Waqar Akbar Cheema
Abstract
This article examines the interplay between two key figures in early Islamic history, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab and Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, focusing on their differences in the recitation (qira’at) of the Qur’an after the Prophet Muhammad’s (ﷺ) time and before the standardisation of the Qur’anic text under ‘Uthman. It argues that these differences highlight the meticulous care taken by early Muslims to preserve the Qur’anic text in line with prophetic instruction. The analysis begins with ‘Umar’s acknowledgement of Ubayy’s unparalleled expertise in Qur’anic recitation, yet notes ‘Umar’s decision to refrain from some of Ubayy’s recitations, due to the latter’s insistence to relate whatever he had heard from the Prophet (ﷺ), which could at times lead his beneficiaries to confuse and conflate abrogated verses and Prophet’s (ﷺ) exegesis and pronouncements with the formal and finally established Qur’anic text. The article explores instances where ‘Umar corrected or questioned Ubayy’s recitations. By analysing these interactions, the article demonstrates that the recitation of the Qur’an, even under the sab‘a ahruf system, was rigorously regulated by prophetic precedent, leaving no room for personal interpretation. The study concludes that the early Muslim approach to the Qur’an was one of extreme caution, where even the most knowledgeable companions, like Ubayy and ‘Umar, were subject to scrutiny to ensure the preservation of the Qur’anic text in its purest form. This meticulous care reflects the early community’s reverence for the Qur’an and their commitment to upholding its integrity, guided by the precedent set by the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ).
1. Introduction
In previous articles, we have discussed at length that the sab‘a ahruf hadith reports are ladened with evidence that the system of qira’at borne by it was predicated on explicit Prophetic precedence to the letter. Moreover, we analysed the reports that carry an impression against the centrality of the precedence.
Now we turn to see how the differences in qira’at were viewed after the Prophet (ﷺ) and before ‘Uthman’s uniting of the Muslim community on sticking to a standard set of masahif, i.e., copies of the Qur’an in writing, as a touchstone for the validity of any given recitation (qira’t).
Currently, we focus on instances involving differences between ‘Umar b. al-Khattab and Ubayy b. Ka‘b. The position of ‘Umar in the history of Islam in general and in the efforts for the preservation of the Qur’anic text, in particular, are known as he was the one who first convinced Abu Bakr to gather the text at a single place after many reciters fell in the Battle of Yamama.[1] Moreover, he was very particular about how people approached the Qur’an. Ubayy, too, was a prominent companion of the Prophet (ﷺ) and was known for his passion for reciting the Qur’an and learning its meanings from the Prophet (ﷺ).[2]
This paper discusses several cases of their interlocution about reciting particular verses from the Qur’an. The study of these reported instances bears on the approach of these two giants in particular, and early Muslims in general, towards the Qur’an and the specifics of its words.
2. ‘Umar’s testimony regarding Ubayy’s expertise and approach towards Qur’an
قال عمر رضي الله عنه: ” أقرؤنا أبي، وأقضانا علي، وإنا لندع من قول أبي، وذاك أن أبيا يقول: لا أدع شيئا سمعته من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم “. وقد قال الله تعالى: {ما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها}
‘Umar said, “Our best reciter is Ubayy, and the one of us with the most knowledge of judgment is ‘Ali. However, we leave some of what Ubayy says (min qawl ubayy) because Ubayy says, ‘I do not leave anything that I heard from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ),’ while Allah Almighty says, ‘Whenever We abrogate an ayat or cause it to be forgotten.’”[3]
Some narrations include the following phrase towards the end of the report:
وقد نزل بعد أبي كتاب
~
Indeed, the Qur’an was revealed beyond what Ubayy had heard.[4]
Some narrations have that ‘Umar said, “we leave some of what of Ubayy recites” (ma yaqra‘ ubayy)[5] or “from Ubayy’s mistaken recitations” (min lahn ubayy).[6]
A narration clarifies that Ubayy said he would not give up on anything he heard from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) for anyone else’s word (li qawl ahad).[7]
‘Umar thus confirms that even the unwarranted bits recited by Ubayy were those he had taken directly from the Prophet (ﷺ) and was not ready to give them up based on the testimony of others regarding their abrogation or not being a formal part of the Qur’anic text.[8] This establishes the centrality of the Prophetic instruction in early Muslims’ conception of how the Qur’anic text was received and recited.
