A Critical Evaluation of Variations found in the ‘Uthmānic Copies (Part 2/4)

Basrah(Ma9, Ma18, Ma19); Irāq (Ma14)	وَلُؤْلُؤ	Madīnah and Kūfah(Ma9);Madīnah (Ma14, Ma19);Kūfah (Ma18)	وَلُؤْلُؤًا (35: 33)	41.
Irāq(Ma14, Mq1, Ma16);	يَا عِبَادِ لاَ خُوْفٌ عَلَيْكُمْ	Madīnah (Ma14, Ma20, Mq1, (Mq1(j)); Syria (Ma16, Mq1); H~ijāz (Ma16,Mq1(j))	يَا عِبَادِي لاَ خُوْفٌ عَلَيْكُمْ (43: 68 )	42.
Irāq(Ma16, Fd2); All except Syria (Mq1)	وَ قَالُوْا اتَّخَذَ اللهُ وَلَدًا	Syriaand H~ijāz (Ma16); Syria (Fd2, Mq1, Mq4)	قَالُوْا اتَّخَذَ اللهُ وَلَدًا (2: 116)	43.
Irāq(Ma16, Fd2); All except Syria (Mq1)	قَلِيْلاً مَا تَذَكَّرُوْنَ	Syriaand H~ijāz (Ma16);Syria (Fd2: تَتَذَكَّرُوْنَ); Syria (Mq1, Mq4)	قَلِيْلاً مَا يَتَذَكَّرُوْنَ (7: 3)	44.
Irāq(Ma16, Fd2); All except Syria (Mq1)	وَ مَا كُنَا لِنَهْتَدِيَ	Syriaand H~ijāz (Ma16); Syria(Fd2, Mq1, Mq4)	مَا كُنَا لِنَهْتَدِيَ (7: 43)	45.
Irāq(Ma16, Fd2); Syria(Fd2); All except Syria (Mq1)	قَالَ المَلَأُ الَذِيْنَ اسْتَكْبَرُوْا مِنْ قَوْمِهِ	Syriaand H~ijāz (Ma16);Syria (Fd2, Mq1, Mq4)	وَقَالَ المَلَأُ الَذِيْنَ اسْتَكْبَرُوْا مِنْ قَوْمِهِ (7: 75)	46.
Irāq(Ma17); Makkah (Mq1, Mq3)	مَا مَكَّنَنِي فِيْهِ رَبِي خَيْر	Syriaand H~ijāz (Ma17); All except Makkah (Mq1)	مَا مَكَّنِّي فِيْهِ رَبِي خَيْر *(18: 95)	47.
Irāq(Ma16, Fd2); All except Syria (Mq1)	وَلَلدَّارُ الْآخِرَةُ	Syria (Fd2, Ma16, Mq1, Mq4)	وَلَدَارُ الْآخِرَةُ (6: 32)	48.
Irāq(Fd2)	إِنَ اللّذِيْنَ حَقَّتْ عَليْهِمْ كَلِمَةُرَبِكَ	Syria(Fd2, Mq4)	إِنَ اللّذِيْنَ حَقَّتْ عَليْهِمْ كَلِمَاتُ رَبِكَ (10: 96)	49.
Irāq(Fd2)	أَئِنَّالَمُخْرَجُوْنَ	Syria(Fd2, Mq4)	إِنَّناَ لَمُخْرَجُوْنَ (27: 67)	50.
All except Makkah (Mq1)	أًوَلَمْ يَرَالذِيْنَ كَفَرُوا	Makkah (Mq1, Mq3)	أًلَمْ يَرَالذِيْنَ كَفَرُوا (21: 0 3)	51.
All except Makkah(Mq1)	وَ نُزِّلُ المَلآئِكَةُ	Makkah (Mq1, Mq3)	وَ نُنْزِلُ المَلآئِكَةَ (25:25 )	52.
All except Makkah(Mq1)	أَوْ لَيَاْتِيَنِّي	Makkah (Mq1, Mq3)	أَوْ لَيَاْتِيَنَّنِي  (21:27 )	53.
All except Makkah(Mq1)	وَ قَالَ مُوْسى رَبِّي أَعْلَمُ	Makkah (Mq1, Mq3)	قَالَ مُوْسى رَبِّي أَعْلَمُ (28: 37)	54.
		Syria(Mq7)	تَجْرِي تَحْتِهَا الأَنْهَارُ (43:7)	55.
		Syria(Mq7, Mq 8)	لَلْتَّخَذْتَ عَلَيْهِ (18 :77)	56.
		Syria(Mq7)	إِذَا أدْبَرَ (74: 33)	57.
		Madīnah (Mq7)	وَ قَالَ المَلِكُ اِتُونِي (12: 54)	58.
		Makkah (Mq7)	فَئَامِنُوْا بِاللهِ وَ رُسُلُهِ (4:171)	59.
All except Syria(Mq1), Syria, H~ijāz and Irāq(Ma16)	تَاْمُرُونِّي أَعْبُدُ	Syria(Mq1)	تَاْمُرُوْنَنِي أَعْبُدُ (39: 64)	60.

