16.22% 15.86%
Vrb frm 11.48% 4.02%
waqf 1.80% N/A
a As I explained earlier, the partial database comprised the last thirty chapters of the Qurʾān
and Sūrat Yūsuf.
form of al-ʿarabiyya; a form that was on its way to being systematized and stan-
dardized. The variant readings of the Qurʾān played an important role in this
process, and the tension that was created between the grammarians and the
Qurrāʾ was characteristic of this standardization process. I believe that this was
the first stage in the canonization process of the Qurʾān and that it deserves to
be studied thoroughly through the grammatical works available to us prior to
Ibn Mujāhid’s time.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Conclusion and Future Research
I believe that the data I provided in this book and my close study of the nu-
merous examples of variant readings of the Qurʾān show that the seven
Eponymous Readings were later constructs, systematized and canonized—
in the form in which we know them today—well after than their presumed
genesis. Moreover, today’s renditions of these Eponymous Readings through
two Canonical Rāwīs misrepresent the history of the transmission of these
Canonical Readings. It is unfortunate that we still have voices within Islamic
scholarship arguing that the “reading of Ḥafs from his teacher ʿĀṣim is the de
facto reading of ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib from the master Copy which he inherited
from the Prophet Muhammad.”1 The Eponymous Readings were not static sys-
tems of recitation that were authored at one time in history and then transmit-
ted verbatim from one generation to another. They were subjected to revision,
editing, polishing, and rigorous internal systematization that led them to their
current state. To speak of Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim (or any other Eponymous Reading)
as a unified system of recitation—in both their principles of recitation and
individual variants—created at the hands of a single individual is a histori-
cal fallacy, as the research in this book demonstrated. One of the main objec-
tives of this study, and my future studies on the other Canonization processes
of the Qurʾān, is to overcome the misconception that the text was static and
demonstrate that the Qurʾān, as an orally performed document, evolved and
developed over time.
I believe that it is necessary for us to reexamine the concept of the Qurʾān
itself and of its nature, its development, and its reception history. To assume
that Muslims of the early 2nd/8th century were completely familiar with the
particulars of the whole text of the Qurʾān is questionable. The documenta-
tion of the Eponymous Readings in Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa showed that
these System-Readings were in the process of development. The discrepan-
cies and variations we find within these Systems point to a formative period
of Qirāʾāt scholarship when Muslims were trying, collectively, to systematize
and canonize the performed aspect of the muṣḥaf. In the first chapter I pro-
posed a new chronology for the critical phases in the history of the performed
text of the Qurʾān, i.e., the Qirāʾāt. The First Canonization took place between
ʿUthmān’s codification of the maṣāḥif and the early grammarians’ efforts in
1 Ahmed El-Wakil, “New Light on the Collection and Authenticity of the Qurʾan: The Case for
the Existence of a ‘Master Copy’ and how it Relates to the Reading of Ḥafṣ ibn Sulaymān from
ʿĀṣim ibn Abī al-Nujūd,” Journal of Shi’a Islamic Studies 8:4 (2015): 409.

258 Conclusion and Future Research
standardizing al-ʿarabiyya. The Second Canonization took place at the hands

of Ibn Mujāhid with his Kitāb al-Sabʿa, while the Third Canonization took
place at the hands of al-Dānī and al-Shāṭibī, with the creation and propaga-
tion of the two-Rāwī Canon. Ibn al-Jazarī was the driving force behind the
Fourth Canonization, with the “semi-official” integration of three additional
Eponymous Readings and his further systematizing the transmissions of
Qirāʾāt through the Canonical Ṭarīq (pl. Ṭuruq). The Fifth Canonization pro-
cess took place in the 20th century, with al-Azhar’s first printed edition of the
Qurʾān using the rendition of Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim.
In the Second Chapter I explored the concept of shawādhdh al-sabʿa, the
irregular readings of the Canonical Readings, and studied sixty-six transmis-
sion errors in Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa. I concluded that the Eponymous
Readings were not authored as single, unified systems, and that the discrepan-
cies and variations in these Eponymous Readings were weeded out over time.
I suggested different reasons behind the exclusion of certain Rāwīs from the
Canon of the Eponymous Readings, and proposed that geographical affiliation,
specialization in the subject, and adherence to the consensus of the students
of the Eponymous Reader played a critical role in this canonization process.
In Chapter Three, I compared the mechanisms of transmission in Qirāʾāt and
Ḥadīth and demonstrated that, due to the different natures of both disciplines,
the application of Ḥadīth methodology to Qirāʾāt created tension and confu-
sion within the field, particularly in matters related to ʿadāla (probity), the cri-
teria of sound isnād, and the conditions of ṣaḥīḥ transmission.
In Chapter Four I re-examined the notions of oral and written transmission
within the discipline of Qirāʾāt and demonstrated that the Qirāʾāt tradition
was heavily dependent on written means of transmission from a very early
period. Qirāʾāt scholars corresponded with one another via letters and pos-
sessed personal notebooks and codices which they used to authenticate and
validate Qurʾānic variants. Additionally, after comparing the textual variants
recorded in Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa with Abū ʿUbayda and Ibn Abī Dāwūd
al-Sijistānī’s earlier accounts of the textual variations in the codices of Kūfa,
Baṣra, Damascus, Madīna and Makka, I argued that the notion of the five main
regional codices (Imāms) contradicts, to some extent, the data I presented on
the textual variants documented by Ibn Mujāhid. I suggested that several dif-
ferent codices were in circulation at the same time and that these codices were
simultaneously consulted by the Qurrāʾ in the same geographical region.
In the last chapter, I documented in detail the principles of recitation
and the individual variants of the Seven Eponymous Readings based on Ibn
Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa. The large variations in the principles of recitation
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Conclusion and Future Research 259
point to a formative period of Qirāʾāt scholarship during which the Qurrāʾ were
trying to standardize the oral performance of the Qurʾān. Moreover, a general
statistical analysis of the variant types of the individual variants ( farsh) shows
a high percentage of the categories related to internal vowels, long vowels, case
endings, Imperfect prefix conjugation, and verb form discrepancies and sug-
gests that these variations were closely connected to grammatical and mor-
phological instability as well as to a less rigid control over the Qurʾānic diction.
In addition to research that needs to be conducted on the other canonization
periods of the Qurʾān, a more in-depth analysis of the variant readings con-
cerning their grammar, morphology, and semantics is needed. The database
I provided in this book will be the starting point of an Encyclopedia of vari-
ant readings of the Qurʾān, whose website is currently under construction, and
which aims at providing a comprehensive database of the Qurʾānic variants
in manuals of Qirāʾāt, works of tafsīr, Qurʾānic manuscripts, and grammatical
compilations. It will be a step towards understanding the slow development
and evolution of the Qurʾānic text over the past 1400 years.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
Appendix
Comprehensive Table of Quranic Variants
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

All audio files referred to in this Appendix can be accessed by scanning this QR code or via the following link: https://qr.brill.com/748fc1.
262
(Q. X:Y) Arabic Variants Transmitters Notes Variant types
uṣūl: major assimilation (al-idghām

‿r-raḥīm_maliki AA
al-kabīr)
‿r-raḥīm｡ māliki A
‿r-raḥīmi māliki K
1:3–4 ‫ا �لر� ي‬ Assim
‫ح�م �م�ل�ك‬ IK
‿r-raḥīm｡ maliki N
‿r-raḥīmi maliki IA
H
A No one applied imāla, i.e. mēliki

Supported by (Q. 3:26), which only
māliki
K reads mālika l-mulki
Transmitted on behalf of the Prophet
IK
N Long vwl (±ā)
Supported by (Q. 114:2) maliki n-nāsi,
IA
1:4 ‫�م�ل�ك‬ maliki (Q. 59:22) l-maliku l-quddūsu
AA Transmitted on behalf of the Prophet
AA → al-Yazīdī → Abū Ḥamdūn
H
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar
malki → Muḥammad b. Shuʿayb al-Jarmī IM: This is because of the ikhtilās AA taskīn
→ Madyan b. Shuʿayb → IM often applied
Appendix
milki AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK → Shibl → al-Qawwās [→ Qunbul]

Throughout the Qurʾān
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl
‿s-sirāṭa … sirāṭa AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl
Doubt from Hārūn whether AA read ‿
AA → Hārūn al-Aʿwar
‿s-sirāṭa or ‿ṣ-ṣirāṭa
IK → [X] → Ibn Fulayḥ
IK → [X] → al-Bazzī
Doubt from Hārūn whether AA read
AA → Hārūn al-Aʿwar
‿s-sirāṭa or ‿ṣ-ṣirāṭa
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith
AA → al-Yazīdī
N ibdāl
1:6–7
‫ا �ل��صرا ط … �صرا ط‬ (s↔ṣ↔z)

IA
A
‿ṣ-ṣirāṭa … ṣirāṭa K
K: sirāṭa with sīn is more common in
K → Khalaf → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā Arabic speech. Nonetheless, I read
l-Kisāʾī l-Ṣaghīr ṣirāṭa with ṣād following the rasm of
the muṣḥaf
Khallād: Sulaym had always read
‿ṣ-ṣirāṭa with ṣād; however, during
H → Sulaym → Khallād → Muḥammad
prayers he would articulate it closer to
b. ʿĪsā l-Iṣbahānī → Ḥasan al-Jammāl
zāy. Sulaym used to do so only in this
(Ibn [Abī] Mihrān) → IM
263
verse, but he would articulate a pure

ṣād throughout the Qurʾān

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

264
‿z-zirāṭa … zirāṭa AA → al-Aṣmaʿī A pure zāy

A hybrid sound between ṣād and zāy
AA → ʿUryān b. Abī Sufyān
ishmām
IM: This reading cannot be determined
H
‿ṣz-ṣzirāṭa … ṣzirāṭa by the rasm (lā yaḍbiṭuhā l-kitāb)
H → Sulaym
(Q. 16:9), (Q. 28:23), (Q. 6:46), (Q. 52:37),
H → Khalaf
(Q. 88:22)
H→K
Khallād: Sulaym had always read
‿ṣ-ṣirāṭa with ṣād; however, during
‿ṣz-ṣzirāṭa … ṣirāṭa H → Sulaym → Khallād → Muḥammad
prayers he would articulate it closer to
zāy. Sulaym used to do so only in this
→ IM
verse, but he would articulate a pure
ṣād throughout the Qurʾān
‿z-zirāṭa … ṣirāṭa H → al-Farrāʾ
ʿalayhum H uṣūl: ṣilat mīm al-jamʿ

ʿalayhimū IK (Q. 2:7)
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
N → Ibn Jammāz One has the choice to read ʿalayhimu
ʿalayhimu
N → Qālūn or ʿalayhim
N → al-Musayyabī
Appendix
1:7 �‫ع��ل��ه‬ N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar vowels

‫ي �م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N → Ibn Jammāz
One has the choice to read ʿalayhimu
N → Qālūn
or ʿalayhim
N → al-Musayyabī
Qālūn: N did not consider ʿalayhimu to
be wrong.
N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Qālūn IM: This statement shows that N’s
ʿalayhim reading was ʿalayhim; and this is how
I was instructed to read
N → Warsh (Q. 2:6)
AA
A (Q. 2:61), (Q. 28:23), (Q. 36:14), (Q. 8:16),
IA (Q. 6:1), (Q. 2:142)
K
N
A
AA
ghayri IA
H
1:7 ‫غ‬ iʿrāb
‫��ير‬ K
IK
IK → al-Khalīl b. Aḥmad → Bakkār b. IM: According to al-Akhfash, ghayra
ʿAbd Allāh b. Yaḥyā l-ʿŪdī → Naṣr b. ʿAlī in the accusative could be justified as
ghayra
→ Anas b. Khālid Abū Ḥamza al-Anasī istithnāʾ, but this is wrong
265
→ IM Sabʿa: al-ʿAwdhī, Ghāya: al-ʿŪdī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

266
fīhī hudan IK uṣūl: hāʾ al-kināya

N (Q. 20:32), (Q. 19:15)
IA
‫ف‬ madd
2:2 ‫�ي��ه �ه�د �ى‬ fīhi hudan A (Q. 18:63), (Q. 48:10), (Q. 25:69)
K
H
fīh_hudan AA uṣūl: Major assimilation Assim
N
IK
A
A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā → Abū Hishām
yuʾminūna al-Rifāʿī → Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā b. uṣūl: al-Hamz
Ḥayyān → IM
IA
2:3
‫ن‬ H Hamz
�‫�يو�م ن��و‬
K
yūminūn｡ H waqf mode
N → Warsh
AA During prayers and fast recitation (idrāj)
yūminūna During prayers
AA → al-Yazīdī → al-Sūsī (Q. 2:106), (Q. 5:101), (Q. 18:10), (Q. 17:14),
(Q. 18:16), (Q. 6:39), (Q. 15:51)
Appendix
A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā → al-Shammūnī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H → Sylaym → Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī →

During prayers
Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā b. Ḥayyān → IM
uṣūl: al-madd wa-l-qaṣr

N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī
(Q. 2:22)
bi-mā unzila
IK
AA
A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā
→ Abū Muḥammad al-Qāsim b.
Aḥmad al-Khayyāṭ → al-Ḥasan
bi-mā̄｡ unzila
al-Jammāl → IM
‫أ‬ al-Sabʿa: Abū Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad al-
2:4 ‫ب�م�ا � �ن�ز ل‬ Firyābī. It should be Abū Bakr Jaʿfar b. madd

→ Abū Muḥammad al-Qāsim b.
Muḥammad al-Firyābī
Aḥmad al-Khayyāṭ → IM
A → Shuʿba → ʿAbd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-ʿIjlī
A → al-Qāḍī Sharīk [b. ʿAbd Allāh]
→ Minjāb b. al-Ḥārith → Jaʿfar b.
Muḥammad al-Firyābī → IM
bi-mā̄ unzila
[A → Shuʿba] → ʿAbd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-
ʿIjlī → al-Ḥulwānī → al-Jammāl → IM
(Q. 7:47), (Q. 23:99), (Q. 2:21), (Q. 2:114),
H
(Q. 2:31), (Q. 2:40), (Q. 2:5)
267

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

268
K
bi-ma̿ unzila madd wasaṭ
IA
N
IK
ȧ-ºandhartahum uṣūl: two consecutive hamzas in one
N → Warsh word
K IK’s reading sounds more like
a-ºandhartahum, without prolonging madd
N → Abū Qurra
the first hamza
N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf
ā-ºandhartahum
N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān
2:6
‫�ذ ت‬
�‫ا ن� ��ه‬ AA (Q. 3:15), (Q. 54:25), (Q. 38:8)
‫ر �م‬
A
H
K
a-andhartahum IA → Ibn Dhakwān Hamz
IA → Hishām b. ʿAmmār → Abū
l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b.
Bakr → IM
IK
N
2:7
‫غ� ش �ة‬ ghishāwatun IA (Q. 45:23) iʿrāb
‫��و‬
Appendix
AA
A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
ghishāwatan A → al-Mufaḍḍal
N
yukhādiʿūna IK
AA
‫ن‬ Vrb frm
2:9 ‫�م�ا �خ‬
�‫��د �عو‬ ‫و ي‬ A
(I↔III)
IA
yakhdaʿūna
H
K
shēʾa, jēʾa, khēba, ṭēba, ḍēqa, khēfa, ḥēqa.

(Q. 33:10) zāghat and (Q. 61:5) azāgha
H
fa-zēdahumu but (Q. 61:5) zēghū.
(Q. 83:14) rēna but (Q. 19:23) fa-ajāʾahā
IA shēʾa, jēʾa
N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf (Q. 20:61) khēba by N → Khārija →
fa-zǣdahumu N → Ibn Jammāz ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl → Abū Mūsā l-Harawī
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal → IM
rǣna by N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān
and N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf
269
rāna by N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn

2:10 ‫�ف�ز ا د �ه‬ fa-zādahumu al-Musayyabī imāla
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

270
IK
uṣūl: al-imāla
AA
rēna by A → Shuʿba and rāna by
A
A → Ḥafṣ
rēna
K shǣʾa and jǣʾa by K → Abū ʿUbayd
shāʾa and jāʾa by K → Nuṣayr b. Yūsuf
N
IK
yukadhdhibūna
AA
Vrb frm
2:10
‫�ذ ن‬
�‫�� ب�و‬
‫ي� ك‬ IA
(I↔II)
A
yakdhibūna H
K
K (Q. 11:44) ghuīḍa, (Q. 11:77), (Q. 29:33)

suīʾa, (Q. 67:27) suīʾat, (Q. 34:54) ḥuīla,
quīla
IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī (Q. 39:71,73) suīqa, (Q. 39:69), (Q. 89:23)
wa-juīʾa
IA → Ibn Dhakwān suīʾa, suīʾat, ḥuīla, suīqa
IK
qīla
A
‫ق‬
Appendix
2:11 AA vowels
‫�ي��ل‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
N
suīʾa, suīʾat
uṣūl: Dropping the hamza in waqf mode

(Q. 9:37), (Q. 10:53), (Q. 36:56),
mustahzūn｡ H
(Q. 37:66), (Q. 69:37), (Q. 5:69), (Q. 2:62)
and (Q. 22:7)
IK
2:14
‫�ز ن‬ Hamz
�‫�م��ست��ه و‬ N
IA
mustahziʾūna
AA
A
K
K → al-Dūrī
ṭughyēnihim … ādhēnihim
K → Nuṣayr b. Yūsuf
K → Abū l-Ḥārith
2:15, 19
‫�ذ ن‬ IK imāla
�‫��طغ��ي�� ن��ه� … ا ا��ه‬
‫�م‬ ‫م‬
ṭughyānihim … ādhānihim N
IA
271
AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

272
A
H
N → Qālūn
bi-l-hudǣ
N → Warsh
N → al-Musayyabī
IK
2:16 ‫ب�ا ��ل�ه�د �ى‬ bi-l-hudā AA uṣūl: al-imāla imāla
A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
H
bi-l-hudē
K
H
shēʾa
IA
shǣʾa K → Abū ʿUbayd
N
2:20 ‫�ش��ا ء‬ A imāla
K
shāʾa
AA
IK
K → Nuṣayr b. Yūsuf
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
shay｡ʾin H
IK
N
2:20 ‫�ش��ي� ء‬ IA uṣūl: sakt Ḥamza Hamz
shayʾin
AA
A
K
IK
IA
fa-aḥyākum A
2:28 � � ‫ف��ا‬ AA uṣūl: al-imāla (aḥyā) imāla
‫حي�� ك‬
‫م‬ H
fa-aḥyǣkum N
fa-aḥyēkum K
IK
A
IA
wa-huwa uṣūl: subject pronouns (huwa and hiya)
H
N → Ibn Jammāz
273
2:29 ‫و�هو‬ N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

274
N → Warsh
N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī
→ Muḥammad b. al-Faraj → IM
K
AA
N → Qālūn
wa-hwa N → Ismāʿīl b. Abī Uways (Q. 28:61)
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUbayd
inniya … inniya …
niʿmatiya … niʿmatiya …
niʿmatiya … ʿahdiya …
N
baytiya … fa‿dhkurūnī …
bī … minniya …
rabbiya
niʿmatiya … ʿahdiya … AA
baytī … fa‿dhkurūnī …
bī … minniya … rabbiya
Appendix
niʿmatiya …

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
ʿahdiya … baytī …
fa‿dhkurūniya … bī … IK
minnī … rabbiya
innī … innī … niʿmatiya … A → Shuʿba
niʿmatiya … niʿmatiya … IA
ʿahdiya … baytī …
fa‿dhkurūnī … bī … K
minnī … rabbiya
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬
2:30, 33, ‫ا �ى ا ع��ل … ا � ا ع��ل‬ innī … innī … niʿmatiya …
‫ى تم‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬
‫ن ت‬ niʿmatiya … niʿmatiya …
40, 47,
122, 124,
‫… ��ع��م�ى … ��ع��م�ى‬ ʿahdī … baytiya … A → Ḥafṣ
‫ن ت‬ fa‿dhkurūnī … bī … uṣūl: yāʾāt al-iḍāfa taskīn
125, 152, ‫… ��ع��م�ى … ��ع�ه�د �ى‬
‫ف �ذ ن‬ minnī … rabbiya
186, 249, ‫�رو �ى‬ ‫… ب�ي�ت�ى … ��ا ك‬
258 ‫ن‬ innī … innī … niʿmatiya …
‫… ب�ى … �م�ى … ر ب�ى‬ niʿmatiya … niʿmatiya …

ʿahdī … baytī … H
fa‿dhkurūnī … bī …
minnī … rabbī
niʿmatī … niʿmatī …
A → al-Mufaḍḍal
niʿmatī
biya N → Warsh
fa‿dhkurūniya N → Abū Qurra
275

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

276
IK
N
IA
anbiʾhum AA
A Hamz
2:33 �‫نا��ىه‬ H
‫�ب � م‬ K
IA → Hishām → Aḥmad b. Muḥammad
anbīhim
b. Bakr → IM
IM: This is grammatically incorrect. One
IA → Ibn Dhakwān → al-Akhfash
anbiʾhim cannot articulate the hamza and vocalize Vowels
al-Dimashqī
the hāʾ with kasra at the same time.
fa-azālahumā H Long vwl (±ā)

IK
N Note that this variant fa-azālahumā
‫ف‬ IA
2:36 ‫��ا �ز ��ل�ه��م�ا‬ fa-azallahumā with different radicals, the first with z, Gemin
⟷ fa-azallahumā contitutes two verbs
AA w, l and the second with z, l, l

A
K
fa-azēlahumā H → Abū ʿUbayd IM: This is wrong imāla
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
Ādama … kalimātun IK
N
IA
2:37 �‫ا د م �م� ن� رب��ه ك�ل�م� ت‬ AA iʿrāb
Ādamu … kalimātin
A
H
K
IK
tuqbalu AA
A → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī
IA
H
2:48 ‫�ق‬ K Imperf (t↔y)
‫ى�� ب��ل‬
N
yuqbalu
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam
A → Shuʿba → K
A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya
A → Ḥafṣ
waʿadnā AA
277
IK Vrb frm
2:51 ‫وع�د ن�ا‬ wāʿadnā N (Q. 7:142), (Q. 20:80) (I↔III)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

278
IA
A
H
K
IK
‿ttakhadhtumu
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
‫ت‬ N
2:51 � ‫ث� ا‬
�‫�خ��ذ ت‬ (Q. 3:81), (Q. 18:77) Assim
‫م‬ ‫م‬ IA
‿ttakhattumu
AA
H
K
IK
N
A
‫� … �ع ن��د‬‫�إلى ب�ا رى ك‬ IA
2:54 ‫م‬ bāriʾikum … bāriʾikum (Q. 2:67) taskīn
�
‫ب�ا رى ك‬ H
‫م‬ K
AA → al-Yazīdī
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
bāriʾkum … bāriʾkum AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl uṣūl: ikhtilās Abī ʿAmr

Sībawayhi: AA slurs the kasra on the
hamza in bāriʾikum and the ḍamma in
bāriʾikum … bāriʾikum AA → Sībawayhi (Q. 2:67) ya‌ʾmurukum. He creates the
illusion that he is devocalizing
the letter but in fact he is not
IK
AA
naghfir A Imperf
2:58 ‫غ �ف‬ H (n↔y↔t)
‫ى�� ر‬
K
yughfar N
tughfar IA Act ↔ pass
IK
N
IA
khaṭāyākum
2:58 �
‫�خ��ط�ى ك‬ AA imāla
‫م‬ A
H
khaṭāyēkum K
279

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

280
(Q. 3:79), (Q. 3:112), (Q. 3:68).

N → Qālūn and N → al-Musayyabī do
‿n-nabīʾīna N
not articulate the hamza in (Q. 33:50)
and (Q. 33:53)
IK
2:61 ‫ن ن‬ Hamz
�‫ا �ل��بى�ى‬ IA
AA uṣūl: al-nabiyyīn, al-nubuwwa, al-
‿n-nabiyyīna A anbiyāʾ, and al-nabiyy
H
K
(Q. 5:69) wa-ṣ-ṣābūna. Throughout

wa-ṣ-ṣābīna N
the Qurʾān
IK
IA
2:62 ‫ن‬ Hamz
�‫وا �ل��ص ب��ى‬ AA
wa-ṣ-ṣābiʾīna
A
H
K
IK (Q. 2:260), (Q. 43:15), (Q. 112:4)

AA
IA
Appendix
K
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → al-Qaṣabī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA → al-Yazīdī
AA → Abū Zayd One has the choice to read huzuʾan or
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar huzʾan (al-tathqīl wa-l-takhfīf )
ʿĀṣim might or might not have
A → Ḥafṣ → Sahl [b. Zanjala?] →ʿAmr b.
articulated the hamza even though
al-Ṣabbāḥ → al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak →
most of the time he would not
Wuhayb al-Marwazī → IM
articulate it
N → Ibn Jammāz
huzuʾan N → Warsh Hamz
N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
N → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar
N → Qālūn → Ismāʿīl al-Qāḍī
N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī → Ḥasan al-
Jammāl → IM
N → al-Aṣmaʿī → Abū Saʿīd ʿAbd al-
Raḥmān b. Manṣūr al-Ḥārithī → IM
2:67 ‫�ه�ز وا‬
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → al-
Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak → Wuhayb al-
Marwazī → IM
huzuwan
ʿĀṣim might or might not have
A → Ḥafṣ → Sahl [b. Zanjala?] →ʿAmr b.
281
articulated the hamza even though

most of the time he would not
articulate it vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

282
A → Ḥafṣ → Saʿd al-ʿŪfī → Muḥammad

b. Saʿd al-ʿŪfī → IM
AA → al-Aṣmaʿī
AA → Abū Zayd One has the choice to read huzuʾan or
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar huzʾan (al-tathqīl wa-l-takhfīf )
H
huzʾan
N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways
N → Abū Qurra
huzwan｡ H in waqf mode
taʿmalūna throughout the Qurʾān

yaʿmalūna IK except (Q. 2:74), (Q. 2:85), (Q. 2:144),
(Q. 6:132), (Q. 27:93)
N taʿmalūna throughout the Qurʾān
A → Shuʿba except (Q. 2:85), (Q. 2:144), (Q. 6:132)
2:74
‫ن‬ Imperf (y↔t)
�‫ى�عم�لو‬ IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Aḥmad b. Yūsuf taʿmalūna throughout the Qurʾān
taʿmalūna → IM except (Q. 27:93)
Notebook transmission
taʿmalūna also in (Q. 27:93) by IA → Ibn
Appendix
IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī
Dhakwān → Mūsā b. Mūsā l-Khuttalī
and IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

A → Ḥafṣ
except (Q. 2:144), (Q. 6:132)
AA
except (Q. 2:144), (Q. 2:149)
H taʿmalūna throughout the Qurʾān if the
verse reads wa-mā ‿llāhu bi-ghāfilin
ʿammā taʿmalūna. Yaʿmalūna if the
K
verse reads wa-mā rabbuka bi-ghāfilin
ʿammā yaʿmalūna
khaṭīʾātuhu N
IK
IA
2:81
‫�ئ‬ AA Long vwl (±ā)
‫�خ��طي�� ت��ه‬ khaṭīʾatuhu

A
H
K
IK
yaʿbudūna H
K
2:83
‫ن‬ AA Imperf (y↔t)
�‫ى�ع ب��د و‬
N
taʿbudūna
A
283
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

284
IK
AA
ḥusnan N
2:83 �
‫ح��سن��ا‬ A (Q. 46:15) vowels
IA
H
ḥasanan
K
IK
N
taẓẓāharūna
AA
‫ن‬ ‫تظ‬ IA
2:85 �‫��هرو‬ (Q. 33:4), (Q. (Q. 66:4) Gemin
AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
A
taẓāharūna
H
K
IK
usārā IA
2:85 ‫ا ��سر�ى‬ imāla
A
usārǣ N
AA
usārē
K Long vwl (±ā)
Appendix
asrē H

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
tafdūhum
IA
Vrb frm
2:85 ‫ت��ف� �د �ه‬ H
‫وم‬ (I↔III)
N
tufādūhum A
K
‿l-qudsi IK
N
IA
2:87 ‫�ق‬ AA vowels
‫ا �ل�� د ��س‬
‿l-qudusi
A
H
K
IK
N
‫غ ف‬ IA
2:88 �‫��ل‬ ghulfun vowels
AA
A
H
285

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

286
K
IM: The known reading of AA is
ghulufun AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā l-Luʾluʾī
ghulfun
N
uṣūl: n-z-l
A (Q. 5:115), (Q. 26:193), (Q. 57:16),
IA (Q. 15:21), (Q. 17:82), (Q. 17:93), (Q. 6:114),
(Q. 3:124), (Q. 6:37), (Q. 31:34), (Q. 42:28) Vrb frm
2:90 ‫ي��ن�ز ل‬ yunazzila H
(II↔IV)
K
IK
yunzila
AA
wa-Jabrīla IK
A → Shuʿba → K
A → Abān
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → vowels
wa-Jabra‌ʾīla
Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir → Ibn
2:98
‫و ج��برى�ل‬ Saʿdān
H
K
IK → Shibl → Muḥammad b. Ṣāliḥ →
IK saw the Prophet in a dream reading
Rawḥ b. ʿAbd al-Muʾmin → Ḥusayn b. Long vwl (±ī)
Appendix
it as such
Bishr al-Ṣūfī → IM

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
AA
wa-Jibrīla
A → Ḥafṣ
Hamz
IA
wa-Jabra‌ʾila On the pattern of Jabraʿila
A → Ḥammād b. Salama
IK
IA
A → Shuʿba → K
wa-Mīkāʾīla A → Abān On the pattern of Mīkāʿīla Long vwl (±ī)

A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam →
Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir → Ibn
2:98 �‫و�مي�� ك‬
‫��ل‬ Saʿdān
H
K
IK → Shibl → Muḥammad b. Ṣāliḥ
wa-Mīkāʾila IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Ibn Saʿdān On the pattern of Mīkāʿila
N Hamz
AA
wa-Mīkāla
A → Ḥafṣ
287

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

288
IK
AA
wa-lākinna ‿sh-shayāṭīna Gemin
A
2:102 ‫�ل ك ن ش ن‬
�‫�� ا �ل��ي��ط��ي‬‫و‬ N (Q. 8:17), (Q. 10:44), (Q. 2:177), (Q. 2:189)
H
wa-lākini ‿sh-shayāṭīnu K iʿrāb
IA
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra
AA
‿shtarēhu
H
K
2:102 ‫ا �ش��ت��رى�ه‬ IK imāla
N
‿shtarāhu IA
A → Ḥafṣ
A
nunsikh IA
IK
N
Vrb frm
2:106 ‫ن��ن��س�� خ‬ AA
� nansakh (I↔IV)
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
nansa‌ʾhā ibdāl (y↔ʾ)
AA
N
Vrb frm
nunsihā IA
‫�ن‬ (I↔IV)
2:106 ‫ن��س�ه�ا‬ A
H
K
qālū IA Per the codices of al-Shām

IK
N
2:116
‫ق‬ AA ḥarf (±w)
‫��ا �لوا‬-‫و‬ Per the codices of Madīna, Makka,
wa-qālū
A Kūfa, and Baṣra
H
K
fa-yakūna IA IM: this is wrong

IK
N
2:117
‫� ن ف� ن‬ AA iʿrāb
�‫�و‬
‫ك�� ي�� ك‬
fa-yakūnu
A
H
289

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

290
tasʾal N Act↔Pass
IK
tusʾalu IA
‫ت‬
2:119 AA iʿrāb
‫��س�ى�ل‬
A
H
K
IA Throughout al-baqara
Ibrāhāma
IA → Ibn Dhakwān → al-Akhfash
IK
N Long vwl
2:124 ‫ا � �ه‬
‫بر م‬ AA (ā↔ī)
Ibrāhīma
A
H
K
IK
A
wa‿ttakhidhū AA
2:125
‫ت خ�ذ‬ H Tense
‫�� وا‬ ‫وا‬
K
N
Appendix
wa‿ttakhadhū
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
fa-umtiʿuhu IA
IK
N
‫ف‬ Vrb frm
2:126 ‫��ا �مت��ع�ه‬ AA
fa-umattiʿuhu (II↔IV)
A
H
K
IK
AA → ʿAbd al-Wahhāb b. ʿAṭāʾ
wa-arnā
al-Khaffāf
AA → Abū Zayd
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf

AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl
2:128 ‫وا رن�ا‬ wa-arinā AA → al-Yazīdī (Q. 7:143), (Q. 41:29), (Q. 4:153) taskīn
AA → Hārūn
AA → ʿUbayd
N
H
wa-arinā
K
291
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

292
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
N
wa-awṣā
IA
IK
‫أ‬ Vrb frm
2:132 ‫و�صى‬- �-‫و‬ AA
(II↔IV)
wa-waṣṣā A
H
K
IK
N
yaqūlūna
A → Shuʿba
‫�ق ن‬ AA
2:140 �‫ى�� و�لو‬ Imperf (y↔t)
IA
H
taqūlūna
K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N Throughout the Qurʾān on the pattern
la-ra‌ʾūfun
A → Ḥafṣ of raʿūfun
Appendix
‫ف‬ IA
2:143 ��‫�لرو‬ Long vwl (±ū)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A → Shuʿba
A → Shuʿba → K
la-ra‌ʾufun AA On the pattern of raʿufun
H
K
muwallāhā IA
IK
N
Act ptcpl↔
2:148 ‫�مو��ل�ه�ا‬ AA
muwallīhā Pass ptcpl
A
H
N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ →

al-Ushnānī → IM
li-ºallā
N → Warsh → Yūnus b. ʿAbd al-Aʿlā
N → Warsh → Saqlāb The companions/transmitters of
2:150 ‫�لى�لا‬ N → Warsh Warsh are unware of the reading that Hamz
IK does not articulate the hamza
li-allā N
IA
293
AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

294
A
H
K
IK
N Imperf (y↔t)
taṭawwaʿa A
2:158, 184 ‫ط‬ AA
‫ى��وع‬
IA Tense
H
yaṭṭawwaʿ
K Gemin
IK uṣūl: al-rīḥ vs. al-riyāḥ

N
‿r-riyāḥi AA
(Q. 7:57), (Q. 14:18), (Q. 15:22), (Q. 18:45),
2:164 �‫ا �لر‬ A (Q. 25:48), (Q. 27:63), (Q. 30:46), Long vwl (±ā)
‫ي‬
‫ح‬
IA (Q. 30:48), (Q. 35:9), (Q. 42:33), and
H (Q. 45:5).
‿r-rīḥi
K
IK
yarā A
Appendix
2:165 ‫ىر�ى‬ AA Imperf (y↔t)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
N
tarā
IA
IK
N
AA
‫ن‬ yarawna
2:165 �‫�يرو‬ A Act↔Pass
H
K
yurawna IA
IK
IA
khuṭuwāti
K
A → Ḥafṣ
2:168 ‫�خ��ط ت‬
� IK → X → Ibn Fulayḥ vowels
‫و‬
N
khuṭwāti AA
A → Shuʿba
295

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

296
IK
N
IA
K
‫ف‬ AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. uṣūl: Unvocalized consonants
2:173 ‫� ��طر‬
‫��م� ن� ا �ض‬ fa-manu ‿ḍṭurra ʿAlī preceding alif al-waṣl vowels
AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b.
ʿAlī → ʿUbayd Allāh b. ʿAlī l-Hāshimī
→ IM
AA → al-Yazīdī
AA
fa-mani ‿ḍṭurra
A
H
H
‿l-birra A → Ḥafṣ
IK
2:177 ‫�ل��ي��س ا �ل��بر‬ iʿrāb
N
‿l-birru IA
AA
A
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA Gemin/ḥarf
‫�� ن ا �ل��بر … و�ل ك ن‬
�� ‫و�ل ك‬ wa-lākinna ‿l-birra … wa- (lākin↔
2:177, 189 A (Q. 8:17), (Q. 10:44), (Q. 2:102)
lākinna ‿l-birra lākinna)
‫ا �ل��بر‬ H
K
wa-lākini ‿birru … wa-lākini N
iʿrāb
‿birru IA
IK
N
mūṣin AA
IA Vrb frm
2:182 ‫�مو�ص‬
A → Ḥafṣ (II↔IV)
A → Shuʿba
muwaṣṣin H
K
IK
A
fidyatun ṭaʿāmu AA tanwīn
2:184
‫ف‬ H
‫��د ي��ة ��ط�ع�ا‬
‫م‬
K
297
N
fidyatu ṭaʿāmi iʿrāb
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

298
IK
A
2:184 ‫�م��س �ك ن‬
�‫��ي‬ miskīnin AA Long vwl (±ā)
H
K
N
masākīna
IA
A → Shuʿba
AA → Abū Zayd
AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl They transmit both wa-li-tukmilū and
wa-li-tukammilū AA → Hārūn wa-li-tukammilū
AA → al-Yazīdī AA used to read wa-li-tukammilū but
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith changed it later on to wa-li-tukmilū
‫ت‬ AA → Abū Zayd Vrb frm
2:185 ‫و�ل� م‬
‫ك�لوا‬
AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl They transmit both wa-li-tukmilū and (II↔IV)
AA → Hārūn wa-li-tukammilū
wa-li-tukmilū AA → al-Yazīdī AA used to read wa-li-tukammilū but
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith changed it later on to wa-li-tukmilū
A → Ḥafṣ
N
Appendix
IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
H
K
A
IK
‿d-dāʿ｡i … daʿān｡i …
IA
wa‿ttaqūn｡i
H
K
‿d-dāʿ｡ī … daʿān｡ī …
AA
wa‿ttaqūn｡ī
‫ن‬ ‫�إ�ذ‬ N → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar

… � ‫ا د ع�ا‬ ‫ا �ل�د ا‬ ‿d-dāʿ｡ī … daʿān｡ī N → Ibn Jammāz
2:186, 197 ‫ع ت �ق ن‬ Long vwl (±ī)
�‫وا�� و‬ N → Warsh
N → Abū Khulayd
‿d-dāʿ｡ī
N → Qālūn
‿d-dāʿ｡i … daʿān｡i N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān
wa‿ttaqūn｡ī
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Qālūn
299
wa‿ttaqūn｡i
N → al-Musayyabī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

300
IK
IA
‿l-biyūta K
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Qālūn
H
AA uṣūl: bu/iyūt, shu/iyūkh, ʿu/iyūn, ghu/
iyūb, and ju/iyūb
2:189 ‫ا �ل� �� ت‬
� N → Warsh vowels
‫�بيو‬ (Q. 40:67), (Q. 36:34), (Q. 5:109),
N → Ibn Jammāz (Q. 24:31)
‿l-buyūta N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
N → al-Wāqidī
A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ
‿l-buiyūta K
IK
N
… ‫ت��ق ت��لو�ه … ي��ق ت��لوك‬ tuqātilūhum … Vrb frm
2:191 ‫م‬ ‫م‬ A
‫قت‬ yuqātilūkum … qātalūkum (I↔III)
‫��لوك‬ AA
‫م‬
IA
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
taqtulūhum … H
yaqtulūkum … qatalūkum K
IK
rafathun … fusūqun
AA
N iʿrāb
2:197
‫ف ق‬ ‫فث‬ ‫ف‬ IA
�‫��لا ر�� ولا ��سو‬
rafatha … fusūqa A
H
tanwīn
K
marḍē(ti/h｡) K
IK
imāla
N
ّٰ ‫ت‬
2:207 ‫� ا �ل��ل�ه‬ ‫� �ا‬
‫�مر �ض‬ marḍā(ti/h｡) IA
AA
A tāʾ marb
marḍāt｡i H
A → Shuʿba
H
2:208 ‫ا �ل��س��ل‬ ‿s-silmi AA (Q. 47:35), (Q. 8:61) vowels
‫م‬
301
IA
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

302
IK
‿s-salmi N
K
IK
AA
turjaʿu
N
A Act↔Pass
2:210 �� ‫ى‬ (Q. 11:123)
‫ر جع‬ IA
tarjiʿu H
K
yurjaʿu N → Khārija Imperf (y↔t)
N
yaqūlu al-Farrāʾ: K used to read it yaqūlu for
K → al-Farrāʾ → Muḥammad b.
a very long time but he changed his
al-Jahm → IM
reading later on to yaqūla
IK
2:214 ‫� ت �ق‬ iʿrāb
‫ح�ى ي�� ول‬ IA
AA
yaqūla
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
al-Farrāʾ: K used to read it yaqūlu for

K → al-Farrāʾ → Muḥammad b.
a very long time but he changed his
al-Jahm → IM
reading later on to yaqūla
H
kathīrun
K
IK
2:219 �
‫�كى��ير‬ N ibdāl (b↔th)
kabīrun IA
AA
A
AA
IK → Ismāʿīl al-Qusṭ → Maḥbūb → Abū
‿l-ʿafwu IM: The widely-known reading of the
Zayd ʿUmar b. Shabba → ʿAbd Allāh b.
Meccans is ‿l-ʿafwa, in the accusative
ʿAmr al-Warrāq → IM
IK
2:219 ‫�ف‬ ‫�ق‬ iʿrāb
‫ا �ل�ع�� و‬ ‫�ل‬ N
IA Doubt from IM about IA’s reading
‿l-ʿafwa
A
H
K
303

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

304
IK
N
yaṭhurna AA Vrb frm (I↔V)
IA
‫ن‬ A → Ḥafṣ
2:222 �‫�ي��ط�هر‬
A → Shuʿba
yaṭṭahharna Gemin
H
K
yukhāfā H
IK
N
2:229
‫� ف‬ IA Act↔Pass
‫�خ�ا ��ا‬‫ي‬ yakhāfā
AA
A
K
IK
N
IA
2:230 ‫ى�ب�ي�� ن��ه�ا‬ yubayyinuhā AA Imperf (n↔y)
A
Appendix
H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
nubayyinuhā A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Abū
IM: This is wrong
Hishām → Ibn Ḥayyān → IM
IK
AA
tuḍārru A → Abān
IA → [X] → ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd b. Bakkār
IA → [X] → al-Akhfash Doubt from IM
N
2:233
‫ت‬ iʿrāb
‫لا ��ض‬
‫� �ا ر‬ A → Ḥafṣ
H
tuḍārra K
IM: I have no transmission of this
variant from IA through Ibn Dhakwān,
IA
however, the well-known reading in
al-Shām is tuḍārra
IK
ataytum
IK → Qunbul → IM
‫ت‬ N Vrb frm
2:233 �‫ا �� ت‬
‫يم‬ IA (I↔III)
ātaytum
305
AA
A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

306
H
K
IK
N
tamassūhunna A
2:236 ‫ن‬ ‫ت‬ AA
Vrb frm
��‫�م��سو�ه‬ (I↔III)
IA
H
tumāssūhunna
K
IK
N
qadruhu … qadruhu
AA
A → Shuʿba
2:236 ‫�ق�د ره … �ق�د ره‬ vowels
IA
H
qadaruhu … qadaruhu
K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
waṣiyyatun
Appendix
A → Shuʿba
2:240
‫�ص��ة‬
‫و� ي‬ K iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A → Ḥafṣ
IA
waṣiyyatan
AA
H
fa-yuḍaʿʿifuhu IK
fa-yuḍaʿʿifahu IA
iʿrāb
fa-yuḍāʿifahu A
‫ف‬ (Q. 57:11), (Q. 2:261), (Q. 64:17),
2:245 ‫� �ع��ف� �ه‬
‫�ي��ض‬ N
(Q. 3:130), (Q. 33:30)
H
fa-yuḍāʿifuhu Vrb frm
K
(II↔III)
AA
(Q. 2:247), (Q. 52:37), (Q. 88:22),

IK → Qunbul
(Q. 7:69)
N → Abū Qurra
wa-yabsuṭu A → Ḥafṣ
AA
H
K → al-Farrāʾ
2:245 A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → IM Notebook transmission ibdāl (s↔ṣ)
307
‫وي�ب��ص��ط‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

308
N
K → al-Dūrī
wa-yabṣuṭu
K
K → Nuṣayr → Muḥammad b. Idrīs
al-Dandānī
A
ʿasītum N
IK
IA
2:246 �‫�ع��س�� ت‬ AA (Q. 47:22) vowels
‫يم‬ ʿasaytum
A
H
K
IK
gharfatan N
AA
2:249 ‫غ� ف��ة‬
‫ر‬ A vowels
IA
ghurfatan
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
A
dafʿu
‫ف‬ IA
2:251 �� ‫د‬ (Q. 22:40), (Q. 22:38) Long vwl (±ā)
‫ع‬ H
K
N
difāʿu
A → Abān → ʿAbd al-Wahhāb
IK
bayʿa … khullata … shafāʿata
AA
iʿrāb
‫�ة‬ ‫ف‬ N
‫لا ب�ي� �ي��ه ولا خ��ل� ولا‬

2:254 ‫ع‬ A (Q. 14:31), (Q. 52:23)
‫�ش��ف� �ع��ة‬ bayʿun … khullatun …
IA
shafāʿatun
H tanwīn
K
IK
IA
‫أ‬ AA uṣūl: The alif of anā
2:258 �� ana uḥyī madd
‫ي‬
�‫ح�ي‬ A (Q. 6:163), (Q. 26:115), (Q. 18:38)
309
H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

310

anā uḥyī N → Qālūn
N → Warsh
IK
labithta … labithtu N
A
2:259 ‫�ث‬ AA (Q. 18:19) Assim
�‫�بل�� ت‬
IA
labitta … labittu
H
K
IK
N
yatasannah｡ A
(Q. 6:90), (Q. 69:28–9), (Q. 101:10), Cons Loss
2:259 ‫ل ي��ت��سن��ه‬ AA
‫م‬ (Q. 69–19–20) (±h)
IA
H
yatasann(a/ah｡)
K
IK
nunshiruhā N
Appendix
AA ibdāl (r↔z)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
IA
nunshizuhā
H
K
2:259 ‫�ن‬ A → Abān
‫ن�� ش��ر�ه�ا‬
A → Abān → ʿAbd al-Wahhāb
Vrb frm
nanshuruhā al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī
(I↔IV)
A → Abān → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī →
ʿUbayd Allāh b. ʿAlī l-Hāshimī → IM
IK
N
tense
aʿlamu A
2:259 ‫ا ع��ل‬ AA
‫م‬ IA
H iʿrāb
‿ʿlam
K
fa-ṣirhunna H
IK
2:260 ‫ن‬ ‫ف‬ N vowels
��‫��صر�ه‬ fa-ṣurhunna
IA
311
AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

312
A
K
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam (Q. 2:260), (Q. 43:15), (Q. 112:4)

juzuʾan AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar One has the choice to read in tathqīl
AA → Abū Zayd or takhfīf
IK
AA
IA
K
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → al-Qaṣabī
AA → al-Yazīdī
260 ‫�ج�ز وا‬ AA → al-ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl vowels
AA → Abū Zayd
juzʾan
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar
H
A → Ḥafṣ
Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak → Wuhayb al-
Marwazī → IM
Appendix
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Warsh

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
juzan｡ H → Sulaym → Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī in waqf mode Hamz
A
AA
yuḍāʿifu N
‫ف‬ (Q. 57:11), (Q. 3:130), (Q. 64:17), Vrb frm
2:261 ��‫� �ع‬
‫�ي��ض‬ H
(Q. 2:245), (Q. 33:30) (II↔III)
K
IK
yuḍaʿʿifu
IA
A
bi-rabwatin
IA
2:265
‫� � �ة‬
‫بربو‬ IK (Q. 23:50) vowels
N
313
bi-rubwatin AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

314
H
K
IK
uklahā N
AA
‫أ‬
2:265 ��
‫ك��ل�ه�ا‬ A (Q. 6:141), (Q. 34:16), (Q.13:4) vowels
IA
ukulahā
H
K
IK
fa-niʿimmā A → Ḥafṣ
N → Warsh
N
‫ف‬ AA
2:271 ‫� ن��عما‬ fa-niʿmmā vowels
A → Shuʿba
IA
fa-naʿimmā H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
wa-nukaffiru Imperf (n↔y)
A → Shuʿba
N → Abū Khulayd
N
2:271 ‫ى ك �ف‬
‫�� ر‬ ‫و‬ H
wa-nukaffir
K
iʿrāb
A → Shuʿba → K
IA
wa-yukaffiru
A → Ḥafṣ
IK (Q. 3:178)
N
AA
yaḥsibuhumu K
Hubayra: Ḥafṣ used to vocalize the sīn
2:273 �
�
�‫ح��س��ه‬ of yaḥsab with fatḥa but he changed vowels
‫ي ب� م‬ A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra
his reading to yaḥsib, with kasra on
the sīn
IA
yaḥsabuhumu A
H
315

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

316
Hubayra: Ḥafṣ used to vocalize the sīn

of yaḥsab with fatḥa but he changed
his reading to yaḥsib, with kasra on
the sīn
IK
N
AA
K
IA
fa‿ʾdhanū
A → Ḥafṣ
‫ف �ذ‬ A → al-Mufaḍḍal Vrb frm
2:279 ‫��ا ن�وا‬ A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā → ʿAmr b. al- (I↔IV)
Ṣabbāḥ → al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak →
A → Shuʿba
H
fa-ādhinū A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā → ʿAmr b. al-
Ṣabbāḥ → al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak →
IK
N
‫تظ ن‬ ‫تظ ن‬
Appendix
2:279 �‫لا ��ل�مو� ولا ��ل�مو‬ taẓlimūna … tuẓlamūna IA Act↔Pass

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
H
K
tuẓlamūna … taẓlimūna A → al-Mufaḍḍal
maysuratin N
IK
IA
2:280
‫� �ة‬
‫م��ي��سر‬ AA vowels
maysaratin
A
H
A
taṣaddaqū
AA → ʿAbd al-Wahhāb
IK
‫ق‬ N
2:280 ‫�ت��ص�د �وا‬ Gemin
IA
taṣṣaddaqū
AA
H
K
317

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

318
tarjiʿūna AA
IK
N
2:281
‫ن‬ ‫ت‬ IA (Q. 24:64) Act↔Pass
�‫�ر ج��عو‬ turjaʿūna
A
H
K
in H
IK
N
‫ن ت‬ ḥarf (an↔in)
2:282 ‫ا � ��ض‬ IA
‫� �ل‬ an hamz
AA
A
K
fa-tudhakkiru H
IK iʿrāb
fa-tudhkira
AA
2:282
‫ف �ذ‬ N
‫�ت�� ك‬
‫�ر‬
IA Vrb frm
fa-tudhakkira
A (II↔IV)
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
tijāratan ḥāḍiratan A
IK
N
2:282
‫ت� �ة �ض �ة‬
‫ج ر ح�ا � ر‬ IA Doubt from IM iʿrāb
tijāratun ḥāḍiratun
AA
H
K
IK
AA
AA → al-Yazīdī
fa-ruhunun IK → Shibl → al-Nabbāl → Qunbul vowels
IK → Shibl → al-Bazzī

al-Murrī
2:283 ‫ف ن‬ AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl
��‫�ر�ه‬
fa-ruhnun IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl
IK → Muṭarrif al-Shaqarī → ʿUbayd b.
ʿAqīl
Long vwl (±ā)
N
A
fa-rihānun H
K
319
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

320
IK
N
‿lladhī ‿ʾtumina IA
AA
‫تن‬ ‫�ذ‬ K
2:283 ��‫ا �ل� �ي� ا و�م‬ taskīn
H → Sulaym IM: This reading is wrong. The hamza
H → Sulaym → Khalaf can neither be vocalized with ḍamma
‿lladhī ‿ʾutumina
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam nor a ḍamma-like sound. It must
A → Ḥafṣ completely be devocalized (sākina)
IK
N
fa-yaghfir … wa-yuʿadhdhib AA
2:284
‫�ذ‬ ‫ف �ف‬ H iʿrāb
�‫�ي�� غ�� ر … و�ي�ع� ب‬
K
fa-yaghfiru … A
wa-yuʿadhdhibu IA
IK
N
‫�ت‬ A → Shuʿba
2:285 ‫� ب��ه‬�‫وك‬ wa-kutubihi (Q. 66:12) Long vwl (±ā)
IA
Appendix
AA
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
wa-kitābihi
H
N
IK
IA
AA
alif lām mīma‿llāhu H
K
Yaḥyā b. Ādam: In my last audition
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam with Shuʿba, I recited this verse as
such, just like H’s reading
A → Ḥafṣ IM: This is the known reading of A

ّٰ
3:1–2 ‫ا ل ا �ل��ل�ه‬ A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Abū waqf
‫م‬ Hishām al-Rifāʿī → Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-
Qāḍī → IM
al-Rifāʿī → Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-Qāḍī → IM
alif lām mīm｡ A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya →
Allāhu Muḥammad b. al-Jahm → IM
A → Shuʿba → ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Abī
Ḥammād → Abū l-Asbāṭ → Aḥmad b.
Muḥammad b. Ṣadaqa → IM
321
A → al-Farrāʾ → Muḥammad b. al-Jahm

→ IM

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

322
IK
emphatic rāʾ (mufakhkham)
A
IA
‿t-tawrāta N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān
al-rāʾ maftūḥa
H bayn al-fatḥ wa-l-kasr
3:3 ‫ا �تل�ورى�ه‬ ‿t-tawrǣta (Q. 3:193), (Q. 38:62), (Q. 14:26), imāla
N
(Q. 23:50)
N → Warsh
uṣūl: imāla
‿t-tawrēta AA
Imālat dhawāt al-rāʾ
K
IK
AA
sa-tughlabūna
A
‫�ش ن‬ wa-tuḥsharūna
3:12 �‫ح��رو‬
‫��س�ى غ��ل�بو ن� و ى‬ IA Imperf (y↔t)
N
sa-yughlabūna H
wa-yuḥsharūna K
IK
‫ن‬ AA
3:13 �‫ى ��ه‬ yarawnahum Imperf (y↔t)
Appendix
‫رو � م‬ A
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
H
K
N
tarawnahum
A → Abān
Throughout the Qurʾān except (Q. 5:16)

A → Shuʿba
riḍwānahu
A → Shaybān
A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Ḥammād
wa-ruḍwānun A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam →
Throughout the Qurʾān including
Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir
(Q. 5:16) ruḍwānahu

A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya → Ibn
al-Jahm → IM
3:15
‫�ض ن‬ A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Ḥammād → Abū vowels
�‫� و‬ ‫ور‬
l-Asbāṭ → Ibn Ṣadaqa → IM
Throughout the Qurʾān including
A → Ḥafṣ
(Q. 5:16) riḍwānahu
IK
N
wa-riḍwānun
AA
IA
323
H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

324
IK
N
IA
‫ن‬ inna ḥarf (an↔in)
3:19 �‫ا‬ AA
hamz
A
H
anna K
AA
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Qālūn Reading ‿ttabaʿan in waqf mode and
‿ttabaʿan｡ī
N → Warsh ‿ttabaʿanī in waṣl mode
N → al-Musayyabī
‫ن ت ن‬ N → Ismāʿīl b. Abī Uways
3:20 Long vwl (±ī)
��‫و�م�� ا �ب��ع‬ N → Abū Yūsuf al-Zuhrī [Yaʿqūb b. Abī
Ibrāhīm b. Saʿīd?]
IK
A
IA Reading ‿ttabaʿan in waqf mode and
‿ttabaʿan｡i
H ‿ttabaʿani in waṣl mode
K
Appendix
N → Abū Qurra

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA
‫�ق ن‬ wa-yaqtulūna Vrb frm
3:21 �‫و�ي�� ت��لو‬ AA
(I↔III)
A
K
wa-yuqātilūna H
IK
A → Shuʿba
‿l-mayti … ‿l-mayta (Q. 35:9), (Q. 6:122), (Q. 36:33), (Q. 6:139)
AA
IA
A → Ḥafṣ Throughout the Qurʾān

3:27 N (Q. 7:57), (Q. 49:12) Gemin
�‫ا لم�ى� ت� … ا لم�ى� ت‬ There is probably a misprint in the
H
edition of al-Sabʿa, which says wa-
‿l-mayyiti … ‿l-mayyita yukhriju l-ḥayya mina l-mayyiti wa-
yukhriju l-mayyita mina l-ḥayy.
K N lightens the yāʾ of mayyit (thus,
mayt) when it describes a living being
that has not died yet.
uṣūl: imāla
K
325
(Q. 3:102) tuqētihi

tuqē(tan/h｡)
Ishmām min ghayr mubālagha
H
(Q. 3:102) tuqātihi

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

326
tuqǣ(tan/h｡) N bayn al-fatḥ wa-l-kasr

IK
3:28 ‫ت��ق�ه‬ IA imāla
tuqā(tan/h｡)
AA
A
IK
N
AA
waḍaʿat H
3:36 �‫� �ع� ت‬
‫و �ض‬ K perf (at↔tu)
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
waḍaʿtu
IA
IK
N
wa-kafalahā Zakariyyāʾu hamz
3:37
‫�ف‬ AA Zakariyyāʾ, with hamza (mamdūd)
‫�� ل�ه�ا �ز ك‬
‫�ر �يا‬ ‫وك‬ throughout the Qurʾān
IA
Vrb frm
wa-kaffalahā Zakariyyāʾa A → Shuʿba
(I↔II)
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A → Ḥafṣ
Zakariyyā, without hamza (qaṣr)
wa-kaffalahā Zakariyyā H iʿrāb
throughout Qurʾān
K
IK
N
Perf (a↔at)
fa-nādat-hu A
3:39
‫ف‬ AA
‫� ن��ا د ى�ه‬
IA
H imāla
fa-nādēhu
K
fī ‿l-miḥrēbi inna ‿llāha IA imāla

fī ‿l-miḥrābi inna ‿llāha H
IK
ّٰ ‫ن‬
3:39 ‫�را ب� ا � ا �ل��ل�ه‬
‫�يف� ا لم��ح‬ N ḥarf (an↔in)
fī ‿l-miḥrābi anna ‿llāha AA hamz
A
K
327

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

328
IK Throughout the Qurʾān except

AA (Q. 42:23) yabshuru
yubashshiruka N
IA Throughout the Qurʾān
3:39 ‫ي��ب ش��رك‬ A Vrb frm (I↔II)
Throughout the Qurʾān except
H
(Q. 15:54) tubashshirūna
yabshuruka
The lightened form yabshur in (Q. 3:39,
K
45), (Q. 17:9), (Q. 18:2, 9), (Q. 42:23)
K
yabshuruki
H
IK
3:45 ‫ي��ب ش��رك‬ N Vrb frm (I↔II)
yubashshiruki IA
AA
A
N
wa-yuʿallimuhu
A
3:48 ‫وى�ع�ل�م�ه‬ IK imperf (n↔y)
wa-nuʿallimuhu AA
Appendix
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
inniya … ṭāʾiran N
‫أ‬ IK ḥarf (an↔in)
anniya … ṭayran
‫ا �ن� � خ��ل ق �ل ك ن‬
�‫� �م�أ‬ � ‫ي‬ AA (Q. 5:110) hamz
3:49 ‫ا �ل��ط�� ن ��كه��ئ��ة ا �ل��ط��م ف�� ن��ف�� خ‬ A innī/inniya will be included under
� ‫في� � في ن ير‬
IA yāʾāt al-iḍāfa
‫�و� ط�ىرا‬ ‫�ي��ه �ي�� ك‬ annī … ṭayran
H Long vwl (±ā)
K
fa-yuwaffīhim A → Ḥafṣ
N
IK
‫ف ف‬ IA
3:57 �‫��ى ��ه‬ Imperf (n↔y)
‫و ي� م‬ fa-nuwaffīhim AA
A
H
K
IK
329
N
kun fa-yakūnu AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

330
A
K
H
3:59
‫� ن ف� ن‬ iʿrāb
�‫�و‬
‫ك�� ي�� ك‬ IA → Ayyūb b. Tamīm → Hishām
IA IM: this is wahm (error). Ayyūb b.
kun fa-yakūna Tamīm used to read fa-yakūna but
IA → Ayyūb b. Tamīm → Hishām changed his reading to fa-yakūnu
IK
ha-antumū On the pattern of haʿantum
N
hā-ºantum AA ghayr mahmūz mamdūd istifhāman hamz
3:66 �‫�ه�ا ن� ت‬ N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
‫م‬ hā-ntum mamdūd ghayr mahmūz
N → Qālūn
A
IA No disagreement is reported on
hā-antum madd
H lengthening the alif of hāʾulāʾi and ulāʾi
K
N
‫ن ت‬ IA
3:73 ‫ا � �يو �ى‬ an madd
Appendix
AA
A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
ān IK
K
IK
uṣūl: al-hāʾ al-muttaṣila bi l-fiʿl
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K al-majzūm
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → al-Dūrī → (Q. 3:145), (Q. 4:115), (Q. 24:52),
Sulaymān b. Dāwūd al-Hāshimī (Q. 27:28), (Q. 39:7), (Q. 42:20),
N → Warsh (Q. 99:7–8), (Q. 90:7), (Q. 20:75),
yuʾaddihī … lā yuʾaddihī (Q. 7:111), (Q. 26:36)
A → Ḥafṣ
Ḥafṣ sometimes read the hāʾ with kasr

A → Ḥafṣ → Sahl [b. Zanjala?] → ʿAmr
and sometimes with sukūn though most
b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak
3:75 ‫�يود ه … لا �يود ه‬ of the time his reading was with kasr madd
→ Ibn al-Faraj
N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī Ismāʿīl yushimm al-hāʾa al-iḍjāʿ, ghayr
N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī → Ibn Abī mushbaʿ. Vocalizing the hāʾ with a yāʾ-
yuʾaddihi … lā yuʾaddihi
Mihrān → IM like vowel which is shorter than a yāʾ,
N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī → Abū ʿAwn i.e. closer to a kasra
331
→ Muḥammad b. Ḥamdūn
al-Ḥadhdhāʾ → IM

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

332
N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ

IA → Ibn Dhakwān
A → Shuʿba → K → Abū Tawba →
Muḥammad b. al-Jahm → IM
A → Ḥafṣ → Sahl [b. Zanjala?] → ʿAmr and sometimes with sukūn though
b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak most of the time his reading was
yuʾaddih … lā yuʾaddih with kasr taskīn
AA → al-Yazīdī
ʿAbbās asked AA about jazm al-hāʾ,
who answered that it is not laḥn
H
IK
taʿlamūna N
AA
‫ت ن‬ Vrb frm
3:79 �‫��ع�ل�مو‬ A
(I↔II)
IA
tuʿallimūna
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
wa-lā ya‌ʾmurukum N
K iʿrāb
A
3:80 ‫ولا ى�ا �مرك‬
‫م‬ wa-lā ya‌ʾmurakum IA
H
This is phonetic ikhtilās and not jazm
wa-lā ya‌ʾmurkum AA taskīn
(Q. 3:80)
IK
N
K
a-ya‌ʾmurukum
3:80 ‫اي�ا �مرك‬ A taskīn

‫م‬ IA
H
a-ya‌ʾmurkum AA This is phonetic ikhtilās and not jazm
H
li-mā ātaytukum
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra This is not known through A → Ḥafṣ
‫ت‬ A
3:81 �
‫لم�ا ا �ي�ى ك‬ vowels
‫م‬ K
la-mā ātaytukum
IK
333
AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

334
IA
la-mā ātaynākum N Perf (tu↔n)
IK
wa-akhadhtum
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
‫خ‬ N
3:81 �‫ا��ذ ت‬ (Q. 2:51), (18:77) Assim
‫و م‬ IA
wa-akhattum
AA
H
K
IK
N
IA
iṣrī AA
A
3:81 �‫ا �صر�ي‬ vowels
H
K
A → Shʿuba → Muʿallā b. Manṣūr → Ibn
uṣrī Saʿdān → Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b.
Wāṣil → IM
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
yabghūna … turjaʿūna AA Imperf (t↔y)

yabghūna … yurjaʿūna A → Ḥafṣ
A
‫ن‬ ‫غ ن‬ H
3:83 �‫�بى��و� … ىر ج� ��عو‬ K Imperf (t↔y)
tabghūna … turjaʿūna
N
IK
IA
H
K
ḥijju Ḥafṣ: ḥajj is the substantive noun while
ḥijj is the verbal noun. IM: this is wrong.

