Series of Answers by the Eminent Scholar Ata bin Khalil Abu al-Rashtah, Ameer of Hizb ut-Tahrir, to the Questions of the Visitors to His Facebook Page "Fiqhi"
Answer to a Question
An Issue regarding the Mutawatir Recitations of the Noble Quran
To: Ashraf Bader
Question:
Peace be upon you, our honorable Ameer. I ask Allah, the Most High, the All-Powerful, that you are in good health and well-being, and I ask Allah to help you and keep you firm. I would like to raise a topic, asking Allah to grant me success in it, and I would be grateful if you could look into it and decide upon it.
It was mentioned in the book The Islamic Personality, Volume I, in the chapter "The Need of the Ummah Today for Mufassireen," when discussing the Arabs' use of some words instead of their synonyms or near-synonyms as long as the intended meaning remains sound. In the subject of recitations (Qira'at), an example was provided on page 309, and I suspect that we may have missed the mark there. It is the statement of the Almighty "lanubawwi'annahum mina al-jannati ghurafa" when paired with the recitation of Abu Ja'far from his two narrations "lanubawwiyannahum mina al-jannati ghurafa." This is for two reasons:
First: It is true that Abu Ja'far recites it by substituting the hamza with a ya, but he recites with the connection (silah) of the mim of the plural (mim al-jam') definitively: "lanubawwiyannahumu mina." Thus, the merging (idgham) of the mim of "lanubawwiyannahum" with the mim of "min" is eliminated, contrary to how it is represented in the book on page 309. Recitation with substitution (ibdal) alongside the merging of the mim has not been reported in any of the mutawatir recitations. Furthermore, the rule of substitution does not affect the meaning of the word; it is one of the fundamental rules (usul). Since the subject is about the Arabs' use of words instead of their synonyms or near-synonyms, this does not serve as a suitable example, because the meaning of "bawwa'a" (بوأ) and "bawwa" (بوا) does not differ; the word is the same but subject to the rule of substitution.
Second: The example would be correct if we replaced the recitation of Abu Ja'far with the recitation of Hamza, Al-Kisa'i, or Khalaf al-Ashir. This is because they recite it as "lanuthwiyannahum mina al-jannati ghurafa." The root of "thawa" (الثواء) differs from "tabwi'ah" (التبوئة) in terms of origin, and this is what the context requires. Allah knows best. O Allah, if I am correct, it is from You, and if I have erred, it is from myself. I ask Allah to make us among those who contribute to keeping this culture (tsaqofah) pure. May Allah reward you with good, help you, and keep you firm.
Answer:
And peace be upon you, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings. May Allah bless you for your kind prayers for us...
Your question, or let us say your comment, is on the following passage from the book The Islamic Personality, Volume I:
[... As for the disposal of individual words within their structures, or the disposal of the structures themselves, the Quran proceeds according to the established custom of the Arabs in whose tongue the Quran was revealed. Despite the Quran's inimitability (i'jaz) to the Arabs, it did not deviate from their continuous custom in the disposal of speech; its reality in this regard is the very reality of the Arabs' established custom in that...
This has occurred in the Quran in the use of some words instead of their synonyms or near-synonyms, such as the recitations in the Quran:
مَٰـلِكِ يَوۡمِ ٱلدِّينِ
"Sovereign of the Day of Recompense." (Al-Fatihah [1]: 4)
مَلِكِ يَوۡمِ ٱلدِّينِ
"King of the Day of Recompense." (Al-Fatihah [1]: 4)
وَمَا يَخۡدَعُونَ إِلَّآ أَنفُسَهُمۡ
"But they deceive not except themselves." (Al-Baqarah [2]: 9)
وَمَا يُخۡادِعُونَ إِلَّآ أَنفُسَهُمۡ
"But they deceive not except themselves." (Al-Baqarah [2]: 9)
لَنُبَوِّئَـنَّهُم مِّنَ ٱلۡجَنَّةِ غُرَفاً
"We will surely settle them in lofty mansions of Paradise." (Al-Ankabut [29]: 58)
لَنُبَوِّيَـنَّهُم مِّنَ ٱلۡجَنَّةِ غُرَفاً
"We will surely settle them in lofty mansions of Paradise." (Al-Ankabut [29]: 58)
and other verses according to the recitations.] End quote.