 

IV. Interpretations of the Variations

According to Abū ‘Ubayd[1] (d. 224 AH), these variations are part of the Qur’ān and have been copied from the imām written by ‘Uthmān (rta). Except for one instance,[2] in which a word has been added, in all others the difference is just between one letter. In other words, these are very minor differences in his opinion and as such, no one should reject them in any way.

According to al-Dānī[3] (d. 444 AH), ‘Uthmān (rta) collected the Qur’an in masāhif and preferred to write it in accordance with the dialect of the Quraysh. It was a proven fact to him that these variations in the readings of a word were actually revealed from God and heard from the Prophet (sws) and it was also not possible for him to write the variations of one word in the same codex except if he repeated the words; this would obviously cause confusion and ambiguity. So he distributed these variations in various copies, writing them out in some and omitting them from some others so that the ummah was able to preserve them the way they were heard from their Prophet (sws).

According to al-Zurqānī[4], in order to accommodate the Seven Ahruf in the copies made by him, ‘Uthmān (rta) did two things:

1. He wrote out the copies without any diacritics and vocal signs so that one category of variations could be accommodated within the script. For example, the following two variants could be accommodated within the script if it was devoid of diacritics and vocal signs:

وَانْظُرْ إلَى العِظَامِ كَيْفَ نُنْشِزُهَا (2: 259)

وَانْظُرْ إلَى العِظَامِ كَيْفَ نُنْشِرُهَا (2: 259)

2. He wrote out these copies such that some of them had one reading and others another. This was done for the category of readings which could not be accommodated within the script of the mushaf.

For example:

وَأَوْصَى بِهَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ(132:2)

وَوَصَّى بِهَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ(132:2)

In this case, ‘Uthmān (rta) could have written the variations adjacent to one another; this would, however, give the erroneous impression that the variations had been revealed simultaneously; in this regard, the correct opinion is that one set of variations covering the whole of the Qur’ān was revealed once and then the next set.

He could also have written the variations on margins but did not do so lest people thought that the reading(s) written on the margins were corrections of the ones found in the text.

Muhammad Hādī Ma‘rifah[5] has criticized the committee instituted by ‘Uthmān (rta) for not checking the copies made for discrepancies and it was these discrepancies which were a primary source of variant readings that sprung forth later. He asserts that the copies should have been the same and uniform and since this was not so, the reading of Makkah and the reading of Madīnah and the reading of Basrah and the reading of Kūfah and the reading of Syria sprung forth.Ma‘rifah criticizes the viewpoint of al-Zurqānī according to whom the variations in the copies were deliberate in order to accommodate the Seven Ahruf. He says that the narratives of the Seven Ahruf are all suspect.

 

V. Critical Evaluation

Certain questions arise on the matn (text) and isnād (chain of narration) of the narratives which depict variations in the copies made by ‘Uthmān (rta). In the following paragraphs a matn and isnād analysis of these narratives will be presented.

 

A. Matn

The questions which arise on the matn of these narratives are as follows:

1. It is generally believed that the source of the variations in the ‘Uthmānic copies was the Prophet (sws) himself. It is he who read out variously to his companions who then transmitted these variations to later generations. Now a look at the variations themselves shows that there is no novelty or meaninfulness in them which sense and reason demand should be the case if the Prophet (sws) wanted to communicate the same verse in different styles or ways. Contrary to this, the variations are quite trivial. So what exactly was the purpose of the Prophet (sws) in reading a verse variously when the variation itself is not meaningful? In most cases, the meaning is not even slightly changed.

2. If it is accepted that the Prophet (sws) read some verses with the variations cited earlier, then did he do it out if his own discretion or was it God who communicated a verse variously? Obviously, the Prophet (sws) could not have introduced variations without God’s permission, as the Qur’ān (10:15) has strictly forbidden him to effect any change in the revelation. So it has to be understood that the variations were from God Himself. The same question now stares us in the eye: Can God be expected to introduce such variations which seem purposeless and have no uniqueness or meaningfulness in them?