A → Ḥafṣ
It is the other way around, namely, ḥajj
3:97 �
‫ح‬ is the verbal while ḥijj is the substantive vowels
‫�ج‬ IK
N
ḥajju AA
A → Shuʿba
IA
335

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

336
tuqētihi K imāla
tuqǣtihi N bayna al-fatḥ wa-l-kasr
IK
‫ت‬ tuqātihi
3:102 ‫ت��ق�ا ��ه‬ AA imāla
A
IA
H
N
IK
AA
wa-yusāriʿūna IA
3:114
‫ن‬ imāla
�‫و�ي��س�ا ر�عو‬ A
H
K
Other transmitters from K did not
wa-yusēriʿūna K → al-Dūrī
perform imāla
IK
N
A → Shuʿba
wa-mā tafʿalū … fa-lan Imperf
tukfarūhu IA (t↔y)
‫�ف‬ AA was indifferent whether one reads
Appendix
‫ف ن‬
�‫و�م�ا ى�� ع��لوا … ��ل‬ AA with yāʾ or tāʾ, i.e., tafʿalū … tukfarūhu
3:115 ‫ىك‬
‫��ف� روه‬ or yafʿalū … yukfarūhu

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
Transmitting this variant only without
AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
transmitting the variant with the tāʾ
wa-mā yafʿalū … Imperf (t↔y)
H
fa-lan yukfarūhu
K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
AA Al-Dājūnī al-kabīr: Muḥammad b.
lā yaḍirkum
H → Ḥajjāj al-Aʿwar → Aḥmad b. Jubayr Aḥmad b. ʿUmar Abū Bakr al-Ramlī.
→ ʿAbd al-Razzāq b. al-Ḥasan → Al- Gemin
In al-Sabʿa, IM has Abū ʿAbd Allāh
3:120 ‫لا �ي� �ض�� رك‬ Dājūnī al-kabīr → IM ibdāl (r↔y)
‫م‬ Muḥammad b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Ramlī,
vowels
IA noted as a mistake and tadlīs by Ḍayf

A and Ibn al-Jazarī
lā yaḍurrukum
H
K
munazzalīna IA
N
IK
‫ن�ز ن‬ Vrb frm
3:124 �‫�م�� ل��ي‬ AA
munzalīna (II↔IV)
A
337
H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

338
IK
musawwimīna AA
A
‫ن‬ Act Ptcpl↔
3:125 �‫�م��سو�م��ي‬ N
Pass Ptcpl
IA
musawwamīna
H
K
A
AA
muḍāʿafatan N
(Q. 57:11), (Q. 2:261), (Q. 64:17), Vrb frm
3:130 ‫� �ض �ع��ف� ��ة‬
��‫م‬ H
(Q. 2:245), (Q. 33:30) (II↔III)
K
IK
muḍaʿʿafatan
IA
N There is no wāw in the codices of

sāriʿū ḥarf (±w)
IA Medina and Damascus
IK
A
3:133 ‫��س�ا ر�عوا‬-‫و‬
wa-sāriʿū H
(Q. 3:114), (Q. 3:176), (Q. 23:56) imāla
K
AA
Appendix
wa-sēriʿū K → al-Dūrī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
qarḥun … qarḥun AA
‫ق‬ ‫ق‬ IA
3:140 � … ‫�ر‬ (Q. 3:172) vowels
‫رح‬ ‫ح‬ A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
qurḥun … qurḥun H
K
K
IK
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → al-Dūrī →

uṣūl: al-hāʾ al-muttaṣila bi l-fiʿl
Sulaymān b. Dāwūd al-Hāshimī
al-majzūm
N → Warsh
nuʾtihī … nuʾtihī madd
→ Ibn al-Faraj
N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ Specified in (Q. 42:20) but could
be applied here. It contradicts Ibn
Mujāhid’s statement that these two
transmissions support the following
variant “nuʾtihi … nuʾtihi”
339
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

340

A → Ḥafṣ → Sahl → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → and sometimes with sukūn though
al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak most of the time his reading was with
kasr
N → Qālūn → Ibn Yazīd al-Ḥulwānī →
Ibn Mihrān → IM
N → Qālūn → Ibn Yazīd al-Ḥulwānī
→ Abū ʿAwn b. ʿAmr b. ʿAwn →
nuʾtihi … nuʾtihi Muḥammad b. Ḥamdūn al-Ḥadhdhāʾ
→ IM
IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī lā yushbiʿ al-kasr
kasr al-hāʾ without specifying that it is
(Q. 3:145) ‫ن�وت��ه �م ن��ه�ا … ن�وت��ه �م ن��ه�ا‬ IA → Ibn Dhakwān
in between yāʾ and kasra
A → Shuʿba → K → Abū Tawba →
A → Ḥafṣ → Sahl → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ →
and sometimes with sukūn though most
al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak
nuʾtih … nuʾtih of the time his reading was with kasr taskīn
AA → al-Yazīdī
ʿAbbās asked AA about jazm al-hāʾ,
who answered that it is not laḥn
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
wa-kāʾin IK on the pattern of kāʿin

N
AA
3:146 ‫� ن‬
‫و‬
�‫كا�ي‬ IA hamz
wa-ka-ayyin on the pattern of kaʿayyin
A
H
K
IK
Vrb frm
qutila N
(I↔III)
AA
‫�قت‬ A
3:146
‫��ل‬
IA
qātala Act↔Pass
H
K
IK
N
‿r-ruʿba A
3:151 �‫ا �لر�ع� ب‬ AA vowels
H
IA
341
‿r-ruʿuba throughout the whole Qurʾān

K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
342
IK
N
yaghshā A
3:154 ‫غش‬ AA Imperf (y↔t)
‫ى��ى‬
IA
H
taghshē
K
IK
N
A
‫ن‬ inna ‿l-amra kullahu
3:154 ‫ا � الا�مرك�ل�ه‬ K iʿrāb
IA
H
inna ‿l-amra kulluhu AA
IK
H
yaʿmalūna
K
‫ن‬ AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
3:156 �‫ى�عم�لو‬ Imperf (y↔t)
N
A
taʿmalūna
AA
Appendix
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
IA
A → Shuʿba
muttum A → Ḥafṣ
3:157, 158 �‫� تم� … � تم‬ Ḥafṣ reads muttum with a ḍamma on vowels
‫م‬ ‫م‬ A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿAmr Sahl → ʿAmr b.
the mīm, only here and in (Q. 3:158).
He reads mittu, mitnā, etc. in the rest of
the Qurʾān
N
mittum H
K
IK
N
IA
‫ن‬ tajmaʿūna AA
3:157 ‫جى‬
�‫��م�عو‬ Imperf (y↔t)
A
H
K
yajmʿūna A → Ḥafṣ
343

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
344
IK
yaghulla AA
A
3:161 ‫غ‬ N Act↔Pass
‫�ي��ل‬
IA
yughalla
H
K
IK
AA
taḥsibanna
K
‫ت‬
3:169 ‫� ن‬ �
�‫ح��س��ب‬ N vowels
IA
taḥsabanna A
H
IK
N
AA
‫قت‬ qutilū
3:169 ‫��لوا‬ A Vrb frm (I↔II)
H
K
Appendix
quttilū IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA
ّٰ ‫ن‬ wa-anna ḥarf (an↔in)
3:171 ‫وا � ا �ل��ل�ه‬ AA
hamz
A
H
wa-inna K
IK
N
‿l-qarḥu AA
IA
3:172 ‫ا �ل��ق‬ (Q. 3:140) vowels

‫رح‬ A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
‿l-qurḥu H
K
AA
wa-khāfūn｡ī N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
N → Ibn Jammāz
3:175
‫خ ف ن‬ N → al-Musayyabī Long vwl (±ī)
�‫و��ا �و‬
N → Qālūn
345
wa-khāfūn｡i
N → Warsh
IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
346
IA
A
H
K
N always reads yuḥzin except in

yuḥzinka N
(Q. 21:103) yaḥzunuhum
IK
IA Vrb frm
3:176 ‫ح�ز ن��ك‬
�‫ي‬ AA (I↔IV)
yaḥzunka (Q. 58:10), (Q. 12:13), (Q. 21:103)
A
H
K
yusēriʿūna K → al-Dūrī
K
IK
‫ن‬ N
3:176 �‫ي��س�ا ر�عو‬ imāla
yusāriʿūna IA
AA
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
yaḥsibanna
K
vowels
3:178, 180 ‫� ن‬ ‫ى‬
�‫ح��س��ب‬ N (Q. 2:273)
IA
yaḥsabanna
A
taḥsabanna H Imperf (y↔t)
IK
N
yamīza A
3:179 ‫�م��ز‬
‫يي‬ AA (Q. 8:37) Vrb frm (I↔II)
IA
H
yumayyiza
K
AA
yaʿmalūna
IK
N
3:180
‫ن‬ A Imperf (y↔t)
�‫ى�عم�لو‬
taʿmalūna IA
H
347

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

348
sa-yuktabu mā qālū wa-

qatluhumu ‿l-anbiyāʾa … H Imperf (y↔n)
wa-yaqūlu
‫ق قت‬ ‫�ت‬ AA Act ↔ Pass
�‫�� ب� �م�ا ��ا �ل ا ��له‬ ‫��س�ى ك‬ IK
3:181 ‫و �قو � م‬ ‫ن‬
‫الا ��ب� ي��ا ء … وى�� ول‬ sa-naktubu mā qālū wa- N iʿrāb
qatlahumu ‿l-anbiyāʾa …
A
wa-naqūlu
IA
Imperf (y↔n)
K
This is how it is written in the codex of

wa-bi-z-zuburi IA
Damascus
N
IK
3:184 ‫�ز‬ ḥarf (±b)
‫و ب(��ـ)ا �ل ب�ر‬ AA
wa-z-zuburi
A
H
K
IK
la-yubayyinunnahu …
AA Imperf (y↔t)
‫�ت‬ wa-lā yaktumūnahu
3:187 ‫�� مون��ه‬
‫�ل�ى ب��ي��ن ن��ه … ولا ى ك‬ A → Shuʿba
la-tubayyinunnahu …
N Imperf (y↔t)
wa-lā taktumūnahu
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
H
K
A → Ḥafṣ
lā yaḥsibanna … IK
vowels
yaḥsibunnahum AA
lā yaḥsibanna …
N Tense
taḥsibannahum
lā yaḥsabanna …
3:188 �
�‫ح��س� ن��ه‬ �
‫ح��س� ن‬
‫�ب� … ى‬ ‫لا ى‬ IA
‫�ب � م‬ taḥsabannahum
lā taḥsabanna … H
Imperf (y↔t)
taḥsabannahum A
lā taḥsibanna …
K
taḥsibannahum
N bayna al-fatḥ wa-l-kasr. There is slight

AA descripancy in the description of the
li-l-abrǣr IA imāla here and in (Q. 3:3). AA and K
H are said to have performed a sharper
3:193, 198 K imāla than H and N imāla
‫�ل�لا �برا ر‬
IK
li-l-abrār bi-l-fatḥ
A
349
H → Sulaym → Khalaf
li-l-abrēr
H → Sulaym → Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

350
IK
N
IA
AA
rusulika uṣūl: rusul
3:194 ‫ر��س�ل�ك‬ AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr taskīn
(Q. 2:285), (Q. 40:50), (Q. 7:101), (Q. 5:32)
A
H
K
ruslika AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
IK Vrb frm
wa-qātalū wa-quttilū
IA (I↔III)
Vrb frm
N
‫قت قت‬ wa-qātalū (I↔II↔III)
3:195 ‫و��لوا و��لوا‬ A (Q. 9:111)
wa-qutilū
AA
Act↔Pass
wa-qutilū H
wa-qātalū K
wajhiya … minniya … wa-

… �‫��ه� … �م�ن‬ � inniya … li-ya … inniya … N yāʾāt al-iḍāfa
3:20, 35, ‫يأ‬ ‫وج ي‬ anṣāriya in/an variant is under (Q. 3:49)
36, 41, 49,
… �‫ و�إ�ين� … يل� … � �ين‬wajhī … minnī … wa-innī … No disagreement on (Q. 3:40)
‫أن‬ IK
Appendix
52 �‫� ��ص�ا ر �ي‬ lī … anniya … anṣārī balaghaniya taskīn

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
wajhī … minniya … wa-

innī … liya … anniya … AA
anṣārī
wajhiya … minnī … wa- IA
innī … lī … annī … anṣārī A → Ḥafṣ
wajhī … minnī … A → Shuʿba
wa-innī … lī … H
annī … anṣārī K
IK
N
IA
Abū Zayd transmitted both variants on

AA → Abū Zayd
behalf of AA
tassāʾalūna
ʿAbbās: One is free to choose either
AA → al-ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl variant though I read the lightened
form (bi-l-takhfīf)
AA → al-Yazīdī
A
H
K
351
‫ن‬ ‫ت‬
4:1 �‫��س�ا ء �لو‬ tasāʾalūna AA → Hārūn Gemin

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

352
AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl
AA → ʿAdī b. al-Faḍl → al-Wāqidī
AA → Khārija b. Muṣʿab
AA → Abū Zayd Abū Zayd transmitted both variants
ʿAbbās: One is free to choose either
AA → al-ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl variant though I read in the lightened
form (bi-l-takhfīf )
wa-l-arḥāmi H
N
IK
4:1 ‫الا ح�ا‬ IA iʿrāb
‫و ر م‬ wa-l-arḥāma
AA
A
K
IK
AA
qiyāman A
4:5
‫ق‬ H Long vwl (±ā)
‫�ي�ما‬
K
N
qiyaman
Appendix
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
IK
IA
‫ف‬ ḍiʿāfan khāfū AA
4:9 ‫�ض‬
‫� �ع��ف� �ا خ��ا �وا‬ imāla
A
K
H → ʿUbayd Allāh b. Mūsā
ḍiʿēfan khēfū H → Sulaym → Khalaf
IK
N
AA
wa-sa-yaṣlawna
H
‫ن‬ K
4:10 �‫و��سي��ص��لو‬ (Q. 88:4), (Q. 84:12) Act ↔ Pass
A → Ḥafṣ
IA
A → Abān
wa-sa-yuṣlawna
A → Shuʿba
IK
IA
353
wāḥidatan
AA
A
‫ا �ة‬
4:11 ‫و ح�د‬ iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

354
H
K
wāḥidatun N
IK Disagreement when the alif of umm

N is preceded by kasra or yāʾ. They read
with ḍamma on the alif in (Q. 4:11)
fa-li-ummihi A
fa-li-ummihi ”, (Q. 16:78) min buṭūni
AA ummahātikum, (Q. 28:59) fī ummihā,
‫ف‬ IA and (Q. 43:4) fī ummi l-kitābi
4:11 ‫��لا �م�ه‬ vowels
H They read with kasra on the alif in
(Q. 4:11) fa-li-immihi, (Q. 28:59) fī
immihā, and (Q. 43:4) fī immi l-kitābi.
fa-li-immihi
K H reads (Q. 16:78) min buṭūni
immihātikum but K reads with a fatḥa
on the mīm: min buṭūni immahātikum
IA
yūṣā IK
A → Shuʿba
N
4:11 ‫�يو�صى‬ Act ↔ Pass
AA
yūṣī H
K
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
IK
yūṣā
A → Shuʿba
Only A → Ḥafṣ reads yūsī in (Q. 4:11)
A → Ḥafṣ and yūṣā in (Q. 4:12) whereas the
4:12 ‫�يو�صى‬ Act ↔ Pass
N other Readers read the same variant
AA consistently in verses 11 and 12
yūṣī
H
K
IK
A
yudkhilhu AA
4:13, 14 ‫ى�د خ��ل�ه‬ H Imperf (y↔n)

K
N
nudkhilhu
IA
Also hādhānni in (Q. 20:63) and

(Q. 22:19), fa-dhānnika in (Q. 28:32),
wa-lladhānni IK
hātaynni in (Q. 28:27), and alladhaynni
in (Q. 41:29)
A
355
N They all read the lightened form of

‫�ذ ن‬ IA
4:16 � ‫وا �ل� ا‬ wa-lladhāni hādhāni, fa-dhānika, hātayni, and Gemin

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

356
H alladhayni except AA in (Q. 28:32)

K reading fa-dhānnika
AA
IK
They read karhan also in (Q. 9:53) and
N
(Q. 46:15)
karhan AA
4:19 A They read karhan in (Q. 9:53) but vowels
‫ك‬
‫�ر�ه�ا‬
kurhan in (Q. 46:15). AA → Ibn
IA
Dhakwān reads karhan in (Q. 46:15)
H They read kurhan also in (Q. 9:53) and
kurhan
K (Q. 46:15)
IK
mubayyanatin
A → Shuʿba
Also reading (Q. 24:34) mubayyanātin
N
AA
Act ptcpl↔
4:19 ‫�م�� ن��ة‬ IA
‫بي‬ Pass ptcpl
mubayyinatin H
K Also reading (Q. 24:34) mubayyinātin
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
‿l-muḥṣanāti … AA Reading muḥṣanāt throughout the
muḥṣanātin … ‿l-muḥṣanāti A whole Qurʾān.
IA
‫� �ن‬ ��‫ا لم‬ H Act ptcpl ↔
4:25 �‫ح��ص�� ت‬‫ح��ص��ن� ت� … م‬
‫ت‬ ‫ا ل � �ن‬
��‫ح��ص‬��‫… م‬ K Pass ptcpl
Mujāhid [b. Jabr] → Qays b. Saʿd → They read muḥṣanāt, with fatḥa on
Ḥammād b. Salama → Ḥajjāj b. al- the ṣād, only in (Q. 4:24). They read
‿l-muḥṣināti …
Minhāl → Abū Ḥamza al-Anasī → IM muḥṣināt, with kasra on the ṣād,
muḥṣinātin … ‿l-muḥṣināti
IK → Ḥammād b. Salama → Ḥajjāj b. throughout the whole Qurʾān: (Q. 5:5)
al-Minhāl → Abū Ḥamza al-Anasī → and (Q. 24:4, 23)
IM
IK
N
Act ↔ Pass
AA
wa-aḥalla … uḥṣinna IA
A → Shaybān → ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Abī
Ḥammād → Muḥammad b. ʿUmar b.
al-Walīd al-Kindī → ʿAlī b. al-ʿAbbās
al-Bajalī → IM
K
357
wa-uḥilla … aḥṣanna
H
4:24, 25 ‫ا ح� … ا � ن‬
�‫ح��ص‬ wa-uḥilla … uḥṣinna A → Ḥafṣ Act ↔ Pass
‫و ل‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

358
A → Shuʿba
wa-aḥalla … aḥṣanna
A → Sufyān al-Thawrī → ʿUbayd Allāh
b. Mūsā → al-Ḥusayn b. ʿAlī b. al-
wa-aḥalla
Aswad → Muḥammad b. al-Ḥusayn b.
Shahrayār → IM
IK
N
tijāratun
AA
4:29
‫ت� �ة‬
‫جر‬ IA iʿrāb
H
tijāratan K
A
N
IK
IA
nukaffir … wa-nudkhilkum AA
4:31 � ‫ىك‬
‫��ف� ر … وى�د خ��ل ك‬ Imperf (n↔y)
‫م‬ A
H
K
yukaffir … wa-yudkhilkum A → al-Mufaḍḍal → Abū Zayd
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
madkhalan (Q. 22:59)
A → Shuʿba → K
IK
IA
4:31 ‫�م�د خ��لا‬ vowels
AA All Readers read (Q. 17:80)
mudkhalan
A “mudkhala … mukhraja”
H
K
IK They soften the hamza of sa‌ʾala when

K it occurs as a command for the second
person and when preceded by wāw or
wa-salū AJ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
fāʾ, such as (Q. 10:94) fa-sali ‿lladhīna,
Shayba [b. Naṣāḥ] → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar (Q. 17:101) fa-sal banī Isrāʾīla, and
→K (Q. 43:45) wa-sal man arsalnā
AA They articulate the hamza in all the
4:32 ‫و��س�ى��لوا‬ hamz
N aforementioned examples, i.e., fa‿sʾali
‿lladhīna, fa‿sʾal banī Isrāʾīla, and
A
wa‿sʾal man arsalnā. All Readers,
wa‿sa‌ʾalū IA including IK and K, articulate the
hamza in (Q. 60:10) wa-l-yasʾalū mā
H anfaqū because it is a command for the
third person
359
IK
ʿāqadat N Vrb frm
4:33 ‫�ع��ق�د ت‬
� AA (I↔III)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

360
IA
A
ʿaqadat H
K
Al-Mufaḍḍal was the only one to come

wa-l-jāri ‿l-janbi A → al-Mufaḍḍal → Abū Zayd
up with this variant
IK
N
4:36 �‫وا �جل��ا ر ا �جل��ن� ب‬ IA vowels
wa-l-jāri ‿l-junubi AA
A
H
K
IK
N
bi-l-bukhli A
4:37 ‫�خ‬ AA (Q. 57:24) vowels
‫ب�ا �ل ب��ل‬
IA
H
bi-l-bakhali
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
ḥasanatun yuḍaʿʿifhā IK
ḥasanatan yuḍaʿʿifhā IA iʿrāb
ḥasanatun yuḍāʿifhā N
‫ح��سن��ة‬ � ‫وا ن� ت��ك‬
4:40 A
‫� �ع��ف��ه�ا‬
‫�ي��ض‬
AA Vrb frm
ḥasanatan yuḍāʿifhā
H (II↔III)
K
IK
Act↔Pass
AA
tusawwā
A Vrb frm
‫ت‬ (II↔V)
4:42 ‫��سو�ى‬ N
tassawwā Gemin
IA
H
tasawwē imāla
K
IK
N
Vrb frm
4:43 ‫ل ت‬
�‫م��س‬ lāmastumu A (Q. 5:6)
‫م‬ (I↔III)
AA
IA
361

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

362
H
lamastumu
K
IK
niʿimmā A → Ḥafṣ
N → Warsh
N
‫ن‬ AA
4:58 ‫��عما‬ niʿmmā (Q. 2:271) vowels
A → Shuʿba
IA
naʿimmā H
K
AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī

ani ‿qtulū … awu ‿khrujū
AA → al-Yazīdī
IA
‫أ‬ ‫قت‬ IK
4:66 ‫ ا ن� ا ��لوا … � و ا خ�ر�ج�وا‬anu ‿qtulū … awu ‿khrujū vowels
N
K
ani ‿qtulū … awi A
‿khrujū H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
AA
‫�ق‬ qalīlun
4:66 A iʿrāb
‫��يل��ل‬
H
K
qalīlan IA According to the codex of Damascus
IK
takun A → Ḥafṣ
N
4:73 ‫ل ىكن‬ AA Imperf (y↔t)

�� ‫م‬
IA
yakun
A → Shuʿba
H
K
IK
yuẓlamūna H
4:77
‫ظ ن‬ K All Readers read (Q. 4:49) yuẓlamūna Imperf (y↔t)
�‫ى��ل�مو‬
363
N
tuẓlamūna AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

364
A
IA
AA Devocalising the tāʾ and assimilating it

bayyaṭ_ṭāʾifatun
H with the ṭāʾ
IK
4:81 ‫�� ت ط�ا ئ��ف� ��ة‬
� ‫ب�ي‬ N Assim
bayyata ṭāʾifatun A
IA
K
IK
N
fa-tabayyanū AA ibdāl (b↔th)
4:94
‫ف‬ IA (Q. 49:6)
‫�ت��ى�ى�ىوا‬
A
H ibdāl (b↔y)
fa-tathabbatū
K ibdāl (t↔n)
IK
IK → Qunbul
IK → al-Bazzī
Appendix
4:94 ‫ا �ل��س��ل‬ ‿s-salāma IK → Muṭarrif al-Shaqarī Long vwl (±ā)

‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK → Shibl → Ḥakīm
AA
K
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
A → Abān → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
A → Abān → Ḥaramī → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
→ al-Ushnānī → IM
‿s-silma
A → Abān → Shaybān b. Muʿāwiya →
[Mūsā b. Hārūn?] → IM
N
IA
‿s-salama H vowels
IK → Shibl
ʿUbayd: “They?” read every word in
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl the Qurʾan which was derived from
“istislām” without alif
IK
AA
‫غ‬ ghayru
4:95 ‫��ير‬ A iʿrāb
365
H
N

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

366
K
IA
ghayra
Rawḥ → Ḥusayn b. Bishr al-Ṣūfī → IM
IK
N
nuʾtīhi A
4:114 ‫ىوت�ي��ه‬ IA Imperf (n↔y)
K
AA
yuʾtīhi
H
In addition to (Q. 19:60), (Q. 40:40)

and (Q. 40:60) sa-yudkhalūna. Only IK
IK
→ Maʿrūf b. Mushkān →Muṭarrif al-
Shaqarī reads (Q. 35:33) yudkhalūnahā
A → Shuʿba → Ibn ʿUṭārid → Abū
Hishām A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā → Aḥmad b. ʿUmar
yudkhalūna al-Wakīʿī + Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Abū
+ Khalaf read (Q. 40:40) yadkhulūna
Hishām
In addition to (Q. 19:60), (Q. 35:33)
yudkhalūnahā, and (Q. 40:40).
AA
However, AA reads (Q. 40:60)
Appendix
‫خ ن‬
4:124 �‫ي��د ��لو‬ sa-yadkhulūna. Act↔Pass

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba → K
A → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Khallād
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā → Khalaf
yadkhulūna In all the aforementioned cases
IA
N
H
K
IK
N
yaṣṣālaḥā
IA
Vrb frm
4:128 ‫ح�ا‬
��‫�ي��ص��ل‬ AA
(IV↔VI)
A
yuṣliḥā H
K
IK
N
talwū AA
talwū derives from lawā while talū
4:135 ‫ت��لوا‬ A Root
derives from waliya
K
H
367
talū
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

368
IK
AA
nuzzila … unzila Act↔Pass
IA
‫أ‬ A → Shuʿba → K
4:136 ‫�ن�ز ل … � �ن�ز ل‬ N
A
nazzala … anzala Act↔Pass
H
K
IK
N
IA
nuzzila
4:140 ‫�ن�ز ل‬ AA Act↔Pass
H
K
nazzala A
IK
N
AA
4:145 ‫ا �ل�د رك‬ ‿d-daraki vowels
IA
A → Shuʿba → K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
‿d-darki H
K
A → Ḥafṣ reads yuʾtīhim only in this

yuʾtīhim A → Ḥafṣ specific location, otherwise he reads
nuʾtīhim in the rest of this sūra
A → Shuʿba
H
4:152
‫ت‬ Imperf (n↔y)
�‫ى�ؤ ��ه‬ IK Only H reads (Q. 4:162) sa-yuʾtīhim
‫ي �م‬
nuʾtīhim AA whereas all the other Readers,
N including A→ Ḥafṣ, read sa-nuʾtīhim
IA
K
IK
arnā
al-Khaffāf
AA → Abū Zayd
‫أ‬
4:153 ‫� رن�ا‬ IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf (Q. 7:143), (Q. 41:29), (Q. 2:128) taskīn
arinā AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith
369
AA → al-Yazīdī
AA → Hārūn

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

370
AA → ʿUbayd
N
H
K
arinā
A → Shuʿba
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
taʿddū N
vowels
taʿaddū N → Warsh
IK
‫ت‬ IA
4:154 ‫��ع�د وا‬
AA
taʿdū Vrb frm (I↔V)
A
H
K
sa-yuʾtīhim H
IK
4:162 �‫��س�ى ت��ه‬ N (Q. 4:152) Imperf (n↔y)
‫وي � م‬ sa-nuʾtīhim
IA
Appendix
AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
K
Zubūr throughout the Qurʾan, e.g.,

Zubūran H
(Q. 21:105) fī ‿Z-Zubūri
IK
N
4:163 ‫�ز ب�ورا‬ IA vowels
Zabūr throughout the Qurʾan, e.g.,
Zabūran
AA (Q. 21:105) fī ‿Z-Zabūri
A
K
IK
AA
H
K
shana‌ʾānu A → Ḥafṣ
5:2
‫ش �ن ن‬ N → Ibn Jammāz vowels
� ‫�� ئ��ا‬
N → al-Aṣmaʿī
N → Warsh
N → Qālūn
IA
371
shanʾānu
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

372
N → al-Wāqidī
N → al-Musayyabī
IK
in
AA
N
5:2 ‫ا ن� �ص�د وك‬ A ḥarf (an↔in)
‫م‬ an IA
H
K
IK
N
wa-l-muḥṣanātu … AA
muḥṣanāt throughout the Qurʾān
wa-l-muḥṣanātu A
IA
…� ‫ح�� ن ت‬��‫وا لم‬ H Act Ptcpl↔
5:5 ‫ت‬ ‫��ص�� ن‬
��‫وا لم��ح��ص‬ K Pass Ptcpl
They read muḥṣanāt, with fatḥa on
Mujāhid [b. Jabr] → Qays b. Saʿd →
the ṣād, only in (Q. 4:24). They read
wa-l-muḥṣinātu … Ḥammād b. Salama → Ḥajjāj b. al-
muḥṣināt, with kasra on the ṣād,
wa-l-muḥṣinātu Minhāl → Abū Ḥamza al-Anasī → IM
throughout the Qurʾān: (Q. 5:5) and
IK → Ḥammād b. Salama → Ḥajjāj b. al- (Q. 24:4, 23)
Appendix
Minhāl → Abū Ḥamza al-Anasī → IM

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
H
wa-arjulikum
AA
‫أ‬ A → Shuʿba
5:6 �
‫و� ر ج��ل ك‬ iʿrāb
‫م‬ N
IA
wa-arjulakum
K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
lāmastumu A
Vrb frm
5:6 ‫ل ت‬
�‫م��س‬ AA (Q. 4:43)
‫م‬ (I↔III)
IA
H
lamastumu
K
IK
N
qāsiyatan A
5:13 ‫�ق��س��ة‬ AA Long vwl (±ā)
‫ي‬
IA
H
373
qasiyyatan
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

374
A → Shaybān
A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Ḥammād
ruḍwānahu Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir
al-Jahm → IM
A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Ḥammād → Abū
5:16 ‫ر �ض‬
‫� ون��ه‬ l-Asbāṭ → Ibn Ṣadaqa → IM (Q. 3:15) vowels
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
riḍwānahu
AA
IA
H
K
IK
N
IA uṣūl: rusul
rusulunā
5:32 ‫ر��س�� نل��ا‬ A (Q. 2:285), (Q. 40:50), (Q. 7:101), taskīn
H (Q. 3:194)
K
Appendix
ruslunā AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
li-s-suḥuti … ‿s-suḥuta …
AA
‿s-suḥuta
K
�‫ح� ت‬
��‫ح� ت� … ا �ل��س‬ ��‫�ل��ل��س‬ N
5:42, 62,
… li-s-suḥti … ‿s-suḥta … A vowels
63
�‫ح� ت‬��‫ا �ل��س‬ ‿s-suḥta IA
H
li-s-saḥti … ‿s-saḥta …
N → Khārija → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl
‿s-saḥta
IK
A In both, waṣl and waqf modes
H
There is no disagreement among
IA the Readers in reading (Q. 5:3)
wa‿khshawn｡i
K wa‿khshawni l-yawma both in waṣl and
5:44
‫�خ ن‬ N → Qālūn waqf modes, including AA and N Long vwl (±ī)
�‫وا � ش��و‬
N → al-Musayyabī Also discussed under yāʾāt al-iḍāfa
N → Warsh
AA
wa‿khshawn｡ī N → Ibn Jammāz Only in waṣl mode
375

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

376
anna ‿n-nafsa bi-n-nafsi IK

wa-l-ʿayna bi-l-ʿayni wa-l- AA
anfa bi-l-anfi wa-l-udhuna
bi-l-udhuni wa-s-sinna
bi-s-sinni wa-l-jurūḥu IA
qiṣāṣun
iʿrāb
anna ‿n-nafsa bi-n-nafsi A
wa-l-ʿayna bi-l-ʿayni wa-l-
‫ن �ف‬ ‫أ ن ن �ف‬
anfa bi-l-anfi wa-l-udhuna
‫� � ا �ل�� س ب�ا �ل�� أ��س‬ bi-l-udhuni wa-s-sinna
‫نف‬ ‫ا �ل�ع�� ن �ا �ل�ع�� ن‬ H
�� ‫ي� وال‬ ‫و ي� ب‬
bi-s-sinni wa-l-jurūḥa
5:45
‫ل أ ن ف ال أ �ذ ن‬ qiṣāṣun
� � ‫ب�ا � �� و‬
‫أ‬
‫ �ا ل� �ذ ن� وا �ل��س ن �ا �ل��س ن‬anna ‿n-nafsa bi-n-nafsi
� ‫�ب‬ ‫ ب‬wa-l-ʿaynu bi-l-ʿayni wa-l-
� ‫ق‬ �
‫ل‬
� ‫ا‬ anfu bi-l-anfi wa-l-udhunu
‫ا‬
‫و ج روح � ص‬�‫ص‬ �� K iʿrāb
bi-l-udhuni wa-s-sinnu
bi-s-sinni wa-l-jurūḥu
qiṣāṣun
anna ‿n-nafsa bi-n-nafsi wa-
l-ʿayna bi-l-ʿayni wa-l-anfa Reading udhn throughout the whole
bi-l-anfi wa-l-udhna bi-l- N Qurʾān. All the other Readers read vowels
udhni wa-s-sinna bi-s-sinni udhun
wa-l-jurūḥa qiṣāṣun
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
wa-li-yaḥkuma H ḥarf (li↔l)

IK
N
5:47 �
‫حك‬
��‫�ل‬ IA
‫وي م‬ wa-l-yaḥkum iʿrāb
AA
A
K
IK
N
AA
‫غ ن‬ yabghūna
5:50 �‫�بى��و‬ A Imperf (n↔y)
H
K
tabghūna IA
AA
wa-yaqūla
AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr ʿAlī b. Naṣr: AA read both: wa-yaqūla
AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr and wa-yaqūlu
iʿrāb
A
‫�ق‬ wa-yaqūlu
5:53 ‫و ي‬
‫�� ول‬- H
K
IK
According to the codices of M
edina,
377
yaqūlu N ḥarf (±w)

Mecca, and Damascus
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

378
IK
A
man yartadda AA
5:54 ‫�م� ن� �يرت��د د‬ H Gemin
K
N
man yartadid
IA
IK
N
A
wa-l-kuffāra
IA
5:57 ‫ا �ل ك �ف‬
‫�� ا ر‬ ‫و‬ iʿrāb
H
AA → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī
AA
wa-l-kuffāri
K
wa-ʿabuda ‿ṭ-ṭāghūti H vowels

IK
N
5:60 ‫�ع��د ا �ل��طغ�� ت‬
�‫و‬ IA
‫و ب‬ wa-ʿabada ‿ṭ-ṭāghūta iʿrāb
AA
A
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
Reading (Q. 6:124) risālātihi and
H
(Q. 7:144) bi-risālātī
K
risālatahu Reading (Q. 6:124) risālatahu and
IK
(Q. 7:144) bi-risālatī
5:67 ‫ر��س�ا �تل��ه‬ Reading (Q. 6:124) risālatahu Long vwl (±ā)
A → Ḥafṣ
and (Q. 7:144) bi-risālatī
Reading (Q. 6:124) risālātihi and
N
(Q. 7:144) bi-risālatī
risālātihi IA Reading (Q. 6:124) risālātihi and
A → Shuʿba (Q. 7:144) bi-risālātī
IK
N
takūna
A
5:71
‫ال ت ن‬
‫ا �ك‬
�‫�و‬ IA iʿrāb
AA
takūnu H
K
IK
N
ʿaqqadtumu
379
AA Vrb frm
5:89 �‫�ع��ق�د ت‬ A → Ḥafṣ (I↔II↔III)
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

380
A → Shuʿba
ʿaqadtumu H
K
ʿāqadtumu IA
IK
N
fa-jazāʾu mithli tanwīn
AA
5:95 ‫ف�ج�ز ث‬ IA
‫� ا ء �م��ل‬
A
fa-jazāʾun mithlu H iʿrāb
K
IK
A
tanwīn
kaffāratun ṭaʿāmu AA
5:95 ‫��ف� �ة ��ط�ع�ا �م��س �ك ن‬
�‫��ي‬ H
‫م‬ ‫او ك ر‬
K
N iʿrāb
kaffāratu ṭaʿāmi
IA
qiyaman IA
IK
Appendix
N
‫ق‬ AA
5:97 ‫�ي�ما‬ qiyāman Long vwl (±ā)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
IK
N
‿stuḥiqqa … ‿l-awlayāni AA Act↔Pass
IA
�‫ح ق ع��ل��ه‬ ��‫ا ��ست‬ K
5:107 ‫� ي �م‬
‫ن‬ A → Shuʿba
�‫الا و�ل��ي‬ ‿stuḥiqqa … ‿l-awwalīna
H
A → Ḥafṣ Long vwl (±ā)
‿staḥaqqa … ‿l-awlayāni IK → Qurra b. Khālid → ʿAlī b. Naṣr →

Naṣr b. ʿAlī

‿l-ghiyūbi A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam
H
IK
IA
K
381
iyūb, and ju/iyūb

N → al-Musayyabī (Q. 2:189), (Q. 40:67), (Q. 36:34),
5:109 �‫ا �ل غ��يو ب‬ ‿l-ghuyūbi N → Qālūn (Q. 24:31) vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

382
N → Warsh
N → Ibn Jammāz
‿l-ghuiyūbi K
ṭāʾiran N
IK Long vwl (±ā)
IA
5:110 ‫ط�ىرا‬ AA
ṭayran
A
hamz
H
K
IK Also in (Q. 11:7) and (Q. 61:6) while

A reading (Q. 10:2) la-sāḥirun
siḥrun N
‫��س‬ siḥr in all three verses, (Q. 11:7), (Q. 61:6),
5:110 � AA Long vwl (±ā)
‫حر‬ and (Q. 10:2)
IA
H
sāḥirun sāḥir in all aforementioned verses
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
hat_tastaṭīʿu rabbaka K Assim

IK Imperf (t↔y)
N
5:112 ‫�ه�ل ى��ست��طي��ع رب��ك‬ IA
hal yastaṭīʿu rabbuka
AA iʿrāb
A
H
N
munazziluhā A
IA
Vrb frm
5:115 ‫�م��ن�ز ��ل�ه�ا‬ IK
(II↔IV)
AA
munziluhā
H
K
yawma N
IK
IA
5:119 � AA iʿrāb
‫يوم‬ yawmu
A
H
383

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

384
yadiya … inniya … inniya …

fa-inniya … wa-ummiya … N
liya
yadī … inniya … innī … fa-
IK
innī … wa-ummī … liya
yadiya … inniya … innī … fa-
‫أخ ف‬ AA
5:28, 28, innī … wa-ummiya … liya
29, 115, �‫ �إ �ين‬،��‫ �إ �ين� � ��اأ‬،�‫ي� أ�د �ي‬ yāʾāt al-iḍāfa taskīn
‫ف‬ A → Shuʿba
116, 116 �‫ يل‬،�‫ و� مي‬،�‫ ��إ �ين‬،‫� ر�ي�د‬ yadī … innī … innī … fa-
H
innī … wa-ummī … lī
K
yadiya … innī … innī … fa-
A → Ḥafṣ
innī … wa-ummiya … lī
yadī … innī … innī … fa-
IA
innī … wa-ummiya … lī
IK
N
yuṣraf AA
‫ف‬ IA
6:16 ��‫ى��صر‬ Act↔Pass
A → Ḥafṣ
H
yaṣrif K
A → Shuʿba
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul
takun fitnatuhum
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
N iʿrāb
6:23
‫ف �ن‬ AA
‫ل ىك‬
�‫�� ن �ت�� ت��ه‬
‫م � �م‬
takun fitnatahum A → Shuʿba
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl → Khalaf
H
yakun fitnatahum Imperf (t↔y)
K
IK
N
rabbinā A
ّٰ
6:23 ‫وا �ل��ل�ه رب�ن��ا‬ AA iʿrāb
IA
H
rabbanā
K
385

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

386
IK
N
nukadhdhibu …
AA iʿrāb
wa-nakūnu
K
‫ن ن‬ ‫ل ن �ذ‬ A → Shuʿba
6:27 �‫�و‬ ‫وا � ك‬
‫�� ب� … و� ك‬
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
nukadhdhiba …
H
wa-nakūna
A → Ḥafṣ iʿrāb
nukadhdhibu …
IA → Hishām b. ʿAmmār
wa-nakūna
IK
N
ḥarf (±l)
AA
wa-la-d-dāru ‿l-ākhiratu
6:32
‫�� ا ال خ� �ة‬ A
‫ول ل�د ر ا ر‬
H
K iʿrāb
wa-la-dāru ‿l-ākhirati IA
IK Also reading yaʿqilūna in (Q. 7:169),

K (Q. 12:109), and (Q. 36:68), but taʿqilūna
‫�ق ن‬ H in (Q. 28:60)
6:32 �‫ى�ع�� لو‬ yaʿqilūna Imperf (t↔y)
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
yaʿqilūna in (Q. 7:169), (Q. 12:109), and

(Q. 36:68). All Readers read taʿqilūna in
AA
(Q. 28:60) except AA who reads both
yaʿqilūna and taʿqilūna
yaʿqilūna in (Q. 7:169) and (Q. 36:68) but
A → Shuʿba
taʿqilūna in (Q. 12:109) and (Q. 28:60)
N taʿqilūna in all four verses
taʿqilūna A → Ḥafṣ taʿqilūna in (Q. 7:169), (Q. 12:109), and
IA (Q. 28:60), but yaʿqilūna in (Q. 36:68)
IK
IA
AA
la-yaḥzunuka Vrb frm
6:33 ‫ح�ز ن��ك‬

��‫�ل��ي‬ A
(I↔IV)
H
K
la-yuḥzinuka N
IK
A
yukadhdhibūnaka AA
Vrb frm
H
6:33
‫�ذ‬
‫�� ب�ون��ك‬
‫ي� ك‬ (I↔IV)
IA
387
N
yukdhibūnaka
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

388
IK
A Articulating the hamza of ra‌ʾā
a-ra‌ʾaytakum AA throughout the Qurʾān, e.g., (Q. 6:46)
IA a-ra‌ʾaytum and (Q. 18:63) a-ra‌ʾayta
H
Softening the hamza and giving it a
value in between fatḥa and alif. There
is a short lengthening of vowel after
6:40 �
‫ا ر�تى� ك‬ hamz
‫م‬ “ra-” which compensates for the loss
a-raºaytakum
N of hamza (min ghayr hamz wa-l-alif
a-rȧºaytakum
ʿalā miqdār dhawq al-hamz). N applies
this technique throughout the Qurʾān,
e.g., (Q. 6:46) a-raºaytum and (Q. 18:63)
a-raºayta
Throughout the Qurʾān, neither with
a-raytakum K alif nor hamza, e.g., (Q. 6:46) a-raytum
and (Q. 18:63) a-rayta
fattaḥnā IA
IK
N
6:44 ‫ح ن��ا‬
��‫ف�ت‬ AA Vrb frm (I↔II)
fataḥnā
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
A
a-ra‌ʾaytum AA
‫أ‬ IA
6:46 �‫� تى‬ (Q. 6:40), (Q. 18:63) hamz
‫رم‬ H
a-raºaytum
N
a-rȧºaytum
a-raytum K
IK
N
IA
bihi ‿nẓur AA Reciters usually pause on bihi

6:46 ‫نظ‬ A vowels
‫ب��ه ا��ر‬
H
K
bihu ‿nẓur
N → Abū Qurra
IK
N
IA
389
yaṣdifūna
AA
‫ف ن‬ A
6:46 �‫�ي��ص�د �و‬ (Q. 1:67) ibdāl (ṣ↔z)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

390
H → Sulaym → Khallād → Muḥammad

→ IM
H → Sulaym
yaṣzdifūna H → Khalaf
K
IK
N
AA
bi-l-ghadāti
6:52
‫� غ �ة‬
‫ب�ا ل��د و‬ A Long vwl (±ā)
H
K
bi-l-ghudwati IA
IK
AA
innahu … fa-innahu ḥarf (an↔in)
H
6:54
‫ف‬ K
‫ا ن��ه … ��ا ن��ه‬
A
annahu … fa-annahu
IA ḥarf (an↔in)
annahu … fa-innahu N
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
wa-li-tastabīna sabīlu iʿrāb
IA
‫�ت ن‬ A → Ḥafṣ
6:55
‫و�ل�ى��س� ب��ي� ��س�ب� ي��ل‬ wa-li-tastabīna sabīla N
A → Shuʿba
Imperf (t↔y)
wa-li-yastabīna sabīlu H
K
IK ibdāl (ṣ↔ḍ)
yaquṣṣu N
A
6:57 ‫�ق‬ AA
‫ي�� ص‬ Root

H
yaqḍi
IA
K
IK
N
IA Perf (a↔at)
‫ف‬ tawaffat-hu
6:61 ‫ت�و��ى�ه‬ AA
A
K
391
imāla
tawaffēhu H

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

392
IK
N
yunajjīkum … yunjīkum Vrb frm
AA
‫ق‬ ‫�ن‬ ‫ق‬ (II↔IV)
‫� … ��ل‬‫��ل �م� ن� ي� ج�ي�� ك‬ IA
6:63, 64 ‫ّٰ �ن م‬
�
‫ا �ل��ل�ه ي� ج� ي�� ك‬ yunjīkum … yunjīkum AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr This is the reading of Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī
‫م‬ A
Vrb frm
yunajjīkum … yunajjīkum H
(II↔IV)
K
wa-khifyatan A → Shuʿba
IK
N
IA
6:63 ‫�خ��ف� ��ة‬
‫و ي‬ (Q. 7:55) vowels
wa-khufyatan AA
A → Ḥafṣ
H
K
anjānā A
H
‫ن‬ anjēnā imāla
‫ا ج��ى� نى��ا‬ K
‫ن‬
6:63 ‫ا ج��ى ن��ا‬ IK
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
anjaytanā IA Perf (a↔ta)
AA
IK
N
AA
‫�ن‬ yunsiyannaka Vrb frm
6:68 ‫ي��س�ي� ن��ك‬ A
(II↔IV)
H
K
yunassiyannaka IA
IK
N
IA Perf (a↔at)
‿stahwat-hu
6:71 ‫ا ��ست��هوى�ه‬ AA
A
K
imāla
‿stahwēhu H
Throughout the Qurʾān regardless what

A → Ḥafṣ
follows ra‌ʾā
393
ra‌ʾā
IK
6:76 ‫كا‬ ‫رء ا ك‬
��‫�و ب‬ ræʾǣ N imāla

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

394
ra‌ʾē AA
AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl → al-Quṭaʿī
Throughout the Qurʾān only when ra‌ʾā
A → Shuʿba is followed by a vocalized consonant,
reʾē IA e.g. (Q. 6:76) ra‌ʾā kawkaban. Compare
H with (Q. 6:77)
K
Throughout the Qurʾān regardless what

A → Ḥafṣ
follows ra‌ʾā
IK Throughout the Qurʾān when ra‌ʾā is
N followed by an unvocalised consonant
ra‌ʾā
(sākin), e.g., (Q. 6:77) ra‌ʾā ‿l-qamara,
‫�ق‬ AA
‫رء ا ا �ل��مر‬ (Q. 6:78) ra‌ʾā ‿sh-shamsa, (Q. 16:85,
6:77, 78 ‫ش‬ K 86) ra‌ʾā ‿lladhīna, (Q. 18:53) ra‌ʾā imāla
‫رء ا ا �ل��م��س‬ IA ‿l-mujrimūna, etc.
A → Shuʿba Throughout the Qurʾān, e.g., reʾā
reʾā ‿l-qamara, reʾā ‿sh-shamsa, reʾā
H
‿lladhīna, reʾā ‿l-mujrimūna, etc.
reʾē A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf
IK
AA
‫ت‬
6:80 �
�‫ا‬
�‫ح��ج�و�ين‬ a-tuḥājjūnnī A (Q. 39:64) ta‌ʾmurūnnī Gemin
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
a-tuḥājjūnī (Q. 39:64) ta‌ʾmurūnī
IA
hadēn｡i K
IK
A
IA
In both, waṣl and waqf modes imāla
hadān｡i H
6:80 ‫ن‬ N → Qālūn
�‫�ه�د ى‬
N → Warsh
N → al-Musayyabī
AA
hadān｡ī N → Ibn Jammāz hadānī in waṣl mode Long vwl (±ī)

IK
N
darajāti
AA
6:83 ‫ت ن‬ ‫ف‬ IA (Q. 12:76) tanwīn
��‫د ر�ج�� م‬ �� ‫ن‬
‫رع‬
A
darajātin H
395

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

396
IK
N
wa-l-Yasaʿa A
6:86 ‫ا �ل��س‬ AA (Q. 38:48) vowel
‫و يع‬
IA
H
wa-l-Laysaʿa
K
IK
N
fa-bi-hudāhumu ‿qtadih｡ Both in waṣl and waqf modes taskīn
AA
A
‫ف �ه قت ق‬ IM: This is wrong (ghalaṭ). The hāʾ
6:90 cannot carry a vowel because it is a
‫��ب�ه�د م ا ��د ه ��ل‬
fa-bi-hudāhumu ‿qtadihi IA pausal hāʾ that is never vocalised. Its
only function is to clarify the vowel of Cons Loss
what precedes it
fa-bi-hudēhumu K
‿qtadi｡h H
yajʿalūnahu … yubdūnahā IK
wa-yukhfūna AA Imperf (t↔y)
‫ق‬ ‫جى‬ N
‫� ��ع��لون��ه �را‬
Appendix
‫ط��ي�� نس‬
6:91
‫��ف‬
�‫ب و � و و‬
‫�ى��د ن��ه�ا ىخ‬ IA
Imperf (t↔y)
A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
tajʿalūnahu … tubdūnahā H
Imperf (t↔y)
wa-tukhfūna
K
wa-li-yundhira A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
N
‫ن �ذ‬ IK
6:92 ‫و�ل�ى�� ر‬ Imperf (t↔y)
wa-li-tundhira IA
AA
H
IK
AA
baynukum A → Shuʿba
IA
6:94 �
‫ب�ي� ن� ك‬ iʿrāb
‫م‬ H
N
baynakum K
A → Ḥafṣ
397

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

398
IK
N
wa-jāʿilu
AA
6:96 IA Long vwl (±ā)
‫و ج� ��ع�ل‬
A
wa-jaʿala H
K
IK
fa-mustaqirrun
AA
N
‫ف� ت �ق‬ Act Ptcpl↔
6:98 IA
‫�م��س�� ر‬ Pass Ptcpl
fa-mustaqarrun A
H
K
IK
N
(Q. 6:141) and (Q. 36:35). However,
thamarihi AA IK, N, IA, H, and K read (Q. 18:34)
6:99 ‫�ث�مره‬ A thumurun and (Q. 18:42) bi-thumurihi. vowels
IA AA reads thumrun and bi-thumrihi. A
reads thamarun and bi-thamarihi
H
thumurihi
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
wa-kharraqū N
IK
IA
6:100
‫ق‬ AA Vrb frm (I↔II)
‫و خ�ر�وا‬
wa-kharaqū
A
H
K
IK
dārasta
AA
N Vrb frm
6:105 �‫د ر��س� ت‬ A (I↔III)
darasta
H
K
darasat IA Perf (ta↔at)
IK
A → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Hārūn
b. Ḥātim → Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-qāḍī → IM
yushʿirukum innahā
A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā → Abū Hishām taskīn
al-Rifāʿī → Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-qāḍī → IM
A → Dāwūd al-Awdī
399
‫ن‬ yushʿirkum innahā AA ikhtilās

6:109 ‫ي� ش��عرك ا ��ه�ا‬
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

400
N
A → Ḥafṣ
yushʿirukum annahā H
K
ḥarf (an↔in)
IA Doubt from IM about IA’s reading
Yaḥyā: Shuʿba did not remember how
yushʿirukum (a/i?)nnahā A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam A read it and whether it was innahā or
annahā (kasran am fatḥan)
IK
N
AA
lā yuʾminūna
‫ن‬ K
6:109 �‫لا ىو�م ن��و‬ Imperf (t↔y)
A → Ḥafṣ
IA
lā tuʾminūna
H
N
qibalan
IA
A (Q. 18:55)
6:111 ‫�ق ب��لا‬ H vowels
qubulan K
IK
While reading (Q. 18:55) qibalan
Appendix
AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
munazzalun
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK Vrb frm
6:114 ‫�م��ن�ز ل‬ N (II↔IV)
munzalun
AA
H
K
IK kalimatu in (Q. 10:33), (Q. 10:96),

AA and (Q. 40:6)
kalimātu
N kalimātu in (Q. 10:33), (Q. 10:96),
6:115 �‫ك�ل�م� ت‬ IA and (Q. 40:6) Long vwl (±ā)

A
kalimatu in (Q. 10:33), (Q. 10:96),
kalimatu H
and (Q. 40:6)
K
IK
fuṣṣila … ḥurrima AA
Act↔Pass
IA
N
faṣṣala … ḥarrama
6:119 � A → Ḥafṣ
401
‫ف��ص�ل … ح‬
‫رم‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

402
A → Shuʿba
faṣṣala … ḥurrima H Act↔Pass
K
IK
yaḍill, with fatḥa on the yāʾ, in
(Q. 10:88), (Q. 14:30), (Q. 22:9), (Q. 31:6),
AA
and (Q. 39:8)
la-yaḍillūna
N yaḍill, with fatḥa on the yāʾ in
‫ن‬ (Q. 10:88), and yuḍill, with ḍamma on Vrb frm
6:119 �‫� ��لو‬
‫�يل��ض‬
IA the yāʾ, in (Q. 14:30), (Q. 22:9), (Q. 31:6), (I↔IV)
and (Q. 39:8)
A yuḍill, with ḍamma on the yāʾ, in
la-yuḍillūna H (Q. 10:88), (Q. 14:30), (Q. 22:9), (Q. 31:6),
K and (Q. 39:8)
mayyitan N
IK
IA
6:122 ‫�مي��ت��ا‬ AA vowels
maytan
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
H
K
risālātihi
N
6:124 ‫ر��س�� تل��ه‬ (Q. 5:67) Long vwl (±ā)
IA
A → Shuʿba
IK
risālatahu
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
AA → ʿUqba b. Sinān → Ḥajjāj al-Aʿwar
ḍayqan → Aḥmad b. Jubayr [al-Inṭākī] → ʿAbd
al-Razzāq b. al-Ḥasan → Muḥammad

b. Aḥmad al-Ramlī l-Dājūnī → IM
N
6:125 ‫�ض‬
‫�� ي��ق�ا‬ (Q. 25:13) vowels
IA
AA
ḍayyiqan
A
H
K
IK
403
AA
6:125 ‫ح‬
‫�ر ج��ا‬ ḥarajan IA vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

404
H
K
A → Ḥafṣ
N
ḥarijan
A → Shuʿba
yaṣʿadu IK
N
AA
IA Vrb frm
6:125 ‫�ي��ص�ع�د‬ yaṣṣaʿʿadu
H (I↔V↔VI)
K
A → Ḥafṣ
yaṣṣāʿadu A → Shuʿba
yaḥshuruhum A → Ḥafṣ
A
IK
N
6:128 ‫�ش‬‫ى‬
‫ح�� ه‬ Imperf (n↔y)
‫رم‬ naḥshuruhum IA
AA
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
taʿmalūna IA
IK
N
6:132
‫ن‬ AA Imperf (t↔y)
�‫ى�عم�لو‬ yaʿmalūna
A
H
K
makānātikum A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shaybān b. Muʿāwiya al-Naḥwī
→ ʿUbayd Allāh b. Mūsā → Hārūn b.
Ḥātim → Mūsā b. Isḥāq → IM

6:135 IK Throughout the Qurʾān Long vwl (±ā)
�
‫��ا ن�ت� ك‬
�‫�م ك‬
‫م‬ makānatikum N
IA
AA
H
K
IK
N
405
takūnu
AA
‫ن‬ IA
6:135 ‫ىك‬
�‫�و‬ (Q. 28:37) Imperf (t↔y)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

406
A
H
yakūnu
K
bi-zuʿmihim K
IK
N
6:136 �‫�ب�ز�ع��مه‬ IA vowels
‫�م‬ bi-zaʿmihim
AA
A
H
zuyyina … qatlu awlādahum

IA Act↔Pass
shurakāʾihim
‫ذ‬ IK
‫�ز ن ث ن‬ ‫وك‬ iʿrāb
��‫�� ل�ك ي�� ل�أ�ك��ير �م‬ N
6:137 ‫ي� �ق��ت� � و�ل�د�ه‬ ‫�� ن‬ ‫ش‬ ‫ل‬
‫م‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ ا م��رك‬zayyana … qatla awlādihim AA
‫ش‬ iʿrāb
‫��ر � �ه‬ shurakāʾuhum A
‫كا م‬
H
iʿrāb
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
yakun maytatun IK
Imperf (t↔y)
takun maytatun IA
takun maytatan A → Shuʿba
6:139 ‫�� ن �م��ت��ة‬
‫وا � ى ك� ي‬ N
iʿrāb
yakun maytatan AA
H
K
IK
qattalū
IA
N
‫قت‬
6:140 ‫��لوا‬ A Vrb frm (I↔II)

qatalū AA
H
K
IK
ukluhu
N
IA
6:141 ‫اك�ل�ه‬ AA (Q. 2:265), (Q. 34:16), (Q. 13:4) vowels
ukuluhu A
407
H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

408
IK
N
ḥiṣādihi
H
6:141 �
‫ح��ص�ا د ه‬ K vowels
A
ḥaṣādihi AA
IA
IK
‿l-maʿazi AA
IA
6:143 ‫�م� ن ا ل��م�ع�ز‬ A vowels
�‫و‬
N
‿l-maʿzi
H
K
IK
takūna maytatan H
AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī Both readings on behalf of AA
6:145 ‫� ن �م��ت��ة‬ ‫ن‬ AA Imperf (t↔y)
‫ا � ى كو� ي‬
N
yakūna maytatan
A
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī Both readings on behalf of AA

iʿrāb
takūna maytatun IA
IK (Q. 6:126) yadhdhakkarūna,

(Q. 19:67) yadhdhakkaru, (Q. 25:62)
AA yadhdhakkara, and (Q. 17:41)
tadhdhakkarūna li-yadhdhakkarū
N
Reading all the aforementioned verses
A → Shuʿba
with tashdīd except (Q. 19:67) yadhkuru
IA
A → Ḥafṣ Reading tadhakkarūna in the lightened
A → Abān → Naṣr b. ʿAlī → ʿAlī b. Naṣr form throughout the Qurʾān
H If the verb is conjugated in the third
6:152
‫ت�ذ ن‬ person with the yāʾ prefix, they read Gemin
‫� ك‬
�‫�رو‬
yadhdhakkarūna, in tashdīd form. If
the verb is conjugated in the second
person with tāʾ prefix, they read
tadhakkarūna tadhakkarūna, in the lightened form,
except in (Q. 25:62) where H reads
K yadhkura and K reads yadhdhakkara.
Also, both H and K read (Q. 17:41) and
(Q. 25:50) li-yadhkurū whereas all the
other Readers read li-yadhdhakkarū.
As for (Q. 74:56), N reads tadhkurūna
whereas all the other Readers read
409
yadhkurūna

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

410
wa-anna … sirāṭī IK yāʾāt al-iḍāfa

ḥarf (an↔in)
N
ḥarf
A
wa-anna … ṣirāṭī IM mentions that IA reads sirāṭ with (an↔anna)
6:153
‫ن �ذ‬ ibdāl (s↔ṣ
�‫وا � �ه� ا ��سرا طي‬ AA sīn though earlier in his discussion
under (Q. 1:5–6) he says that IA reads ↔ṣz)
wa-an … sirāṭiya IA ṣirāṭ with ṣād
wa-inna … ṣzirāṭī H taskīn
wa-inna … ṣirāṭī K
IK
N
ta‌ʾtiyahumu A
6:158 �‫ى�ا ت��ه‬ AA Imperf (t↔y)
‫ي �م‬
IA
H
ya‌ʾtiyahumu
K
IK
N
farraqū A
6:159
‫فق‬ AA (Q. 30:32)
Vrb frm
‫�ر�وا‬ (II↔III)
IA
H
Appendix
fāraqū
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
hadān｡ī N → Ibn Jammāz
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Qālūn
‫ن‬ Differences between the two variants
6:161 � ‫�ه�د ا‬ N → Warsh Long vwl (±ī)
are not clear in current recitations
IK
hadān｡i
IA
A
H
K
IK
qayyiman N
AA
6:161
‫ق‬ A vowels
‫�ي�ما‬
IA
qiyaman
H
K
inniya … inniya … inniya …

wajhiya … ṣirāṭī … rabbiya … N
411
wa-maḥyāy … wa-mamātiya

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

412
inniya … inniya … inniya …

wajhiya … ṣirāṭī …
N → Warsh yāʾāt al-iḍāfa taskīn
rabbiya … wa-maḥyāya …
wa-mamātiya
innī … innī … innī … H
wajhī … ṣirāṭī … rabbī … K
wa-maḥyāya …
‫ن أخ ف‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ن‬ wa-mamātī A → Shuʿba
�� ‫ا �ى ا�مر�…ا �ى � ��ا‬
6:14, 15, ‫ن‬ innī … innī … innī …
… ‫… ا �ى ا رى�ك‬
74, 79, wajhiya … ṣirāṭī … rabbī …
�‫و ج‬ A → Ḥafṣ
153, 161, ‫��هى … �صرا طى‬ wa-maḥyāya …
162, 162 ‫م‬
‫حي��ا �ى‬
�‫… ر ب�ى … و‬ wa-mamātī
‫ت‬
�
‫و ى‬‫ا‬
�‫م‬‫م‬ … innī … inniya … inniya …
wajhī … ṣirāṭī … rabbiya …
AA
wa-maḥyāya …
wa-mamātī
innī … inniya … inniya …
wajhī … ṣirāṭī … rabbī …
IK
wa-maḥyāya …
wa-mamātī
innī … innī … innī …
wajhiya … ṣirāṭiya …
IA
rabbī … wa-maḥyāya …
wa-mamātī
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
tadhdhakkarūna
AA
A → Shuʿba
‫�ذ ن‬ Gemin
7:3 ‫(ى�ـ)ى� ك‬
�‫�رو‬ H
tadhakkarūna K
A → Ḥafṣ
yatadhakkarūna IA
tatadhakkarūna IA → [X] Imperf (t↔y)
IK
N
IA
maʿāyisha AA
7:10 ‫ش‬ hamz
��‫�م�ع�ى‬ A
H
K
maʿāʾisha N → Khārija
413

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

414
IK (Q. 43:11), (Q. 30:19), (Q. 45:35). All

N Readers read (Q. 70:43) yakhrujūna and
tukhrajūna (Q. 30:25) takhrujūna, in the
A
active voice.
AA As for (Q. 55:22), IK, A, IA, H, and
H K read yakhruju; N and AA read
7:25
‫تخ ن‬ yukhraju; AA → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Abū Act↔Pass
�‫�ر�ج�و‬
Hishām and AA → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī →
K Abū Hishām → Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā Ibn
takhrujūna Ḥayyān → IM read nukhriju minhumā
‿l-luʾluʾa wa-l-marjāna
While reading tukhrajūna in (Q. 43:11),
IA
(Q. 30:19), and (Q. 45:35).
IK
A
wa-libāsu
AA
7:26 ‫و� بل��ا ��س‬ H iʿrāb
N
wa-libāsa IA
K
khāliṣatun N
IK
Appendix
IA
7:32
‫خ��ا � ص��ة‬
��‫ل‬ khāliṣatan AA iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
yaʿlamūna A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
‫ن‬ N
7:38 �‫ى�ع�ل�مو‬ Imperf (t↔y)
taʿlamūna IA
AA
H
K
IK
N
tufattaḥu
A Vrb frm (I↔II)
7:40 ��‫ى��ف� ت‬ IA
‫ح‬
tuftaḥu AA
H
yuftaḥu Imperf (t↔y)
K
IK
415
N
‫ن‬ AA
7:43 ‫كا‬
�� ‫�م�ا‬-‫و‬ wa-mā ḥarf (±w)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

416
A
H
K
mā IA
IK
N
ūrithtumūhā
A
7:43 ‫ا ورىىمو�ه�ا‬ IA (Q. 43:72) Assim
AA
ūrittumūhā H
K
IK
N
IA
‫ن‬ naʿam
7:44 ‫��ع‬ AA Throughout the Qurʾān vowels
‫م‬ A
H
naʿim K
IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul → IM
N ḥarf (an↔
an laʿnatu
Appendix
AA anna)
7:44
‫ا ن �ل�ع ن��ة‬ A
�

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK → al-Qawwās → al-Bazzī → Muḍar

b. Muḥammad → IM
IK → [Shibl] → Muḥammad b. Ṣāliḥ →
Rawḥ b. ʿAbd al-Muʾmin → al-Ḥusayn
b. Bishr al-Ṣūfī → IM
All Readers read (Q. 24:7) anna laʿnata
anna laʿnata IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf and (Q. 24:9) anna ghaḍaba, except N
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → al-Haytham b. who reads an laʿnatu and an ghaḍabu
Khālid
iʿrāb
IA
H
K
IK
N
yughshī AA (Q. 13:3). In (Q. 8:11), IK and AA read
IA yaghshākumu ‿n-nuʿāsu; IA, A, H, and Vrb frm
7:54 ‫غش‬
‫�ي��ى‬ A → Ḥafṣ K read yughashshīkumu ‿n-nuʿāsa, (II↔IV)
while N reads yughshīkumu ‿n-nuʿāsa
A → Shuʿba
yughashshī H
K
wa-sh-shamsa wa-l- IK
417
qamara wa-n-nujūma N
musakhkharātin AA iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

418
A
‫�ق‬ ‫ش‬ H
‫وا �ل��م��س وا �ل��مر‬
7:54 ‫خ‬
‫ا �ل ن�� م��س�� ت‬ K
� ‫ر‬ ‫و �ج وم‬ wa-sh-shamsu wa-l-
‫ب�ا �مره‬ qamaru wa-n-nujūmu IA
musakhkharātun
wa-khifyatan A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
7:55 ‫�خ��ف� ��ة‬
‫و ي‬ (Q. 6:63) vowels
wa-khufyatan IA
AA
H
K
‿r-rīḥa nushuran IK
AA Long vwl (±ā)
‿r-riyāḥa nushuran
N
7:57 ‫ا �ل � ش‬
‫ى��را‬ ‿r-riyāḥa nushran IA vowels
‫ري‬
‫ح‬
‿r-riyāḥa bushran A ibdāl (b↔n)
H
‿r-rīḥa nashran vowels
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
A → Shuʿba
maytin
AA
IA
7:57 �‫�م�ى� ت‬ (Q. 3:27) vowels
A → Ḥafṣ
N
mayyitin
H
K
H and K read (Q. 35:3) min khāliqin

ghayrihi K ghayri whereas the other Readers read
min khāliqin ghayru
IK
7:59 N iʿrāb
‫غ��يره‬
IA
ghayruhu Throughout the Qurʾān
AA
A
H
ublighukum AA
IK
N
419
uballighukum
IA
Vrb frm
7:62 �
‫ا ب��ل غ�� ك‬ A Throughout the Qurʾān (II↔IV)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
‫م‬
(cont.)