3. Ubayy Reciting the Abrogated: ‘Umar’s Check
عن بجالة التميمي قال: وجد عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه مصحفا في حجر غلام له، فيه: {النبي أولى بالمؤمنين من أنفسهم -وهو أب لهم – وأزواجه أمهاتهم وأولو الأرحام بعضهم} فقال: احككها يا غلام. فقال: والله لا أحكها وهي في مصحف أبي بن كعب رضي الله عنه. فانطلق عمر رضي الله عنه إلى أبي بن كعب رضي الله عنه. فقال: شغلني القرآن، وشغلك الصفق بالأسواق. إذ تعرض رحاك على عنقك بباب ابن العجماء.
~
Narrated by Bajalah al-Tamimi: ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab found a mushaf in possession of a boy, which had the verse: “The Prophet is closer to the believers than their selves” – and he is a father to them – and his wives are their mothers and those with kinship ties have more right to one another” (33:6). ‘Umar said, “Erase it, boy!” The boy replied, “By Allah, I will not erase it, for it is thus in the mushaf of Ubayy ibn Ka‘b.” So, ‘Umar went to Ubayy ibn Ka‘b. Ubayy said, “The Qur’an had preoccupied me while you were preoccupied with the markets, offering your mill at the door of Ibn al-Ajma’.”[9]
Some narrations add that ‘Umar kept silent,[10] and left.[11]
Another report, however, adds that Ubayy had clarified that the words he had added about the Prophet being a father to the believers had been abrogated.
فأتيا أبي بن كعب فقال: «يا أبي، ألا تسمع كيف يقرأ هذا هذه الآية؟» فقال أبي: «كانت فيما أسقط» . قال عمر: ” فأين كنت عنها؟ فقال: شغلني عنها ما لم يشغلك “
~
They went to Ubayy ibn Ka‘b. ‘Umar said, “Ubayy! Do you not hear how this man recites this verse?” Ubayy replied, “It was among the things that were dropped (usqit).” ‘Umar then asked, “So, where was I about it?” Ubayy responded, “I was preoccupied with what did not preoccupy you.”[12]
In both narrations, ‘Umar demonstrates a vital concern for the authenticity of Qur’anic verses. When confronted with a variant recitation, he immediately questioned its validity and sought confirmation. It reflects the principle that Qur’anic recitations require endorsement from a legitimate source. ‘Umar’s concern is evident in his instruction to erase the phrase and seek verification from Ubayy.
The mention of abrogation here is also crucial, as Ubayy clarifies that the phrase had been “dropped,” indicating that its omission was based on prophetic guidance rather than personal choice.[13] This underscores the significant role of the Prophet’s instructions in determining what was retained or omitted from the Qur’anic text, ensuring that recitations were strictly regulated and not arbitrary in any way.
The distinction between Ubayy and ‘Umar in their engagement with the Qur’an underscores the importance of sustained scholarly attention to the direct prophetic instruction in preserving the accuracy of the Qur’anic text. Ubayy, known for his mastery in recitation and continuous company with the Prophet, maintained detailed knowledge of the revelation, including abrogated parts of the Qur’an and the words denoting guidance not meant to be part of the Qur’anic text. His awareness was informed by direct learning from the Prophet (ﷺ) about the status of specific revelations, including whether they were incorporated into the formal Qur’anic text or intended for guidance without inclusion. In contrast, ‘Umar’s broader interests, including trade, might have bereaved him of the opportunity to learn the details of the revelation as extensively as Ubayy did.[14]
However, since Ubayy was known to transmit words related to the Qur’anic verses pronounced by the Prophet (ﷺ), even if subsequently clarified to be left out of the Qur’an, ‘Umar was careful to cross-check whenever he had concerns.