3. If the committee formed by ‘Uthmān (rta) was entrusted to make copies of the mushaf compiled by Abū Bakr (rta) which was in the safe keeping of H~afsah (rta), how could the copies reflect something that was not in the original?[6] Surely, the original mushaf did not have any variations because it was written in one single reading. Or should it be construed that the original too had these variations? In case this is true, why does not any source substantiate this fact?

4. If these variations existed in the ‘Uthmānic copies, why is it that we do not find the Qur’ān being read according to these variations in these lands ever since? Where have these variations gone?

Thus, according to the chart tabulated earlier:

i. According to entry no. 3, in the masāhif of Syria, Makkah and the Madīnah it was written:يَقُولُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوْا (5: 53) and so was the oral reading of the people of Syria and Madīnah. However, today what is actually written and orally read in these three areas is: يَقُولُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوْا (5: 53)وَ.

ii. According to entry no. 5, in the masāhif of Madīnah and Basrah it was written: لَّئِنْ أَنْجَيُتَنَا (63:6) and so was the oral reading of these areas. However, today what is actually written and orally read in these areas is:(63:6) لَّئِنْ أَنجَانَا.

iii. According to entry no. 6, in the masāhif of Syria, Makkah (since Makkah is also a part of H~ijāz) and Madīnah it was written: الَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُواْ مَسْجِدًا ضِرَارًا (107:9) and so was the oral reading of Syria and Madīnah. However, today the recital actually written and orally read in these three areas is: (107:9) وَالَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُواْ مَسْجِدًا.

iv. According to entry no. 7, in the masāhif of Syria, Makkah and Madīnah it was written: خَيْرًا مِّنْهُما مُنقَلَبًا(36:18)and so was the oral reading of Syria and Madīnah. However, today the recital actually written and orally read in these three areas is: (36:18)خَيْرًا مِّنْهَا مُنقَلَبًا.

v. According to entry no 14, in the masāhif of Madīnah and Basrah it was written: قُلْ رَبِّي يَعْلَمُ (4:21)and so was the oral reading of these areas. However, today the recital actually written and orally read in both these areas is: (4:21)قَالَ رَبِّي يَعْلَمُ.

vi. Although in entry no 15, the difference is not exactly ascribed to the three cities under discussion (viz. Madīnah, Kūfah and Basrah), the objection still holds that today in all three of these areas the recital actually written and orally read is: قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَدْعُو رَبِّي (72: 20).

vii. According to entry no 18, in the masāhif of Kūfah it was written: وَمَا عَمِلَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ (35:36)and so was the oral reading of this area. However, today the recital actually written and orally read inKūfah is: (35:36)وَمَا عَمِلَتْهُ أَيْدِيهِمْ.

viii. According to entry no. 19, in the masāhif of Makkah and Kūfah it was written: فَهَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا السَّاعَةَ أَن تَأْتِهِمْ بَغْتَةً (18:47). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inMakkah and Kūfah is: فَهَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا السَّاعَةَ أَن تَأْتِيَهُمْ بَغْتَةً (18:47).

ix. According to entry no. 20, in Madīnah the recital was: وَسَيَعْلَمُ الْكَافِرُ (42:13). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inMadīnah is: (42:13)وَسَيَعْلَمُ الْكُفَّارُ.

x. According to entry no. 21, in the masāhif of Syria and H~ijāz it was written: وَبالذُّبُرِ وَبِالكِتَابِ (184:3).However, today the recital actually written and orally read in these areas is: (184:3)وَالزُّبُر ِوَالكِتَابِ.

xi. According to entry no. 22, in the masāhif of Syria it was written: مَا فَعَلُوهُ إِلاَّ قَلِيلاً ( 66:4). However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Syria is: ( 66:4)مَا فَعَلُوهُ إِلاَّ قَلِيلٌ.

xii. According to entry no 25, in the masāhif of Syria and H~ijāz, it was written: ثُمَّ كِيدُونِي فَلاَ تُنظِرُونِ (195:7). However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Syriaand H~ijāz is: ثُمَّ كِيدُونِ فَلاَ تُنظِرُونِ (195:7).

