Anyone who reads Yasir Qadhi’s article An Alternative Opinion on the Reality of the ‘Seven Ahruf’ and Its Relationship with the Qira’at may encounter some ambiguity due to the lack of a precise definition of what he calls the “Divine Permission Model”. The article is not brief, and the critical implications demanded by the theory might be missed by a reader who does not read it carefully. For this reason, we decided to compile some key statements scattered throughout the article in one place, making it easier for the reader to find them and form a complete picture of the theory’s implications. We will comment on some of Qadhi’s statements for the sake of clarification, not refutation, as our responses will be addressed in other articles on our website.
It should be noted that the combined variables that make up Qadhi’s model of the seven aḥruf is unprecedented.
The Meaning of Seven Ahruf:
Qadhi said:
The alternative model claims that the ‘seven ahruf is a Divine concession that allowed the Companions to recite the Qur’ān in accordance with their dialects and to the best of their memory as long as the meanings were correctly conveyed. In this model, the Prophet himself recited the Qur’ān in one manner (harf), but permission was given to the Companions to recite it in ‘several wordings’ (which is the most obvious manner to translate the phrase ‘sab’a ahruf) as long as the meaning was conveyed. Some later scholars coined the term ‘qirā’ah bi-l-ma’nā’ (or: ‘reciting according to the meaning’) to explain this view; it has also been called the ‘Divine Permission’ model. According to this opinion, it was this original harf that was preserved by ‘Uthmān (i.e., only one harf was preserved); since the other ahruf were not recited, there was no ‘discarding’ of the others per se. Rather, the concession of qirā’ah bi-l-maʿnā was revoked because there was no need for it. So, the phrase, ‘unzil al-Qur’an ʿalā sabʿat ahruf, according to this model, would be understood as: “The permission for the Qur’ân to be recited in several wordings has been revealed.”[1]
According to Qadhi, the number seven is figurative, signifying abundance, and tanzīl (revelation) is also metaphorical, meaning permission or concession.
Qadhi then explained the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) approval of the recitation of Hishām bin Ḥakīm (may Allah be pleased with him) when he brought his disagreement with ʿUmar (may Allah be pleased with him) to the Prophet. The Prophet responded: “This is how it was revealed.”
Qadhi interprets this to mean:
‘Your recitation is also approved by Allah and is to be considered Qur’ān, because Allah allowed the Qur’ān to be recited in several wordings.’[2]
The disagreement between ʿUmar and Hishām (may Allah be pleased with them) led them to seek judgment from the Prophet (peace be upon him), as both claimed that the Prophet had taught them their respective recitations. The Prophet then instructed them to recite before him and approved both recitations by saying, “This is how it was revealed.” In reality, both recitations were correct and revealed, and the Prophet (peace be upon him) had recited them. However, Qadhi denies this, claiming that Hishām’s recitation originated from forgetfulness. But how could the Prophet (peace be upon him) say, “This is how it was revealed,” when the apparent understanding of the statement suggests a genuine confirmation that the Prophet had taught it to him? Upon reflection, this essentially accuses the Prophet of lying, as Qadhi’s interpretation of the statement contradicts its apparent meaning.
What the Concession of the Seven Ahruf Entails:
It has been previously mentioned that Qadhi believes the seven aḥruf encompass dialectical variations. He further expands on this by adding the following:
Synonyms and Achieving the General Meaning:
Qadhi states:
Here once again, similar to previous quotations, we find the sentiment that the ‘seven ahruf represent word variations emanating from the Companions, as long as they were synonymous and the original meaning was conveyed.[3]
He elaborates on this and provides an example:
Of course, the necessary condition would be that the appropriate meaning is conveyed; hence saying ‘[Allah is] Hearing and Seeing’ instead of [Allah is] Majestic and Powerful’ would be such an example if the context of the verse allowed it.[4]
Qadhi does not require that the Divine Permission has to be based on exact synonyms. He provides another example based on a weak narration:
In one report, ibn Mas’ud was teaching someone to recite, “The tree of Zaqqum; is the food of the sinner (al-athim)[44:43-4],” but the man could not say it, and instead always repeated, …the food of the orphan (al-yatim)’. Ibn Mas’ud said: “Can you say: “…the food of the evildoer (al-fajir)””? The man said that he could; to which ibn Mas’ud replied: “Then recite it like this!”[5]
The refutation of this misconception has already been addressed in another article.
Ijtihad:
Qadhi states:
Clearly, since the qirā at are not the exact same – at least in their minds – as the Revelation, they would allow for some minor areas of ijtihad in this science, as he explicitly states. And this is what many reports would seem to indicate if we take them at face value.
For example, in one narration it is reported that ibn Mas’ud advised his students,“ If you differ about a consonant in the Qur’ān – if it is a yā or a tā – then recite it as masculine (viz., with a yā), because the [default] of the Qur’ān is masculine.”[6]
The narration is disconnected and not authentic, as clarified in another article.