These points collectively illustrate that the multiplicity in recitations under the sab‘a ahruf system was meticulously governed by prophetic precedent, with no room for personal interpretation or unauthorised inclusions.
That ‘Umar spent time trading in the market was not mentioned as a disparage but rather as a fact. ‘Umar himself noted this as an excuse for not knowing a hadith narrated and confirmed by Musa al-Ash‘ari and Abu Sa‘id a-Khudri.[15]
4. Ubayy Relaying Non-Qur’anic Words: ‘Umar’s Inquiry
On other occasions, Ubayy recited and relayed words he knew need not be in the mushaf. Here is a case.
عن محمد بن سيرين، أن عمر رضي الله عنه سمع كثير بن الصلت، يقرأ (لو أن لابن آدم واديين من مال لتمنى واديا ثالثا، ولا يملأ جوف ابن آدم إلا التراب، ويتوب الله على من تاب) فقال عمر رضي الله عنه: ما هذا؟ قال: هذا في التنزيل فقال عمر رضي الله عنه: من يعلم ذاك؟ والله لتأتين بمن يعلم ذاك أو لأفعلن كذا وكذا قال: أبي بن كعب. فانطلق إلى أبي فقال: ما يقول هذا؟ قال: ما يقول؟ قال: فقرأ عليه فقال: صدق، قد كان هذا فيما يقرأ قال: أكتبها في المصحف؟ قال: لا أنهاك قال: أتركها؟ قال: لا آمرك “
~
Narrated by Muhammad ibn Sirin: ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) heard Kathir ibn al-Salt reciting: “If the son of Adam had two valleys full of wealth, he would wish for a third valley, and nothing fills the belly of the son of Adam except dust, and Allah forgives those who repent.” ‘Umar said, “What is this?” Kathir replied, “This is part of the revelation.” ‘Umar said, “Who teaches this? By Allah, you will bring someone who teaches this, or I will do such and such.” Kathir said, “Ubayy ibn Ka‘b.” So, he went to Ubayy and said, “What does this one say?” Ubayy replied, “What does he say?” ‘Umar recited it to him. Ubayy said, “He is correct. This was part of what was recited.” ‘Umar asked, “Shall I write it in the Qur’an?” Ubayy replied, “I do not forbid you.” ‘Umar asked, “Shall I leave it out?” Ubayy replied, “I do not ask you to do so.”[16]
Another narration which has that Ibn ‘Abbas also mentioned Ubayy’s position before ‘Umar records that upon hearing this unclear response from Ubayy,[17] ‘Umar said:
قال: كان إثباتك أولى من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، أم قرآن منزل؟
~
Was it your responsibility to confirm it more than the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), or was it part of the revealed Qur’an?[18]
Besides confirming the relevance of ‘Umar’s observation regarding Ubayy not taking due care in transmitting words not truly part of the Qur’an, the significance of ‘Umar’s insistence on verifying the unfamiliar recitation with Ubayy ibn Ka‘b is evident. It demonstrates the necessity of prophetic authority in confirming Qur’anic verses. Ubayy’s acknowledgement that the words were once read along with the Qur’anic revelation and his non-committal stance on its inclusion in the Qur’an emphasises that prophetic instruction was essential for determining the Qur’an’s textual integrity. ‘Umar’s challenge underscores that adherence to prophetic precedent, rather than personal discretion, however limited, was crucial in determining the contours of the Qur’anic text.
5. Ubayy Recalling Exegetical Discourse
In the above case, Ubayy’s statement confirmed that he was unsure if what he read and relayed was not part of the Quran, but we do not have such an indication from him in another case. However, other details lead us to the same conclusion.