xiii. According to entry no 26, in the masāhif of Syria, it was written: مَا كَانَ للِنَبِيٍّ (67:8). However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Syriais: (67:8)مَا كَانَ لِنَبِيٍّ.

xiv. According to entry no 27, in the masāhif of Syria, it was written: هُوَ الَّذِي يُنْشِرُكُمْ فِي الْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ (22:10). However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Syriais: هُوَ الَّذِي يُسَيِّرُكُمْ فِي الْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ (22:10).

xv. According to entry no 32, in the musahaf of Makkah, it was written: فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرَسُوْلِهِ (171:4). However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Makkahis: وَرُسُلِهِفَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ(171:4). ِ

xvi. According to entry no 33, in the masāhif of Makkah, it was written: تَجْرِي مِنْ تَحْتَهَا الأَنْهَارُ (100:9). However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Makkahis: تَجْرِي تَحْتَهَا الأَنْهَارُ (100:9).

xvii. According to entry no 35, in the masāhif of Kūfah it was written: (23: 112) قُلْ كَمْ لَبِثْتُمْ. However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Kūfah is: (23: 112)قَالَ كَمْ لَبِثْتُمْ.

xviii. According to entry no 36, in the masāhif Kūfah it was written: (23: 114)قُلْ إِنْ لَبِثْتُمْ. However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Kūfah is: قَالَ إِنْ لَبِثْتُمْ(23: 114).

xix. According to entry no 38, in the masāhif of Basrah, it was written: (112:21) قُلْ رَبِّ احْكُم بِالْحَقِّ. However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Basrah is: قَالَ رَبِّ احْكُم بِالْحَقِّ (112:21).

xx. According to entry no 42, in the masāhif of Syria, Makkah (as it is included in H~ijāz) and Madīnah it was written: يَا عِبَادِي لاَ خُوْفٌ عَلَيْكُمْ (43: 68 ) and so was the oral reading of the people of Madīnah. However, today the recital actually written and orally read in these areas is: (43: 68  )يَا عِبَادِ لاَ خُوْفٌ عَلَيْكُمْ.

xxi. According to entry no 48, in the masāhif of Syria it was written: وَلَدَارُ الْآخِرَةُ (6: 32). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inSyria is: (6: 32)وَلَلدَّارُ الْآخِرَةُ.

xxii. According to entry no 49, in the masāhif of Syria it was written: إِنَ اللّذِيْنَ حَقَّتْ عَليْهِمْ كَلِمَاتُ رَبِكَ (10: 96). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inSyria is: إِنَ اللّذِيْنَ حَقَّتْ عَليْهِمْكَلِمَةُ رَبِكَ. (10: 96).

xxiii. According to entry no 50, in the masāhif of Syria it was written: إِنَّناَ لَمُخْرَجُوْنَ (27: 67). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inSyria is:لَمُخْرَجُوْنَ (27: 67)أَئِنَّا.

xxiv. According to entry no 51, in the masāhif of Makkah it was written: أًلَمْ يَرَالذِيْنَ كَفَرُوا (21 : 30). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inMakkah is: أًوَلَمْ يَرَ الذِيْنَ كَفَرُوا (21 : 30).

xxv. According to entry no 52, in the masāhif of Makkah it was written: وَنُنْزِلُ المَلآئِكَةَ (25:25 ). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inMakkah is: (25:25)  وَ نُزِّلُ المَلآئِكَةُ.

xxvi. According to entry no 53, in the masāhif of Makkah it was written: أَوْ لَيَاْتِيَنَّنِي (21:27). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inMakkah is: (21:27 )أَوْ لَيَاْتِيَنِّي.

xxvii. According to entry no 54, in the masāhif of Makkah it was written: قَالَ مُوْسى رَبِّي أَعْلَمُ (28: 37).However, today the recital actually written and orally read inMakkah is: وَ قَالَ مُوْسى رَبِّي أَعْلَمُ (28: 37).

xxviii. According to entry no 55, in the masāhif of Syria it was written: تَجْرِي تَحْتِهَا الأَنْهَارُ (43:7).However, today the recital actually written and orally read inSyria is: تَجْرِي مِنْ تَحْتِهَا الأَنْهَارُ (43:7).

xxix. According to entry no 56, in the masāhif of Syria it was written: لَلْتَّخَذْتَ عَلَيْهِ (18 :77). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inSyria is: لَتَّخَذْتَ عَلَيْهِ (18 :77).