420
H
K
(Q. 2:247), (Q. 52:37), (Q. 88:22),

IK → Qunbul
(Q. 2:245)
N → Abū Qurra
basṭatan A → Ḥafṣ
AA
H
K → al-Farrāʾ
7:69 ‫� ط��ة‬
��‫ب��ص‬ A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → IM From a notebook ibdāl (s↔ṣ)
N
K → al-Dūrī
baṣṭatan
K
K → Nuṣayr → Muḥammad b. Idrīs
al-Dandānī
A
wa-qāla IA
Appendix
IK
‫ق‬ N
7:75 ‫��ا ل‬-‫و‬ qāla According to the codices of Damascus ḥarf (±w)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
H
K
IK
a-ta‌ʾtūna … ȧ-ºinnakum
AA
A → Shuʿba
uṣūl: consecutive hamza-
‫أتأ ن أ‬ H interrogatives
7:80,81 �
‫� �� ت�و� … � � نى� ك‬ a-ta‌ʾtūna … a-innakum hamza
‫م‬ K (Q. 13:5), (Q. 37:16), (Q. 56:47),
IA (Q. 29:28,29), (Q. 27:67), (Q. 79:10)
N
a-ta‌ʾtūna … innakum
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
AA
la-fataḥnā
7:96 ‫ح ن��ا‬
��‫�ل��ف� ت‬ A Vrb frm (I↔II)
H
K
la-fattaḥnā IA
421

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

422
Reading awa amina in (Q. 37:17) and

IK
(Q. 56:48)
aw amina
N taskīn
(Q. 37:17) and (Q. 56:48)
IA
7:98 ‫ن‬ awa‿mina N → Warsh uṣūl: naql ḥarakat al-hamza
��‫ا وا�م‬
A
AA
awa amina hamz
H
K
IK
N
IA uṣūl: rusul
rusuluhum
7:101 �‫��س��له‬ A (Q. 2:285), (Q. 40:50), (Q. 5:32), taskīn
‫ر �م‬ H (Q. 3:194)
K
rusluhum AA
ʿalayya N
IK
IA
7:105 AA Long vwl (±ā)
‫ع��لى‬ ʿalā
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
arjiʾhū IK They articulate the hamza in (Q. 9:106)

AA and (Q. 33:51) murja‌ʾūna and turjiʾu
IA → Hishām
arjiʾhu
b. Ḥātim
N → al-Musayyabī
arjihi hamz
N → Qālūn
N → Warsh
arjihī N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf
K
He articulates the hamza in (Q. 9:106)

and (Q. 33:51) and reads murja‌ʾūna and
arjiʾhi IA → Ibn Dhakwān
turjiʾu
IM: this is wrong (wahm)
A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya → Ibn Ibn al-Jahm: It was probably read with
7:111 ‫ا ر�ج��ى�ه‬ al-Jahm → IM a hamza before the rāʾ
taskīn
arjiʾh A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam →
Aḥmad al-Wakīʿī → Ibrāhīm b. Aḥmad
al-Wakīʿī
Hishām → Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-Qāḍī → IM
423

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

424
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf

A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → ʿAbd
Allāh b. Shākir → IM
A → Shuʿba → K
murja‌ʾūna but not in (Q. 33:51) turji.
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā → ʿAbd Allāh b.
arjih Shākir reads murjawna and turji
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra Reading (Q. 26:36) arjihi
vowels
A → Ḥafṣ → X
A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ →
Reading murjawna, turji and arjih
al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak → Wuhayb
al-Marwazī
H
IK
N
(Q. 10:79) while reading (Q. 26:37)
sāḥirin AA Long vwl (±ā)
saḥḥārin
7:112 ‫��س‬
�
‫حر‬ A
IA
H Similarly in (Q. 10:79)
saḥḥārin and (Q. 26:37) Gemin
K
IK
While reading (Q. 26:41) ȧ-ºinna
Appendix
inna N
‫ن‬ A → Ḥafṣ While reading (Q. 26:41) a-inna
7:113 �‫ا‬ hamz

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
ȧ-ºinna AA
A → Shuʿba
In addition to (Q. 26:41)
H
a-inna
K
IA Doubt from IM
IK
N
IA
talaqqafu Vrb frm
AA
‫�ق ف‬ (I↔V)
7:117 A
��‫�هي� ت��ل‬
H
K
talqafu A → Ḥafṣ
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
ttalaqqafu Gemin
IK → al-Bazzī
N
AA (Q. 20:71) and (Q. 26:49)
ā̇mantum (a-ºȧmantum) IA hamz
425
IK → al-Bazzī
7:123 �‫ء ا�م��ن ت‬ IK → Ibn Fulayḥ

‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

426
wāmantum (wa-ºȧmantum) IK → Wahb b. Wāḍiḥ → al-Bazzī

[the wāw is not a conjunction particle
but a transformed hamza]. IM: this is
wa‌ʾāmantum IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul probably wrong (wahm). Qunbul reads
(Q. 20:71) āmantum and (Q. 26:49)
ȧmantum
H
Similarly in (Q. 20:71) and (Q. 26:49)
a-āmantum K
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū Shuʿayb al-Qawwās →
al-Ḥulwānī Similarly in (Q. 20:71) and (Q. 26:49)
Also in (Q. 20:71) but a-āmantum in
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra madd
(Q. 26:49)
āmantum
Also in (Q. 20:71) but there is no
A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → al- transmission on (Q. 26:49). IM: It is
Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak → Wuhayb known that A → Ḥafṣ reads āmantum
in these three locations
N → Warsh Similarly in (Q. 20:71) and (Q. 26:49)
IK
sa-naqtulu
N
7:127 ‫ن �ق ت‬ AA Vrb frm (I↔II)
‫��س�� ل‬
A
Appendix
sa-nuqattilu IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
IK
N
AA
IA
yūrithuhā All Readers read (Q. 19:63) nūrithu
‫ث‬ H Vrb frm
7:128 ‫�يور��ه�ا‬
K (II↔IV)
A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra → Aḥmad b. ʿAlī IM: this is wrong; Ḥafṣ is known to have
yuwarrithuhā
l-Khazzāz → IM read yūrithuhā, in the lightened form
IK
N
AA
yaʿrishūna
‫ش ن‬ H
7:137 �‫�ي�عر��و‬ (Q. 16:68) vowels
K
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
yaʿrushūna
IA
427

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

428
IK
N
yaʿkufūna A
‫�ف ن‬ IA
7:138 ‫�ي�ع ك‬
�‫�� و‬ vowels
AA
yaʿkifūna H
K
anjākum IA
IK
N
‫ن‬
7:141 �
‫��ى�ى ك‬
�‫ا ج‬ AA Perf (a↔na)
‫م‬ anjaynākum
A
H
K
IK
AA
A
‫�ق ن‬ yuqattilūna Vrb frm
7:141 �‫ي�� ت��لو‬ IA
(I↔II)
H
K
Appendix
yaqtulūna N

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
wa-wāʿadnā AA
IK
N
Vrb frm
7:142 ‫ووع�د ن�ا‬ IA (Q. 2:51), (Q. 20:80)
wa-waʿadnā (I↔III)
A
H
K
IK
arnī AA → ʿAbd al-Wahhāb b. ʿAṭāʾ
AA → Abū Zayd
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf
arinī AA → al-Yazīdī
AA → Hārūn
7:143 �‫ا ر �ين‬ (Q. 2:128), (Q. 41:29), (Q. 4:153) taskīn
AA → ʿUbayd
N
H
K
arinī
A → Shuʿba
429
IA
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

430
IK
N
(Q. 18:98) Long vwl (±ā)
dakkan AA
7:143 ‫كا‬
�‫د‬ IA
A
H Reading (Q. 18:98) dakkāʾa tanwīn
dakkāʾa
K
IK
bi-risālatī
N
IA
7:144 AA Long vwl (±ā)
�‫�بر��س��ل�يت‬
bi-risālātī A
H
K
IK In (Q. 18:66), IK, N, A, H, and K read

N rushdan while AA reads rashadan; IA
‿r-rushdi A → Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith → Ayyūb b. Tamīm
→ Ibn Dhakwān → Aḥmad b. Yūsuf
7:146 ‫ا �لر�ش��د‬ IA vowels
al-Taghlibī → IM reads rushudan; IA
AA → Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith → Ayyūb → Ibn
H Dhakwān → Mūsā b. Mūsā l-Khuttalī
‿r-rashadi
Appendix
K → IM and IA → Hishām read rushdan

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
ḥuliyyihim AA
A
7:148 �‫ح��ل��ه‬ vowels
‫ي �م‬ IA
H
ḥiliyyihim K
IK
N
yarḥamnā rabbunā Imperf (t↔y)
AA
‫ن ن غ �ف‬ wa-yaghfir
7:149 ‫ىرح�م��ا رب��ا وى�� ر‬ IA
A Imperf (t↔y)
tarḥamnā rabbanā H
iʿrāb
wa-taghfir K
IK
N
umma
AA
A → Ḥafṣ
7:150 ‫ا�ن ا‬ (Q. 20:94) iʿrāb
‫ب� م‬ IA
H
ummi
431
K
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

432
IK
N
A
iṣrahum
7:157 ‫ا ص �ه‬ AA Long vwl (±ā)
‫� رم‬
H
K
āṣārahum IA
IK
A
naghfir … khaṭīʾātikum hamz
H
K
7:161 � ‫غ �ف �ل �خ‬
‫� ��ط�ى��ىى ك‬
‫ى�� ر ك‬ naghfir … khaṭāyākum AA iʿrāb
‫م‬ ‫م‬
AA → Maḥbūb Act↔Pass
tughfar … khaṭīʾātukum Imperf
N
(n↔t)
tughfar … khaṭīʾatukum IA Long vwl (±ā)
IK
N
maʿdhiratun AA
IA
Appendix
7:164
‫� �ذ �ة‬ H iʿrāb
‫م�ع� ر‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
A → Shuʿba → X
maʿdhiratan
A → Ḥafṣ → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī
IK
AA
H
On the pattern of faʿīl hamz
K
N → Abū Qurra
ba‌ʾīsin A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā → ʿAbd Allāh b. Shuʿba: I memorized bayʾasin from

Shākir (Abū l-Bukhturī) → IM A, however, I doubted myself. Thus, I
7:165 A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya → abandoned this reading and adopted
‫�بى�ى��س‬
Muḥammad b. al-Jahm → IM al-Aʿmash’s reading ba‌ʾīsin, just like H
Al-Aʿmash → Shuʿba Long vwl (±ī)
bīsin N
baysin N → Khārija On the pattern of faʿl
biʾsin IA On the pattern of fiʿl
b. Ḥātim → Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-Qāḍī → On the pattern of fayʿal
433
IM

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

434
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā → ʿAbd Allāh b. Shuʿba: I memorized bayʾasin from

Shākir (Abū l-Bukhturī) → IM A, however, I doubted myself. Thus, I
bayʾasin vowels
A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya → abandoned this reading and adopted
Muḥammad b. al-Jahm → IM al-Aʿmash’s reading ba‌ʾīsin, just like H
IK
AA
H
yaʿqilūna
‫�ق ن‬ K (Q. 6:32), (Q. 12:109), (Q. 28:60),
7:169 �‫ى�ع�� لو‬ Imperf (t↔y)
A → Shuʿba (Q. 36:68)
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
taʿqilūna
N
yumsikūna A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
‫ن‬ N Reading (Q. 60:10) tumsikū Vrb frm
7:170 ‫ي�م��س ك‬
�‫�و‬ yumassikūna IA (I↔IV)
H
K
AA Reading (Q. 60:10) tumassikū
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
A
dhurriyyatahum
H
7:172
‫�ذ‬ K Long vwl (±ā)
�‫�ت��ه‬
‫ري � م‬
N
dhurriyyātihim AA
IA
yaqūlū … yaqūlū AA
IK
N
7:172, 173 ‫ى��قو�لوا … ى��قو�لوا‬ IA Imperf (t↔y)
taqūlū … taqūlū
A
H
K
Similarly in (Q. 32:40) while reading

K
yalḥadūna in (Q. 16:103)
IK
‫� ن‬ yulḥidūna N Vrb frm
7:180 �‫ح�د و‬��‫ي��ل‬ IA (I↔IV)
Similarly in (Q. 16:103) and (Q. 32:40)
A
435
AA
yalḥadūna H

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

436
IK
wa-nadharuhum N
IA
Imperf (n↔y)
AA
wa-yadharuhum A → Shuʿba
7:186 ‫�ذ �ه‬
‫وى� ر م‬ A → Ḥafṣ
H
K
wa-yadharhum iʿrāb
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra → al-Khazzāz →
IM
IK
IA
AA
shurakāʾa Long vwl (±ā)
H
7:190 ‫كا‬
� ‫�ش��ر‬ K
A → Ḥafṣ
N
shirkan tanwīn
A → Shuʿba
yatbaʿūkum N
IK
Appendix
IA
7:193 ‫ي��تب��عوك‬ yattabiʿūkum AA Vrb frm (I↔V)

‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
IK
A
IA
H Without yāʾ in both waṣl and waqf
K modes
N → Warsh
kīdūn｡i N → Qālūn
N → al-Musayyabī
IM: in my notebook, IA → Ibn
Dhakwān reads kīdūnī. Ibn Dhakwān:

‫� ن‬ IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Aḥmad b. Yūsuf
7:195 in my notebook I have kīdūnī, with yāʾ, Long vwl (±ī)
�‫�يك��د و‬ → IM
however I have it memorized as kīdūni,
without yāʾ
AA
N → Ibn Jammāz
With yāʾ in waṣl mode
IA
kīdūn｡ī IM: in my notebook, IA → Ibn
Dhakwān reads kīdūnī. Ibn Dhakwān:
IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Aḥmad b. Yūsuf
in my notebook I have kīdūnī, with yāʾ,
→ IM
437
however I have it memorized as kīdūni,

without yāʾ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

438
IK
A
Three yāʾs: The first is an unvocalized
IA consonant, the second is a vocalized
N consonant, and the third is the first
waliyyiya H person possessive pronoun taskīn
K
AA → Abū Zayd The yāʾs in waliyyiya are assimilated,
however one could read it without
assimilation
The second yāʾ is not prononced with
waliyyiya AA → al-Yazīdī → Ibn al-Yazīdī a full kasra (lām al-kalima mushtamma
kasran)
7:196 ‫ولى‬ Ibn Saʿdān: The yāʾs in waliyyiya are
assimilated. IM: this explanation
(tarjama) is erroneous (laysat bi-
shayʾ). The second yāʾ, which is the
third radical of the verb (lām al-fiʿl) is
vocalised, before which there is the
AA → al-Yazīdī →Ibn Saʿdān unvocalized extraneous (zāʾida) yāʾ.
waliyya Assim
One cannot devocalize the lām of
the verb and assimilate it when it is
preceded by an unvocalized lām. Thus,
I think (IM) that Ibn Saʿdān meant
that AA dropped the middle yāʾ and
assimilated the extraneous yāʾ into the
possessive pronun, the third yāʾ
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA → Abū Zayd The yāʾs in waliyyiya are assimilated,

however one could read it without
assimilation
IK
ṭayfun AA
K
7:201
‫ف‬ N Long vwl (±ā)
�‫ط�ى‬
A
ṭāʾifun
IA
H
IK
AA
A
‫ن‬ yamuddūnahum Vrb frm
7:202 �‫�م�د ��ه‬ IA
‫ي و �م‬ (I↔IV)
H
K
yumiddūnahum N
rabbī … innī … maʿī …

innī … āyātī … baʿdī … H
439
ʿadhābī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

440
rabbiya … inniya … maʿī …

innī … āyātiya … baʿdiya … N
ʿadhābiya
rabbiya … inniya … IK
maʿī … inniya … āyātiya …
‫ن أ ف‬ baʿdiya … ʿadhābī AA
7:33, 59, … �� ‫ر ب�ى … �إ �ى � خ��ا‬
‫�ف‬ ‫ن‬ rabbiya … innī … maʿī … A → Shuʿba
105, 144, ‫ �م�عى … �إ �ى ا �ص��ط�� ي��ت��ك‬innī … āyātiya … baʿdī …
‫ت‬ yāʾāt al-iḍāfa taskīn
146, 150, ʿadhābī K
‫… ء يا��ى �ذ… ب��ع�د �ى‬
156
‫… ع� ا ب�ى‬ rabbiya … innī … maʿiya …
innī … āyātiya … baʿdī … A → Ḥafṣ
ʿadhābī
rabbiya … innī … maʿī …
innī … āyātī … baʿdī … IA
ʿadhābī
N
murdafīna
A → Shuʿba → al-Muʿallā b. Manṣūr
IK
8:9 ‫ف ن‬ IA Act↔Pass
�‫�مرد ��ي‬
murdifīna AA
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
IK → al-Qawwās → al-Ḥulwānī →
al-Jammāl → IM
IK
yaghshākumu ‿n-nuʿāsu iʿrāb
AA
yughshīkumu ‿n-nuʿāsa N
8:11 ‫ى غ�� ش��ى ك ن‬
‫� ا �ل��ع�ا ��س‬ A
‫م‬ IA
Vrb frm
yughashshīkumu ‿n-nuʿāsa (I↔II↔IV)
H
K
IK
N
‿r-ruʿba A
8:12 �‫ا �لر�ع� ب‬ AA (Q. 3:151) vowels
H
IA
‿r-ruʿuba
K
IK
AA Gemin/ḥarf
wa-lākinna ‿llāha … wa-
441
(lākin↔
lākinna ‿llāha A (Q. 2:108), (Q. 10:44), (Q. 2:177),
ّٰ ّٰ lākinna)
8:17 ‫�� ن� ا �ل��ل�ه‬ ‫و�ل ك‬
‫�� ن� ا �ل��ل�ه … و�ل ك‬ N (Q. 2:189)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

442
H
wa-lākini ‿llāhu … wa-lākini
K iʿrāb
‿llāhu
IA
IK
muwahhinun kayda N
Vrb frm
AA
(II↔IV)
IA
8:18 ‫�يك��د‬
� �‫�مو�ه� ن‬
H
mūhinun kayda
K iʿrāb
A → Shuʿba
tanwīn
mūhinu kaydi A → Ḥafṣ
IK
A → Shuʿba
wa-inna AA
‫ن‬ H ḥarf
8:19 � ‫وا‬ K (inna↔anna)
N
wa-anna IA
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA
ṣalātuhum … mukāʾan iʿrāb
AA
wa-taṣdiyatan
A
H
‫ت‬ ‫� ن‬
�‫كا ص� ا ��ه‬ � ‫م�ا‬ K
‫و � �ل �م‬
8:35 ‫��ا ء‬ ‫ت‬
�‫�ع ن��د ا �بل��ي�� إ لا �م ك‬ A → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Hārūn
‫�ت ص�د �ة‬ b. Ḥātim → Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-Qāḍī →
�‫و�� ي‬
IM
A → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī →
ṣalātahum … mukāʾun iʿrāb
Khallād
wa-taṣdiyatun
A → al-Aʿmash → Sufyān al-Thawrī →

Sufyān al-Thawrī said to al-Aʿmash:
ʿUbayd Allāh b. Mūsā → Ḥusayn b.
If ʿĀṣim committed solecism, will you
al-Aswad → Muḥammad b. al-Ḥusayn
do the same?
→ IM
IK
N
li-yamīza A
8:37 ‫�ل�م��ز‬ IA Vrb frm (I↔II)
‫يي‬
AA
H
443
li-yumayyiza
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

444
IK
bi-l-ʿidwati … bi-l-ʿidwati
AA
N
8:42
‫� �ة‬ ‫ة‬ IA vowels
‫ب�ا �ل�ع�د و� … ب�ا ل�ع�د و‬
bi-l-ʿudwati … bi-l-ʿudwati A
H
K
IK → Qunbul
AA
IA
ḥayya
H
K
A → Ḥafṣ
8:42 �‫�حي‬ Assim
A → Shuʿba
N
IK → al-Bazzī
ḥayiya
Rawḥ b. ʿAbd al-Muʾmin → al-Ḥusayn
b. Bishr al-Ṣūfī → IM
tatawaffā IA
Appendix
N
‫ت ف‬ IK
8:50 ‫�ى�و�ى‬ yatawaffā Imperf (t↔y)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
H
K
IK
N
taḥsibanna
AA vowels
K (Q. 24:57)
8:59 ‫� ن‬ ‫ى‬
�‫ح��س��ب‬ taḥsabanna A → Shuʿba
IA
yaḥsabanna H Imperf (t↔y)
A → Ḥafṣ Reading taḥsabanna in (Q. 24:57)
annahum IA
N
IK
‫ن‬ ḥarf
8:59 �‫ا��ه‬ AA
‫�م‬ innahum (anna↔inna)
A
H
K
445

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

446
li-s-silmi A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
N
IK
8:61 ‫�ل��ل��س��ل‬ vowels
‫م‬ li-s-salmi IA
AA
H
K
IK
takun … takun N
IA imperf (t↔y)
yakun … takun AA
8:65, 66 ‫�� ن … ى ك ن‬
�� ‫ى ك‬ A
H
yakun … yakun
K imperf (t↔y)
N → Khārija
IK
N (Q. 30:54) ḍuʿfin … ḍuʿfan and
ḍuʿfan AA throughout the Qurʾān. Ḥafṣ disagreed
8:66 ‫�ض‬
‫� �ع��ف� �ا‬ IA with ʿĀṣim in (Q. 30:54) and read on his vowels
K own authority, not on ʿĀṣim’s ḍuʿfin …
A ḍuʿfan
Appendix
ḍaʿfan
H

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
takūna AA
N
IK
8:67
‫ن‬ IA Imperf (t↔y)
‫ىك‬
�‫�و‬ yakūna
A
H
K
IM only mentions the long alif as the

difference between this varint and
‿l-usārē (asārē?) AA the other, asrā. He does not indicate
whether the reading is usārā or asārā.
Most Qirāʾāt manuals indicate usārā
N
8:70 ‫الا ��سر�ى‬ Long vwl (±ā)
IK
IA
‿l-asrā
A
H
K
IK
AA
walāyatihim ‿l-walāyatu in (Q. 18:44)
447
N
8:72 �‫�ل��ت��ه‬ IA vowels
‫وي � م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

448
A
K
‿l-wilāyatu in (Q. 18:44)
wilāyatihim H
N
inniya … inniya IK
AA
‫ن خ ف‬ ‫ن‬ IA
8:48 �� ‫ا �ى ا ر �ى … ا �ى ا��ا‬ yāʾāt al-iḍāfa taskīn
A
innī … innī
H
K
IK
aymmata (aºimmata) AA The exact description of the reading
is aymmata but it could also be
N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī Ismāʿīl
represented by aºimmata. Similarly,
N → al-Musayyabī āymmata would be close to ȧºimmata
Madīna → al-Musayyabī → Abū ʿUmāra Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar seems to be responsible
9:12 ‫ا ىم�ه‬ āymmata (ȧºimmata) Madīna → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways → for these three transmissions. This hamz
Abū ʿUmāra variant is reported on behlaf of the
Madīna → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar → Abū people of Madīna and not attributed
ʿUmāra → al-Dūrī → Ismāʿīl b. Aḥmad directly to N. This is the reading of Abū
al-Riqqī → IM Jaʿfar al-Madanī
Appendix
Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways: I memorize it

N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways → Aḥmad
as a‌ʾimmata from N, pronounced with
b. Ṣāliḥ
two hamzas

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
IA
a‌ʾimmata
H
K
īmāna IA
IK
N
9:12 ‫ن‬ AA root
��‫ا ىم‬ aymāna
A
H
K
IK
masjida … masājida
AA
A Long vwl (±ā)
N
9:17 ‫�م��س��ج��د … �م��س��ج��د‬ masājida … masājida IA
H
K
Long vwl (±ā)
IK → Ḥammād b. Salama → Ḥajjāj b.
masjida … masjida
Minhāl → Abū Ḥamza al-Anasī
449

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

450
wa-ʿashīrātukum A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
9:24 � ‫�ش‬
‫ع��ىرت� ك‬ Long vwl (±ā)
‫م‬ ‫و‬ wa-ʿashīratukum IA
AA
H
K
IK
N
IA
ʿUzayru ‿bnu
H
‫ع�ز �ز ن‬ AA → al-Yazīdī
9:30 �‫� �ي ا �ب‬ tanwīn
AA
A
K
ʿUzayruni ‿bnu
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → al-Qaṣabī →
Ibn Abī Khaythama → IM
yuḍāhiʾūna A
IK
Appendix
N
‫ن‬ ‫ض‬ IA
9:30 �‫�ي��ه�ىو‬ yuḍāhūna hamz

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
H
K
IM: This is what the Meccans read
Makka
today
N
‿n-nasīʾu IA hamz
AA
A
H
‫�ن‬
9:37 K
‫ا �ل��سى‬
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl →
‿n-nasʾu Muḥammad b. Saʿdān → Muḥammad On the pattern of al-nasʿu Gemin
b. Aḥmad b. Wāṣil → IM
→ Ibn Abī Khaythama
‿n-nasiyyu The recitation is that of Warsh
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl → Khalaf Long vwl (±ī)
→ Idrīs b. ʿAbd al-Karīm
‿n-nasyu IK → X
IK
451
N
9:37 ‫ى��ض‬ yaḍillu IA Act↔Pass
‫� �ل‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

452
AA
A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
yuḍallu H
K
IK
N
karhan AA
9:53 ‫ك‬
‫�ر�ه�ا‬ A (Q. 4:19), (Q. 46:15) vowels
IA
H
kurhan
K
IK
N
tuqbala AA
9:54 ‫�ق‬ A Imperf (t↔y)
‫ى�� ب��ل‬
IA
H
yuqbala
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA In the edition of al-Sabʿa it is written
yulāmizuka, possibly a misprint
yalmizuka AA
because the description of the reading
A matches yalmuzuka
H
K
IK → Ḥammād b. Salama → ʿAbd Allāh
9:58 ‫ى�ل�م�ز ك‬ vowels
b. ʿAmr b. Abī Umayya al-Baṣrī → Ibn
al-Jahm → IM
yalmuzūna in (Q. 9:79)
Rawḥ b. ʿAbd al-Muʾmin → al-Ṣūfī → IM
yalmuzuka
Makka → Shibl → Muḥammad b. Ṣāliḥ
→ Rawḥ b. ʿAbd al-Muʾmin → al-Ṣūfī

→ IM
IK → Ḥammād b. Salama → Ḥajjāj b. al-
This is the recitation of Y (Yaʿqūb)
udhnun … udhnu N
IK
IA
9:61
‫�ذ ن‬ ‫�ذ ن‬ AA vowels
� ‫ا �…ا‬ udhunun … udhunu
A
453
H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

454
IK
N
IA
wa-raḥmatun
AA
A
9:61 ‫ورح�م�ه‬ iʿrāb
K
H
N → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUmāra
wa-raḥmatin
Ḥamza b. al-Qāsim → al-Layth b. IM: This is wrong (ghalaṭ)
Khālid → al-Kisāʾī l-ṣaghīr → IM
naʿfu … nuʿadhdhib A
IK Imperf (n↔y)
N
9:66
‫�ذ‬ ‫ف‬ IA Imperf (n↔t)
�‫ى�ع�� … ى�ع� ب‬ yuʿfa … tuʿadhdhab
AA Act↔Pass
H
Act↔Pass
K
IK
N
IA
yalmizūna AA (Q. 9:58)
A
Appendix
H
‫ن‬
9:79 �‫ى�ل�م�ز و‬ K vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK → Ḥammād b. Salama → ʿAbd Allāh

b. ʿAmr b. Abī Umayya al-Baṣrī → Ibn
al-Jahm → IM
yalmuzūna Rawḥ b. ʿAbd al-Muʾmin → al-Ṣūfī → IM
Makka → Shibl → Muḥammad b. Ṣāliḥ →
The recitation of ahl Makka
Rawḥ b. ʿAbd al-Muʾmin → al-Ṣūfī → IM
IK → Ḥammād b. Salama → Ḥajjāj b. al-
This is the recitation of Y (Yaʿqūb)
IK
‿s-sūʾi AA
Ibn Muḥayṣin
N
A
9:98 ‫ا �ل��سوء‬ (Q. 48:6) vowels
IA
‿s-sawʾi H
K
Rawḥ → al-Ṣūfī → IM
IK
A
455
AA
qurbatun IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

456
H
K
N → Qālūn
9:99
‫ق‬ N → al-Musayyabī There is no disagreement in (Q. 9:99)
vowels
‫�ر�ب�ه‬ qurubāt
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Sulaymān b.
Dāwūd al-Hāshimī
qurubatun N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → X
N → Warsh
N → al-Aṣmaʿī
N
IA
AA
taḥtahā
‫ت‬ A
9:100 �
� - ‫�م� ن‬
‫حت��ه�ا‬ � ḥarf (±min)
H
K
IK
min taḥtihā As written in the Meccan codices
Makka
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
a-ṣalawātuka in (Q. 11:87) and
ṣalawātika N
ṣalawātihim in (Q. 23:9)
IA
Long vwl (±ā)
9:103 ‫�ص��لوت��ك‬ A → Shuʿba Cons loss
a-ṣalātuka in (Q. 11:87) and ṣalawātihim
A → Ḥafṣ
in (Q. 23:9)
ṣalātaka H a-ṣalātuka in (Q. 11:87) and
K ṣalātihim in (Q. 23:9)
IK
AA
IA
murja‌ʾūna b. Ḥātim
al-Jahm → IM
Aḥmad al-Wakīʿī → Ibrāhīm b. Aḥmad
al-Wakīʿī
N
457

‫ن‬ A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf
9:106 �‫�مر�ج�و‬ murjawna (Q. 7:111), (Q. 33:51) hamz

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

458

A → Shuʿba → K
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā → Abū l-Bukhturī
Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak → Wuhayb
H
K
N Per the codices of Madīna and

alladhīna
IA Damascus
IK
9:107 ‫�ذ ن‬ AA ḥarf (±wa)
�‫ا �ل� �ي‬-‫و‬ Per the codices of Makka, Baṣra, and
wa-lladhīna A
Kūfa
H
K
IK
A Act↔Pass
‫�ن ن‬
9:109 ‫ ا ��س��س ب��ى��ن�ه … ا ��س��س‬assasa bunyānahu … assasa AA
‫��ى��هن‬ bunyānahu
‫ب‬
Appendix
H
K iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
ussisa bunyānuhu … ussisa N

bunyānuhu IA
IK
N
jurufin AA
‫ف‬ K
9:109 ��‫ج�ر‬ vowels
A → Ḥafṣ
IA
jurfin A → Shuʿba
H
IK
H
hārin
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā mufakhkhama
N
9:109 ‫�ه�ا ر‬ imāla
AA
hērin
K
A → Shuʿba
IM: I do not have a transmission from
h?rin IA
IA for this reading
459

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

460
IK
N
Act↔Pass
tuqaṭṭaʿa AA
K
9:110 ‫ت��ق��ط‬
‫ع‬ A → Shuʿba
IA Vrb frm
taqaṭṭaʿa H (II↔V)
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
Act↔Pass
fa-yaqtulūna wa-yuqtalūna AA
9:111
‫ف �ق ن �ق ن‬ A
�‫��ى� ت��لو� وى�� ت��لو‬
IA
H Act↔Pass
fa-yuqtalūna wa-yaqtulūna
K
H
yazīghu
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK
9:117 ‫ى�ز � غ‬ Imperf (t↔y)
�‫ي‬ N
tazīghu
IA
AA
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA
ghilẓatan AA
A
9:123 ‫غ�� ظ‬
‫�ل��ه‬ vowels
H
K
A → al-Mufaḍḍal → Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī
ghalẓatan → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā l-Quṭaʿī →
tarawna H
IK
N
9:126
�‫ىرو‬ yarawna
AA
A
K
IK
N
maʿiya … maʿī yāʾāt al-iḍāfa
AA
461
‫�م�عى ا ب��د ا … �م�عى‬

9:83 ‫ع�د وا‬ IA taskīn

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

462
H
maʿī … maʿī K
A → Shuʿba
Ḥafṣ reads maʿiya throughout the
maʿiya … maʿiya A → Ḥafṣ
Qurʾān
IK
khafīf tāmm without full lengething of
alif lām ra A → Ḥafṣ
the rāʾ
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Ibn Jammāz
AA Ibn Mujāhid’s phrase is ʿalā l-hijāʾ
IA maksūra, which could be understood
as the letters being pronounced
H
according to their alphabetical value,
10:1 ‫ا �لر‬ imāla
i.e. rāʾ, instead of ra, and thus reciting
rēʾ. It could also be understood as the
alif lām re letters being pronounced individually
and not connected, as in alār, for
example. However, there is no
K recitation to this effect. Also, IM at the
beginning of the entry states that the
disagreement among the Readers is
related to imāla and tafkhīm only, and
Appendix
the full value of the rāʾ was not brought

up in the discussion

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

alif lām ræ lā yufakhkhim al-rāʾ
IK
A
la-sāḥirun
H
10:2 ‫�ل��س��ح‬
‫�ر‬ K Long vwl (±ā)
N
la-siḥrun AA
IA
ḍiʾāʾan IK → Qunbul Throughout the Qurʾān

IK → al-Bazzī The companions/students of al-Bazzī
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ and Ibn Fulayḥ deny the reading ḍiʾāʾan
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ → Isḥāq b. Aḥmad Ibn Fulayḥ: We are familiar only with
al-Khuzāʿī → IM the reading ḍiyāʾan
10:5 ‫�ض‬
‫�� ى�ا‬ N hamz
ḍiyāʾan
IA
AA
A
H
463

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

464
IK
AA
yufaṣṣilu
A → Ḥafṣ
IK → al-Bazzī → Ibn Abī Mihrān → IM
‫�ف‬ IK → al-Bazzī → Muḍar b. Muḥammad
10:5 Imperf (n↔y)
‫ى�� ص�ل‬ → IM
N
nufaṣṣilu
A → Shuʿba
IA
H
K
la-qaḍā … ajalahum IA
IK
Act↔Pass
N
10:11 �‫�ل��ق�ض�� ا �ل��ه� ا��له‬ AA
‫ى ي �م ج �م‬ la-quḍiya … ajaluhum
A
H iʿrāb
K
IK
Appendix
adrākum N
10:16 �
‫ا د رى ك‬ A → Ḥafṣ imāla
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A → Shuʿba
adrēkum IA
H
K
IK Also in (Q. 16:1), (Q. 16:3), and (Q. 30:40)

N while reading tushrikūna in (Q. 27:59)
AA Also in (Q. 16:1), (Q. 16:3), (Q. 30:40),
A and (Q. 27:59). IM: This is what I have
yushrikūna in my notebook according to the
transmission IA → Ibn Dhakwān →
10:18
‫ش ن‬ Aḥmad b. Yūsuf. However, I saw in the Imperf (t↔y)
‫ى��رك‬
�‫�و‬ IA
notebook of Mūsā b. Mūsā that IA →
Ibn Dhakwān read (Q. 27:59) tushrikūna
IA → Hishām b. ʿAmmār → Aḥmad b. Also in (Q. 16:1), (Q. 16:3), (Q. 30:40),
Muḥammad b. Bakr and (Q. 27:59)
tushrikūna
H Not specified directly by IM but can be
K deduced through exclusion
yanshurukum IA
IK
‫ى�ى��سرك‬ N
465
‫م‬
10:22 ‫ى��س�ىرك‬ yusayyirukum AA Root
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

466
A
H
K
A → Ḥafṣ
matāʿa IK → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī
→ ʿUbayd Allāh b. ʿAlī → IM
IK
N
10:23 ��‫�مت‬ iʿrāb
‫ع‬ IA
matāʿu AA
A
H
K
IK
qiṭʿan
K
N
10:27
‫ق‬ AA vowels
‫��ط�ع�ا‬
qiṭaʿan A
IA
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
tablū A
10:30 ‫�ىى��لوا‬ AA ibdāl (b↔t)
IA
H
tatlū
K
IK
AA
kalimatu A
10:33 �‫ك�ل�م� ت‬ H (Q. 10:96) Long vwl (±ā)
K
N
kalimātu
IA
IK
yahaddī IA Vrb frm
N → Warsh (I↔VIII)
yahddī N
yushimm al-hāʾ shayʾan min al-fatḥ
yahaddī AA Gemin
(giving the hāʾ a slight fatḥa-like value)
467
H
yahdī taskīn
10:35 ‫�ى�ه�د �ى‬ K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

468

yihiddī A → Shuʿba → Aḥmad b. Jubayr →
Aḥmad b. Ṣadaqa → IM
(Q. 36:49) vowels
A → Ḥafṣ
yahiddī A → Shuʿba → K
IK
AA
ḥarf (lākinna
wa-lākinna ‿n-nāsa A
↔lākin)
10:44 ‫�ل ك ن‬
‫�� ن� ا �ل��ا ��س‬‫و‬ N (Q. 2:108), (Q. 8:17), (Q. 2:177), (Q. 2:189)
IA
H
wa-lākini ‿n-nāsu iʿrāb
K
IK
N
IA
naḥshuruhum AA
10:45 ‫�ش‬‫ى‬
‫ح�� ه‬ Imperf (n↔y)
‫رم‬ H
K
A
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix
yaḥshuruhum

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Qālūn
N → Ibn Abī Uways
From the uṣūl of Warsh: naql ḥarakat
N → Warsh
ā̇lāna al-hamza
N → Abū Khulayd
10:51, 91 ‫ن‬ N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K →Ibn Jubayr hamz
��‫ا ل‬ N → Ibn Abī l-Zinād → Ḥajjāj al-Aʿwar
IK
IA
AA
ā̇lʾāna
A
H
K
IK
N
AA
yajmaʿūna
A
H
‫ن‬
469
10:58 ‫جى‬
�‫��م�عو‬ K Imperf (t↔y)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

470
IM: There is no transmission from

IA concerning any disagreement in
tajmaʿūna IA reading fa-l-yafraḥū (i.e. to read fa-l-
tafraḥū) which occurs at the beginning
of the verse
IK
N
IA
yaʿzubu
10:61 �‫�ي�ع�ز ب‬ AA Throughout the Qurʾān vowels
A
H
yaʿzibu K
IK
N
AA
aṣghara … akbara
10:61 ‫��بر‬
‫ولا ا �ص غ��ر … ولا ا ك‬ A iʿrāb
IA
K
aṣgharu … akbaru H
fa‿jmaʿū N → al-Aṣmaʿī → Naṣr b. ʿAlī

Appendix
N Vrb frm
‫ف‬ IK
10:71 ‫��ا �ج �م�عوا ا�مرك‬ (I↔IV)
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
AA
fa-ajmiʿū A
H
K
IK
N
sāḥirin AA Long vwl (±ā)
10:79 ‫��س‬
�
‫حر‬ A (Q. 7:112), (Q. 26:37)
IA
H
saḥḥārin Gemin
K
bihi ȧ‿s-siḥru AA
IK
N
10:81 ‫�ر‬
‫ب��ه ا �ل��س��ح‬ IA hamz
bihi ‿s-siḥru
A
H
K
471

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

472
A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Abū

tabawwayā｡ Muslim → Ibn Abī Muslim ʿUbayd in waqf mode
Allāh b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān
yulayyin al-hamza, yushīr ilayhā
tabawwaºā H
bi-ṣadrihi
IK On the pattern of tabawwaʿā
10:87 ‫ت��بوى�ا‬ hamz
N
IA
tabawwa‌ʾā
AA
A
K
IK
AA
li-yaḍillū
N
(Q. 6:119), (Q. 14:30), (Q. 22:9), (Q. 31:6), Vrb frm
10:88 ‫� ��لوا‬
‫�يل��ض‬ IA
and (Q. 39:8) (I↔IV)
A
li-yuḍillū H
K
tatbaʿānni IA → Ibn Dhakwān

IK
Appendix
Vrb frm
‫ن‬ N
10:89 � ‫ى�ىى�ع�ا‬ tattabiʿānni (I↔VIII)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
H
K
IK
N
annahu A
ḥarf
10:90 ‫ا ن��ه‬ AA
(inna↔anna)
IA
H
innahu
K
IK
fa-sali
K
AJ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
Shayba → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
10:94
‫ف‬ AA
(Q. 4:32), (Q. 17:101), (Q. 43:45).
hamz
‫��س�ل‬ No disagreement in (Q. 60:10)
fa ‿sʾal N
A
IA
473

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

474
IK
AA
kalimatu A
10:96 �‫ك�ل�م� ت‬ H (Q. 10:33) Long vwl (±ā)
K
N
kalimātu
IA
wa-najʿalu A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
10:100 ‫ى‬ Imperf (n↔y)
‫و ج� ��ع�ل‬ wa-yajʿalu IA
AA
H
K
IK
N
IA
nunajji
AA nunajjī in (Q. 19:72) Vrb frm
10:103 �‫ن�ن�ج‬
A (I↔IV)
H
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix
nunji
K nunjī in (Q. 19:72)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
liya … nafsiya … AA
inniya … wa-rabbiya …
N
ajriya
liya … nafsī … inniya …
IK
‫ن‬ ‫ن �ف‬ wa-rabbī … ajrī
10:15, 15, ‫لى … �� سى أ… ا �ى‬ lī … nafsī … innī … wa- IA yāʾāt al-iḍāfa taskīn
15, 53, 72 ‫… ور ب�ى … � ج�ر�ى‬ rabbī … ajriya A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
lī … nafsī … innī … wa-
H
rabbī … ajrī
K
IK
A
siḥrun N
11:7 ‫��س‬
�
‫حر‬ AA (Q. 5:110), (Q. 61:6), (Q. 10:2) Long vwl (±ā)
IA
H
sāḥirun
K
IK
annī AA
K ḥarf
‫ن‬
475
11:25 �
‫ا �ى �ل ك‬ N (anna↔inna)
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

476
IA
innī A
H
AA
bādiʾa ‿r-rāyi AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
AA → al-Yazīdī In prayers or fast reading (idrāj)
In slow recitation hamz
AA was reported to have recited both
bādiʾa ‿r-ra‌ʾyi AA → al-Yazīdī
ways, with and without the articulation
11:27 of hamza, i.e. ‿r-rāyi and ‿r-ra‌ʾyi
‫ب�ا د �ى ا �لرا �ى‬ IK
N
IA
bādiya ‿r-ra‌ʾyi
A hamz
H
K
IK
AA
Act↔Pass
fa-ʿamiyat N
IA
11:28 �‫��ع��م�ى� ت‬
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
Vrb frm
fa-ʿummiyat K
(I↔II)
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
IA
kulli AA
11:40 ‫� �ز ن‬
�‫كل و ج��ي‬ (Q. 23:27) tanwīn
A → Shuʿba
H
K
kullin A → Ḥafṣ
IK
mujrāhā
IA
vowels
H
K
majrēhā
11:41 ‫جم‬
‫�ر�ى�ه�ا‬ This is the only variant in which A →
A → Ḥafṣ
Ḥafṣ performs imāla
A → Shuʿba imāla
mujrǣhā
N
mujrēhā AA
477

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

478
IK
IA
wa-mursāhā
AA None of the Seven Readers treated
A → Ḥafṣ mujrāhā and mursāhā as adjectives
11:41 ‫و�مر��س��ى�ه�ا‬ (active participles) modifying God imāla
H
wa-mursēhā (Allāh), i.e. reading mujrīhā and
K musrīhā
N
wa-mursǣhā
A → Shuʿba
IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul → IM reads

yā bunay (Q. 31:13) and (Q. 31:17) and yā
IK bunayyi (Q. 31:16). IK → al-Qawwās →
al-Bazzī reads yā bunay (Q. 31:13) and
(Q. 31:17) and yā bunayya (Q. 31:16)
yā bunayyi N
AA Throughout the Qurʾān. They always
11:42 ‫ن‬ vocalise the first person possessive iʿrāb
‫ى�ب��ى‬ H
pronoun yāʾ with kasra when the noun
IA is singular ibn
K
But reading yā bunayyi throughout the
A → Shuʿba
Qurʾān
yā bunayya
Throughout the Qurʾān when the yāʾ is
A → Ḥafṣ
suffixed to the singular ibn
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
iʿrāb
N
AA
‫غ‬ ʿamalun ghayru tanwīn
11:46 ��‫�ع�م� ��ى ص��ل‬ IA
‫ل ر�ح‬
A
H vowels
ʿamila ghayra K
IK
tasʾalanna IA → Hishām b. ʿAmmār → Abū ʿUbayd
[al-Qāsim]
IM: this contradicts what Abū ʿUbayd
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
has transmitted
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī
tasʾalanni
11:46 ‫ت ن‬ N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Sulaymān b. Gemin
�‫��س�ى�ل‬ Dāwūd al-Hāshimī In waṣl mode
N → Abū Bakr Ibn Abī Uways Abū Bakr Ibn Abī Uways is credited for
the two different readings. It is probable
N → Ibn Jammāz
one of them could be Ismāʿīl Ibn Abī
N → Warsh Uways
tasʾalannī
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
N → Abū Bakr Ibn Abī Uways
479

tasʾalnī
AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

480

A
In waṣl and waqf modes
tasʾalni H Long vwl (±ī)
K
AA in waqf mode
IK
Reading fazaʿi yawmiʾidhin (Q. 27:89)
AA
and ʿadhābi yawmiʾidhin (Q. 70:11)
IA
yawmiʾidhin A Reading fazaʿin yawma‌ʾidhin (Q. 27:89)
H and ʿadhābi yawmiʾidhin (Q. 70:11)
Reading fazaʿi yawmiʾidhin (Q. 27:89)
and ʿadhābi yawmiʾidhin (Q. 70:11)
11:66
‫�ذ‬ Reading fazaʿin yawma‌ʾidhin (Q. 27:89) iʿrāb
�‫�خ�ز �ى ىو�م�ى‬ K
and ʿadhābi yawma‌ʾidhin (Q. 70:11)
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Abū Bakr Ibn Abī Uways Reading fazaʿi yawma‌ʾidhin (Q. 27:89)
yawma‌ʾidhin N → al-Musayyabī and ʿadhābi yawma‌ʾidhin (Q. 70:11)
IM: one cannot say fazaʿin yawmiʾidhin
N → Qālūn
however one can say fazaʿi yawmiʾidhin
N → Warsh and fazaʿi yawma‌ʾidhin
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N Thamūdan in (Q. 25:38), (Q. 29:38),
Thamūdan … li-Thamūda
AA and (Q. 53:51)
iʿrāb
IA
H
11:68
‫ل�ث‬ ‫ن ث‬ Thamūda … li-Thamūda
‫ا � �مود … �مود‬ A → Ḥafṣ
Also in (Q. 25:38), (Q. 29:38),
K
and (Q. 53:51)
A → Shuʿba → al-Juʿfī
Thamūdan … li-Thamūdin A → Shuʿba → K iʿrāb
Also in (Q. 25:38), (Q. 29:38) but reading
Thamūda in (Q. 53:51)
IK
N
… salāmun AA
11:69 ‫��س��ل … ��س��ل‬ IA (Q. 51:25) Long vwl (±ā)
‫م‬ ‫م‬ A
H
… silmun
K
481

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

482
IK
N
Yaʿqūbu AA
‫�ق‬ K
11:71 �‫�ي�ع�� و ب‬ iʿrāb
A → Shuʿba
IA
Yaʿqūba H
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
fa‿sri
N
AA
‫ف‬ Vrb frm
11:81 ‫��ا ��سر‬ A
(I↔IV)
fa-asri IA
H
K
IK
‿mra‌ʾatuka
AA
N
11:81
‫ت‬ A iʿrāb
‫ا�مرا ��ك‬
‿mra‌ʾataka IA
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
a-ṣalawātuka N
IA Long vwl (±ā)
11:87 ‫ا �ص��لوت��ك‬ (Q. 9:103), (Q. 23:9)
A → Shuʿba Cons loss
A → Ḥafṣ
a-ṣalātuka H
K
IK
N ya‌ʾt in waqf mode and ya‌ʾtī in
ya‌ʾt｡ī
AA waṣl mode
K
11:105 ‫�ا ت‬
� ‫ي‬ Long vwl (±ī)
A
ya‌ʾt in waqf mode and ya‌ʾti in
ya‌ʾt｡i IA
waṣl mode
H
ya‌ʾtī IK Doubt from IM about IK’s technique
IK
N
saʿidū AA
IA
483
11:108 ‫��س�ع�د وا‬ A → Shuʿba Act↔Pass

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

484
H
suʿidū K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
wa-in … la-mā
N
Gemin
wa-in … lammā A → Shuʿba
‫ن‬ H
11:111 ‫كلا لم�ا‬
� � ‫وا‬
wa-inna … lammā IA
A → Ḥafṣ ḥarf
K (in↔inna)
wa-inna … la-mā
AA
IK
N
AA Act↔Pass
wa‿ttabaʿa A
11:116 ��‫ا ت‬ IA (Q. 18:85)
‫و بع‬
H
K Vrb frm
AA → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Hārūn (IV↔VIII)
wa-utbiʿa
[b. Ḥātim]
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
yurjaʿu
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK
11:123 �� ‫ى‬ Act↔Pass
‫ر جع‬ IA
yarjiʿu
AA
H
K
N
taʿmalūna IA
A → Ḥafṣ
11:123 �‫ى�عم�لو‬ Imperf (t↔y)
IK
yaʿmalūna AA
H
K
fa-inniya … ʿanniya … inni-

ya … ajriya … wa-lākinniya …
inniya … nuṣḥiya … in-
niya … inniya … ajriya …
N
faṭaraniya … inniya …
485
ḍayfiya … inniya … inniya …

tawfīqiya … shiqāqiya …
a-rahṭiya

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

486
fa-inniya … ʿanniya …
inniya … ajriya … wa-
lākinniya … inniya …
nuṣḥiya … inniya …
AA
inniya … ajriya … faṭaranī …
innī … ḍayfiya … inniya …
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ف ن‬ inniya … tawfīqiya …
‫��إ �ىأ… �ع�ى … �إ �ى‬ shiqāqiya … a-rahṭiya
‫ن‬
‫… � ج�ر�ى … و�ل�ك�ى‬ fa-innī … ʿannī … innī … A → Shuʿba
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬ ajrī … wa-lākinnī … innī … H
… ‫… �إ �ى … ��ص��حى‬
11:3, 10, ‫ن‬ ‫ظ‬ ‫ن‬ nuṣḥī … innī … innī … ajrī …
26, 29, 29, ‫أ�إ �ى ا �ع�� أك … �إ �ى‬ faṭaranī … innī … ḍayfī …
‫�ذ‬ innī … innī … tawfīqī … K
31, 34, 46, … ‫� �عو … � ج�ر�ى‬
47, 51, 51, ‫ن‬ ‫ف ن‬ shiqāqī … a-rahṭī yāʾāt al-iḍāfa taskīn
54, 78, 84, … ‫��طر�ى … �إ �ى‬ fa-innī … ʿannī … innī …
84, 88, 89, ‫ن‬ ajriya … wa-lākinnī …
�
‫�� ي��ف�ى … �إ �ى ا ري� ك‬ ‫�ض‬
92 ‫م‬ innī … nuṣḥī … innī …
‫ن أ خ �ف‬ A → Ḥafṣ
… � ‫… ا �ى � ��ا‬ innī … ajriya … faṭaranī …
‫ق‬ ‫ف‬ innī … ḍayfī … innī … innī …
… ‫ت�و�ي��قى … �ش��ق�ا �ى‬
‫أ‬ tawfīqī … shiqāqī … a-rahṭī
‫� ر�ه��طى‬ fa-innī … ʿannī … innī …
ajriya … wa-lākinnī …
innī … nuṣḥī … innī …
innī … ajriya … faṭaranī … IA
innī … ḍayfī … innī … innī …
tawfīqiya … shiqāqī …
a-rahṭiya
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
fa-inniya … ʿannī … inniya …

ajriya … wa-lākinniya …
innī … nuṣḥī … inniya … in-
niya … ajriya … faṭaraniya … IK → al-Bazzī
innī … ḍayfī … inniya …
inniya … tawfīqiya …
shiqāqī … a-rahṭiya
fa-inniya … ʿannī … inniya …
ajriya … wa-lākinnī … innī …
nuṣḥī … inniya … inniya …
ajriya … faṭaranī … innī … IK → al-Qawwās
ḍayfī … innī … inniya …
tawfīqiya … shiqāqī …
a-rahṭiya
AA
N → Ibn Jammāz
tukhzūnī in waṣl mode and tukhzūn
tukhzūn｡ī AJ → Ibn Jammāz
in waqf mode
‫ىخ�ز ن‬ AJ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
11:78 �‫� و‬ Long vwl (±ī)
Shayba → Ibn Jammāz
Shayba → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Warsh tukhzūni in waṣl mode and tukhzūn
487
tukhzūn｡i IK in waqf mode

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

488
A
IA
H
K
yā-abata IA
N
IK
Throughout the Qurʾān.
AA
yā-abati In waṣl mode iʿrāb
A
12:4 �‫ى�ا ب� ت‬ H
K
IK in waqf mode
yā-abah in waqf mode
IA IM is not certain about this transmis- Cons loss
sion (wa-kadhālika Ibn ʿĀmir fī-mā arā)
K
ruʾyēka (Q. 12:43) ruʾyēya and ‿r-ruʾyē
K → al-Dūrī
But reading (Q. 12:43) ruʾyēya and
‿r-ruʾyē
ruʾyāka H
IK
Appendix
12:5 ‫ر�ىى�ا ك‬ N imāla

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
AA
A
āyatun IK
N
IA
Long vwl
12:7 �‫ا ى� ت‬ AA
āyātun (±ā)
A
H
K
IK
mubīninu ‿qtulū N
K
‫قت‬ A
12:8–9 ‫�م ب��ي�� ن� ا ��لوا‬ vowels
AA
mubīnini ‿qtulū
IA
H
489

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

490
ghayābāti N
IK
IA
12:10
‫غ‬ AA Long vwl (±ā)
�‫��ى�ى� ت‬ ghayābati
A
H
K
IK
IK → Ismāʿīl b. al-Qusṭ → Abū Bakr
nartaʿi wa-nalʿab Imperf (n↔y)
al-Bakrāwī (?) → Naṣr b. ʿAlī → ʿUbayd
Allāh → IM
yartaʿi wa-yalʿab N
12:12
‫ت‬ Imperf (n↔y)
�‫ىر�ع وى��ل�ع� ب‬ AA
nartaʿ wa-nalʿab
IA
A Vrb frm
yartaʿ wa-yalʿab H (I↔VIII)
K
la-yuḥzinuniya N
la-yaḥzununiya IK
IA Vrb frm
12:13 ‫ح�ز ن ن‬ H mentioned under yāʾāt al-ḍāfa (I ↔IV)
Appendix
‫�ل��ي�� ى‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
la-yaḥzununī A
AA
IK
N
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Abū Bakr Ibn Abī Uways IM: People in Ḥijāz articulate the
N → Qālūn hamza
N → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar [b. Abī Kathīr]
‿dh-dhiʾbu Al-Aṣmaʿī: I asked Nāfiʿ about articulat-
N → al-Aṣmaʿī → Abū Saʿīd ʿAbd al- ing the hamza in al-dhiʾb and al-biʾr; N
Raḥmān b. Muḥammad al-Ḥārithī said: If the Arabs (Bedouins) articluate

l-Baṣrī → IM the hamza then you should do so as well
12:14
‫�ذ‬ AA hamz
�‫ا �ل� ى� ب‬
A
IA
H
K
AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī →
ʿUbayd Allāh al-Hāshimī → IM
‿dh-dhību AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl
N → Warsh
491
AJ → Ibn Jammāz
Shayba b. Naṣāḥ → Ibn Jammāz

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

492
IM: This is wrong (wahm) because N is

N → Ibn Jammāz
known to have articulated the hamza
AJ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
Shayba b. Naṣāḥ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
IK
N
yā-bushrāya Cons loss
AA
IA
yā-bushrā A
H imāla
yā-bushrē
K
12:19 ‫ش‬ Also reading (Q. 12:23) mathwāy,
‫ى�ى��ر�ى‬
(Q. 6:162) wa-maḥyāy, and (Q. 20:18)
ʿaṣāy. All other transmitters from N
vocalised the yāʾ with fatḥa, mathwāya,
yā-bushrǣy N → Warsh ʿaṣāy, and yā-bushrāya except wa- taskīn
maḥyāy. IM: I saw the students/
companions of Warsh unfamilair with
this reading, and they read all these
words with fatḥa on the yāʾ
haytu IK
N
hīta
IA hamz
Appendix
IA → Hishām → Abū l-ʿAbbās

hiʾtu
12:23 �‫�ه�ى� ت‬ al-Bakrāwī → IM

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IM: Ibn Dhakwān did not say anything

hiʾta IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī
about articulating the hamza
A vowels
AA
hayta
H perfect
K (tu↔ta)
IK
‿l-mukhliṣīna AA
mukhliṣan (Q. 19:51)
IA
‫ن‬ ‫�خ‬ Act Ptcpl↔
12:24 N
�‫ا لم��ل��ص��ي‬ Pass Ptcpl
A
‿l-mukhlaṣīna
H mukhlaṣan (Q. 19:51)

K
IK
K
wa-qālatu ‿khruj
IA
‫ق ت خ‬ N → Khārija
12:31 ‫و��ا �ل�� ا �ر�ج‬ vowels
N
AA
wa-qālati ‿khruj
A
493

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

494
AA
ḥāshā … ḥāshā N → al-Aṣmaʿī → Naṣr b. ʿAlī → ʿUbayd
Allāh b. ʿAlī → IM
IK
ّٰ ‫ش‬ ٰ ‫ش‬
12:31, 51 ‫ح�� ل��ل�ه‬ �
� … ‫ح�� ل�ّ�ل�ه‬ N Long vwl (±ā)
IA
ḥāsha … ḥāsha
A
H
K
IK
N
AA
da‌ʾban IA vowels
H
12:47 ‫د ا ب�ا‬ K
A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
da‌ʾaban
A → Mūsā l-Zābī hamz
daºban AA in idrāj mode
IK
Appendix
N
‫ن‬ AA
12:49 �‫ى�ع��صرو‬ yaʿṣirūna Imperf (t↔y)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
IA
H
taʿṣirūna
K
nashāʾu IK
N
IA
12:56 ‫ش‬
‫ى��ا‬ AA Imperf (n↔y)
yashāʾu
A
H
K
IK
N
li-fityatihi AA Long vwl (±ā)
‫�ف‬ IA
12:62 ‫�ل�� ت��ىى�ه‬ A → Shuʿba
H
li-fityānihi K ibdāl (t↔n)
A → Ḥafṣ
495

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

496
IK
N
naktal AA
‫ت‬
12:63 ��‫ك‬ A Imperf (n↔y)
‫ى�ل‬
IA
H
yaktal
K
IK
N
ḥifẓan AA
IA
12:64 �
‫ح��ف� ظ��ا‬ A → Shuʿba Long vwl (±ā)
H
K
ḥāfiẓan
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Muḥammad b. Abān
IK
N
darajāti
AA
12:76 ‫ت ن‬ IA tanwīn
��‫د ر ج��ا � �م‬
A
darajātin H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
IA
‿stayʾasū … tayʾasū … AA
‿stayʾasa A
12:80, 87, … ‫ا ��ست��ى��سو … ت��ى��سوا‬
‫ت‬ H hamz
110
‫ا ��س��ى��س‬ K
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl →
‿stāyasū … tāyasū … al-Haytham b. Khālid
‿stāyasa
H
K
a-innaka
A
12:90 ‫ا ن��ك‬ IA uṣūl: consecutive hamza-interrogatives hamz
N
ȧ-ºinnaka
AA
innaka IK
yattaqī｡ IK → Qunbul → IM
N
497
IA
12:90 ‫تق‬ yattaqi｡ AA in waṣl and waqf modes Long vwl (±ī)
��‫ي‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

498
A
H
K
Throughout the Qurʾān except

nūḥī A → Ḥafṣ
(Q. 42:3) yūḥī
A → Shuʿba Imperf (n↔y)
IK
12:109 N
‫ىو�حى‬
yūḥā IA Throughout the Qurʾān
AA
Act↔Pass
H
K
IK
AA
yaʿqilūna
H
‫�ق ن‬ K
12:109 �‫ى�ع�� لو‬ Act↔Pass
N
A → Shuʿba
taʿqilūna
A → Ḥafṣ
IA
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
kudhdhibū
AA
‫ذ‬ Vrb frm
12:110 ‫ك‬
‫�� ب�وا‬ IA
(I↔II)
A
kudhibū H
K
IK
N
AA Vrb frm
fa-nunjī
H (II↔IV)
K
12:110
‫ف‬
‫��ى��ج�ى‬ A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra IM: This is wrong
fa-nnujiya AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī IM: This is wrong
Act↔Pass
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
fa-nujjiya
A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → al- Assim
Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak b. al-Yatīm
mathwāy N → Warsh
mathwāya N
499
H
12:23 ‫ث‬ K
‫�م��و�ى‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

500
A
IA
IK
AA
N → al-Musayyabī
IK
AA
‫ن ف‬ annī
12:59 ‫ا �ى ا و �ى‬ IA
H
K
A
anniya N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī
N → Warsh
N → al-Musayyabī
AA
ikhwatī
‫�خ ت‬ H
12:100 ‫ا �و �ى‬ K
A
IA
Appendix
ikhwatiya
IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
H
sabīlī
K
12:108 A
‫��س�ب� ي��لى‬
IA yāʾāt al-iḍāfa taskīn
N → Warsh
sabīliya N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
N → al-Musayyabī
IK
IA
AA
‫� نن‬ yadʿūnanī
12:33 H
‫ي��د عو��ى‬
K
A
yadʿūnaniya N
inniya arāniya … inniya N

arāniya AA
innī arāniya … innī arāniya IK
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ن‬
501
12:36 ‫ا �ى ا را �ى … ا �ى ا را �ى‬ IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

502
H
innī arānī … innī arānī K
A
IK
IA
rabbī … nafsī … rabbī … lī
12:37, ‫ن �ف‬ H
‫ر ب�ى … �� سى … نر ب�ى‬ abī … ḥuznī … rabbī … bī
53, 53, 80, ‫ح�ز‬ K
80, 86, ‫… لى ا ب�ى … � �ى‬ A
98, 100 ‫ح��س ن� ب�ى‬
� ‫… ر ب�ى … ا‬
rabbiya … nafsiya … N
rabbiya … liya abiya …
AA
ḥuzniya … rabbiya … biya
N
IA
ābāʾiya … laʿalliya … ḥuzniya
IK
12:38, 46, ‫ح�ز ن‬
‫ا ب�ا ىى … �ل�ع��لى … � �ى‬ AA
86
A
ābāʾī … laʿallī … ḥuznī H
K
tuʾtūnī｡ IK tuʾtūnī in both waṣl and waqf modes

N → Ibn Jammāz
tuʾtūnī in waṣl mode, tuʾtūn in waqf
Appendix
tuʾtūn｡ī N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar

‫تت ن‬ mode
12:66 �‫�و�و‬ AA Long vwl (±ī)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Warsh
IA tuʾtūni in waṣl mode, tuʾtūn in
tuʾtūn｡i
A waqf mode
H
K
IK
N
yughshī AA
IA Vrb frm
13:3 ‫غش‬
‫ى��ى‬ A → Ḥafṣ (II↔IV)
A → Shuʿba
yughashshī H
K
wa-zarʿun wa-nakhīlun IK
ṣinwānun wa-ghayru AA
ṣinwānin A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba iʿrāb
wa-zarʿin wa-nakhīlin N
‫ن‬ ‫ن�خ‬ ‫�ز‬ ṣinwānin wa-ghayri
503
� ‫� ي��ل ��ص ن��وا‬ ‫و رع و‬ IA

ṣinwānin
‫ن‬ ‫غ‬ H
13:4 � ‫و��ير ��ص ن��وا‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

504
K
wa-zarʿun wa-nakhīlun
A → Ḥafṣ → al-Qawwās → al-Ḥulwānī →
ṣunwānun wa-ghayru vowels
al-Ḥasan b. al-ʿAbbās
ṣunwānin
IK
Imperf (t↔y)
tusqā … wa-nufaḍḍilu N
AA
imāla
13:4 ‫ى��س��قى … وى��ف� ��ض‬ H
‫� �ل‬ tusqē … wa-yufaḍḍilu
K
yusqā … A Imperf (n↔y)
wa-nufaḍḍilu IA
IK
‿l-ukli
N
IA
13:4 � ‫الا‬ AA (Q. 2:265), (Q. 34:16), (Q. 6:141) vowels
‫كل‬
‿l-ukuli A
H
K
ȧ-ºidhā … ȧ-ºinnā AA
Appendix
a-ºidhā … a-ºinnā IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
There is disagreement on behlf of N

regarding the value of madd. IM does
(ȧ/a)-ºidhā … innā N
not give the details (Refer to uṣūl al-
qirāʾa: two consecutive interrogatives) hamz
a-idhā … innā K
A
a-idhā … a-innā
H
‫�ذ‬ IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Aḥmad b. Yūsuf
13:5 ‫ا ى� ا … ا ن�ا‬ on the pattern of ʿāʿinnā
→ IM
idhā … ā-innā
IA → Hishām → Abū l-ʿAbbās
al-Bakrāwī → IM
The wording in al-Sabʿa is confusing. madd
It refers to the articulation of two
IA → Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith → Ibn hamzas in a-idhā but it might by a typo
idhā … a-innā
Dhakwān → X where it should refer to a-innā, without
an alif between the two hamzas. This is
more clear in Jamiʿ al-Bayān
IK
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar ‿l-mutaʿālī in waṣl mode and
‿l-mutaʿālī｡ al-Minqarī → al-Ḥulwānī ‿l-mutaʿālī in waqf mode
AA → Abū Zayd → Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī Notebook transmission
13:9 ‫ا لمت��ع�ا ل‬ → IM Long vwl (±ī)
N
IA
505
‿l-mutaʿāl｡i
AA ‿l-mutaʿāli in waṣl mode and ‿l-mutaʿāl
A in waqf mode

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

506
H
K
IK
N
tastawī AA
‫ت‬ IA
13:16 ‫ى��س��و�ى‬ Imperf (t↔y)
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
yastawī H
K
IK
N
AA
tūqidūna IA
A → Shuʿba
13:17
‫ق ن‬ Reads both tūqidūna and yūqidūna but Imperf (t↔y)
�‫ىو��د و‬ AA → Naṣr b. ʿAlī → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
more often tūqidūna
H
K
yūqidūna A → Ḥafṣ
Reads both tūqidūna and yūqidūna but
AA → Naṣr b. ʿAlī → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
Appendix
more often tūqidūna

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
wa-ṣaddū
AA
13:33 ‫و�ص�د وا‬ IA (Q. 40:37) Act↔Pass
A
wa-ṣuddū H
K
IK
wa-yuthbitu AA
A
Vrb frm
13:39 �‫وى�ى�ى� ت‬ N
(II↔IV)
IA
wa-yuthabbitu
H
K
IK
‿l-kāfiru N
AA
13:42 ‫ا �ل ك �ف‬ A Long vwl (±ā)
‫�� ر‬
IA
‿l-kuffāru
H
507

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

508
hādī｡ … hādī｡ … wāqī｡ … hādī, wāqī, and wālī both in waṣl and
IK
wāqī｡ … wālī｡ waqf modes
N
13:7, 33, IA
‫ق‬ Long vwl (±ī)
34, 37, 11 ‫�ه�ا د … وا � … وا ل‬ hād｡in … hād｡in … AA hādin, wāqin, and wālin in waṣl mode;
wāq｡in … wāq｡in … wāl｡in A hād, wāq, and wāl in waqf mode
H
K
IK
AA
A
Allāhi H
ّٰ
14:2 ‫ا �ل��ل�ه‬ K iʿrāb
N → al-Aṣmaʿī → Naṣr b. ʿAlī → ʿUbayd
Allāh b. ʿAlī → IM
N
Allāhu
IA
bi-maytin IK → al-Bazzī
IK
(Q. 33:49)
N Qunbul: This was an error from
Appendix
14:17 �‫ب�م�ى� ت‬ bi-mayyitin IA al-Bazzī Gemin

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
H
K
IK
N
khalaqa AA
14:19 ‫خ ق‬ A (Q. 24:45) Long vwl (±ā)
�‫��ل‬
IA
H
khāliqu
K
bi-muṣrikhiyyi H
H → Isḥāq al-Azraq
IK
‫�خ‬ N
14:22 ‫ب�م��صر�ى‬ iʿrāb
bi-muṣrikhiyya IA
AA
A
K
509

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

510
H
qarǣr
N
AA
‫ق‬ qarēr
14:26 ‫�را ر‬ K imāla
IA
qarār IK
A
IK
li-yaḍillū
AA
N
Vrb frm
14:30 ‫�لى��ض‬
‫� ��لو‬ IA
(I↔IV)
li-yuḍillū A
H
K
IK
bayʿa … khilāla
AA
tanwīn
N
14:31 ‫خ‬ ‫ف‬ IA
‫لا ب�ي�ع �ي��ه ولا ��ل�ل‬
bayʿun … khilālun A
H iʿrāb
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
H
AA
duʿāʾ｡ī duʿāʾī in waṣl mode, duʿāʾ in waqf mode
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra Long vwl (±ī)
N → al-Aṣmaʿī → Naṣr b. ʿAlī
N → Warsh
duʿāʾī｡ IK → al-Bazzī duʿāʾī in both waṣl and waqf modes
A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → Abū
14:40 ‫د ع�ا ء‬ ʿUmāra
N
duʿāʾ｡i duʿāʾi in waṣl mode, duʿāʾ in waqf mode
K
IA
hamz
A → Shuʿba
duʿā｡ī in waṣl mode (ishmām al-yāʾ

fī l-waṣl: articulating a yāʾ-like vowel in
duʿā｡ī IK → [X] → Qunbul
waṣl mode); duʿā in waqf mode
(wa-yaqif bi-l-alif )
N
IK
taḥsibanna
AA
14:42, 47 ‫� ن‬ ‫ى‬
�‫ح��س��ب‬ K vowels
IA
511
taḥsabanna H
A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
512
nuʾakhkhiruhum AA → ʿAbbās
IK
N
IA
14:42 ‫ى خ� �ه‬ Imperf (n↔y)
‫و رم‬ yuʾakhkhiruhum AA
A
H
K
la-tazūlu K
IK
N
14:46 ‫�ل��ت�ز ول‬ IA iʿrāb
li-tazūla
AA
A
H
liya A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
Appendix
IA
AA
‫� ن‬
14:22 � ‫و م�ا‬
‫كا � لى‬ lī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
IA
li-ʿibādī H
K
IK
14:31 ‫�ل�ع ب��ا د �ى‬ N
li-ʿibādiya A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ taskīn
AA Not mentioned directly by IM
IK
inniya AA
N
14:37
‫�ن � �ن‬
�‫�� ت‬
‫ا ى ا �س ك‬ IA
H
innī
K
A
waʿīd｡ī N → Warsh
IK
513
N
14:14 ‫و�عي��د‬ waʿīd｡i IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
514
AA
A
H
K
AA
ashraktumūn｡ī N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
N → Ibn Jammāz
al-yāʾāt al-zawāʾid long vwl (±ī)
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Warsh
14:22
‫ا �ش ك�ت ن‬
�‫�مو‬‫��ر‬ N
IK
ashraktumūn｡i
IA
A
H
K
IK
AA
IA
rubbamā H
K
Appendix
ʿAlī b. Naṣr: I heard AA reading both

15:2 ‫رب�م�ا‬ ways: rubbamā and rubamā Gemin

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
N
rubamā
ʿAlī b. Naṣr: I heard AA reading both
ways: rubbamā and rubamā
IK
Vrb frm
N
(II↔V)
tanazzalu ‿l-malāʾikatu AA
Imperf
IA
15:8 ‫��ه‬
‫ى�ى�ز ل ا لم��لى �ك‬ (n↔t)
tunazzalu ‿l-malāʾikatu A → Shuʿba
Act↔Pass
H
nunazzilu ‿l-malāʾikata K
iʿrāb
A → Ḥafṣ
sukirat IK
N
IA
15:15 ‫� ت‬
� AA Vrb frm (I↔II)
‫��س ك�ر‬ sukkirat
A
H
K
515

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

516
tubashshirūnni IK
Assim
tubashshirūni N
AA
15:54
‫ن‬ ‫ت‬ IA
�‫��ب ش��رو‬
Cons loss
tubashshirūna A
(Long vwl ±ī)
H
K
IK
N
yaqnaṭ A
Throughout the Qurʾān. All Readers
15:56 ‫�ي��ق ن��ط‬ IA vowels
read (Q. 42:28) qanaṭū
H
AA
yaqniṭ
K
IK
N
la-munajjūhum A
Vrb frm
15:59 ‫ل ن�� ه‬ AA
‫م ��ج و م‬ (II↔IV)
IA
H
la-munjūhum
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA
‫ق‬ qaddarnā AA (Q. 27:57), (Q. 56:60), (Q. 77:23), Vrb frm
15:60 ‫��د رن�ا‬ H (Q. 87:3) (I↔II)
K
A → Ḥafṣ
qadarnā A → Shuʿba
N
IK
IA
‿l-aykati AA
15:78 ‫��ه‬
‫ا� �ك‬ �
‫ا �ص‬
‫ح� ب� ال ي‬ (Q. 50:14), (Q. 26:176), (Q. 38:13) hamz
A
H
K
‿la‿ykati N → Warsh
IK
ʿibādiya anniya … inniya N
AA
15:49, ‫ن‬ ‫ن‬
‫�ع ب��ا د �ى ا �ى … ا �ى‬ IA
49, 89
A
ʿibādī annī … annī
517
H
K
taskīn

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

518
banātiya N
IK
IA
‫نت‬ AA
15:71 ‫ب��ا �ى‬ banātī
A
H
K
IK
N
AA Imperf (t↔y)
yushrikūna … yushrikūna A
IA
16:1,3
‫ش ن‬ ‫ش ن‬
�‫�و‬ ‫ى��رك‬
‫�و� … ى��رك‬ IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Aḥmad b. Yūsuf
→ IM
IA → Hishām → Aḥmad b. Muḥammad
al-Bakrāwī → IM Imperf (t↔y)
tushrikūna … tushrikūna
H
Not mentioned directly by IM
K
IK
yunzilu ‿l-malāʾikata
AA Vrb frm
N (II↔IV↔V)
Appendix
16:2 ‫��ه‬
‫ى�ى�ز ل ا لم��لى �ك‬ yunazzilu ‿l-malāʾikata A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
H
IM does not directly mention K’s read- Imperf (t↔y)
K ing but it may be deduced from his
phrase wa-qara‌ʾa l-bāqūna
tanazzalu ‿l-malāʾikatu See Jāmiʿ al-bayān
A → Shuʿba → K iʿrāb
(tunazzalu?) The recitation of Y
IK
N
IA
yunbitu AA
16:11 �‫ى�ى��ب� ت‬ Imperf (n↔y)
A → Ḥafṣ
H
K
nunbitu A → Shuʿba
N
IK
wa‿sh-shamsa wa‿l- AA iʿrāb
qamara wa‿n-nujūma
A → Shuʿba
musakhkharātin
‫�ق‬ ‫ش‬ H
‫وا �ل��م��س وا �ل��مر‬
519
‫خ‬
‫ا �ل ن�� م��س�� ت‬ K
16:12 � ‫ر‬ ‫و �ج وم‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

520
wa‿sh-shamsu wa‿l-
qamaru wa‿n-nujūmu IA
musakhkharātun
iʿrāb
wa‿sh-shamsa wa‿l-
qamara wa‿n-nujūmu A → Ḥafṣ
musakhkharātun
IK
AA
N
tusirrūna … tuʿlinūna …
IA
tadʿūna Imperf (t↔y)
ّٰ H
‫ن‬
�‫وا �ل��ل�ه ى�ع��ل �م�ا ى��سرو‬ K
16:19–20 ‫نم ن �ذ ن‬ A → Shuʿba → K
�‫و�م�ا ى�ع��ل�و� وا �ل� �ي‬
‫ن‬
�‫ى�د �عو‬ A
tusirrūna … tuʿlinūna … A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → Ibn
yadʿūna al-Yatīm (al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak)
A → Shuʿba Imperf (t↔y)
yusirrūna … yuʿlinūna … A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra → al-Khazzāz →
yadʿūna IM
AA
N
16:27 ‫كا �ى‬
� ‫�ش��ر‬ shurakāʾiya A Throughout the Qurʾān hamz
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
H
K
IK → al-Qawwās
shurakāya IK → al-Bazzī Similar to hudāya in (Q. 2:38)
tushāqqūni N
IK
IA
16:27
‫ت �ق ن‬ AA Assim
�‫� ش�� و‬ tushāqqūna
A
H
yatawaffēhumu …
H
yatawaffēhumu
yatawaffāhumu …
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra imāla
yatawaffāhumu
A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → Ibn
al-Yatīm
A → Shuʿba
521
tatawaffāhumu … IK
‫ف‬ ‫ف‬ N
16:28, 32 �‫�ىىو��ه� … �ىى ��ه‬ tatawaffāhumu Imperf (t↔y)
‫و �م‬ ‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

522
IA
AA
K
H
ya‌ʾtiyahumu
K
IK
16:33 �‫ى�ا ت��ه‬ A Imperf (t↔y)
‫ي �م‬
ta‌ʾtiyahumu N
AA
IA
IK
AA
yuhdā
N
16:37 ‫�ى�ه�د �ى‬ IA Act↔Pass
A
yahdī H
K
IK
N
Appendix
‫�ن ف ن‬ A
16:40 �‫�و‬
‫ك�� ي�� ك‬ fa-yakūnu Throughout the Qurʾān iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
H
IA
fa-yakūna (Q. 36:82)
K
IK
N
IA Imperf (n↔y)
yūḥā AA
16:43 ‫ىو�حى‬ A
H
K Act↔Pass
IK
N
yaraw AA
16:48 ‫ىروا‬ IA (Q. 29:19) Imperf (t↔y)
A
H
taraw
K
523

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

524
IK
N
IA
‫�ف‬ yatafayya‌ʾū
16:48 ‫�ىى� �ىو‬ A Imperf (t↔y)
H
K
tatafayya‌ʾū AA
mufriṭūna N
IK
IA
‫�ف ن‬ Act Ptcpl↔
16:62 �‫�م�� رطو‬ AA
mufraṭūna Pass Ptcpl
A
H
K
IK
AA
nusqīkum H
K Vrb frm
16:66 �
‫ى��س��ق�ى ك‬ (Q. 23:21)
‫م‬ A → Ḥafṣ (I↔IV)
IA
nasqīkum N
Appendix
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
yaʿrushūna
A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
‫ش ن‬ IK
16:68 �‫ى�عر��و‬ vowels
N
yaʿrishūna
AA
H
K
IK
N
IA
‫�� ن‬ yajḥadūna AA
16:71 �‫ح�د و‬��‫جى‬ Imperf (t↔y)
A → Ḥafṣ
H
K
tajḥadūna A → Shuʿba
IK
N
16:78 �
‫ا ��م�هت�� ك‬ ummahātikum A vowels
‫م‬
525
AA
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

526
immihātikum H
immahātikum K
IK
ẓaʿanikum N
AA
16:80 �
‫ظ��ع ن�� ك‬ A vowels
‫م‬ H
ẓaʿnikum
K
IA
IK
N
AA
ra‌ʾā … ra‌ʾā vowels
K
16:85, 86 ‫را �ى … را �ى‬ IA
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
reʾā … reʾā
H imāla
reʾē … reʾē A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf
IK
Appendix
wa-la-najziyanna A
16:96 ‫ج�ز ن‬ AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr (Q. 16:97) Imperf (n↔y)
�‫و�ل�ى�� ي‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
AA
wa-la-yajziyanna IA
H
K
‿l-qudsi IK
N
IA
16:102 ‫�ق‬ AA vowels
‫ا �ل�� د ��س‬ ‿l-qudusi
A
H
IK
N
yulḥidūna AA
‫� ن‬ Vrb frm
16:103 �‫ح�د و‬��‫ى��ل‬ A
(I↔IV)
IA
H
yalḥadūna
K
fatanū IA
527
IK
16:110 ‫ف �ت ن‬ N Act↔Pass
‫�� و‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

528
AA
A
futinū
H
K
IK
N
IA
AA
wa-l-khawfi
A
‫خ ف‬ H
16:112 ��‫وا �ل�و‬ iʿrāb
K
AA → al-Yazīdī
wa-l-khawfa
AA → Dāwūd al-Awdī
IK
ḍīqin N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUbayd
N
Appendix
IA
16:127 ‫�ض ق‬
�‫�� ي‬ ḍayqin AA (Q. 27:70) vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
yattakhidhū AA
IK
N
17:2
‫ى�ىخ �ذ‬ IA Imperf (t↔y)
‫�� و‬ tattakhidhū
A
H
K
IK
N
li-yasūʾū
AA Imperf (n↔y)
A → Ḥafṣ
17:7 ‫�ل�ى��سو‬ A → Shuʿba
li-yasūʾa IA Pronoun
H (3rd-M-
li-nasūʾa K P↔3rd-M-S)
529
IK
AA Vrb frm
17:9 ‫ش‬ wa-yubashshiru N (I↔II)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
‫و�ي��ب��ر‬
(cont.)