وأخرج أبو يعلى ، وَابن مردويه عن أبي بن كعب رضي الله عنه أنه قرأ ولا تقربوا الزنا إنه كان فاحشة ومقتا وساء سبيلا إلا من تاب فإن الله كان غفارا رحيما فذكر لعمر رضي الله عنه فأتاه فسأله فقال : أخذتها من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وليس لك عمل إلا الصفق بالبقيع.
~
Abu Yaʿlā and Ibn Mardawayh reported from Ubayy ibn Kaʿb that he recited, “Do not even go close to fornication. It is indeed a shameful and detestable act and an evil way to follow. Except for those who repent, for Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (cf. Qur’an 4:22 and 17:32). When ʿUmar (b. al-Khaṭṭāb) was informed of this, he went to Ubayy and asked about it. Ubayy replied, “I received this from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) while you only used to be busy with transactions at the market.”[19]
What Ubayy recited appears as a conflation of the two verses, Qur’an 4:22 and 17:32 with a closing mentioning Allah’s mercifulness for one who repents. In an exegetical report with al-Tabari, Ibn Zaid mentions the connection, stating that “Do not marry those women whom your fathers had married …,” (4:22) describes “fornication” (17:32) as “a shameful act, detestable, and an evil way to follow” (4:22 and 17:32) —adding the term “detestable” in 4:22.[20]
Scholars have highlighted that whereas both Q 4:22 and Q 17:32 condemn adultery, the use of the word “detestable” in the former instance stresses the curse of copulating with the wife of one’s father.[21] Another Madinan authority, Muhammad b. Ka‘b al-Kurazi mentioned that in the story of Aziz’s (Potiphar) wife seducing Prophet Yusuf (Joseph), the “proof” (Q 12:24) that helped Prophet Yusuf reject the call to sin was the message “Do not even go close to fornication. It is indeed a shameful and detestable act and an evil way to follow,”[22] which were precisely the words Ubayy recited in the above narration. Since ‘Aziz (Potiphar) was to Yusuf both a master and a fatherly figure (Q 12:21), he was repulsed from falling for the seduction from the former’s wife. This fact, it appears, was indicated in the Prophet’s (ﷺ) regular study circle with the words that happened to be an admix of the two verses. The final mention of repentance leading to forgiveness from Allah sits well with the subsequent repentance of ‘Aziz’s wife (Q 12:51).[23] Ubayy, unlike ‘Umar, having attended the sitting, appears to have recalled that and mentioned it without meaning to relay a formal recital of Qur’anic lines.
Interestingly, both Ka’b al-Qurazi and ibn Zayd were from the Madinan school of tafsir, of which Ubayy was the protagonist.[24] This shows another reason why the above connection of dots makes sense.
All of the above proves that ‘Umar’s objection was on merit, given that Ubayy was not clarifying the exact nature of the words he was relating. However, Ubayy’s biting response highlighted that, unlike ‘Umar, he had nevertheless heard the words from the Prophet (ﷺ).
6. Another Case of Ubayy’s Exegetical Interjection
Early sources mention another incident in which Ubayy relayed an explanatory interjection without necessary clarification. Once again, ‘Umar learned of it, intervened, quickly inquired, and ensured rectification.
عن أبي إدريس الخولاني: أن أبا الدرداء، ركب إلى المدينة في نفر من أهل دمشق ومعهم المصحف الذي جاء به أهل دمشق ليعرضوه على أبي بن كعب، وزيد بن ثابت، وعلي، وأهل المدينة. فقرأ يوما على عمر بن الخطاب، فلما قرءوا هذه الآية: (إذ جعل الذين كفروا في قلوبهم الحمية حمية الجاهلية ولو حميتم كما حموا لفسد المسجد الحرام) ، فقال عمر: من أقرأكم؟ قالوا: أبي بن كعب، فقال لرجل من أهل المدينة: ادع إلي أبي بن كعب، وقال للرجل الدمشقي: انطلق معه.
