|  | | | | | Unfencing the fences around the Qur’an
Rashid Shaz
[continued...] The grandeur and magnificence of Divine Revelation is such that if it were revealed on a mountain, it would have gone to pieces and shreds.[1] There can be no question about the fact that Divine Revelation is an extraordinary honour that Allah has bestowed on the Muslim community through Muhammad. This is an occurrence of universal dimension where the merit of a person, his claims, his questions and answers have absolutely no role to play. Its heavenly and universal dimension is hidden in the fact that not only the first generation of Muslims, but up until the end of this world, people of faith would excavate it to find answers to their questions, and this text would continue to guide them in all ages and epochs. It is a pity that our commentators have treated this universal and heavenly text as a mere social document. For most of the verses, the dates and occasions of their revelation have been rigorously determined. This tendency to provide the Qur’an a historical perspective became so strong that it was considered necessary to explore the historical context of revelation of all the verses. Rather, some verses were construed as direct response to the questions raised by the Prophet’s Companions. At times these traditions even suggested that Omar was intellectually superior to the Prophet himself! For instance, describing the occasion for revelation of the verse ولا تصل على أحد منهم مات أبدا ولا تقم على قبره (Al-Tauba: 84) – it was asserted that it was revealed when the Prophet gave his consent to the funeral prayer of the hypocrite (munafiq) Abdullah bin Abi and Omar opposed the Prophet’s decision in public. The verse was revealed promptly, as it has been claimed, in support of Omar’s point of view, and the Prophet was compelled to change his stand on the issue.[2] Providing this kind of socio-historical context to Divine Revelation not only negates its universal and timeless dimension and reduces its scope and meaning, but also it runs counter to the concept of Apostleship found in the versesما ضل صاحبكم وماغوى (Al-Najm: 2) in the Qur’an. Omar’s mature attitude may have its own merit, but it can never claim precedence over the Prophet’s opinion; nor can it be surmised that Allah would reveal a verse in support of Omar who is locked in a contentious argument with the Prophet himself. The pity is that our hallowed books have encouraged this tendency of looking at Divine Revelation in terms of their social contexts. This would give one the impression that this Text was not conceived and executed in heaven but on the earth itself. For instance, about the verse واتخذ وامن مقام ابراهيم مصلى (2/145), it is recorded in Sahih Bukhari that it was revealed in response to Omar’s query or suggestion given by him to the Prophet at the time of the circumambulation of the Ka’ba. It is recorded in Bukhari on the authority of Anas that Omar had said –“My Lord agreed with me on three things: one, declaring Abraham’s house as the direction of prayer; second, instruction for veil for women; and third, the warning to the Prophet’s wives that if the Prophet divorced them, He would provide him with better wives.”[3] If we understood Divine Revelation as espousing Omar’s views, it would mean that Omar had a better understanding of Allah’s Will than the Prophet. It would also demonstrate how a heavenly Text was subservient to social imperatives and reactions. This does not end here, as many Qur’anic verses seem to be copies of sayings by Omar and some other Companions of the Prophet. Ibn Abi Hatim has reported a saying by Omar that when the verse ولقد خلق الانسان من سلالة من طين (Al-Muminoon: 12) was revealed, he said فتبارك الله احسن الخالقين( Al-Muminoon: 14) and then the verse فتبارك الله احسن الخالقين was revealed.[4] Similarly, it is reported by Abdur Rahman bin Aili that when a Jew had said to Omar about Gabriel that “He who your friend names is our enemy”, Omar said in reply:
من كان عدوالله وملائكته ورسله وجبريل وميكائيل فان الله عدوللكافرين
-Baqara: 98). The transmitter claims that just after that Allah revealed the verse having the same words uttered by Omar.[5] Similarly, Sa’d bin Ma’z’s quick reaction regarding ifk (scandal against Aisha)سبحانك هذا بهتان عظيم (Al-Noor: 16) later became a part of the narrative of Qur’anic revelation.[6] It is said that in the battle of Ahd, Mas’ab bin Amir was the flag-bearer of the Islamic army. When his right hand was chopped off, he held the flag in the left hand. When the left hand too was slashed, he continued to hold the flag with his two mutilated hands and held it straight by pressing it to his chest and uttered the following in a heroic and high-flown voice: وَمَا محمد الاّ رسول قَدخَلَت مِنْ قبله الرسل اَفاِن مات اَوْ قُتِلَ انْقَلَبْتُم علي أعقابكم (Aal-e Imran: 144). He died in this condition. The transmitter says that the above verse that became a part of the Qur’an later was revealed after this incident.[7] To accord the slightest credence to such claims would amount to a dilution of the status of the Qur’an as a definitive, universal and heavenly text, making it appear to be a social document recording the reactions of the first generation of Muslims. It is a matter of concern that even reliable books of Qur’anic knowledge and Commentaries are not entirely free from such untenable transmissions and fanciful anecdotes.
When an exalted means of transmission like Divine Revelation is brought down to the level of vague tidings (mubashshirat), unintelligible voice and visions, the definitiveness, which is the hallmark of a Divine Text is brought to doubt. Not only that a loose interpretation/concept of the process of revelation caused doubt about both the words and the meaning emanating from Allah, but also it made space for fabricated traditions that consistently and repeatedly suggest that Qur’anic revelations were incomplete, defective and suspect. There is no dearth of such traditions in the Books of Commentaries, attributed to renowned scholars of traditions, which, if taken at their face value, would, logically lead us to entertain suspicions about the authenticity of Qur’anic revelations. There are such traditions in Bukhari, Muslim and Tirmizi, which run counter to the concept of the Qur’an as an unadulterated and immutable text.[8] Even for the conventional exegetes who, faced with such a situation, cannot stop at exhibiting their erudition in the art of ‘discrimination’ (tatbeeq), it has not been possible to totally dismiss these reports. Thus, the doubts and misgivings that had crept into public perception about the Qur’anic Text stayed as before.
