The Preservation of the Quran

On 20 July 1969, humans set foot on the moon for the first time. This event was reported worldwide. Experts agreed on its occurrence. Such agreement is termed ijma (consensus) in scholarly terminology. This consensus involved so many people that it would have been impossible for all of them to collude to fabricate a falsehood. The transmission of this agreement by a large group is termed tawatur (continuous transmission). Subsequently, this event was passed down from generation to generation with both consensus and tawatur until it reached us. Even today, there is consensus regarding its occurrence. This would not have been possible without past consensus and tawatur. For an individual today, certainty about this event arises from the current consensus. Thus, before investigation, it is accepted as true, and then documented evidence may be examined for further verification. Even if such evidence is unavailable, doubt about its occurrence does not arise. Every historically consensus and continuously transmitted event is reported in this way and produces certainty.

Now consider the opposite scenario. History also reports some conflicting accounts regarding this event, claiming it was a fabrication. Some analyses are offered as proof, though they are not accepted as scholarly, yet some people consider the event doubtful based on these analyses.

Now consider the Qur’an. There is consensus among Muslims worldwide on a single text and recitation. This consensus would not have been possible without past consensus and tawatur. Therefore, confidence in the preservation of a single text and recitation of the Qur’an arises from the present consensus and tawatur of Muslims. Documentary evidence or chains of narration are not required to prove this; however, historical evidence of past consensus and tawatur is referred to for further research.

Consensus and tawatur regarding an event depend on circumstances. If they do not occur at the time of the event, they can never occur later. Therefore, if a non-consensual event became widespread in some period, scholars and researchers would know it was neither consensus-based nor continuously transmitted. Likewise, the agreement of Muslims on a single text and recitation could not have occurred later if it had not existed in the first Muslim community. Events on which the companions of the Prophet did not reach consensus remain disputed even today.

Some individual reports exist that claim the first compilation of the Qur’an was incomplete, that some verses were left out, that some memorizers were martyred in battles, and that some parts they knew were not included in the Qur’an. All these exist in history as individual reports. However, they contradict the consensus of the companions, who preserved the Arḍah-yi Akhirah (final recension) of the Qur’an completely and transmitted it to the next generation. Since then, it has been continuously transmitted to us.

Had the first Muslim community experienced the doubts described in these reports, later generations would have received a Qur’an without consensus. However, the reality is that the companions agreed on the Arḍah-yi Akhirah recitation. Later, the third Caliph, Uthman, ordered its official publication and the destruction of private copies. Uthman did not collect people onto a new recitation; rather, he published the recitation on which they had already agreed. This recitation is known as qiraat al-ammah (public recitation).

Some companions possessed earlier recitations before the Arḍah-yi Akhirah, which were later abrogated. These were transmitted in the form of individual reports. Some of their interpretive statements were mistakenly considered part of the Qur’anic text. These were transmitted as exegetical reports but never became part of the Qur’an. They remained of interest to scholars and reciters within their circles.

Later, in some regions, recitations different from qiraat al-ammah became common, such as in some African countries. Scholars know these were not public recitations. For example, at the end of the third century AH, the judge of Kairouan, Abdullah ibn Talib, ordered the recitation of Nafiʿ instead of the public recitation.³ From then on, the people of that region recited it. The reason was likely that they followed the Maliki school of jurisprudence, and Imam Malik preferred Nafiʿ’ s recitation. However, there is no trace regarding who propagated the public recitation among Muslims, as it was always practiced among the masses and scholars since the time of the Prophet (PBUH).

Regarding the preservation of the Qur’an, the most skeptical are the Shiah. Yet, even among them, the Qur’an has been memorized, recited, and studied academically with a single text and recitation.

If the Muslim community had read different texts or recitations at different times and consensus on one text occurred later, historical evidence would need to show where multiple texts were used, how regional interactions handled differing recitations, how scholars cited verses according to different texts, and when and how the majority of Muslims agreed on a single text and recitation. Such widespread change would need documentation.

Any claim about dissemination and publication of the Qur’an must be connected to the entire history of the Muslim community, because the Qur’an was not a book for a few individuals but for the whole Ummah. Even a single letter change would affect the entire community. Claims of alternating recitations or lack of consensus for a period would be reflected in continuous transmission, but no such event exists in Muslim history.

The correct scholarly approach is to reject individual reports that contradict historical facts rather than doubt the facts themselves.

The memorization, recitation, and scholarly engagement with the Qur’an occur daily millions of times. In this sense, the consensus and tawatur of the Ummah on a single text and recitation are continuously reaffirmed. This is why there can be no error or discrepancy in its text and recitation. Any copying or printing errors are treated as mistakes and do not become widespread.

Because of the Qur’an’s preservation, old copies were not deliberately preserved. Such effort is reserved for rare books.