فذهبا فوجدا أبي بن كعب عند منزله يهيّئ بعيرا له هو بيده، فسلّما عليه، ثم قال له المدني: أجب أمير المؤمنين عمر، فقال أبي: ولم دعاني أمير المؤمنين؟ فأخبره المدني بالذي كان، فقال أبي للدمشقي: ما كنتم تنتهون معشر الركيب أو يشدفني منكم شر، ثم جاء إلى عمر وهو مشمر والقطران على يديه، فلما أتى عمر؛ قال لهم عمر: اقرءوا، فقرءوا (ولو حميتم كما حموا لفسد المسجد الحرام) فقال أبي: أنا أقرأتهم، فقال عمر، لزيد: اقرأ يا زيد! فقرأ زيد قراءة العامة، فقال: اللهمّ! لا أعرف إلا هذا، فقال أبي: والله يا عمر! إنك لتعلم أني كنت أحضر ويغيبون، وأدعى ويحجبون ويصنع بي، والله لئن أحببت لألزمن بيتي فلا أحدث أحدا بشيء.~
Abu Idris al-Khawlani reported: Abu al-Darda’ travelled to Madina with a group from the people of Damascus, carrying the manuscript that the people of Damascus had brought to present to Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, b. ibn Thabit, ‘Ali, and the people of Madina. One day, they recited before ʿUmar ibn al-Khattab, and when they recited this verse: “When the disbelievers developed in their hearts indignation, the indignation of ignorance; and if you were to harbour indignation as they did, the Sacred Mosque would be corrupted,” ʿUmar asked, “Who taught you this recitation?” They replied, “Ubayy ibn Ka‘b.” So ʿUmar told a man from Madina, “Call Ubayy ibn Ka‘b to me,” and said to the Damascene man, “Go with him.”
They found Ubayy ibn Ka‘b at his home, preparing a camel with his own hands. They greeted him, and the man from Madina said, “Answer the call of the Commander of the Faithful, ʿUmar.” Ubayy asked, “Why has the Commander of the Faithful summoned me?” The man from Madina informed him of what had happened. Ubayy then said to the Damascene, “You people of the caravan will not stop until one of you brings harm to me.”
Then Ubayy went to ʿUmar with his sleeves rolled up and tar on his hands. When he arrived, ʿUmar said to them, “Recite.” They recited, “And if you were to harbour indignation as they did, the Sacred Mosque would be corrupted,” Ubayy said, “I am the one who taught them this recitation.” ʿUmar then said to Zayd, “Recite!” Zayd recited according to the common recitation. ʿUmar said, “O Allah, I do not recognise anything but this.” Ubayy said, “By Allah, ʿUmar, you know I used to be present when others were absent. I was invited while others were turned away, and I was treated specially. By Allah, if you wish, I will stay in my home and never teach anyone anything again.”[25]
An earlier source, Ibn Shabba (d. 262/876), has the narration with ending in the following words:
فقال أبي: أما والله يا عمر إنك لتعلم أني كنت أحضر ويغيبون، وإن شئت لا أقرأت أحدا آية من كتاب الله، ولا حدثت حديثا عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال عمر رضي الله عنه: اللهم غفرا، قد جعل الله عندك علما، فأقرئ الناس وحدثهم. قال: فكتبوها على قراءة عمر وزيد.