We do not find evidence of any doubts regarding the Qur’anic text or its readings till the end of the first century H.E. It was Shahab Zahri who first reported disagreements among the Prophet’s Companions about the Qur’anic text, the seven levels of reading and interpretation (sab’ qirat/ahraf) and the attribution of the task of compiling the Qur’an to Othman. After Shahab Zahri, a veritable floodgate of falsehood, half-truths and suspicion opened up and gradually they crept into our cultural and civilizational inheritance. Ironically, they have now become a part of the repertoire of authentic knowledge. In the Commentaries from the time of Tabari to modern times, the single-transmitter traditions have always been alluded to by the Commentators on the authority of Sahah Sitta and are regarded as part of the authentic interpretive literature in Islam. If a community comes to entertain the slightest doubt regarding its Divine Text, that distortions and defects may have crept into it at any stage, then it cannot accept that text as the immutable and indisputable source of its intellectual and cultural life. On the contrary, any doubt about the validity of the Divine Text as a Book of Guidance would actuate people to seek guidance from other known and secular sources. If one finds advocacy or acceptance of non-Biblical or secular values rather than disdain among its high priests, its main cause lies in the fact that they have lost faith in their Divine Revelation as a complete and immutable text. As a result, the sea of faith that had once enveloped them has now receded to the shore. If even the orthodox Israelites are compelled to attach more importance to the interpreters of Torah and the compilers of Mishnah than to Pentateuch, the reason lies in the fact that they do not regard Pentateuch as a self-contained body of Divine Revelations and their conviction that the enormous treasure of interpretive and Juristic literature actually represents an effort to preserve Pentateuch. If a community falls a prey to doubts and misgivings about its revealed text, and feels that it has undergone distortion or tempering at any stage, it leads to a spurt in the growth of human commentaries and interpretations, in isolation from the revealed text. This is the point that marks the growth of non-scriptural or secular traditions. Gradually the Divine Text is relegated to the status of a sacred relic providing spiritual solace, and the actual life is governed by non-scriptural and secular values.
In comparison with the earlier texts or scrolls, the Qur’an has this unique distinction that its Sender had taught the recipient the use of pen علّم بالقلم. Apart from its preservation through memorizing, special arrangements were made for its preservation through a written text. There is enough textual evidence to which we will allude later, where it has been referred to as a text within two covers. The word “book” has been used for the Qur’an for about 70 times in the Book. It has been variously referred to as “Al-Kitab”, “Kitabul Mubeen”, “Kitab Al-Hakeem”, “Kitab Al-Azeez”. In surah Tur, it has been referred to as a “Book on Parchment Paper” .كتاب مستور في رق منشور For such a planned, well-thought-out and thoroughly executed book, our commentators believed in such unreliable and inauthentic traditions, which cast a shadow of doubt over such a basic book. Disagreements on verses, loss of certain verses, tracing out some verses after a long search, and even after all this, the inability to incorporate all the verses in the Othmanic version – these are the yarns and anecdotes with which the Islamic exegetes filled the margins of their commentary books.
One of the traditions transmitted by Shahab Zahri goes so far as to claim that some verses of the Qur’an that were revealed could not be recorded as those who memorized it died on the day of the Battle of yamama ولم يعلم بعدهم ولم يكتُب In other words, that part of the Qur’an to which only they were privy could not be incorporated in the text because of their death. Ibn Maja contains a tradition attributed to Ayisha that the text containing verses related to stoning to death and relationship between foster mother and foster child (rada’ kabeer) were eaten up by a goat when people were busy during the funerals of the Prophet. That is why those verses could not be incorporated in the Qur’an.[9] Another reason for the verse related to stoning to death not finding entry into the Qur’an was purported to be the fact that at the time of compilation of the Qur’an whoever brought some part of the text had to produce a witness to verify it. Omar who brought in the verse in question could not produce a witness for its verification. Hence it remained outside of the Qur’anic text.[10] Tafsir Ibn Kathir also mentions why Abdullah bin Mas’ud’s “Mauzatain” (surah Falaq and surah Naas) were not considered a part of the Qur’an.[11] Regarding “Mauzatain”, it is recorded in Bukhari with reference to Abi bin Ka’b that he used to read قل اعوذ برب الفلق and قل اعوذ برب الناس without the prefatory “qul” (“say”). In other words, he would say -- اعوذ برب الفلق and اعوذ برب الناس.