What the readings change

The readings from the codices of Ibn Mas‘ūd and Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b add the word

“consecutively” (mutatābi‘āt) so that this verse reads “fast for three days consecutively.”

This addition imposes the fasting of atonement in a consecutive form. Although

according to the reading of the current Arabic Qur’ān, it is permissible to fast

intermittently. This is a jurisprudence disagreement.

The question in the verse asks hal yastat.i‘u rabbuka (“is thy Lord able...?”) But

we have a variant reading passed down from Ibn ‘Abbās, ‘Alī Ibn Abī Tālib, ‘Ā’isha; a

group of the Companions of Muhammad; al-Tābi‘ūn (“the followers”); and some of

the readers of the following generation who read it this way: hal tastat.i‘u rabbaka (“can

you [make] your Lord...?”). They read a “t” instead of the “y” and used the accusative

marking over the “b”. This reading was the one Muhammad himself used to recite this

verse. They said that it means, “Can you, O Christ, ask you Lord?” It is also said that

perhaps the meaning is “Can you call on your Lord?”

These two variant readings present a crucial difference. In the reading of the current

Arabic Qur’ān, the disciples inquire whether Allah is able to bring down a table. This

reading is seen by some readers to be blasphemous because the disciples are questioning Allah’s ability to bring down a table; for Allah, of course, is able to perform this task.

As a result, they read hal tastat.i‘u rabbaka an yunazzila (“can you [make] your Lord

send down?”). By that change of the word they make the question addressed to Christ.

This reading removes the blasphemous manner away from the disciples’ question but

weakens its linguistic construction.

The reading from the codex of Ibn Mas‘ūd is “If Thou shouldst punish them, verily,

they are Thy servants; if Thou shouldst forgive them, verily, Thou art the most forgiving

most merciful.” A number of scholars agree with this reading. Their view is that the

context should lead to al-ghafūr al-rah. īm (“the most forgiving, the most merciful”)

after the phrase, “If Thou dost forgive them.” Ibn Shannbūdh originally supported

this reading but was forced to retract it.76 (See the article “Variant Readings of the

Qur’ān”).

Several authorities read this verse as yusraf (“it is averted”) in the passive.

What is meant by the pronoun it, in “it is averted,” is the torment mentioned in the previous verse.

Another group read it as yasrif (“he averts”), without mentioning the subject,

(i.e., Allah). Al-Tabarī favors this last form. Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b read the Qur’ān as saying,

“The one whom Allah averts it from him.” That is, he [Allah] is the one who removes.

It is mentioned that he read it as “the one whom Allah averts from him” as well.

In both forms Allah is the one who remove s the torment. But the second form, where

the subject is mentioned, is stronger and clearer.

Question: If the expression is stronger when the subject is mentioned, why is it writtenin

the Qur’ān in the weaker form?

It is told that ‘Alī Ibn Abī Tālib and Ibn Mas‘ūd read this verse as “but We have

thrown veils on their hearts, so they understand it not, and on their eyes a covering.”

Compared to the current Arabic Qur’ān, their codices included the additional phrase

“and on their eyes a covering”.

In Arabic, the Qur’ān reads ta‘qilūna (“you understand”), which addresses those

who were present with Muhammad, who denied the resurrection.

Yet, several readers read it as ya‘qilūna (“they understand”) that addresses those who

are righteous.

Question: Does the verse address the righteous or those who deny the resurrection?

Some have read the verse as “suddenly and openly” with “and” instead of “or”.

Question: How did the punishment come—suddenly, openly, or both?

A few readers have read this verse as dalaltu (“err”) with the letter “dād ” instead of

salaltu (“rotted”) with the letter “sād.”

When one speaks of meat and uses the verb salla, it means the meat became rotten

The reading in the current Arabic Qur’ān is “The decision rests with Allah alone.

He explains [yaqussu, literally “tells”] the truth...” [Sale trans.]. However, the context

is one of judgment between groups. Ibn Mas‘ūd, Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b, Ibn ‘Abbās, and

others strengthen the reading by using this form: “The command rests with none but Allah:

He judges by the truth,” replacing yaqussu (“tells”) with yaqdi (“judges”).

Most readers read nuriya Ibrāhīma malakūta (“we show Abraham the kingdom”)

with Allah as the subject of the verb. Another team of readers read turiya Ibrāhīma malakūtu (“You show Abraham the kingdom”). Malakūtu (“kingdom”) is in the nominative, meaning that it is the subject of the verb.

A third group or readers read it as yara Ibrāhīmu (“Abraham sees”), with Ibrāhīm as

the subject of the verb.

Question: Who or what is the subject of the verb—Allah, the malakūt (kingdom), or Ibrāhīm (Abraham)?

The saying in the verse is attributed to the enemies of Muhammad who said to him,

darasta (“Thou hast studied”).

The verse means that they said to him, “O Muhammad! You have studied ‘in the

ancient books what you bring to us.’” Al-Tabarī considers this reading to be the most

accurate rendition.