~
Ubayy said, “By Allah, ʿUmar, you know I used to be present when others were absent. If you wish, I will not teach anyone any verse from the Book of Allah, nor narrate any saying from the Messenger ( ﷺ).” ‘Umar responded, “Allah’s mercy! Indeed, Allah has granted you knowledge, so teach the people the Qur’an and narrate to them (from the Prophet).” Then, they wrote the verse down according to the reading of ‘Umar and Zayd.[26]
In this case, Ubayy added an explanatory note to the recitation of Qur’an 48:26, which talks about the incitement from the pagans of Quraish at the time a truce was reached between the Muslims led by the Prophet (ﷺ) and the Quraish at Hudaibiyya:
When the disbelievers developed in their hearts indignation, the indignation of ignorance; then Allah sent down tranquillity from Himself upon His Messenger and upon the believers … (Q48:26)
Here, the descent of tranquillity refers to keeping the believers immune to indignation like the indignation that pagans had developed. Besides other factors, this would have led to bloodshed in the sacred precincts (haram) of the Ka‘ba. This explanation has been reported by Ibn Juraij,[27] and many other past commentators.[28]
Ubayy also added an explanatory sentence for this: “And if you were to harbour indignation as they did, the Sacred Mosque would be corrupted.”[29] Ubayy’s response to the inquiry by ‘Umar confirms he had heard it from the Prophet (ﷺ) himself. ‘Umar’s rejoinder also suggests he did not doubt that the Prophet (ﷺ) had mentioned this to Ubayy, but he wanted to confirm whether it was truly meant to be a part of the Qur’an. When Zayd confirmed that it was not, ‘Umar got the knowledge seekers from Damascus led by Abu al-Darda’ to write it accordingly in their mushaf, as mentioned in the report by Ibn Shabba.
The report also conveys ‘Umar’s exasperation with Ubayy’s insistence on relating everything he had heard from the Prophet (ﷺ). While ‘Umar did not want to dissuade Ubayy from transmitting knowledge, he did his best to ensure the people did not conflate the Qur’an with anything, not even the saying of the Prophet (ﷺ) in explanation of the Qur’an.
7. A Hasty Objection: ‘Umar’s Dispute with Ubayy and Subsequent Reconciliation
In yet another narration, ‘Umar and Ubayy traded harsh words before settling on the facts of the matter.
عن أبي مجلز، أن أبيا قرأ: {من الذين استحق عليهم الأوليان} ، فقال له عمر: كذبت فقال له: أنت أكذب فقيل له: تكذب أمير المؤمنين فقال: أنا أشد تعظيما لأمير المؤمنين منك فقال: إني كرهت أني أصدق في تكذيب كتاب الله، وأكذب في تصديق كتاب الله، فقال له عمر: صدقت.
~
Abū Mijlaz[30] related: Ubayy recited: “Then, if it is discovered that the two had rendered themselves liable to a sin, then, in their place shall stand two others, foremost of those whose right has been taken away (is’taḥaqqa ʿalayhimu l-awlayān)” (Qur’an 5:107). ʿUmar said to him: “You have lied.” Ubayy replied: “Rather, you are lying.” He was then asked: “Are you calling the Commander of the Faithful a liar?” Ubayy responded: “I revere the Commander of the Faithful more than you do. However, I hate to confirm something that contradicts the Book of Allah and reject what affirms the Book of Allah.” Upon this, ʿUmar said to him: “You have spoken the truth.”[31]
As it has come down to us, the report does not preserve any other conversation details. What Ubayy recited is one of the standard recitations of the verse. We do not know how ‘Umar recited it. Ubayy’s reaction, however, confirmed that he was sure to have received it thus from the Prophet (ﷺ) himself. ‘Ali b. Abi Talib is also reported to have related this verse with the exact wording from the Prophet (ﷺ).[32]