Decipher the Structure of the Uthmanic Skeleton:
Qadhi said:
This of course would imply there is a level of independent reasoning that the first few generations of reciters employed, especially with respect to vocalising a skeletal word in the ‘Uthmānic codex that allowed for multiple readings.[7]
He also says when attempting to explain the words of Ibn Jinnī:
In other words, the concession of the ahruf is the precise concession that has allowed the proliferation of the qirā’at, or to put it more bluntly: he is stating that if the first generation could substitute an entire word with another and this was considered valid, then these later qira’at may a fortiori differ in deciphering a skeletal word in the ‘Uthmānic script, and these variants would all be considered valid.[8]
Forgetfulness:
Qadhi said:
At times, such as the case of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattāb and Hishām ibn Hakīm, the word variation might be due to a memory lapse, especially as Hishām was a new convert.[9]
This is not limited to new converts though. Even the main teachers of recitation like Ibn Masʿūd made mistakes according to Qadhi. He states in a footnote:
There is no notion that all wordings emanate from the Prophet; rather, ibn Mas’ūd is arguing to preserve his wordings because those wordings (according to his memory) are the original Prophetic ones. As for why’Uthmān decided to adopt Zayd’s harf, the answer is obvious and will be mentioned later in this article: ‘Uthmān conditioned an actual written copy of the Revelation dictated by the Prophet himself, while ibn Mas’ud was relying on his memory.[10]
Qadhi, furthermore, attributes this position to al-Shafiʿī:
It is also pertinent to note that he links a word-change to a memory lapse, claiming this is a part of the concession of the ‘seven ahruf.[11]
This has already been addressed in another article as well.
Mistakes of Uthman’s Committee:
Qadhi describes variants included in the copies of the Quran that were sent by ʿUthmān may Allah be pleased with him:
In the opinion of the author of this article, it is problematic to use the word ‘error’ or ‘mistake’, since describing these differences as ‘mistakes’ directly contradicts the explicit prohibition mentioned in the very hadith of the ahruf, such as ‘Do not argue over the Qur’an…’ and ‘All of them are pure and whole…’ and other such phrases. In fact, interestingly, this sentiment of problematizing such differences and considering them mistakes was precisely the mindset of the new converts during the wars of ‘Uthmān’s time who almost excommunicated each other because of their differences. When one understands the Divine Permission model, these differences are perfect and trivial examples of it, and hence allowed by the hadiths of the ahruf. Thus, in the opinion of this author they are not and should not be characterized as ‘mistakes’ or ‘errors’.[12]
It is clear that Qadhi considers labeling them as “errors” to be religiously prohibited, even though they are, in fact, unintentional variations in his view, since he also says: It is of course not impossible that these variations were intentional.[13]
The Uthmanic Collection and Divine Concession:
Qadhi said:
‘Uthmān conditioned an actual written copy of the Revelation dictated by the Prophet himself.[14]
He then said:
The ‘Uthmānic project was successful in preserving the original harf in which the Qur’an was revealed. There would, however, be some minor caveats.[15]
The original Arabic version of Qadhi’s article includes an extra sentence in place of “caveats.” Qadhi said:
“There would, however, be some minor changes that do not affect the preservation.”
وإن بقي بعض الاختلافات اليسيرة التي لا تؤثِّر في هذا الحفظ.
So, what are these differences? Qadhi states:
The sources for the differences in the qirāʾat would then be three: firstly, the accents and pronunciations that Arab peoples from diverse regions and tribes differed over; secondly, the application of ijtihad by qualified grammarians and reciters of the first two centuries in deciphering a small percentage of the consonants (tashkil) and the grammatical case (iʿrāb) of a word; and lastly and most infrequent, the minute variations between the official ‘Uthmānic codices.[16]
It can be understood from Qadhi’s words that the concession and what it entails, including personal Ijtihād and “mistakes”—although not explicitly stated as such—have persisted in the ten qirāʾāt (recitations) to this day.
The Preservation of the Qurʾān and its Miraculousness:
Qadhi adopts the view that the Qurʾān is preserved and miraculous while acknowledging that the recitations used today include the errors of the Companions and the reciters—though Qadhi refrains from using the term “errors” explicitly.
It can also be said that the ‘Uthmānic compilation is the result of Allah’s preservation and, as the original revealed harf, is inherently inimitable by nature. The extremely miniscule variations within the established qira’at, especially when one compares those differences to the known pre-‘Uthmānic ones, do not impact either the claim of preservation or the miraculous nature of the Qur’ān.[17]
This statement contradicts logic, as there is no way to reconcile the idea of an “inherently inimitable” and preserved Qurʾān with the presence of human errors.
Qadhi is aware of this reality, as he encourages the study of these two issues in light of his conclusions.
Thirdly, a systematic and thorough extrapolation of how the qirā’āh bi-l-ma’nā paradigm is fully compatible with the normative belief in the preservation of the Qur’ān and its ifāz still requires further study.[18]
The obvious answer should be that these are not compatible at all.
Conclusion:
Qadhi considers the concept of the “seven aḥruf” a metaphorical expression that permits the first generation to recite the Qurʾān using synonyms, dialects, and personal Ijtihād. This permission also extended to readings resulting from memory lapses and scribal errors.
This definition of the seven aḥruf is unprecedented, as no one before Qadhi has put forth such an understanding.
Qadhi also believes that these variations became more limited after the compilation of the Qurʾān under ʿUthmān (may Allah be pleased with him), though they still exist in our current recitations. However, he deems this acceptable, as Allah has promised to preserve His Book, and since it is described as miraculous, it remains so, despite the human errors it may contain.
And Allah knows best. May peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and all his companions.
Source:
- Qadhi, Yasir. “An Alternative Opinion on the Reality of the ‘Seven Ahruf’ and Its Relationship with the Qira’at.” History of the Quran – Approaches and Explorations, edited by F. Redhwan Karim. Kube Publishing, 2024.