xxx. According to entry no 57, in the masāhif of Syria it was written: إِذَا أدْبَرَ (74: 33). However, today the recital actually written and orally read inSyria is: إِذْ أدْبَرَ (74: 33).

xxxi. According to entry no 58, in the masāhif of Madīnah it was written: وَ قَالَ المَلِكُ اِتُونِي (12:54).However, today the recital actually written and orally read in Madīnah is: وَ قَالَ المَلِكُ اِئتُونِي (12: 54).

xxxii. According to entry no 59, in the masāhif of Makkah it was written: فَئَامِنُوْا بِاللهِ وَ رُسُلُهِ (4: 171).However, today the recital actually written and orally read inMakkah is:   فَئَامِنُوْا بِاللهِ وَ رَسُولِهِ (4: 171).

In short, in all these areas (Makkah, Madūnah, Kūfah, Basrah and Syria) there exists no variation at all. Each has the same reading. Moreover, there is no historical record to support the possible assumption that these readings were revoked at one time in these places and some other reading was enforced in their place.

5. Only the variations in the masāhif of Syria have been reported by narrator(s) who could be considered contemporaneous to the events they report (see: Fd2, Mq1(a), Mq4).[7] However, all these isnāds are not free from weaknesses viz a viz their narrators. As far as variations reported in the masāhif of other areas is concerned, people who for the first time report these changes belong to the second or third century. (for details, see: the forthcoming section on “Analysis of Isnād”). The question arises that if these variations were present since the time of ‘Uthmān (rta), then why were they generally reported after a lapse of at least one century?

6. Regarding the justifications put forth by various scholars, Abū ‘Ubayd is of the view that the differences were very minor and except for one place only existed in single letters being added or suppressed. Notwithsanding the fact that his information is not totally correct,[8] the fact that these variations existed is subject to the questions raised above.

Al-Dānī’s and al-Zurqānī’s contention that the variations were distributed in various copies so that the ummah could preserve them is also subject to the above questions. Ma‘rifah’s critique is very valid.[9]

7. One of the narratives (Ma16) speaks of the imām (primary codex) of H~ijāz and the imām of Irāq. It is known that Makkah and Madīnah (both belonging to the territory of H~ijāz) had separate imāms which differed with each other too at certain places; similarly, it is known that Kūfah and Basrah (both belonging to the territory of Irāq) also had separate imāms which differed with each other too at certain places. We do not know of any individual imām of H~ijaz or that of Irāq. Perhaps the only possible solution to this is that the imām of Irāq implies both the imām of Kūfah and and that of Basrah and the imām of H~ijāz implies the imām of Makkah and that of Madīnah). However, if this is the case, then we find many contradictions in the narratives.[10]

8. We also find that there exist internal contradictions in the narratives which report these variations. They include:

 

i.وَأَوْصَى بِهَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ(2: 132)  / وَوَصَّى بِهَا

According to entry no 1, Mq1 says that only the Madīnan and Syrian codices hadوَأَوْصَى بِهَاand all the rest had وَوَصَّى بِهَا; however, Ma16 says that the codex of Hijāz (which includes Makkah) also had وَوَصَّى بِهَا.

 

ii.)  سَارِعُواْ إِلَى مَغْفِرَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ(133:3/ سَارِعُواْ وَ

According to entry no 2, Mq1 says that only the Madīnan and Syrian codices had سَارِعُواْ إِلَى مَغْفِرَةٍand all the rest hadوَسَارِعُواْ إِلَى مَغْفِرَة ٍ; however, Ma16 says that the codex of Hijāz which includes Makkah also had سَارِعُواْ إِلَى مَغْفِرَةٍ.

 

iii. ( مَن يَرْتَدِدْ (54:5/ مَن يَرْتَدَّ

According to entry no 3, Mq1 says that only the Madīnan and Syrian codices had مَن يَرْتَدِدْand all the rest hadمَن يَرْتَدَّ; however, Ma16 says that that the codex of H~ijāz which includes Makkah also had مَن يَرْتَدِدْ. Mq1(f) says that mushaf of ‘Uthmān (rta) hadمَن يَرْتَدِدْ,while Ma1, Ma2 and Ma11 say that it hadمَن يَرْتَدَّ.

 

iv. ) فَتَوَكَّلْ (26: 217/ وَتَوَكَّلْ

According to entry no 8, Mq1 says that only the Madīnan and Syrian codices had فَتَوَكَّلْand all the rest had وَتَوَكَّلْ; however, Ma16 says that the codex of Hijāz (which includes Makkah) also hadفَتَوَكَّلْْ.