While we do not know what particular concern ‘Umar had, some sources mention that Ibn ‘Abbas considered the foremost ones to be essentially the closest ones of the deceased and wondered what would happen if the closest ones were minors. In haste, he did not realise that the minority would impede them from being the foremost ones,[33] and accordingly preferred to recite it as “if it is discovered that the two had rendered themselves liable to sin, then, in their place shall stand two others, from the former ones whose right had been affirmed) is’tuḥiqqa ʿalayhimu l-awwalīn).”[34]However, subsequently, he too recognised and related the recitation that Ubayy and ‘Ali had received from the Prophet (ﷺ).[35] Perhaps ‘Umar had a similar reservation on first hearing the recitation from Ubayy; however when Ubayy stressed that he had learned it from the Prophet (ﷺ), ‘Umar budged. It is also possible that ‘Umar’s concern was allayed upon confirmation from some other companion as well, as in the case around Q48:26 discussed above and Q9:100 discussed below. If ‘Umar’s concern was like that of ibn ‘Abbas, this was more like the saying of ‘Abdullah b. Awn al-Muzani (d. 151/768), “Sometimes people would differ about two things that would both be true.”[36]
8. ‘Umar’s Initial Objection and Later Acceptance of Ubayy’s Recitation
In yet another case ‘Umar objected to Ubayy’s recitation
عن محمد بن كعب القرظي قال: مرّ عمر بن الخطاب برجل يقرأ: (والسابقون الأولون من المهاجرين والأنصار) ، حتى بلغ: (ورضوا عنه) ، قال: وأخذ عمر بيده فقال: من أقرأك هذا؟ قال: أبي بن كعب! فقال: لا تفارقني حتى أذهب بك إليه! فلما جاءه قال عمر: أنت أقرأت هذا هذه الآية هكذا؟ قال: نعم! قال: أنت سمعتها من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم؟ قال: نعم! قال: لقد كنت أظن أنّا رُفِعنا رَفْعة لا يبلغها أحدٌ بعدنا! فقال أبيّ: بلى، تصديق هذه الآية في أول سورة الجمعة: … وفي سورة الحشر: … وفي الأنفال: ….
~
Muhammad ibn Ka‘b al-Qurazi said: ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab passed by a man who was reciting, “As for the first and foremost of the Emigrants (Muhajirin) and the Supporters (Ansar) and those who followed them in goodness,” until he reached “and they are pleased with Allah.” ‘Umar took hold of the man’s hand and asked, “Who taught you this recitation?” The man replied, “Ubayy ibn Ka’b!” ‘Umar said, “Do not leave my side until I take you to him!” When they arrived, ‘Umar asked Ubayy, “Did you teach him to recite this verse in this way?” Ubayy said, “Yes!” ‘Umar asked, “Did you hear it from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)?” Ubayy replied, “Yes!” ‘Umar then said, “I thought we had been raised to a level that no one would reach after us!” Ubayy replied, “Indeed, the confirmation of this verse is at the beginning of Surah al-Jumu’ah (62:3) … and in Surah al-Hashr, (59:10) … and Surah al-Anfal, (8:75) …[37]
Another narration says that ‘Umar had first confirmed it from Zayd too.
عن حبيب بن الشهيد، وعمرو بن عامر الأنصاري، أن عمر بن الخطاب، قرأ: (والسابقون الأولون من المهاجرين والأنصار الذين اتبعوهم بإحسان) فرفع الأنصار، ولم يلحق الواو في الذين، فقال له زيد بن ثابت: {والذين اتبعوهم بإحسان} [التوبة: 100] فقال عمر: (الذين اتبعوهم بإحسان) فقال زيد: أمير المؤمنين أعلم. فقال عمر: ” ائتوني بأبي بن كعب، فسأله عن ذلك فقال أبي: {والذين اتبعوهم بإحسان} [التوبة: 100] فقال عمر: «فنعم إذا» . فتابع أبيا
~
Habib ibn al-Shahid and ‘Amr ibn ‘Amir al-Ansari reported that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab recited “wal-sābiqūna l-awalūna mina l-muhājirīna wal-anṣāri alladhīna ittabaʿūhum bi-iḥ’sān” (Q9:100) with the word ‘Ansar’ in the nominative case, and without the waw (and) (making it ‘As for the first and foremost of the Muhajirin and the Ansar who followed them in goodness,’…”). Zayd b. Thabit said to him, “[the Muhajirin and the Ansar] and those who followed them in goodness,” ‘Umar insisted, “the Ansar who followed them in goodness,” Zayd then remarked, “The Commander of the Faithful knows best.” ‘Umar then said, “Bring me Ubayy ibn Ka‘b,” and when he asked Ubayy about it, Ubayy confirmed, “[the Muhajirin and the Ansar] and those who followed themin goodness,” ‘Umar then said, “Well, then it is indeed thus,” and he followed Ubayy’s reading.[38]
This example of ‘Umar and Ubayy’s dispute is interesting because here it was ‘Umar who had got it wrong and was corrected by Ubayy besides confirmation of the latter’s claim by Zayd. While Zayd did not press assuming ‘Umar had remembered it better, Ubayy’s assertive claim that he had indeed received it from the Prophet (ﷺ) and that other instances in the Qur’an confirmed the meaning of how he had remembered made ‘Umar recognise that this time the lapse was on his part.