[12] About Abi bin Ka’b it was recorded that he used to read the verse ولاتقربوالزناانه كان فاحشة وساء سبيلا(Al Isra: 32) as ولاتقربوالزناانه كان فاحشة ومقتا وساء سبيلاالاَ مَن تاب فاِنَّ الله كان غفورارحيما It is said that despite Omar’s instruction to the contrary, he insisted on reading the verse in the same way. It was also said that Abdullah bin Masu’d would read the verse in Surah zariat ان الله هو الرزاق ذوالقوة المتين, (Al Zariyat:58)asاني انا الرزاق Similarly, as regards the verse in Surah “Fatah” اذ جعل الذين كفروا في قلوبهم الحمية حمية الجاهلية فانزل الله سكينته على رسوله وعلى المؤمنين والزمهم كلمة التقوي وكانوا احق بها واهلهاوكان الله بكل شي عليماّ (Al Fatah: 26) it is recorded that Abi Ka’b would read ولو حميتم كما حموا نفسه لفسد المسجد الحرام after the phrase “حميةالجاهلية”.[13] One tradition goes so far as to assert that the Prophet said to Abi bin Ka’b, “I have been instructed to read the Qur’an before you”, and read the verse – ان ذات الدين عندالله الحنفية لاالمشركة ولااليهودية ولاالنصرانية ومن يعمل خيرا فلن يكفرله and then he also read – لوكان لابن آدم وادلابتغي اليه ثانيا ولو اعطي اليه ثالثا ولا يملا جوف ابن آدم الا التراب ويتوب الله من تاب…. The second part appended to the verse cannot be found in the Qur’an now.[14] It is recorded in Tirmizi that Abdullah bin Masu’d and Abu Darda used the verse -- ماخلق الذكر والانثى’…. in the Surah “Wal Lail” as “والذكر والانثى’”.[15] Similarly, it is recorded in Bukhari that some people, particularly, Ibn Abbas[16] would add – فى مواسم الحج while reading the verse –عليكم جناح أن تبتغوا فضلا من ربكم ليس ….(Al Baqara: 198). There are such traditions recorded in Al Itqan, Kanz-ul Ummal etc. that when Omar made enquiries about some verses, he was told, “these verses were with the person who died in the battle of Yamama.[17] At this Omar simply muttered انالله وانااليه راجعون
These fanciful accounts that came in circulation after the first century H.E. to prove that the Qur’an was a defective text made their way into the margins of interpretive literature. This not only engendered doubts into the minds of common people about the Divine Text, but it happened in many cases that the fabricated verses became a means of interpreting the original verses. For instance, if the majority of commentators today interprete the verse – حافظوا على الصلوات والصلوة الوسطى… (Al Baqara: 238) as pointing to ة العصر‘صلو, then they cannot escape the allegation that they got this idea from the fabricated traditions where it was asserted that when Abu Bakr had it declared publicly that those who had any verse of the Qur’an with them should bring it over to him for compilation, then Hafsa had said, “When you reach الوسطى حافظوا على الصلوة then send for me.” As the scribe reached الوسطى حافظوا على الصلوةand she was sent for, she said, “If you have reached الوسطى حافظوا على الصلوةwrite وهى صلوة العصر fter it. Omar objected, “Do you have any proof of this additional part?” When no proof was presented, Omar declared, “By Allah, something brought over by a woman without any proof or witness cannot be incorporated into the Qur’an.” And that part was not incorporated. However, even though the phrase, العصر صلوةwas not incorporated into the Qur’anic Text, Commentators till today generally take salat al wusta to meanصلوة العصر
Even though the earlier versions of the Qur’an or other hypothetical readings of it by the Prophet’s Companions apart from the version compiled by Othman did not succeed in making inroads into the Qur’anic text, they (the fabricated verses) certainly influenced the way we understand and interpret the Qur’an. Even in the most reliable Books of Commentaries, there is evidence that the commentators have used the ideas and suggestions contained in the fabricated verses. For instance, verse 79 of Surah “Kahaf "– وكان ورآء هم ملك ياخذ كل سفينة غصبا ,… is said to be –وكان امامهم ياخذ كل سفينة صالحة غصبا according to the version/ reading of Ibn Abbas, or the verse –ما الغلا م فكان ابواه مؤمنين وأ … in which the phrase’وكان كافرا’ was prefixed. The impact of these fabricated verses can be gauged from the fact that in most of the old or new Books of Commentaries, it has been assumed that the slave (ghulam) must be an infidel (kafir).[18]
It is taken as an established fact that in Books of Commentaries and traditions[19] that the present version of the Qur’an is the Othmanic version compiled by Abu Bakr with the advice of Zaid bin Sabit and Omar, after the death of the Prophet. Othman got copies of this version of the text made during his caliphate. It is also said that at the time when it was copied during the period of Othman some verses were traced out after long search and were incorporated into it. For example, only Abu Khuzaima was in possession of the last part of Surah “Burrat”[20] Some traditions mention that the verse –من المؤمنين from Surah “Ahzaab” was lost.[21] It is also claimed that the concluding verses of Surah “Ahzaab” were not there in the version compiled by Abu Bakr. They were found after a thorough search during the caliphate of Othman and were incorporated.[22] In some traditions, the Othmanic version was not simply claimed as an enlarged version of Abu Bakr, but totally deny the existence of any version by Abu Bakr at all! As it is reported by Ibn Sa’d and Mustadrak, according to Muhammad bin Sireen, the compilation of the Qur’an was not completed before death of Omar.[23] According to these traditions, after the preparation of the Othmanic version of the Qur’anic Text, Othman had ordered that all other versions/ parts found in the Muslim world be destroyed or burnt so that no dispute or controversy arises in future.[24] By quoting and referring to such traditions and incorporating them into their books, our scholars of traditions and the commentators have brought down an exalted and definitive text like that of the Qur’an to the level of the King Jame’s version of the Bible.