 

v. )وَأَنْ يُظْهِرَ فِي الْأَرْضِ (26:40/ أَوْ أَنْ يُظْهِرَ

According to entry no 9, Mq1/Mq1(i) say that only ‘Uthmān’s codex and the Kūfan codex had أَوْ أَنْ يُظْهِرَand all the rest had وَأَنْ يُظْهِرَ فِي الْأَرْضِ; however, Ma9 says that both Kūfan and Basran codices had أَوْ أَنْ يُظْهِرَ; similarly, Fd1,Ma12, Ma14, Ma16, Mq2(a) say that those of Irāq (which includes Kūfah and Basrah) also hadأَوْ أَنْ يُظْهِرَ. Also, Ma1, Ma2and Ma11 say that the mushaf of ‘Uthmān (rta) also had أَوْ أَنْ يُظْهِرَ.

 

vi. )وَمَا أَصَابَكُم مِّن مُّصِيبَةٍ بِمَا كَسَبَتْ (30:42/ فَبِمَا كَسَبَتْ

According to entry no 10, Mq1 says that only the Madīnan and Syrian codices hadوَمَا أَصَابَكُم مِّن مُّصِيبَةٍ بِمَا كَسَبَتْand all the rest had فَبِمَا كَسَبَتْ; however, Ma16 says that the codex of of Hijāz (which includes Makkah) also hadبِمَا كَسَبَتْ.

 

vii. )فِيهَا مَا تَشْتَهِيهِ الْأَنفُسُ (71:43/ تَشْتَهِيِ الْأَنفُسُ

According to entry no 11, Mq1 says that only the Madīnan and Syrian codices had فِيهَا مَا تَشْتَهِيهِ الْأَنفُسُand all the rest had تَشْتَهِيِ الْأَنفُسُ; however, Ma16 says that the codex of Hijāz (which includes Makkah) also hadفِيهَا مَا تَشْتَهِيهِ الْأَنفُسُ.

Mq1(k) says that the mushaf (imām) of ‘Uthman (rta) had تَشْتَهِيهِ الْأَنفُسُwhile Ma1, Ma2, Ma11 and Mq6say that it had تَشْتَهِيِ الْأَنفُسُ.

 

viii. )فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ (24:57/ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ

According to entry no 12, Mq1 says that only the Madīnan and Syrian codices had فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُand all the rest had فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ; however, Ma16 says that the codex of of Hijāz (which includes Makkah) also hadفَإِنَّ اللَّهَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ.

 

ix.)فَلَا يَخَافُ عُقْبَاهَا (15:91/ وَلَا يَخَافُ

According to entry no 13, Mq1 says that only the Madīnan and Syrian codices hadفَلَا يَخَافُ عُقْبَاهَاand all the rest had وَلَا يَخَافُ; however, Ma16 says that the codex of Hijāz (which includes Makkah) also hadفَلَا يَخَافُ عُقْبَاهَا.

 

x.)لله ، لله ، لله (23: 85،87،89/ لله ، الله ، الله

According to entry no 1, as per Mq1 only the codex of Basrah had لله ، الله ، الله; and all others hadلله، لِلَّهِ ، لِلَّهِ; however, according to Ma14, Ma16 and Fd2, the codex of Irāq (which includes Kūfah) also had لله ، الله ، الله.

According to Ma14, the codex of Irāq (which includes Kūfah and Basrah) had لله ، الله ، اللهwhile Ma9 and Ma19 say that the mushaf of Kūfah had لله ، لله، لله.Ma18, on the other hand, says that the mushaf of Kūfah had لله ، لله،الله.

 

xi.)وَوَصَّيْنَا الْإِنسَانَ بِوَالِدَيْهِ إِحْسَانًا (15:46/ بِوَالِدَيْهِ ِحُسْنًا

According to entry no 17, as per Mq1 all except the Kūfan codex had بِوَالِدَيْهِ ِحُسْنًا; however, according to Ma19 the Basran codex had بِوَالِدَيْهِ إِحْسَانًا.

 

xii. )فَهَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا السَّاعَةَ أَن تَأْتِهِمْ بَغْتَةً (18:47

According to entry no 19, According to Ma9 and Mq1(l) the above was the reading of the Makkans and Kūfans, and according to Ma19 and Ma20, the above was also the reading of the Kūfans.