There are many notable readings with variations of the word darasta (“you studied”):

dārasta (read by Ibn ‘Abbās and others): “‘You dārasta, O Muhammad, with

someone else about these matters.” They are referring to Muhammad’s studies

under Salmān al-Fārisī and others, including foreigners and Jews.”

dārastu (read with the damma “u”): This reading means they were saying that

Allah taught Muhammad, which would be an expression of ridicule and mockery

toward Muhammad. Others state that the verse was a quote from a man of the

People of the Book, who said, “...dārastu Muhammadan,” meaning “I taught him

[Muhammad].”

darrasta (read with a shadda-doubling the letter): “You, O Muhammad, taught

the ancient books.”

durrista (read in the passive): “Someone taught you the ancient books,

O Muhammad.”

darasa (read in the past tense): “Muhammad studied the ancient previous books.”

darasat (read by Ibn Mas‘ūd, ‘Abd Allah Ibn al-Zubayr , Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b, and

others): “The verses were repeated in their hearing so many times that they [the

verses] were worn out.” Al-Farrā’ states, “What is meant is taqādamat, that is, what

he [Muhammad] was reciting to the people was something that they had heard

[repeatedly in the past] and had passed by us [we heard it long before now].”

Question: Does this phrase mean “you studied, O Muhammad, with someone”; “you

studied the books, O Muhammad”; “someone taught you, O Muhammad”; or “that

the verses of the Qur’ān were repeated so many times in the hearing of non-Muslims that it became worn out”?.

This expression in the codex of Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b reads “how do you know perhaps if

it came to them they would not believe”.

Changes in this verse are apparent when comparing this verse from the current Arabic

Qur’ān to the codex of Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b:

yush‘irukum (“make you realize, sense, feel”) is replaced in Ka‘b’s reading by

adrākum (“make you know, comprehend”).

innahā (“it [feminine] is”) is replaced in Ka‘b’s reading by la‘alahā (“maybe it

[feminine] is”).

jā’at (“it [feminine] came”) has the third person masculine plural pronoun hum (“them”) attached to it in Ka‘b’s reading.

One group read this as layudillūna from the verb adalla (“to mislead another”).

Others read it as layadillūna with a fatha (a) on the “y” from the verb dalla (“to mislead

oneself [go astray]”).

Question: Is the final form meant to say “they mislead others” or “they mislead themselves”? There is certainly a vast difference between the two meanings.

The one group read it as stated the current Arabic Qur’ān: akābir (“the great”), in

the plural.

Another group read it akbar (“the greatest''), in the singular. Yet, a third group read it akthar (“the majority”).

Question: Which reading is the most accurate—the elites (plural), the elite (singular), or the majority of the elites?

The majority of the readers read zayyana (“made seemly”) with shurakā’ūhum

(“their associates'') as the subject of the verb zayyna. The word qatla (“the killing”)

is the object of the verb. The word awlādihim (“their children”) is part of the idafa

grammatical structure. The meaning is that the partners are the ones who make the

killing of their children alluring in the sight of the idolaters. The same meaning is

found in the reading of the codex of ‘Alī Ibn Abī Tālib, but he read zuyyina qatlu (“it

was made seemly the killing”) in the passive. He and others thus read, “It was made

seemly....the killing of their children, their associates”.

Another group read it as zuyyina qatlu (“it was made seemly the killing”) of

their children shurakā’ihim (“their associates”), where zuyyina is in the passive and

shurakā’ihim is in the possessive, as a substitute for the children. This reading means

that the children are the partners in life that are killed.

Question: Are the partners the ones that make the killing seemly, or are they the victims of the killing?

The verse was read by some as “they have erred before that and are not guided.” In other words, they added “before that” to the verse.

This verse was read by ‘Alī Ibn Abī Tālib as “It is he who produces gardens planted

and unplanted”.

The word used in the current Arabic Qur’ān, ma‘rūshāt (“with trailed...vines”),

comes from the verb ‘arasha (“to build a wooden structure”). When one says

i‘tarasha al-‘arish, the meaning is “the vines have climbed the trellises.” The gardens

that are ma‘rūshāt in the verse are the vineyards. As to the planted ones, maghrūsāt from the verb gharasa, it means to plant in the ground. This is a difference in the technical imaging of the verse.

If the reading had come from one source, we would not have found this difference.

One reading highlights the vines on the trellises, and another refers to the plants planted in the ground.

The Qur’ān as read by Abū Hurayra uses “nor earned s.ālih. ān (“a righteous deed”),

instead of the current Arabic Qur’ān’s reading khayrān (“good”). This is a change made by Abū Hurayra in the formatting of the word.

The common reading from the current Arabic Qur’ān that is read by the majority is

ittabi‘ū...wa lā tattabi‘ū (“follow...and follow not”) from al-ittibā‘ (“following”).

But another group read this verse as ibtaghū...wa lā tabtaghū (“seek...and seek not”)

from al-ibtighā’ (“seeking”).

This verse from the current Arabic Qur’ān instructs Muslims to closely follow what

was revealed, meaning that they should follow its teachings alone and heed no others.

On the other hand, the second way this verse is read demands an action—the pursuit

of a goal, where “seeking something” means to want it and go after it. This second

reading of the verse implies that what was revealed is not readily available to those addressed; they must seek it out.

Ibn Mas‘ūd read this verse in a different form: “Then shall we question those to

whom we sent our messengers before you and those by whom we sent it”.