The Othmanic version that is regarded as the enlarged version of Abu Bakr is said to have been compiled/ edited by Othman, Omar and Zaid bin Sabit. It is said that the main reason for the last two verses of Surah “Tauba” to be a part of that surah was the view expressed by Omar. He is reported to have said, “If there were three verses, we would have incorporated them in a new Surah.” As the verses were only two they were tagged on to Surah “Taubah”.[25] It was also claimed that while the Qur’an was being written down, adequate care was taken that the text conformed to the pattern of speech and convention of pronunciation prevalent among members of the Quraish tribe. According to these traditions, Othman’s view was that as the text was revealed to a member of the Quraish tribe, it should be recorded according to the phonetics and speech conventions of that tribe. It has also been recorded that while copying the text Zaid bin Sabit remembered a particular verse of Surah “Ahzaab”. After a search it من المؤمنين رجال was found with Khozama bin Sabit and was incorporated. Tirmizi records that there was disagreement among three copyists about the word, “taboot” as to whether it should be written as “taboot” or “tabooh”. Othman decided to have it written as “taboot”.[26] It is also part of this lore that during the copying of the Qur’anic text, Khozama bin Sabit Ansari raised the objection that the copyists had left two verses. When he pointed them out as – لقد جاء كم رسول من انفسكم عزيز عليه ماعنتم حريص عليكم بالمؤمنين رؤف رحيم … (Al-Tauba: 128), they were accepted for copying. But the problem as to where to place them still remained. Khozama suggested that the surah should end with the verses. Thus, the verses became the concluding part of Surah Barah.[27] These traditions have not only weakened the faith of the ordinary people, but many great scholars and experts of traditions also could not save themselves from misgivings and hesitancy. The logical corollary of taking the traditions regarding the versions of the Qur’anic text by Abu Bakr and Othman that have crept into Bukhari, Muslim and Tirmizi and other books of authentic traditions as true would be the loss of faith in the Qur’an’s status as a definitive text. A great scholar of tradition like Ibn Hajr who had undertaken a thorough process of discrimination (tatbeeq) and elucidation (ta’wil) of the tradition related to the versions by Abu Bakr had to admit to the fact that even though the entire Qur’an had been written down during the Prophet’s lifetime, it was not put together in one volume, nor was there any chapter-wise division لكن غيرمجمؤع فى موضع واحد ولا مرتب السور[28] Moreover, even in the case of the Othmanic version, the editors seemed to have been more casual than cautious. It is said that when the text was ready, Othman looked over it and remarked, “You have done a good job, but there are some inadequacies of ‘Arabiat’ in it which the Arabs can rectify on their own.”رى’ شيأ من اللحن مستقيمة العرب بالسنتها ا ….)[29]
[1] لوانزلنا هذالقرآن على جبل لرأيته خاشعا متصدعا من خشية الله
[2] The Orientalists have taken great advantage of these fabricated reports, see D.S. Margolith, Muhammad and the Rise of Islam, London, 1927, p. 218
[3] Sahih Bukhari, vol. 6, pp. 11-12
[4] Al Itqan, vol. 1, p. 89, op. cit
[5]Ibid.
[6] Ibid. p. 90
[7] Ibid.
[8] Regarding the compilation of the Qur’an there are several descriptions of the same event, reported through Maqtal Imama in Bukhari with slight variations. First, in the chapter, “Jama’ Al-Qur’an”, second, in “Kitab Al-Tafseer” and third, in “Kitab Al-Ahkam”. Apart from these, there are partial descriptions regarding this report in the chapter “Katib Al-Nabi” and “Kitab Al-Tauheed”. Moreover, apart from Tirmizi, Abu dawood and Sahah Sitta, other collections of traditions are also not devoid of reports regarding compilation of the Qur'an. Nevertheless, because of its inclusion in Bukhari this report has gained fame and credibility regarding the compilation of the Qur'an in the period of Abu Bakr, We are presenting, as a matter of preference, only the three reports available in Bukhari: (i) حدثنا موسى بن اسماعيل عن ابراهيم بن سعد حدثنا ابن شهاب عن عبيد بن السباق أن زيد ابن ثابت رضى الله عنه قال: أرسل الى أبوبكر الصديق مقتل اهل اليمامة فاذا عمر بن الخطاب عنده قال أبوبكر رضى الله عنه: ان عمر أتانى فقال ان القتل قد استحر يوم اليمامة بقراء القرآن وانى أخشى ان استحرا القتل بالقراء بالمواطن فيذهب كثير من القرآن وانى أرى أن تامر بجمع القرآن قلت لعمر: كيف نفعل شيأ لم يفعله رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم؟قال عمر: هذا والله خيرا. فلم يزل عمر يراجعنى حتى شرح الله صدرى لذلك ورأيت فى ذلك الذى رأى عمر. قال زيد قال أبوبكر: انك رجل شاب عاقل لانتهمك رقد كنت تكتب الوحى لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم. فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه. فوالله لو كلفونى نقل جبل من الجبال ما كان أثقل على مما أمرنى به من جمع القرآن. قلت: كيف تفعلون شيأ لم يفعله رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم؟ قال: هو والله خير. لم يزل أبوبكر يراجعنى حتى شرح الله صدرى للذى شرح له صدر أبى بكر وعمر رضى الله عنهما. فتتبعت القرآن أجمعه من العسب واللخاف وصدور الرجال حتى وجدت آخر سورة التوبة مع أبى خزيمة الأنصارى لم أجدها مع أحد غيره (لقد جاءكم رسول من انفسكم عزيزعليه ماعنتم) حتى خاتمة براءة فكانت الصحف عند أبى بكر حتى توفاه الله ثم عند عمر حياته ثم عند حفصه بنت عمر رضى الله عنه. (“Jama’ Al-Qur’an”, Fathul Bari, vol. 8, p. 627, Hadith number 4986) (ii) حدثنا أبواليمان أخبرنا شعيب عن الزهرى قال أخبرنى ابن السباق أن زيد بن ثابت الأنصارى رضى الله عنه-وكان ممن يكتب الوحى- قال: أرسل الى أبوبكر مقتل أهل اليمامة وعنده عمر فقال أبوبكر: ان عمر أتانى فقال ان القتل قد استحريون اليمامة بالناس وانى أخشى أن يستحر القتل بالقراء فى المواطن فيذهب كثير من القرآن الا أن تجمعوه وانى لأرى أن تجمع القرآن. قال أبوبكر: قلت لعمر كيف أفعل شيأ لم يفعله رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم. فقال عمر: هو والله خير. فلم يزل عمر يراجعنى فيه حتى شرح الله لذلك صدرى ورأيت الذى رأى عمر- قال زيد بن ثابت: وعمر عنده جالس لايتكلم- فقال أبوبكر: انك رجل شاب عاقل ولا نتهمك وكنت تكتب الوحى لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم. فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه. فوالله لو كلفنى نقل جبل من الجبال ما كان أثقل على مما أمرنى به من جمع القرآن. قلت كيف تفعلان شيأ لم يفعله النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم. فقال أبوبكر: هو والله خير. فلم أزل أراجعه حتى شرح الله صدرى للذى شرح الله له صدر أبى بكر وعمر فقمت فتتبعت القرآن أجمعه من الرقاع والأكتاف والعسب وصدور الرجال حتى وجدت من سورة آيتين مع خزيمة الأنصارى لم أجدهما مع أحد غيره (لقد جاءكم رسول من أنفسكم عزيز عليه ما عنتم حريص عليكم) الى آخرها. وكانت الصحف التى جمع فيها القرآن عند أبى بكر حتى توفاه الله ثم عند عمر حتى توفاه الله ثم عند حفصة بنت عمر تابعه عثمان بن عمر والليث عن يونس عن ابن شهاب. وقال الليث: حدثنى عبد الرحمن بن خالد عن ابن شهاب وقال مع أبى خزيمة الأنصارى. وقال موسى عن ابراهيم حدثنا ابن شهاب مع أبى خزيمة. وتابعه يعقوب بن ابراهيم عن أبيه. وقال أبوثابت حدثنا ابراهيم وقال مع خزيمة أو أبى خزيمة. (“Kitab Al-Tafseer” Fathul Bari, vol. 8, pp. 194-95, Hadith number 4679) (iii) حدثنا محمد بن عبيد الله أبو ثابت حدثنا ابراهيم بن سعد عن ابن شهاب عن عبيد بن السباق "عن زيد بن ثابت قال: بعث الى أبوبكر لمقتل أهل اليمامة وعنده عمر. فقال أبوبكر: ان عمر أتانى فقال: ان القتل قد استحر يوم اليمامة بقراء القرآن وانى أخشى أن يستحرالقتل بقراء القرآن فى المواطن كلها فيذهب قرآن كثير وانى أرى أن تأمر بجمع القرآن. قلت: كيف أفعل شيأ لم يفعله رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم؟ فقال عمر: هو والله خير. فلم يزل عمر يراجعنى فى ذلك حتى شرح الله صدرى للذى شرح له صدر عمر ورأيت فى ذلك الذى رأى عمر قال زيد: قال أبوبكر وانك رجل شاب عاقل لانتهمك قد كنت تكتب الوحى لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فتتبع القرآن فاجمعه. قال زيد: فوالله لو كلفنى نقل جبل من الجبال ما كان بأثقل على مما كلفنى من جمع القرآن.قلت: كيف تفعلان شيأ لم يفعله رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم؟ قال أبوبكر: هو والله خير فلم يزل يحث مراجعتى حتى شرح الله صدرى للذى شرح الله له صدر أبى بكر وعمر ورأيت فى ذلك الذى رأيا. فتتبعت القرآن أجمعه من العسب والرقاع واللخاف وصدور الرجال فوجدت آخر سورةالتوبة (لقد جاءكم رسول من أنفسكم) الى آخرها مع خزيمة-أوأبى خزيمة- فألحقتها فى سورتها. وكانت الصحف عند أبى بكر حياته حتى توفاه الله عزوجل ثم عند عمر حياته حتى توفاه الله ثم عند حفصة بنت عمر. قال محمد بن عبيد الله: اللخاف يعنى الخزف. (“Kitab Al-Ahkaam” Fathul Bari, vol. 113, p. 195, Hadith number 7191) The fact is – this notion about the compilation of the Qur'an that it had been completed during Abu Bakr’s lifetime which has become a part of common knowledge thrived because of these reports. That is why to understand the core issue, we must make a critical assessment of these reports.
If we make a comparative study of these three reports that I have recorded in details intentionally, we will get to know about their internal contradictions. But before we point to the contradictions in the text, it would be advisable to talk about the cultural background that lies at the centre of their collective manifestation. The first thing to be noted is that these reports present such a picture of the Prophet’s period that it suffered from lack of tools for reading and writing, and that had an awful lack of educated people. If one gathers other reports of this kind that have been recorded in comparatively less credible books and looks at them collectively, the following cultural scenario of Madina during the Prophet’s lifetime would emerge: The Madina of the Prophet’s period seems have been virtually unaware of pen and books for acquiring knowledge. Pen and parchment were very scarce. According to these reports, there was so much scarcity for writing materials that even for a book like the Qur'an that had such a seminal place for Muslims both in this life and the Hereafter, that was being read day and night in the Prophet’s Mosque, the reading or teaching of which was declared to be an act of great merit, and the grandeur of which is demonstrated by such verses as – لوانزلنا هذالقرآن على جبل لرأيته خاشعا متصدعا من خشعة الله…, there were no facilities to write it down. That is why Zayd was appointed to gather Quranic verses written down on all kinds of objects like pieces of wood or animal bones etc. and stored by people in their houses, and collect them in the form of a book. Moreover, for a momentous text like the Qur'an that is the last Divine Book, only this much precaution was taken that whoever brought the verses would get them entered in the presence of two witnesses. Of course, the events of the exclusion of the verse relating to the relationship with foster mother (ayah riza’at) and the disqualification, due to lack of one witness, of the verse relating to stoning to death (ayah rijm) brought by Omar are also part of the lore of the Qur'an’s compilation. We feel that those who have the slightest idea about the seminal position of the Qur'an in the cultural life of Madina during the Prophet’s time, and those who have studied it with open eyes to know how about this Divine text Allah exhorts people to exercise care and caution, to be aware of its its grandeur, to read it in the last quarter of the night, how Allah further characterises it as كتاب مستور فى رق منشور, promises to protect it by asserting – اناله لحافظونand انا علينا جمعه وقرآنه and says, with reference to His Prophet – رسول من الله يتلو صحفا مطهرة would find it difficult to believe in the fabricated tale of compiling the text of the Qur'an from the scattered pieces of wood, bones, planks etc. during the period of Abu Bakr’s caliphate.