530
IA
A
H
wa-yabshuru
K
yulaqqāhu IA
Act↔Pass
IK
N
yalqāhu Vrb frm
17:13 ‫ى��ل��ق�ه‬ AA
(I↔II)
A
H
yalqēhu imāla
K
IK
N
IA
amarnā AA
A Vrb frm
17:16 ‫ا�مرن�ا‬
H (I↔II↔III)
K
N → Khārija like āmannā
āmarnā IK → Ḥammād b. Salama → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
Appendix
This is the reading of Y

→ Naṣr b. ʿAlī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA → Abū l-ʿAbbās khatan Layth →

ammarnā Hārūn b. Ḥātim → Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-
Qāḍī → IM
IK
N
yablughanna AA Pronoun
17:23 ‫غن‬ A (3rd-M-S↔
��‫�بى��ل‬
IA 3rd-M-D)
H
yablughānni
K
IK
uffa
IA
N
uffin
‫ف‬ A → Ḥafṣ
17:23 �� ‫ا‬ (Q. 21:67), (Q. 46:17) iʿrāb
AA
A → Shuʿba
uffi
H
K
khiṭāʾan IK
531
Long vwl (±ā)

khaṭa‌ʾan IA
17:31 ‫�خ��ط�ا‬ N

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

532
AA
A
khiṭʾan H
K
vowels
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd
Per one of the manuscripts of al-Sabʿa
khaṭʾan IA though according to the editor this is a
scribal error
IK
N
yusrif
AA
17:33
‫ف‬ A Imperf (t↔y)
��‫ى��سر‬
H
tusrif K
IA
IK
N
bi-l-qusṭāsi AA
‫�ق‬ IA
17:35 ‫ب�ا �ل�� س��ط�ا ��س‬ (Q. 26:182) vowels
A → Shuʿba
H
bi-l-qisṭāsi K
Appendix
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
sayyiʾatan N
AA
17:38 ‫��س�ىى�ه‬ A tāʾ marb
IA
sayyiʾuhu
H
K
IK
N
li-yadhdhakkarū AA
17:41
‫�ذ‬ A (Q. 25:50) Vrb frm (I↔V)
‫�لى� ك‬
‫�رو‬
IA
H
li-yadhkurū
K
yaqūlūna … yaqūlūna …
IK
yusabbiḥu
N Imperf (t↔y)
taqūlūna … yaqūlūna …
A → Shuʿba
yusabbiḥu
IA
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬
17:42, … �‫ى��قو�لو� … ى��قو�لو‬ taqūlūna … yaqūlūna … Imperf (t↔y)
533
AA
43, 44 ��‫ى��س‬ tusabbiḥu
‫بح‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

534
yaqūlūna … yaqūlūna …
A → Ḥafṣ
tusabbiḥu
taqūlūna … taqūlūna … H
Imperf (t↔y)
tusabbiḥu K
a-ºdhā … a-ºnnā IK
a-ºdhā … innā
N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ hamz
a-idhā … innā K
17:49
‫�ذ‬ (Q. 27:67), (29:28), (Q. 13:5)
‫ا ا …ا ن�ا‬ A
a-idhā … a-innā
H
IA → Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Bakr →
idhā … ā-innā madd
Hishām
ȧ-ºdhā … ȧ-ºnnā AA
zubūran H
IK
N
17:55 ‫�ز ب�ورا‬ IA vowels
zabūran
AA
A
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
akhkhartan｡ī
AA
akhkhartanī｡ IK
17:62 ‫خ تن‬ IA Long vwl (±ī)
��‫ا �ر‬
A
akhkhartan｡i
H
K
wa-rajilika A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
17:64 ‫ور ج��ل�ك‬ vowels

wa-rajlika IA
AA
H
K
nakhsifa … nursila … IK
nuʿīdakum … fa-nursila …
AA
‫ىخ ف‬ fa-nughriqakum
… ‫��س� … ىر��س�ل‬
‫�ف‬ yakhsifa … yursila …
… ‫ى�عي��دك … �ىر��س�ل‬ yuʿīdakum … fa-yursila … N
‫م ف ق‬
535
17:68, 69 �
‫��ى غ��ر� ك‬ fa-yughriqakum Imperf (n↔y)
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

536
A
IA
H
K
IK
N
aʿmā … aʿmā
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
17:72 ‫�ع‬ ‫�ع‬ imāla
‫ا �مى … ا �مى‬ A → Shuʿba
aʿmē … aʿmē H
K
aʿmē … aʿmā AA
IK
N
khalfaka
AA
‫�ف‬ A → Shuʿba
17:76 ‫خ��ل� �ك‬ Long vwl (±ā)
A → Ḥafṣ
IA
khilāfaka
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
wa-na‌ʾā A → Ḥafṣ On the pattern naʿā
imāla
AA → al-Yazīdī
wa-nāʾa IA On the pattern of bāʿa
K root
17:83 ‫و�نى�ا‬ wa-neʾē
H → Sulaym → Khallād
AA → [X] → Ibn ʿAbdūs (Abū l-Zaʿrāʾ)
(Q. 41:51)
→ IM vowels
wa-na‌ʾē
H → Sulaym → Ibn ʿAbdūs (Abū
l-Zaʿrāʾ) → IM
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
tufajjira
AA
17:90 ‫�ف‬ IA Vrb frm (I↔II)
‫ى�� ج�ر‬
A
tafjura H
K
537

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

538
IK
AA Throughout the Qurʾān except kisafan
kisfan
H (Q. 30:48)
K
17:92 ‫� �ف‬�
‫ك��س� �ا‬ N vowels
Also in (Q. 30:48) but kisfan in
A → Shuʿba (Q. 26:187), (Q. 34:9), (Q. 52:44)
kisafan Throughout the Qurʾān except kisafan
A → Ḥafṣ
(Q. 52:44)
IA Reading kisfan throughout the Qurʾān
IK
qāla Per the codices of Mecca and Shām
IA
‫�ق‬ N
17:93 ‫ق�ل‬ A Long vwl (±ā)
‫��ا ل‬ qul AA
H
K
IK
K
fa-sal
‫ف‬ AJ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
17:101 hamza
‫��س�ل‬ Shayba → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
Appendix
AA
N

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
fa‿sʾal IA
H
ʿalimtu K
IK
N
17:102 �‫ع�ل�م� ت‬ IA perf (ty↔ta)
ʿalimta
AA
A
H
A
quli ‿dʿū … awi ‿dʿū
H
vowels
IK
‫أ‬ ‫ق‬ N
17:110 ‫��ل ا د �عو … � و ا د �عو‬ qulu ‿dʿū … awu ‿dʿū IA
AA
vowels
K
quli ‿dʿū … awu ‿dʿū AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl
AA
539
‿l-muhtad｡ī
N
17:97 ‫ا ل�م�هت��د‬ IK Long vwl (±ī)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

540
A
H
‿l-muhtad｡i
K
IA
N
rabbiya
AA
IK
17:100 ‫ر ب�ى‬ IA taskīn
rabbī A
H
K
IM: no one besides A → Shuʿba read

ladunihī A → Shuʿba
as such
A → Ḥafṣ taskīn/ikhtilās
IK
18:2 ‫�ل�د ن��ه‬ N
ladunhu IA
AA
vowels
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
wa-yubashshira N
‫ش‬ Vrb frm
18:2 ‫و�ي��ب��ر‬ IA (Q. 3:39)
(I↔II)
A
H
wa-yabshura
K
IK
AA
mirfaqan A
‫ف‬ H
18:16 ‫�مر��ق�ا‬ vowels
K
N
marfiqan IA
A → Shuʿba → K
IK
tazzāwaru N
assim
AA
18:17 ‫ت�ز‬ A
‫� ور‬
tazāwaru H
Vrb frm
541
K
(VI↔IX)
tazwarru IA like taḥmarru

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

542
IK
wa-la-mulliʾta
N
A
IA Vrb frm
18:18 �‫ولم�ل�ى� ت‬ AA (I↔II)
wa-la-muliʾta
H
K
IK → Ismāʿīl b. Muslim
IK
labithtum N
A
18:19 �‫�ل��ث ت‬ AA (Q. 2:259) Assim
‫ب م‬ IA
labittum
H
K
IK
N
bi-wariqikum IA vowels
‫ق‬ K
18:19 �
‫ب�ور� ك‬
‫م‬ A → Ḥafṣ
AA
bi-warqikum H Assim
Appendix
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā l-Luʾluʾī (Ibn

bi-warkkum Abī Maryam?) → Rawḥ (b. ʿAbd yushimmuhā shayʾan min al-tathqīl
al-Muʾmin?)
IK
N
miʾatin AA
18:25 ‫�م�ا ى�ه‬ A tanwīn
IA
H
miʾati
K
IK
N iʿrāb
AA
‫ش‬ yushriku
18:26 ‫ى��رك‬ A
H
Imperf (t↔y)
K
tushrik IA
IK
N
543
AA Long vowel
18:28 ‫ب�ا �ل غ��د وه‬ bi-l-ghadāti A (±ā)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

544
H
K
bi-l-ghudwati IA
thumrun … bi-thumrihi AA
IK
N
IA
18:34, 42 ‫�ث�مر … �ب�ث�مره‬ thumurun … bi-thumurihi H vowels
K
thamarun … bi-thamarihi A
IK
Per the codices of Makka, Madīna,
minhumā N
and al-Shām
IA
18:36 ‫�م ن��ه�ا‬ AA ḥarf (±m)
‫�م ن��ه��م�ا‬
A
minhā Per the codices of Baṣra and Kūfa
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
A
H
lākinna huwa in waṣl mode, and
lākinn(a/ā｡) huwa K
‫ن‬ lākinnā｡ huwa in waqf mode
18:38 ��‫� ك‬
‫ل�ا �هو‬ N → Ibn Jammāz waqf
N → Warsh
N → Qālūn
N → al-Musayyabī lākinnā huwa in waṣl mode, and
lākinnā｡ huwa
IA lākinnā｡ huwa in waqf mode
IK
N
takun A
18:43 ‫ىكن‬ AA Imperf (t↔y)
��
IA Doubt from IM: fī-mā arā
H
yakun
K
IK
N
‿l-walāyatu li-llāhi ‿l-ḥaqqi IA vowels
545
A → Shuʿba
‫�ق‬ ٰ
18:44 ‫ا �لو�لى�ه �ل�ّ�ل�ه ا �ل‬
�‫ح‬ A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
546
‿l-wilāyatu li-llāhi
H
‿l-ḥaqqi
‿l-walāyatu li-llāhi
AA iʿrāb
‿l-ḥaqqu
‿l-wilāyatu li-llāhi
K
‿l-ḥaqqu
IK
N
ʿuquban AA
18:44 ‫�ع��ق ب��ا‬ IA vowels
K
A
ʿuqban
H
IK
tusayyaru ‿l-jibālu AA Imperf
IA (n↔t)
18:47 ‫ى��س�ىر ا �جل‬
‫� ب��ا ل‬ N
A
nusayyiru ‿l-jibāla
H Act↔Pass
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
naqūlu H
IK
N
18:52 ‫�ق‬ IA Act↔Pass
‫ى�� ول‬ yaqūlu
AA
A
K
IK
AA
qibalan
N
18:55 ‫ق� ب��لا‬ IA vowels
A
qubulan H
K
li-mahlakihim A → Shuʿba mahlaka in (Q. 27:49)

li-mahlikihim A → Ḥafṣ mahlika in (Q. 27:49)
IK
N
18:59 �‫��كه‬
� ‫ل�مه��ل‬ vowels
‫� �م‬ IA
li-muhlakihim muhlaka in (Q. 27:49)
AA
547
H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

548
IK
A
a-ra‌ʾayta AA
IA
18:63 �‫ا رى� ت‬ (Q. 6:40) hamz
H
a-raºayta
N
a-rȧºayta
a-rayta K
ansēnīhi K imāla
ansānīhu A → Ḥafṣ ʿalayhu (Q. 48:10)
A → Shuʿba ʿalayhi (Q. 48:10)
‫ن‬ N
18:63 ‫ا ��س�ىى�ه‬ vowels (Pr)
ansānīhi IA
AA
H
ansānīhī IK vowels (Y)
IK
N
A
18:66 ‫ر�ش��د ا‬ rushdan vowels
H
Appendix
K
IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Mūsā b. Mūsā From a notebook

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA → Hishām
rushudan From a notebook
→ IM
rashadan AA
IK
AA
tasʾalnī A
‫ت ن‬ H Gemin
18:70
‫��س�ى��ل�ى‬ K
N
tasʾalannī
IA → Hishām
tasʾalanni IA vowels (Y)
IK
AA
Imperf (t↔y)
li-tughriqa ahlahā N
18:71
‫ق‬ IA
‫��لى غ��ر� ا�ه��ل�ه�ا‬
A
H iʿrāb
li-yaghraqa ahluhā
K
549
IK
zākiyatan N Long vwl (±ā)
18:74 � ‫�ز‬
‫�كى�ه‬ AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

550
A
IA
zakiyyatan
H Gemin
K
IK Throughout the Qurʾān

AA
H
nukran Throughout the Qurʾān except nukurin
K
(Q. 54:6)
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
18:74, 87 �‫ن� ك‬
‫�را‬ vowels
IA
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Qālūn
nukuran Throughout the Qurʾān
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Warsh
N → al-Aṣmaʿī → Naṣr b. ʿAlī
IK
AA
ladunnī Gemin
Appendix
IA
‫ن‬
18:76 ‫�ل�د �ى‬ H

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
A → Ḥafṣ
ladunī N
vowels
ladunī A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf yushimm al-dāl shayʾan min al-ḍamm
ladnī
A → Shuʿba → K → Abū ʿUbayd Reported in Kitāb al-Maʿānī
taskīn
Reported in Kitāb al-Qirāʾāt. IM: This
ludnī A → Shuʿba → K → Abū ʿUbayd
is wrong
la-takhidhta IK
Assim
la-takhitta AA
la‿ttakhadhta A → Ḥafṣ
N
18:77 ‫�لت��خ��ذ ت‬
� A Vrb frm
la‿ttakhatta IA (I↔VIII)
H
K
IK wa-la-yubdilannahum (Q. 24:55), yubdi-

A → Shuʿba lahu (Q. 66:5), yubdilanā (Q. 68:32)
IA Vrb frm
18:81 ‫ي�ب��د ��ل�ه��م�ا‬ yubdilahumā wa-la-yubaddilannahum (Q. 24:55),
H (II↔IV)
551
yubdilahu (Q. 66:5), yubdilanā

K
(Q. 68:32)
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

552
N wa-la-yubaddilannahum (Q. 24:55),

yubaddilahumā yubaddilahu (Q. 66:5), yubaddilanā
AA (Q. 68:32)
IK
N
A
H
ruḥman K
AA
ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl: I choose to read
18:81 AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl ruḥuman although both ruḥuman and vowels
‫رح�م�ا‬
ruḥman were reported on behalf of AA
IA
AA
ruḥuman ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl: I choose to read

AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl ruḥuman although both ruḥuman and
ruḥman were reported on behalf of AA
IK
fa‿ttabaʿa … ‿ttabaʿa …
N
‫ف‬ ‿ttabaʿa
Appendix
��‫��ا ت�ب� ��س�ب� ب��ا … ث� ا ت‬ AA

18:85, ‫م بع‬ ‫ع‬ (Q. 26:60), (Q. 7:175), (Q. 37:10), Vrb frm
89, 92 ‫��س�ب� ب��ا … ث� ا ت�ب� ��س�ب� ب��ا‬ A (Q. 15:18), (Q. 11:116) (IV↔VIII)
‫م ع‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
fa-atbaʿa … atbaʿa … atbaʿa H
K
IK
N
ḥamiʾatin Long vwl (±ā)
AA
A → Ḥafṣ
18:86 ‫ح�م�ى�ه‬ A → Shuʿba
IA
ḥāmiyatin Hamz
H
K
IK
N
jazāʾu ‿l-ḥusnā A → Shuʿba tanwīn
‫� ن‬ IA
18:88 ‫�ج�ز ا ا �ل‬
‫ح��س�ى‬ AA
H
jazāʾani ‿l-ḥusnā K iʿrāb
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
553
‫�� ن‬ (Q. 36:9) suddan

�‫ي� ا �ل��س�د � ن … �� ن��ه‬ ‫ب‬ ‿s-saddayni … saddan AA
‫ي� وب ي � م‬
18:93, 94 ‫��س�د ا‬ A → Ḥafṣ (Q. 36:9) saddan vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

554
A → Shuʿba
‿s-suddayni … suddan N (Q. 36:9) suddan
IA
H
‿s-suddayni … saddan (Q. 36:9) saddan
K
IK
N
yafqahūna AA
‫�ف ق ن‬ Vrb frm
18:93 �‫ى��هو‬ A
(I↔IV)
IA
H
yufqihūna
K
Ya‌ʾjūja wa-Ma‌ʾjūja A
IK
N
18:94 ‫ي�ا �ج�و�ج و�م�ا �ج�و�ج‬ IA (Q. 21:96) Hamz
Yājūja wa-Mājūja
AA
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
(Q. 23:72) kharjan … fa-kharāju
kharjan A
Long vowl
18:94 ‫خ�ر ج��ا‬ AA
(±ā)
IA (Q. 23:72) kharjan … fa-kharju
H
kharājan (Q. 23:72) kharājan … fa-kharāju
K
makkananī IK
N
IA
‫�م�كىى‬ Assim
18:95 AA Per the codex of Makka
ḥarf (±n)
‫�م ك‬ makkannī
‫��ىىى‬ A
H
K
IK
N
IA
AA Vrb frm
radman ātūnī
A (I↔IV)
A → Ḥafṣ
555
H
‫ت ن‬
18:95, 96 ‫رد �م�ا ا �و �ى‬ K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

556
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Aḥmad

b. ʿUmar al-Wakīʿī → Ibrāhīm b.
Aḥmad b. ʿUmar al-Wakīʿī → IM
radmani ‿ʾtūnī A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Abū waqf
Hishām → Mūsā b. Isḥāq → IM
→ Mūsā b. Isḥāq → IM
IK
‿ṣ-ṣudufayni AA
IA
‫ف ن‬ N
18:96 �‫ا �ل��ص�د ��ي‬ vowels
H
‿ṣ-ṣadafayni
K
A → Ḥafṣ
‿ṣ-ṣudfayni A → Shuʿba
IK
N
AA
‫ت ن‬ Vrb frm
18:96 ‫ا �و �ى‬ ātūnī IA
(I↔IV)
K
Appendix
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A → Shuʿba
‿ʾtūnī
H
IK
N
IA
‫ف‬ ‿sṭāʿū
18:97 ‫��م�ا ا ��س��ط�عوا‬ AA Assim
A
K
‿sṭṭāʿū H IM: This reading is not permissible
IK
Long vwl
N
(±ā)
dakkan AA
IA
18:98 ‫كا‬
�‫د‬ tanwīn
H
dakkāʾa K hamz
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
557
tanfada N
18:109 ‫� نى��ف� �د‬ AA Imperf (t↔y)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

558
IA
A
H
yanfada
K
rabbiya … bi-rabbiya …
N
maʿī … maʿī … maʿī … sa-
tajiduniya … dūniya
... ‫ �بر ب�ى‬... ‫ر ب�ى‬ rabbiya … bi-rabbiya … maʿī
AA
18:22, ... ‫ �بر ب�ى‬... ‫ر ب�ى‬ … maʿī … maʿī … sa-tajidunī
38, 40, 42, … dūniya
… ‫ �م�عى‬... ‫�م�عى‬ yāʾāt al-iḍāfa taskīn
67, 72, 75, ‫ن‬ rabbiya … bi-rabbiya …
69, 102 … ‫�م�عى … ��ست��ج��د �ى‬ rabbiya … bi-rabbiya … maʿī
‫ن‬ IK
‫د و �ى‬ … maʿī … maʿī … sa-tajidunī
… dūnī
rabbī … bi-rabbī … rabbī …
bi-rabbī … maʿiya … maʿiya
A → Ḥafṣ
… maʿiya … sa-tajidunī …
dūnī
A
rabbī … bi-rabbī … rabbī … IA
bi-rabbī … maʿī … maʿī …
H
maʿī … sa-tajidunī … dūnī
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
taranī, yuʾtiyanī, nabghī, tuʿallimanī,

taran｡ī … yuʾtiyan｡ī …
yahdiyanī, ‿l-muhtadi in waṣl mode
nabghī｡ … tuʿalliman｡ī … IK
taran, yuʾtiyan, nabghī, tuʿalliman,
yahdiyan｡ī … ‿l-muhtad｡i
yahdiyan, ‿l-muhtad in waqf mode
taran｡ī … yuʾtiyan｡ī … AA
‫ن‬ nabgh｡ī … tuʿalliman｡ī …
... �‫ �يوت�ي�� ن‬... �‫ت�ر‬ N
39, 40, 64, ‫ت لن‬ ‫ن� غ‬ yahdiyan｡ī … ‿l-muhtad｡ī Long vwl (±ī)
66, 24, 17 ... ��‫ ��ع��م‬... �‫�ب‬ taran｡i … yuʾtiyan｡i …
‫��ه�د � ن‬
‫ ا ل�م�هت��د‬... �‫ي‬ �‫ي‬ nabgh｡ī … tuʿalliman｡i … K
yahdiyan｡i … ‿l-muhtad｡i
taran｡i … yuʾtiyan｡i … IA
nabgh｡i … tuʿalliman｡i … A
yahdiyan｡i … ‿l-muhtad｡i H
IK
kāf-ha-ya-ʿayn-ṣād dhikru yubayyin al-hāʾ wa-lā yarfaʿuhā
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra yufakhkhim Assim
kāf-he-ya-ʿayn-ṣādh_dhikru AA
‫�ذ‬ kāf-hæ-yæ-ʿayn-ṣād dhikru N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī
1–2 ‫�ر‬
‫��ك�ه�ى�ع��ص ك‬ kāf-ha-ya-ʿayn-ṣādh_dhikru N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān
kāf-hæ-yæ-ʿayn-ṣādh_dhikru N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ nūn al-ʿayn ghayr mubayyana wa-dāl
kāf-hæ-yæ-ʿayn-ṣād dhikru
N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ al-ṣād ghayr mubayyana. Check Jāmiʿ imāla
559
N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ al-bayān where it says the nun is

kāf-hæ-yæ-ʿayn-ṣād dhikru mubayyana

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

560
kāf-he-ye-ʿayn-ṣād dhikru A → Shuʿba

kāf-he-ye-ʿayn-ṣād dhikru K
Cons Loss
H
kāf-ha-ye-ʿayn-ṣādh_dhikru
IA
warāʾiya IK → Qunbul → IM
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf → hamz
warāya like ʿaṣāya and hudāya
X → IM
N
IA
AA
19:5 ‫ورا �ى‬ warāʾī
A
taskīn
H
K
IK
N
yarithunī wa-yarithu A
19:6 ‫� ث� ن� � ث‬
�‫ير ى وير‬ IA iʿrāb
H
AA
yarithnī wa-yarith
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
ʿutiyyan … bukiyyan …
AA
ṣuliyyan … juthiyyan
IA
19:8, 58, ... ‫�ا‬ ��‫ ب� يك‬... ‫�ع��تي��ا‬
A → Shuʿba vowels
70, 72 ‫ �ج��ثي��ا‬... ‫�ص��يل��ا‬
ʿitiyyan … bikiyyan … H
ṣiliyyan … jithiyyan K
ʿitiyyan … bukiyyan …
A → Ḥafṣ
ṣiliyyan … jithiyyan
IK
N
khalaqtuka AA
19:9 ‫�ق‬ A Perf (tu↔nā)
‫خ��ل� �ى�ك‬
IA
H
khalaqnāka
K
IK
A
IA
19:19 �‫لا�ه� ب‬ li-ahaba hamz
H
561
K
N

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

562
AA
li-ºahaba
N → Warsh
li-yahaba
IK
AA
muttu
A → Shuʿba
IA
N
19:23 �‫�م� ت‬ H vowels
K
mittu A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿAmr Sahl → ʿAmr b.
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
AA
nisyan
‫ن‬ IA
19:23 ‫��س�ى�ا‬ vowels
K
A → Shuʿba
H
nasyan
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
man taḥtahā
IA iʿrāb
‫ت‬ A → Shuʿba
19:24 �
� ‫�م� ن‬
‫حت��ه�ا‬ � N
H
min taḥtihā ḥarf
K
(man↔min)
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
Assim
AA
tassāqaṭ
‫ت‬ IA
19:25 ‫��س��ق��ط‬
K
A → Shuʿba Vrb frm
tasāqaṭ H (III↔VI)
tusāqiṭ A → Ḥafṣ
ātēniya … wa-awṣēnī K
IK
N
19:30, 31 ‫ن‬ ‫تن‬ IA imāla
‫ وا و��ص�ى‬... ‫ا��ى‬ ātāniya … wa-awṣānī
AA
A
563

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

564
A
qawla
IA
IK
19:34
‫ق‬ N iʿrāb
‫�ول‬
qawlu AA
H
K
IM: this is grammatically wrong

kun fa-yakūna IA
(khaṭa‌ʾ)
IK
‫� ن ف� ن‬ N
19:35 �‫�و‬
‫ك�� ي�� ك‬ iʿrāb
AA
kun fa-yakūnu (Q. 2:117)
A
H
K
IK
wa-anna N
AA
‫ن‬ ḥarf
19:36 � ‫وا‬ IA
(anna↔inna)
A
wa-inna
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
AA
mukhliṣan
IA
‫مخ‬ A → Shuʿba → K
19:51 ‫��ل��ص�ا‬ Act↔Pass
A → Ḥafṣ
mukhlaṣan
H
K
IK

Hishām
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Ibn
ʿUṭārid
yudkhalūna A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf
‫خ ن‬ A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam →
19:60 �‫ى�د ��لو‬ Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir (Q. 4:124) Act↔Pass
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Aḥmad
b. ʿUmar
AA
A → Ḥafṣ
565
A → Shuʿba → K
A → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Khallād

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

566

IA
yadkhulūna N
H
K
One may or may not perform

assimilation
hat taʿlamu AA → Hārūn used to perform
AA → Hārūn assimilation but changed his reading
later on to hal taʿlamu
One may or may not perform
assimilation
AA → Hārūn used to perform
AA → Hārūn assimilation but changed his reading
19:65 ‫�ه� ى�ع��ل‬ Assim
‫ل م‬ later on to hal taʿlamu
IK
hal taʿlamu N
IA
AA
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
yadhkuru A
IA
19:67
‫�ذ‬ IK
Vrb frm
‫ي� ك‬
‫�ر‬ (I↔V)
AA
yadhdhakkaru
H
K
nunjī K
IK
N
Vrb frm
19:72 ‫�ى�ى��ج�ى‬ IA
nunajjī (II↔IV)
AA
A
H
muqāman IK maqāmin (Q. 44:51), maqāma (Q. 13:33)

N
muqāmin (Q. 44:51), maqāma (Q. 13:33)
IA
A → Shuʿba
19:73 ‫�م��ق�ا �م�ا‬ vowels
maqāman AA
maqāmin (Q. 44:51), maqāma (Q. 13:33)
H
K
567
A → Ḥafṣ maqāmin (Q. 44:51), muqāma (Q. 13:33)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

568
IK
AA
A
H on the pattern of riʿyan
K
N → Ibn Jammāz
wa-riʾyan
N → Warsh hamz
N → Ashhab b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz → Yūnus
b. ʿAbd al-Aʿlā → Muḥammad b. ʿAbd
19:74 ‫ورى�ا‬ Allāh → IM
N
IA
N → Qālūn
N → al-Musayyabī
wa-riyyan N → al-Aṣmaʿī
Madīna → Ibn Jammāz → Yaʿqūb [b.
In al-Sabʿa it has Yūsuf but this is a
Jaʿfar] → Abū ʿUmāra → Abū l-Ḥārith
misprint and the name should be
al-Layth b. Khālid → Muḥammad b.
Yaʿqūb [b. Jaʿfar]
Yaḥyā l-Kisāʾī → IM
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK wa-wulduhu (Q. 71:21), wa-waladan

AA (Q. 43:81)
wa-waladan N
19:77, 88, wa-waladuhu (Q. 71:21), wa-waladan
‫وو�ل�د ا‬ A vowels
91, 92 (Q. 43:81)
IA
H wa-wulduhu (Q. 71:21), wa-wuladan
wa-wuldan
K (Q. 43:81)
IK
A → Ḥafṣ → Ibn al-Ṣabbāḥ → al-Ḥasan (Q. 42:5)
takādu … yatafaṭṭarna In the Sabʿa it says tatafaṭṭarna,
b. al-Mubārak Ibn al-Yatīm Imperf (t↔y)
which is probably a misprint when we
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra
compare the text with al-Fārisī’s Ḥujja
AA
19:90
‫�ف ن‬ �‫ى ك‬ H
�‫ �ىى� ��طر‬... ‫��اد‬ takādu … yatafaṭṭarna (Q. 42:5)
takādu … yanfaṭirna IA
A → Shuʿba Vrb frm
(Q. 42:5)
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra In the Sabʿa it says tatafaṭṭarna, (V↔VII)
N which is probably a misprint when we
yakādu … yatafaṭṭarna compare the text with al-Fārisī’s Ḥujja
K
569

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

570
warāʾī … liya … inniya … AA

ātāniya … inniya … rabbiya N
... ‫ لى‬... ‫ ورا ء �ى‬warāʾiya … lī … inniya … IK

19:5, 10, ‫تن‬ ‫�ن � �ذ‬ ātāniya … inniya … rabbī
‫ ا��ى‬... ‫ا اع‬
18, 30, 45, ‫ى ن و خ �ف‬ A taskīn
47 ... � ‫ ا �ى ا��ا‬... warāʾī … lī … innī … ātāniya K
‫ر ب�ى ا ن��ه‬ … innī … rabbī
IA Doubt from IM
warāʾī … lī … innī … ātānī …
H
innī … rabbī
IK
IA
ṭa-ha N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī
A → Ḥafṣ
Ibn Saʿdān: al-Musayyabī would imāla
20:1 ‫ط�ه‬ articulate it as if it was between fatḥ
ṭæ-hæ N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān and kasr (yushimmuhā l-kasr). When I
told him so, he denied it and claimed
he only pronounced it with fatḥ
Appendix
A → Shuʿba
ṭe-he H

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
AA → ʿAbbās
waqf
ṭa｡ha N → al-Aṣmaʿī The reading of AJ
ṭa-he AA
H
li-ahlihu
IK
N
20:10 ‫لا�ه�ل�ه‬ li-ahlihi IA (Q. 28:29) vowels (Prn)
AA
A
IK
anniya
AA
inniya N
‫ن‬ A
The taskīn variant will be repeated at ḥarf
20:12 ‫ا �ى‬ the end with yāʾāt al-iḍāfa (inna↔anna)
IA
innī
H
K
571

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

572
IK
N
ṭuwā
AA
AA → Abū Zayd
20:12 ‫طو�ى‬ (Q. 79:16–17) tanwīn
A
IA
ṭuwan
H
K
IK
N
Perf (nā↔tu)
A
20:13
‫ا ى�ا خ‬
‫ا��ىرى�ك‬ ‫و‬ wa-anā ‿khtartuka AA
IA
Gemin
K
ḥarf (±anna)
wa-annā ‿khtarnāka H
IK
N
IA
20:18 ‫�ع��ص�ا �ى‬ ʿaṣāya taskīn
AA
A
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
N → Warsh
ʿaṣāy N → Warsh
akhī ashdud ... wa-ushrik-hu IA

N
Tense
A
akhī ‿shdud ... wa-ashrik-hu
H
� ‫ا �خ�ى ا �ش��د د ب��ه ا �ز‬ The taskīn variant will be repeated at
20:30–32 ‫ر ى‬ K
‫��ه‬
‫وا �ش��رك‬ the end with yāʾāt al-iḍāfa
akhiya ‿shdud ...
AA
wa-ashrik-hu vowels (Prn)
akhiya ‿shdud ... IK
wa-ashrik-hū N → al-Musayyabī
IK
N
mihādan
AA
Long vwl
20:53 ‫��م�ه�د ا‬ IA (Q. 43:10)
(±ā)
A
mahdan H
K
573

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

574
IK
N
siwan
AA
20:58 ‫��سو�ى‬ K vowels
IA
suwan A
H
IK
N
fa-yasḥatakum A → Shuʿba
AA Vrb frm
20:61 �
‫ح�ى ك‬
��‫ف��ى��س‬
‫م‬ IA (I↔IV)
A → Ḥafṣ
fa-yusḥitakum H
K
N
IA Gemin
inna hādhāni H
‫ن �ذ ن‬ K ḥarf
20:63 � �‫ا � �ه‬ A → Shuʿba (inna↔in)
in hādhānni IK
in hādhāni A → Ḥafṣ iʿrāb
Appendix
inna hādhayni AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
fa‿jmaʿū AA
AA → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī
AA → Hārūn
‫ف‬ IK Vrb frm
20:64 ‫��ا �ج �م�عوا‬
fa-ajmiʿū N (I↔IV)
IA
A
H
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī

IK → Shibl → al-Ḥasan b. Muḥammad
thumma ‿ytū
b. ʿUbayd Allāh b. Abī Yazīd
IK → Ismāʿīl b. al-Qusṭ → Maḥbūb hamz
thummi ‿ītū IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf IM: This is wrong

20:64 ‫ث� ا �تى�وا‬ IK → al-Nabbāl
‫م‬
IK
N
IA
vowels
thumma ʾtū AA
(connecting)
A
H
575

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

576
talaqqafu IA
talqaf A → Ḥafṣ iʿrāb
A → Shuʿba
N
AA
‫�ق ف‬ Vrb frm (I↔V)
20:69 ��‫ي�مي�� ن��ك ت��ل‬ talaqqaf H
K
IK → al-Nabbāl
IK → Qunbul
Assim
IK → al-Bazzī
ttalaqqaf
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
IK
N
AA
20:69 ‫��س‬
�
‫حر‬ sāḥirin A Long vwl (±ā)
IA
H
siḥrin
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
āmantum A → Ḥafṣ
N → Warsh hamz
AA
20:71 �‫ا�م��ن ت‬ a-ºāmantum N (Q. 7:123)
‫م‬ IA
H
madd
a-āmantum K
A → Shuʿba
takhaf H
IK
N
20:77
‫ىخ ف‬ IA iʿrāb
�� takhāfu
AA
A
K
fa‿ttabaʿahum AA → ʿUbayd
fa-atbaʿahum IK
N
577
IA Vrb frm
‫ف‬ AA
20:78 �‫��ا ت��عه‬ (Q. 26:60) (IV↔VIII)
‫ب �م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

578
A
H
K
IK
anjaynākum ... N
wa-wāʿadnākum … mā Perf (nā↔tu)
IA
razaqnākum
A
‫ن‬ anjaynākum ... (Q. 2:51), (7:142)
‫� �م� ن� ع�د وك‬ �‫ا‬
‫��ى�ى ك‬ In al-Sabʿa it could be understood
‫م‬ ‫ج نم‬ wa-waʿadnākum … mā AA
20:80–81 ‫ �م�ا‬... � ‫ووع�د � ك‬ razaqnākum that H and K read all three verbs
‫ن‬ ‫�زمق‬ anjaytukum ... wa- H without alif, thus waʿadtukum and not
�‫ر �� ك‬ Vrb frm
‫م‬ wāʿadtukum … mā wāʿadtukum
K (I↔III)
razaqtukum
anjaytukum ... H
wa-waʿadtukum … mā
K
razaqtukum
fa-yaḥulla … yaḥlul K
IK
N
IA
AA
20:81 �
‫ و�م� ن ى‬... �‫ح‬ �‫ف‬ fa-yaḥilla … yaḥlil (Q. 20:86) vowels
‫ح�ل�ل‬ � ‫�ى��ل‬ A
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
bi-milkinā AA
IA
‫ن‬ N
20:87 ‫�ل�ا‬
��‫ب�م� ك‬ vowels
bi-malkinā A
AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī
H
bi-mulkinā
K
IK
N
ḥummilnā IA Vrb frm
A → Ḥafṣ (I↔II)
AA → Abū Zayd AA → Abū Zayd read both ways
20:87 ‫ح�م�� نل��ا‬ A → Shuʿba ḥummilnā and ḥamalnā
AA
ḥamalnā H
Act↔Pass
K
AA → Abū Zayd
579

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

580
tattabiʿanī｡ IK
AA
N → Qālūn
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Warsh taskīn
tattabiʿan｡ī
N → Abū Bakr Ibn Abī Uways →
Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
20:93 ‫ت �ت ن‬ N → Ismāʿīl b. Abī Uways → Aḥmad b.
��‫�� ب��ع‬
Ṣāliḥ
N → Ibn Jammāz IM: This is not in the written codex
tattabiʿaniya
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar This is the Reading of AJ
A Cons Loss
IA Final yāʾ
tattabiʿan｡i
H
K
IK
N
yā‿bna umma
AA
A → Ḥafṣ
20:94 �‫ى� ن‬ (Q. 7:150) iʿrāb
‫�ب وم‬ A → Shuʿba
H
yā‿bna ummi
K
Appendix
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
yabṣurū AA
Imperf
20:96 ‫�بى��صروا‬ A
(ya↔ta)
IA
H
tabṣurū
K
IK
tukhlifahu
AA
N
20:97 ‫ى‬
‫�خ��فل� �ه‬ A Act↔Pass
tukhlafahu IA
H
K
nanfukhu AA
IK Imperf
N (na↔yu)
20:102 ‫� نى��ف�� خ‬ IA
� yunfakhu
A
H Act↔Pass
581

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

582
yakhaf IK
N Tense
IA
20:112
‫ىخ ف‬ AA
�� yakhāfu
A Long vwl
H (±ā)
K
N
wa-innaka
A → Shuʿba
IK
AA ḥarf
20:119 ‫وا ن��ك‬ IA (inna↔anna)
wa-annaka
H
K
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
aʿmē … aʿmē H
K
20:124, Misprint in al-Sabʿa where it says Ḥafṣ
125 ‫�ع‬ ‫�ع‬ A → Ḥafṣ imāla
‫ ا �مى‬... ‫ا �مى‬ ʿan Nāfiʿ
Appendix
aʿmā … aʿmā AA Contradiction in page 143 of al-Sabʿa

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
IA
aʿmǣ … aʿmǣ N
IK
N
AA
IA
tarḍā
H
20:130
‫ض‬ A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra Act↔Pass
‫ىر��ى‬ The known reading of Ḥafṣ is tarḍā
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
turḍā K
N
ta‌ʾtihim AA
A → Ḥafṣ
‫ت‬ IK Imperf
20:133 �‫ى�ا ��ه‬
‫�م‬ A → Shuʿba (ta↔ya)
ya‌ʾtihim IA
H
583

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

584
inniya … laʿalliya … inniya

… innaniya … li-dhikriya …
wa-lī … liya … akhī … ʿayniya N
… li-nafsiya … dhikriya …
bi-ra‌ʾsiya … ḥashartaniya
inniya … laʿalliya … inniya
… innaniya … li-dhikriya
… wa-lī … liya … akhiya
AA
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬ … ʿayniya … li-nafsiya …
‫ ا �ى‬... ‫ى‬‫ �ل�ع��ل‬... ‫ا �ى‬ dhikriya … bi-ra‌ʾsiya …
‫�ذ‬ ḥashartanī
20:10, 10, ‫�ر�ى‬ ‫ �ل� ك‬... ‫ نا� ن�ى‬...
inniya … laʿalliya … anniya
12, 14, 14, ‫ لى‬... ‫ ولى‬...
‫ن‬ … innaniya … li-dhikrī …
18, 26, 30, � �‫ ا �خ‬... taskīn
‫ �عي��ى‬... ‫ى‬ wa-lī … lī … akhiya … ʿaynī IK
39, 41, 42, ... ‫ � نل��ف� ��سى‬... … li-nafsiya … dhikriya …
94, 125 ‫�ذ‬
‫ �برا ��سى‬... ‫�ر�ى‬ ‫ك‬ bi-ra‌ʾsī … ḥashartaniya
... ‫ح��رت� ن�ى‬ ‫ � ش‬... innī … laʿallī … innī … H
innanī … li-dhikrī … wa-lī K
… lī … akhī … ʿaynī … li-
IA
nafsī … dhikrī … bi-ra‌ʾsī …
ḥashartanī A → Shuʿba
innī … laʿallī … innī …
innanī … li-dhikrī … wa-
liya … lī … akhī … ʿaynī … A → Ḥafṣ
li-nafsī … dhikrī … bi-ra‌ʾsī …
ḥashartanī
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA
bi-l-wādi in waṣl mode and bi-l-wād in
bi-l-wād｡i AA
waqf mode Cons Loss
20:12 ‫ب�ا �لوا د‬ A Final yāʾ
H
K
bi-l-wādī in waqf mode
bi-l-wādī｡ K → Khalaf
IM: This is not permissible
IK
N
qul AA Tense
‫ق‬ IA
21:4 ‫ق��ل‬
‫��ا ل‬ A → Shuʿba
H
qāla K IM: per the codex of Kūfa Long vwl (±ā)
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
Imperf (n↔y)
IK
585
21:7 ‫ىو�حى‬ yūḥā N

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

586
IA
AA
Act↔Pass
H
K
H
nūḥī K
Imperf (n↔y)
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
21:25 ‫ىو�حى‬ IK
yūḥā N
Act↔Pass
IA
AA
a-lam IK Per the codices of Makka

N
IA
21:30 ‫ا( ) ل‬ AA ḥarf (±w)
‫وم‬ a-wa-lam
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
yurjaʿūna AA → ʿAbbās
Imperf (t↔y)
tarjiʿūna IA This is the reading of Y
IK
‫ن‬ N
21:35 �‫ىر ج� ��عو‬ AA Vrb frm
turjaʿūna
A (I↔IV)
H
K
IK
iʿrāb
N
A
yasmaʿu ‿ṣ-ṣummu Imperf (t↔y)
21:45 ‫ى��س��م ا �ل��ص‬ AA

‫ع م‬ H
Vrb frm
K
(I↔IV)
tusmiʿu ‿ṣ-ṣumma IA
mithqālu N
IK
IA
21:47 ‫�ق‬ AA iʿrāb
‫�مث�� ا ل‬ mithqāla
A
H
587

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

588
wa-ḍiʾāʾan IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul Ibn Fulayḥ refused this reading

IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
IK
N
21:48 ‫�� ى�ا‬
‫و �ض‬ IA hamz
wa-ḍiyāʾan (Q. 10:5)
AA
A
H
K
jidhādhan K
IK
N
21:58
‫�ذ�ذ‬ IA vowels
‫ج�� ا‬
judhādhan
AA
A
H
IK
uffa
IA
N
uffin
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix
21:67 �� ‫ا‬ iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
uffi H
K
IK
N
li-yuḥṣinakum AA
H Imperf
21:80 � ��‫�ل�ى‬
‫ح��ص ن�� ك‬
‫م‬ K (n↔y↔t)
IA
li-tuḥṣinakum
A → Ḥafṣ
li-nuḥṣinakum A → Shuʿba
A → Shuʿba
nujjī AA → ʿUbayd IM: This is not assimilation but an
AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd omission of nūn Cons Loss
A → Ḥafṣ
‫ن‬ IK
21:88 �
‫�ج ى‬ N
nunjī IA
AA Gemin
H
589

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

590
IK
N
vowels
wa-ḥarāmun AA
IA
21:95 �
‫ح‬
‫و رم‬ A → Ḥafṣ
H
Long vwl (±ā)
wa-ḥirmun K
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
AA
futiḥat
21:96 ��‫ف�ت‬
�‫ح� ت‬ A Vrb frm (I↔II)
H
K
futtiḥat IA
IK
N
IA
Yājūju wa-Mājūju
21:96 ‫ى�ا �ج�و�ج و�م�ا �ج�و�ج‬ AA hamz
H
K
Appendix
Ya‌ʾjūju wa-Ma‌ʾjūju A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
li-l-kitābi AA
‫�ت‬ IA
21:104 ‫�ل��ل ك‬
�‫�� ب‬ Long vwl (±ā)
A → Shuʿba
H
li-l-kutubi K
A → Ḥafṣ
‿Z-Zubūri H
IK
N
21:105 ‫�ز‬ IA vowels

‫ا �ل ب�ور‬ ‿Z-Zabūri
AA
A
K

qāla A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ →
Tense
A
IK
591
‫�ق‬ N
21:112 ‫�ل‬ qul

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

592
IA
AA Long
H vwl (±ā)
K
yaṣifūna IA → Ibn Dhakwān

IA → Hishām
IK
‫�ف ن‬ N
21:112 �‫ى��ص� و‬ Imperf (t↔y)
taṣifūna AA
A
H
K
maʿī … inniya … N
massaniya … ʿibādiya AA
IK
maʿī … innī … massaniya … IA
21:24, 29, ‫�م�ع … ا �ن … � ن‬
�‫م��س‬ ʿibādiya K
‫ى‬ ‫ى‬ ‫ى‬ taskīn
83, 105 � � A
‫… ع ب��ا د ى‬
maʿī … innī … massanī …
H
ʿibādī
maʿiya … innī …
A → Ḥafṣ
massaniya … ʿibādiya
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
sukārā … bi-sukārā A
Long vwl
22:2 ‫�ر�ى‬ �‫��س ك‬
�‫�ر�ى … ب��س ك‬ IA
(±ā)
AA
H
sakrē … bi-sakrē
K
N
H
li-yuḍilla K
Vrb frm
22:9 ‫�لى��ض‬ A
‫� �ل‬ (I↔IV)
IA
AA
li-yaḍilla
IK
l-yaqṭaʿ … li-yaqḍū … wa-l-

IK → al-Qawwās
yūfū … wa-l-yaṭṭawwafū
IK → al-Bazzī
�‫ث� �ل��ق ��ط … ث‬ N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
‫�ق م ي ��ع �ف م‬
… ‫� وا … و�يل�� وا‬ ‫�يل�� ض‬ N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī
593
l-yaqṭaʿ … l-yaqḍū … wa-l-

‫ف‬ N → al-Musayyabī
22:15, 29 ‫و�يل��طو�وا‬ yūfū … wa-l-yaṭṭawwafū taskīn

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

594
N → Ismāʿīl b. Abī Uways

A Throught the Qurʾān whenever the
H lām of command is preceded by wāw
K or fāʾ or thumma
AA
li-yaqṭaʿ … li-yaqḍū … wa-l-
N → Warsh
yūfū … wa-l-yaṭṭawwafū
li-yaqṭaʿ … li-yaqḍū … wa-li-
IA
yūfū … wa-li-yaṭṭawwafū
hādhānni IK
N
IA
22:19
‫�ذ ن‬ AA Gemin
� �‫�ه‬ hādhāni
A
H
K
IK
AA
IA hamz
H
Appendix
22:23 ‫و�لو�لو‬ wa-luʾluʾin K (Q. 35:33)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
wa-luʾluʾan A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
iʿrāb
wa-lūluʾan A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam
wa-luʾluwan A → Shuʿba → Muʿallā b. Manṣūr IM: This is wrong
IK
N
IA
sawāʾun AA
22:25 ‫��سوا ء‬ iʿrāb
A
H
K
sawāʾan A → Ḥafṣ
AA
N → Ibn Jammāz
wa-l-bādī in waṣl mode; wa-l-bād in
waqf mode
wa-l-bād｡ī N → Warsh
N → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar ḥarf (±y)
Al-Aṣmaʿī: I heard N recites it with yāʾ,
N → al-Aṣmaʿī i.e. wa-l-bādī, I said to him: Is this how
595
it is written? He said: No
22:25 ‫وا �بل��ا د‬ wa-l-bādī｡ IK wa-l-bādī in both waṣl and waqf modes

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

596
N → al-Musayyabī
wa-l-bādi in waṣl mode; wa-l-bād in
wa-l-bād｡i A
waqf mode
IA
H
K
wa-l-yuwaffū A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
wa-l-yūfū
22:29
‫ف‬ AA Vrb frm
‫و�ل�يو�وا‬ (I↔IV)
H
K
The variant type of taskīn (li↔l) was
wa-li-yūfū IA already mentioned above and I will not
repeat it here
fa-takhaṭṭafuhu N
IK
IA
‫ف‬ fa-takhṭafuhu
22:31 ‫�ت��خ��ط��ف� �ه‬ AA (Q. 2:20) Vrb frm (I↔V)
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
IK
AA
mansakan … mansakan N
22:34, 67 ‫��ا‬
�‫��ا … �م��ن��س ك‬
�‫�م��ن��س ك‬ IA vowels
A
H
mansikan … mansikan
K
IK
yadfaʿu … dafʿu
AA Vrb frm
‫ف‬ yudāfiʿu … difāʿu N (I↔III)
… �� ‫ي��د‬
22:38, 40 ‫ع‬‫ف‬ IA (Q. 2:251)
�� ‫د‬ A
‫ع‬ yudāfiʿu … dafʿu Long vwl
H
(±ā)
K
IK
adhina … yuqātilūna H
Act↔Pass
K
597
N
‫�ق ن‬ ‫�ذ ن‬ A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra
22:39 �‫ا � … ي�� ت��لو‬ udhina … yuqātalūna

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

598
A → Ḥafṣ → Ibn al-Ṣabbāḥ → al-Ḥasan

b. al-Mubārak
A → Ḥafṣ → Ibn al-Ṣabbāḥ → Abū
ʿUmāra Act↔Pass
AA
udhina … yuqātilūna
A → Shuʿba
adhina … yuqātalūna IA
IK
la-hudimat
N
AA
Vrb frm
22:40 �‫��ل�ه�د �م� ت‬ IA
(I↔II)
la-huddimat A
H
K
AA
ahlaktuhā
A → Shuʿba → Ibn Jammāz
IK
N Perf
22:45 ‫ا�ه��ل��ك�ى�ه�ا‬ IA (tu↔nā)
ahlaknāhā
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK → al-Qawwās
IK → al-Bazzī
AA
A
IA
H
wa-biʾrin
K
N → al-Musayyabī → Abū ʿUmāra
AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd
Al-Aṣmaʿī: I asked N about the pronun-
ciation of biʾr and dhiʾb. He answered:
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
22:45 ‫وب��ىر‬ If the Arabs articulate the hamza then hamz
you should do so as well
N → Warsh
wa-bīrin N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Khārija
→ ʿAbd Allāh b. al-Ṣaqr → IM
IK
yaʿuddūna H
599
‫ن‬ K
22:47 �‫ى�ع�د و‬ (Q. 32:5) taʿuddūna Imperf (t↔y)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

600
N
AA
taʿuddūna
IA
A
IK
muʿajjizīna
AA
A
‫ج�ز ن‬ Vrb frm
22:51 �‫�م�ع�� ي‬ N
(II↔III)
muʿājizīna IA
H
K
IK
N
AA
‫قت‬ qutilū Vrb frm
22:58 ‫��لوا‬ A
(I↔II)
H
K
quttilū IA
N
madkhalan
Appendix
A → Shuʿba → K
IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
AA
22:59 ‫�م�د خ��لا‬ mudkhalan A vowels
H
K
(Q. 29:42), (Q. 31:30) tadʿūna; (Q. 40:20)

IK
yadʿūna
N
tadʿūna (Q. 29:42), (Q. 31:30) (Q. 40:20) tadʿūna
IA
‫ن‬ (Q. 31:30) tadʿūna; (Q. 29:42), (Q. 40:20)
22:62 A → Shuʿba Imperf (t↔y)
�‫ى�د �عو‬ yadʿūna
AA
(Q. 29:42), (Q. 31:30), (Q. 40:20) yadʿūna
A → Ḥafṣ
yadʿūna
H (Q. 29:42) tadʿūna; (Q. 31:30), (Q. 40:20)
K yadʿūna
ʿUbayd: If it is not preceded by unzila

then it is [always] pronounced yunzil
yunzil AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd (khafīfa). However, if it is preceded by
unzila, then it could either be yunzil or Vrb frm
yunazzil (II↔IV)
IK
601
N
22:71 ‫ي��ن�ز ل‬ yunazzil IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

602
AA
A
H
K
N
baytiya A → Ḥafṣ
IA → Hishām
A → Shuʿba
22:26 ‫ت‬ IA → Ibn Dhakwān taskīn
‫ب�ي��ى‬
IK
baytī
AA
H
K
nakīr｡ī N → Warsh
IK
N
IA
22:44 ‫ن� �ك‬
‫��ير‬ ḥarf (±y)
nakīr｡i AA
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
li-amānatihim IK
N
IA
23:8 �‫لا �م��ن ت��ه‬ AA Long vwl (±ā)
‫�م‬ li-amānātihim
A
H
K
H
ṣalātihim
K
IK
‫ت‬ Long vwl (±ā)
23:9 �‫ص��ل ��ه‬ N
‫� و �م‬ ḥarf (±w)

ṣalawātihim IA
AA
A
IA
ʿaẓman … ‿l-ʿaẓma
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
AA
603
23:14 ��‫ع‬ ‫�ظ‬

‫ ا �ل� ظ‬... ‫ع��م�ا‬ H Long vwl (±ā)
‫م‬ ʿiẓāman … ‿l-ʿiẓāma
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

604
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Abān → Bakkār [Bakkār b. ʿAbd
Allāh?
Abu Bakr al-Bakrawi?]
IK
Sīnāʾa N
AA
23:20 ‫��س�ي� ن��ا‬ A vowels
IA
Saynāʾa
H
K
IK
tunbitu
AA
N
‫�ن‬ Vrb frm
23:20 �‫ت��ب� ت‬ A
(I↔IV)
tanbutu IA
H
K
IK
Appendix
AA Vrb frm
‫ن‬
23:21 �
‫��س��ق ي�� ك‬ nusqīkum A → Ḥafṣ (I↔IV)
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
N
nasqīkum IA
A → Shuʿba
kullin A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
23:27 � tanwīn
‫كل‬ kulli IA
AA
H
K
manzilan A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
23:29 ‫�م��ن�ز لا‬ vowels
munzalan IA
AA
H
605

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

606
IK
tatran
AA
IK
tanwīn
AA
tatrā｡ N
A
23:44 ‫ت�ت��را‬
IA
H imāla
tatrā
K
H
tatrē｡ K waqf
A
rabwatin
IA
IK
23:50
‫� �ة‬
‫ربو‬ N (Q. 2:265) vowels
rubwatin AA
H
K
H
qarǣrin
N
Appendix
AA
‫ق‬ qarērin
23:50 ‫�را ر‬ K imāla

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
qarārin IA
IK
IK
wa-anna N
AA ḥarf
23:52
‫ن‬ wa-an IA (ann↔an↔
� ‫وا‬
A inna)
wa-inna H
K
nusēriʿu K → al-Dūrī
K
IK
‫ن‬ N
23:56 ‫��س�ا‬ imāla
‫رع‬ nusāriʿu IA
AA
A
H
tuhjirūna N
IK
607
tahjurūna IA Vrb frm

‫ن‬ ‫ت‬ AA
23:67 �‫��ه�� ج�رو‬ (I↔IV)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

608
A
H
K
kharjan fa-kharju IA
IK Long vwl
N (±ā)
‫ف�خ‬ ‫خ‬ kharjan fa-kharāju
23:72 ‫�ر ج��ا �ر�ج‬ AA
A
Long vwl
H
kharājan fa-kharāju (±ā)
K
IK
AA
mutnā
A → Shuʿba
IA
23:82 ‫�م��ت ن��ا‬ vowels
K
A → Ḥafṣ
mitnā
N
H
‿llāhu … ‿llāhu AA
ّٰ ّٰ IK
Appendix
23:87,
‫ ا �ل��ل�ه‬... ‫ا �ل��ل�ه‬ N
ّٰ ّٰ
89 ‫ �ل��ل�ه‬... ‫�ل��ل�ه‬ li-llāhi … li-llāhi IA ḥarf (±l)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
IK
AA
ʿālimi
A → Ḥafṣ
IA
23:92 ‫ع��ل‬ iʿrāb
‫م‬ N
A → Shuʿba
ʿālimu
H
K
IK
N
AA
IA
shiqwatunā A
A → Abān → Bakkār → Bishr b. Hilāl →
Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā l-ʿAbbāsī Abān: I asked A, and he said one
could read both shiqwatunā and
shaqāwatunā
23:106 ‫�ش��قوت�ن��ا‬ Aḥmad b. ʿAlī l-Khazzāz Long vwl (±ā)
609

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

610
H
K
shaqāwatunā Abān: I asked A who said one
Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā l-ʿAbbāsī
could read both shiqwatunā and
shaqāwatunā
IK (Q. 38:63)
AA
sikhriyyan
A
IA
23:110 ‫��س‬
‫�خر �يا‬ IM: This is wrong. It is known that A vowels
read sikhriyyan
sukhriyyan N
H
K
IK
N
annahum AA
IA ḥarf
23:111
‫ن‬ (anna↔
�‫ا��ه‬ A
‫�م‬ inna)
H
innahum K
Appendix
N → Khārija

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
qul kam labithtum … qāla in

IK → al-Bazzī
labithtum Tense (Long
qul kam labithtum … qul in vwl ±ā)
labithtum
‫�ق‬ ‫�ث ت‬ ‫ق‬ qul kam labittum … qul in H
‫ �ل‬... ‫ك �بل��م‬ ‫ل‬��
23:112, 114 ‫م ن‬ labittum K
�‫ا � �بل��ث ت‬
‫م‬ qāla kam labittum … qāla in AA
Assim
labittum IA
qāla kam labithtum … qāla N
in labithtum A
IK
AA
yurjaʿūna (Q. 28:39)
turjaʿūna IA
23:115
‫ن‬ A Act↔Pass
�‫ىر ج��عو‬
N
H yarjiʿūna (Q. 28:39)
tarjiʿūna
K
AA
N
laʿalliya
IK
611
23:100 IA taskīn
‫�ل�ع��لى‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

612
A
laʿallī H
K
IK
wa-farraḍnāhā
AA
N
24:1
‫ف‬ A
Vrb frm
‫�� ن��ه�ا‬
‫و�ر �ض‬ (I↔II)
wa-faraḍnāhā IA
H
K
ra‌ʾfatun (Q. 57:27)

Qunbul: al-Bazzī was mistaken to
IK → Qunbul → IM read both verses with taḥrīk (ra‌ʾafa).
ra‌ʾafatun
However, when I informed him it was
only this verse, he retracted his reading vowels
IK → al-Bazzī
N
24:2 ‫ا ف��ة‬
‫ر‬ IA
AA
ra‌ʾfatun
A
H
K hamz
idrāj mode or prayer
Appendix
rāfatun AA
The Reading of AJ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
‿l-muḥṣanāti … AA
‫ا ل � �ن‬
��‫م‬ ‿l-muḥṣanāti A
24:4,23 ... ‫ح��ص�� ت��ن‬
‫ت‬ Act↔Pass
��‫ح��ص‬ ��‫ا لم‬ IA
H
‿l-muḥṣināti …
K
‿l-muḥṣināti
IK
N
arbaʿa AA
IA
24:6 � ‫ا‬ iʿrāb
‫ربع‬ A → Shuʿba
H
arbaʿu K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
ḥarf
‫ن‬ AA
� ‫ ا‬... ‫ا ن � �ن ت‬ anna laʿnata … anna (anna↔an)
24:7,9 ّٰ �� ‫� لغ�ع‬ A
‫��ض‬
‫�� ب� ا �ل��ل�ه‬ ghaḍaba ‿llāhi
IA iʿrāb
613
H iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

614
ḥarf
K
(anna↔an)
an laʿnatu … an ghaḍiba vowels
N
‿llāhu (N↔V)
IK
N
IA
wa-l-khāmisatu AA
24:9 ‫ا �لخ‬
‫��م��س��ة‬
‫و‬ iʿrāb
A
H
K
wa-l-khāmisata A → Ḥafṣ
AA → ʿUbayd IM: This is unacceptable (radīʾ) unless

it ttalaqqawnahu the dhāl is not assimilated into the
AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī
double tāʾ
H Assim
it_talaqqawnahu
K
24:15
‫�ذ‬
‫ا ت��ل��قون��ه‬ N
A
idh talaqqawnahu
IA
IK Gemin
Appendix
idh ttalaqqawnahu IK → al-Bazzī

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
tashhadu AA
24:24 ‫ش‬
‫ى��ه�د‬ A Imperf (t↔y)
IA
H
yashhadu
K
wa-li-yaḍribna AA → ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl IM: This is unacceptable

IK
N
IA ḥarf (li↔l)
24:31 ‫ن‬ taskīn
��‫و�يل�� ض�� رب‬
wa-l-yaḍribna AA
Tense
A
H
K
IK
IA
jiyūbihinna K
H
uṣūl: bu/iyūt, shu/iyūkh, ʿu/iyūn, ghu/
AA
615
iyūb, and ju/iyūb

N → al-Musayyabī (Q. 2:189), (Q. 40:67), (Q. 36:34),
24:31 ‫�ج�� ن‬
��‫يو��ه‬ juyūbihinna N → Qālūn (Q. 5:109) vowels
‫ب‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
616
N → Warsh
N → Ibn Jammāz
K
juiyūbihinna
H → Sulaym → Abū Hishām
IK
N
AA
ghayri
‫غ‬ H
24:31 ‫��ير‬ iʿrāb
K
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
ghayra
IA
ayyuhu IA (Q. 43:49), (Q. 55:31)

IK waqf
N ayyuh in waqf mode; ayyuha in waṣl
ayyuh｡a
Appendix
H mode
24:31 ‫اي��ه‬ A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA ayyuhā in waqf mode; ayyuha in waṣl

ayyuh(a/ā｡)
K mode
AA vowels (Prn)
ayyuhā｡ Al-Warrāq: One should not intend to
K → Muḥammad b. Saʿdān →
pause here because the verse must be
Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā l-Warrāq
read in waṣl mode
IK
A → Shuʿba
mubayyanātin
N
AA
24:34 �‫�م ب��ي��ن� ت‬ Act↔Pass
IA
H
mubayyinātin
K
A → Ḥafṣ
ka-mishkētin K → al-Dūrī
IK
N
‫� ش �ة‬ IA
24:35 ‫ك�م�� ك‬
‫�و‬ imāla
ka-mishkātin AA
A
H
617

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

618
durriyyun tawaqqada IK
N Imperf (t↔y)
IA
durriyyun yūqadu
A → Ḥafṣ Vrb frm
A → Abān (IV↔V)
‫ق‬ dirrīʾun tawaqqada AA
24:35 ‫د ر �ى ىو��د‬ vowels
H
durrīʾun tūqadu
A → Shuʿba hamz
dirrīʾun tūqadu K
A → AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī
Tense
(?) tawaqqadu Kūfa → AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd →
al-Quṭaʿī
IK
N
AA
H
K
24:36 ��‫��س‬ yusabbiḥu A → Ḥafṣ Act↔Pass
‫ي بح‬
A → al-Ḍaḥḥāk b. Maymūn → Khalaf →
Aḥmad b. Abī Khaythama → IM
A → al-Ḍaḥḥāk b. Maymūn → Khalaf →
Idrīs b. ʿAbd al-Karīm → IM
Appendix
A → Abān → Bakkār

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
yusabbaḥu
A → Shuʿba
saḥābun ẓulumātin IK → Qunbul

saḥābu ẓulumātin IK → al-Bazzī iʿrāb
N
IA
24:40 ‫� ظ‬ ‫��س‬
�‫ح� ب� ��ل�م� ت‬ AA
saḥābun ẓulumātun
A tanwīn
H
K
yuwallifu N → Warsh
N → Qālūn
IK
‫ف‬ IA
24:43 ��‫�يو�ل‬ hamz
yuʾallifu AA
A
H
K
619
H
khāliqu kulli iʿrāb
K
24:45 IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
� �‫خ��ل ق‬
‫كل‬
(cont.)