Even if the earliest copies or manuscripts were available today, their antiquity would only attest to the historical consensus and tawatur, which already exists in the agreement on a single text and recitation. This history of consensus and tawatur is separately preserved in narrations of memorization, commentaries, translations, and jurisprudential references.

It should be noted that recitation in a language does not depend on its script. Some words are not read exactly as written. Native speakers do not require diacritics or phonetics. The same applies to Arabic and Qur’anic recitation. Arabic was not dependent on script, nor was Qur’anic recitation. Most Arabs learned and memorized the Qur’an orally, though written Qur’ans were always present. The Arabic script evolved over time, but this did not affect recitation. The recitation remains the same regardless of the alphabet used. Early orthographic issues were preserved in transmission to respect tradition, and the Ummah never doubted the correct pronunciation. For example: • “bi ayyikumul maftun” (Al-Qalam 68:6): The extra y in ُبِأَیی ِكُم does not affect recitation.

• “wala in muttum aw qutiltum la ilallahi tuhsharun” (Al ʿImran 3:158): An extra alif after l does not change the intended recitation.

• “la azbahannahu” (An-Naml 27:21): An extra alif after l; reading strictly according to script would invert the meaning.

This demonstrates the preservation of Qur’anic recitation.

The qiraat al-ammah was later called qiraat Hafs, because Imam Hafs, who taught the public recitation, became famous, and the name spread after his teaching or death. His contemporaries continued calling it qiraat al-ammah. Some scholars include: Khalid ibn Ahmad (100–170 AH), Sibawayh (148–180 AH), their student Akhush (d. 210 AH), Al-Farraʾ (144–207 AH). Even after Hafs, Imam Bukhari (d. 256 AH) called it qiraat al-ammah.⁴

Before or during the early years of Hafs (d. 180 AH), the Tabieen in India and other Far Eastern regions had the same Qur’an as we have today.

Hafs’ recitation chain shows he taught the public recitation. His teacher, Asim ibn Abi al-Najud, learned it from Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Salmi (d. 73 AH), who began teaching the Qur’an at Kufa’s Grand Mosque during Uthman’s era and taught it continuously for forty years.⁵ He recited to Ali and then taught the entire Qur’an to Hasan and Husayn. He also studied with Zayd ibn Thabit and found no discrepancy between Zayd and Ali’s recitation.⁶

Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Salmi stated:

کانت قراءة أبي بکر وعمر وعثمان وزید بن ثابت والمهاجرین واألنصار واحدة، کانوا یقرؤن القراءة العامة، وهي القراءة التي قرأها رسول ّٰللاّٰ صلی ّٰللاّٰ علیه وسلم علٰی جبریل مرتین في العام الذي قبض فیه، وکان زید قد ش هد

.العرضة األخیرة، وکان یقرئ الناس بها حتی مات The recitation of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Zayd ibn Thabit, and the Muhajirin and Ansar was one; they recited according to the public recitation, which the Prophet )PBUH( recited to Jibril twice in the year of his passing. Zayd ibn Thabit witnessed the final recension and taught people according to it until his death. (Al-Burhan, al-Zarkashi, 1/331)

Asim ibn Abi al-Najud learned this recitation from Abd al-Rahman al-Salmi. Asim was known as “Aqra al-Nas li-Qiraat Zayd”, meaning the most proficient reciter of Zayd’s recitation.⁷ Hafs was a student of this same ʿAsim. Accordingly, Ibn Sawwar al-Baghdadi transmitted a statement of Imam Hafs regarding this matter:

قرأت هذه القراءة على عاصم حرفًا حرفًا ولم أخالف عاصمًا في حرف من كتاب ّٰللاّٰ تعالى. وأخبرني عاصم أنه قرأ على أبِي عبد الرحمٰن السلمى وهي قراءة أبي عبد الرحمٰن التي أخذها عن أصحاب رسول ّٰللاّٰ صلی ّٰللاّٰ علیه وسلم: عثمان وعلي وزید بن ثابت

.وعامتها عن علي بن ابى طالب رضوان ّٰللاّٰ علیهم. قال حفص: فصححت القراءة على عاصم حتى لم أشك في حرف منها I learned this recitation letter by letter from Asim and did not differ from him in a single letter of the Book of Allah. Asim told me that he learned it from Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Salmi, which he had learned from the Companions of the Prophet (PBUH): Uthman, Ali, and Zayd ibn Thabit, mostly from Ali ibn Abi Talib. I corrected my recitation on Asim so that I had no doubt about a single letter. (Al-Mustanir fi al-Qiraat al-Ashr, 236–237)

Based on this, many scholars considered Asim’s recitation the most authentic regarding chain of transmission. Imam Tahawi cited Yahya ibn Aktham:

إن كانتا .لقراءة توخذ بصحة المخرج فما نعلم لقراءة من صحة المخرج ما صح لقراءة عاصم

“If the recitation is judged by the authenticity of its chain, we know of no recitation whose chain is as sound as ʿAsim’s.”⁸ (Sharh Mushkil al-Athar 1/263)