Variant Readings of the Qur’ān

The roots of the variant readings of the Qur’ān go back to the time of Muhammad. The historical record shows an event that sheds light on the presence of differences in the various readings of the Qur’ān among the Muslims. We are told that ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab happened to hear Hisham Ibn Hakim reading sura al-Furqan (Q 25). He noticed that Hisham was saying it in a different form than he (‘Umar) had heard from Muhammad. When ‘Umar asked Hisham for the source of his recitation of the Qur’ān, Hisham responded that he had heard it from Muhammad. ‘Umar did not believe him, so they both went to Muhammad to have him judge between them as to who was quoting the portion of the Qur’ān correctly.

When Muhammad heard the story, he asked Hisham to recite the passage, which he did. Muhammad responded, “Thus it was revealed.” Then Muhammad asked ‘Umar to recite his version, which he did. Muhammad responded, “Thus it was revealed”. He added, “This Qur’ān was revealed in seven different ahruf letters (readings or dialects). Read of it what you find to be easier”.

What this story shows is that not only did the variant readings appear in the time of Muhammad, but also that he himself approved them.

Among the first generation of Muslims, each reader of the Qur’ān rendered it in a different form than the other readers. Eventually, the differences became so important that they led to quarrels among Muslims of the different regions, especially in Iraq and Syria (al-Sham). These quarrels moved ‘Uthman Ibn ‘Affan to unify the text of the Qur’ān during his reign (c. AH 25-30/AD 645-650). (See the article “The Compilation of the Qur’ān”).

Once ‘Uthman’s committee adopted an official text of the Qur’ān (‘Uthmanic codex), ‘Uthman sent copies of it to the various regions where the Muslim armies were present. Since this “official” Qur’ān was without dots on the letters or other diacritical marks, those who read these copies read them based on their own linguistic knowledge.

An examination of this issue is vital to understand the impact of the diacritical marks. For example, the transcription “د”, when connected to the following letters can be read as the letter “N: نـ”, if one adds a dot on top. If the reader puts the dot underneath, he gets a “B: بـ ”. If two dots are put on top, one will have a “T: تـ”. Add another and get a “Th: ثـ”. Move the dots below and get a “Y:يـ ”. Imagine having to guess what the letters were in order to adopt certain interpretations and then propagate them in one’s province as the way the Qur’ān should be read.

Again, a reader may say that a word without the dots is “”. Some may read it as “BYT”, whereas someone else looks at those same dot-less letters and deduces that they are “NBT” and then propagates that way of reading through recitation. At the end, we would have two variant readings of that word. In the one reading, those who memorized the Qur’ān and recited it used the word BYT in that verse, while the others used the word NBT in its place. There could be a myriad of combinations and potential variances on the dots issue alone—let alone the diacritical marks.

As a result, the intended unified reading of the Qur’ān that the committee of ‘Uthman was trying to accomplish did not materialize. Instead, based on this “official” Qur’ān, several new ways of reading it appeared.

In addition to the variant readings of the official text transmitted through the recitation channels, there remained other readings that ‘Uthman was trying to abolish. Most prominently among these were the readings of Ibn Mas‘ud and that of Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b. By the second century of Islam, the variant readings of the Qur’ān were more in number than before ‘Uthman’s attempt to unify the text.

Ibn Mujahid and the Seven Readings versus the Fifty Readings

The first one to write about the various readings was Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim Ibn Salam (d. AH 224/ AD 839). He gathered twenty-five variant readings in a book.3

The Shiites consider Ibban Ibn Taghlub al-Kufi (d. AH 141/AD 759) to be the first to categorize the readings.4 Yehya Ibn Ya‘mur (d. AH 90/AD 708) was the first to write in the field of the readings and was followed by Ibban Ibn Taghlub al-Kufi.5

Around the year AH 300, the readings multiplied in an astonishing manner and the number of readers reached “thousands of thousands,” studying the Qur’ān in approximately fifty variant readings.6 Among these readings appeared certain currents that evoked fear among those who held to the official copy of ‘Uthman:

The first current took its reading from those outside of the official reading of ‘Uthman. One of its representatives was Ibn Shannabudh.