620
N
IA Tense (Long
khalaqa kulla
AA vwl ±ā)
A
IK
H
vowels (Prn)
K
wa-yattaqihī
N → Warsh
N → Qālūn
24:52 ‫وي�ت��ق�ه‬ wa-yattaqihi N → Qālūn
AA
IA taskīn
wa-yattaqih A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra
H → Abū ʿUmāra
A → Shuʿba
wa-yattaqhi A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
AA
Appendix
‫�خ ف‬ H
24:55 �‫ا ��ست��ل‬ ‿stakhlafa Act↔Pass

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
‿stukhlifa A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra yubdalahumā (Q. 18:81), yubdilahu
H (Q. 66:5), yubdilanā (Q. 68:32),
K nubaddila (Q. 70:41)
wa-la-yubaddilannahum
IA Vrb frm
24:55 �‫�ل��د �ل ن��ه‬
‫وي ب � م‬ N yubaddilahumā (Q. 18:81), yubaddilahu (II↔IV)
(Q. 66:5), yubaddilanā (Q. 68:32),
AA
nubaddila (Q. 70:41)

IK yubdalahumā (Q. 18:81), yubdilahu
wa-la-yubdilannahum (Q. 66:5), yubdilanā (Q. 68:32), nubdila
A → Shuʿba (Q. 70:41)
N
IK
taḥsibanna Imperf (t↔y)
AA
24:57 ‫� ن‬ ‫ى‬
�‫ح��س��ب‬ K
IA
yaḥsabanna
H vowels
621
taḥsabanna A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

622
IK
N
thalāthu AA
IA
24:58 �‫ث��ل� ث‬ iʿrāb
A → Ḥafṣ
H
thalātha K
A → Shuʿba
AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl The reading of Y
yarjiʿūna AA → Hārūn al-Aʿwar
AA → Khārija b. Muṣʿab
AA → al-Yazīdī
24:64
‫ن‬ AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith Act↔Pass
�‫ىر ج��عو‬
IK
(Q. 2:281)
N
yurjaʿūna
IA
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
na‌ʾkulu
K
IK
Imperf
25:8 � ‫ن�ا‬ N
‫كل‬ (n↔y)
ya‌ʾkulu A
AA
IA
IK
wa-yajʿalu A → Shuʿba
IA
N
25:10 � AA iʿrāb
‫ويج� ��ع�ل‬
H
wa-yajʿal
K
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba → K
IK
ḍayqan AA → ʿUqba → Ḥajjāj al-Aʿwar →
Aḥmad b. Jubayr → ʿAbd al-Razzāq
623
b. al-Ḥasan → Muḥammad b. Aḥmad vowels

25:13 ‫�ض‬
‫�� ي��ق�ا‬ al-Ramlī → IM (Q. 6:125) (Gemin)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

624
N
IA
AA
ḍayyiqan
A
H
K
IK
A → Ḥafṣ
AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl
yaḥshuruhum … fa-yaqūlu Imperf (n↔y)
AA → Hārūn → ʿAbbās Misprint in al-Sabʿa: ʿAyyāsh
AA → Abū Zayd
N
25:17 ‫ف �ق‬ ‫�ش‬‫ى‬ AA
‫ ��ى� ول‬... ‫ح��ر�هم‬
H
naḥshuruhum … fa-yaqūlu K
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Probably added by some of IM’s Imperf (n↔y)
Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir → Ibn students when compared to al-Fārisī’s
Saʿdān Ḥujja
IM: I do not have transmission from
naḥshuruhum … (?) A → Shuʿba
Shuʿba regarding fa-yaqūlu
naḥshuruhum … fa-naqūlu IA
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
taqūlūna ... tastaṭīʿūna A → Ḥafṣ

A → Shuʿba
Imperf (t↔y)
IK
N
25:19
‫ن‬ ‫�ق ن ف‬
taqūlūna ... yastaṭīʿūna IA
�‫ى�� و�لو� ��م�ا ى��ست��طي��عو‬
AA
H Imperf (t↔y)
K
yaqūlūna ... yastaṭīʿūna IK → al-Bazzī → Qunbul → IM
IK
tashshaqqaqu N
IA
25:25 ‫ت ش �ق ق‬ AA Assim
� ��
A
tashaqqaqu
H
K
wa-nunzilu ‿l-malāʾikata IK
N iʿrāb
‫��ة‬ IA
�‫وى�ى�ز ل ا لم��لى �ك‬
625
Vrb frm
‫��ة‬ AA
25:25 �‫و�ن�ز ل ا لم��لى �ك‬ wa-nuzzila ‿l-malāʾikatu (II↔IV)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

626
A ḥarf (±n)
H
Act↔Pass
K
IK
N
IA
A
yā-laytanī
‫�ت ن‬ H
25:27 vowels [Prn]
‫ي��يل��ى‬ K
Abū Khulayd: both yā-laytanī and yā-
N → Abū Khulayd
laytaniya are fine
AA
yā-laytaniya
N → Abū Khulayd
AA → ʿUbayd
IK → al-Bazzī
N
yā-waylatā IA
25:28 ‫ت‬ A imāla
‫�يو�ي�ل�ى‬
AA
IK
K
yā-waylatē
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
qawmiya AA
IK → al-Bazzī
Qunbul: al-Bazzī used to read qawmiya.
Thus, al-Qawwās told me to check
the reading in the muṣḥaf of Abū
IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul → IM l-Ikhrīṭ Wahb b. Wāḍiḥ as to how it was
vocalized. I checked it and I saw that it
25:30
‫ق‬ was vocalized with a fatḥa, which was taskīn
‫�ومى‬ erased later on vowels [Prn]
qawmī IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd
Makka → Shibl → ʿUbayd
A
IA
H
K
IK
N
AA
wa-Thamūdan
IA
K
627
‫ث‬ A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam

25:38 ‫�مود‬ tanwīn

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

628

A → Shuʿba → K
A → Ḥafṣ
wa-Thamūda
H
AA
nushuran vowels
N
IK
25:48 ‫ش‬
‫ى��را‬ AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd
nushran
IA
bushran A Root
H
nashran
K
H
li-yadhkurū
K
IK
25:50
‫�ذ‬ N Vrb frm (I↔V)
‫�يل�� ك‬
‫�روا‬
li-yadhdhakkarū IA
AA
A
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
ta‌ʾmurunā AA
25:60 ‫ى�ا �مرن�ا‬ IA Imperf (t↔y)
A
H
ya‌ʾmurunā
K
H
surujan
K
IK
Long vwl (±ā)
25:61 ‫��سر ج��ا‬ N
[Pl]
sirājan IA
AA
A
yadhkura H
IK
N
25:62
‫�ذ‬ IA
Vrb frm
‫ي� ك‬
‫�ر‬ (I↔V)
yadhdhakkara
AA
A
629

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

630
IK
yaqtirū
AA
vowels
A
yaqturū H
25:67 ‫ى��ق ت��روا‬
K
N Vrb frm
yuqtirū IA (I↔IV)
A → Shuʿba → K
yuḍaʿʿaf … wa-yakhlud IK
yuḍāʿafu … wa-yakhludu A → Shuʿba iʿrāb
yuḍaʿʿafu … wa-yakhludu IA
Vrb frm
A → Ḥafṣ
(II↔III)
25:69 ‫ ىخ‬... ‫ى��ض �ع��ف‬
‫��ل�د‬ ‫و‬ � � AA iʿrāb
yuḍāʿaf … wa-yakhlud N
H Act↔
K Pass
yuḍāʿaf … wa-yukhlad AA → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī IM: This is wrong
A → Ḥafṣ
fīhī
IK
Appendix
N
‫ف‬ IA
25:69 ‫�ي��ه‬ vowels [Prn]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
fīhi
H
K
AA
A → Shuʿba
wa-dhurriyyatinā
H
‫�ذ �ت‬ K Long vwl (±ā)
25:74 ‫ر�ي� ن��ا‬ IK [Pl]
N
wa-dhurriyyātinā
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
wa-yulaqqawna
AA Act↔Pass
‫�ق ن‬ A → Ḥafṣ
25:75 �‫وى��ل� و‬ IA
H
wa-yalqawna
K Vrb frm (I↔II)
631
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

632
IK
N
Assim
AA
ṭa sīm_mīm
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
N → Khārija
imāla
ṭe sīm_mīm K
26:1 ‫ط��س‬
‫م‬ A → Shuʿba
ṭæ sīm_mīm N → Warsh
N → Qālūn
N → Yaʿqūb
ṭa｡ sīn｡ mīm｡ The Reading of AJ waqf
AJ → Yaʿqūb
ṭa sīn mīm N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
ṭe sīn mīm H
AA → al-Khaffāf → ʿUbayd
Hārūn: AA considered ʿumurika to be
ʿumrika AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd
acceptable as well
AA → ʿUbayd
Hārūn: AA considered ʿumurika to be vowels
AA → Hārūn
Appendix
26:18 ‫�ع�مرك‬ acceptable as well [taskīn]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA → ʿUbayd
IK
N
IA
ʿumurika
AA
A
H
K
arjiʾhū IK They articulate the hamza in (Q. 9:106)

and (Q. 33:51) and read murja‌ʾūna and
AA
turjiʾu
vowels [Prn]
arjiʾhu IA → Hishām
b. Ḥātim
N → al-Musayyabī
arjihi N → Qālūn
N → Warsh
hamz
N → Isḥāq [al-Musayyabī] → Khalaf
arjihī
N → Isḥāq [al-Musayyabī] → Ibn
633
Saʿdān
26:36 ‫ا ر�ج��ى�ه‬ K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

634

arjiʾhi IA → Ibn Dhakwān and (Q. 33:51) and reads murja‌ʾūna and
turjiʾu
Ibn al-Jahm: It is probably with a
hamza before the rāʾ [[probably meant
al-Jahm → IM
after the rāʾ?]]
arjiʾh
Aḥmad al-Wakīʿī → Ibrāhīm b. Aḥmad [[Not recited anymore]]
al-Wakīʿī
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf iʿrāb
A → Shuʿba → K
arjih He articulates the hamza in (Q. 9:106)
murja‌ʾūna but not in (Q. 33:51) turji.
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā → Abū l-Buḥturī
reads murjawna and turji
A → Ḥafṣ
Reading murjawna and turji and (Q.
26:36) arjih
Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak → Wuhayb
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
ȧ-ºinna N
AA
‫ن‬ K
26:41 �‫ا‬ hamz
H
a-inna IA Doubt from IM
A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
talqafu A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul Vrb frm
N (I↔V)
‫�ق ف‬ talaqqafu IA
26:45 ��‫�هى ت��ل‬ AA
H
K
Assim
IK → al-Bazzī
ttalaqqafu
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
N
AA
a-ºā̇mantum hamz
635
IA
26:49 �‫ا�م��ن ت‬ IK → al-Bazzī (Q. 7:123), (Q. 20:71)
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

636
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
IK → Qunbul
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū Shuʿayb al-Qawwās →
al-Ḥulwānī
A → Ḥafṣ
āmantum
N → Wash
madd
K
H
a-āmantum
IK
ani ‿sri
N Vrb frm
IA (I↔IV)
26:52
‫ن‬ AA
‫ا � ا ��سر‬
an asri A
H vowels
K
IK
ḥadhirūna N Long vwl (±ā)
‫�ذ ن‬ AA
26:56 �‫ح� رو‬ [Ptcpl]
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
IA
ḥādhirūna
H
K
H
tarēʾā
A IM: This is the known reading of A
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra imāla
A → Shuʿba
IK
26:61 ‫ت�را ء ا‬ tarāʾā｡
N In waqf mode, on the pattern of tarāʿā
IA
AA
K waqf
H In waqf mode, on the pattern of tarēʿē
tarēʾē｡
K → Nuṣayr
N
IA
khuluqu
A
26:137 ‫خ ق‬ H vowels
�‫��ل‬
IK
khalqu AA
637

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

638
IK
farihīna AA
N
‫ف ن‬ Long vwl (±ā)
26:149 �‫�ر�ه��ي‬ A
[Ptcpl]
IA
fārihīna
H
K
IK
laykata N iʿrāb
IA
26:176 ‫��ه‬ �
‫ا �ص‬
‫ح� ب� ��لى �ك‬ A (Q. 38:13)
H
‿l-aykati hamz
K
AA
IK
N
bi-l-qusṭāsi AA
‫�ق‬ IA
26:182 ‫ب�ا �ل�� س��ط�ا ��س‬ vowels
A → Shuʿba
H
bi-l-qisṭāsi K
Appendix
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
H
‫� �ف‬ kisfan K
26:187 �
‫ك��س� �ا‬ vowels
N
A → Shuʿba
IA
kisafan A → Ḥafṣ
IK
Vrb frm
N
nazala bihi ‿r-rūḥu ‿l-amīnu (I↔II)
AA
‫ن‬ ‫ن�ز‬ A → Ḥafṣ
26:193 �‫� ل ب��ه ا �لروح الا �م��ي‬ IA

nazzala bihi ‿r-rūḥa H iʿrāb
‿l-amīna K
A → Shuʿba
IK
Imperf
N
(t↔y)
AA
yakun lahum āyatan
26:197 ‫ىك‬
‫�� ن� ��ل�ه� ا ى�ه‬ A
‫م‬ H
iʿrāb
639
K
takun lahum āyatun IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

640
N per the codices of al-Madīna and

fa-tawakkal
IA al-Shām
‫ت‬ IK
� ‫و�و‬
‫كل‬
26:217 ‫ف‬ AA ḥarf (w↔f)
� ‫�ت��و‬
‫كل‬ wa-tawakkal A Per their regional codices
H
K
yatbaʿuhum N
IK
IA
26:224
‫�ت‬ AA Vrb frm (I↔V)
�‫��عه‬
‫ي ب �م‬ yattabiʿuhum
A
H
K
inniya … bi-ʿibādiya … maʿī

… liya … li-abiya … ajriya …
maʿiya … ajriya … inniya … N → Warsh
ajriya … ajriya … ajriya …
rabbiya
inniya … bi-ʿibādiya …
maʿiya … liya … li-abiya …
ajriya … maʿī … ajriya … N
Appendix
inniya … ajriya … ajriya …

ajriya … rabbiya

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
innī … bi-ʿibādī … maʿiya …

lī … li-abī … ajriya … maʿiya
A → Ḥafṣ
… ajriya … innī … ajriya …
ajriya … ajriya … rabbī
‫ن خ ف‬ inniya … bi-ʿibādī … maʿī
‫ ب��ع ب��ا د �ى‬... �� ‫ا �ى ا��ا‬ … liya … li-abiya … ajriya
‫ن‬
‫ ا � �م�عى ر ب�ى‬... … maʿī … ajriya … inniya … AA
26:12, ajriya … ajriya … ajriya …
‫ لا ب�ى‬... ‫ لى‬... rabbiya
52, 62, 77, ‫ن‬
86, 109, ��‫ و�م‬... �‫ ا ج�ر�ي‬... inniya … bi-ʿibādī … maʿī …
‫ن‬ taskīn
118, 127, ‫ ا � ا ج�ر�ى‬... ‫�م�عى‬ lī … li-abī … ajrī … maʿī …
IK vowels [Prn]
135, 145, ‫ن خ ف‬ ajrī … inniya … ajrī … ajrī …
164, 180,
... �� ‫ا��ا‬ ‫ ا �ى‬... ajrī … rabbiya
‫ان‬ ‫ن‬
188 � ... ‫ا � ا ج�ر�ى‬ innī … bi-ʿibādī … maʿī …
‫ن‬
lī … li-abī … ajriya … maʿī

‫ ا � ا ج�ر�ى‬... ‫ا ج�ر�ى‬ IA
… ajriya … innī … ajriya …
‫ ر ب�ى‬... ajriya … ajriya … rabbī
innī … bi-ʿibādī … maʿī … lī A → Shuʿba
… li-abī … ajrī … maʿī … ajrī H
… innī … ajrī … ajrī … ajrī
… rabbī K
wa-bushrē A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra

A → Ḥafṣ
IK
641
wa-bushrā N
IA
27:2 ‫ش‬ AA imāla
‫وب��ر�ى‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

642
A
H
K
A
bi-shihābin H
K
27:7
‫�ق‬ ‫ش‬ IK tanwīn
‫ب��ه�ا ب� ��ب��س‬
N
bi-shihābi
AA
IA
A → Shuʿba
reʾēhā K
H
A → Ḥafṣ
27:10 ‫را�ه�ا‬ imāla
IA
ra‌ʾāhā
IK
N
ra‌ʾēhā AA
wēdī AA → ʿAbbās
IK
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
AA
27:18 ‫وا د‬ wādī A imāla
H
K
IM: This is wrong

yaḥṭimankum AA → ʿUbayd
This is the Reading of Y
AA → al-Yazīdī
AA
IK
27:18 � �
‫ح��ط��م ن�� ك‬
�‫ي‬
N
Gemin
‫م‬ yaḥṭimannakum
IA
A
H
K
la-ya‌ʾtiyannanī IK Per the codices of Makka

N
‫تن‬ IA
‫�يل��ا �ي��ى‬ Gemin
27:21 AA
‫ت �ن ن‬ la-ya‌ʾtiyannī [ḥarf ±n]
‫�يل��ا �ي�� ى‬ A
H
643

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

644
fa-makatha A
IK
N
‫ف‬
27:22 ‫��م ك‬
�‫�� ث‬ IA Act↔Pass
fa-makutha
AA
H
K
IK → al-Bazzī
Saba‌ʾa (Q. 34:15)
AA
IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul → IM iʿrāb
Saba‌ʾ IK → Shibl → al-Ḥasan b. Muḥammad IM: This is wrong
b. ʿUbayd Allāh b. Abī Yazīd
27:22 ‫��سب��ا‬ N
IA
Saba‌ʾin A (Q. 34:15) tanwīn
H
K
IK
N Gemin
allā yasjudū
IA
Appendix
27:25 ‫الا ي��س��ج��د وا‬ AA ḥarf (±an)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
Tense
A (Imperf↔
Imp)
Long vwl
H
(±ā)
alā yā ‿sjudū K
waqf
alā yā｡ ‿sjudū K
K
tukhfūna wa-mā tuʿlinūna
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
‫ن ن‬ ‫ىخ �ف ن‬ IK Imperf
27:25 �‫�� و� و�م�ا ى�ع��ل�و‬ N (t↔y)
yukhfūna wa-mā yuʿlinūna

IA
AA
H
IK
K
N → Warsh
fa-alqihī
645
‫ف‬ AA → Shujāʿ
27:28 ‫��ا �ل��ق�ه‬ vowels [Prn]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

646
ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl: I asked AA and he

read fa-alqih however he said that one
AA → ʿAbbās
could also read fa-alqihī. AA chose
fa-alqihī
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
N → Ibn Jammāz
fa-alqihi
N → al-Musayyabī
AA → al-Yazīdī
ʿAbbās b. al-Faḍl: I asked AA and he
read fa-alqih however he said that one
AA → ʿAbbās
could also read fa-alqihī. AA chose
fa-alqih fa-alqihī
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
H
IK
a-tumiddūnan｡ī N
AA waqf
N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān → Ibn
a-tumiddūn｡i
Wāṣil
vowels / Cons
‫ت نن‬ a-tumiddūnanī｡ IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
27:36 ��‫ا �م�د و‬ Loss
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A Assim
a-tumiddūnan｡i IA
K
ḥarf (±n)
H → Sulaym → Abū Hishām → Isḥāq
a-tumiddūnnī
→ IM
ētīka H
IK
N
27:39 ‫ا ت�ي��ك‬ IA imāla
ātīka
AA
A
IK → Abū l-Ikhrīṭ Wahb b. Wāḍiḥ

bi-s-suʾqi (Q. 38:33); suʾqihi (Q. 48:29)
[→ al-Bazzī]
sa‌ʾqayhā
IK → Abū l-Ikhrīṭ → al-Bazzī → Muḍar
IK → Abū l-Ikhrīṭ → al-Bazzī hamz
(Q. 38:33),(Q. 48:29)
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
sāqayhā
IK → al-Bazzī
647
N
‫ق‬ IA
27:44 �� ‫��س�ا‬
‫ي�ه�ا‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
648
AA
A
H
K
IK
N Imperf (n↔t)
la-nubayyitannahu …
AA
la-naqūlanna
27:49 ‫�ق ن‬ ‫�ت ن‬ IA
��‫�ل�ى ب��ي� ��ه … ��لى� ول‬
A
vowels
la-tubayyitunnahu … H
la-taqūlunna K
mahlaka A → Shuʿba
mahlika A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
27:49 ‫��م�ه�ل�ك‬ vowels
IA
muhlaka
AA
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
annā H
K
ḥarf
27:51 ‫ا ن�ا‬ IK
(anna↔inna)
N
innā
AA
IA
IK
a-ºinnakum
N → Warsh
hamz
AA
ȧ-ºinnakum
N
27:55 �
‫ا � نى� ك‬
‫م‬ IA
A
a-innakum madd
H
K
qadarnāhā A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
‫ق ن‬ N Vrb frm
27:57 ‫��د ر��ه�ا‬ qaddarnāhā IA (I↔II)
AA
H
649

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

650
IK
N
IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Mūsā b. Mūsā
→ IM
tushrikūna
IA → Hishām → Aḥmad b.
27:59
‫ش ن‬ Muḥammad b. Bakr → IM Imperf (t↔y)
‫ى��رك‬
�‫�و‬
H
not mentioned by IM
K
AA
yushrikūna A
IA
AA
IA → Hishām
yadhdhakkarūna
IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Mūsā b. Mūsā Imperf (t↔y)
→ IM
IK
27:62
‫�ذ ن‬ N The differences mentioned by IM only
‫ى� ك‬
�‫�رو‬
IA → Ibn Dhakwān pertain to the prefix ya and ta. The
lightened and geminated
tadhakkarūna A
forms of tadhakkara Gemin
H and yadhdhakkaru
K are not mentioned
AA → ʿUbayd
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK Vrb frm
bal adraka AA (IV↔V↔
A → al-Mufaḍḍal VI)
N
27:66 ‫ب�ل ا د رك‬ A
bali ‿ddāraka IA
Assim
H
K
bali ‿ddaraka A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā
hamz
A ḥarf (±ʾ)
‫�ذ‬ a-idhā … a-innā
27:67 ‫ا ى� ا … ا � نى��ا‬ H Refer to the uṣūl
madd
idhā … ȧ-ºinnā N
IA
a-idhā … innanā Assim
K
IK
ḍīqin N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUbayd IM: This is wrong
N
651
IA
27:70 ‫�ض ق‬
�‫�� ى‬ ḍayqin AA vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

652
A
H
K
IK
yasmaʿu ‿ṣ-ṣummu
AA → ʿAbbās Imperf (t↔y)
N
IA Vrb frm
27:80 ‫ى��س��م ا �ل��ص‬ (Q. 30:52)
‫ع م‬ AA (I↔IV)
tusmiʿu ‿ṣ-ṣumma
A
H iʿrāb
K
tahdī ‿l-ʿumya H
iʿrāb
IK
N
Tense
IA
27:81 bi-hādī ‿l-ʿumyi (Q. 30:53) (V↔Ptcpl)
‫�ى�ه�د �ى ا �ل�ع��مى‬ AA
A
ḥarf (t↔b)
K
bi-hādī｡ ‿l-ʿumyi K → Khalaf → al-Kisāʾī l-ṣaghīr → IM waqf
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
inna
AA
‫ن‬ ḥarf
27:82 �‫ا‬ IA
(inna↔anna)
A
anna H
K
H
atawhu
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK Vrb frm
27:87 ‫ا ت�وه‬
N (I↔III)
ātūhu
IA
AA
K
IK
AA
IA
yafʿalūna IM: This is wrong
The transmission is most probably
653
Madīna → Abū ʿUbayd

Madīna [Shayba b. Naṣāḥ → Ismāʿīl b. Imperf
‫�ف ن‬
27:88 �‫ى�� ع��لو‬ Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUbayd] (t↔y)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

654
A → Abān → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī

→ ʿUbayd Allāh b. ʿAlī l-Hāshimī →
IM
N
A
tafʿalūna
H
K
IK
iʿrāb
AA
fazaʿi yawmiʾidhin
IA
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Qālūn
27:89
‫�ذ‬
�‫�ف�ز �يو�م�ى‬ fazaʿi yawma‌ʾidhin N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways
‫ع‬
N → al-Musayyabī tanwīn
N → Warsh
IM: yawma‌ʾidhin is permissible only
A
with fazaʿin
fazaʿin yawma‌ʾidhin
H
K
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix
taʿmalūna N
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Mūsā b. Mūsā

→ IM
→ IM
27:93
‫ن‬ IK Imperf (t↔y)
�‫ى�عم�لو‬
yaʿmalūna AA
A
H
K
inniya … awziʿniya … N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ

lī … inniya … ātāniya …
li-yabluwaniya N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
inniya … awziʿnī … lī …
N → Warsh → Muḥammad b. ʿAbd
inniya … ātāniya …
al-Raḥīm → IM
li-yabluwaniya
inniya … awziʿniya … liya … IK → al-Bazzī
innī … ātāni … li-yabluwanī IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
inniya … awziʿnī … liya …
innī … ātāni … li-yabluwanī
inniya … awziʿnī …
‫�ز ن‬ lī … innī … ātāniya …
‫ن ن ت‬ AA
‫ا �ى ا ��س�� … ا نو �ع�ى‬ li-yabluwanī
27:7, 19,
… ‫ … �م�ا لى … ا �ى‬innī … awziʿnī … lī … innī … IA
655
20, 29, 36, ‫ن‬ taskīn

40 ‫تن‬ ātāni … li-yabluwanī H vowels [Prn]
‫ا �� … �لي�� ب��لو �ى‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

656
innī … awziʿnī … liya …

innī … ātāniya … A → Ḥafṣ
li-yabluwanī
K
innī … ātēni … li-yabluwanī
A → Shuʿba imāla
innī … ātāni … li-yabluwanī
IK
N
Assim
AA
ṭa sīm_mīm
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
Q. 26:1
N → Khārija
imāla
ṭe sīm_mīm K
28:1 ‫ط��س‬
‫م‬ A → Shuʿba
ṭæ sīm_mīm N → Warsh
N → Qālūn
N → Yaʿqūb
ṭa｡ sīn｡ mīm｡ The Reading of AJ waqf
AJ → Yaʿqūb
ṭa sīn mīm N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
ṭe sīn mīm H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
wa-yarē Firʿawnu wa- H

Hāmānu wa-junūduhumā K iʿrāb
IK
‫ف � ن �ه ن‬ N
28:6 ��‫وىر�ى �رعو� و �م‬ Imperf
‫و�ج� ن��ود �ه�م�ا‬ wa-nuriya Firʿawna wa- A (n↔y)
Hāmāna wa-junūdahumā IA imāla
Vrb frm
AA
(I↔IV)
H
wa-ḥuznan
K
IK
28:8 ‫ح�ز ن�ا‬ N vowels
�‫و‬
wa-ḥazanan IA
AA
A
AA
yaṣdura
IA
IK
Vrb frm
28:23 ‫ى��ص�د ر‬ N
(I↔IV)
yuṣdira A
H
657

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

658
hātaynni IK
N
IA
28:27 ‫ت ن‬ AA Gemin
�‫�ه��ي‬ hātayni
A
H
K
H
li-ahlihu ‿mkuthū
IK
N
28:29 ‫لا�ه�ل�ه ا �م�ث�ك�وا‬ vowels [Prn]
IA
li-ahlihi ‿mkuthū
AA
A
K
IK
N
jidhwatin AA
28:29
‫�ذ �ة‬
‫ج�� و‬ K vowels
IA not mentioned by IM
jadhwatin A
judhwatin H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
‿r-rahabi
AA
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra IM: This is wrong
28:32 �‫ا �لر�ه� ب‬ A → Shuʿba vowels
IA
‿r-ruhbi
H
K
‿r-rahbi A → Ḥafṣ → ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ
IK
AA
fa-dhānnika ʿAlī b. Naṣr transmited both the heavy Gemin

AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr and lightened forms, i.e. fa-dhānnika
and fa-dhānika
fa-dhānīka IK → Shibl → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → Naṣr b. ʿAlī
‫ف�ذ‬ ʿAlī b. Naṣr transmited both the heavy
28:32 ‫�� ن��ك‬ AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr and lightened forms, i.e. fa-dhānnika
and fa-dhānika
N Long vwl (±ī)
fa-dhānika IA
A
H
659

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

660
ridan N
IK
IA
28:34 ‫رد ا‬ AA hamz
ridʾan
A
H
K
A
yuṣaddiqunī
H
IK
28:34 ‫�ق ن‬ N iʿrāb
‫�ي��ص�د �ى‬
yuṣaddiqnī IA
AA
K
qāla IK Per the codices of Makka

N
IA
28:37
‫ق‬ AA ḥarf (±w)
‫(و)��ا ل‬ wa-qāla Per their regional codices
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
yakūnu
K
IK
28:37
‫ن‬ N Imperf (t↔y)
‫ىك‬
�‫�و‬
takūnu IA
AA
A
IK
AA
yurjaʿūna
IA
28:39
‫ن‬ A Act↔Pass
�‫ىر ج� ��عو‬
N
yarjiʿūna H
K
A
siḥrāni H
K
28:48 ‫��س‬
‫� ن‬
�‫حر‬ IK Long vwl (±ā)
N
sāḥirāni
AA
661
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

662
IK
IA
AA
yujbā
28:57 ‫ى‬ A Imperf (t↔y)
‫ج�ب�ى‬
H
K
tujbā N
IK
N
ummihā A
28:59 ‫ا ��م�ه�ا‬ AA vowels
IA
H
immihā
K
yaʿqilūna AA
AA
IK
‫�ق ن‬ N It is not specified who transmitted
28:60 �‫ى�ع�� لو‬ Imperf (t↔y)
taʿqilūna IA both variants on behalf of AA
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
bi-ḍiʾāʾin IK → Qunbul → IM IM: This is wrong

IK → Ibn Fulayḥ In the Sabʿa it says IK → Ibn Fulayḥ →
IK → al-Bazzī al-Bazzī
N
28:71 ‫�� ى�ا‬
‫ب��ض‬ IA hamz
bi-ḍiyāʾin
AA
A
H
K
A → Ḥafṣ
la-khasafa
A → Abān → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
A → Shuʿba
IK
28:82
‫خ ف‬ N Act↔Pass
�‫�ل��س‬
la-khusifa IA
AA
H
K
rabbiya … inniya … sa-

tajiduniya … inniya …
N
663
la-ʿalliya … inniya … maʿī …

inniya … rabbiya … la-ʿalliya
… ʿindiya … rabbiya

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

664
rabbiya … innī … sa-tajidunī IK

… inniya … la-ʿalliya …
inniya … maʿī … inniya …
‫ن‬ AA
rabbiya … la-ʿalliya … ʿindiya
... ‫ ا �ى‬... ‫ر ب�ى‬ … rabbiya
28:22, 27,
‫ن‬ ‫ت ن‬
rabbī … innī … sa-tajidunī
‫ ا �نى‬... ‫��س��ج��د �ى‬
27, 29, 29,
… innī … la-ʿallī … innī … taskīn
30, 34, 34, ‫ ا �نى‬... ‫ �ل�ع��لى‬... A → Ḥafṣ
maʿiya … innī … rabbī … vowels [Prn]
37, 38, 78, ‫ ا �ى‬... ‫ �م�عى‬...
la-ʿallī … ʿindī … rabbī
85 ‫ �ل�ع��لى‬... ‫ ر ب�ى‬...
‫ ر ب�ى‬... ‫ �ع��د �ى‬... rabbī … innī … sa-tajidunī … IA
innī … la-ʿallī … innī … maʿī
… innī … rabbī … la-ʿallī … H
ʿindī … rabbī K
IK
N
AA
IA
A → Shuʿba → K
yaraw
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba → ʿAbd al-Jabbār b. Imperf
29:19 ‫ىروا‬ Muḥammad (Q. 16:48) (t↔y)
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
taraw A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam
A → Shuʿba → Ibn al-Mundhir
IK
‿n-nashāʾata
AA
N
29:20 ‫ا �ل��ن ش��ا ه‬ A Long vwl (±ā)
‿n-nashʾata IA
H
IK
AA
iʿrāb
mawaddatu baynikum K
AA → Abū Zayd
AA → Abū Zayd iʿrāb
N
mawaddatan baynakum
665
29:25 �
‫�مود ه ب�ي� ن� ك‬ IA
‫م‬
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

666
mawaddatun baynakum A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā
tanwīn
H
mawaddata baynikum
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
innakum … a-ºinnakum madd
N
innakum … ȧ-ºinnakum N
hamz
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
innakum … a-innakum
A → Ḥafṣ
29:28, 29 �
‫ نا� ك‬... �
‫نا� ك‬ IA → Hishām → Abū l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad
‫م‬ ‫م‬ innakum … ā-innakum
A → Shuʿba ḥarf (±ʾ)
a-innakum … a-innakum H
K
ȧ-ºinnakum … ȧ-ºinnakum AA
la-nunajjiyannahu … IK
munjūka A → Shuʿba
Vrb frm
N
(II↔IV)
la-nunajjiyannahu … AA
29:32, 33 ‫ �م ن��ج�وك‬... ‫�ل��ن ن��ج�ي�� ن��ه‬ munajjūka IA
Appendix
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
la-nunjiyannahu … H
munjūka K Vrb frm
la-nunjiyannahu … (II↔IV)
AA → Abū Zayd
munajjūka
IA
munazzilūna A → Shuʿba → K
IK
‫ن�ز ن‬ Vrb frm
29:34 �‫�م�� لو‬ N
(II↔IV)
AA
munzilūna
A
H
IK
N
AA
IA
wa-Thamūdan
‫ث‬ K
29:38 ‫و�مود‬ tanwīn
A → Shuʿba → K
667
H
wa-Thamūda
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

668
IK
N
H
K
tadʿūna
IA
‫ن‬ Imperf
29:42 �‫ى�د �عو‬ A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā
(t↔y)
A → Shuʿba → K
AA
yadʿūna A → Ḥafṣ
N
AA
āyātun
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
Long vwl
29:50 �‫ا ى� ت‬ AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
(±ā) [PL]
IK
āyatun H
K
A → Shuʿba
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
wa-naqūlu AA
IA
29:55 ‫�ق‬ N Imperf (n↔y)
‫وى�� ول‬
A
wa-yaqūlu
H
K

yurjaʿūna
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
29:57
�‫ىر ج� ��عو‬
turjaʿūna IA
AA
H
K
H
la-nuthwiyannahum
K
IK
Root
29:58 �‫�ل��ن�ى �ى ن��ه‬ N
‫و �م‬ [b↔th; ʾ↔y]
la-nubawwiʾannahum IA
AA
669

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

670
IK
H
K
AA → Abū Zayd
wa-l-yatamattaʿū
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Qālūn
29:66 ‫و�لي��ت��مت��عوا‬ ḥarf (l↔li)
AA
IA
A
wa-li-yatamattaʿū
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Warsh
rabbiya … yā-ʿibādiya … arḍī N

rabbī … yā-ʿibādiya … arḍiya IA
IK
29:26, 56, rabbī … yā-ʿibādiya … arḍī taskīn
‫ �ي ض�ع ب��ا د �ى‬... ‫ر ب�ى‬ A
56 vowels [PRN]
‫ ا ر��ى‬... rabbiya … yā-ʿibādī … arḍī AA
H
rabbī … yā-ʿibādī … arḍī
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
ʿāqibatu N
30:10 ‫�ع��ق ب��ه‬ A → Shuʿba → K iʿrāb
A
IA
ʿāqibata
H
K
A → Shuʿba
yurjaʿūna
AA
AA → ʿAbbās ʿAyyāsh in al-Sabʿa, which is a misprint

IK
30:11
�‫ىر ج� ��عو‬
turjaʿūna IA
H
K
A → Ḥafṣ
671

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

672
H
takhrujūna
K
IK
30:19
‫ىخ ن‬ N Act↔Pass
�‫�ر�ج�و‬
tukhrajūna AA
A
IA
li-l-ʿālimīna A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
IA
30:22 ‫ن‬ vowels
�‫�ل��ل�ع�ل�م��ي‬ li-l-ʿālamīna AA
A
H
K
yufaṣṣilu AA → ʿAbbās ʿAyyāsh in al-Sabʿa, another misprint

IK
N
nufaṣṣilu
IA Imperf
30:28
‫�ف‬ AA (n↔y)
‫ى�� ص�ل‬
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
IK
N
farraqū A
30:32
‫فق‬ AA
Vrb Frm
‫�ر�وا‬ (II↔III)
IA
H
fāraqū
K
N
IA
AA
‫ت‬ ‫ت‬ ātaytum … ātaytum Vrb Frm
30:39 �‫ ا �� ت‬... �‫ا �ي� ت‬ A
‫يم‬ ‫م‬ (I↔III)
H
K
ataytum … ātaytum IK
IK
IA
673
li-yarbuwa Imperf (t↔y)

AA
30:39 ‫�ل��يرب�وا‬ A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

674
H
K Vrb Frm
(I↔IV)
li-turbū N
IK
N
AA
yushrikūna
A
‫ش ن‬ IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Aḥmad b. Yūsuf
30:40 ‫ى��رك‬
�‫�و‬ Imperf (t↔y)
→ IM
H
K
tushrikūna
Muḥammad b. Bakr
IM: No one followed Qunbul in this

li-nudhīqahum IK → Qunbul → IM
transmission
IK → Shibl
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ → Isḥāq b. IM: al-Khuzāʿī is only familiar with
li-yudhīqahum Muḥammad al-Khuzāʿī this transmission
N
‫�ذ‬
30:41 �‫�لى� ��ق��ه‬ IA Imperf (n↔y)
Appendix
‫ي �م‬
AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
kisfan IA
IK
N
30:48 ‫� �ف‬�
‫ك��س� �ا‬ AA vowels
kisafan
A
H
K
IK
N
athari
AA
‫ث‬ A → Shuʿba Long vwl (±ā)
30:50 ‫ا �ر‬ IA [PL]
A → Ḥafṣ
āthāri
H
K
N
IA
675
tusmiʿu ‿ṣ-ṣumma iʿrāb

AA
30:52 ‫ى��س��م ا �ل��ص‬ A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
‫ع م‬
(cont.)

676
H Imperf (t↔y)
K
Vrb frm
IK
yasmaʿu ‿ṣ-ṣummu (I↔IV)
AA → ʿAbbās
This could be more accurately

tahdī ‿l-ʿumya H transliterated as tahdi ‿l-ʿumya since
there is no yāʾ in the script ḥarf (b↔t)
IK
30:53 N
‫�ى�ه�د ا �ل�ع��مى‬ IA
bi-hād｡ī ‿l-ʿumyi iʿrāb
AA
A
waqf
bi-hādī｡ ‿l-ʿumyi K
A
ḍaʿfin … ḍaʿfin … ḍaʿfan
H
IK
‫ف‬ ‫ف‬ N
��‫� �ع‬
‫ �ض‬... ��‫� �ع‬ ‫�ض‬
30:54 ‫ �ض �ع�� ا�ف‬... AA vowels
� ḍuʿfin … ḍuʿfin … ḍuʿfan IA
K
Ḥafṣ did not attribute this
Ḥafṣ
Appendix
transmission to A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
tanfaʿu
N
30:57 �‫� نى��ف‬ IA (Q. 40:52) Imperf (t↔y)
‫ع‬
A
yanfaʿu H
K
wa-raḥmatun H
IK
N
31:3 ‫ح�م��ة‬
‫ور‬ A iʿrāb
wa-raḥmatan
AA
IA
K
IK
li-yaḍilla
AA
N
Verb frm
31:6 ‫�يل��ض‬ IA
‫� �ل‬ (I↔IV)
li-yuḍilla A
H
677

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

678
IK
N
wa-yattakhidhuhā AA
‫��ت خ �ذ‬ IA
31:6 ‫�� ه�ا‬ iʿrāb
‫وي‬ A → Shuʿba
H
wa-yattakhidhahā K
A → Ḥafṣ
yā-bunay … yā-bunayyi …
IK → al-Bazzī
yā-bunayya
yā-bunay … yā-bunayyi …
IK → Qunbul
yā-bunay iʿrāb
yā-bunayya … yā-bunayya … A → Ḥafṣ
yā-bunayya A → al-Mufaḍḍal
31:13, ... ‫ ى�ب� ن�ى‬... ‫ى�ب� ن�ى‬
16, 17 ‫ن‬ A → Shuʿba
‫ى�ب��ى‬ N
yā-bunayyi … yā-bunayyi … AA
yā-bunayyi IA vowels [Prn]
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
mithqālu N
IK
IA
31:16 ‫�ق‬ AA iʿrāb
‫�مث�� ا ل‬ mithqāla
A
H
K
IK
tuṣaʿʿir A
IA
‫ت‬ Vrb frm
31:18 N
‫��ص�عر‬ (II↔III)
AA
tuṣāʿir
H
K
N
AA
niʿamahu A → Ḥafṣ
‫ن‬ AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl
679
31:20 ‫��ع��م�ه‬ tanwīn

niʿmatan IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

680
IA
A → Shuʿba
H
K
wa-l-baḥra AA
IK
N
31:27 ‫�ر‬
‫وا �ل ب��ح‬ IA iʿrāb
wa-l-baḥru
A
H
K
yaʿmalūna AA → ʿAbbās
IK
N
‫ن‬ IA
taʿmalūna AA
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
tadʿūna
IA
‫ن‬ A → Shuʿba Imperf
31:30 �‫ى�د �عو‬ H (t↔y)
K
yadʿūna
A → Ḥafṣ
AA
IK
khalqahu AA
IA
32:7 ‫خ��ل��ق�ه‬ N vowels

A
khalaqahu
H
K

idhā … ā-innā IA → Hishām → Aḥmad b.
Muḥammad b. Bakr hamz
681
(Q. 13:5), (Q. 7:80-1), (Q. 27:67), (Q.

‫�ذ‬ ȧ-ºidhā … innā N
32:10 ‫ ا � نى��ا‬... ‫ا ا‬ 29:28-9)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

682
a-idhā … innā K
A
H madd
a-idhā … a-innā
IA → Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith → Ibn
Confusion in wording
Dhakwān
ukhfī H
IK Act↔Pass
N
32:17 ‫�خ �ف‬ IA
‫ا ��ى‬ ukhfiya
AA
Tense
A
K
IK
N
lammā AA
ḥarf (limā↔
32:24 ‫لم�ا‬ IA
lammā)
A
H
limā
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
yaʿmalūna AA
IK
N
33:2
�‫ى�عم�لو‬ taʿmalūna
A
H
K
‿llāʾi
N
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ → Isḥāq al-Khuzāʿī hamz
→ IM
(Q. 65:4), (Q. 58:2)

AA
‿llāºyi
IK → al-Bazzī → Muḍar b. Muḥammad
33:4 → IM
‫ا �لىى‬ N → Warsh madd
‿llāyyi IK → al-Bazzī → Ibn Mukhlad IM: This is wrong
A
IA
‿llāʾī (Q. 65:4), (Q. 58:2)
H taskīn
K
683

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

684
IK
Gemin
taẓẓahharūna N
AA
33:4
‫ن‬ ‫تظ‬ tuẓāhirūna A (Q. 58:2)
�‫��هرو‬
Vrb frm
H
taẓāharūna (III↔V↔VI)
K
taẓẓāharūna IA
AA
AA → Abū Zayd
yaʿmalūna
AA → Hārūn
AA → Abū Zayd
AA → Hārūn
33:9
‫ن‬ AA → ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl Imperf (t↔y)
�‫ى�ع�ل�مو‬
IK
taʿmalūna N
IA
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
‿ẓ-ẓunūn(a/ā｡) … IK ‿ẓ-ẓunūnā, ‿r-rasūlā, ‿s-sabīlā in waqf

‿r-rasūl(a/ā｡) … K mode; ‿ẓ-ẓunūna, ‿r-rasūla, ‿s-sabīla
‿s-sabīl(a/ā｡) A → Ḥafṣ in waṣl mode
A → Shuʿba
N
IA
33:10, ‫ ا �لر��سولا‬... ‫ا � ظل�� ن��ون�ا‬ ‿ẓ-ẓunūnā｡ … ‿r-rasūlā｡ … AA → ʿAbbās
waqf
66, 67 ‫ ا �ل��س�ب� ي��لا‬... ‿s-sabīlā｡ AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr
AA → Abū Zayd
AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā → Rawḥ → al-
Ḥulwānī → al-Jammāl → IM
AA → al-Yazīdī
‿ẓ-ẓunūn｡ … ‿r-rasūl｡ …
‿s-sabīl｡
H
muqāma A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
33:13 ‫�م��ق�ا‬ vowels
‫م‬ maqāma IA
AA
685
H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

686
IK
la-atawhā N
IA
A
verb from
33:14 ‫لا ت�و�ه�ا‬ H
(I↔III)
K
la-ātawhā
AA
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
uswatun A
IK
N
33:21 IA Throughout the Qurʾān vowels
‫ا ��س �ة‬
‫و‬ iswatun
AA
H
K
IK
N
‿r-ruʿba A
H
IA
‿r-ruʿuba
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
nuḍaʿʿif lahā ‿l-ʿadhāba
IA iʿrāb
yuḍaʿʿaf lahā ‿l-ʿadhābu AA
33:30
‫�ذ‬ ‫ف‬ N
‫ى��ض‬
�‫� �ع�� ل�ه�ا ا �ل�ع� ا ب‬ Imperf (n↔y)
A
yuḍāʿaf lahā ‿l-ʿadhābu H Act↔Pass
Vrb frm
K
(II↔III)
IK
N
Imperf (t↔y)
wa-taʿmal … nuʾtihā AA
33:31
‫ت‬ IA (Q. 33:30) ya‌ʾti
‫ ىو��ه�ا‬... ‫وى�عم�ل‬
A
H Imperf (n↔y)
wa-yaʿmal … yuʾtihā
K
N
wa-qarna
A
IK
‫ق ن‬ vowels [root
33:33 �‫و�ر‬ AA
(q-r-r↔w-q-r)]
wa-qirna IA
H
687

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
688
IK
N
takūna
IA
33:36
‫ىك‬
�‫�و‬
A
yakūna H
K
wa-khātama A
IK
N
33:40 �‫خ��ا ت‬ IA vowels
‫و م‬ wa-khātima
AA
H
K
H
tumāssūhunna
K
IK
33:49 ‫ن‬ ‫ت‬ N
Vrb frm
��‫�م��سو�ه‬ (I↔III)
tamassūhunna IA
AA
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
taʿtadūnahā IK → al-Bazzī
IK → al-Qawwās
IK → al-Bazzī
N
33:49
‫ن‬ ‫ت‬ IA (Q. 14:17), (Q. 81:4) Gemin
‫��عت��د و��ه�ا‬
taʿtaddūnahā
AA
A
H
K
IK
AA
turjiʾu
IA
A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
33:51 ‫ت‬ H (Q. 7:111) hamz
‫�ر�ج�ى‬
K
turjī N
l-Buḥturī
689

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

690
IK
N
IA
yaḥillu A Imperf
33:52 ‫ى‬
�
‫ح�ل‬ H (t↔y)
K
AA → Maḥbūb → al-Quṭaʿī
taḥillu AA
H
inēhu
K
IK
33:53 ‫ا �نى�ه‬ N imāla
ināhu IA
AA
A
sādātinā IA
IK
N
Long vwl (±ā)
33:67 ‫��س�ا د ت�ن��ا‬ AA
sādatanā [PL]
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
N
kathīran H
K
33:68 �
‫�كى��يرا‬ ibdāl (b↔th)
IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Mūsā b. Mūsā Notebook transmission
IA → Hishām
A
kabīran IA → Ibn Dhakwān → Aḥmad b. Yūsuf
al-Taghlibī
IK
AA iʿrāb
ʿālimi A
Dhakwān Long vwl (±ā)
34:3 ‫ع��ل‬
‫م‬ [fāʿil↔faʿʿāl]
N
ʿālimu
IA
H Gemin
ʿallāmi
K
yaʿzibu K
691
IK
N
34:3 �‫�ي�ع�ز ب‬ yaʿzubu IA vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

692
AA
A
H
IK
alīmun
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
N
34:5 �‫ا �ل‬ (Q. 45:11) iʿrāb
‫يم‬ IA
alīmin
AA
H
K
IK
Imperf (n↔y)
N
nasha‌ʾ nakhsif bihimu …
AA
nusqiṭ Imperf (n↔y)
A
34:9
‫ش ىخ ف‬
‫ ى��س��ق��ط‬... �‫��س‬ ‫ى��ا‬ IA Imperf (n↔y)
yasha‌ʾ yakhsif bihimu …
H
yusqiṭ
Assim
yasha‌ʾ yakhsib_bihimu …
K
yusqiṭ
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
H
‫� �ف‬ kisfan K
34:9 �
‫ك��س� �ا‬ vowels
A → Shuʿba
N
IA
kisafan A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
‿r-rīḥu
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
34:12 �‫ا �لر‬ N iʿrāb
‫ي‬
‫ح‬
‿r-rīḥa IA
AA
H
K
ka-l-jawābī in waṣl mode; ka-l-jawābī

ka-l-jawābī｡ IK
in waqf mode
AA
693
ka-l-jawābī in waṣl mode; ka-l-jawāb in

ka-l-jawāb｡ī N → Warsh
waqf mode
N → Abū Qurra

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

694
N
IA
A
H
K ka-l-jawābi in waṣl mode; ka-l-jawāb
34:13 �
‫كا �جل‬
�‫�وا ب‬ ka-l-jawāb｡i waqf
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar in waqf mode
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Khārija
N
minsātahu
AA
IK
34:14
‫�ن ت‬ IA hamz
‫�م��س�ا ��ه‬
minsa‌ʾatahu A
H
K
IK → al-Bazzī
li-Saba‌ʾa (Q. 27:22)
AA
IK → al-Qawwās → Qunbul iʿrāb
Appendix
li-Saba‌ʾ IK → Shibl → al-Ḥasan b. Muḥammad IM: This is wrong (wahm)

34:15 ‫�ل��سب��ا‬ b. ʿUbayd Allāh b. Abī Yazīd

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
IA
li-Saba‌ʾin A tanwīn
H
K
maskinihim K
H vowels
maskanihim
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
34:15 �‫�م��س��ك ن��ه‬
‫�م‬ N
Long vwl (±ā)
masākinihim IA
[PL]
AA
A → Shuʿba
ukuli khamṭin AA
ukli khamṭin AA → ʿAbbās
vowels
N
uklin khamṭin
‫�خ‬ IK
34:16 ‫كل �م��ط‬�‫ا‬ IA
A
ukulin khamṭin tanwīn
H
695

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

696
H
wa-hal nujāzī illā ‿l-kafūra
A → Ḥafṣ Assim
wa-han_nujāzī illā ‿l-kafūra K
IK
34:17 ‫�ج�ز � الا ا �ل ك �ف‬
‫�� ور‬ ‫و�ه�ل ى ى‬ iʿrāb
N
wa-hal yujāzā illā ‿l-kafūru AA
Imperf (n↔y)
IA
A → Shuʿba Act↔Pass
IK
AA
IA → Suwayd b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz →
baʿʿid Hishām → Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b.
Bakr → IM
IA → Ayyūb b. Tamīm → Hishām →
Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Bakr → IM Vrb frm
34:19 ‫ب��ع�د‬
N (II↔III)
A
IA
bāʿid
H
K
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
ṣadaqa
AA
34:20
‫ق‬ IA
Vrb frm
� ‫�ص�د‬ (I↔II)
A
ṣaddaqa H
K
AA → ʿAbbās
quli ‿dʿū
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
‫ق‬
34:22 ‫��ل ا د �عوا‬ IA vowels

qulu ‿dʿū AA
A
H
K
IK
N
IA
adhina A → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī
697
‫�ذ ن‬
34:23 � ‫ا‬ A → Shuʿba → Ibn Abī Umayya Act↔Pass
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

698
AA
H
udhina
K
A → Shuʿba → K
fazzaʿa IA
IK
N
34:23 ‫�ف�ز‬ AA Act↔Pass
‫ع‬ fuzziʿa
A
H
K
‿l-ghurfati H
IK
N
‫ف‬ Long vwl (±ā)
34:37 �‫ا �ل غ��ر�� ت‬ IA
‿l-ghurufāti [PL]
AA
A
K
yaḥshuruhum … yaqūlu A → Ḥafṣ

Appendix
A → Shuʿba
IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
IA
34:40 ‫�ق‬ ‫�ش‬‫ى‬ naḥshuruhum … naqūlu AA imperf (n↔y)
‫ ى�� ول‬... ‫ح��ر�هم‬
H
K
IK
N
IA
‿t-tanāwushu A → Ḥafṣ
‫�ت ن ش‬ A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā
34:52 ��‫ا �ل� ��ا و‬ hamz

A → Shuʿba → K
AA
H
‿t-tanāʾushu K
ʿibādiya … arūniya … ajriya N

… rabbiya AA
IK
699
‫ن‬ ʿibādiya … arūniya … ajrī …

34:13, 27, ‫ ا رو �ى‬... ‫�ع ب��ا د �ى‬ A → Shuʿba taskīn
rabbī
47, 50 ‫ ر ب�ى‬... ‫ ا ج�ر�ى‬... K vowels [Prn]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

700
ʿibādī … arūniya … ajrī …

H
rabbī
ʿibādiya … arūniya … ajriya A → Ḥafṣ
… rabbī IA
H
ghayri
K
IK
35:3 ‫غ‬ N iʿrāb
‫��ير‬
ghayru IA
A
AA
IK
A → Shuʿba
maytin
AA
IA
35:9 �‫�مي�� ت‬ vowels
N
H
mayyitin
K
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
ʿumrihi
IK
N
35:11 ‫�ع�مره‬ IA vowels
ʿumurihi AA
A
H
K
AA
yudkhalūnahā IK → Maʿrūf b. Mushkān → Muṭarrif
al-Shaqarī → ʿAbbās
IK
‫ن‬ N
35:33 ‫ى�د خ��لو��ه�ا‬ (Q. 4:124) Act↔Pass
IA
yadkhulūnahā A
H
K
N
701
wa-luʾluʾan
A → Ḥafṣ
wa-lūluʾan A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam hamz

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

702
A → Shuʿba → al-Muʿallā b. Manṣūr

wa-luʾluwan
al-Rāzī
IK
35:33 ‫و�لو�لو‬ (Q. 22:23)
IA
wa-luʾluʾin
AA iʿrāb
H
K
IK
N imperf (n↔y)
IA
najzī kulla
35:36 ‫ى‬
� ‫�ج�ز �ى‬ A Act↔Pass
‫كل‬
H
K iʿrāb
yujzā kullu AA
IK
AA
bayyinatin
H
A → Ḥafṣ Long vwl (±ā)
35:40 �‫ب�ي��ن� ت‬ N [PL]
Appendix
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
bayyinātin A → Shuʿba
‿s-sayyiʾ H
IK
iʿrāb
N
35:43 IA
�‫ا �ل�� يس‬ ‿s-sayyiʾi
AA
A taskīn
K
IK
N → Ibn Jammāz
ya sīn wa-l-Qurʾāni Assim
AA
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī (Q. 68:1)
ya sīw_wa-l-Qurʾāni N → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar
36:1-2
‫�ق ن‬
� ‫�ي��س وا �ل�� را‬ N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī
imāla
N
703
yæ sīn wa-l-Qurʾāni N → Warsh

N → Qālūn

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

704
A → Shuʿba → K
ye sīw_wa-l-Qurʾāni
K It is not clear from the text whether
yæ sīw_wa-l-Qurʾāni H they assimilate the nūn or not
ye sīn wa-l-Qurʾāni The current Reading of H
IK
N
tanzīlu
AA
36:5 ‫ت ن�ز‬ IA iʿrāb
‫�� ي�ل‬
H
tanzīla K
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba → K
H
saddan … saddan K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
36:9 ‫��س�د ا … ��س�د ا‬ vowels
N
suddan … suddan AA
IA
Appendix
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A → Shuʿba
fa-ʿazaznā
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
‫ف‬ Verb frm
36:14 ‫��ع�ز�ز ن�ا‬ N
(I↔II)
fa-ʿazzaznā IA
AA
H
K
a-ºin IK
N
hamz
A
36:19 ‫ن‬ IA
�‫ا ى‬ a-in
H
K
AA madd
ȧ-ºin
N
IK
A → Shuʿba
705
AA vowels
36:33
‫ا لم��ت��ة‬
‫ي‬ ‿l-maytatu IA [Gemin]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

706
K
H
N
‿l-mayyitatu
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
IA
K
‿l-ʿiyūni
H
‫ن‬ iyūb, and ju/iyūb
36:34 �‫ا �ل�ع��يو‬ N → al-Musayyabī vowels
(Q. 2:189), (Q. 40:67), (Q. 5:109),
N → Qālūn (Q. 24:31)
N → Warsh
‿l-ʿuyūni
N → Ibn Jammāz
‿l-ʿuiyūni K
IK
Appendix
thamarihi N
36:35 ‫�ث�مره‬ AA vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
IA
H
thumurihi
K
IK
N
ʿamilathu AA
�‫�ع�م�ل� ت‬ IA ḥarf (±h)
36:35
‫�ع�م�� تل��ه‬ A → Ḥafṣ [Prn]
A → Shuʿba
ʿamilat H
IK
wa-l-qamaru N
AA
36:39 ‫�ق‬ A iʿrāb
‫وا �ل��مر‬
IA
wa-l-qamara
H
K
707

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

708
N
dhurriyyātihim
IA
IK
36:41
‫�ذ‬ A
Long vwl (±ā)
�‫�ت��ه‬ [PL]
‫ري � م‬
dhurriyyatahum AA
H
K
IK
yakhaṣṣimūna
N → Warsh
AA is close to N in how he devocalized taskīn
AA
yakhṣṣimūna the khāʾ
N
A
‫ن‬ ‫�خ‬ A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf
36:49 �‫ي‬
�‫��ص��مو‬ vowels
yakhiṣṣimūna A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam
K
IA
A → Shuʿba → Aḥmad b. Jubayr → vowels
yikhiṣṣimūna (Q. 10:35) yihiddī
Aḥmad b. Ṣadaqa → IM
Vrb frm
yakhṣimūna H
(I↔VIII)
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
shughlin AA
AA → Abū Zayd
36:55 ‫شغ‬ AA → Abū Zayd vowels
‫��ل‬
A
shughulin
IA
H
K
H
ẓulalin
K vowels
IK
36:56 ‫ظ‬ N
‫��ل�ل‬
ẓilālin IA Long vwl (±ā)
AA [PL]
A
IK
N
709
wa-anu ‿ʿbudūnī
IA
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬
36:61 ‫وا � ا �ع ب��د و �ى‬ K vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

710
AA
wa-ani ‿ʿbudūnī A
H
IK
jubulan H
K
36:62 ‫�ج� ب��لا‬ AA vowels
jublan
IA
N
jibillan
A
makānātihim A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shaybān → ʿUbayd Allāh b. Mūsā
→ Hārūn b. Ḥātim → Mūsā b. Isḥāq
→ IM Long vwl (±ā)
36:67 �‫��ا ن�ت��ه‬
�‫�م ك‬ IK
‫�م‬ makānatihim [PL]
N
IA
AA
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
AA
IA
nankus-hu
K
A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra Vrb frm
36:68 ‫ن�ن��ك��س�ه‬ A → Abān → ʿAlī b. Naṣr (I↔II)
H
A → Shuʿba
nunakkis-hu
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū l-Rabīʿ al-Zahrānī
A → Ḥafṣ →ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ
IK
AA
IA
yaʿqilūna
‫�ق ن‬ A
36:68 �‫ى�ع�� لو‬ Imeprf (t↔y)
H
K
N
taʿqilūna
AA → ʿAbbās
711

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

712
N
li-tundhira
IA
IK
36:70
‫ن �ذ‬ AA Imeprf (t↔y)
‫�ل�ى�� ر‬
li-yundhira A
H
K
IA
kun fa-yakūna
K
IK
36:82
‫�ن ف ن‬ N iʿrāb
�‫�و‬
‫ك�� ي�� ك‬
kun fa-yakūnu AA
A
H
H
lī … innī … innī
IA
N
36:22, ‫ن‬ ‫ن‬ liya … inniya … inniya taskīn
‫لى … ا �ى … ا �ى‬ AA
24, 25 vowels (Prn)
liya … innī … inniya IK
K
liya … innī … innī
A
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA
36:23, ‫ن �ق �ذ ن‬ yunqidhūn｡i AA Long vwl
43 �‫ي�� و‬ A (±ī) [Y]
H
K
yunqidhūn｡ī N → Warsh The reading of Y
IK
N Assim
wa-ṣ-ṣāffāti ṣaffan fa-z- A (Q. 51:1), (Q. 77:5), (Q. 79:4–3),
‫وا �ل�� فص� � ت� � �فص� �ا‬ zājirāti zajran fa-t-tāliyāti

IA (Q. 100:1–3)
dhikran
37:1–3 ‫� �ز ج�را‬ ‫ف��ا �ل�ز ا � ت‬
‫جر‬ K Assim
‫ف� ت � ت �ذ‬
‫�را‬ ‫�ا �ل��ا لي�� ك‬ AA → ʿAbbās
wa-ṣ-ṣāffāṣ_ṣaffan AA When he performs assimilation
fa-z-zājirāz_zajran Assim
H
fa-t-tāliyādh_dhikran
H
bi-zīnatini ‿l-kawākibi
A → Ḥafṣ iʿrāb
bi-zīnatini ‿l-kawākiba A → Shuʿba
713
IK
37:6 �‫�وا ك‬
�‫� ب‬ ‫�ب�ز ي�ن��ة ا �ل ك‬ N tanwīn

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

714
AA
bi-zīnati ‿l-kawākibi IA
K
H
yassammaʿūna K
A → Ḥafṣ
‫ن‬ A → Shuʿba Vrb frm
37:8 �‫ي��س��م�عو‬ IK (I↔V)
yasmaʿūna N
IA
AA
H
ʿajibtu
K
IK
37:12 ‫�جع‬
�‫��ب� ت‬ N Perf (tu↔ta)
ʿajibta AA
A
IA
IM describes the softening of hamza

ȧ-ºdhā … ȧ-ºnnā AA as yāʾ sākina to be pronounced like
hamz
Appendix
“ȧ-ydhā … ȧ-ynnā”
a-ºdhā … a-ºnnā IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

(ȧ/a)-ºdhā … innā N regarding the value of madd. IM does
not provide the details
a-idhā … innā K
A madd
a-idhā … a-innā
H
‫�ذ‬ on the pattern of ʿāʿinnā
37:16 ‫ا ى� ا … ا ن�ا‬ → IM
idhā … ā-innā IA → Hishām → Aḥmad b.
Muḥammad b. Bakr Abū l-ʿAbbās
al-Bakrāwī → IM
The wording in al-Sabʿa is confusing. It ḥarf (±ʾ)
refers to the articulation of two ham-
idhā … a-innā zas in “a-idhā” but it seems like a mis-

Dhakwān → X
print and it should refer to “a-innā”.
This is more clear in Jāmiʿ al-Bayān
N
aw
IA
IK
37:17 ‫او‬ A vowels
awa AA
H
715

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

716
IK
N
yunzafūna AA
37:47
‫ن�ز ف ن‬ IA (Q. 56:19) Act↔Pass
�‫ي�� و‬
A
H
yunzifūna
K
IK
N Vrb frm
IA (IV↔VIII)
muṭṭaliʿūna fa‿ṭṭalaʿa AA
37:54–55
‫ن ف‬ A Vrb frm
‫�م��ط��ل�ع ��ا ط��ل‬
‫و� ع‬ H (IV↔VIII)
K
AA → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Abū Hishām
Tense
muṭliʿūna fa-uṭliʿa Muḥammad b. Yazīd → Muḥammad
b. Mūsā b. Ḥayyān → IM
H
yuziffūna
IK
N
Appendix
Vrb frm
‫�ز ف ن‬ IA
37:94 �‫ي� �و‬ yaziffūna (II↔IV)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
K
H
turī
K
IK
Vrb frm
37:102 ‫ىر�ى‬ N
(I↔IV)
tarā IA
AA
A
wa-inna ‿L-yāsa IA
IK
N
37:123
‫ن‬ AA hamz
‫وا � ا �يل��ا ��س‬ wa-inna Ilyāsa
A
H
K
H
Allāha rabbakum wa-rabba K
717
A → Ḥafṣ
ّٰ
37:126 �‫� ور ب‬
‫ا �ل��ل�ه رب� ك‬ IK iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
‫م‬
(cont.)