Then there are numerous such contradictions in these reports that conflict with other reports in the same collections of hadiths. One has to understand the fact that the social environment at both Mecca and madina during the Prophet’s time was a developed one as far as the writing materials were concerned. There is evidence that this society had a highly developed taste for literature, particularly poetry. The wide popularity of qasidas in the Age of Jahiliya, their public recitation, and the sab’ muallaqat i.e. seven hangings (of poetic compositions) on the walls of Ka’ba have been recorded in history in considerable details. There is no dearth of such reports in the books of exegesis that contain evidence of the writing practice during the Prophet’s period. For example, the written pages of Divine Revelation is said to have had a key role Omar’s acceptance of Islam. His sister and her husband were reading it when Omar entered the room, and they tried to hide it from him. But he insisted on reading it after which, it is said, the seeds of Islam were sown in his heart. Though I do not consider this event to be authentic, but it has been recorded profusely in reliable books of traditions that contain the account of the compilation of the Qur'an during the time of Abu Bakr. The Prophet’s general instruction about the Qur'an that it is doubly virtuous to read it from the written pages than from memory is known to everyone. قرأة الرجل فى غير المصحف الف درجة وقرآته فى المصحف تضاعف على ذلك الفى درجة.…. Then his instruction that one should not travel in the enemy country taking the Divine Text with him has remained a subject of debate among the innovative jurists (Ijtehadi fuqaha). ان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم نهى أن يسافر بالقرآن الى أرض العدو.…(“Kitab Al-Jihad”, Bukhari). It has been reported by the same Zayd bin Sabit in Bukhari that -- كناعند رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم نؤلف القرآن من الرقاع…. Then in the Prophet’s time a considerable number of such calligraphists had emerged who were busy writing down the Qur'an day and night. When they were invaded by doubts as to whether it would be proper for them to accept any remuneration for this work they approached the Prophet, who said – أحق ما أخذتم عليه أجرا كتاب الله تعالى. … that confirmed the validity and desirability of this profession. This tradition is also present in Bukhari through Ibn Abbas.
As we have mentioned, even before the advent of Islam, the culture of reading and writing was prevalent in the Age of Jahiliya. Madina and its environs were inhabited by the people of the Book who, because they were having the Divine Text amongst them, considered themselves superior to other people. And, after the advent of Islam that began with the instruction, “Read” (iqra’), acquiring education took the aspect of a social revolution. The fact that the prisoners of war after the battle of Badr were awarded the penalty of teaching the children of Madina point to the fact that the newly established Muslim society at Madina had a strong culture of reading and writing. Zayd bin Sabit who has been presented in Bukhari as the most skilful copyist of the Qur'an provides a shining example of this culture. Seeing his great talent, the Prophet had advised him to learn Siryani. It is said that the Prophet took his services in his correspondence with other people of the Book, and around seven or eight hijra era, he acquired the distinction of being the copyist of the Divine Revelation. In an environment where acquiring education was treated as a social duty, it is difficult to accept the thesis that the compilation of the Quranic text had to depend solely on those who committed it to memory or those who recorded it casually and chaotically on pieces of objects lying about here and there.
We think that this fabricated account regarding the compilation of the Qur'an is a latter-day invention that is not consistent even with the details provided by the narrators of this account. Even if it is accepted that as a consequence of the battle of Imama Omar had, for the first time, the apprehension of the loss of the Quranic Text, and as it is recorded in some reports contained in Itqaan that when he enquired about some particular Quranic verses and was told that those who knew the verses were killed in the battle, he was greatly shocked, and impressed upon Abu Bakr the urgency of compiling the Quranic Text, telling him that if they did not do so, a greater part of the Quranic Text might well be lost, one finds many inconsistencies in this account when one compares it with the actual historical event. First, if the task of the compilation of the Qur'an had been done at the initiative of Omar, the status of the compiler of the Qur'an should have been enjoyed by Omar, or the Caliph of the period, i.e., Abu Bakr. Othman had merely instructed that additional copies be made of the Hafsa version of the Text compiled by Zayd. Then it passes understanding as to why the person who merely issued instruction for additional copies should be credited with the title of the compiler of the Divine Text, but those at whose initiative the (Abu Bakr) Siddiqui Version (or, Hafsa version) was prepared should be given no credit at all in this momentous task. The part of this narrative that has been recorded in Kitab Al-Ahkaam mentions that Khuzaima or Abu Khuzaima possessed two verses of Surah Tauba, about which there are other reports that claim that Omar took the innovative decision to incorporate them at the end of Surah Tauba saying that if there were three verses then he would have made a separate surah out of them. As there were only two verses, he instructed them to be appended at the end of surah Tauba. As a matter of fact, some reports also claim that – فالحقتهافى سورتها …., i.e., Zayd bin Sabit knew about the exact location or placement of the verses and he placed them in their appropriate/original position, while there are other reports that do not make any such claim. Apart from this, there is one report that mentions the lack of availability of one verse, and another report that mentions the absence of two verses. Then, if Zayd bin Sabit knew the proper placement of the verses, to blame Omar for placing them according to his own better judgment is such a glaring contradiction as has made this tradition suspect in the eyes of the scholars of the Prophetic traditions.