The second current used the official text of ‘Uthman, deriving different readings from it according to the linguistic tastes of the reader. This current was established by Ibn Miqsam al-‘Attar, in addition to those who were not proficient in the grammar of the Arabic language.

During this time period, Ibn Mujahid took on the duty of eradicating these variant readings. His response to Ibn Shannabudh and Ibn Miqsam was to bring them to trial.

Ibn Shannabudh (d. AH 328/AD 939)

Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Ibn Shannabudh studied the Qur’ān according to the readings of many scholars. He also taught many future readers the variant readings of the Qur’ān. He was considered a key reference in this field. During prayer, he used to read the Qur’ān according to the readings of Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b and Ibn Mas‘ud. This practice was used by Ibn Mujahid as a reason to turn the authorities against Ibn Shannabudh. Ibn Mujahid incited the minister, Ibn Muqla, against Ibn Shannabudh, and persuaded the minister to send Ibn Shannabudh to trial.

During trial, Ibn Shannabudh argued that he had roamed the different Islamic countries and gained an encyclopedic knowledge of the variant readings of the Qur’ān. He further accused Ibn Muqla and Ibn Mujahid of having insufficient knowledge in the variant readings of the Qur’ān.

In response to this defense of himself, he was stripped of his clothes and severely whipped. As a result, he retracted from his position and declared his repentance. He died in his confinement.8 (See Note: The predicament of Ibn Shannabudh in Q 5:118).

Ibn Miqsam al-‘Attar (d. AH 354/AD 965)

Muhammad Ibn al-Hassan Ibn Miqsam al-‘Attar was a grammarian and a reader from the Kufan School in Baghdad. He was known for his precision and his extensive knowledge of the sciences of the Arabic language and the Qur’ān. It was said about him that “[h]e was one of the greatest keepers of the grammar of the Kuffans, and most knowledgeable in recitations in all its forms; the famous ones, the strange ones, and the deviant ones”.

He thought it permissible to read the Qur’ān in ways that are not mentioned in the sources as long as these readings were appropriate to the context of the text, and if they were linguistically correct. He allowed even the versions that were not read by the readers of old, “and the saying is attributed to him that every reading that agrees with the script of the Qur’ān is a permissible way to recite [read] even if it had no material [support], meaning from transmission”. This opinion was seen to be against the inerrancy of the Qur’ān because it allowed the reading of the Qur’ān based on ijtihad, one’s individual judgment. He was summoned to trial in AH 222/AD 836 because of the agitation stirred up by Ibn Mujahid.

The trial was attended by both jurisprudents and readers. When he was made to stand to be beaten, he made a plea to Ibn Mujahid, despite the fact that it was Ibn Mujahid who was the real instrument behind this tribulation. Ibn Mujahid heard his pleas and made it a condition that Ibn Miqsam sign an affidavit disowning the readings that he had promoted and accepting only the transmitted readings. Ibn Miqsam remained true to his affidavit until the death of Ibn Mujahid.

Ibn Mujahid

Abu Bakr Ahmad Ibn Mussa Ibn Mujahid (Baghdad AH 245-324/AD 859-935) was the imam of the readers in Baghdad. Increasingly hostile toward those who represented readings other than that of ‘Uthman, like Ibn Shannabudh and Ibn Miqsam, Abu Bakr even spoke against al-Halaj and became one of the most prominent figures against him.

Ibn Mujahid specified three conditions for considering a reading to be sound:

Reading is transmitted through trustworthy scholars from Muhammad himself (the chain of transmission is sound).

Reading is permissible (palatable) in Arabic (agrees with the Arabic language).

Reading is in accordance with the text of the Qur’ān (agrees with the way a word is drawn in the text of ‘Uthman).