718
N
AA
Allāhu rabbukum wa-rabbu
IA
A → Shuʿba
N
āli
IA
IK
Long vwl
37:130 ‫ال‬ AA
(±ā)
il A
H
K
IK
IA
AA
A
la-kādhibūna aṣṭafā H
K
N → al-Musayyabī
‫�ف‬ ‫ذ ن‬ N → Qālūn
37:152–3 ‫ك‬
‫�� ب�و� ا �ص��ط��ى‬
N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways ḥarf (±ʾ)
Appendix
N → Ibn Jammāz

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AJ → Ibn Jammāz
la-kādhibūna ‿ṣṭafā (iṣṭafā) AJ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar The recitation of AJ
N → Warsh → al-Aṣbahānī
(Muḥammad b. ʿAbd al-Raḥīm)
inniya … anniya …
N
sa-tajiduniya
inniya … anniya … IK
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬ sa-tajidunī AA
37:102, ... ‫ ا �ى‬... ‫ا �ى‬
‫ت ن‬ vowels
102, 102 A
‫��س��ج��د �ى‬
IA
innī … innī … sa-tajidunī
H
IK
AA → al-Yazīdī
a-ºunzila
N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī (Q. 54:25)
N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī madd
AA → al-Yazīdī → Ibn al-Yazīdī
ʿAbbas asked AA how to read this
AA → ʿAbbās
variant
ȧ-ºunzila
38:8 ‫ا �ن�ز ل‬ N → Abū Qurra
719

N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf (Q. 54:25) hamz

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

720
IA
A
a-unzila
H
K
IK
wa-aṣḥābu Laykata N
IA
iʿrāb
38:13 ‫��ة‬ �
‫وا �ص‬
�‫ح� ب� ��لى �ك‬ AA
hamz
A
wa-aṣḥābu ‿l-Aykati
H
K
IK
N
fawāqin AA
38:15
‫ف ق‬ IA vowels
� ‫�وا‬
A
H
fuwāqin
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
fatanāhu
AA → al-Khaffāf
IK
N
38:24
‫ف‬ IA Perf (ā↔nā)
‫�ت��نى�ه‬
fatannāhu AA
A
H
K
A → Shuʿba → K
li-tadabbarū The Recitation of AJ

Imperf (t↔y)
A → Ḥafṣ
38:29 ‫�لى�د �بروا‬ IK
li-yaddabbarū N
IA
AA Gemin
H
K
721

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

722
IK
al-Bazzī: I heard Abū l-Ikhrīṭ reciting
bi-s-suʾqi bi-s-suʾqi and sa‌ʾqayhā
IK → Abū l-Ikhrīṭ (→ al-Bazzī) (Q. 27:44), however, I do not follow
him and I do not articulate the hamza hamz
in both of these cases
IM: This should be the correct reading
IK → AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → ʿUbayd Allāh
bi-s-suʾūqi attributed to IK whereas bi-s-suʾqi has
‫ق‬ → IM
38:33 no linguistic grounds
�‫ب�ا �ل��سو‬
IK → al-Bazzī
N
IA
Long vwl
bi-s-sūqi AA
(±ū)
A
H
K
bi-naṣbin A → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra

bi-nuṣubin A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra The recitation of AJ
A → Ḥafṣ This is the known reading of Ḥafṣ
ʿUbayd b. al-Ṣabbāḥ → Abū l-ʿAbbās
al-muqriʾ → IM
A → Shuʿba
Appendix
38:41 �‫ب�ن��ص� ب‬ bi-nuṣbin IK vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
IA
AA
H
K
ʿabdanā IK
N
IA
Long vowel
38:45 ‫�ع ب��د ن�ا‬ AA
ʿibādanā (±ā)
A
H
bi-khāliṣati N
IK
IA
38:46 ‫خ‬
‫��ا � ص��ة‬ AA tanwīn
��‫ب ل‬ bi-khāliṣatin
A
H
K
723

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

724
IK
N
wa-l-Yasaʿa IA
38:48 ‫ا �ل��س‬ AA ḥarf (±l)
‫و يع‬
A
H
wa-l-Laysaʿa
K
IK
yūʿadūna
AA
N
‫ن‬ Imperf
38:53 �‫ىوع�د و‬ IA (Q. 50:32)
(t↔y)
tūʿadūna A
H
K
H
wa-ghassāqun K
A → Ḥafṣ
‫غ ق‬ IK
38:57 � ‫و��س�ا‬ (Q. 78:25) vowels
N
wa-ghasāqun AA
IA
Appendix
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
IK → Ḥammād b. Salama →
Muʾammal → Ibn Ḥanbal → ʿAbd Allāh
wa-ukharu b. Ḥanbal → IM
IK → Ḥammād b. Salama → Suwayd
b. ʿAmr → Abū Hishām → Ibn Ḥayyān
‫خ‬ → IM Long vwl
38:58 ‫وا �ر‬ IK (±ā) [PL]
N
IA
wa-ākharu
A
H
K
IK
‿l-ashrāri attakhadhnāhum
A
imāla
A Combination of the recitations by
‿l-ashrēri attakhadhnāhum IA
AA and Shuʿba
‿l-ashrǣri attakhadhnāhum N
38:62–3
‫ال �ش�� ا ا ت خ�ذ ن‬
�‫�� ه‬ ‫ا رر‬
‫م‬ AA
‿l-ashrēri ‿ttakhadhnāhum
K ḥarf (±ʾ)
Based on (Q. 2:3), H reads ‿l-ashrǣri
‿l-ashrǣri ‿ttakhadhnāhum H ‿ttakhadhnāhum, which is the reading
725
indicated by al-shāṭibiyya

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

726
IK
AA
sikhriyyan
IA
A
38:63 ‫��س‬
‫�خر �يا‬ vowels
N
sukhriyyan
H
K
IK
N
IA
bi-yadayya astakbarta AA
A hamz
H
K
38:75 ‫�� ت‬
� ‫ت‬ IK → Shibl → Muḥammad b. Ṣāliḥ →
‫ب�ي��د �ي� ا ��س�� ك بر‬
bi-yadayya ‿stakbarta
Makka → Shibl → Muḥammad b. Ṣāliḥ
→ Rawḥ → al-Ṣūfī → IM
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd →Muḥammad b.
Yaḥyā l-Quṭaʿī → al-Khazzāz → IM ḥarf (±ʾ)
bi-yadayya ºastakbarta Makka → Shibl → ʿUbayd
→Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā l-Quṭaʿī →
Appendix
al-Khazzāz → IM

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
AA
fa-l-ḥaqqa wa-l-ḥaqqa
IA
38:84 ‫�ق‬ �
‫ف��ا �ل‬ iʿrāb
�‫ح‬
‫ح ق� وا �ل‬
K
A
fa-l-ḥaqqu wa-l-ḥaqqa
H
wa-lī … inniya … baʿdiya …

N
massaniya … lī … laʿnatiya
wa-lī … inniya … baʿdī …
IK
massaniya … lī … laʿnatī
wa-lī … inniya … baʿdiya …
‫ن‬ AA
38:23, 32, ... ‫ ا �ى‬... ‫ولى‬ massaniya … lī … laʿnatī
‫ن‬ K taskīn
35, 41, 69,
‫ �م��س�ى‬... ‫ب��ع�د �ى‬ wa-lī … innī … baʿdī … vowels (prn)
78 ‫�ن ت‬ IA
‫ �ل�ع� �ى‬... ‫ لى‬... massaniya … lī … laʿnatī
A → Shuʿba
wa-liya … innī … baʿdī …
A → Ḥafṣ
massaniya … liya … laʿnatī
wa-lī … innī … baʿdī …
H
massanī … lī … laʿnatī
727

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

728
IK
K
yarḍahū N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿar → K
N → Ibn Jammāz
IA
N → Warsh
N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī vowels
N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ [Prn-h]
N → Qālūn → al-Ḥulwānī → Ibn Abī
39:7 ‫� �ه‬
‫ىر �ض‬ Mihrān
yarḍahu A → Ḥafṣ → Abū ʿUmāra ishmām al-rafʿ like H

H → Sulaym
More accurately, this reading should
be transcribed as yarḍahu since IM
describes it as ishmām al-ḍamm.
However, it is contrasted with ishbāʿ,
which makes it a regular short vowel
Appendix
ḍamma as opposed to wāw

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A → Ḥafṣ → [ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ] → Ibn

al-Yatīm al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak
AA → Shuāʿ → Abū ʿUbayd

AA → Shujāʿ
(Q. 3:75), (Q. 4:115)
A → Shuʿba
madd
al-Aʿmash → H
yarḍah
AA → al-Yazīdī → al-Sūsī
AA → al-Yazīdī → al-Dūrī
IK
li-yaḍilla
AA
N
Vrb frm
39:8 ‫�يل��ض‬ IA
‫� �ل‬ (I↔IV)
li-yuḍilla A
H
K
A
AA
amman
IA
729
39:9 ‫ن‬ K Gemin [±m]

��‫ا�م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

730
IK
aman N
H
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī

Makka → Shibl → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī waqf
ʿibādiya AA → al-Yazīdī → Ibn al-Yazīdī
AA → ʿAbbās An inquiry from ʿAbbās to AA
AA → ʿUbayd
Long vwl
ʿibād｡ AA → ʿUbayd This is the preferred reading of AA
39:17 ‫�ع ب��ا د‬ (±ī)
N
IA
ʿibād｡i
A vowels
H (Prn-Y)
K
IK
sāliman AA
A → Abān
Appendix
N Long vwl
39:29 ‫��س�ل�م�ا‬ salaman IA (±ā)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
H
ʿibādahu
K
IK
Long vwl
39:36 ‫�ع ب��د ه‬ N
(±ā) [PL]
ʿabdahu IA
AA
A
kāshifātun ḍurrahu … AA
mumsikātun raḥmatahu A → Shuʿba → K iʿrāb
IK
‫�ش‬�
... ‫ك��ف� � ت� �ض� ره‬ N
39:38 ‫ت‬ ‫ت‬
‫ح‬ ‫مم��س ك‬
‫�� ر �م��ه‬ kāshifātu ḍurrihi … IA
mumsikātu raḥmatihi A tanwīn
H
K
H
731
quḍiya ʿalayhā ‿l-mawtu iʿrāb

K
39:42 ‫�ق�ض�� ع��ل��ه�ا ا لم ت‬
�‫ى ي� و‬ IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

732
N
IA
qaḍā ʿalayhā ‿l-mawta Act↔Pass
AA
A
IK
N
yā-ʿibādiya IA
A taskīn
39:53 ‫�ي�ع ب��ا د �ى‬ AA → Abū Zayd vowels (prn)
AA
yā-ʿibādī H
K
IK
N
bi-mafāzatihim AA
‫ت‬ IA Long vwl
39:61 �‫�م��ف� �ا �ز ��ه‬
‫ب �م‬ A → Ḥafṣ (±ā) [PL]
A → Shuʿba
bi-mafāzātihim H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
ta‌ʾmurūniya N vowels
IA [Prn-Y]
Ibn Dhakwān: This is how I have it
ta‌ʾmurūnī in my notebook on the authority of
IA → Ayyūb → Ibn Dhakwān Gemin
Ayyūb, although in my memorization
it is ta‌ʾmurūnanī
‫ن‬ ‫ت‬ IA → Ibn Dhakwān
39:64 ‫�ا �مرو �ى‬ ta‌ʾmurūnanī
IA → Hishām
ta‌ʾmurūnniya IK
AA ḥarf (±n)
A
ta‌ʾmurūnnī
H
IK
N
futtiḥat … futtiḥat
AA
Vrb frm
39:71, 73 ��‫ف�ت‬
�‫ح� ت‬ IA
(I↔II)
A
futiḥat … futiḥat H
K
733

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

734
inniya … inniya … arādaniya N

IK
innī … inniya … arādaniya
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬ AA
39:11, ... ‫ ا �ى‬... ‫ا �ى‬ taskīn
‫ن‬ K
13, 38, vowels (prn)
‫ا را د �ى‬ innī … innī … arādaniya A
IA
innī … innī … arādanī H
IK

ḥa mīm N → al-Musayyabī → Muḥammad b.
Saʿdān
A → Shuʿba → K
A → Ḥafṣ
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → al-Qaṣabī → imāla
ḥa mīm Aḥmad b. Zuhayr Ibn Abī Khaythama
→ IM
AA → al-Yazīdī → Ibn al-Yazīdī → IM
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar →
Aḥmad b. Yazīd → al-Ḥasan al-Jammāl
ḥæ mīm
→ IM
Appendix
N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ → al-

40:1 �
�‫ح‬ Ushnānī → IM
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ → al-

Ushnānī → IM
N → Khārija b. Muṣʿab → Muḥammad
fatḥ ghayr mushbaʿ
b. Abān al-Balkhī
AA → ʿUbayd → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā
al-Quṭaʿī → al-Khazzāz → IM
AA → al-Yazīdī → Muḥammad b.
Saʿdān → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā al-
Quṭaʿī → IM
AA → ʿAbbās → ʿAbd al-Ghaffār →
shaklan bi-lā tarjama
ḥe mīm Ibrāhīm b. ʿAlī al-ʿUmarī → IM
AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā → Ibn Rūmī

taskīn

A → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī →

Khallād → Abū Bakr al-Narsī → IM
IA
H
K
AA → Hārūn
ḥ mīm
AA → ʿAbbās
735

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

736
N
kalimātu
IA
IK
Long vwl
40:6 �‫ك�ل�م� ت‬ AA
(±ā) [PL]
kalimatu A
H
K
N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways → Aḥmad ‿t-talāqī, ‿t-tanādi in waṣl mode;

‿t-talāq｡ī …‿t-tanād｡i
b. Ṣāliḥ ‿t-talāq, ‿t-tanād in waqf mode
N → Warsh → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ ‿t-talāqī, ‿t-tanādī in waṣl mode;
‿t-talāq｡ī …‿t-tanād｡ī
N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ ‿t-talāq, ‿t-tanād in waqf mode waqf
‿t-tanād｡ī N → Abū Qurra
N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways → Ibrāhīm
‿t-talāq｡i
al-Qūrasī
40:15, 32
‫ق‬ N → Ibn Jammāz
‫ ا �ل��ت ن��ا د‬... � ‫ا �تل��لا‬
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Abū Khulayd ‿t-talāqi, ‿t-tanādi in waṣl mode; Long vwl
‿t-talāq｡i … ‿t-tanād｡i
A ‿t-talāq, ‿t-tanād in waqf mode (±ī) [Y]
AA
IA
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
‿t-tanādī｡ AA → ʿAbbās
‿t-talāqī, ‿t-tanādī in waṣl mode;
‿t-talāqī｡ … ‿t-tanādī｡ IK
‿t-talāqī, ‿t-tanādī in waqf mode
wāqī, hādī in waqf mode; wāqin, hādin

wāq(ī｡/in) … hād(ī｡/in) IK waqf
in waṣl mode
N
Long vowel
IA
40:21, 33
‫ق‬ (±ī) [Y]
‫ �ه�ا د‬... � ‫وا‬ AA wāq, hād in waqf mode; wāqin, hādin
wāq｡in … hād｡in
A in waṣl mode
tanwīn
H
[waqf]
N
tadʿūna
IA
IK
40:20
�‫ى�د �عو‬
yadʿūna A
H
K
737

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

738
minkum IA Per the codices of Damascus

IK
N
�‫�م ن��ه‬ ḥarf (k↔h)
40:21 ‫�م‬ AA
minhum Per their regional codices [Prn]
�
‫�م ن�� ك‬ A
‫م‬
H
K
IK
N
wa-an
‫ن‬ AA
� ‫وا‬ IA
40:26 ‫ن‬ ḥarf (±ʾ)
�‫او ا‬ A
aw an H Per the Kūfan codices
K
N
yuẓhira … ‿l-fasāda AA iʿrāb
A → Ḥafṣ
‫ض‬ ‫ظ‬
��‫�ي��هر �يف� الا ر‬ IK
40:26
‫ا �ل��ف� ��س�ا د‬ IA
Vrb frm
yaẓhara … ‿l-fasādu A → Shuʿba
(I↔IV)
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
IA
A
ʿudhtu N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī
40:27 ‫ع��ذ ت‬
� (Q. 44:20) Assim
N → Warsh
N → Ibn Jammāz
ʿuttu AA
H
K
AA → ʿUbayd → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā IM: this is ikhtilās, which AA was

rajlun
l-Quṭaʿī → al-Khazzāz inclined to perform
IK
N
40:28 IA vowels
‫ر ج��ل‬
rajulun AA
A
H
K
739

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

740
qalbin AA
IK
N
40:35
‫ق‬ IA tanwīn
�‫��ل� ب‬ qalbi
A
H
K
fa-aṭṭaliʿa A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK
‫ف‬ N
40:37 ‫��ا ط��ل‬ iʿrāb
‫ع‬ fa-aṭṭaliʿu IA
AA
H
K
A
wa-ṣudda H
K
40:37 ‫و�ص�د‬ IK Act↔Pass
N
wa-ṣadda
AA
Appendix
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
A → Shuʿba → ʿAbd al-Jabbār al-
yudkhalūna
ʿUṭāridī → Abū Hishām
Hishām
‫خ ن‬ A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam → Khalaf

40:40 �‫ى�د ��لو‬ Act↔Pass
Aḥmad b. ʿUmar al-Wakīʿī
A → Ḥafṣ
yadkhulūna
N
IA
H
K
N
H
adkhilū
K
A → Ḥafṣ Verb frm
40:46 ‫ا د خ��لوا‬
IK (I↔IV)
AA
‿dkhulū
IA
741
A → Shuʿba

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

742
IK
N
IA
rusulukum uṣūl: rusul
40:50 �
‫ر��س��ل ك‬ A vowels
‫م‬ (Q. 2:285), (Q. 5:32), (Q. 7:101), (Q. 3:194)
H
K
ruslukum AA
IK
tanfaʿu AA
IA
40:52 �‫� نى��ف‬ N Imperf (t↔y)
‫ع‬
A
yanfaʿu
H
K
A
tatadhakkarūna H
K
40:58
‫�ت�ذ ن‬
‫ى�� ك‬
�‫�رو‬ IK Imperf (t↔y)
N
yatadhakkarūna
AA
Appendix
IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
sa-yudkhalūna A → Shuʿba
AA → ʿAbbās
A → Ḥafṣ
40:60
‫خ ن‬ AA Act↔Pass
�‫��سي��د ��لو‬
N
sa-yadkhulūna
IA
H
K
IK
IA
K
shiyūkhan N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways

H uṣūl: bu/iyūt, shu/iyūkh, ʿu/iyūn, ghu/
iyūb, and ju/iyūb
40:67 ‫ش��يو خ��ا‬ AA vowels
(Q. 2:189), (Q. 36:34), (Q. 5:109),
N → al-Musayyabī (Q. 24:31)
N → Qālūn
shuyūkhan N → Warsh
N → Ibn Jammāz
743

shuiyūkhan K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

744
dharūnī … inniya … inniya N

… inniya … laʿalliya … liya … AA
amriya … ‿dʿūnī … jāʾanī AA → al-Yazīdī
dharūnī … inniya … inniya
… inniya … laʿalliya … liya … AA → ʿAbbās
amrī … ‿dʿūnī … jāʾanī
dharūniya … inniya …
‫ن خ ف‬ ‫�ذ ن‬ inniya … inniya … laʿalliya
�� ‫خ ا �فى ا��ا‬...‫رو �ى ن‬ IK Contradiction on pages 571, 573
40:26, ... �� ‫ ا �ىف ا��ا‬... … liya … amrī … ‿dʿūniya
26, 30, 32, ‫ �ل�ع��ل‬... �� ‫ا��ا‬ ‫ا �ن خ‬
‫ى‬ … jāʾanī taskīn
‫ى‬
36, 41, 44, ‫ ا�مر�ى‬... ‫ لى‬... dharūniya … inniya … vowels
‫� ن‬
60, 66 ... ‫ ا د عو ن�ى‬... inniya … inniya … laʿalliya
N → Abū Qurra
‫ج��ا ء �ى‬ … liya … amriya … ‿dʿūniya
… jāʾanī
dharūnī … innī … innī …
innī … laʿallī … liya … amrī IA
… ‿dʿūnī … jāʾanī
dharūnī … innī … innī … A
innī … laʿallī … lī … amrī … H
‿dʿūnī … jāʾaniya K
IK
AA
N → Ibn Jammāz
Appendix
‫ت ن‬ N → al-Musayyabī
40:38 �‫ا �ب��عو‬ ‿ttabiʿūn｡ī waqf

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

‿ttabiʿūnī｡ IK
Long vwl
IA
‿ttabiʿūn｡i (±ī) [Y]
A
H
K
IK
naḥsātin N
AA
‫ن‬
41:16 �
�
‫ح��س�ا ت‬
� IA vowels
A
naḥisātin
H
K
naḥshuru aʿdāʾa N
IK iʿrāb
IA
41:19 ‫�ش‬‫ى‬
‫ح��ر ا ع�د ا ء‬ AA
yuḥsharu aʿdāʾu Imperf (n↔y)
A
H
745
Act↔Pass
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

746
IK
IA
arnā
A → Shuʿba (Q. 2:128), (Q. 7:143), (4:153)
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū l-Rabīʿ
A → Ḥafṣ
41:29 ‫ا رن�ا‬ Hishām: arnā is wrong, it should be vowels
IA → Hishām
arinā
arinā N
H
K
arinā AA
‿lladhaynni IK
N
IA
41:29 ‫�ذ ن‬ AA Gemin
�‫ا �ل� �ي‬ ‿lladhayni
A
H
K
IK
N
IA
Appendix
Vrb frm
‫� ن‬ A
41:40 �‫ح�د و‬��‫ى��ل‬ yulḥidūna (Q. 7:180) (I↔IV)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
K
yalḥadūna H
IK
AA
ȧ-ºaʿjamiyyun N hamz
IA
41:44 ‫�ع‬
‫ا ج��مى‬ A → Ḥafṣ
H
a-aʿjamiyyun K madd
A → Shuʿba
N
thamarātin IA
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba Long vwl
41:47 ‫�ث�م ت‬
�‫ر‬ IK (±ā) [PL]
thamaratin AA
H
K
747

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

748
wa-nāʾa IA → Ibn Dhakwān

imāla
AA on the pattern of naʿā
AA → al-Yazīdī
AA → ʿAbbās
wa-na‌ʾā
IK
N
41:51 ‫و�نى�ا‬
A
H → Sulaym → Khallād (Q. 17:83) Root
H → Sulaym → Khalaf (nāʾa↔na‌ʾā)
wa-neʾē
K
H → Sulaym → al-Dūrī → Abū l-Zaʿrāʾ
wa-na‌ʾē → IM
N
shurakāʾī … rabbiya
AA
N → al-Musayyabī
IA taskīn
41:47, 50 � ‫�ش��ر‬
‫ ر ب�ى‬... ‫كا �ى‬ shurakāʾī … rabbī A vowels (prn)
H
K
Appendix
shurakāʾiya … rabbī IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
yūḥā IK
N
IA
42:3 ‫ىو�حى‬ AA (Q. 12:109) Act↔Pass
yūḥī
A
H
K
IK
IA Imperf (t↔y)
takādu … yatafaṭṭarna
H
‫��اد ا �ل��س��م ت‬ A → Ḥafṣ
� �‫ى ك‬
42:5 ‫نو‬
‫�ف‬ ‫ت‬ N
�‫�ى�� طر‬ yakādu … yatafaṭṭarna

K Vrb frm
AA (V↔VII)
takādu … yanfaṭirna A → Shuʿba
IK
AA
yabshuru
H
‫ش‬ Vrb frm
42:23 ‫ي��ب��ر‬ K (Q. 3:39)
(I↔II)
N
749
yubashshiru IA
A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

750
IK
N
yafʿalūna A → Shuʿba
‫�ف ن‬ IA
42:25 �‫ى�� ع��لو‬ Imperf (t↔y)
AA
A → Ḥafṣ
tafʿalūna H
K
Per the codices of Madīna and

N
bi-mā al-Shām
IA
‫ب�م�ا‬ IK
42:30 ‫ف‬ ḥarf (±f)
‫�ب�ما‬ AA
fa-bi-mā A
H
K
N
‿l-jawār｡ī
AA waqf
‿l-jawārī｡ IK
42:32 ‫ا �جل�وا ر‬ IA
A
‿l-jawār｡i Long vwl (±ī)
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
wa-yaʿlamu
IA
IK
42:35 ‫��ع��ل‬ AA iʿrāb
‫وي م‬ wa-yaʿlama A
H
K
IK
N
kabāʾira IA
Long vwl
42:37 �‫ك‬
‫��ب�ى�ىر‬ A (Q. 53:32)
(±ā) [PL]
AA
H
kabīra
K
N
yursilu … fa-yūḥī
IA
iʿrāb
IA → Ayyūb → Ibn Dhakwān
‫ف‬ IK
42:51 ‫�ير��س�ل ر��سولا ��يو�حى‬ AA
yursila … fa-yūḥiya
A
iʿrāb
H
751

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

752
IK
N
ummi A
43:4 ‫ا‬ AA vowels
‫م‬
IA
H
immi
K
IK
AA
an
A
43:5
‫ن‬ IA ḥarf (an↔in)
�‫ا‬
N
in H
K
IK
N
mihādan
AA
Long vwl
43:10 ‫��م�ه�د ا‬ IA (Q. 20:53)
(±ā) [PL]
A
mahdan H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
takhrujūna K
IA
43:11
‫تخ ن‬ IK Act↔Pass
�‫�ر�ج�و‬
N
tukhrajūna
AA
A
IK
Vrb frm
N
(I↔II)
yansha‌ʾu A → Shuʿba
AA
43:18 ‫ي��ن ش��وا‬
IA
H Act↔Pass
yunashsha‌ʾu K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
ʿinda N
IA
Root
43:19 ‫�ع�ى�د‬ A
(ʿnd↔ʿbd)
AA
ʿibādu
H
753

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

754
N
a-ºushhidū
A → al-Mufaḍḍal Vrb frm
ȧ-ºushhidū N → al-Musayyabī (I↔IV)
IK
43:19 ‫ا �ش��ه�د وا‬ IA Act↔Pass
AA ḥarf (±ʾ)
a-shahidū
A hamz
H
madd
K
IA
qāla
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
‫ق‬ IK Tense [Long
43:24
‫��ل‬ N vwl ±ā]
qul
AA
H
K
IK
saqfan
AA
N Long vwl
Appendix
43:33 ‫��س��ق��ف� �ا‬ suqufan A (±ā) [PL]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
H
K
A
lammā H
IA → Hishām
IA → Ibn Dhakwān ḥarf (lamā↔
43:35 ‫لم�ا‬ IK lammā)
lamā N
AA
K
IK
N
jāʾānā
IA
A → Shuʿba Perf (a↔ā)
43:38 ‫ج��ا ء ن�ا‬ AA [Long vwl±ā]
H
jāʾanā
K
A → Ḥafṣ
755

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

756
innakum IA
IK
N
ḥarf (inna↔
43:39 �
‫نا� ك‬ AA
‫م‬ annakum anna)
A
H
K
IK
K hamz
wa-sal
AJ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
Shayba → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K
43:45 AA (Q. 4:32), (Q. 10:94), (Q. 17:101)
‫و��س�ل‬
N
ḥarf (±ʾ)
wa‿sʾal A
IA
H
yā-ayyuh｡u IA vowels
IK [Prn-h]
N (Q. 24:31), (Q. (Q. 55:31)
yā-ayyuh｡a
A waqf
Appendix
43:49 ‫ي�اي��ه‬ H

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
yā-ayyuh(a/ā｡) K → Muḥammad b. Saʿdān → yā-ayyuhā in waqf mode; yā-ayyuha in
Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā l-Warrāq → IM waṣl mode
aswiratun A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
IA Long vwl
43:53
‫ا ��س �ة‬
‫ور‬ asāwiratun AA (±ā) [PL]
A
H
K
H
sulufan
K
IK
43:56 ‫��س��فل� �ا‬ N vowels
salafan IA
AA
A
N
757
yaṣuddūna IA
‫ن‬ K
43:57 �‫�ي��ص�د و‬ vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

758
IK
AA
yaṣiddūna
A
H
A
a-ālihatunā H
K madd
AA IM: The value of three alifs
N
a-ā̇lihatunā
IA
43:58 ‫ا ��ل�ه��ت ن��ا‬ IK hamz
N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ: The value of two alifs
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUmar al-
a-ºālihatunā Dūrī → Ibn ʿAbdūs → IM
N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways → Aḥmad ḥarf (±ʾ)
Doubt from Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ (urānī )
b. Ṣāliḥ
ālihatunā N → Warsh → X → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ bi-ghayr istifhām
N
IA vowels
yā-ʿibād｡ī
AA [Prn-Y]
AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā → Ibn Rūmī
Appendix
yā-ʿibād｡iya A → Shuʿba
waqf
43:68 ‫�ي�ع ب��ا د‬ A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
yā-ʿibād｡i H Long vwl
K (±ī) [Y]
yā-ʿibādī｡ AA → al-Yazīdī → Ibn al-Yazīdī
N
tashtahīhi IA
A → Ḥafṣ
‫ت‬ IK
‫� ش��ت��هي��ه‬
43:71 ‫تش ت‬ Per the regional codices ḥarf (±h)
AA
�‫��هي‬
tashtahī H
K
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
ūrithtumūhā
A
‫ث�ت‬ IA
43:72 ‫ا ور�مو�ه�ا‬ (Q. 7:43) Assim
AA
ūrittumūhā H
K
759

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

760
N
AA
turjaʿūna
IA
43:85
‫ن‬ A Imperf (t↔y)
�‫ىر ج� ��عو‬
IK
yurjaʿūna H
K
A
wa-qīlihi
H
‫ق‬ IK
43:88 ‫و�ي��ل�ه‬ iʿrāb
N
wa-qīlahu
IA
AA
K
N
IA → Hishām
taʿlamūna
al-Khaffāf: both taʿlamūna and
AA → al-Khaffāf
yaʿlamūna are acceptable
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
Appendix
IK
‫ن‬ AA
43:89 �‫ى�ع�ل�مو‬ yaʿlamūna Imperf (t↔y)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
al-Khaffāf: both taʿlamūna and
AA → al-Khaffāf
yaʿlamūna are acceptable
N
taḥtiya AA
IK → al-Bazzī
‫ت‬ IK → al-Qawwās vowels
43:51 �
‫�ت‬
‫ح�ى‬ A [Prn-Y]
taḥtī H
IA
N
IA
wa‿ttabiʿūn｡i A waqf
H
43:61
‫ت ن‬ K
�‫وا �ب��عو‬
N → Ibn Jammāz Long vwl
wa‿ttabiʿūn｡ī
IK (±ī)
761
AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

762
IK
N
rabbu
AA
IA
44:7 �‫ر ب‬ (Q. 73:9), (Q. 78:37) iʿrāb
A → Shuʿba
H
rabbi
K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
IA
A
ʿudhtu N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī
44:20 ‫ع��ذ ت‬
� (Q. 40:27) Assim
N → Warsh
N → Ibn Jammāz
ʿuttu AA
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
yaghlī
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
‫غ‬ AA
44:45 Imperf (t↔y)
‫ى��لى‬ IA
taghlī
N
H
K
IK
N
fa‿ʿtulūhu
IA
AA → ʿUbayd
A
44:47 ‫ف��ا �عت��لوه‬ vowels
AA
H
fa‿ʿtilūhu
K
AA → ʿUbayd
annaka K
IK
763
N ḥarf (inna↔
44:49 ‫ا ن��ك‬ innaka IA anna)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

764
AA
A
H
N
muqāmin
IA
IK
44:51 ‫�م��ق�ا‬ AA vowels
‫م‬
maqāmin A
H
K
N
inniya … lī AA
IK
‫ن‬ inniya … liya N → Warsh vowels
44:19, 21 ‫ لى‬... ‫ا �ى‬ IA [Prn-Y]
A
innī … lī
H
K
tarjumūn｡ī … fa‿ʿtazilūn｡ī N → Warsh Recitation of Y

Appendix
IK waqf
‫ف ت�ز ن‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ت‬ N
44:20, 21 �‫ ��ا ع�� لو‬... �‫�ر�ج �مو‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
AA
Long vwl (±ī)
tarjumūn｡i … fa‿ʿtazilūn｡i A
[Y]
H
K
IK
N
iʿrāb
āyātun … āyātun AA
45:4,5 �‫اي� ت‬ IA
A
H iʿrāb
āyātin … āyātin
K
IK
N
yuʾminūna A → Ḥafṣ
45:6
�‫ىو�م ن��و‬
IA
H
tuʾminūna
K
765

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

766
IK
alīmun
A → Ḥafṣ
N
IA
45:11 �‫ا �ل‬ iʿrāb
‫يم‬ AA
alīmin
A
H
K
IK
N
li-yajziya
A
45:14 ‫ج�ز‬ AA Imperf (n↔y)
‫�ل�ى�� ى‬
IA
li-najziya H
K
IK
N
sawāʾun AA
IA
45:21 ‫��سوا ء‬ iʿrāb
A → Shuʿba
H
sawāʾan K
Appendix
A → Ḥafṣ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
ghashwatan vowels
K
IK
45:23
‫غ� ش �ة‬ N (Q. 2:7)
‫��و‬ Long vwl
ghishāwatan IA
(±ā)
AA
A
wa-s-sāʿata H
IK
N
45:32 ‫ا �ل��س�ا ع��ة‬
‫و‬ IA iʿrāb
wa-s-sāʿatu
AA
A
K
IK
AA
yukhrajūna N
45:35
‫خ ن‬ IA Act↔Pass
�‫ي�ر�ج�و‬
A
H
767
yakhrujūna
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

768
IK → Qunbul
AA
li-yundhira A
‫ن �ذ‬ H
46:12 ‫�ل�ى�� ر‬ Imperf (t↔y)
K
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ → al-Khuzāʿī → IM
li-tundhira N
IA
IK
N Long vwl
ḥusnan
AA (±ā)
46:15 �
‫ح��سن��ا‬ IA
A
iḥsānan H ḥarf (±ʾ)
K
A
IA
kurhan … kurhan
H
K (Q. 4:19), (Q. 9:53)
46:15 ‫�ر�ه�ا‬ ‫ك‬
‫ ك‬... ‫�ر�ه�ا‬ IK vowels
N
karhan … karhan AA
Appendix
Ibn Dhakwān: This is how

IA → Ibn Dhakwān
I memorized it

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N Imperf (n↔y)
yutaqabbalu … yutajāwazu AA
IA
46:16 ‫ ى��ت��ا �ز‬... ��‫�تى��ق‬
‫ج و‬ ‫بل‬ A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ Act↔Pass
nataqabbalu … natajāwazu H
K
N
uffin
A → Ḥafṣ
IK iʿrāb
uffa
‫ف‬ IA
46:17 �� ‫ا‬ AA
H
uffi
K tanwīn
A → Shuʿba
IK
wa-li-yuwaffiyahum AA
A
46:19
‫ف‬ N Imperf (n↔y)
�‫��لى ��ه‬
‫و و ي� م‬ IA
wa-li-nuwaffiyahum
H
769

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

770
ȧ-ºadhhabtum IK
madd
a-adhhabtum IA
N
‫�ذ‬ ḥarf (±ʾ)
46:20 �‫ا �ه� ت‬ A
‫�ب م‬ AA
adhhabtum
H hamz
K
IK
iʿrāb
N
tarā … masākinahum IA
Imperf (t↔y)
46:25 �‫ىر�ى الا �م��س��ك ن��ه‬ AA
‫�م‬
K
A Act↔Pass
yurā … masākinuhum
H
N
awziʿnī … a-taʿidāniniya …
N → Warsh → Mawwās → Muḥammad
inniya … wa-lākinniya
b. ʿAbd al-Raḥīm
awziʿniya … a-taʿidāniniya …
inniya … wa-lākinniya Contradiction between pages 596
‫ت نن‬ ‫�ز ن‬ IK → al-Bazzī
Appendix
46:15, 17, ‫ ا��ع�د ا��ى‬...‫ا و �ع�ى ن‬ and 599 vowels

21, 23
‫ن‬ N → Abū Qurra [Prn-Y]
‫ و�ل�ك�ى‬... ‫ ا �ى‬...

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
awziʿnī … a-taʿidāniniya …
IK → al-Qawwās
innī … wa-lākinnī
awziʿnī … a-taʿidāninī …
AA
inniya … wa-lākinniya
awziʿnī … a-taʿidāninī … innī A
… wa-lākinnī K Not mentioned by IM
AA
qutilū
A → Ḥafṣ Vrb frm
A → Shuʿba (I↔III)
‫قت‬ IK
47:4 ‫��لوا‬
N
qātalū
IA
Act↔Pass
H
K
In the Meccan codex, it is indicated

asinin IK
being maftūḥat al-alif
N
IA Long vwl
47:15 ‫ن‬
�‫ا ��س‬ AA (±ā) [Ptcpl]
āsinin
A
H
771

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

772
anifan IK → al-Bazzī → Muḍar → IM

N
IA Long vwl
47:16 ‫نا��ف� �ا‬ ānifan AA (±ā) [Ptcpl]
A
H
K
ʿasītum N
IK
IA
47:22 �‫�ع��س�� ت‬ AA (Q. 2:246) vowels
‫يم‬ ʿasaytum
A
H
K
wa-umliya AA
IK
N
47:25 IA Act↔Pass
‫وا �م��لى‬ wa-amlā
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
isrārahum K
A → Ḥafṣ
IK Tense
47:26 ‫ا ��س ا �ه‬ [Noun↔
‫ررم‬ N
Verb]
asrārahum AA
IA
A → Shuʿba
wa-la-yabluwannakum …
A → Shuʿba
yaʿlama ... wa-yabluwa
A → Ḥafṣ Imperf (n↔y)
IK
47:31 ‫ و�بى��لوا‬... �
‫و�ل�ى ب��ل نو� ك‬ N
‫م‬ wa-la-nabluwannakum …
IA Imperf (n↔y)
naʿlama ... wa-nabluwa
AA
H
Imperf (n↔y)
K
IK
AA
‿s-salmi N
773
IA
47:35 ‫ا �ل��س��ل‬ A → Ḥafṣ vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
‫م‬
(cont.)

774
K
H
‿s-silmi
A → Shuʿba
AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr Contradiction with (Q. 3:66)

A
madd
hā-antum IA
H
K
47:38 �‫�ه�ا ن� ت‬ IK
‫م‬ ha-antum
N hamz
hā-ºantum
AA
hā-ntum Unclear if it is read hā-ºantum
N → Qālūn
IK
‿s-sawʾi … ‿s-sūʾi AA
Ibn Muḥayṣin
48:6 ‫د ا ىر�ة ا �ل��سوء‬ N (Q. 9:98) vowels
IA
‿s-sawʾi… ‿s-sawʾi
A
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
li-yuʾminū … wa-yuʿazzirūhu IK
wa-yuwaqqirūhu Imperf (t↔y)
AA
wa-yusabbiḥūhu
AA → Hārūn al-Aʿwar → ʿUbayd
‫ وى�ع�ز روه‬... ‫��لىو�م ن��وا‬ Imperf (t↔y)
48:9 N
‫حوه‬
��‫ وىو�قروه وى��س ب‬li-tuʾminū … wa-tuʿazzirūhu IA
wa-tuwaqqirūhu Imperf (t↔y)
A
wa-tusabbiḥūhu
H
Imperf (t↔y)
K
ʿalayhu A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba Using qiyās
A
IK
vowels
48:10 ‫ع��يل��ه‬ N
ʿalayhi [Prn-h]
IA
AA
H
775

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

776
IK
N
fa-sa-nuʾtīhi IA
A → Abān
‫ف‬ AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd
48:10 ‫��س�ىوت�ي��ه‬ Imperf (n↔y)
AA
AA → ʿUbayd
fa-sa-yuʾtīhi A
H
K
H
ḍurran
K
IK
48:11 ‫�ض� را‬ N vowels
ḍarran IA
AA
A
H
kalima
K
IK Long vwl
Appendix
48:15 ‫ك�ل‬
� N (±ā)
‫م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
kalāma AA
A
N
nudkhilhu … nuʿadhdhibhu
IA
IK
48:17
‫�ذ‬ AA Imperf (n↔y)
‫ ى�ع� ب��ه‬... ‫ى�د خ��ل�ه‬
yudkhilhu … yuʿadhdhibhu A
H
K
yaʿmalūna AA
IK
N
48:24
‫ن‬ IA Imperf (n↔y)
�‫ى�عم�لو‬ taʿmalūna
A
H
K
IK
shaṭa‌ʾahu
IA
777
N
48:29 ‫�ش��ط�ى�ه‬ shaṭʾahu AA vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

778
A
H
K
fa-azarahu IA on the pattern of faʿalahu

IK
N
Vrb frm
48:29 ‫ف��ا �ز ره‬ AA
fa-āzarahu (I↔III)
A
H
K
IK
(Q. 38:33)
IK → Abū l-Ikhrīṭ
suʾqihi
IK → Abū l-Ikhrīṭ → al-Bazzī → Muḍar al-Bazzī: Abū l-Ikhrīṭ used to articulate
b. Muḥammad → IM the hamza but I do not
N
IA
48:29
‫ق‬ AA hamz
‫��سو��ه‬
A
sūqihi H (Q. 38:33)
K
IK → al-Bazzī
Appendix
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
fa-tabayyanū AA
‫ف‬ Root (b-y-n)
49:6 ‫�ت��ى�ى�ىوا‬ IA
↔ (th-b-t)
A
H
fa-tathabbatū
K
IA → Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith → Ayyūb b.

ikhwatikum Tamīm → Ibn Dhakwān → Aḥmad b.
This is the recitation of Y
Yūsuf → IM
vowels
IA → Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith → Ayyūb b.
Tamīm → Suwayd → Hishām

IK
49:10 �
‫ا �خ�وى ك‬
‫م‬ N
akhawaykum
AA
A ibdāl (t↔y)
H
K
mayyitan N
IK
779
IA
49:12 ‫�مي��ت��ا‬ maytan AA vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

780
A
H
K
ya‌ʾlitkum AA
IK
N
Root (ʾ-l-t) ↔
49:14 �
‫ي�� تل� ك‬ IA
‫م‬ yalitkum (l-y-t)
A
H
K
IK
yaʿmalūna
A → Abān
N
‫ن‬ IA
AA
taʿmalūna
A
H
K
N
yaqūlu
Appendix
A → Shuʿba
50:30
‫�ق‬ IK Imperf (n↔y)
‫ى�� ول‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
AA
naqūlu A
H
K
yūʿadūna IK
AA
N
50:32
‫ن‬ IA (Q. 38:53) Imperf (t↔y)
�‫ىوع�د و‬ tūʿadūna
A
H
fa-naqabū AA → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī

AA
IK
‫ف‬ N Vrb Frm
50:36 ‫� ن��ق��بوا‬
fa-naqqabū IA (I↔II)
A
H
781

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

782
IK
wa-idbāra N
H
50:40 ‫وا د �بر‬ AA vowels
IA
wa-adbāra
A
K
‿l-munādī｡ IK ‿l-munādī in waqf mode

N ‿l-munād in waqf mode; ‿l-munādī in
‿l-munād｡ī
AA waṣl mode
Long vwl (±ī)
50:41 ‫ا لم ن��ا د‬ IA
[Y]
A ‿l-munād in waqf mode; ‿l-munādi in
‿l-munād｡i
H waṣl mode
K
IK
tashshaqqaqu N
IA
50:44 ‫ت ش �ق ق‬ AA Gemin
� ��
A
tashaqqaqu
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
read as such when AA performs

AA
wa-dh-dhāriyādh_dharwan assimilation
H
AA → ʿAbbās
51:1
‫�ذ‬ ‫�ذ‬ IK Assim
‫وا �ل� ري� ت� روا‬
N
wa-dh-dhāriyāti dharwan
A
IA
K
IK
N
mithla AA
‫ث‬ IA
51:23 iʿrāb
‫�م��ل‬ A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
mithlu H
K
H
silmun
K
IK
‫ق‬ Long vwl
51:25 ‫��ا ل ��س��ل‬ N
‫م‬ (±ā)
salāmun IA
783
AA
A

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

784
‿ṣ-ṣaʿqatu K
IK
N
Long vwl
51:44 ‫ا � ص�ع��ق��ة‬
��‫ل‬ IA
‿ṣ-ṣāʿiqatu (±ā)
AA
A
H
IK
N
wa-qawma
IA
51:46
‫ق‬ A iʿrāb
�
‫و وم‬
AA
wa-qawmi H
K
IK
Long vwl
wa‿ttabaʿathum A
(±ā) [PL]
dhurriyyatuhum … H
dhurriyyatahum K
N → Khārija
Long vwl
‫�ذ‬ wa‿ttabaʿathum (±ā) [PL]
�‫�ت��ه‬ �‫ا ت��ع��ىه‬
Appendix
‫و ب � �ذم ري � م‬ dhurriyyatuhum … N
52:21 �‫ �ت��ه‬... dhurriyyātihim
‫ري � م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
wa‿ttabaʿathum
dhurriyyātuhum … IA iʿrāb
dhurriyyātihim
wa-atbaʿnāhum
Vrb frm
dhurriyyātihim … AA
(IV–VIII)
dhurriyyātihim
alitnāhum IK
N
IA
52:21 �‫ا �ل��ت ن��ه‬ AA vowels
‫�م‬ alatnāhum
A
H
IK
laghwa … ta‌ʾthīma
AA
iʿrāb
N
52:23 ��‫لا �ل غ��و ف��ه�ا ل تا ث‬ IA
‫ي� وا � يم‬
laghwun … ta‌ʾthīmun A
H tanwīn
K
785

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

786
IK
AA
IA
innahu
A ḥarf (inna↔
52:28 ‫ا ن��ه‬ H anna)
N → Ibn Jammāz
N
annahu
K
Hishām: it is written with ṣād but

pronounced with sīn
‿l-musayṭirūna K → al-Farrāʾ
IK
‫ن‬ N ibdāl
52:37 �‫ا لم��صي��طرو‬ IA (s↔ṣ↔z)
(Q. 88:22)
‿l-muṣayṭirūna AA
A
K
‿l-muṣzayṭirūna H
IA
yuṣʿaqūna
A
IK
Appendix
‫�ق ن‬ N
52:45 �‫�ي��ص�ع�� و‬ Act↔Pass

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
yaṣʿaqūna H
K
In all the verse endings of this sūra,

IK the alif maqṣūra is read in fatḥ
without imāla
hawā
A → Shuʿba reads (Q. 53:11) ra‌ʾē and
A
(Q. 53:13) ra‌ʾēhu
53:1 IA imāla
‫�هو�ى‬
N
hawǣ AA → ʿUbayd → al-Quṭaʿī reads
AA
(Q. 53:7) ‿l-aʿlē and (Q. 53:8) fa-tadallē
H
hawē
K
IK
‿l-aʿlā A
IA
N
53:7 ‿l-aʿlǣ imāla
‫الا ع��لى‬ AA
H
‿l-aʿlē K
787

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

788
IK
fa-tadallā A
IA
N
53:8 ‫فت‬ fa-tadallǣ imāla
‫��د لى‬ AA
H
fa-tadallē K
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
IK
N
‫ذ‬ kadhaba AA Vrb frm
53:11 ‫ك‬
�‫�� ب‬ A (I↔II)
H
K
kadhdhaba IA → Hishām
IK
ra‌ʾā A → Ḥafṣ
IA
N
Appendix
ræʾǣ
53:11 ‫را �ى‬ AA (Q. 53:13) imāla

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
reʾē K
A → Shuʿba
H
a-fatamrūnahu
K
IK
Vrb frm
53:12 ‫ا �ف�ت�مرون��ه‬ N
(I↔III)
a-fatumārūnahu IA
AA
A
wa-Manāʾata IK
N
IA
53:20
‫� ن �ة‬ AA hamz
‫و م��و‬ wa-Manāta
A
H
K
ḍiʾzā IK
N
789
IA
53:22 ‫�ض ى�ز‬
‫� � �ى‬ ḍīzā AA hamz

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

790
A
H
K
H
kabīra
K
IK
Long vwl
53:32 ‫�ك��ىر‬ N
‫�ب‬ (±ā) [PL]
kabāʾira IA
AA
A
IK
A
ʿĀdani ‿l-ūlā IA
H hamz
K
53:50 ‫ع�ا د ا الا ولى‬ AA
N → Ibn Jammāz
ʿĀdal_lūlā N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar
N → Warsh
Appendix
N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī Assim

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N → Abū Bakr b. Abī Uways → Aḥmad

b. Ṣāliḥ
ʿĀdal_lūʾlā N → Qālūn → Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ
al-Qūrasī
IK
N
IA
wa-Thamūdan AA
‫ث‬ A → Shuʿba → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī
53:51 ‫و�مود ا‬ tanwīn
A → Shuʿba → K
K
H
wa-Thamūda A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
N → Qālūn
‿d-dāʿ｡i … ‿d-dāʿ｡ī N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī
791
al-Qūrasī Long vwl (±ī)

54:6, 8 ‫ ا ��د ا‬... ‫ا �ل�د ا‬ N → Ismāʿīl b. Abī Uways [Y]
‫ل ع‬ ‫ع‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

792
N → Ibn Jammāz
‿d-dāʿ｡ī … ‿d-dāʿ｡ī
N → Warsh
AA
IA
A
‿d-dāʿ｡i … ‿d-dāʿ｡i
H
K
N
IA
AA
nukurin
54:6 �‫ن� ك‬ A vowels
‫�ر‬
H
K
nukrin IK
IK
N
khushshaʿan
A
Long vwl
54:7 ‫�خ� ش��ع�ا‬ IA
(±ā) [PL]
AA
khāshiʿan H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
AA
fa-fataḥnā Vrb frm
54:11 ‫ح ن��ا‬
��‫ف��ف� ت‬ A
(I↔II)
H
K
fa-fattaḥnā IA
wa-nudhur｡ī N → Warsh This is from the Recitation of Y

N
IK
54:16, 18, IA
‫ن�ذ‬ Long vwl (±ī)
21, 30, 37, ‫و� ر‬ wa-nudhur｡i AA [Y]

39
A
H
K
IK
AA → al-Yazīdī
a-ºulqiya
N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn al-Musayyabī (Q. 38:8)
N → Qālūn → al-Qāḍī hamz
793
AA → ʿAbbās ʿAbbas directly inquiring from AA

54:25
‫�ق‬ ȧ-ºulqiya N → Abū Qurra
‫ا �ل��ى‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

794

IA
A
a-ulqiya madd
H
K
IA
sa-taʿlamūna H
A → Ḥafṣ
54:26
‫ن‬ A → Shuʿba Imperf (t↔y)
�‫��س�ى�ع�ل�مو‬
IK
sa-yaʿlamūna
N
AA
K
wa-l-ḥabba dhā ‿l-ʿaṣfi

IA
wa-r-rayḥāna
iʿrāb
IK
‫� �ذ �ذ‬ ‫وا �ل‬ wa-l-ḥabbu dhū ‿l-ʿaṣfi N
55:12
‫حف� ب� و\ ا‬
‫� ن‬
‫ا‬
�‫ح‬� �
‫ل‬ ‫ا‬ �
� ‫ا �ل�ع��ص و ر ي‬ wa-r-rayḥānu AA
iʿrāb
A
wa-l-ḥabbu dhū ‿l-ʿaṣfi H
iʿrāb (ū↔ī)
Appendix
wa-r-rayḥāni K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
yukhraju minhumā N
‿l-luʾluʾu wa-l-marjānu AA
iʿrāb
yukhriju minhumā ‿l-luʾluʾa
wa-l-marjāna
AA → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Abū Hishām Imperf (n↔y)
‫ن‬ ‫خ‬ nukhriju minhumā ‿l-luʾluʾa
‫ي�ر�ج �م��ه��م�ا ا �ل��لو�لو‬ AA → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī → Abū Hishām
55:22 wa-l-marjāna (Q. 7:25) Act↔Pass
‫ن‬ → Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā l-muqriʾ → IM
� ‫وا ل�مر ج��ا‬
IK
A
yakhruju minhumā Vrb frm
IA
‿l-luʾluʾu wa-l-marjānu (I↔IV)
H
K
IK
N
AA
IA
‿l-munsha‌ʾātu
K A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam read both Act Ptcpl↔
55:24 ‫ا لم��ن ش��ى�ا ت‬
� A → Ḥafṣ ways Pass Ptcple
A → Ḥammād b. Salama → Ḥaramī
H
795
‿l-munshiʾātu

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

796
IK
N
Imperf (n↔y)
sa-nafrughu AA
‫�ف غ‬ IA
55:31 �‫��س�ى‬
�‫� ر‬ A
sa-yafraghu AA → Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī
vowels
H
sa-yafrughu
K
ayyuh｡u IA
IK waqf
N
ayyuh｡a
A
55:31 ‫اي��ه‬ H (Q. 24:31); (Q. 43:49)
AA
vowels
K
ayyuh(a/ā｡)
K → Abū Jaʿfar al-Ḍarīr Muḥammad b.
Saʿdān → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā → IM
shiwāẓun IK
N
IA
Appendix
55:35
‫�ش�� ا �ظ‬
‫و‬ shuwāẓun AA vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
IK
wa-nuḥāsin
AA
N
‫ن‬
55:35 �
�‫و‬
‫ح�ا ��س‬ IA iʿrāb
wa-nuḥāsun A
H
K
K → Abū l-Ḥārith → Muḥammad b.

yaṭmuthhunna … Yaḥyā l-Kisāʾī l-Ṣaghīr
yaṭmithhunna
K → Abū ʿUbayd
yaṭmithhunna … Any combination of kasr and rafʿ is
K → Abū ʿUbayd
yaṭmuthhunna permissible
vowels
K → Abū ʿUbayd
yaṭmuthhunna …
K → Abū l-Ḥārith → Salama b. ʿĀṣim → K was indifferent whether to read in
yaṭmuthhunna
Aḥmad b. Yaḥyā Thaʿlab → IM kasr or rafʿ
Any combination of kasr and rafʿ is
55:56, 74 ‫ث ن‬ ‫ث ن‬ K → Abū ʿUbayd
��‫ �ي��ط��م��ه‬... ��‫�ي��ط��م��ه‬ permissible
797
yaṭmithhunna … K → Abū l-Ḥārith → Salama b. ʿĀṣim → K was indifferent whether to read in

yaṭmithhunna Aḥmad b. Yaḥyā Thaʿlab → IM kasr or rafʿ

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

798
IK
N
IA
vowels
AA
A
H
dhū IA Per the codices of al-Shām

IK
‫�ذ‬ N
55:78 ‫و‬ AA iʿrāb (ū↔ī)
‫�ذ‬ dhī
Per the regional codices of Ḥijāz and
‫ا‬ A Iraq
H
K
IK
N
yunzafūna
AA
56:19
‫ن�ز ف ن‬ IA (Q. 37:47) Act↔Pass
�‫ى�� و‬
A
yunzifūna H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
wa-ḥūrun ʿīnun AA
IA
56:22 ‫ن‬ �‫و‬ iʿrāb
�‫حور ع��ي‬ A
wa-ḥūrin ʿīnin H
K
IK
IA
K
A → Ḥafṣ
N → Ibn Jammāz
ʿuruban N → Warsh
N → al-Musayyabī
56:37 ‫�عرب�ا‬
AA → al-Yazīdī vowels
ʿAbbās: I asked AA and he read ʿuruban.
AA → ʿAbbās When I asked him about ʿurban he said
that the Tamīm tribe says ʿurban
799
H
ʿurban A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

800
AA → Abū Zayd
AA → Shujāʿ b. Absī Naṣr
IM describes the softening of hamza

ȧ-ºdhā … ȧ-ºnnā AA as a yāʾ sākina to be pronounced like
ȧ-ydhā … ȧ-ynnā
a-ºdhā … a-ºnnā IK hamz
56:47
‫�ذ‬ (ȧ/a)-ºdhā … innā N regarding the value of madd. IM does
‫ ا ن�ا‬... ‫ا ى� ا‬
not give the details
a-idhā … innā K
A
madd
a-idhā … a-innā H
IA IA contradicts his uṣūl in this verse
N
aw
IA
IK
vowels
56:48 ‫ا و ا ب�ا ون�ا‬ A
(taskīn)
awa AA
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
sharba
IA
56:55 �‫�ش��ر ب‬ K vowels
N
shurba A
H
nuzluhum AA → ʿAbbās
IK
N
IA
56:56 �‫�ن�ز ��له‬ vowels
‫�م‬ nuzuluhum AA → al-Yazīdī

A
H
K
N
IA
AA
‫ق‬ qaddarnā Vrb frm
56:60 ‫��د رن�ا‬ A (Q. 15:60)
(I↔II)
H
K
801
qadarnā IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

802
a-innā A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
56:66 ‫ا ن�ا‬ hamz (±)
innā IA
AA
H
K
IK
N
bi-mawāqiʿi AA
‫ق‬ Long vwl
56:75 �� ‫�م‬ A
‫ب وع‬ (±ā) [PL]
IA
H
bi-mawqiʿi
K
takdhibūna A → al-Mufaḍḍal
A
IK
‫ت �ذ ن‬ N Verb frm
56:82 ‫�ك‬
�‫�� ب�و‬ tukadhdhibūna IA (I↔II)
AA
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
ukhidha mīthāqukum AA
IK Act↔Pass
N
57:8
‫خ �ذ‬ IA
�
‫ا�� مي��ث��ق ك‬
‫م‬ akhadha mīthāqakum
A
iʿrāb
H
K
IK
N
AA
‫كلا‬
�‫و‬ wa-kullan
57:10 A iʿrāb
‫ول‬‫ك‬
� H
K
wa-kullun IA Per the codices of al-Shām
fa-yuḍaʿʿifahu IA
iʿrāb
fa-yuḍaʿʿifuhu IK
fa-yuḍāʿifahu A
57:11
‫ف‬ AA
‫� �ع��ف� �ه‬
‫�ي��ض‬
Vrb frm
N
fa-yuḍāʿifuhu (II↔III)
H
803

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

804
anẓirūnā H
IK
N
‫ن‬ Vrb frm
57:13 ‫ا� ظ��رون�ا‬ IA
‿nẓurūnā (II↔V)
AA
A
K
tuʾkhadhu IA → Hishām
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
IK
‫خ �ذ‬ N
57:15 ��‫ىو‬ Imperf (t↔y)
yuʾkhadhu AA
A
H
K
N
nazala A → Ḥafṣ
Vrb frm
(I↔II)
A → Shuʿba
57:16 ‫�ن�ز ل‬ IK
nazzala
Appendix
IA
AA Act↔Pass

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
K
nuzzila AA → ʿAbbās
‿l-muṣaddiqīna IK
wa-l-muṣaddiqāti A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
‫ق‬ N
57:18 ‫ا لم��ص�د ق�� ن‬
�‫ي� وا لم��ص�د �� ت‬ Gemin
‿l-muṣṣaddiqīna IA
wa-l-muṣṣaddiqāti AA
H
K
atākum AA
IK
N
Vrb frm
57:23 �
‫تا� ك‬ IA
‫م‬ ātākum (I↔III)
A
H
K
805

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

806
H
bi-l-bakhali
K
IK
57:24 ‫�خ‬ N vowels
‫ب�ا �ل ب��ل‬
bi-l-bukhli IA
AA
A
N Per the codices of al-Shām and

‿llāha ‿l-ghaniyyu
IA al-Madīna
‫غن‬ ّٰ IK
57:24 ‫ا �ل��ل�ه ٰ �هو ا �ل��ى‬ AA ḥarf (±huwa)
‫ّ غن‬
‫ا �ل��ل�ه ا �ل��ى‬ ‿llāha huwa ‿l-ghaniyyu A Per the codices of Makka and Iraq
H
K
(Q. 24:2)
Qunbul: al-Bazzī was mistaken to read
ra‌ʾafatan IK → al-Bazzī both verses with taḥrīk: ra‌ʾafa, but
when I told him it was only as such in vowels
(Q. 24:2) he retracted his reading
IK → al-Bazzī
Appendix
N
57:27
‫ا ف��ة‬
‫ر‬ ra‌ʾfatan IA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
H
hamz
K
idrāj mode or prayer
rāfatan AA
The Recitation of AJ
IK Vrb frm
yaẓẓahharūna … (III↔V↔VI)
N
yaẓẓahharūna
AA
58:2,3
‫ن‬ ‫ظ‬ yuẓāhirūna … yuẓāhirūna A
�‫�ي��هرو‬
IA Gemin
yaẓẓāharūna … yaẓẓāharūna H
K
ummahātuhum A → al-Mufaḍḍal
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
58:2 �‫�م�ا �ه� ن ا ��مهت��ه‬ iʿrāb
‫� � �م‬ ummahātihum IA
AA
H
807

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

808
‿llāʾi
N
→ IM
AA
‿llāºi
→ IM
58:2
‫ا �لىى‬ N → Warsh
madd
IM: This is wrong
‿llāyyi IK → al-Bazzī → Ibn Mukhlad
(Q. 65:4); (Q. 33:4)
A
IA
‿llāʾī
H taskīn
K
wa-yantajūna H
IK
N
‫ن‬ Vrb frm
58:8 �‫و�ي�ى�ى��ج�و‬ IA
wa-yatanājawna (VI↔VII)
AA
A
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
li-yuḥzina N
IK
IA
‫ح�ز ن‬ Vrb frm
58:10 � ��‫�ل��ي‬ AA
li-yaḥzuna (I↔IV)
A
H
K
‿l-majālisi A
IK
N
Long vwl (±ā)
58:11 IA
‫ا لم��ج��ل��س‬ ‿l-majlisi [PL]

AA
H
K
IK
AA
H
‿nshizū fa‿nshizū K
A → ʿUrwa b. Muḥammad al-Asadī →
Just like yaʿkufūn
ʿAbd al-Jabbār b. ʿUṭārid (al-ʿUṭāridī)
809
‫فن‬ ‫ن‬
58:11 ‫ا � ش��ز وا ��ا � ش��ز وا‬ A → al-Aʿmash → IM IM: I asked al-Aʿmash vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

810
N
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
‿nshuzū fa‿nshuzū A → Shuʿba → al-Aʿshā
A → Shuʿba → Hārūn b. Ḥātim
A → Shuʿba → ʿUrwa b. Muḥammad
→ IM
Yaḥyā b. Ādam said he did not memo-
? Hishām
rize how A recited it
al-Wakīʿī
N
wa-rusuliya
IA
IK
58:21 AA vowels [Y]
‫ور��س��لى‬
wa-rusulī A
H
K
kutiba … ‿l-īmānu A → al-Mufaḍḍal

IK
Act↔Pass
Appendix
N
58:22 ‫ن‬ ‫�ت ف� �ق‬
�‫ك‬ kataba … ‿l-īmāna IA
��‫�� ب� ى ��لوب��ه�م الاي�م‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
iʿrāb
H
K
IK
N
‿r-ruʿba A
H
IA
‿r-ruʿuba
K
yukharribūna AA
IK
N
‫خ ن‬ Vrb frm
59:2 �‫ي�رب�و‬ IA
yukhribūna (II↔IV)
A
H
K
811

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

812
IK
jidārin
AA
N
Long vwl (±ā)
59:14 ‫ج��د ر‬ IA
[PL]
judurin A
H
K
IK
inniya N
AA
‫ن‬ IA
taskīn
59:16 ‫ا �ى‬ vowels (Y)
A
innī
H
K
IK
N
yufṣalu Act↔Pass
AA
‫�ف‬ A → al-Mufaḍḍal
60:3
‫ي�� ص�ل‬ yafṣilu A
yufaṣṣalu IA Vrb frm
H (I↔II)
yufaṣṣilu
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
uswatun A
IK
N
60:4
‫ا ��س �ة‬
‫و‬ IA vowels
iswatun
AA
H
K
tumassikū AA
IK
N
60:10
‫ت‬ IA
Vrb frm
‫�م��س ك‬
‫�وا‬
tumsikū (II↔IV)
A
H
K
IK
N
baʿdiya
AA
A → Shuʿba taskīn
61:6 ‫ب��ع�د �ى‬ IA vowels (Y)
A → Ḥafṣ
baʿdī
H
813

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

814
IK
A
siḥrun N
61:6 ‫��س‬
�
‫حر‬ AA Long vwl (±ā)
IA
H
sāḥirun
K
IK
H
mutimmu nūrihi iʿrāb
K
A → Ḥafṣ
61:8 ‫ن�وره‬ �‫� تم‬
‫م‬ N
AA
mutimmun nūrahu tanwīn
IA
A → Shuʿba
tunajjīkum IA
IK
N
‫ت�ن‬ AA
Vrb frm
61:10 �
‫� ج�ي�� ك‬
‫م‬ tunjīkum (I↔IV)
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
anṣāran li-llāhi N tanwīn
AA
ّٰ ‫ن‬
61:14 ‫ا��ص�ا ر �ل��ل�ه‬ A
IA
anṣāra ‿llāhi ḥarf (±li)
H
K
anṣāriya N
IK
IA
‫ن‬ taskīn
61:14 ‫ا��ص�ا ر �ى‬ AA
vowels (Y)
anṣārī
A
H
K
IK → Qunbul
AA
K
khushbun
AA → al-Yazīdī
815
IK → X → Abū Rabīʿa Muḥammad b.

63:4 �‫�خ� ش�� ب‬ Isḥāq vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

816
AA → ʿUbayd
AA → ʿAbbās
AA → al-Khaffāf
AA → Abū Zayd
khushubun
N
A
IA
H
N
lawaw
IK
IA Vrb frm
63:5 ‫�لووا‬ AA (I↔II)
lawwaw
A
H
K
IK
N
IA iʿrāb
wa-akun
63:10 ‫وا ك� ن‬ A
��
H
K
Long vwl (±ū)
Appendix
wa-akūna AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
yaʿmalūna A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
‫ن‬ N
63:11 �‫ى�ع�ل�مو‬ Imperf (t↔y)
taʿmalūna IA
AA
H
K
AA → ʿUbayd
yajmaʿukum
yajmaʿkum AA → ʿAbbās
IK
N
64:9 �
‫ي ج��م�ع ك‬ taskīn
‫م‬ IA
yajmaʿukum AA
A
H
K
N
817
nukaffir … wa-nudkhilhu IA
Imperf (n↔y)
64:9 ‫ىك‬ IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
‫ وى�د خ��ل�ه‬... ‫��ف� ر‬
(cont.)