You see that in the book The Islamic Personality, Volume I, there is an error in two places:
First: Making the mim of (لنبوينهم) in the book vowelless (sakinah), which results in its merging into the mim that follows it in the word (من). Thus, the mim in the word (مّن) appeared with a shaddah in the book, which indicates idgham. This is incorrect according to your view because (لنبوينهم), which belongs to Abu Ja'far, is with the connection (silah) of the mim of the plural, so there is no idgham of the mim in it.
Second: That the citation of the recitation (لنبوينهم) is not suitable because the word (لنبوئنهم) is like the word (لنبوينهم) in meaning; it is merely a case of substituting the hamza, so a ya took its place. This, in your opinion, does not fit the point intended for illustration.
The answer to that is as follows:
- Regarding your first observation, which is the appearance of a shaddah on the mim in the word (مّن), meaning the merging of the mim of (لنبوينهم) into the mim of (من), which contradicts the mentioned recitation of Abu Ja'far because he recites with the silah of the plural mim, i.e., he recites (لَنُبَوِّيَنَّهُمُ مِن), so he does not merge the first mim into the second... This observation is correct. It was reported regarding the recitation of Abu Ja'far:
(An-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-’Ashr (1/273)): "They differed regarding the connection (silah) of the plural mim with a waw and its iskan (making it vowelless) when it occurs before a vocalized letter... Ibn Kathir and Abu Ja'far recited with a dammah on the mim in all of that and connected it with a waw in pronunciation."
(Faridat ad-Dahr fi Ta’seel wa Jam’ al-Qira’at (4/73)): The recitation: (2)... Abu Ja'far with the recitation of lanubawwiyannahum by substituting the hamza with a vocalized ya and the connection of the mim.)
Accordingly, what is in the book is a typographical error. It was not present in previous editions of The Islamic Personality, Volume I. For example, the third edition did not have diacritical marks (harakat) on the letters, and the text of the verse in it according to Abu Ja'far's recitation was: (لنبوينهم من الجنة غرفا) without a shaddah, i.e., without idgham. However, later, the Quranic verses in the book were set in the Uthmanic script with full diacritics. The first recitation appeared correctly as fixed in the Mushafs:
لَنُبَوِّئَـنَّهُم مِّنَ ٱلۡجَنَّةِ غُرَفاً
"We will surely settle them in lofty mansions of Paradise." (Al-Ankabut [29]: 58)
When the other recitation—Abu Ja'far's recitation—was used as an example, it seems the typesetter changed the hamza in the text of the first recitation and placed a ya in its place according to Abu Ja'far's recitation without noticing the issue of the silah of the plural mim, thus keeping the diacritics as they were:
لَنُبَوِّيَـنَّهُم مِّنَ ٱلۡجَنَّةِ غُرَفاً
Thus, a shaddah appeared on the letter mim in the word (مّن), and this is a typographical error.
- As for your second observation, that using Abu Ja'far's recitation (لنبوينهم) as an example is unsuitable because "the meaning of bawwa'a and bawwa does not differ as the word is the same but subject to the rule of substitution," this observation is inaccurate. This is because the illustration in this part of The Islamic Personality is for the use of two words that indicate a single meaning. The lack of difference in meaning does not affect the validity of the illustration; on the contrary, the meaning should be one or near-identical for the illustration to be valid. It says: "(This has occurred in the Quran in the use of some words instead of their synonyms or near-synonyms, such as the recitations in the Quran)," meaning that what is required is the unity or proximity of meaning despite the difference in the word... Using two different recitations due to substitution (ibdal) is an illustration using two different words even if the meaning is exactly the same, because words that undergo substitution are considered different words and not a single word... Al-Suyuti pointed this out in his book Al-Mizhar when discussing substitution, saying:
[The thirty-second type: Knowledge of Substitution: Ibn Faris said in Fiqh al-Lughah: Among the ways of the Arabs is the substitution of letters and placing some in the place of others: madahahu and madahahu, a rifall horse and a rifann horse; this is frequent and famous, and scholars have authored works on it... Among those who authored on this type are Ibn al-Sikkit and Abu al-Tayyib al-Lughawi.
Abu al-Tayyib said in his book: The meaning of substitution is not that the Arabs intentionally replace one letter with another, but rather they are different dialects (lughat) for identical meanings; two words in two dialects are close for one meaning, such that they do not differ except in one letter. He said: The evidence for this is that a single tribe does not speak a word sometimes with a hamza and sometimes without, nor with a sad once and a sin another time. Likewise, the substitution of the lam of the definite article into a mim, and the initial hamza into an ‘ayn; as in their saying ‘an instead of an; the Arabs do not share in any of that; rather, one people says this and others say that... ] End quote.