When he applied these conditions on the commonly used readings of his time, he found there were far too many in existence. As a result, he decided to adopt seven readings from among the most common found among the people. As to the reason for his specifying seven only, it is said it was in remembrance of the fact that ‘Uthman had sent out seven copies.

Regarding Ibn Mujahid’s choice to adopt only seven readings, many scholars believe that it was “based on coincidence and agreement. The number of readers was much larger than that. And among those whom he had left out of his seven were those who were more excellent [our emphasis]”. Several linguists and scholars have remained firm in their rejection of the seven he chose.

Widening the Seven Readings

Over a period of centuries, the number of accepted readings doubled.

The Ten Readings

Around the year AH 800/AD 1397), after five centuries had passed since the institution of the seven readings of Ibn Mujahid, a discussion among the scholars of the Qur’ān took place on whether it was necessary to add the condition of tawatur (“frequency”) to accept the validity of a reading. During the discussion, Ibn al-Jizri (AH 751-833/AD 1350-1429) endorsed the condition of tawatur for accepting a reading. He added three more readings, making a total of ten readings.

The Fourteen Readings

After three more centuries, Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Dumyati (d. AH 1117/AD 1705) added four other readings to the body of the approved readings. In AH 1082/AD 1671), he composed his book, Ithaf fudala’ al-Bashar bi-al-Qira’at al-Arba‘at ‘Ashar. Its first edition was issued in AH 1285/AD 1868) and contained 561 pages. It has been reprinted several times since.

Deviant Readings

The rest of the readings were considered to be deviant readings. However, this specification was not without its issues, as a new disagreement ensued among the scholars of the Qur’ān concerning which readings are considered deviant: the ones outside the Seven, the Ten, or the Fourteen readings.

On the other hand, setting some of the readings outside the list of the approved readings did not lessen their authority. Instead, in several instances the deviant readings were considered stronger than the approved ones. Ibn al-Jani states that the people (of his time period) considered certain readings to be deviant, but in actuality those readings were characterized by the same reliability, possessing the same conditions for acceptance, as the rest. And, “many of which were equal in eloquence to those that were agreed upon [our emphasis]”.

He adds that, even though he remains committed to the approved readings, he still sees the “strength of those called deviant.” He notes the presence of weak readings among the approved readings, like that of Ibn Kathir, such as the austere word “ضِئاء: di’a’ ” instead of “ضِياء: diya’” both of which mean “light” in Q 10.5, Q 21.48, and Q 2.71. In the reading of Ibn ‘Amir in Q 6.137, the word shuraka’ihim (“their associates”) grammatically comes in place of the word children, making the children both the associates and the ones killed in the verse: “made seemly to many of the idolaters the killing of their children, their associates. (See the comment on Q 6.137.)

In other instances, the scholars saw the deviant reading to be the correct one. For example, in Q 5.38 the word thief, and in Q 24.2 the word adulteress were both read with a dumma (oo-sound) ending. Some read it with a fatha (ah-sound) ending, which was a deviant reading. However, Sibawayh considers it “stronger Arabic than the common way of reading”. It is the opinion of the linguistic scholars that some of the deviant readings are better quality linguistically than the common ones. Al-Akhfash (Sa‘id Ibn Mas‘ada al-Basriy) comments that some of the deviant readings were of “a better quality than that of the majority readings”. Such words were also heard from al-Mubarrid (Abi ‘Abbas Muhammad Ibn Yazid).

Discussions Among Muslims

The use of seven (and later, more) variant readings produced ongoing and often divisive discussion by Muslim scholars regarding the meanings and differences among all these readings.

Meaning of the Seven

A discussion took place between the scholars of the Qur’ān regarding what is meant by the seven letters (readings) in the narrative (hadīth) of Muhammad: “This Qur’ān came down according to seven letters.” These scholars were divided in their opinions:

One group of scholars said that the seven letters referred to the dialects of seven tribes: Quraysh, Kinana, Assad, Hathil, Banu Tamim, Dabba, and Qays.