818
AA
A
yukaffir … wa-yudkhilhu Imperf (n↔y)
H
K
IK
yuḍaʿʿifhu
IA
N
Vrb frm
64:17 ‫� �ع��ف� �ه‬
‫�ي��ض‬ AA
(II↔III)
yuḍāʿifhu A
H
K
IK
N
iʿrāb
IA
bālighun amrahu AA
65:3 ‫ب��ل غ ا�مره‬ A
�
H
K tanwīn
A → Ḥafṣ
bālighu amrihi
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
wa-llāʾi … wa-llāʾi
N
→ IM
AA
wa-llāºi… wa-llāºi
→ IM
65:4 ‫ وا لى‬... ‫وا لى‬ N → Warsh madd
wa-llāyyi … IM: This is wrong
IK → al-Bazzī → Ibn Mukhlad
wa-llāyyi (Q. 58:2) (Q. 33:4)
A
IA
wa-llāʾī … wa-llāʾī taskīn
H
K
IK
wa-kāʾin
AA → ʿUbayd
Gemin
N
IA
65:8 ‫� ن‬
‫و‬
�‫كا ى‬ AA
wa-ka‌ʾayyin
A
Long vwl [±ā]
H
819

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

820
IA → Hishām
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
nukran
AA
H
65:8 �‫ن� ك‬
‫�را‬ vowels
K
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
N → Warsh
nukuran
N → Qālūn
A → Shuʿba
N
nudkhilhu IA
IK
65:11 ‫ى�د خ��ل�ه‬ Imperf (n↔y)
AA
yudkhilhu A
H
K
ʿarafa K
IK
Appendix
N Vrb frm
‫ف‬ IA
66:3 ��‫�عر‬ ʿarrafa (I↔II)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
H
IK
N
taẓẓāharā Gemin
AA
66:4
‫ت‬ IA (Q. 2:85), (Q. 33:4)
‫� ظ��هرا‬
A
taẓāharā H tense
K
wa-Jabrīlu IK
N
hamz
AA
wa-Jibrīlu IA
A → Ḥafṣ
66:4 wa-Jabra‌ʾilu A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam On the pattern of Jabraʿil vowels
‫و ج��بري�ل‬
H
K
A → Shuʿba → K
wa-Jabra‌ʾīlu
Long vwl (±ī)
821


Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

822
Combined recitation of AA → al-Sūsī

ṭallakkunna … yubdilahu AA → ʿAbbās
and H
AA → al-Yazīdī
Assim
ṭallaqakunna … This is the recorded recitation via
yubaddilahu N al-Shāṭibiyya, it is not mentioned
directly in al-Sabʿa
IK
66:5 ‫ط��ل��ق ك‬
‫ ي�ب��د �ل�ه‬... �‫�� ن‬
A → Shuʿba
H
Verb frm
ṭallaqakunna … yubdilahu K
(II↔IV)
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
nuṣūḥan
N → Khārija
A → Ḥafṣ
N
66:8
‫ن‬ IK vowels
‫��صوح�ا‬
naṣūḥan IA
AA
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
wa-kutubihi A → Ḥafṣ
N → Khārija
IK
‫�ت‬ Long vwl (±ā)
66:12 ‫� ب��ه‬�‫وك‬ IA (Q. 2:285)
[PL]
N
wa-kitābihi
A → Shuʿba
H
K
H
tafawwutin
K
IK
Vrb frm
67:3 ‫ت��ف� ت‬
� N
‫و‬ (II↔VI)
tafāwutin IA
AA
A
fa-suḥuqan K
K
IK
823
N
67:11 ‫ح��ق�ا‬
��‫ف��س‬ fa-suḥqan IA vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

824
AA
A
H
A
H
‿n-nushūr｡u a-amintum
IA hamz
K
67:15–16
‫�ن‬
�‫ا �ل� ش�� ا�م��ن ت‬ N
‫ور م‬ ‿n-nushūr｡u ȧ-ºamintum
AA
Clearly this is only in waṣl mode. In madd
‿n-nushūru wa-ºamintum
IK Waqf mode, IK’s reading should be
(or: ‿n-nushūrū ºamintum)
‿n-nushūr a-ºamintum
fa-sa-yaʿlamūna K
IK
N
67:29
‫ن‬ ‫ف‬ IA Imperf (t↔y)
�‫��س�ى�ع�ل�مو‬ fa-sa-taʿlamūna
AA
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
ahlakaniya … maʿiya N
IA
‫ن‬ taskīn
67:28, 28 A → Ḥafṣ
‫ �م�عى‬... ‫ا�ه��ل�ك�ى‬ vowels (Y)
A → Shuʿba
ahlakaniya … maʿī
K
ahlakanī … maʿī H
ahlakanī … maʿiya N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf
nadhīr｡ī … nakīr｡ī N → Warsh Recitation by Y

IK
N
‫�ذ‬ IA Long vwl (±ī)
67:17, 18 ‫��ير‬
‫ ن� �ك‬... ‫ن� �ير‬
nadhīr｡i … nakīr｡i AA [waqf]
A
H
K
IK
N
AA
825
IA
‫ن‬ H
68:1 ‫� ا �ل��ق��ل‬ nūn wa-l-qalami (Q. 36:1), (Q. 26:1) Assim

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
‫و م‬
(cont.)

826
A → Ḥafṣ
N → Ibn Jammāz
nūn wa-l-qalami N → al-Musayyabī
or (nūw_wa-l-qalami) N → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar
A → Shuʿba → K
K
IK
N
AA hamz (±)
an
K
68:14 �‫ا‬ A → Shuʿba → K
H
a-an
A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam madd
ān H → Abū ʿUbayd IM: This is wrong
or (ȧ-ºan) IA
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
anu ‿ghdū IA
K
68:22 ‫ا ن� غا��د وا‬ AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr vowels
A
H
ani ‿ghdū
AA → al-Yazīdī
IK
A → Shuʿba
IA
yubdilanā
H Vrb frm
68:32 ‫ي�ب��د � نل��ا‬ K (II↔IV)
A → Ḥafṣ
AA
yubaddilanā
N
la-yazliqūnaka N
IK
827
IA Vrb frm
68:51
‫�ق‬ la-yuzliqūnaka AA (I↔IV)
‫�لي��ز �ل�� ون��ك‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

828
A
H
K
AA
qibalahu K
A → Abān
‫ق‬ IK
69:9 ‫� ب��ل�ه‬ vowels
N
qablahu IA
H
A
IK → al-Ḥulwānī
wa-taʿyahā
IK → Qunbul → Abū Rabīʿa
N
69:12
‫ت‬ IA vowels
��‫و��ع‬
‫ي�ه�ا‬
wa-taʿiyahā AA on the pattern of wa-taliyahā
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
yakhfē
K
IK
69:18 ‫ىخ �ف‬ N Imperf (t↔y)
‫��ى‬
takhfā IA
AA
A
IK
AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd →
yuʾminūna …
[Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā] al-Quṭaʿī → Imperf (t↔y)
yadhdhakkarūna
al-Khazzāz → IM
IA → Hishām
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
69:41, 42
‫�ذ ن‬ ‫ن‬
‫ ى� ك‬... �‫ىو�م ن��و‬
�‫�رو‬ tuʾminūna … N Imperf (t↔y)
tadhdhakkarūna AA
A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
Gemin
tuʾminūna … tadhakkarūna H
K
N
sāla
829
IA
IK
70:1 ‫��س�ا ل‬ sa‌ʾala AA hamz

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

830
A
H
K
yaʿruju K
IK
N
70:4 ‫ى�عر�ج‬ IA Imperf (t↔y)
taʿruju
AA
A
H
IK → al-Bazzī → Muḍar → IM
AJ → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUbayd
yusʾalu The recitation of AJ
Shayba → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Abū
ʿUbayd
70:10 N Act↔Pass
‫ي��س�ى�ل‬
IA
yasʾalu AA
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
IA
yawmiʾidhin
A
H
70:11
‫�ذ‬ ‫�ذ‬ K iʿrāb
�‫ع� ا ب� �يو�م�ى‬
N → Ibn Jammāz
yawma‌ʾidhin N → al-Musayyabī
N → Qālūn
N → Warsh
nazzāʿatan A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
IK
N
70:16 ‫�ن�ز ا ع��ة‬ iʿrāb
nazzāʿatun IA
AA
H
831

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

832
li-amānatihim IK
N
IA
Long vwl (±ā)
70:32 �‫لا �م��ن ت��ه‬ AA
‫�م‬ li-amānātihim [PL]
A
H
K
IK
N
IA
bi-shahādatihim AA
H
‫ت‬ Long vwl (±ā)
70:33 �‫� ش��ه�د ��ه‬ K
‫ب � �م‬ [PL]
A → Shuʿba
A → Ḥafṣ
AA → ʿAbbās
bi-shahādātihim
al-Ḥulwānī
yadkhula A → al-Mufaḍḍal
A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix
IK
70:38
‫خ‬ yudkhala N Act↔Pass
‫ي��د ��ل‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IA
AA
H
K
IA
nuṣubin
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
‫ن‬ N
70:43 �‫��ص� ب‬ vowels
AA
naṣbin
A
H
IK
N
anu ‿ʿbudū IA
K
71:3 ‫ا ن� ا �ع ب��د وا‬ AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr (Q. 68:22) vowels
A
H
ani ‿ʿbudū
AA → al-Yazīdī
833

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

834
IK
IA
duʿāʾiya
AA
N taskīn
A vowels (Y)
H
71:6 ‫د ع�ا �ى‬ duʿāʾī
K
AA → ʿAbbās
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → al-Haytham →
duʿāya hamz
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf →
IK
AA
wa-wulduhu H
K
71:21 ‫وو�ل�د ه‬ vowels
N → Khārija
N
wa-waladuhu A
IA
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
A → Shuʿba → Burayd Abū l-Muʿāfā
IM: This is wrong
al-Ḍarīr → Abū l-Rabīʿ al-Zuhrānī
Wuddan A → Shuʿba → Yaḥyā b. Ādam →
Muḥammad b. al-Mundhir →
IM: This is wrong
Muḥammad b. Saʿdān → al-Marwazī
→ IM
IK
71:23 ‫ود ا‬ vowels
IA
AA
A
Waddan
A → Ḥafṣ
H
K
khaṭāyāhum AA Like qaḍāyāhum

Long vwl
IK
(ā↔ī)
N
IA
71:25 �‫�خ��ط��ىه‬ hamz
‫�م‬ khaṭīʾātihim A
vowels [Prn
H
him↔hum]
835
K CS (±t)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

836
A → Ḥafṣ
baytiya IA → Hishām
N → Abū Qurra
A → Shuʿba
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
‫ت‬ taskīn
71:28 N → Ibn Jammāz
‫ب�ي��ى‬ vowels (Y)
IK
baytī
N
AA
H
K
IK
N
wa-innahu … wa-innā …
AA
wa-innahum
72:3, 4, 6, A → Shuʿba
5, 8, 9, 10, ... ‫ وا ن�ا‬... ‫وا ن��ه‬ ḥarf (inna↔
‫ن‬ A → al-Mufaḍḍal
11, 12, 13, �‫ا��ه‬ anna)
14, 7 ‫و �م‬ IA
wa-annahu … wa-annā … A → Ḥafṣ
wa-annahum H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
IA
wa-annahu
H
ḥarf (inna↔
72:19 ‫وا ن��ه‬ K
anna)
A → Ḥafṣ
N
wa-innahu A → Shuʿba
IK
N
nasluk-hu
AA
72:17 ‫��ه‬
‫ى��س��ل �ك‬ IA Imperf (n↔y)
A
yasluk-hu H
K
lubadan IA → Hishām
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
IK
837
N
72:19 ‫�بل��د ا‬ libadan AA vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

838
A
H
K
A
qul H
AA → Abū Zayd → Abū l-Rabīʿ
‫�ق‬ IK Tense [Long
72:20
‫�ل‬ N vwl (±ā)/Imp]
qāla AA
IA
K
IK
rabbiya N
AA
taskīn
72:25 ‫ر ب�ى‬ IA
vowels (Y)
A
rabbī
H
K
AA
wiṭāʾan
Appendix
IA vowels
73:6 ‫وط�ا‬ IK

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
A
waṭʾan Long vwl (±ā)
H
K
IK
N
rabbu
AA
A → Ḥafṣ
73:9 �‫ر ب‬ iʿrāb
A → Shuʿba
IA
rabbi
H
K
N
thuluthayi … wa-niṣfihi
AA vowels
wa-thuluthihi
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
IK
thuluthayi … wa-niṣfahu A
73:20
‫ن‬ ‫ث� ث‬ iʿrāb
‫�ل�ى ا �يل��ل و�� فص� �ه وث�� ثل��ه‬ wa-thuluthahu H
K
thulthayi … wa-niṣfihi
IA → Hishām → al-Ḥulwānī iʿrāb
wa-thuluthihi
839
thuluthayi … wa-niṣfahu IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf →

vowels
wa-thulthahu Muḥammad b. al-Jahm → IM

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

840
A → Ḥafṣ
wa-r-rujza
A → Shuʿba
IK
74:5 ‫ا �ل �ج�ز‬ N vowels
‫ور‬
wa-r-rijza IA
AA
H
K
AA
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
adrēka
A → Shuʿba → K
A → Ḥafṣ
74:27 ‫ا د رى�ك‬ imāla
N
IK
adrāka
IA
H
K
IK
Appendix
Vrb frm
AA (I↔IV)
‫�ذ‬ IA
74:33 ‫ا ا د �بر‬ idhā dabara [hamz ±]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
K
A → Shuʿba
N
idh adbara A → Ḥafṣ
H
N
IA
la-iḥdā AA
A
74:35 ‫لا ح�د �ى‬ H hamz
K
IK → Jarīr → Wahb b. Jarīr → Khalaf →
Idrīs → IM
laḥdā
IK → Jarīr → Wahb b. Jarīr → Khalaf →
Aḥmad b. Abī Khaythama → IM
N
mustanfara IA
IK
841
Act Ptcpl↔
74:50
‫�م��س��ت ن �ف �ة‬
‫�� ر‬ AA Pass Ptcpl

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

842
A
mustanfira H
K

takhāfūna
→ IA
IK
74:53
‫ىخ ف ن‬ N Imperf (t↔y)
�‫��ا �و‬
yakhāfūna AA
A
H
K
tadhkurūna N
IK
IA
74:56
‫�ذ ن‬ AA Imperf (t↔y)
‫ى� ك‬
�‫�رو‬ yadhkurūna
A
H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
la-uqsimu … wa-lā uqsimu IK → Qunbul → IM

N ḥarf (la↔lā)
‫ق‬ ‫ق‬ IA
75:1, 2 ‫ ولا ا ��س‬... ‫لا ا ��س‬
‫م‬ ‫م‬ lā uqsimu … wa-lā uqsimu AA
A ḥarf (la↔lā)
H
IK
AA
IA
bariqa
‫ق‬ A
75:7 �‫ب�ر‬ vowels
H
K
N
baraqa
A → Abān
IK
yuḥibbūna … yadharūna AA
Imperf (t↔y)
IA
75:20, 21
‫�ذ ن‬ ‫� ن‬ ‫ى‬ N
�‫ ى� رو‬... �‫ح��بو‬
A
tuḥibbūna … tadharūna
H Imperf (t↔y)
843

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

844
wa-qīla｡ man rāqin A → Ḥafṣ

IK
N
75:27
‫ق‬ ‫ق‬ IA waqf
� ‫و�ي��ل �م� ن� را‬ wa-qīla man rāqin
AA
A
H
IK
N
A → Shuʿba
H
K
tumnā AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith
AA → al-Yazīdī
75:37 ‫ن‬ AA → Hārūn al-Aʿwar → al-Naḍr b. (Q. 53:46) Imperf (t↔y)
‫ىم�ى‬
Shumayl
AA → Abū Zayd
AA → ʿAbbās
A → Ḥafṣ
yumnā
IA
Appendix
AA → Abū Zayd

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK → Qunbul
salāsil｡a
H
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf → Ibn
tanwīn [DP]
al-Jahm → IM
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → al-Haytham →
salāsil(ā｡/an)
Ibn al-Jahm → IM
N
A → Shuʿba → K
76:4 ‫��س��ل��س�لا‬ AA
ʿAbd al-Wārith: AA liked to pause at
salāsilā, unlike the other pauses in
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū Maʿmar → al-Aḥzāb, since this one, salāsilā, is not waqf
salāsil(ā｡/a) al-Ḥulwānī a verse end. This probably means that
the pause or iṭlāq here were shorter in
duration
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
nuṭʿimkum AA → ʿAbbās
IK
N
‫ن‬ IA
76:9 �
‫��ط�ع��م ك‬ taskīn
‫م‬ nuṭʿimukum AA
A
845
H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

846
A → Shuʿba
qawārīran qawārīran N
K
Ḍayf interjects and adds that tanwīn
according to al-Taysīr the correct
A → Ḥafṣ
qawārīr(ā｡/a) qawārīr(ā｡/a) reading should be qawārīr(ā｡/a)
‫ق‬ qawārīr｡a, which is the reading of AA
‫�وا ري�را‬
76:15, 16 ‫ق‬ IA
‫�وا ري�را‬
qawārīr｡a qawārīr｡a H
qawārīran qawārīra IK
AA waqf
AA → ʿAbbās
qawārīr(ā｡/a) qawārīr｡a
AA → Abū Zayd → Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī
Transmission through correspondence
→ IM
N
H
ʿālīhim
A → Abān
76:21 �‫ع��ل��ه‬ IK iʿrāb
‫ي �م‬
IA
ʿāliyahum AA
A
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
khuḍrin wa-istabraqun
A → Shuʿba
AA
iʿrāb
khuḍrun wa-istabraqin IA
‫ت ق‬ ‫�خ‬ N → Khārija
76:21 �‫�� ض�� ر وا ��س�� ب��ر‬ H
khuḍrin wa-istabraqin K
AA → ʿUbayd
iʿrāb
N
khuḍrun wa-istabraqun Not mentioned by IM
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
AA
Hishām: This is wrong, the better
reading is tashāʾūna. Abū Khulayd
yashāʾūna said to Ayyūb al-qāriʾ: you are wrong
in this reading, meaning tashāʾūna.
Muḥammad b. Bakr → IM
‫ش ن‬ Ayyūb said: By God I can prove it
76:30 �‫ى��ا و‬ inasmuch as I can prove you are ʿUtba Imperf (t↔y)
b. Ḥammād
N
IA
tashāʾūna A
H
847

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

848
fa-l-mulqiyādh_dhikran AA
AA → ʿAbbās
IK
‫�ذ‬ ‫ف‬ N
77:5 ‫��ا لم��ل��ق ي�� ت� ك‬
‫�را‬ Assim
fa-l-mulqiyāti dhikran IA
A
H
K
IK
N
ʿudhran … nudhuran vowels
IA
‫�ذ‬ ‫�ذ‬ A → Shuʿba
77:6 ‫ع� را ا و ن� را‬ A → Ḥafṣ
AA
ʿudhran … nudhran vowels
H
K
wuqqitat AA
IK
N
77:11
‫ق‬ IA hamz
�‫ا ��ت� ت‬ uqqitat
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA
‿l-ākhirīna AA
‫خ ن‬ A
77:17 �‫الا �ر�ي‬ hamz
H
K
AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā → Rawḥ →
‿l‿ākhirīna Aḥmad b. Yazīd → al-Ḥasan b. ʿAbbās The recitation of Warsh
→ IM
N
fa-qaddarnā
K
IK
77:23
‫ف‬ IA
Vrb frm
‫��ق�د رن�ا‬ (I↔II)
fa-qadarnā AA
A
H
IK
N
jimālātun
IA
849
Long vwl (±ā)

77:33 �‫�ج �م�ل� ت‬ A → Shuʿba [PL]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

850
H
jimālatun K
A → Ḥafṣ
sa-taʿlamūna …
IA → Ibn Dhakwān Notebook transmission
sa-taʿlamūna
IA → Hishām Imperf (t↔y)
IK
78:4, 5
‫ن‬ ‫ن‬ N
�‫��س�ى�ع�ل�مو� … ��س�ى�ع�ل�مو‬ sa-yaʿlamūna …
AA
sa-yaʿlamūna
A
Imperf (t↔y)
H
K
IK
N
wa-futtiḥat
AA
78:19 �‫ح� ت‬
��‫وف�ت‬ IA Vrb frm (I↔II)
A
wa-futiḥat H
K
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
labithīna H
IK
N
78:23 ‫ث ن‬ IA Long vwl (±ā)
�‫�ل��ب��ي‬ lābithīna
AA
A
K
A → Ḥafṣ
wa-ghassāqan
H
K
‫غ ق‬ vowels
78:25 ‫و��س�ا ��ا‬ A → Shuʿba
[Gemin]
IK
wa-ghasāqan N
AA
IA
kidhāban K
IK
N
‫ذ‬ vowels
78:35 ‫ك‬
‫�� ا ب�ا‬ IA
kidhdhāban [Gemin]
AA
851
A
H

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

852
IK
N
rabbu … ‿r-raḥmānu iʿrāb
AA
78:37 ‫حن‬
��‫ر ب� … ا �لر �م‬ A
rabbi … ‿r-raḥmāni
IA
iʿrāb
H
rabbi … ‿r-raḥmānu
K
wa-s-sābiḥās_sabḥan
AA
fa-s-sābiqās_sabqan
AA → ʿAbbās Assim
IK
‫ح�ا‬
��‫��س ب‬ �‫ح� ت‬
��‫وا �ل��س ب‬
N
79:3–4 ‫ف �ق‬
‫ت‬ wa-s-sābiḥāti sabḥan fa-s-
‫��سب��ق�ا‬ �� ‫��ا �ل��سب‬ IA
sābiqāti sabqan
A
Assim
H
K
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
a-innā … idhā hamz
K
79:10, 11
‫�ذ‬ ȧ-ºinnā … idhā N
‫ا ن�ا … ا ا‬
Appendix
A madd
a-innā … a-idhā
H

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
ȧ-ºinnā … ȧ-ºidhā AA
hamz (±)
a-ºinnā … a-ºidhā IK
IK
N
AA
IA
A → Ḥafṣ
nakhiratan A → al-Mufaḍḍal
A → Abān → ʿAbbās
K → al-Dūrī was indifferent whether to
K → al-Dūrī
read nakhiratan or nākhiratan
79:11
‫ن�خ �ة‬
‫ر‬ Abū l-Ḥārith: K used to read nakhi- Long vwl (±ā)
K → Abū l-Ḥārith ratan but then recoursed to reading
nākhiratan
H
A → Shuʿba
K → al-Dūrī
nākhiratan Abū l-Ḥārith: K used to read nakhi-
K → Abū l-Ḥārith ratan but then recoursed to reading
nākhiratan
K → Abū ʿUbayd
853

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

854
IK
ṭuwā ‿dhhab N
AA
79:16–17
‫�ذ‬ IA tanwīn
�‫طو�ى ا �ه� ب‬
A
ṭuwani ‿dhhab
H
K
IK
tazzakkā N
AA → ʿAbbās
‫ت�ز‬ AA
79:18 ‫� كى‬ Gemin
IA
tazakkā A
H
K
mundhirun AA → ʿAbbās The recitation of AJ

AA
IK
‫ن‬ ‫ن �ذ‬ N
79:45 tanwīn
��‫�م�� ر �م‬ mundhiru IA
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
AA
‫ف‬ fa-tanfaʿuhu
80:4 ‫��ت ن��ف� �ع�ه‬ H iʿrāb
K
IA Doubt from IM
fa-tanfaʿahu A
IK
taṣṣaddā
N
IA
80:6
‫ت‬ AA Gemin
‫��ص�د �ى‬
taṣaddā A
H
K
IK → al-Bazzī
ʿanhū ttalahhā
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
N
80:10 ‫ن ت‬ Gemin
‫�ع��ه ��ل�هى‬ IA
855
ʿanhu talahhā AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

856
A
H
K
IK
N
innā
AA
ḥarf (inna↔
80:25 ‫ا ن�ا‬ IA
anna)
A
annā H
K
IK
N
IA
ʿuṭṭilat AA (Q. 33:49)
81:4 �‫�ع��ط�ل� ت‬ A Vrb frm (I↔II)
H
K
Qunbul: al-Bazzī made a mistake here
ʿuṭilat IK → al-Bazzī
but retracted his reading later on
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
sujirat … nushshirat … IK Vrb frm

suʿirat AA (I↔II)
N
81:6, 10, …� ‫� ت‬
‫� … �ن ش�� ت‬ �� IA Vrb frm
‫تر‬ ‫ جسر‬sujjirat … nushirat … suʿʿirat
12 �‫��س�عر‬ A → Ḥafṣ (I↔II)
sujjirat … nushshirat … H
suʿirat K Vrb frm
sujjirat … nushirat … suʿirat A → Shuʿba (I↔II)
IK
bi-ẓanīnin AA
‫��ض ن ن‬ K
�‫�� ي‬ ‫ب‬
81:24 ‫ظن ن‬ N ibdāl (ḍ↔ẓ)

�‫ب��ي‬ A
bi-ḍanīnin
IA
H
IK
N
fa-ʿaddalaka
AA
82:7
‫ف‬ IA Vrb frm (I↔II)
‫��ع�د �ل�ك‬
A
857
fa-ʿadalaka H
K

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

858
rakkabak_kallā N → Khārija
IK
N
IA
82:8–9 � ‫كك‬
‫كلا‬ ��‫ر ب‬ Assim
rakkabaka kallā AA
A
H
K
AA
IA
adrēka H
K
82:17 ‫ا د را ك‬ imāla
A → Shuʿba → K
adrǣka N
A
adrāka
IK
IK
yawmu
AA
N
82:19 � IA iʿrāb
‫يوم‬ yawma A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA
IA
AA → ʿAbd al-Malik [al-Aṣmaʿī] → imāla
bar_rāna
Ayyūb → Abū l-Rabīʿ → al-Dabbāgh AA: I prefer this reading over bal rēna
→ IM
IK → Qunbul → IM Doubt from IM
IK → Qunbul → Abū Rabīʿa
Close to idghām but it is not full
‫ن‬ *balr_rāna AA → ʿAbbās
83:14 � ‫ب�ل را‬ idghām
bal rāna Assim
→ Ibn al-Faraj → IM
N → al-Musayyabī → Khalaf → Aḥmad
bar_rǣna
b. Zuhayr → IM
A → Shuʿba
N → Khārija
bar_rēna
H
waqf
K
bal｡ rāna A → Ḥafṣ
IA
‿l-abrēri AA
859
K
83:18 ‫الا �برا ر‬ ‿l-abrǣri H imāla

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

860
IK
‿l-abrāri N
A
khātamuhu K
IK
vowels
N
83:26
‫�خ�ت‬ IA
‫�م�ه‬
khitāmuhu
AA
Long vwl
A
(±ā)
H
ahlihimi AA
H
ahlihumu K
vowels
83:31 �‫ا�ه��له‬ IA IM: This is against the uṣūl of IA
‫�م‬ [Prn-hm]
N
ahlihimu IK
A
fakihīna A → Ḥafṣ fākihīna in the rest of the Qurʾān

IK
Appendix
N Long vwl
83:31 ‫ف� � ن‬
�‫��ك�ه��ي‬ fākihīna IA (±ā)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA
A
H
Kss
AA → Hārūn → ʿAlī b. Naṣr

AA → Yūnus b. Ḥabīb
hath_thuwwiba
H
K
83:36 ‫ث‬ AA → al-Yazīdī Assim
�‫�ه�ل �و ب‬
IK
hal thuwwiba N
IA
IK
N
‿nshaqqat … wa-ḥuqqat … IA
‫ � �ق‬... ‫ا �ن ش��ق� ت‬ muddat … wa-takhallat … AA
�‫ح�� ت‬ ‫و‬ �
‫ت‬ wa-ḥuqqat A vowels
84:1–5 �
... � ‫ م�د‬... [waqf]
‫ � �ق‬... ‫��ل� ت‬ ‫ت‬ H
�‫ح�� ت‬ ‫و‬ �‫وخ‬ K
‿nshaqqati … wa-ḥuqqati …
AA → ʿUbayd → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā
861
muddati … wa-takhallati … ishmām al-jarr

→ al-Khazzāz → IM
wa-ḥuqqati

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

862
IK
N
wa-yuṣallā Vrb frm
IA
(I↔II↔IV)
K
84:12 AA
‫و�ي��ص��لى‬
wa-yaṣlā A
H
Act↔Pass
N → Khārija → ʿAbbās
wa-yuṣlā
A → Abān → ʿAbbās
IK
la-tarkabanna H
K
84:19 ‫�لت�� ك ن‬
‫ر‬ N vowels
�‫��ب‬
IA
la-tarkabunna
AA
A
IK
N
‿l-majīdu AA
IA
Appendix
85:15 ‫ا لم��ج�ي��د‬ A iʿrāb

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
H
‿l-majīdi K
maḥfūẓun N
IK
IA
85:22 ‫م‬
‫ح��ف� �ظ‬
‫�و‬ AA iʿrāb
maḥfūẓin
A
H
K
IK
N
lamā
AA
ḥarf (lamā↔
86:4 ‫لم�ا‬ K
lammā)
A
lammā IA
H
qadara K
IK
863
N Vrb frm
‫ق‬ IA
87:3 ‫��د ر‬ qaddara (I↔II)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

864
AA
A
H
yuʾthirūna AA
IK
N
87:16
‫ث ن‬ IA Imperf (t↔y)
�‫ىو�رو‬ tuʾthirūna
A
H
K
IK
N
IA
taṣlā H
88:4
‫ت‬ K Act↔Pass
‫��ص��لى‬
A → Ḥafṣ
AA
tuṣlā
A → Shuʿba
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
AA → ʿUbayd
AA → ʿAbbās
AA → al-Yazīdī
AA → Abū Zayd
yusmaʿu ... lāghiyatun iʿrāb
AA → Hārūn → al-Naḍr b. Shumayl →
Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā → al-Khazzāz
→ IM
AA → ʿAbd al-Wahhāb → al-Naḍr b.
Shumayl → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā →
al-Khazzāz → IM
88:11 ‫ى��س��م ف��ه�ا �ل غ��ة‬

‫ع ي� ي‬
AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd → Muḥammad
b. Yaḥyā → al-Khazzāz → IM
AA → Hārūn → al-Naḍr b. Shumayl →
→ IM
AA → ʿAbd al-Wahhāb → al-Naḍr b.
Shumayl → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā →
tusmaʿu ... lāghiyatun al-Khazzāz → IM Imperf (t↔y)
AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd → Muḥammad
865
N
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf →

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

866
N → Khārija
A
tasmaʿu ... lāghiyatan IA Act↔Pass
H
K
IK
N
AA
bi-muṣayṭirin A
AA → ʿAbbās
ibdāl
88:22 ‫ب�م��صي��طر‬ K → al-Dūrī → Ibn ʿAbdūs
(s↔ṣ↔z)
Hishām: It is written with ṣād but
IA → [Hishām] → al-Ḥulwānī
bi-musayṭirin pronounced as sīn
K → al-Farrāʾ → Ibn al-Jahm → IM
bi-muṣzayṭirin H
IK
N
wa-l-watri AA
89:3 ‫ت‬ A vowels
‫وا �لو�ر‬
IA
H
wa-l-witri
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
yasrī｡ … bi-l-wādī｡ IK
yasr｡ī … bi-l-wād｡i N → Ismāʿīl b. Abī Uways
yasr｡ī … bi-l-wād｡ī N → Warsh
IA
A
yasr｡i Long vwl (±ī)
H
[Y]
K
K used to read yasrī for a long time but
K → Abū ʿUbayd
then he recoursed to yasri
89:4, 9 ‫ ب�ا �لوا د‬... ‫�ي��سر‬
Written correspondence
AA → Abū Zayd → Abū Ḥātim → IM Abū Zayd: AA does read yasri in waṣl
mode
yasr｡ī ʿUbayd and ʿAlī b. Naṣr: AA paused Long vwl (±ī)
AA → ʿUbayd
at the end of each verse but when he [Y]
read in waṣl mode he would recite
AA → ʿAlī b. Naṣr yasrī, similar to nabgh｡ī (Q. 18:64) and
‿d-dāʿ｡ī idhā daʿān｡ī (Q. 2:186) waqf
AA → al-Yazīdī
yasri｡ AA → ʿAbbās
IK → Qunbul
A
IA
867
H Long vwl (±ī)

akraman｡i … ahānan｡i K [Y]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

868
al-Yazīdī: AA said he is indifferent

wether to read with or without yāʾ in
AA → al-Yazīdī
waṣl mode. As for waqf, one should
follow the rasm
IK → al-Bazzī
akramanī｡ … ahānanī｡
AA → Abū Zayd → Abū l-Rabīʿ
N → Qālūn
N → al-Musayyabī
Long vwl (±ī)
‫نن‬ [Y]
89:15, 16 ‫اك‬
�� ‫ ا�ه�ا‬... �‫�ر�م� ن‬ N → Abū Qurra
N → Abū Khulayd
akraman｡ī … ahānan｡ī N → Khārija
N → Warsh
al-Madīna → Ismāʿīl b. Muslim →
Maḥbūb → Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā
l-Quṭaʿī → al-Khazzāz → IM
al-Yazīdī: AA said he is indifferent waqf
whether to read with or without yāʾ
AA → al-Yazīdī
in waṣl mode. As for waqf, one should
follow the rasm
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
AA → ʿAbbās
akraman｡ … ahānan｡
AA → Abū Zayd
AA → ʿUbayd
IK
tukrimūna … taḥuḍḍūna … Imperf (t↔y)
N
ta‌ʾkulūna … tuḥibbūna
‫� ن‬ IA
‫ح��ض‬
�‫� و‬ �‫ى ك‬
‫ ى‬... �‫� �مو ن‬
‫ر ت ن‬ A Imperf (t↔y)
89:17–20 ... �‫ك�لو‬ � ‫ �ا‬... tukrimūna … taḥāḍḍūna …
H
‫� ن‬ ‫ى‬
�‫ح��بو‬ ta‌ʾkulūna … tuḥibbūna
K Imperf (t↔y)
yukrimūna … yaḥuḍḍūna … Vrb frm
AA
ya‌ʾkulūna … yuḥibbūna (II↔VI)
K
yuʿadhdhabu … yūthaqu
Act↔Pass
IK
‫ثق‬ ‫�ذ‬ N
89:25, 26 ��‫ �يو‬... �‫�ي�ع� ب‬ IA
yuʿadhdhibu … yūthiqu
AA
Act↔Pass
A
H
869

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

870
IK
AA
iʿrāb
K
fakka raqabatan … aṭʿama
AA → ʿUbayd
AA → ʿAbbās Tense
IA [perf↔N]
90:13, 14 ‫ق �ة‬ ‫ف‬ N
‫ ا ��ط�ع‬... ��‫��ك ر� ب‬
‫م‬ A
H
fakku raqabatin … iṭʿāmun AA → ʿAbbās
AA → ʿAbd al-Wārith → Abū l-Rabīʿ → Tense
al-Dabbāgh → IM [perf↔N]
AA → ʿAbbās → ʿAbd al-Ṣamad →
→ IM
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū l-Rabīʿ → Muḥammad

‿l-mashʾame｡
imāla
A → Ḥafṣ → Abū l-Rabīʿ → al-Dabbāgh
‿l-mashʾammati
→ IM
IK
N
Appendix
‫م��ى� م��ة‬ Gemin

90:19 �� ‫ا ل ش‬ IA
‿l-mashʾamati AA

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H waqf
K
IK
IA
mūṣadatun N hamz
A → Shuʿba
(Q. 108:4)
K
‫�ة‬ AA
90:20 ‫�مو�ص�د‬
muʾṣadatun H imāla
A → Ḥafṣ

→ IM
waqf
muʾṣade｡ IM: this reading has no gorund
IK
IA
A
wa-ḍuḥāhā All the verse endings of this sūra and
Q. 92 and Q. 93
871
N → Qālūn
91:1-15 �‫و��ض‬
‫ح��ى�ه�ا‬ K imāla

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

872
Except talāhā (Q. 91:2), ṭaḥāhā

H (Q. 91:6), sajā (Q. 93:2), daḥāhā
(Q. 79:30)
wa-ḍuḥēhā N → Ibn Jammāz
Except talāhā (Q. 91:2)
N → Khārija
AA → ʿAbbās
no imāla in Q. 92
AA → ʿUbayd
N
wa-ḍuḥǣhā
AA → al-Yazīdī
H
IK
IA
talāhā … ṭaḥāhā A
91:2, 6 ‫ح��ى�ه�ا‬
��‫ ط‬... ‫ت��ل�ه�ا‬ imāla
N → Qālūn
K
talēhā … ṭaḥēhā AA → ʿAbbās
AA → ʿUbayd
Appendix
N → Ibn Jammāz
talāhā … ṭaḥēhā
N → Khārija

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
N
talǣhā … ṭaḥǣhā
AA → al-Yazīdī
N Per the codices of al-Madīna and

fa-lā
IA al-Shām
IK
‫ولا‬ A
91:15 ḥarf (fa↔wa)
‫ف��لا‬
wa-lā AA per the regional codices
H
K
IK
IA
A
yaghshā
N → Qālūn
‫غش‬ All the verse endings of this sūra and
92:1-21 K imāla
‫�ي��ى‬ Q. 92 and Q. 93
H
yaghshē
873
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Khārija

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

874
N
yaghshǣ
AA → al-Yazīdī
ttalaẓẓā IK → al-Bazzī
IK → Qunbul
N
‫ن ت �ظ‬ IA
92:14 Gemin
‫�ا را ��ل��ى‬ talaẓẓā AA
A
H
K
IK
IA
A
wa-ḍ-ḍuḥā All the verse endings of this sūra and
Q. 92 and Q. 93
N → Qālūn
K
H Except sajā (Q. 93:2)
Appendix
93:1-8 ‫وا �ل��ض‬

‫� ��حى‬ wa-ḍ-ḍuḥē N → Ibn Jammāz imāla

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
The edition of al-Sabʿa has ʿAbd al-Wārith

N → Khārija
which should probably be Khārija
AA → ʿAbbās no imāla in Q. 92
N
wa-ḍ-ḍuḥǣ
AA → al-Yazīdī
All the verse endings of this sūra and

IK
Q. 92 and Q. 93
IA
A
sajā

N → Qālūn
H
93:2 ‫��س‬ imāla
‫�ج�ى‬ K
N → Ibn Jammāz
sajē
N → Khārija
AA → ʿAbbās no imāla in Q. 92
N
sajǣ
AA → al-Yazīdī
875

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

876
On the pattern of raʿahu. IM: this is

ra‌ʾahu IK → Qunbul
wrong
ra‌ʾēhu AA imāla
IA
96:7 ‫را ه‬ A → Shuʿba
riʾēhu On the pattern of riʿāhu
H
K Long vowel
N (±ā)
ra‌ʾāhu
A → Ḥafṣ
IK
N
AA
maṭlaʿi
IA
97:5 ‫�م��ط��ل‬ vowels
‫ع‬ A
H
K
maṭliʿi
AA → ʿUbayd
N
‿l-barīʾati … ‿l-barīʾati
IA
IA → Hishām
Appendix
IK
98:6,7
‫ا �� ى��ة‬ ‿l-bariyyati … ‿l-bariyyati AA hamz
‫لبري‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
A
H
K
yurahu … yurahu A → Abān

IK
IA
H Act↔Pass
K
A → Ḥafṣ
yarah｡u/ū … yarah｡u/ū
99:7, 8 ‫ �يره‬... ‫�يره‬ A → Shuʿba → Burayd
N → Warsh
AA → al-Yazīdī
waqf
AA → ʿAbbās
IA → Hishām
yarah … yarah
A → Shuʿba → K
wa-l-ʿādiyāḍ_ḍabḥan
AA
fa-l-mughīrāṣ_ṣubḥan
AA → ʿAbbās Assim
H
877
‫ح�ا‬
��‫�� ب‬‫�ض‬ �‫وا �ل�ع�د ي� ت‬ wa-l-ʿādiyāti ḍabḥan fa-l- IK
100:1, 3 ‫ح�ا‬
��‫��ص ب‬ �‫ف��ا ل��مغ�� ت‬
‫ير‬ mughīrāti ṣubḥan N

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

878
IA
A Assim
K
AA → [Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī] → Abū

‿l-qēriʿatu
Ḥātim
imāla
‿l-qāriʿah｡ mā-hiyah｡
AA → ʿUbayd
IK
101:1–3, 10 ‫ �م�ا �هي��ه‬... ‫ا �ل��ق�ا رع��ة‬ N
IA
‿l-qāriʿatu ... mā-hiya AA waqf
A
H
K
IA
la-turawunna
K
IK
‫ت ن‬ Vrb frm
102:6, 7 �‫�ل��رو‬ N
(I↔IV)
la-tarawunna AA
A
H
Appendix

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
N
IA
wa-l-ʿaṣri AA
A
103:1 ‫وا �ل�ع��صر‬ taskīn
H
K
[AA] → Abū l-Mundhir Sallām b.
IM: This is not permissible. See
wa-l-ʿaṣiri Sulaymān al-Ṭawīl → ʿAffān → ʿAlī b.
(Q. 103:3)
Sahl → IM
AA → [Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī] → Abū IM: This is only possible in waqf mode
bi-ṣ-ṣabiri Ḥātim al-Rāzī → Salmān b. Yazīd al- where one moves the kasra from the
Baṣrī → IM rāʾ to the bāʾ. This is similar to:
yā ʿajaban wa-d-dahru bāqin ʿajabuh
min ʿanaziyyin sabbanī lam aḍribuh
where it should have been aḍribhu;
and to:
ra‌ʾaytu thiyāban ʿalā juththatin
AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā → Rawḥ →
fa-qultu Hishāmun wa-lam ukhbiruh
Aḥmad b. Yazīd → al-Jammāl → IM
where it should have been ukhbirhu
K → Khalaf preferred to pause on
minhu and ʿanhu while giving the nūn
the scent of ḍamma, i.e. reciting minuh
879
and ʿanuh
IK
103:3 ‫ب�ا �ل��ص��بر‬ bi-ṣ-ṣabri N taskīn [KH]

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

880
IA
AA
A
H
K
IK
N
jamaʿa
AA
Vrb frm
104:2 ‫�م‬ A
‫�ج ع‬ (I↔II)
IA
jammaʿa H
K
IK
IA
mūṣadatun N
hamz
A → Shuʿba
‫�ة‬ K
104:8 ‫�مو�ص�د‬
AA
H
muʾṣadatun A → Ḥafṣ
Appendix

→ IM imāla

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

muʾṣade｡
b. Yaḥyā → al-Khazzā → IM
IK
N
ʿamadin AA
IA
104:9 ‫�ع�م�د‬ vowels
A → Ḥafṣ
A → Shuʿba
ʿumudin H
K
on the pattern of li-iʿlāni … iʿlānihim

li-iʾlāfi … iʾlāfihim A → Shuʿba IM: Shuʿba abandoned this reading
and adopted the reading of H hamz
li-ilāfi … īlāfihim IA
IK
106:1-2
‫ف‬
�‫ ا �ل��ف��ه‬... �‫لاي��ل‬
‫�م‬ N
AA
li-īlāfi … īlāfihim
H Long vwl (±ī)
K
A → Ḥafṣ
881

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

882
ʿēbidūna … ʿēbidun …
ʿēbidūna
al-Ḥulwānī
IK
‫ن‬ N
109:3,4,5 ‫ ع�ا ب��د‬... �‫�ع ب��د و‬ imāla
IA
ʿābidūna … ʿābidun …
AA
ʿābidūna
A
H
K
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Ibn Saʿdān

IK → al-Bazzī → al-Makhzūmī
IK → Ibn Fulayḥ
wa-lī AA
H
K
IA → Ibn Dhakwān
Appendix
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → Khalaf → Ibn

109:6 ‫ن‬ al-Jahm → IM vowels [Y]
�‫ولى د�ي‬

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK → Shibl → ʿUbayd → al-Haytham b.

Khālid → Ibn al-Jahm → IM
IK → Shibl → Abū l-Rabīʿ → al-
Dabbāgh → IM
IK → al-Bazzī → Muḍar → IM
A → Shuʿba
→ IM
wa-liya N → Qālūn
N → al-Musayyabī
N → Ibn Jammāz
N → Warsh
N → Khārija
N → Abū Khulayd
N → Abū Qurra
IA → Hishām
Lahbin IK
N
IA
111:1 �‫��ل�ه� ب‬ AA vowels
Lahabin
A
H
883

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

884
ḥammālata A
IK
N
111:4 ‫ح�م�ا ��ة‬
�‫ل‬ IA iʿrāb
ḥammālatu
AA
H
K
IK
N
A
aḥadun tanwīn
IA
H
K
AA → Hārūn → ʿUbayd → Muḥammad Hārūn and Naṣr b. ʿAlī: AA claimed
b. Yaḥyā → al-Khazzāz → IM that Arabs did not read as such in
112:1 ‫ا ح�د‬ waṣl mode. Nevertheless, when
aḥad｡un
AA → Naṣr b. ʿAlī → ʿAlī b. Naṣr → AA read in waṣl
ʿUbayd Allāh b. ʿAlī mode, he would
recite aḥadun waqf
AA → Abū Zayd
AA: I witnessed the Qurʾān readers
AA → ʿAbbās
aḥad｡ pausing on aḥad. Nevertheless, it is
AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā → Rawḥ → aḥadun if one reads in waṣl mode
al-Ḥulwānī → al-Jammāl → IM
Appendix
aḥadu AA → Hārūn

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)
IK
IA
K
AA → al-Yazīdī
N → Ibn Jammāz
kufuʾan
vowels
N → Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar → Abū ʿUmāra
N → Khārija
‫�ف‬
112:4 ‫�� وا‬‫ك‬ A → Shuʿba
N → al-Musayyabī → Ibn Saʿdān →

kufuwan Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā l-Marwazī → IM
A → Ḥafṣ
AA → ʿAbbās
AA → Maḥbūb → al-Quṭaʿī
H
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → K hamz
kufʾan
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → Sulaymān b.
Dāwūd al-Hāshimī
N → Qālūn → Ismāʿīl b. Isḥāq → IM
885

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
(cont.)

886

N → al-Musayyabī →Abū ʿUmāra
N → Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar → [Abū ʿAmr?
al-Duri?]
IK
N
AA
ḥāsidin IA
113:5 ‫ح�ا ��س�د‬ A imāla
H
K
AA → Aḥmad b. Mūsā → Rawḥ → al-
ḥēsidin
Ḥulwānī → al-Jammāl → IM
IK
N
IA
‿n-nāsi AA
‫ن‬ A
114:1 ‫ا �ل��ا ��س‬ imāla
H
K
Only when al-nās is in the genitive
K → al-Dūrī → al-Ḥulwānī
‿n-nēsi otherwise no imāla is performed
Appendix
AA → al-Dūrī Not mentioned directly by IM

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3
Biography
Biography Full name Death date City Pages in Other

number al-Nashr sources
1489 Abū Ḥamdūn, al-Ṭayyib b. 240 Baghdād 1:311–2

Ismāʿīl (d. 240/854–5)
3860 al-Yazīdī, Yaḥyā b. al- 202 Baṣra–Baghdād 2:327–9
Mubārak (d. 202/817–8)
1989 ʿAbd al-Wārith b. Saʿīd 180 Baṣra 1:425–6
(d. 180/796)
1834 Abū Maʿmar, ʿAbd Allāh 224 Baṣra 1:392–3
b. ʿAmr (d. 224/838–9)
? Muḥammad b. Shuʿayb ? ? ?
al-Jarmī (?)
3584 Madyan b. Shuʿayb, 300 Baṣra 2:255–6
Mardawayhi
(d. 300/912–3)
570 al-Qawwās al-Nabbāl, 240–5 Makka 1:113–4
Aḥmad b. Muḥammad
(d. 240–5/854–60)
2063 ʿUbayd b. ʿAqīl 207 Baṣra 1:441
(d. 207/823)
1414 Shibl b. ʿAbbād 148–60 Makka 1:293
(d. 148–60/765–78)
553 al-Bazzī, Aḥmad b. 250 Makka 1:109–10
Muḥammad b. Abī Bazza
(d. 250/865)
2001 Ibn Fulayḥ, 250–73 Makka 1:428
ʿAbd al-Wahhāb
(d. 250–73/864–88)
3763 Hārūn b. Mūsā l-Aʿwar 170 Baṣra 2:303
(d. 170/786)
1965 al-Aṣmaʿī, ʿAbd al-Malik b. 215–6 Baṣra 1:419
Qurayb (d. 215–6/830–2)
? ʿUryān b. Abī Sufyān (?) ? Baṣra ?
1397 Sulaym b. ʿĪsā 188–200 Kūfa 1:288–9
(d. 188–200/804–816)
1235 Khalaf b. Hishām al- 229 Baghdād 1:246–7
Bazzār (d. 229/844)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

888 Biography
(cont.)

3842 al-Farrāʾ, Yaḥyā b. Ziyād 207 Kūfa 2:324

(d. 207/822)
1238 Khallād b. Khālid, Abū 220 Kūfa 1:248
ʿAbd Allāh al-Shaybānī
(d. 220/835–6)
3340 Muḥammad b. 242–53 Rayy–Iṣbahān 2:197
ʿĪsā l-Iṣbahānī
(d. 242–53/856–68)
986 Ibn [Abī] Mihrān, 289 Rayy–Baghdād 1:197
al-Ḥasan b. al-ʿAbbās al-
Jammāl (d. 289/902)
3535 al-Kisāʾī l-Ṣaghīr, 270–88 Baghdād 2:244–5
Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā
(d. 271–88/885–902)
758 Ismāʿīl b. Jaʿfar 177–200 Madīna–Baghdād 1:148
(d. 177–200/793–816)
1387 Ibn Jammāz, Sulaymān 170 Madīna 1:285
b. Muslim [or b. Sālim]
(d. 170/786)
2509 Qālūn, ʿĪsā b. Mīnā 205–220 Madīna 1:542–3
(d. 205–220/820–35)
734 al-Musayyabī, Isḥāq 206 Madīna 1:143
b. Muḥammad
(d. 206/821–2)
429 Aḥmad b. Qālūn (?) ? Madīna 1:88
2090 Warsh, ʿUthmān b. Saʿīd 179 Egypt 1:446–7
(d. 179/795–6)
1242 al-Khalīl b. Aḥmad 170–7 Baṣra 1:249
(d. 170–7/786–93)
824 Bakkār b. ʿAbd Allāh b. ? Baṣra 1:161
Yaḥyā l-ʿŪdī (?)
2364 ʿAlī b. Naṣr al-Jahḍamī 188–9 Baṣra 1:514
(d. 188–9/804–5)
3732 Naṣr b. ʿAlī l-Jahḍamī 250 Baṣra 2:294
(d. 250/864)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Biography 889
(cont.)

? Anas b. Khālid b. ʿAbd 268 Baghdād ?

Allāh, Abū Ḥamza
al-Anasī (d. 268/881)
1543 Abū Bakr b. Abī 230 Madīna 1:326
Uways, ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd
(d. 230/844–5)
267 Aḥmad b. Ṣāliḥ, Abū Jaʿfar 248 Egypt 1:61
(d. 248/863)
754 al-Qāḍī, Ismāʿīl b. Isḥāq 282 Baghdād 1:147
(d. 282/896)
1589 Ibn ʿAbdūs, ʿAbd al- 280 Baghdād 1:337–8
Raḥmān Abū l-Zaʿrāʾ
(d. 281/895)
1159 al-Dūrī, Abū ʿUmar Ḥafṣ 246 Baghdād–Sāmarrāʾ 1:230–2
b. ʿUmar (d. 246/861)
1196 Abū ʿUmāra, Ḥamza b. ? Kūfa 1:239
al-Qāsim al-Aḥwal (?)
3329 Abū ʿAwn, Muḥammad 260–70 Wāsiṭ 2:195
b. ʿAmr b. ʿAwn
(d. 260–70/873–83)
697 al-Ḥulwānī, Aḥmad b. 250 Rayy–Ḥulwān 1:136–7
Yazīd (d. 250–1/864–5)
2847 Ibn al-Musayyabī, 236 Madīna 2:88
Muḥammad b. Isḥāq
(d. 236/850)
1421 Shuʿba b. ʿAyyāsh, Abū 193–4 Kūfa 1:295–6
Bakr (d. 193–4/808–10)
1158 Ḥafṣ b. Sulaymān, 180–90 Kūfa–Baghdād– 1:229–30
Abū ʿUmar Makka
(d. 180–90/797–807)
3948 Yūnus b. Ḥabīb, Abū 182–5 Baṣra 2:352
ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Ḍabbī
(d. 182–85/799–803)
1514 al-ʿAbbās b. al- 186–95 Baṣra–Mawṣil 1:320–1
Faḍl, Abū l-Faḍl
(d. 186–95/802–812)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

890 Biography
(cont.)

1446 al-Sūsī, Abū Shuʿayb Ṣāliḥ 261 Riqqa 1:302

b. Ziyād (d. 261/875)
2637 Abū l-Ḥārith al-Layth b. 240 Baghdād 2:33
Khālid (d. 240/855–6)
3019 Ibn Saʿdān, Abū 231 Kūfa 2:127
Jaʿfar Muḥammad
(d. 231/845–5)
2913 al-Shammūnī, 240- Kūfa 2:103
Muḥammad b. Ḥabīb
(d. after 240/854)
3539 Abū Hishām al-Rifāʿī, 248 Kūfa–Baghdād 2:245–6
Muḥammad b. Yazīd
(d. 248/862)
3897 al-Aʿshā, Yaʿqūb b. 200 Kūfa 2:339
Muḥammad Abū Yūsuf
(d. 200/815–6)
3343 Ibn Ḥayyān, Muḥammad ? Baghdād 2:198
b. ʿĪsā l-Muqriʾ Abū Jaʿfar
(?)
2585 al-Qāsim al-Khayyāṭ, Abū 291 Kūfa 2:16–7
Muḥammad al-Qamlī
(d. 291/904)
1787 ʿAbd Allāh b. Ṣāliḥ al-ʿIjlī 220 Kūfa–Baghdād 1:379
(d. 220/835–6)
2898 al-Firyābī, Abū l-Ḥasan 301 Firyāb–Baghdād– 2:100
Muḥammad b. Jaʿfar Ḥalab
(d. 301/913–4)
? Minjāb b. al-Ḥarith 231 Kūfa ? Tahdhīb
(d. 231/846) al-kamāl
28:492
? Sharīk b. ʿAbd Allāh al- 187–8 Bukhārā–Kūfa ? Siyar 8:200
Qāḍī (d. 187–8/803–5)
1929 Ibn al-Yazīdī, ʿAbd Allāh ? Baghdād 1:413
b. Yaḥyā (?)
3682 Abū Qurra, Mūsā b. Ṭrāiq ? Yemen–Zabīd 2:278–9 al-Thiqāt
al-Saksakī (?) 9:159
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Biography 891
(cont.)

496 Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. ? Damascus 1:100

Bakr, Abū l-ʿAbbās
al-Bakrāwī (?)
1720 Ibn Dhakwān, ʿAbd Allāh 242 Damascus 1:363–4
b. Aḥmad (d. 242/857)
3787 Hishām b. ʿAmmār, Abū 244–5 Damascus 2:308–10
l-Walīd (d. 244–5/859–61)
3817 Yaḥyā b. Ādam 203 Wāsiṭ 2:317–8
(d. 203/818)
3673 Mūsā b. Isḥāq al-Qāḍī 297 Baghdād 2:276
(d. 297/909–10)
1832 Ibn Abī Umayya, ʿAbd ? Baṣra–Kūfa 1:392
Allāh b. ʿAmr (d. ?)
2906 Ibn al-Jahm, Muḥammad 208 Baghdād 2:101–2
(d. 208/823–4)
1572 Ibn Abī Ḥammād, ʿAbd al- ? Kūfa 1:334
Raḥmān b. Sukayn (d. ?)
3889 Abū l-Asbāṭ, Yaʿqūb b. ? Kūfa 2:336
Ibrāhīm al-Muʿallim (d. ?)
552 Ibn Ṣadaqa, Aḥmad b. ? Baghdād 1:109
Muḥammad b. ʿAbd Allāh
(d. ?)
1211 Khārija b. Muṣʿab, Abū 168 Sarakhs 1:243
l-Ḥajjāj (d. 168/785)
3115 Qunbul, Muḥammad 291 Makka 2:146–7
b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān
(d. 291/904–5)
1416 Shujāʿ b. Abī Naṣr, Abū 190 Balkh–Baghdād 1:293–4
Nuʿaym (d. 190/806–7)
2590 Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim b. 224 Khurāsān–Baghdād 2:18
Sallām (d. 224/838)
3639 al-Mufaḍḍal al-Ḍabbī, 168 Kūfa 2:268
Abū Muḥammad
(d. 168/784–5)
1735 ʿAbd Allāh b. Aḥmad b. 290 Marw–Baghdād 1:366 Siyar
Ḥanbal (d. 290/903) 13:516
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

892 Biography
(cont.)

? Abū Mūsā l-Harawī, Isḥāq ? Harāt–Baghdād ? Mīzān

b. Ibrāhīm (d. ?) 1:328
3742 Nuṣayr b. Yūsuf, Abū l- 240 Rayy–Baghdād 2:297
Mundhir (d. 240/854–5)
2053 ʿUbayd Allāh b. Muʿādh 237 Baṣra 1:439
al-ʿAnbarī, Abū ʿAmr
(d. 237/851–2)
3622 Muʿādh b. Muʿādh al- 196 Baṣra 2:264
ʿAnbarī, Abū ʿUbayd Allāh
(d. 196/812–3)
2916 Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan ? Baṣra 2:103
(Maḥbūb), Abū Jaʿfar al-
Qawārīrī (?)
3361 Ibn al-Faraj, Muḥammad ? Baghdād 2:201 Ansāb 5:64
Abū Bakr al-Kharābī
755 Ismāʿīl b. Abī Uways 227 Madīna 1:147–8
(d. 227/842–3)
2074 Abū Khulayd, ʿUtba b. ? Damascus 1:443
Ḥammād (?)
3762 al-Akhfash, Hārūn 292 Damascus 2:302–3
b. Mūsā b. Sharīk
(d. 292/905–6)
3830 Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥārith al- 145 Yemen–Damascus 2:320–1
Dhimārī (d. 145/762–3)
1123 Ḥusayn al-Juʿfī, Abū 203 Kūfa 1:224
ʿAbd Allāh/Abū ʿAlī
(d. 203/819)
2459 Sībawayhi, ʿAmr b. 180 Shīrāz–Baṣra 1:531
ʿUthmān (d. 180/796)
2035 ʿUbayd Allāh b. ʿAlī ? Baghdād 1:435
l-Hāshimī, Abū l-Qāsim
(?)
1728 Abū Ṭālib, ʿAbd Allāh b. ? Baghdād 1:365
Aḥmad b. Sawāda (?)
58 al-Zahrānī, Ibrāhīm b. ? Baṣra? 1:21
Saʿīd (?)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Biography 893
(cont.)

1996 ʿAbd al-Wahhāb b. ʿAṭāʾ, 204–7 Baṣra–Baghdād 1:427

Abū Naṣr al-Khaffāf
(d. 204–7/820–4)
3313 al-Qaṣabī, Muḥammad b. ? Baṣra–Baghdād 2:191
ʿUmar (?)
1339 Abū Zayd al-Anṣārī, Saʿīd 215 Baṣra 1:277
b. Aws (d. 215/830–1)
3811 Wahb/Wuhayb al- ? Marw–Baghdād 2:314
Marwazī, Abū Bakr (?)
1043 al-Ḥasan b. al-Mubārak, ? Baghdād 1:208
Ibn al-Yatīm al-Anmāṭī
2454 ʿAmr b. al-Ṣabbāḥ, Abū 221 Baghdād 1:530–1
Ḥafṣ (d. 221/836–7)
3781 Hubayra al-Tammār, Abū ? Baghdād 2:307–8
ʿUmar (d. ?)
? Sahl b. Zanjala, Abū ʿAmr 238 Rayy ?
(d. 238/853)
3017 Muḥammad b. Saʿd al- ? Baghdād 2:126
ʿŪfī, Abū Jaʿfar (?)
3894 Yaʿqūb b. Jaʿfar ? Madīna 2:338–9
1615 ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. ? Baṣra 1:342
Manṣūr, Abū Saʿīd al-
Ḥārithī Kurabzān
710 Aḥmad b. Yūsuf al- ? Baghdād 1:139
Taghlibī, Abū ʿAbd Allāh
3700 Mūsā b. Mūsā l-Khuttalī ? Baghdād 2:282
(al-Khuttulī), Abū ʿĪsā
666 Aḥmad b. Mūsā, Abū ? Baṣra 1:130
Jaʿfar al-Luʾluʾī (Ibn Abī
Maryam?)
1090 Ḥusayn b. Bishr al-Ṣūfī (?) ? Ṭabaristān 1:216
1273 Rawḥ b. ʿAbd al-Muʾmin 234–5 Baṣra 1:259
(d. 234–5/848–50)
3075 Muḥammad b. Ṣāliḥ al- ? Baṣra 2:138
Murrī, Abū Isḥāq (?)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

894 Biography
(cont.)

1169 Ḥammād b. Salama 167 Baṣra 1:233

(d. 167/784)
2 Abān b. Yazīd al-ʿAṭṭār 161 Baṣra 1:11
(d. 161/778)
3482 Muḥammad b. al- ? Kūfa 2:233
Mundhir (?)
1022 al-Ushnānī, al-Ḥasan b. 278 Baghdād 1:204–5
ʿAlī b. Mālik (d. 278/891)
3949 Yūnus b. ʿAbd al-Aʿlā 264 Egypt 2:352
(264/877)
1359 Saqlāb b. Shunayna, Abū 191 Egypt 1:280
Saʿīd (d. 191/807–8)
3322 al-Wāqidī, Muḥammad b. 209 Madīna–Baghdād 2:193
ʿUmar (d. 209/824–5)
1833 ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAmr, Abū ? Baghdād 1:392
Muḥammad al-Warrāq (?)
2408 ʿUmar b. Shabba, Abū 262 Baṣra–Baghdād 1:523 Siyar
Zayd (d. 262/876) 12:369
771 Ismāʿīl al-Makkī 170 Makka 1:150–1
l-Qusṭ, Ibn Qusṭanṭīn
(d. 170/786–7)
1542 ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd b. Bakkār ? Damascus 1:326
(?)
2842 al-Dandānī, Muḥammad ? Rayy 2:87–8
b. Idrīs (?)
3615 Muṭarrif al-Shaqarī b. ? Baṣra 2:262 Ansāb
Maʿqil, Abū Bakr al-Nahdī 7:363
1435 Shaybān b. ʿAbd al- ? Kūfa 1:298
Raḥmān, Abū Muʿāwiya
(?)
1377 Sulaymān b. Dāwūd 219 Baghdād 1:284
al-Hāshimī, Abū Ayybūb
(d. 219/834–5)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Biography 895
(cont.)

2983 Muḥammad b. Ḥamdūn 310 Wāsiṭ 2:120

al-Ḥadhdhāʾ, Abū l-Ḥasan
(d. 310/922–3)
3707 Abū Tawba al-Naḥwī, ? Kūfa 2:283
Maymūn b. Ḥafṣ [Jaʿfar]
(?)
3631 Muʿallā b. Manṣūr, Abū 211 Rayy–Baghdād 2:266
Yaʿlā l-Rāzī (d. 211/826–7)
2818 Muḥammad b. Aḥmad 273 Baghdād 2:82
b. Wāṣil, Abū l-ʿAbbās
(d. 273/886)
936 Ḥajjāj b. Muḥammad 206 Damascus 1:186
al-Aʿwar al-Miṣṣīṣī
(d. 206/821–2)
176 Aḥmad b. Jubayr, Abū 258 Khurāsān–Kūfa– 1:43–44
Jaʿfar [Bakr] (d. 258/872) Anṭākiyya
1639 ʿAbd al-Razzāq b. al- 290 Anṭākiyya– 1:346–347
Ḥasan, Abū l-Qāsim Damascus
[al-Ḥusayn] [Ibn ʿAbd
Allāh b. ʿAmr al-ʿIjlī]
(d. 290/903–4)
2765 al-Dājūnī al-kabīr, 324 Damascus (Ramla) 2:70–71
Muḥammad b. Aḥmad b.
ʿUmar Abū Bakr al-Ramlī
(d. 324/936)
3888 [[Yaʿqūb b. Abī Ibrāhīm 208 Madīna–Baghdād 2:336
b. Saʿīd??]] Yaʿqūb b.
Ibrāhīm, Abū Yūsuf al-
Zuhrī (d. 208/824)
2112 ʿAdī b. al-Faḍl, Abū Ḥātim ? Baṣra 1:453
(?)
2054 ʿUbayd Allāh b. Mūsā, 213 Kūfa 1:439
Abū Muḥammad al-ʿAbsī
(d. 213/828)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

896 Biography
(cont.)

? Qays b. Saʿd, Abū ʿUbayd 119 Makka ? Ibn Saʿd

Allāh (d. 119/737–8) 8:44
? Ḥajjāj b. Minhāl, Abū 216–7 Baṣra ? Siyar
Muḥammad al-Anmāṭī 10:352
(d. 216–7/831–2)
2659 Mujāhid b. Jabr, Abū 102–4 Makka 2:40
l-Ḥajjāj (d. 102–4/720–2)
2964 Muḥammad b. al-Ḥusayn ? Balkh–Baghdād 2:116
b. Shahrayār, Abū Bakr (?)
1089 al-Ḥusayn b. ʿAlī b. ? Kūfa 1:216
al-Aswad [al-Ḥusayn b.
al-Aswad] (?)
1357 Sufyān b. Saʿīd al- 161 Kūfa 1:280
Thawrī, Abū ʿAbd Allāh
(d. 161/777–8)
3323 Muḥammad b. ʿUmar al- ? Kūfa 2:193
Kindī, Abū Jaʿfar (?)
2238 ʿAlī b. al-ʿAbbās al-Bajalī, ? Kūfa 1:484
Abū l-Ḥasan (?)
3882 Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī, 110–32 Madīna 2:333–4
Yazīd b. al-Qaʿqāʿ
(d. 110–32/728–49)
1439 Shayba b. Niṣāḥ 130–8 Madīna 1:298
(d. 130–8/747–55)
940 Ḥaramī b. ʿUmāra, Abū ? Baṣra 1:186
Rawḥ (?)
? Mūsā b. Hārūn, Abū 294 Baghdād Siyar
ʿImrān al-Bazzāz 12:116–9
(d. 294/907)
1437 Shaybān b. Muʿāwiya al- 164 Baṣra–Kūfa 1:298
Naḥwī (d. 164/780–1)
? Ḥakīm (?) (transmitted ? Makka? ?
from Shibl b. ʿAbbād)
1531–2 ʿAbd al-Jabbār b. ʿUṭārid ? Kūfa 1:325
(al-ʿUṭāridī) (?)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Biography 897
(cont.)