The most important thing about this tradition is that it is narrated through singular chains of transmission (khabar-e ahad) , in the idiom of the exegetical scholarship, and some of its transmitters have been known to be extremely unreliable: Zayd bin Sabit’s narration of the report through Ubaid bin Al-Sabaq and that of Zahri’s report. In other words, in the span of one hundred years, this extremely important event relating to the compilation of the Qur'an has reached us only through the reports of these three narrators! As a matter fact, if the task of compiling the Qur'an had really been completed during Abu Bakr’s lifetime, it would have been known to everyone as an extremely important event in the history of Islam, and not reduced to the lone reports of only three people, for a hundred years. Then, even among the reports of these three, it seems beyond the realm of possibility for Abeed bin Al-Sabaq, who was known to have been born in 50 H.E., to have reported it from Zayd who died in 48 H.E. In other words, it cannot be said to be true to chronology. Then this fact also defies explanation as to why, during the reign of Abu Bakr, only Zayd bin Sabit was entrusted with this onerous task, when there were more skilful and more experienced copyists of Divine Revelation available in Madina. Zayd bin Sabit who had learnt copying from the prisoners of the battle of Badr had certainly the fame of a rising copyist of some talent, but in the presence of more experienced copyists of Divine Revelation, it does not seem quite intelligible as to why only he was relied upon for copying the Quranic Text. It is clear from history that there were quite a few among the Prophet's Companions who carried out this responsibility of copying down Quranic verses from time to time, and who certainly had a greater reputation as the copyists of the Quranic verses. In the books of history, including Ibn sa’d, Tabari and others, one finds the following names among the Prophet's Companions who had considerable reputation as copyists of the Divine Revelation: Omar, Abu Bakr, Othman, Ali, Abi bin Ka’b, Abdullah bin Abi Sar’h, Zubair bin Awam, Khalid bin Sa’id bin Al-Aaas, Aban bin Sa’id bin al Aas, Hanzala ibn Al-Rabi’, Mu’yaqb bin Abi Fatima, Abdullah bin Arqam Al-Zahri, Sharahbin bin Hasna, Abdullah bin Rawaha, Amir bin Faheera, Umr bin Al-Aas, Sabit bin Qais bin Shamas, Mugheera bin Sha’ba, Khalid bin Walid, Muawiya bin Abu Sufiyan, Zayd bin Sabit (Zad Al-Ma’ad Al-Ibn Al-Qeem, Matba’ Maiminiya, Egypt, vol. 1, p. 30). We should also keep in mind that this task of compilation of the Qur'an was the most important task in Zayd bin Sabit’s life and a great honour for him. How could he have narrated this great event only to Abeed bin Sabaq who was said to have been born two years after his death? And Abeed bin Sabaq narrates it only to Shahab Zahri who, through his disciples, makes this event a part of our common knowledge. We have already pointed out earlier that the list of martyrs of the battle of Imama that has reached us through Ibn Aseer and other books of history does not contain the name of any other reputed qari except that of Salim Maula Abi Huzaifa. So, there was no valid reason as to why Omar should be unduly alarmed about the possibility of the extinction of the Qur'an. This totally fabricated story made its apperance a hundred years after the event of the Prophet’s migration from Mecca. It begins through Shahab Zahri, or these accounts have wrongly been attributed to him. This should also be made clear that many of the traditions relating to the dispute among Prophet's Companions about the Caliphate or that cast aspersions on the holy characters of the members of the Prophet’s family emanate from Zahri, that cannot be considered authentic by any means. For a debate on the art of testing the traditions through the scrutiny of antecedents (rijal) regarding these traditions in Bukhari. Tarikh Al-Qur’an by Mufti Abdul Latif Rahmani and Jam’a Al-Qur’an by Tamanna Imadi have produced incontrovertible evidence, particularly the latter which is of crucial importance as far as the debate of rijal is concerned.
[9] See the chapter, “Rida Al-Kabeer”, Sanan Ibn Maja
[10]For a scholarly discussion on this issue, see, “Bahas Mafrooza Ayah Rajm” in Tamanna Imadi, Jama’ Al-Qura’n, Karachi, 1994
[11] Even though Ibn Kathir expressed a favourable view of Ibn Mas’ud as he could have had a different opinion about these two known surahs of the Qur'an, other than the consensus arrived at by the Prophet's Companions regarding them. But he has not produced any evidence regarding this. Thinking this, Abdullah bin Mas’ud must have held the same opinion. Among the new exegetes, Abul Ala Maududi has made this fabricated tradition the basis of his premise that the Prophet's Companions are not immune from mistakes and criticism. Rather than making such serious allegations against a reputed companion of the Prophet like Abdullah bin Masu’d it would have been more reasonable if the reporters were subjected to scrutiny and correction. That they were practising falsehood is evident in the books of rijal. But as the exegetical literature largely followed the tradition of imitating the Predecessors it could not be expected normally that a fresh interpretation would throw some new light on the understanding of the Qur'an. The detailed note on mauzatain by Abul Ala Maududi which marks the zenith of his career as an exegete, cannot, by any measure, be called an improvement on the understanding of the Predecessors. First, the events that were described in the ancient books of exegesis and reports regarding the Prophet’s being under the influence of black magic have been accepted by Abul Ala Maududi without any critical scrutiny, although if one applies the minimum standard of the conventional parameters of testing a report, or even on the parameters of intellectualism, these fanciful accounts can be proved to be unreliable . To claim that black magic had any effect on the Prophet is an allegation of serious proportions. And then to say that he was under its impact for six months or a year, and, in the words of Abul Ala Maududi, when he got out of its impact, “it was exactly as though someone was tied up and then released,” is to cast aspersion not only on the person of the Prophet but on the status of Apostleship as well. The internal evidence contained in the Qur'an makes it loud and clear that