A second group said that having seven letters permits freedom in applying grammar, allowing those who had different dialects to overcome the difficulties that are particular to them, such as the hamza (guttural “a”) for those of Quraysh, and the fatha (the short “a”) for those of the Assad tribe.

Yet another group believed that the seven letters were a symbolic representation of a wider number—that the number is not limited to seven readings, but each group could read according to its dialect. The aim was to make it easier for the people, so that each group could read in its own language.

Kinds of Differences in the Readings

There are seven differences in the readings according to Ibn Qutayba:

The difference in grammar without changing the transcription of the word. In this difference only the diacritical marks are different, such as the word “الْبُخْلِ: al-bukhli” in Q 4.37 being read by some “الْبَخَلِ: al-bakhali” and “الْبِخْلِ : al-bikhli,” all meaning “stinginess”.

The difference in grammar that changes the meaning without changing the transcription of the word. In Q 34.19 the supplication using the word “ بَاعِدْ : baa‘id: make the distance more remote” had its grammar changed in some readings, changing its diacritical marks and meaning to “بَاعَدَ : baa‘ada: “He made the distance more remote.” Thus the verb was changed from the imperative to the past tense. Instead of asking Allah to create the distance, he already had done so.

The difference in the letters of the words, which in turn changes their meanings, without changing the grammar. An example of this is Q 2.259, where the word “ نُنشِزُهَا : nunshizuha: to reanimate, to set together” was changed in some readings to “نُنْشِرُها : nunshiruha: to resurrect from the dead”.

The difference in the entire word, without changing the meaning. An example is in Q 36.29 where the word “ صَيْحَةً : sayhatan” was replaced by the word “زَقية : zaqya,” both meaning “a scream”.

The difference in the word and its meaning. An example is found in Q 56.29 where the word “َطَلْحٍ: Talhin: a massive thorny tree found in Hejaz'' was substituted with the word “طلعٍ: Tal‘in: bananas”. Another example is found in Q 2.36 where the word “فَأَزَلَّهُمَا : fa’azallahuma: he made them slip'' was substituted by the word “فوسوس : fawaswasa: he whispered”. (See the comment on Q 2.36).

The difference in the order of the words. An example is in Q 50.19 where the words of the verse “and came the stupor of death with truth” was read by Abu Bakr, the successor to Muhammad, in this order: “and came the stupor of truth with death”. Ibn Mas‘ud, on the other hand, read it “and came to the stupors of truth with death”.

The difference by addition and omission. An example is in Q 31.26: “...verily, God, He is the independent, worthy of praise...” was read by some as “Indeed, the Rich one the Worthy of praise”.

Ibn Qutayba omitted two more kinds:

The difference by deletion. One example is the deletion of Ibn Mas‘ud for the two suras (chapters) Q 113 and Q 114 from his Qur’ān.

The difference by addition. Such addition can be seen in the codex of Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b having the two additional suras, al-Khal‘ and al-Hafd. (See the article “The Compilation of the Qur’ān).

Current Variant Readings of the Qur’ān

There are ten readings of the Qur’ān present today in the hands of the Muslims. Each reading has two narrators. Therefore, there are twenty narrations of the Qur’ān proceeding out of ten readings.

Before mentioning the names of the narrators and the readers, as confirmed by the references, we want to point out that Islamic scholars explain “the readings” as merely differences in pronunciations, not in meanings.

It is understandable that very minute changes, like the dropping of a hamza without changing the meaning, might take place in a text that is said to be inspired. (A hamza is the sign “ء” that is placed over a letter, or by itself, to signify a glottal stop in Arabic and usually expressed in English as an apostrophe.) Such minute changes do not present any significant problems since there might be a difference in the pronunciation, while retaining the meaning from one environment to another.