However, ‘Alī ibn Hamzah al-Kasā’ī says that he has not heard any of the Kūfans read it as تَأْتِهِمْ.[11]

Similarly, Khalf ibn Hishām says that he does not know any of the Makkans read it as تَأْتِهِمْ.[12]

 

xiii. )وَبالذُّبُرِ وَبِالكِتَابِ (184:3/وَالكِتَابِوَالزُّبُر ِ

According to entry no 21, Ma16,Fd2, Mq1, Mq1(a), Mq1(b) and Mq4 say that the Syrian codex had وَبِالكِتَابِوَبالذُّبُرِwhile Mq1(c) and Mq1(d) say that the Syrian codex hadوَالكِتَاب وَبِالزُّبُرِ.

Mq1 says that all except the Syrian codex hadوَالزُّبُر ِوَالكِتَابِwhile Ma16 says that the codex of H~ijāz hadوَبالذُّبُرِ وَبِالكِتَابِ.

 

xiv.)زُيّنَلِكَثِيرٍ مِّنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ قَتْلُ أَوْلاَدَهُمْ شُرَكَآئِهِمْ (138:6/زَيَّنَ لِكَثِيرٍ مِّنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ قَتْلَ أَوْلاَدِهِمْ شُرَكَآؤُهُمْ

According to entry no 23, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian Codex hadزَيَّنَ لِكَثِيرٍ مِّنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ قَتْلَ أَوْلاَدِهِمْ شُرَكَآؤُهُمْwhile Ma16 says that the codex of H~ijāz codex had زُيّنَ لِكَثِيرٍ مِّنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ قَتْلُ أَوْلاَدَهُمْ شُرَكَآئِهِمْ.

 

xv. )وَإِذْ أَنجَاكُم مِّنْ آلِ فِرْعَونَ (141:7/ وَإِذْ أَنجَيْنَاكُم

According to entry no 24, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian Codex had وَإِذْ أَنجَيْنَاكُمwhile Ma16 says that the Hijāz codex had وَإِذْ أَنجَاكُم.

 

xvi.)كَانُوا هُمْ أَشَدَّ مِنْكم (21:40/ كَانُوا هُمْ أَشَدَّ مِنْهُمْ

According to entry no 28, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian Codex had كَانُوا هُمْ أَشَدَّ مِنْهُمْwhile Ma16 says that the Hijāz codex hadكَانُوا هُمْ أَشَدَّ مِنْكم.

 

xvii. )وَالْحَبُّ ذَا الْعَصْفِ (12:55/ وَالْحَبُّ ذُو الْعَصْفِ

According to entry no 29, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian Codex had وَالْحَبُّ ذُو الْعَصْفِwhile Ma16 says that the Hijāz codex had وَالْحَبُّ ذَا الْعَصْفِ.

 

xviii. )تَبَارَكَ اسْمُ رَبِّكَ ذُوْ الْجَلَالِ (78:88/ ذِي الْجَلَالِ

According to entry no 30, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian Codex had ذِي الْجَلَالِ while Ma16 says that the Hijāz codex had تَبَارَكَ اسْمُ رَبِّكَ ذُوْ الْجَلَالِ.

 

xix. )وَكُلًّ وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الْحُسْنَى (10:57/ وَكُلًّا وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الْحُسْنَى

According to entry no 31, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian Codex had وَكُلًّا وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الْحُسْنَىwhile Ma16 says that the Hijāz codex hadاللَّهُ الْحُسْنَىوَكُلًّ وَعَدَ.

 

xx. )والجَارِ ذَا القُربَى والجَار الجُنُبْ (4: 36/ والجَارِ ذِي القُربَى

According to entry no 34, Ma9 and Mq1(e) say that some of the Kūfan copies read والجَارِ ذَا القُربَىwhile Ma19 says that the Kūfan copies readوالجَارِ ذِي القُربَى. Also, ‘Alī ibn Hamzah al-Kasā’ī[13]says that he does not know anyone among the Kūfans read it except والجَارِ ذِي.

 

xxi. )قَالَ سُبْحَانَ رَبِّي (93:17/ قُلْ سُبْحَانَ رَبِّي

According to entry no 37, Mq1 says that all codices except Syria and Makkah hadقُلْ سُبْحَانَ رَبِّي. Ma18 says that the codex of Kūfah had قَالَ سُبْحَانَ رَبِّي.

