In the last post, we mentioned that opinions regarding the seven ahruf of the Qur’aan are divided into three. Below is an explanation of these opinions.
A. THOSE OPINIONS WHICH HAVE NO BASIS WHATSOEVER:
In this category fall those opinions which do not have any hadeeth to support them, nor do they make logical sense. Some of these are:
1) Seven different categories of text. For example: constrained and unconstrained, general and specific, literal and metaphoric, naasikh and mansookh. Other categories include those given by grammarians and linguists, specifying different verb forms.
2) An esoteric interpretation by certain Soofi groups, claiming that there are seven levels of knowledge, or seven degrees of meanings to each verse.
3) Seven different branches of knowledge, such as tawheed, sharee’ah, etc.
All these opinions contradict the purpose of the ahruf, namely to make the recitation of the Qur’aan easier for the Ummah. Also, there is no proof for these opinions, and they contradict common sense.
B. THOSE OPINIONS WHICH HAVE SOME APPARENT BASIS, BUT ARE WEAK OPINIONS:
Included in this category are the following opinions:
1) These ahruf are seven different ways to pronounce the words, without actually changing the letters. However, this opinion contradicts the variations in words that occur in the qira’aat.
2) The ahruf are seven types of verses in the Qur’aan: apparent, command, recommendation, specific, particular, general and parable. There is a weak hadeeth to support this.
3) Similar to the above, and also based on a weak hadeeth, the different types are: commands, prohibitions, promises, occurrences, halaal and haraam, clear and ambiguous. (1)
4) The seven ahruf are the same as the seven qira’aat. This is contradicted historically, as there are more than seven qira’aat, and the collection and codification of the qira’aat occurred four centuries after the Prophet’s (PBUH) death. (2) None of the major scholars of Islaam held this view, as Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 A.H.) said, “There is no difference of opinion among the scholars that the seven ahruf are not the same as the seven famous qira’aat.” (3)
Unforunately, most of the Muslim masses understand hadeeth of the ahruf to refer to the qira’aat.
C. THOSE OPINIONS WHICH HAVE STRONG EVIDENCE:
These opinions are the ones that are worthy of serious inspection, as they have strong evidence historically and from the meanings of the ahaadeeth. There are three opinions in this category.
1) The seven ahruf refer to the seven dialects (lughaat) of the Arabs prevalent at the time of the Prophet (PBUH). Each of these dialects belongs to a tribe among the Arabs, namely, the Quraysh, Hudhayl, Tameem, Hawaazin, Thaqeef, Kinaanah and Yemen. (other scholars gave the names of other tribes). Thus, under this opinion, various verses would be pronounced according to the pronunciation of that particular tribe, and words from one dialect would be replaced by other words used by that particular tribe.
Some scholars say that these seven dialects are spread throughout the Qur’aan, meaning that part of the Qur’aan is in the dialect of the Quraysh, other parts are in the dialect of Hudhayl, and so forth. Others say that the entire Qur’aan is recited in each of these dialects, thus forming the seven ahruf.
This was the opinion of Aboo ‘Ubayd al-Qaasim ibn Sallaam (d. 224 A.H.), al-Bayhaqee (d. 458 A.H.), Ibn ‘Attiyah (d. 541 A.H.) and others.
2) The seven ahruf denote seven ways of recitation (lahajaat) such that words are replaced by their synonyms. In other words, the seven ahruf have the exact same meanings but different wordings.
This was the opinion of Imaam at-Tabaree (d. 311 A.H.), at-Tahaawee (d. 321 A.H.), Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (d. 463 A.H.) and others.
3) The seven ahruf refer to seven different ways that the verse can be changed. In other words, whenever a difference is found between these ahruf, this type of difference will fall into one of the following seven categories: (4)
1. Change in wording. For example, in 101:5, ka al-’ihni il-manfoosh is changed to ka as-soof il-manfoosh, both of which mean the same thing.
2. Differences in wordings or letters such that they conform to the vowelless, dotless script of ‘Uthmaan. (5) For example, fatabayanoo is changed to fatathabatoo in 49:6, just by changing the dots. Also, in Sooral al-Faatihah, maaliki is changed to maliki without any change in the script of ‘Uthmaan.
3. Change in word order. For example, in 2:159, wa qaatalu wa qutilu is changed to wa qutilu wa qaatalu.
4. Addition or subtraction of a letter or word. For example, in 57:24, fa inna Allaahu hoowa al-ghaniyul hameed is recited without the pronoun, fa ina Allaah al-ghaniyul hameed.
5. The form of the word structure is changed. This change could be from plural to singular or dual (or other variations), or from feminine to masculine. For example, in 23:8, the plural li amanaatihim is changed to the singular li amanatihim.
6. Differences in inflection points. For example, 2:125, wa attakhadhoo mim maqaami Ibraaheema musallaa is read in the command wattakhidhoo.
7. Differences in pronunciation. For example, lessening the effect of certain hamzahs (called tas-heel) or pronouncing certain alifs and yaas differently (called imaalah).
This was the opinion of Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276 A.H.), al-Baaqillaani (d. 403 A.H.), Makkee ibn Abee Taalib (d. 437 A.H.), ar-Raazee (d. 606 A.H.), Ibn al-Jazaree (d. 832 A.H.), and others. Some of them give different categories, but their general thesis is the same.
Among these three opinion, the third one seems to have the least weight. Despite the fact that it classifies the differences in the ahruf into ingenious categories, it does not explain the essence of what the ahruf are. In other words, when Hishaam was reciting a different harf from ‘Umar, he was probably differing with ‘Umar in more than one of these seven categories. Therefore, the third definition does not really answer the question as to the meaning of the ahruf.
The first two opinions, on the other hand, have very strong evidences to support them. (6) It seems — and Allaah knows best — that both of these opinions have an element of truth in them, and there does not exist any grounds for rejecting either of them.
Therefore, it is concluded that the seven ahruf represent variations based upon, but not limited to, the most fluent Arab tribes of that time. These variations occurred in words, letters, and pronunciations, such that all these variations made it easier for the Companions to memorise the Qur’aan. These variations did not always reach seven different ways of recitation for each verse, but whenever such variations existed, the different ways of recitation never exceeded seven. (7)
Part 1: The Ahruf of the Qur’aan
Part 2: What is Meant by the Ahruf of the Qur’aan?
Footnotes:
(1) For a discussion of the weakness in the above two hadeeth, see Itr, p. 138.
(2) See the next chapter for further details on the qira’aat.
(3) Zarzur, p. 186.
(4) All of these variations, except for the first, are found in the present-day qira’aat.
(5) The manuscript of ‘Uthmaan did not have dots or diacritical marks to distinguish between certain letters and vowels. See Chapter 8, on “The Collection of the Qur’aan.”
(6) See Itr, pps. 168-177.
(7) cf. al-Qaree, p. 79, and al-Hamad’s conclusion, p. 144, which is very similar to this one.
Extracted from ‘An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’aan’