However, the more significant problem discovered in our research comes from the fact that there are many words that have a different meaning when one reads from one variant reading to another. Furthermore, the important issue is that these differences cannot be labeled simply as variations in pronunciations between different tribes and different localities, because the words themselves are used among all the Arabs. Evidence of this research will be documented in this book.

Because these variant readings do not corroborate with each other, one finds that they are no longer just different readings of the same Qur’ān. Instead, the intellectually honest seeker discovers there are, in fact, several codices that differ in meanings and exegetical interpretations. As a result, one will find different religious rulings based on those different meanings.

Most Common Variant Readings of the Qur’ān

There are four major variant readings by different readers still in recent circulation:

Reading of Hafs: Originally, the reading of Kufa in Iraq this reading now represents the reading of about 80% of the Muslims in the world. It is read in the Persian Gulf, as well as in Egypt, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and some of the South and East Asian countries, such as Malaysia, Uzbekistan, China and Indonesia.

Reading of Warsh: This reading continues to be used mainly in the northwest African Arab-dominated countries of Tunis, Algeria and Morocco. Originally, it was the reading of Medina (Yathrib), where Warsh studied under Nafi‘, the most prominent reader of Medina. For that reason, the reading of Warsh carries his name, The Qur’ān According to the Reading of Warsh.

The Reading of Qalun: Qalun was one of the narrators who related the Qur’ān from Nafi‘ as well. It is a variant read by the people of Libya, whose Qur’ān is still printed according to Qalun’s reading.

The Reading of al-Duri according to Abi ‘Amru: This reading spread in Sudan, where recently several editions of this version were printed by the publisher Dar Mushaf Afriqia at the International University of Africa in Khartoum.

If all these readings are taken from one codex—that of ‘Uthman—why are there numerous differences among them despite the one origin? This question must be considered especially since we are not talking only about different pronunciations and utterances but also about differences in meaning from the original.

Note that if these differences are still present, even after ‘Uthman Ibn ‘Affan burned all the variant codices, one wonders what differences were present before he destroyed the other variant versions.

The research provided in this book contains some examples (out of hundreds) of core differences present in the different readings of the Qur’ān. The common saying that “there is only one Qur’ān from China to Morocco” needs to be reexamined and revised.

Conclusion

The Qur’ān was recited according to different readings during the life of Muhammad. After his death, the gap widened between the readers. The most prominent readers of that time were Ibn Mas‘ud and Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b, both whose texts had additions and differences in comparison to the codex of ‘Uthman’s committee. Both of these men enjoyed the trust and confidence of Muhammad. Ibn Mas‘ud had personally heard more than seventy chapters as recited by Muhammad himself. Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b used to write down the Qur’ān for Muhammad and is considered one of the most important among the group of readers who were the companions of Muhammad.

When the Muslim armies marched outside of the Arabian Peninsula, the problem of variant readings grew, which led ‘Uthman to impose a standard copy of the Qur’ān. Indeed, an “official codex” was penned down and copies of it were sent out to the different regions. However, the solution by ‘Uthman’s committee to the problem of the variant readings created other variant readings as a result of the letters that had no dots (in a language where dots create a massive distinction between letters).

Many variant readings arose based on the ‘Uthmanic codex. In addition, there were already variant codices that differed from the ‘Uthmanic codex in circulation. For three consecutive centuries the text of the Qur’ān remained a source of quarrel and dispute between the Muslims, until the number of acknowledged readings reached fifty. Ibn Mujahid tried to solve the problem by settling on seven readings based on two factors:

Superstition—namely, the sacredness of the number seven.

Familiarity—based on the widespread acceptance of the reading.

Afterwards, more readings were approved, increasing the total to ten various readings, then fourteen. The Islamic books continued to contain the unorthodox readings, which were later called “deviant readings,” despite the fact that some of these versions were of better linguistic quality and had better composition than the “authoritative” ones. These “deviant readings” are found in a variety of sources, most famous of which are the books al-Muhtasib by Ibn al-Jani and I‘rab al-Qira’at al-Shath-tha by Abi al-Baqa’ al-‘Akbari (d. AH 616/AD 1219).