mauzatain are among those surahs revealed in Mecca where, in small and cryptic sentences, we have been told about different aspects of Allah’s Unity (tauheed). The supposed incident related to black magic is said to have occurred in 7 H.E. which, according to these reports, took place in Madina. To explain this contradiction, Abul Ala Maududi, like the old commentators, took resort to the long-drawn process of tatbeeq, and reached the conclusion that several surahs of the Qur'an could have been revealed more than once, and that it could also be true that it had been revealed in Mecca but its special potency regarding black magic could have been communicated to the Prophet after the “black magic event” in Madina. We feel that only those who do not properly understand the grandeur of Divine Revelation and recognise the personality of the Prophet can entertain such notions that the same Divine message could be revealed twice, first without a recipe for its use and second, with it. After all, what kind of a Prophet he would be (we seek Allah’s refuge from such abominations) who, despite the presence of verses that acted as antidote to black magic, did not know how to use the potentials in them (as claimed by these reports) at the most opportune moment? In the exegetical footnotes of mauzatain, Abul Ala Maududi also, like the earlier commentators, have included all these reports that have made it difficult to access these verses directly. It was also claimed that the potentiality of these verses extends beyond the Qur'an to the Torah and the Old Testament. In the words of Abul Ala Maududi, “It has been known that it is permissible for the people of the Book to read from the Torah and the Old Testament to drive away black magic.” Moreover, he has recorded a report by Abu Sa’id Khadri in such approving terms that it provides justification for claiming remuneration for driving away black magic. The reported story runs as follows: Once the Prophet had sent some individuals in an expedition. On their way, they came by an Arab tribe whose members refused them any hospitality. In the meanwhile, the chief of the tribe was stung by a scorpion, and the people of the tribe sought help in the form of medicine or charms from these visitors. Abu Sa’id agreed to treat the person on the condition that as a remuneration the people of the tribe must pay him a flock of sheep. It is said in the report that Abu Sa’id began to read surah Fateha while massaging the spot with his saliva. Soon, the poison lost its effect. When the Prophet was asked if it was all right to charge remuneration for the task, he smiled and said, “Take the sheep and mark my share in them as well”. On the one hand, Abul Ala Maududi takes this story to be reliable, on the other hand he forbids practitioners of charms and black magic to seek justification in this report for their practice. We feel that such incidents amount to casting aspersions on the Prophet’s character. He was a man of sublime morals. It does not stand to reason that he would eat from the wealth earned through unlawful means. Such reports cannot be trusted even if they have been recorded in reliable books of tradition Then, to attribute it to the Prophet of Allah that he said on the occasion – ان احق ما اخذته عليه اجرا كتاب الله.…., i.e., you were quite within your rights to accept remuneration for reading out from Allah’s Book It was, in fact, providing justification for the business of those people who use the verses of the Quran to cure the diseases through incantation. It was against the act of earning one’s livelihood through the means disliked by Islam. In sum, the exegetical literature that has come down to us from the Predecessors has transformed the verses relating to Allah’s Unity (tauheed) into verses of black magic in such a way that even those commentators who are critical of black magic cannot realise that they have, in fact, become advocates of deen-e Tabari rather than deen-e Qur’ani. And that they are constantly being drawn into this quagmire of exegetical footnotes and conflicting and contradictory reports, so much so that any effort to get out of it pulls them back into the bog ineluctably. [12]See, chapters on “Fazailul Qur’an” , Bukhari, before the chapters on “Fazail Al-Qur’an”. Such reports about Abi bin Ka’b and Abdullah bin Mas’ud can be found in Tafsir Ibn Kathir and Masnad Ahmad.
[13] See, Kanzul ‘Amal, p. 279. Cf. Nisai, Kitab Al-Masahif, Ibn Abi Dawood, Mustadrak Hakim etc. op. cit
[14] Kanz al-Ammal, vol. 1, p. 178
[15] Tirmizi, vol. 2, p. 117, Muslim I, p. 274
[16] حدثنى عبد الله بن محمد حدثنا سفيان عن عمرو عن ابن عباس رضى الله عنهما قال كانت عكاظ ومجنة وذوالمجاز أسواقا فى الجاهلية فلماكان الاسلام فكأنهم تأثموا فيه فنزلت (ليس عليكم جناح أن تبتغوا فضلا من ربكم) فى مواسع الحج. قرأها ابن عباس.…. (Fathul Bari, vol. 4, p. 338, Hadith no. 2050, “Kitab Al-Bayu”)
[17] Tamanna Imadi, Jama’ Al-Qur’an, p. 92, op. cit
[18] Al-Itqan, vol. 1, p. 132
Similarly, regarding the chopping off the right hand of thieves, the judgment of the ulama, in fact, is derived from the verse attributed to Abdullah bin Mas’ud in a distorted version where – والسارق والسارقة فاقطعوا ايدهما….was sought to be replaced by “ايمانهما” (ref. Sahih Muslim). Such distorted verses have influmenced our exegetical and juristic thinking to a considerable extent. The impact of the statement attributed to Sa’d bin Waqas – قرأت وله اخ او اخت من ام فلكل … can be felt in our juristic thinking related to inheritance. Some scholars have also shown the audacity to assert that a deviant version (qirat) which they call “qirat-e shaza” can be more helpful than the original verses in untying the web of meaning. [See, Abul Baqa’ Al-Akbari (d. 616 H.E.), املا ما من به الرحمن من وجوه الاعراب والقراءة فى جميع القرآن Cairo, 1341 H.E.]. Sometimes, these alternative versions were considered to be helpful in enhancing the presige of scholars. For example, the version attributed to Omar bin Abdul Aziz – انما يخشى الله من عباده العلماء… (the word ‘Allah’ is subject and “al-Ulama’ is object; ref. Tafseer Qartabi, vol. 14, p. 220) Zarkashi was constrained to take “khashiyat” to mean ‘honour’ or ‘kindness’ and not ‘fear’. According to Zarkashi (Al-Burhan, vol. 1, p. 377) any statement by a reputed Companion of the Prophet needed to be given precedence, and that such statements are helpful in the elucidation and interpretation of the Quranic verses.
[19] |
|
|
|