419 Aḥmad b. ʿUmar al- 235 Baghdād 1:87

Wakīʿī, Abū Ibrāhīm
(d. 235/849)
? Qurra b. Khālid, Abū 154 Baṣra ? Siyar
Muḥammad al-Sadūsī (d. 7:95–7
circa 154)
3532 al-Quṭaʿī, Muḥammad b. ? Baṣra 2:243–4
Yaḥyā (?)
3757 Hārūn b. Ḥātim, 249 Kūfa 2:301
Abū Bishr al-Bazzāz
(d. 249/863–4)
? Dāwūd b. Yazīd al-Awdī, ? Kūfa ? Tahdhīb
Abū Yazīd (?) 8:467–70
2126 ʿUqba(ʿAfiyya?) b. Sinān ? Baṣra 1:456
al-Fazārī (?)
3613 Muḍar b. Muḥammad, ? Kūfa 2:262
Abū Muḥammad
al-Ḍabbī
3794 al-Haytham b. Khālid, ? Baṣra? 2:311
Abū Muḥammad
al-Khawātīmī
14 Ibrāhīm b. Aḥmad al- ? Egypt 1:14
Wakīʿī, Abū Isḥāq
1874 ʿAbd Allāh b. Muḥammad ? Baghdād 1:401
b. Shākir, Abū l-Bukhturī
3814 Wahb b. Wāḍiḥ, Abū 190 Makka 2:314
l-Ikhrīṭ (d. 190/806)
1453 Abū Shuʿayb al-Qawwās, ? Kūfa–Baghdād 1:303
Ṣāliḥ b. Muḥammad (?)
392 Aḥmad b. ʿAlī al-Khazzāz, 286 Baghdād 1:82
Abū Jaʿfar (d. 286/899)
804 Ayyūb b. Tamīm, 198–219 Damascus 1:156
Abū Sulaymān
(d. 198–219/813–834)
751 Ismāʿīl b. Aḥmad al-Riqqī ? Riqqa 1:147
(d. ?)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

898 Biography
(cont.)

233 or 696 Ibn Abī Khaythama, Abū 279 Baghdād 1:136, 1:54
Bakr Aḥmad b. Zuhayr
(d. 279/892?)
717 Idrīs b. ʿAbd al- 292–3 Baghdād 1:140
Karīm, Abū l-Ḥasan
(d. 292–3/904–5)
1832 ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAmr b. Abī ? Baṣra–Kūfa 1:392
Umayya (d. ?)
727 Isḥāq b. Aḥmad al- 308–9 Makka 1:142
Khuzāʿī, Abū Muḥammad
(d. 308–9/921–2)
? ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ibn Abī ? Madīna ? Siyar 8:169
l-Zinād (d. 174/791)
1624 ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Wāqid, ? Baghdād 1:344 Tārīkh
Abū Muslim (d. ?) Baghdād
11:548
2032 ʿUbayd Allāh b. ʿAbd al- 298 Baghdād 1:435 Tārīkh
Raḥmān b. Wāqid, Abū Baghdād
Shubayl (d. 298/911) 12:53
? Mūsā l-Zābī l-Kūfī (d. ?) ? Wāsiṭ–Kūfa ? Ansāb
6:215
2664 Muḥammad b. Abān, 171 Kūfa 2:41
Abū ʿAmr (d. 171/787)
2841 Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī, 275–9 Rayy 2:87
Muḥammad b. Idrīs
(d. 275–9/888–92)
738 Isḥāq b. Yūsuf al-Azraq, 194–5 Wāsiṭ 1:144
Abū Muḥammad al-
Wāsiṭī (d. 194–5/810–11)
560 Aḥmad b. Muḥammad ? Baṣra 1:111
Khatan Layth, Abū
l-ʿAbbās (d. ?)
788 Ismāʿīl b. Muslim, Abū 160 Makka 1:153
Isḥāq al-Makhzūmī
(d. circa 160/777)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Biography 899
(cont.)

? Ashhab b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz 203–4 Egypt ? Tahdhīb

(d. 203–4/818–9) 3:296
1058 al-Ḥasan b. Muḥammad ? Makka 1:210
b. ʿUbayd Allāh b. Abī
Yazīd (d. ?)
1788 ʿAbd Allāh b. al-Ṣaqr, 302 Baghdād 1:379 Siyar 14:173
Abū l-ʿAbbās al-Baghdādī
l-Sukkarī (d. 302/914)
822 Bishr b. Hilāl, Abū Jaʿfar 247 Baṣra 1:161 Tahdhīb
al-Ṣawwāf (d. 247/861) 4:159
3347 Muḥammad b. ʿĪsā 294 Baghdād 2:198 Tārīkh
Abū Mūsā l-Hāshimī Baghdād
(d. 294/907) 3:701
3525 Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā 300 Marw–Baghdād 2:242
l-Warrāq (d. circa 300/913)
1468 al-Ḍaḥḥāk b. Maymūn al- 192 Baṣra 1:306 al-Thiqāt
Thaqafī (d. 192/808) 6:483
1407 Suwayd b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz 194 Wāsiṭ 1:291
(d. 194/810)
1378 Sulaymān b. Dāwūd, 234 Baṣra 1:284
Abū l-Rabīʿ al-Zahrānī
(234/849)
2061 ʿUbayd b. al-Ṣabbāḥ, Abū 219–235 Kūfa–Baghdād 1:440–1
Muḥammad al-Nahshalī
(d. 219–235/834–850)
? Muʾammal b. Ismāʿīl al- 206 Makka–Baṣra ? Tahdhīb
ʿAdawī (d. 206/822) 10:380
75 Ibrāhīm b. ʿAlī b. Ibrāhīm ? Mawṣil–Baghdād 1:24 Tārīkh
al-ʿUmarī (d. ?) al-Islām
23:183
3317 Muḥammad b. ʿUmar b. 220 Baṣra 2:192
Rūmī, Abū ʿAbd Allāh
Fairūz (d. 220/835)
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Bibliography
Ibn al-ʿAdīm (d. 660/1262), Kamāl al-Dīn. Bughyat al-ṭalab fī tārīkh Ḥalab. ed. Suhayl
Zakkār. 12 vols. Beirut: Dār al-Fikr, 1988.
Aḥmad, al-Sālim Muḥammad Maḥmūd, “al-Qirāʾāt allatī ḥakama ʿalayhā Ibn Mujāhid
bi-l-ghalaṭ wa-l-khaṭa‌ʾ,” (n.p.; n.d.) [online word document article].
al-Ahwāzī (d. 446/1055), Abū ʿAlī. Al-Wajīz fī sharḥ qirāʾāt al-qara‌ʾa al-thamāniya
a‌ʾimmat al-amṣār al-khamsa. ed. Durayd Aḥmad. Beirut: Dār al-gharb al-islāmī,
2002.
al-Akhfash (d. 215/833), Abū l-Ḥasan. Maʿānī l-Qurʾān. ed. Hudā Qurrāʿa. Cairo:
Maktabat al-Khānjī, 1990.
Amīn, Aḥmad. Fajr al-Islām. Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1969.
Ibn al-Anbārī (d. 328/940), Abū Bakr. Al-Aḍdād. ed. Muḥammad Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm.
Beirut: al-Maktaba al-ʿAṣriyya, 1987.
Ibn al-Anbārī (d. 577/1181), Abū l-Barakāt. Nuzhat al-alibbāʾ fī ṭabaqāt al-udabāʾ. ed.
Muḥammad Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm. Cairo: Dār al-fikr al-ʿarabī, 1998.
Al-ʿArabī, Hishām Yusrī. Jughrāfiyyat al-madhāhib al-fiqhiyya. Cairo: Dār al-Baṣāʾir,
2005.
Ibn al-ʿArabī (d. 543/1148), Abū Bakr. al-ʿAwāṣim min al-qawāṣim. ed. ʿAmmār Ṭālibī.
Cairo: Dār al-turāth, 1974.
Arberry, Arthur John. The Koran Interpreted. New York: Touchstone, 1996.
al-Asad, Nāṣir al-Dīn. Maṣādir al-shiʿr al-jāhilī. Beirut: Dār al-Jīl, 1988.
Ibn al-Athīr (d. 606/1210), Majd al-Dīn Abū l-Saʿādāt. Jāmiʿ al-uṣūl fī aḥādīth al-rasūl.
ed. ʿAbd al-Qādir al-Arnāʾūṭ. 11 vols. Damascus: Maktabat al-Ḥalwānī, 1969.
Ibn ʿAṭiyya (d. 546/1151), Abū Muḥammad. al-Muḥarrar al-wajīz fī tafsīr al-Kitāb al-
ʿazīz. ed. ʿAbd al-Salām ʿAbd al-Shāfī Muḥammad. 6 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-
ʿilmiyya, 2001.
al-Aʿẓamī, Muḥammad Muṣṭafā. The History of the Qurʾānic Text. Leicester: UK Islamic
Academy, 2003.
Baalbaki, Ramzi. “The Treatment of Qirāʾāt by the Second and Third Century
Grammarians.” In The Qurʾan: formative interpretation, edited by Andrew Rippin,
159–80. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999.
al-Bāqillānī (d. 403/1013), Abū Bakr. Al-Intiṣār li-l-Qurʾān. ed. Muḥammad ʿIṣām
al-Quḍāt. Beirut: Dār Ibn Ḥazm, 2001.
Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463/1071), Abū ʿUmar. al-Istidhkār al-jāmiʿ li-madhāhib fuqahāʾ
al-amṣār. 30 vols. Beirut: Dār Qutayba, 1993.
Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463/1071), Abū ʿUmar. Al-Istīʿāb fī maʿrifat al-aṣḥāb. ed. ʿĀdil
Murshid. Amman: Dār al-iʿlām, 2002.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Bibliography 901
al-Bayhaqī (d. 458/1066), Abū Bakr. Al-Madkhal ilā l-sunan al-kubrā. ed. Muḥammad
Ḍiyāʾ al-Raḥmān al-Aʿẓamī. 2 vols. Riyad: Aḍwāʾ al-salaf, 1999.
Berg, Herbert. The Development of Exegesis in Early Islam. Richmond: Curzon, 2000.
Bergsträsser and Theodor Nöldeke, Gotthelf. Geschichte des Qorâns: Die Geschichte des
Qorāntexts. 3 vols. Leipzig: Dieterich’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1926.
Brown, Jonathan. “How We Know Early Ḥadīth Critics Did Matn Criticism and Why It’s
So Hard to Find.” Islamic Law and Society 15, no. 2 (2008): 143–84.
Brown, Jonathan. “The Rules of Matn Criticism: There Are No Rules.” Islamic Law and
Society 19 (2012): 356–396.
Burton, John. The Collection of the Qurʾān. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1977.
Cook, Michael. “The stemma of the regional codices of the Koran.” Graeco-Arabica
9–10 (2004): 89–104.
Coulson, N. J. A History of Islamic Law. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1964.
Crone, Patricia. “Two Legal Problems Bearing on the Early History of the Qurʾān.”
Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 18 (1994): 1–37
al-Daʿjānī, Ṭalāl. Mawārid Ibn ʿAsākir fī Tārīkh Dimashq. 3 vols. Riyad: Al-Jāmiʿa
al-Islāmiyya, 2003.
Ḍamra, Ibrāhīm Tawfīq. Aḥlā durūsī fī riwāyat al-Sūsī. Amman: Al-Maktaba
al-waṭaniyya, 2007.
Ḍamra, Ibrāhīm Tawfīq. Ghāyat surūrī fī riwāyat al-Dūrī. Amman: Al-Maktaba
Ḍamra, Ibrāhīm Tawfīq. Kashf al-astār ʿan ṭarīq Hubayra al-tammār. Amman: Dāʾirat
al-maktaba al-waṭaniyya, 2013.
Ḍamra, Ibrāhīm Tawfīq. Naẓm al-Jumān fī qirāʾat al-Aʿmash b. Mahrān. Amman:
al-Maktaba al-waṭaniyya, 2011.
Ḍamra, Ibrāhīm Tawfīq. al-Ṭarīq al-munīr ilā qirāʾat Ibn Kathīr. Amman: al-Maktaba
al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3), Abū ʿAmr. al-Idghām al-kabīr. ed. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Ḥasan al-
ʿĀrif. Cairo: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 2003.
al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3), Abū ʿAmr. Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ. ed. ʿAbd al-
Muhaymin ʿAbd al-Salām Ṭaḥḥān et al. 4 vols. PhD diss.: Jāmiʿat Umm al-qurā,
1985–95.
al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3), Abū ʿAmr. Al-Muḥkam fī naqṭ al-maṣāḥif. ed. ʿAzza Ḥasan.
Beirut: Dār al-fikr, 1997.
al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3), Abū ʿAmr. Al-Muqniʿ fī maʿrifat marsūm maṣāḥif ahl al-amṣār.
ed. Nūra bint Ḥasan bin Fahd al-Ḥumayyid. Riyad: Dār al-Tadmuriyya, 2010.
al-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3), Abū ʿAmr. Al-Taysīr fī l-qirāʿāt al-sabʿ. ed. Ḥātim al-Ḍāmin.
Cairo: Maktabat al-tābiʿīn, 2008; ed. Otto Pretzl. Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1984.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

902 Bibliography
Ibn Abī Dāwūd al-Sijistānī (d. 316/928), Abū Bakr. Kitāb al-Maṣāḥif. ed. Muḥibb al-Dīn
ʿAbd al-Sabḥān Wāʿiẓ. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-bashāʾir al-islāmiyya, 2002.
Déroche, François. La transmission écrite du Coran dans les débuts de l’Islam: le codex
Parisino-petropolitanus. Leiden: Brill, 2008.
Déroche, François. Qurʾans of the Umayyads. Leiden: Brill, 2014.
Déroche, François. “Written Transmission.” In The Blackwell Companion to the Qurʾān,
edited by Andrew Rippin, 172–86. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.
al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Shams al-Dīn. Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ al-kibār ʿalā l-ṭabaqāt
wa-l-aʿṣār. ed. Ṭayyār Ạltīqūlāg. 4 vols. Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, İslâm
Araştırmaları Merkezi, 1995.
al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Shams al-Dīn. Mīzān al-iʿtidāl fī naqd al-rijāl. ed. ʿAlī
Muḥammad al-Bijjāwī. 4 vols. Beirut: Dār al-maʿrifa, 1963.
al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Shams al-Dīn. Al-Ruwāt al-thiqāt al-mutakallam fīhim bimā
lā yūjib raddahum. ed. Muḥammad Ibrāhīm al-Mawṣilī. Beirut: Dār al-bashāʾir
al-islāmiyya, 1992.
al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Shams al-Dīn. Siyar aʿlām al-nubalāʾ. ed. Shuʿayb al-Arnāʾūṭ.
25 vols. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 1985.
al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Shams al-Dīn. Tārīkh al-Islām wa-wafayāt al-mashāhīr
wa-l-aʿlām. ed. ʿAbd al-Salām Tadmurī. 53 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1990.
Dickinson, Eerik. The Development of Early Sunnite Ḥadīth Criticism. Leiden: Brill, 2001.
al-Dimyāṭī (d. 1117/1705), Shihāb al-Dīn. Itḥāf fuḍalāʾ al-bashar fī l-qirāʾāt al-arbaʿata
ʿashar. ed. Shaʿbān Muḥammad Ismāʿīl. 2 vols. Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1987; ed. Anas
Mahra. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1998.
Donner, Fred M. Narratives of Islamic Origins. Princeton: The Darwin Press, 1998.
al-Dūsarī, Ibrāhīm b. Saʿīd. Mukhtaṣar al-ʿibārāt li-muʿjam iṣṭilāḥāt al-qirāʾāt. Riyad:
Dār al-ḥaḍāra, 2008.
Dutton, Yasin. “Orality, Literacy, and the ‘Seven’ Aḥruf Ḥadīth.” Journal of Islamic
Studies 23, no. 1 (2012): 1–49.
Dutton, Yasin. The Origins of Islamic Law: The Qurʾan, the Muwaṭṭa‌ʾ and Madinan ʿAmal.
London: Routledge, 2002.
Dutton, Yasin. “Two ‘Ḥijāzī’ Fragments of the Qurʾan and Their Variants, or: When Did
the Shawādhdh Become Shādhdh?”. Journal of Islamic Manuscripts 8 (2017): 1–56.
El-Wakil, Ahmed. “New Light on the Collection and Authenticity of the Qurʾan: The
Case for the Existence of a ‘Master Copy’ and how it Relates to the Reading of Ḥafṣ
ibn Sulaymān from ʿĀṣim ibn Abī al-Nujūd.” Journal of Shi’a Islamic Studies 8, no. 4
(2015): 409–448.
al-Faḍlī, ʿAbd al-Hādī. Al-Qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya: tārīkh wa-taʿrīf. Beirut: Dār al-qalam,
1985.
Ibn al-Faḥḥām al-Ṣiqillī (d. 516/1122), Abū l-Qāsim. Al-Tajrīd li-bughyat al-murīd. ed.
Ḍārī al-Dūrī. Amman: Dār ʿAmmār, 2002.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Bibliography 903
al-Fālūjī l-Atharī, Akram b. Muḥammad Ziyāda. Muʿjam shuyūkh al-Ṭabarī. Cairo: Dār
Ibn ʿAffān, 2005.
al-Fārisī (d. 377/987), Abū ʿAlī. Al-Ḥujja li-l-qurrāʾ al-sabʿa. ed. Badr al-Dīn Qahwajī and
Bashīr Juwayjānī. 7 vols. Damascus: Dār al-Ma‌ʾmūn li-l-turāth, 1984.
al-Farrāʾ (d. 207/822), Abū Zakariyyā. Maʿānī l-Qurʾān. ed. Muḥammad ʿAlī al-Najjār
and Aḥmad Najātī. 3 vols. Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1983.
Fedeli, Alba and Andrew Edmondson. “Early Qur’anic Manuscripts and their Networks:
A Phylogenetic Analysis project.” Paper presented at the Conference “Qur’anic
Manuscript Studies: State of the Field”, Budapest, May 2017.
George, Alain. “Coloured Dots and the Question of Regional Origins in Early Qur’ans
(Part I).” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 17, no. 1 (2015): 1–44.
George, Alain. “Coloured Dots and the Question of Regional Origins in Early Qur’ans
(Part II).” Journal of Qur’anic Studies Vol. 17, no. 2 (2015): 75–102.
Ibn Ghalbūn (d. 399/1009), Abū l-Ḥasan. Al-Tadhkira fī l-qirāʾāt al-thamāni. ed. Ayman
Rushdī Suwayd. 2 vols. Jeddah: Silsilat uṣūl al-Nashr, 1991.
Goldziher, Ignác. Die Richtungen der Islamischen Koranauslegung. Leiden: Brill, 1920.
al-Ḥaddād, Muḥammad b. ʿAlī b. Khalaf. Al-Aʿmāl al-kāmila li-l-ʿallāma al-muqriʾ
Muḥammad b. ʿAlī b. Khalaf al-Ḥusaynī al-Ḥaddād shaykh ʿumūm al-maqāriʾ
al-Miṣriyya. ed. Ḥamad Allāh al-Ṣaftī. Damascus: Dār al-Ghawthānī, 2010.
al-Hādī Qāba, ʿAbd al-Ḥalīm b. Muḥammad. al-Qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya tārīkhuhā
thubūtuhā ḥujjiyyatuhā wa-aḥkāmuhā. Beirut: Dār al-gharb al-islāmī, 1999.
Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 852/1449), Shihāb al-Dīn. Al-Iṣāba fī tamyīz al-ṣaḥāba. ed.
Abū Hājar Zaghlūl. 9 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1853.
Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 852/1449), Shihāb al-Dīn. Lisān al-Mīzān. ed. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ
Abū Ghudda and Salmān ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Abū Ghudda. 10 vols. Beirut: Dār al-bashāʾir
al-islāmiyya, 2002.
Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 852/1449), Shihāb al-Dīn. Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb. ed. Ibrāhīm
al-Zaybaq and ʿĀdil Murshid. 4 vols. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 1995.
al-Ḥamad, Ghānim Qaddūrī. Muḥāḍarāt fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān. Amman: Dār ʿAmmār, 2003.
al-Ḥamad, Ghānim Qaddūrī. Rasm al-Muṣḥaf: dirāsa lughawiyya tārīkhiyya. Baghdād:
Jāmiʿat Baghdād, 1982.
Ḥamāda, Ḥusayn Ṣāliḥ. Mabāḥith fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-maḥajja
al-bayḍāʾ, 2008.
Hamdan, Omar. “The Second Maṣāḥif Project: A Step Towards the Canonization of the
Qur’anic Text.” In The Qurʾān in Context, edited by Angelika Neuwirth et al., 795–835.
Leiden: Brill, 2010.
Hamdan, Omar. Studien zur Kanonisierung des Korantextes: al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrīs Beiträge
zur Geschichte des Korans. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006.
Hamdan, Omar. “Ẓāhirat al-manāmāt fī kutub al-qirāʾāt wa-tarājim al-qurrāʾ.” Majallat
maʿhad al-Imām al-Shāṭibī, no. 4 (2007): 57.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

904 Bibliography
Ibn Ḥanbal (d. 241/855), Aḥmad. Musnad al-Imām Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal. ed. Shuʿayb
al-Arnāʾūṭ and ʿĀdil Murshid. 50 vols. Beirut: Dār al-risāla, 1995.
al-Hararī, Muḥammad. Al-Qirāʾāt al-mutawātira allatī ankarahā Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī fī
Tafsīrihi. Riyad: [n.p.], 1986.
Harvey, Ramon. “The Legal Epistemology of Qur’anic Variants: The Readings of Ibn
Masʿd in Kufan fiqh and the Ḥanafī madhhab.” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 19, no. 1
(2017): 72–101.
Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344), Muḥammad b. Yūsuf. Tafsīr al-baḥr al-muḥīṭ.
ed. ʿĀdil ʿAbd al-Mawjūd and ʿAlī Muʿawwaḍ. 8 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya,
1993.
Ibn Ḥibbān al-Bustī (d. 354/965), Abū Ḥātim. Al-Thiqāt. Hyderabad: Dāʾirat al-maʿārif
al-ʿuthmāniyya, 1978.
Hilali, Asma. The Sanaa palimpsest : the transmission of the Qur’an in the first
centuries AH. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2017.
al-Ḥillī, Ḥāzim Sulaymān. Al-Qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya bayn al-mustashriqīn wa-l-nuḥāt.
Beirut: Manshūrāt al-Jamal, 2014.
al-Hudhalī (d. 465/1072–3), Abū l-Qāsim. Al-Kāmil fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr wa-l-arbaʿīn
al-zāʾida ʿalayhā. ed. Jamāl b. al-Sayyid b. Rifāʿī l-Shāyib. Cairo: Muʾassasat Samā,
2007.
al-Iṣfahānī (d. 360/971), Ḥamza b. al-Ḥasan. Al-Tanbīh ʿalā ḥudūth al-taṣḥīf. ed.
Muḥammad Asʿad Ṭalas. Beirut: Dār Ṣādir, 1992.
Isḥāq, ʿAlī Shawwākh. Muʿjam muṣannafāt al-Qurʾān al-karīm. 4 vols. Riyad: Dār
al-Rifāʿī, 1984.
Ismāʿīl, Shaʿbān Muḥammad. Al-Qirāʾāt: aḥkāmuhā wa-maṣdaruhā. [n.p.], 1982.
al-Istarābādhī (d. 686/1287), Raḍī l-Dīn. Sharḥ Shāfiyat ibn al-Ḥājib. ed. Muḥammad
Muḥyī l-Dīn ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd et al. 4 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1982.
al-Jamal, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān. “Athar ikhtilāf al-qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya fī l-waqf wa-l-ibtidāʾ.”
Majallat Jāmiʿat al-Najāḥ li-l-Abḥāth 18, no. 1 (2004): 285–308.
al-Jaʿbarī (d. 732/1332), Burhān al-Dīn. Jamīlat arbāb al-marāṣid fī sharḥ ʿAqīlat atrāb
al-qaṣāʾid. ed. Muḥammad Khuḍayr Muḍḥī l-Zawbaʿī. Damascus: Dār al-Ghawthānī,
2010.
Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597/1200–1), Abū l-Faraj. Al-Ḍuʿafāʾ wa-l-matrūkīn. ed. ʿAbd Allāh
al-Qāḍī. 3 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1986.
Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Abū l-Khayr. Ghāyat al-nihāya fī ṭabaqāt al-qurrāʾ. ed.
Gotthelf Bergsträsser. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 2006.
Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Abū l-Khayr. Munjid al-muqriʾīn wa-murshid al-ṭālibīn. ed.
ʿAlī b. Muḥammad al-ʿImrān. Mecca: Dār al-fawāʾid, 1998.
Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Abū l-Khayr. Al-Muqaddimah fī-mā yajib ʿalā qāriʾ al-Qurʾān
an yaʿlamah. ed. Ayman Rushdī Suwayd. Jaddah: Dār Nūr al-maktabāt, 2006.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Bibliography 905
Ibn al-Jazarī (d. 833/1429), Abū l-Khayr. Al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr. ed. Muḥammad
Sālim Muḥaysin. 3 vols. Cairo: Maktabat al-Qāhira, 1978; ed. ʿAlī Muḥammad
al-Ḍabbāʿ. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya.
Jeffery, Arthur. The Foreign Vocabulary of the Qurʾān. Leiden: Brill, 2007.
Jeffery, Arthur. Materials for the History of the Text of the Qurʾān : the Old Codices. Brill:
Leiden, 1937.
Jeffery, Arthur. “The Qurʾān Readings of Ibn Miqsam.” In Ignace Goldziher Memorial
Volume, edited by Samuel Löwinger and Joseph Somogyi, 1–38. Budapest and
Jerusalem: [n.p.], 1948, 1958.
Ibn Jinnī (d. 392/1002), Abū l-Fatḥ. Al-Muḥtasab fī tabyīn wujūh shawādhdh al-qirāʾāt
wa-l-īḍāḥ ʿanhā. ed. ʿAlī al-Najdī Nāṣif and ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Shalabī. 2 vols. Cairo: al-
Majlis al-aʿlā li-l-shuʾūn al-islāmiyya, 1966.
al-Jundī, Khālid. al-Minaḥ al-rabbāniyya li-l-shakhṣiyya al-Muḥammadiyya fī l-radd ʿalā
l-Ruṣāfī. Beirut: Dār al-maʿrifa, 2016.
Juynboll, G. H. A. Muslim Tradition : Studies in Chronology, Provenance, and Authorship
of Early Ḥadīth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373), Abū l-Fidāʾ ʿImād al-Dīn. Al-Bāʿith al-ḥathīth sharḥ ikhtiṣār
ʿulūm al-Ḥadīth. ed. Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir. Riyad: Maktabat al-maʿārif, 1996.
Ibn Khālawayhi (d. 370/980–1), Abū ʿAbd Allāh. al-Ḥujja fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ. ed. ʿAbd al-
ʿĀl Sālim Mukarram. Beirut: Dār al-shurūq, 1979.
Ibn Khālawayhi (d. 370/980–1), Abū ʿAbd Allāh. Mukhtaṣar fī shawādhdh al-Qurʾān min
Kitāb al-Badīʿ. ed. G. Bergesträsser. Baghdad: Maktabat al-Muthannā, 1968.
Ibn Khaldūn (d. 808/1406), ʿAbd al-Raḥmān. al-Muqaddima. ed. ʿAbd al-Salām
al-Shaddādī. 5 vols. al-Dār al-Bayḍāʾ: Bayt al-funūn wa-l-ʿulūm wa-l-ādāb, 2005.
al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī (d. 463/1069), Abū Bakr. Al-Kifāya fī ʿilm al-riwāya. Hyderabad:
Dāʾirat al-maʿārif al-ʿuthmāniyya, 1938.
al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī (d. 463/1069), Abū Bakr. Tārīkh Madīnat al-Salām wa-akhbār
muḥaddithīhā wa-dhikr quṭṭānihā l-ʿulamāʾ min ghayr ahlihā wa-wāridīhā. ed.
Bashshār ʿAwwād Maʿrūf. 17 vols. Beirut: Dār al-gharb al-islāmī, 2001.
al-Khaṭīb, ʿAbd al-Laṭīf. Muʿjam al-qirāʾāt. 11 vols. Damascus: Dār Saʿd al-Dīn, 2000.
al-Khūʾī, Abū l-Qāsim. Al-Bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Aʿlamī, 1974.
al-Kirmānī (d. circa. 535/1140), Raḍī l-Dīn. Shawādhdh al-qirāʾāt. ed. Shimrān al-ʿIjlī.
Beirut: Muʾassasat al-balāgh, 2001.
al-Kishkī, ʿAṭiyya. Qirāʾāt al-nabī dirāsa qurʾāniyya ḥadītha. Riyad: al-Nashr al-ʿilmī
wa-l-maṭābiʿ, 2011.
al-Labadī, Muḥammad Samīr Najīb. Athar al-Qurʾān wa-l-qirāʾāt fī l-naḥw al-ʿarabī.
Kuwait: Dār al-kutub al-thaqāfiyya, 1978.
Lichtenstädter, Ilse. “al-Mufaḍḍal b. Muḥammad b. Yaʿlā b. ʿĀmir b. Sālim b. al-Rammāl
al-Ḍabbī.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

906 Bibliography
al-Māḍī, Sāmī. “Ibn Shanabūdh wa-maẓāhir qirāʾatihi bayn al-qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya.”

Majallat kulliyyat al-ādāb, no. 102: 1–44.
al-Mahdawī (d. 440/1048), Abū l-ʿAbbās. Hijāʾ maṣāḥif al-amṣār. ed. Ḥātim al-Ḍāmin.
Sharjah: Dār Ibn al-Jawzī, 2009.
Makkī b. Abī Ṭālib al-Qaysī (d. 437/1045), Abū Muḥammad. Al-Ibāna ʿan maʿānī l-qirāʾāt.
ed. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Ismāʿīl Shalabī. Cairo: Dār nahḍat Miṣr, 1960.
Makkī b. Abī Ṭālib al-Qaysī (d. 437/1045), Abū Muḥammad. Al-Kashf ʿan wujūh al-qirāʾāt
al-sabʿ wa-ʿilalihā wa-ḥujajihā. ed. Muḥyī l-Dīn Ramaḍān. 2 vols. Beirut: Muʾassasat
al-risāla, 1997.
al-Marʿashlī, Yūsuf. ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth al-sharīf wa-bayān maṣādirihi. Beirut: Dār
al-maʿrifa, 2017.
al-Mārghanī (d. 1349/1931), Ibrāhīm b. Aḥmad. Dalīl al-ḥayrān ʿalā mawrid al-ẓamʾān.
Tunisia: [n.p.], 1907.
Mawqiʿ nūn li-l-Qurʾān wa-ʿulūmihi. http://www.nquran.com/.
Melchert, Christopher. “Ibn Mujāhid and the Establishment of Seven Qurʾanic
Readings.” Studia Islamica 91 (2000): 5–22.
Ibn Mihrān (d. 381/991), Abū Bakr Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn. Al-Ghāya fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr
yalīhi bāb fī l-istiʿādha wa-l-tasmiya wa-imālāt Qutayba ʿan al-Kisāʾī. ed. Muḥammad
Ghiyāth al-Jinbāz. Riyad: Dār al-Shawāf, 1986.
Ibn Mihrān (d. 381/991), Abū Bakr Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn. Al-Mabsūṭ fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr.
ed. Subayʿ Ḥākimī. Damascus: Majmaʿ al-lughah al-ʿarabiyya, 1986.
al-Mizzī (d. 742/1341), Jamāl al-Dīn. Tahdhīb al-kamāl fī asmāʾ al-rijāl. ed. Bashshār
ʿAwwād Maʿrūf. 35 vols. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 1992.
Motzki, Herald. Analysing Muslim Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2010.
Motzki, Herald. “The Collection of the Qurʾān: A Reconsideration of Western Views in
Light of Recent Methodological Developments.” Der Islam 78: 1–34.
Muḥaysin, Muḥammad Sālim. Muʿjam ḥuffāẓ al-Qurʾān ʿabr al-tārīkh. Beirut: Dār al-jīl,
1992.
Ibn Mujāhid (d. 324/936), Abū Bakr. Kitāb al-Sabʿa fī l-qirāʾāt. ed. Shawqī Ḍayf. Cairo:
Dār al-maʿārif, 1979.
al-Munajjid, Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn. “Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ al-kibār ʿalā l-ṭabaqāt wa-l-aʿṣār
li-l-Dhahabī.” Majallat majmaʿ al-lugha al-ʿarabiyya bi-Dimashq 49, no. 1 (1974):
133–47.
Muslim b. al-Ḥajjāj (d. 261/875) and Muḥyī l-Dīn al-Nawawī (d. 676/1277), Abū l-Ḥusayn.
Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim bi-sharḥ al-Nawawī (al-Minhāj sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim b. al-Ḥajjāj).
18 vols. Cairo: al-Maṭbaʿa al-Miṣriyya bi-l-Azhar, 1929.
al-Muṭayrī, Aḥmad b. Saʿd. Asānīd al-Qirāʾāt wa-manhaj al-qurrāʾ fī dirāsatihā. Riyad:
Jāmiʿat al-Imām Muḥammad b. Suʿūd, 2013.
Ibn al-Nadīm (d. 384/1047), Abū l-Faraj. Kitāb al-Fihrist. ed. Riḍā Tajaddud. Tehran:
Maktabat al-Asadī, 1971.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Bibliography 907
al-Naḥḥās (d. 338/949), Abū Jaʿfar. Iʿrāb al-Qurʾān. ed. Zuhayr Ghāzī Zāhid. 5 vols.
Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1985.
Naṣr, ʿAṭiyya Qābil. Ghāyat al-murīd fī ʿilm al-tajwīd. Riyadh: [n.p.], 1992.
Nasser, Shady Hekmat. “The Grammatical Blunders of Qurʾān Reciters: Zallat al-qāriʾ
by Abū Ḥafṣ al-Nasafī (d. 537/1142).” Journal of Abbasid Studies, no. 2 (2015): 1–37.
Nasser, Shady Hekmat. “Ibn Mujāhid.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Third Edition (2017).
Published electronically 2017.
Nasser, Shady Hekmat. “(Q. 12:2) We have sent it down as an Arabic Qurʾān: Praying
behind the Lisper.” Islamic Law and Society 23 (2016): 23–51.
Nasser, Shady Hekmat. “Revisiting Ibn Mujāhid’s position on the seven canonical
Readings: Ibn ʿĀ mir’s problematic reading of “kun fa-yakūna”.” Journal of Qur’anic
Studies 17, no. 1 (2015): 85–113.
Nasser, Shady Hekmat. The Transmission of the Variant Readings of the Qurʾān: The
Problem of tawātur and the Emergence of shawādhdh. Leiden: Brill, 2013.
Nasser, Shady Hekmat. “The Two-Rāwī Canon before and afer ad-Dānī (d. 444/1052–3):
The Role of Abū ṭ-Ṭayyib Ibn Ghalbūn (d. 389/998) and the Qayrawān/Andalus
School in Creating the Two-Rāwī Canon.” Oriens 41, no. 1–2 (2013): 41–75.
al-Nawawī (d. 676/1277), Abū Zakariyyāʾ. Al-Majmūʿ sharḥ al-Muhadhdhab li-l-Shīrāzī
ed. Muḥammad Najīb al-Muṭīʿī. 23 vols. Jedda: Maktabat al-irshād, 1980.
Neuwirth, Angelika. “al-Shāṭibī.” Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān. http://dx.doi.org.ezp-
prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_6866.
al-Nuwayrī (d. 857/1453), Abū l-Qāsim. Sharḥ Ṭayyibat al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr. ed.
ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Abū Sinna. 3 vols. Cairo: al-Maṭābiʿ al-amīriyya, 1986.
al-Nuwayrī (d. 857/1453), Abū l-Qāsim. Sharḥ Ṭayyibat al-Nashr fī l-qirāʾāt al-ʿashr. ed.
Majdī Bāslūm. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 2002.
Owens, Jonathan. A Linguistic History of Arabic. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Paret, R. “Ibn S͟hanabūd͟h.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition.
al-Qāḍī, ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ. al-Qirāʾāt al-shādhdha wa-tawjīhuhā min lughat al-ʿarab.
Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1981.
al-Qāḍī, ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ. Al-Qirāʾāt fī naẓar al-mustashriqīn wa-l-mulḥidīn. Medina:
[n.p.], 1981.
al-Qāḍī, ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ. Tārīkh al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf. Cairo: Maktabat al-Jundī, [n.d.].
al-Qāḍī, ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ. Al-Wāfī fī sharḥ al-Shāṭibiyya fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ. Jedda: Maktabat
al-Sawādī li-l-tawzīʿ, 1999.
Qamḥāwī, Muḥammad. Al-Burhān fī tajwīd al-Qurʾān. Beirut: Al-Maktaba al-thaqāfiyya,
1972.
Ibn al-Qāṣiḥ (d. 801/1399), Abū l-Baqāʾ. Sharḥ Talkhīṣ al-fawāʾid wa-taqrīb al-mutabāʿid
ʿalā ʿAqīlat atrāb al-qaṣāʾid. ed. ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Qāḍī. Cairo: Muṣṭafā al-Bābī
al-Ḥalabī, 1949.
Ibn al-Qāṣiḥ (d. 801/1399), Abū l-Baqāʾ. Sirāj al-qāriʾ al-mubtadī wa-tidhkār al-muqriʾ
al-muntahī. ed. ʿAlī Muḥammad al-Ḍabbāʿ. Cairo: Muṣṭafā al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī, 1954.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

908 Bibliography
al-Qāsim b. Sallām (d. 224/838), Abū ʿUbayd al-Harawī. Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān. ed. Aḥmad b.
ʿAbd al-Wāḥid al-Khayyāṭī. 2 vols. Morocco: Maṭbaʿat Faḍāla, 1995.
al-Qifṭī (d. 646/1249), Jamāl al-Dīn. Inbāh al-ruwāt ʿalā anbāh al-nuḥāt. ed. Muḥammad
Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm. 4 vols. Cairo: Dār al-fikr al-ʿarabī, 1986.
al-Quḍāt, Muḥammad ʿIṣām. Al-Wāḍiḥ fī aḥkām al-tajwīd. Amman: Dār al-nafāʾis, [n.d].
al-Qurṭubī (d. 671/1273), Abū ʿAbd Allāh. Al-Jāmiʿ li-aḥkām al-Qurʾān. ed. ʿAbd Allāh
al-Turkī. 24 vols. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-risāla, 2006.
Ibn Qutayba (d. 276/828), Abū Muḥammad. Ta‌ʾwīl mushkil al-Qurʾān. ed. Aḥmad Ṣaqr.
Cairo: Dār al-turāth, 1973.
Rabb, Intisar. “Non-Canonical Readings of the Qur’an: Recognition and Authenticity
(The Ḥimṣī Reading).” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 8, no. 2 (2006): 84–127.
al-Rājiḥī, ʿAbduh. Al-Lahajāt al-ʿArabiyya fī l-Qirāʾāt al-Qurʾāniyya. Alexandria: Dār
al-maʿrifa al-jāmiʿiyya, 1996.
al-Rāzī (d. 604/1207), Fakhr al-Dīn. Mafātīḥ al-ghayb. 32 vols. Beirut: Dār al-fikr, 1981.
al-Rāzī, Abū l-Faḍl (d. 454/1062). Maʿānī l-aḥruf al-sabʿa. ed. Ḥasan Ḍiyāʾ al-Dīn ʿItr.
Qatar: Wizārat al-awqāf wa-l-shuʾūn al-islāmiyya, 2011.
Robson, James. “al-Djarḥ wa ‘l-Taʿdīl.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second edition.
al-Rūmī, Fahd b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān. Dirāsāt fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān al-karīm. Riyad: Maktabat
al-malik Fahd, 2005.
al-Sabt, Khālid b. ʿUthmān. Qawāʿid al-tafsīr jamʿan wa-dirāsatan. Riyad: Dār Ibn ʿAffān,
2000.
Sadeghi, Behnam and Mohsen Goudarzi. “Ṣan‘ā’ 1 and the Origins of the Qur’ān.” Der
Islam 87, no. 1 (2012): 1–129.
al-Ṣafadī (d. 764/1363), Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn. Al-Wāfī bi-l-wafayāt. ed. Aḥmad al-Arnāʾūṭ and
Turkī Muṣṭafā. 29 vols. Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-turāth al-ʿarabī, 2000.
al-Ṣafāqisī (d. 1118/1706), Abū l-Ḥasan. Ghayth al-nafʿ fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ. ed. Sālim
al-Zahrānī. 3 vols.: PhD diss., Jāmiʿat Umm al-qurā, 2005.
al-Sakhāwī (d. 643/1245), ʿAlam al-Dīn. Jamāl al-qurrāʾ wa-kamāl al-iqrāʾ. ed. ʿAlī
Ḥusayn al-Bawwāb. 2 vols. Mecca: Maktabat al-turāth, 1987.
al-Sakhāwī (d. 902/1428), Shams al-Dīn. Fatḥ al-mughīth bi-sharḥ Alfiyyat al-Ḥadīth. ed.
ʿAbd al-Karīm al-Khuḍayr and Muḥammad Fuhayd. 5 vols. Riyad: Dār al-minhāj,
2005.
al-Ṣāliḥ, Ṣubḥī. Mabāḥith fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān. Beirut: Dār al-ʿilm li-l-malāyīn, 1977.
Ibn al-Sallār (d. 782/1380), Amīn al-Dīn. Ṭabaqāt al-qurrāʾ al-sabʿa. ed. Aḥmad ʿAzzūr.
Beirut: al-Maktaba al-ʿaṣriyya, 2003.
al-Samʿānī, Abū Saʿd (d. 562/1166). Al-Ansāb. ed. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Yamānī. 12 vols.
Cairo: Maktabat Ibn Taymiyya, 1980.
al-Saʿīd, Labīb. Difāʿ ʿan al-qirāʾāt al-mutawātira fī muwājahat al-Ṭabarī al-mufassir.
Cairo: [n.p.], 1978.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Bibliography 909
al-Samīn al-Ḥalabī (d. 756/1355), Aḥmad b. Yūsuf. Al-Durr al-maṣūn fī ʿulūm al-kitāb
al-maknūn. ed. Aḥmad al-Kharrāṭ. 11 vols. Damascus: Dār al-qalam, 1985.
Schoeler, Gregor. The Oral and the Written in Early Islam. Translated by Uwe Vagelpohl.
ed. James E. Montgomery. New York: Routledge, 2006.
Shabana, Ayman. “Custom, as a source of law.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, third edition.
al-Shāfiʿī (d. 204/820), Muḥammad b. Idrīs. Al-Risāla. ed. Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir.
Cairo: Maktabat dār al-turāth, 1979.
Shah, Mustafa. “The Case of variae lectiones in Classical Islamic Jurisprudence:
Grammar and the Interpretation of Law.” International Journal for the Semiotics of
Law 29, no. 2 (2016): 285–311.
Shah, Mustafa. “Exploring the Genesis of Early Arabic Linguistic Thought: Qur’anic
Readers and Grammarians of the Kūfan Tradition (Part I).” Journal of Qur’anic
Studies 5, no. 1 (2003): 47–78.
Shah, Mustafa. “Exploring the Genesis of Early Arabic Linguistic Thought: Qur’anic
Readers and Grammarians of the Basran Tradition (Part II).” Journal of Qur’anic
Studies 5, no. 2 (2003): 1–47.
Shāhīn, ʿAbd al-Ṣabūr. Athar al-qirāʾāt fī l-aṣwāt wa-l-naḥw al-ʿarabī: Abū ʿAmr b. al-ʿAlāʾ.
Cairo: al-Khānjī, 1987.
Abū Shāma al-Maqdisī (d. 665/1267), Shihāb al-Dīn. Ibrāz al-maʿānī min Ḥirz al-amānī
fī l-qirāʾāt al-sabʿ. ed. Ibrāhīm ʿAṭwa ʿAwaḍ. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1982.
Abū Shāma al-Maqdisī (d. 665/1267), Shihāb al-Dīn. Al-Murshid al-wajīz ilā ʿulūm
tataʿallaq bi-l-kitāb al-ʿazīz. ed. Ibrāhīm Shams al-Dīn. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-
ʿilmiyya, 2003.
Abū Shuhba, Muḥammad. Al-Madkhal li-dirāsat al-Qurʾān al-karīm. Riyad: Dār
al-Liwāʾ, 1987.
Sīb, Khayr al-Dīn. Al-Qirāʾāt al-qurʾāniyya wa-atharuhā fī ikhtilāf al-aḥkām al-fiqhiyya.
Beirut: Dār Ibn Ḥazm, 2008.
Sībawayhi (d. 180/796), Abū Bishr ʿAmr b. ʿUthmān. Al-Kitāb. ed. ʿAbd al-Salām Hārūn.
5 vols. Cairo: Maktabat al-Khānjī, 1988.
Sibṭ al-Khayyāṭ (d. 541/1146), Abū Muḥammad ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAlī. Al-Mubhij fī l-qirāʾāt
al-thamāni wa-qirāʾat al-Aʿmash wa-Ibn Muḥayṣin wa-ikhtiyār Khalaf wa-l-Yazīdī. ed.
ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz b. Nāṣir al-Sabr. 2 vols.: PhD diss., Jāmiʿat al-Imām Muḥammad b. Suʿūd
al-islāmiyya, 1984–5.
Sinai, Nicolai. “When did the consonantal skeleton of the Quran reach closure? Part I.”
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 77, no. 2 (2014): 273–292.
Sinai, Nicolai. “When did the consonantal skeleton of the Quran reach closure? Part II.”
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 77, no. 3 (2014): 509–521.
Stewart, Devin J. “Consensus, Authority, and the Interpretive Community in the
Thought of Muḥammad b. Jarīr al-Ṭabarī.” Journal of Qur’anic Studies 18, no. 2 (2016):
130–179.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

910 Bibliography
al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), Jalāl al-Dīn. Bughyat al-wuʿāt fī ṭabaqāt al-lughawiyyīn

wa-l-nuḥāt. ed. Muḥammad Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-fikr, 1979.
al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), Jalāl al-Dīn. Al-Durr al-manthūr fī l-tafsīr bi-l-ma‌ʾthūr. ed. ʿAbd
Allāh al-Turkī. 17 vols. Cairo: Markaz Hajar li-l-buḥūth wa-l-dirāsāt al-ʿarabiyya
wa-l-islāmiyya, 2003.
al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), Jalāl al-Dīn. Al-Itqān fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān. ed. Markaz al-dirāsāt
al-qurʾāniyya. 7 vols. Medina: Mujammaʿ al-malik Fahd li-ṭibāʿat al-Muṣḥaf al-sharīf,
2005.
al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), Jalāl al-Dīn. Tadrīb al-rāwī fī sharḥ Taqrīb al-Nawāwī. ed. Ṣalāḥ
ʿUwayḍa. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 1996.
al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923), Abū Jaʿfar. Jāmiʿ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān. ed. ʿAbd Allāh
al-Turkī. 26 vols. Cairo: Dār Hajar, 2001.
al-Ṭabrisī (d. 548/1154), Abū ʿAlī. Majmaʿ al-bayān fī tafsīr al-Qurʾān. 10 vols. Beirut: Dār
al-ʿulūm, 2005.
Talmon, Rafael. “Ḥattā + Imperfect and Chapter 239 in Sībawayhī’s Kitāb: a Study in the
Early History of Arabic Grammar.” Journal of Semitic Studies XXXVIII, no. 1 (Spring
1993): 71–95.
Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328), Taqī l-Dīn. Majmūʿat al-fatāwā. ed. ʿĀmir al-Jazzār and
Anwar al-Bāz. 37 vols. al-Manṣūra: Dār al-wafāʾ, 2005.
al-Ṭayyār, Musāʿid b. Sulaymān. Wuqūf al-Qurʾān wa-atharuhā fī l-tafsīr. Riyad:
Mujammaʿ al-Malik Fahd, 2010.
al-Tirmidhī (d. 279/892), Abū ʿĪsā. Al-Jāmiʿ al-kabīr. ed. Bashshār ʿAwwād Maʿrūf. 6 vols.
Beirut: Dār al-gharb al-Islāmī, 1996.
al-ʿUkbarī (d. 616/1219), Abū l-Baqāʾ. Imlāʾ mā manna bihi l-Raḥmān min wujūh al-iʿrāb
wa-l-qirāʾāt fī jamīʿ al-Qurʾān. ed. Ibrāhīm ʿAṭwa ʿAwaḍ. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kutub
al-ʿilmiyya, 1979.
al-ʿUkbarī (d. 616/1219), Abū l-Baqāʾ. Iʿrāb al-qirāʾāt al-shawādhdh. ed. Muḥammad al-
Sayyid Aḥmad ʿAzzūr. 2 vols. Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1996.
Vollers, Karl. Volkssprache Und Schriftsprache Im Alten Arabien. Straßburg: Verlag von
Karl J. Trübner, 1906.
Watson, Janet C. E. The Phonology and Morphology of Arabic. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2002.
Wright, William. A Grammar of the Arabic Language. 2 vols. Beirut: Librairie du Liban,
1996.
al-Yaʿqūbī (d. 284/897), Abū l-ʿAbbās Aḥmad b. Isḥāq. Tārīkh al-Yaʿqūbī. ed. ʿAbd al-Amīr
Muhannā. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-Aʿlamī, 2010.
Yāqūt al-Ḥamawī (d. 626/1229), Abū ʿAbd Allāh. Muʿjam al-udabāʾ. ed. Iḥsān ʿAbbās.
7 vols. Beirut: Dār al-gharb al-islāmī, 1993.
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Bibliography 911
Zadeh, Travis E. The Vernacular Qur’an : Translation and the Rise of Persian Exegesis.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
al-Zajjāj (d. 311/923), Abū Isḥāq. Maʿānī l-Qurʾān wa-iʿrābuh. ed. ʿAbd al-Jalīl Shalabī.
5 vols. Beirut: ʿĀlam al-kutub, 1988.
al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1143), Abū l-Qāsim. Al-Kashshāf ʿan ḥaqāʾiq ghawāmiḍ al-tanzīl
wa-ʿuyūn al-aqāwīl fī wujūh al-ta‌ʾwīl. ed. ʿĀdil ʿAbd al-Mawjūd and ʿAlī Muḥammad
ʿAwaḍ. 6 vols. Riyad: Maktabat al-ʿUbaykān, 1998.
al-Zawraq, Muḥammad Khalīl. Uṣūl riwāyat Qālūn min ṭarīq al-Shāṭibiyya. Libia: Dār
al-kutub al-waṭaniyya, 2004.
al-Ziriklī, Khayr al-Dīn. Al-Aʿlām. 8 vols. Beirut: Dār al-ʿilm li-l-malāyīn, 2002.
al-Zubaydī (d. 379/989), Abū Bakr. Ṭabaqāt al-naḥwiyyīn wa-l-lughawiyyīn. ed.
Muḥammad Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm. Cairo: Dār al-maʿārif, 1973.
al-Zurqānī, Muḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAẓīm. Manāhil al-ʿirfān fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān. ed. Fawwāz
Zamarlī. 2 vols. Beirut: Dār al-kitāb al-ʿarabī, 1995.
Audio Recordings
“Mawqiʿ nūn li-l-Qurʾān wa-ʿulūmihi,” http://www.nquran.com/

Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim: Muḥammad Ṣiddīq al-Minshāwī, Muḥammad Ayyūb, Ibrāhīm
al-Akhḍar, Mashārī l-ʿIfāsī, ʿAbd Allāh Baṣfar
Shuʿba ʿan ʿĀṣim: ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī and ʿAbd al-Ḥakīm ʿAbd al-Laṭīf
Warsh ʿan Nāfiʿ: Maḥmūd Khalīl al-Ḥuṣarī, ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ ʿAbd al-Ṣamad, and Yāsīn
al-Jazāʾirī
Qālūn ʿan Nāfiʿ: Maḥmūd Khalīl al-Ḥuṣarī
Qunbul and al-Bazzī ʿan Ibn Kathīr: Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Ḥakīm
Al-Dūrī ʿan Abī ʿAmr: Maḥmūd Khalīl al-Ḥuṣarī and ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī
Al-Sūsī ʿan Abī ʿAmr: Recordings by ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī
Hishām and Ibn Dhakwān ʿan Ibn ʿĀmir: Miftāḥ al-Salṭanī
Khalaf ʿan Ḥamza: ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī
Khallād ʿan Ḥamza: Miftāḥ al-Salṭanī
Al-Dūrī and Abū l-Ḥārith ʿan al-Kisāʾī: ʿAbd al-Rashīd Ṣūfī
Abū Jaʿfar al-Madanī: Miftāḥ al-Salṭanī
Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī: Yāsir al-Mazrūʿī
A commentary on the Shāṭibiyya by Muḥammad ʿIṣām al-Quḍāt: https://youtu.be/
IqX5DtbFXsc
A commentary on the rules of Qurʾānic recitation by Ayman Suwayd: https://youtu
.be/LQo1-sBXHyg
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Index
ʿadāla (probity, trustworthiness, moral and al-Farrāʾ, Abū Zakariyyā 6, 68–9, 75, 160
professional integrity) 5, 61, 94, farsh (individual/unique variant readings)
103–6, 108, 117, 131, 135–6, 141, 143, 258 xiii, 5, 22, 43, 119, 139, 141, 190, 194, 206,
ʿĀʾisha bint Abī Bakr (The Prophet’s wife) 211, 218–22, 225, 229, 246, 252, 254, 259
137 fatwā (legal opinion) 7
ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib 17, 111, 114, 119 fiqh (law, jurisprudence) 61, 101, 118, 183–4
al-Aʿmash, Sulaymān b. Mihrān 32, 44–6,
58, 76–9, 83, 111, 114, 123, 143, 176 Ibn Ghalbūn, ʿAbd al-Munʿim (the father)
al-Andalusī, Abū Ḥayyān al-Gharnāṭī 20–1, and Abū l-Ḥasan Ibn Ghalbūn (the
76–7, 125, 183 son) 19, 110, 201
al-ʿāmma (majority of readers) 11, 123 ghunna (nasality) 11, 14, 65, 177, 196–7, 201
al-ʿarabiyya (standard, systematized Arabic)
5, 57, 60, 68, 76, 119, 253, 256, 258 Ḥadīth (traditions, accounts) xiii, 4–5, 31–2,
al-Aṣmaʿī, Abū Saʿīd 56–7, 80, 84, 166, 170, 37–8, 56–8, 61, 91, 93–4, 100–111, 117–18,
210, 218 125–37, 139, 143, 169–70, 183, 258
Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Abū Muḥammad 21, 61, 81, 125 Ḥafṣ ʿan ʿĀṣim 3, 8, 25, 27, 28, 246, 257–8
al-Azhar 8–9, 258 al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī (al-Nīshāpurī) 101
ḥarf, aḥruf, ḥurūf (letter, particle, variant
Baghdād 37, 101, 142 reading, mode of recitation) xii–xiii, 32,
al-Bāqillānī, Abū Bakr 127, 137, 144 34, 60, 118, 120, 169, 194, 209, 211, 220,
Baṣra (Baṣrīs, Baṣrans) 6, 32, 37–8, 41, 44, 51, 249–50, 252, 255–6
55, 59, 76, 81, 114, 118–20, 122, 124, 143–5, al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī, Abū Saʿīd 17, 36, 77
147–53, 156–8, 161, 172, 253, 258 Ḥijāz (ḥijāzī) 79, 114, 118–19, 123, 153–7,
bidʿa (innovation) 111, 134 159–60
Hubayra al-Tammār, Abū ʿUmar 4, 27–31,
Christians 140 35, 63, 67–8, 70, 72–3, 77, 81–2, 84,
86–7, 90, 175, 225, 228
ḍaʿīf (weak) 72, 135 al-Hudhalī, Abū l-Qāsim 6
ḍabṭ (accuracy, scrupulousness, academic al-Ḥulwānī, Aḥmad b. Yazīd 4, 23–4, 42,
proficiency) 5, 37, 104–6, 109, 131 47–50, 65, 71, 153–4, 167, 173, 198, 208–9,
Damascus (Dimashq, Damascene) 17, 81, 213–4, 227
101, 116, 119–20, 143, 168, 258 Abū Hurayra 111
al-Dānī, Abū ʿAmr 6–7, 9, 19, 45, 63, 69, 71,
80–1, 91, 108, 110, 120, 130, 143, 148, idghām (assimilation) 11, 13, 29, 81, 119, 174,
150–5, 157–8, 161, 167–8, 172, 179, 181, 194–5, 198–201, 204, 222, 248
193, 201, 209, 230, 258 ijāza (certificate) 101, 108, 129–30
al-Dimyāṭī, Shihāb al-Dīn 7, 46, 155 ijmāʿ (consensus) 3, 16, 18–19, 25, 29–30, 34,
al-Dūrī, Abū ʿUmar 4, 19, 23–4, 26, 43, 48, 36, 38, 42–6, 49–50, 54–5, 57, 91, 101, 106,
50, 54, 58, 133, 135, 181, 198, 215, 217–8, 109, 114, 122–4, 141, 143–4, 158, 194, 258
226, 228, 247 ikhtiyār (selection through personal opinion)
18, 44–5
Egypt (Miṣr) 8, 62, 101, 119 ikhtilās (slurring/concealing a short vowel)
10, 13, 70, 119, 177, 221–2, 249, 253
al-Fārisī, Abū ʿAlī 8, 32, 68–70, 72, 74, 76–9, ʿilal, tawjīh (justification of the readings)
81–4, 178, 183, 186 69, 107, 109
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Index 913
ʿilla (reason) 11, 109 madhhab (legal school) 102, 184

imāla (a>e shift) 9–10, 12–3, 27, 29, 42–3, Madīna (Medinan) 21, 45, 59, 76, 81, 84, 102,
47–8, 51–4, 56, 63, 66, 102, 177–8, 190–1, 119, 121–4, 138, 143–7, 149–51, 153–4, 156,
199, 203, 214–19, 249, 251–2, 254–6 159, 161, 259
ʿIrāq (Iraq, ʿIrāqīs) 19, 30, 62, 119, 123, 144–7, maghrib, north africa, Andalus (Western
151–2, 156–61 parts of the Islamic world) 7, 19, 62–3,
ishbāʿ (giving vowels their due of 197
lengthening) 10, 45, 72, 193, 227–8 Makka (Meccan) 30, 81, 120, 122, 132, 143,
ishmām (the inclination of one consonant 148–50, 153, 155, 157–8, 160, 162, 187,
to another or one vowel to another; giving 258
a consonant or vowel the scent of Makkī l-Qaysī, Abū Muḥammad 16–7, 63,
another) 10, 13, 70–1, 163, 204, 207, 225 84
Ibn Masʿūd 69, 103, 111, 114, 119, 126, 141, 184
jarḥ wa-taʿdīl, tazkiya (cross examination, mashriq (eastern parts of the Islamic world)
impeach, impugn) xiii, 80, 94, 105–7, 7, 19
117, 131, 136, 143 matn (body/text of the ḥadīth) 103, 106–7,
Ibn al-Jazarī, Abū l-Khayr 7, 9, 16–8, 21–3, 131, 136
27, 31–2, 38, 41, 51, 55, 57, 89, 108, 114, miḥna (inquisition) 142
117, 119, 130, 142–3, 152–4, 156, 168, 197, Ibn Mihrān, Abū Bakr 7–8, 101, 108, 110,
201, 207, 209, 258 115–6, 197
Jews 140 al-Mufaḍḍal al-Ḍabbī, Abū l-ʿAbbās 31–5,
44, 57–8, 60, 69, 74, 90, 158
kāfir (non-believer) 104 murūʾa (social propriety) 105
karāma (miracle) 135 muṣḥaf, maṣāḥif (codex, codices) xii–xiii,
khabar (pl. akhbār) 31 1–2, 4, 6, 16, 18, 20, 23, 56, 62, 81, 83–5,
Khalaf al-Bazzār (al-ʿāshir) 7, 15, 24, 26, 38, 110, 119–123, 126–7, 135, 137–8, 141,
45, 55, 58, 71, 80, 114, 134,160, 166, 197, 143–67, 172, 176, 180, 186, 203, 257–8
205, 247
Ibn Khālawayhi, Abū ʿAbd Allāh 8, 70, 165 oral, orality xiii, 1–5, 8–9, 17, 110, 130, 136–7,
Kūfa, Kūfan 9, 18, 33–4, 37–8, 77, 81, 100, 102, 139–43, 151, 153, 159, 163, 169–72, 175–7,
111, 114, 118–20, 123–4, 134, 143–5, 179–80, 182, 184, 207, 229, 257–9
147–55, 157–61
poetry (shiʿr) 31–2, 56–7, 93, 100, 123, 125,
lafẓ (utterance, verbatim) 103, 163, 207 139, 247, 251–4
laḥn (solecism, grammatical error) 43, 81, Prophet (Muḥammad) 2–4, 79, 102, 104–5,
137–8, 228 108, 110–18, 123, 126, 128, 131, 135, 139,
lugha (pl. lughāt) (dialects, regional linguistic 176, 183, 187–9, 257
variations) 43, 61, 72, 79, 81, 84, 137–8,
144, 183, 186–7, 189 qaṣr (standard pronunciation of vowels;
dropping a hamza preceded by long
al-Maʾmūn, ʿAbd Allāh (Abbasid Caliph) vowel) 10, 13, 207–8, 210, 249, 251
140 Quraysh (Qurashī) 119, 138
al-Madanī, Abū Jaʿfar Yazīd b. al-Qaʿqāʿ 7,
15, 41–2, 45, 59, 67, 70, 79–80, 87, 124, rasm (consonantal outline/skeleton/script)
135, 196–8, 209, 247 2–3, 6, 15–6, 18, 20, 61–2, 83, 110, 126–7,
maʿnā (meaning) 75, 84, 103, 105 141, 143, 157–9, 162–7, 173, 176, 183, 215,
madd (lengthening of vowels) 10, 13, 102, 247
162, 170, 173, 177, 179, 191, 207–11, 213, al-Rāzī, Abū Ḥātim 32, 49–50, 57, 88, 90, 172
249, 251–2, 254–6 al-Rāzī, Fakhr al-Dīn 125
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

914 Index
al-Rifāʿī, Abū Hishām 33, 38, 57, 69, 72, 87, tawātur, mutawātir (concurrent
100, 206, 218, 225 transmissions that impart certain/
rijāl (tarājim, biographical entries) necessary knowledge) xii, 2, 16, 21, 61, 72,
91, 107, 109–10, 117, 122–3, 126, 130–1, 136,
sakt (pause) 74, 102, 166, 210, 219, 228 142, 172, 178, 184, 209, 246
samāʿ (audition, license, being certified/ thiqa (trustworthy) 32, 34, 37, 76, 104, 110,
attested through aural reception of 117, 141, 143
material) xiii, 18, 36, 58, 70, 105 tilāwa, tajwīd (recitation) xiii, 2, 10, 208
shādhdh, shudhūdh, shawādhdh (Irregular,
anomalous) xii, 3, 5, 15–22, 27–28, 30, Ubayy b. Kaʿb 111–12, 114, 116, 118, 139, 141
32–34, 38, 42, 48–49, 51–52, 55, 66, 70, umma (nation, Muslim community) 5
76, 89, 109, 111, 122, 126, 136, 141–4, uṣūl (principles of Qurʾānic recitation) xiii,
155–156, 158, 176, 247, 251, 258 5, 22, 29, 43, 45, 65, 119, 139, 141, 164, 170,
al-Shāṭibī, Abū Muḥammad 6–7, 19, 91, 180, 183, 187–90, 220, 222, 229–30, 252
121–2, 230, 258 uṣūl al-fiqh (principles of Jurisprudence)
al-shāṭibiyya (ḥirz al-amānī wa-wajh 118
al-tahānī, versified poem by al-Shāṭibī) ʿUthmān b. ʿAffān, ʿUthmānic xiii, 1, 3, 5–6,
6–8, 16, 23, 26, 47, 49, 64, 89, 153, 177, 15, 61–2, 111, 115–17, 119–20, 122, 125, 127,
197, 216, 247 137–8, 141–4, 148, 152, 154, 162, 176, 215,
Shayba b. Niṣāḥ 45, 59, 80, 87 257
Sībawayhi, ʿAmr b. ʿUthmān 6, 68, 75, 82,
221, 230 waḍʿ (Forgery) 125–8, 130
al-Sijistānī, Abū Ḥātim 32, 154 waqf (pause during recitation) 14, 29, 48,
al-Sijistānī, Ibn Abī Dāwūd 120, 137, 144, 63, 74, 83–5, 163, 165–6, 172, 206–7, 228,
148–61, 259 249, 251–2, 255–6
al-Subkī, Abū l-Ḥasan Taqī l-Dīn 22 Warsh ʿan Nāfiʿ 3, 246, 272
waṣl (resuming the recitation) 14, 41, 48, 74,
ṭabaqāt (biographical dictionaries) 57, 62, 83, 163, 165–7, 172, 194, 207, 210, 226,
107–8, 120 228, 249
al-Ṭabarī, Abū Jaʿfar 6, 68–9, 72, 76–7, 79,
81–2, 84, 107–8, 116–7, 119, 122–5, 185 Yaʿqūb al-Ḥaḍramī, Abū Muḥammad 7, 15,
tafkhīm (emphatic) 9, 12, 28, 42, 63, 191 41–2, 44, 51, 55, 67, 81, 152–3, 156, 197,
taklīf (reaching the age of legal 247
responsibility) 104
ṭarīq (path, transmitters of the canonical al-Zajjāj, Abū Isḥāq 6, 67–8, 72, 76, 83–4
rāwīs; pl. ṭuruq) 22–3, 6–7, 31, 38, 47, 81, al-Zamakhsharī, Jār Allāh 61, 107, 183
142–3, 153–4, 169, 258 Zayd b. Thābit 111, 121, 138
Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3


The Second Canonization of The Qur An

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Second Canonization of The Qur An

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Second Canonization of the Qurʾān (324/936)

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Hekmat Nasser

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

The Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available online at http://catalog.loc.gov

isbn 978-90-04-40197-6 (hardback)

Copyright 2021 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

1 Preliminaries. The Second Canonization of the Qurʾān 1

2 Survival of the Fittest 16

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

2 Summary and Notes 57

3 Ḥadīth and Qurʾān rijāl Criticism 100

4 Orality Revisited. The Written Transmission of Qirāʾāt 137

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

5 The Nature of the Qurʾānic Variants 183

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

1.3.20 Unvocalized Consonants Preceding alif al-waṣl 223

6 Conclusion and Future Research 257

Appendix: Comprehensive Table of Quranic Variants 261

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Chapter Three is a comparative study of the mechanisms of transmission in

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Preliminaries. The Second Canonization

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2021 | doi:10.1163/9789004412903_002 Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

The question of whether this first canonization/codification process of the

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

the rules of cross examination of transmitters in the discipline of Qirāʾāt, and

2 The Second Canonization

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

The Second The Fourth Canonization:

11/632 47/656 324/936 444/1052‒590/1193 833/1429 1923

The First Canonization: The Third Canonization: The Fifth Canonization:

FIGURE 1 A proposed timeline of the Canonizations of the Qurʾān by Qirāʾāt scholars

3 Definitions and Terminology

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

madd: lengthening long vowels beyond their standard duration.

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

mawqūf: synonymous with munjazim.21

21 Ibid., 109, 578.

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

takrīr: badal; substitute, apposition.28

2) Long and short vowels

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

34 Thami Benkirane, “Vowel Reduction,” Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics.

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

5 Abbreviations and Notes

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Shady Nasser - 978-90-04-41290-3

Survival of the Fittest

1 The Irregular Readings of the Canonical Readings

… I saw people lacking in motivation, and I saw the landmarks of this

A critical concept in the discipline of Qirāʾāt literature is shudhūdh (irregularity/

1 Shaʿbān Muḥammad Ismāʿīl, al-Qirāʾāt: aḥkāmuhā wa-maṣdaruhā ([n.p.], 1982), 117.

21 Ibid., 109, 578.

34 Thami Benkirane, “Vowel Reduction,” Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics.

1 Shaʿbān Muḥammad Ismāʿīl, al-Qirāʾāt: aḥkāmuhā wa-maṣdaruhā ([n.p.], 1982), 117.

32 [ʿĀṣim → Ḥafṣ → Hubayra].

43 See below, transmission error #50.

47 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 522–3.

48 Refer to Section 2 of Chapter 4.

54 Ibn al-Jazarī, Ghāya, 2:268.

73 Refer to figures #2 and #5.

96 Ibn Mujāhid, Sabʿa, 410.

106 Ibid., 337, 616.

116 Ibid., 674.

121 Dhahabī, Maʿrifat al-qurrāʾ, 1:343.

126 Ibid., 232.