A manuscript of the Qur’ān was discovered in 1972 in San‘a’ (Yemen). It is one of the oldest extant manuscripts of the Qur’ān today and could give much insight into the problem of the variant readings. However, scholars were not permitted to examine it, except for Dr. Gerd Puin, who had limited access for a short period of time. (See the article “The Compilation of the Qur’ān”).

Currently, the Muslims recite the Quran according to two main different readings:

First Reading: In the east, Muslims employ the reading of ‘Asim as told by Hafs. It was issued in 1924 under the supervision of al-Azhar in Cairo.

Second Reading: Used in North Africa, this is the reading of Nafi‘ as told by Warsh. The Qur’ān printed in Algeria in 1905 by al-Tha‘labiyya Press is based on this reading.

What do these readings reveal?

Islamic doctrine states that the Qur’ān has one source, Allah. It declares that the Qur’ān has one copy in al-Lawh al-Mahfuz (the Preserved Tablet). But this belief generates many questions concerning these variant readings:

Does not the presence of many different readings of the Qur’ān debunk the claim of its being from a single source?

Does not the presence of fifty readings rescind the claim that the Qur’ān is in a Preserved Tablet?

Do not the numerous readings and their variances reveal the human element in the composition of the Qur’ānic text?

Does not the development of the readings reveal that the Qur’ān was subject to changes, as it remained in the stages of writing and correcting for centuries? It is for this reason that we find Shiite and Mu‘tazilite readings, in addition to the various non-‘Uthman text-based readings.

There are two benefits from studying the Qur’ānic variant readings:

Careful study of the readings allows us to become acquainted with old linguistic grammatical, morphological, and verbal forms that are no longer in use.

Studying the variant readings reveals the expedient uses of the Qur’ān as evidence to its claim of i‘jaz (“inimitability”). A famous common example concerns Muhammad’s prophesy that the Romans (translated by Palmer as “The Greeks”) would have victory over the Persians in Q 30.2-4:

The Greeks are overcome in the highest parts of the land; but after being overcome they shall overcome in a few years; to God belongs the order before and after; and on that day the believers shall rejoice….

Sources state that when the Persians had victory over the Romans in AD 616, the news reached Mecca. The tribe of Muhammad, the Quraysh, rejoiced at the defeat of the Romans because they were Christians, whereas the Persians were Magi. Muhammad was not happy with that, so he declared, “The Greeks are overcome…but…they shall overcome….” The scholars of Islam have declared that the verse is evidence to the prophethood of Muhammad as it foretold the victory of the Romans over the Persians that took place in AH 4/AD 625.

However, this claim has no support in the text. What is clear is that Muhammad was responding to the rejoicing people of the Quraysh by reminding them that history will turn and the Persians would face defeat one day. The Quraysh might have interpreted the victory of the Magi as evidence to the supremacy of that faith over Christianity, as al-Razi deduced. He wrote in his commentary that these verses came “to show that victory does not indicate rightness”.

There is another variant reading that says, “The Romans overcome…and they shall be overcome….” The commentaries on this reading state that after the battle of Badr (AH 2/AD 624), when the news of the Romans’ victory over the Persians reached the Muslims, this verse came to promise the Muslims’ victory over the Romans in the future. Those who end up victorious in the first reading, end up defeated in the second. According to the first reading, where the Romans would defeat the Persians at the end, the “prophecy” would have been revealed in Mecca three to five years before the Hijra.According to the second reading, this “prophecy” was revealed in Medina.

Therefore, we have a disagreement in the historical background and the nature of the promise. (Will the Romans overcome or be overcomed?) Despite this discrepancy, the Islamic scholars did not hesitate to draw the curtains over these details to justify the saying that the text is a prophetic miracle. The gratitude for unveiling this “inimitability” goes to the variant readings of the Qur’ān.