So, substituting one letter for another in a single word makes the two words different even if their meaning is one, because each of them is a dialect (lughah) among the Arabs: some Arabs say for praise (madh) "madaha" with a ha and others say "madahahu" with a different ha and the meaning is one. Some say "saqar" with a sin and others say "saqar" with a sad and the bird is one. Some say "nabu'uhum" with a hamza and others say "nabuyuhum" with a ya and the meaning is one... The Noble Quran used in some cases multiple words to express the same meaning in the same verse when there are multiple Quranic recitations for the verse according to the various dialects of the Arabs. Among these is the multiplicity of dialects due to substitution, as is the case in the passage we are discussing in The Islamic Personality, Volume I. The word (لنبوئنهم) is different from the word (لنبوينهم) due to substitution, even though the meaning is one. However, some Arabs say (لنبوئنهم) and others say (لنبوينهم), and the Quran used this dialect and that, where the recitations multiplied; thus, the recitation of some reciters was (لنبوئنهم) and the recitation of Abu Ja'far was (لنبوينهم).
Through this, it is clear that we did not miss the mark when we mentioned Abu Ja'far's recitation (لنبوينهم) alongside the recitation (لنبوئنهم), because the requirement is fulfilled by mentioning the two different recitations where two different words are used because they are two dialects among the Arabs to express the same meaning.
However, using the other recitation, which is (لنثوينهم) with a tha in place of the ba, may be further from causing confusion and clearer in highlighting the intended point in the mentioned text in The Islamic Personality. Therefore, we will amend the text by placing (لنثوينهم) with a tha in place of (لنبوينهم) with a ya.
This recitation is reported for the same verse as mentioned in An-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-’Ashr: ["(And they differed) in: (لنبوئنهم من الجنة), so Hamza, Al-Kisa'i, and Khalaf recited with a triple-dotted tha (ث) sakinah after the nun and the substitution of the hamza with a ya from ath-thawa' (الثواء), which is staying/residing. The rest recited with a single-dotted ba (ب) and the hamza from at-tabawwu' (التَّبَوُّءِ), which is the dwelling place, and the substitution of its hamza for Abu Ja'far was previously mentioned under the single hamza."] End quote. It was mentioned in the Tafsir of al-Tabari: [... {لَنُبَوِّئَنَّهُمْ مِنَ الْجَنَّةِ غُرَفاً} [Al-Ankabut: 58] He says: We will surely settle them in the high places of Paradise. The reciters differed in the recitation of that. The general reciters of Madinah, Basra, and some of the Kufans recited it: {لَنُبَوِّئَنَّهُمْ} [An-Nahl: 41] with a ba. The general reciters of Kufa recited it with a tha: (لَنُثوِيَنَّهُمْ). The correct view regarding that in my opinion is that they are two famous recitations among the reciters of the cities; scholars among the reciters have recited with each of them, and they are close in meaning. Whichever one the reciter uses, he is correct. That is because His saying: {لَنُبَوِّئَنَّهُمْ} [An-Nahl: 41] is from bawwa'tuhu manzilan: meaning I settled him. Likewise, lanuthwiyannahum; it is only from athwaytuhu maskanan, when you settle him in a dwelling, from ath-thawa', which is the place of stay.] End quote.
Thus, the mutawatir recitations from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ for the Noble Quran, without which recitation is not valid, do not deviate from the language of the Arabs:
قُرآنًا عَرَبِيًّا غَيْرَ ذِي عِوَجٍ
"An Arabic Quran, without any deviance." (Az-Zumar [39]: 28)
As well as His saying, Exalted is He:
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ
"Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Quran that you might understand." (Yusuf [12]: 2)
Meaning, in the language of the Arabs.
In conclusion, I appreciate your eagerness and interest in the science of recitations, as well as your pursuit of accuracy. I ask Allah Subhanahu for your success.
Your brother, Ata bin Khalil Abu al-Rashtah
23 Rabi’ al-Akhir 1443 AH Corresponding to 28/11/2021 CE
Link to the answer from the Ameer's page (may Allah protect him) on Facebook
Link to the answer from the Ameer's page (may Allah protect him) on the Web