 

xxii. )(76: 15-16قَوَارِيْرَا قَوَارِيْرَا / قَوَارِيْرَا قَوَارِيْرَ

According to entry no 39, as per Ma9 and Ma14 the Madīnan codex had قَوَارِيْرَا قَوَارِيْرَاwhile according to Ma19 the Madīnan codex had قَوَارِيْرَا قَوَارِيْرَ.

According to Ma14 the Irāqan codex had قَوَارِيْرَا قَوَارِيْرَ. Now this should include Kūfah and Basrah; however Ma9 and Ma19 say that the Kūfan codex had قَوَارِيْرَا قَوَارِيْرَا.

 

xxiii.  (35: 33)وَلُؤْلُؤًا/ وَلُؤْلُؤ

According to entry no 41, Ma14 says that the codex of Irāq (which includes Kūfah and Basrah) had وَلُؤْلُؤwhile Ma9 and Ma18say that the codex of Kūfah hadوَلُؤْلُؤًا.

 

xxiv. )قَالُوْا اتَخَذَ اللهُ وَلَدًا (2: 116/ وَقَالُوْا اتَخَذَ اللهُ وَلَدًا َ

According to entry no 43, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian codex had وقَالُوْا اتَخَذَ اللهُ وَلَدًا, while Ma16 says that the codex of Hijāz had قَالُوْا اتَخَذَ اللهُ وَلَدًا.

 

xxv. )قَلِيْلاً مَا يَتَذَكَّرُوْنَ (7: 3/ قَلِيْلاً مَا تَذَكَّرُوْنَ

According to entry no 44, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian codex had قَلِيْلاً مَا تَذَكَّرُوْنَwhile Ma16 says that the codex of H~ijāz hadقَلِيْلاً مَا يَتَذَكَّرُوْنَ.

Fd2 says the Syrian codex hadقَلِيْلاً مَا تَتَذَكَّرُوْنَ . Mq4 and Ma16 say that the Syrian codex had قَلِيْلاً مَا يَتَذَكَّرُوْنَ.

 

xxvi. مَا كُنَا لِنَهْتَدِيَ (7: 43/ مَا كُنَا لِنَهْتَدِيَوَ

According to entry no 45, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian codex hadوَ مَا كُنَالِنَهْتَدِيَ  while Ma16 says that the codex of H~ijāz hadمَا كُنَا لِنَهْتَدِيَ.

 

xxvii.)وَقَالَ المَلَأُ الَّذِيْنَ اسْتَكْبَرُوْا مِنْ قُوْمِهِ (7: 75/قَالَ المَلَأ

According to entry no 46, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian codex had قَالَ المَلَأُwhile Ma16 says that the codex of Hijāz hadوَقَالَ المَلَأُ. Fd2says that the Syrian codex also hadقَالَ المَلَأُ.

 

xxviii.)مَا مَكَّنِي فِيْهِ رَبِي خَيْر (18: 95/ مَا مَكَّنَنِي فِيْهِ رَبِي خَيْر

According to entry no 47, Mq1 says that all except the Makkan codex had مَا مَكَّنِّي. However, Ma17 says that that of Irāq hadمَا مَكَّنَنِي.

Abū H~ayawah Shurayh ibn Yazīd[14] said that he has not heard any one except Mubashshir ibn ‘Ubayd read it مَا مَكَّنَنِي فِيْهِ.

 

xxix.(39: 64) تَاْمُرُونِّي أَعْبُدُ

According to entry no 60, Mq1 says that all except the Syrian codex had the words تَاْمُرُوْنَنِي أَعْبُدُ (39: 64)while Ma16 says that the Syrian codex hadتَاْمُرُونِّي أَعْبُدُ (39: 64)ُas well.

 

xxx. According to (Fq3) quoted by Abū ‘Ubayd,[15] there were only five differences in the codices of Kūfah and Basrah.[16] However, a recourse to the chart above shows that there were a total of thirteen differences, only five of which have been referred to by Abū ‘Ubayd.[17]

 

xxxi. A narrative (Ma9) quoted by Ibn Abī Dā’ūd[18] after enumerating the differences between the codices of Madīnah, Kūfah and Basrah says that it has comprehensively covered all the differences between these codices. However, a recourse to the chart above shows that there are seven[19] other instances in which the codices of Madīnah differed from those of Kūfah and Basrah. (This is assuming the fact that the word H~ijāz encompasses the codices of Makkah and Madīnah also and the word Irāq encompasses the codices of Kūfah and Basrah also)