The List of Readers

The Seven Readers

Abu ‘Amru Ibn al-‘Ala’ from Basra (d. c. AH 154/AD 770). Yehya Ibn al-Mubarak (d. AH 202/AD 817) read according to al-’Ala’. According to al-Mubarak there are the two readings of Abu ‘Amr al-Duri (d. AH 246/AD 860) and Abu Shu‘ayb al-Susi (d. AH 261/AD 874).

‘Asim Ibn Abi al-Nujud Bahdala from Kufa (d. AH 128/AD 745). Abu Bakr Shu‘ba (d. AH 193/AD 808) and Hafs (d. AH 180/AD 796) read according to the reading of al-Nujud Bahdala.

Hamza Ibn Habib al-Zayyat from Kufa (d. AH 156/AD 772). Sulaim Abu ‘Issa read according to al-Zayyat. Khalaf (d. AH 229/AD 843), and Khallad (Abu ‘Issa al-Shibani) (d. AH 220/AD 835) read according to Sulaim Abu ‘Issa.

‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Amir al-Yahsubiyy from Damascus (d. AH 118/AD 736). Ibn Dhakwan (d. AH 242/AD 856) and Hisham al-Silmi (d. AH 245/AD 859) read according to al-Yahsubiyy.

‘Abd Allah Ibn Kathir from Mecca (d. AH 120/AD 738). Qunbul (d. AH 291/AD 903) and al-Bazzi (d. AH 250/AD 864) read according to Ibn Kathir.

Ali Ibn Hamza al-Kissa’ from Kufa (d. AH 189/AD 805). Abu al-Harith al-Laith Ibn Khalid al-Baghdadi (d. AH 240/AD 854) and al-Duri (who is mentioned in (1) above) read according to Hamza.

Nafi‘ Ibn Abi Nu‘aim (a.k.a. Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman) from Medina (d. AH 169/AD 785). Qalun (d. AH 220/AD 835) and Warsh (d. AH 197/AD 812) read according to ‘Abd al Rahman.

The Three after the Seven

Abu Ja‘far (d. AH 130/AD 747). Abu al-Harith ‘Issa Ibn Wardan (d. AH 160/AD 776) and Ibn Jamaz (Abu al-Rabi‘ Sulayman Ibn Muslim) (d. AH 170/AD 786) read according to Abu Ja’far.

Ya‘qub al-Hadrami from Basra (d. AH 205/AD 820). Ruwais Muhammad Ibn al-Mutawakil (d. AH 238/AD 852) and Rawh Ibn ‘Abd al-Mu‘in (d. AH 234-235/AD 848-849) read according to al-Hadrami.

Khalaf Ibn Hisham al-Bazzar from Kufa (d. AH 229/AD 843). Ishaq al-Warraq (d. AH 286/AD 899) and Idriss al-Haddad (d. AH 292/AD 904) read according to al-Bazzar.

The Four after the Ten

Muhammad Ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Muhaisin from Mecca (d. AH 123/AD 740).

Yehya Ibn al-Mubarak Ibn al-Maghir al-Yazidi from Basra (d. AH 202/AD 817).

Al-Hassan al-Bassari from Basra (AH 21-110/AD 641-728)

Sulayman Ibn Mahran al-A‘mash from Kufa (AH 60-148/AD 679-765).

Illustration of Variant Readings

The chart below illustrates what a reader might come across in the Qur’ān compiled by ‘Uthman’s committee. If the reader was to see the script , he could add the dots and accents as he thinks a word should be read, based on his knowledge and linguistic taste. These variant ways of reading this one word demonstrate how the myriads of variant readings came out of the official Qur’ān of ‘Uthman. Over time and by force, as explained in the articles, certain readings were imposed, despite the fact that not everyone agreed that they are the best way to read the text.