Moreover, it also tells us that the companions were meticulous about the minute details, down to the letter ‘waw’, of the Qur’an.
Here, the contrast between Zayd and Ubayy highlights the latter’s boldness in the discharge of responsibility to speak his mind, even if it meant confronting a towering figure and the commander of the faithful like ‘Umar. Considering the sensitivity of the matter and the fact that any individual could err, ‘Umar realised the importance of attitude and praised it coming from Ubayy. The following narration also bears on it.
عن الحسن “أن عمر بن الخطاب رد على أبي بن كعب قراءة آية، فقال أبي: لقد سمعتها من رسول الله – صلى الله عليه وسلم – أنت يلهيك يا عمر الصفق بالبقيع! فقالت عمر: صدقت، إنما أردت أن أجربكم، هل فيكم من يقول الحق. فلا خير في أمير لا يقال عنده الحق ولا يقوله “.
~
Al-Hasan reported: “ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb questioned the recitation of a verse by Ubayy ibn Kaʿb. Ubayy said, ‘I certainly heard it from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) while you, ʿUmar, were distracted by your trading in the marketplace.’ ʿUmar replied, ‘You have spoken the truth. I only wanted to test you all: is anyone among you who will speak the truth? For there is no good in a leader in whose presence the truth is not spoken, nor who does not speak it.’”[39]
9. The Genius Slips – ‘Umar Confuses Explanation for Abrogation
Finally, we have an instance where ‘Umar confused explanation for abrogation.
عن خرشة بن الحر، أن عمر بن الخطاب، رأى معه لوحا مكتوبا فيه {إذا نودي للصلاة من يوم الجمعة فاسعوا إلى ذكر الله} [الجمعة: 9] فقال: من أقرأك أو من أمل عليك هذا؟ فقال: أبي بن كعب. فقال: ” إن أبيا كان أقرأنا للمنسوخ. اقرأها (فامضوا إلى ذكر الله)
~
Narrated by Kharasha ibn al-Hurr: ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb saw a tablet on which was written, “O you who believe, when the call for Ṣalāh (prayer) is proclaimed on Friday, hasten (fas‘aw) for the remembrance of Allah” (62:9). He asked, “Who taught you this? or Who dictated it to you?” The reply was, “Ubayy ibn Kaʿb.” ʿUmar said, “Indeed, Ubayy is the most engrossed among us in reciting the abrogated. Recite it as ‘proceed (famdaw) to the remembrance of Allah.’”[40]
Here, too, ‘Umar was quick to inquire about the source of a word he did not think was the rightful recitation. Moreover, even when told that it had been learnt from Ubayy, he termed it a case of abrogation, not a paraphrase or personal opinion. Both facts confirm that there was no room for substituting words of revelation with personal discretion or judgment based on proximity in meaning. Recitation had to be based on instruction in precedent.
Ubayy is also reported to have ‘recited’ this verse like ‘Umar.[41] However, this was only a clarification because of the instruction to avoid physically moving in haste for prayers. While narrations from other companions were also by way of explanation, ‘Umar appears to have erred on this point.[42] The verse Q62:9 was revealed in the early days after the Prophet’s (ﷺ) migration to Madina.[43] At a later date, however, the Prophet (ﷺ) advised people against hurrying up for prayers (falā ta’tūhā tas‘awn).[44] One can imagine the Companions wondering about dealing with the two seemingly competing instructions and the Prophet (ﷺ) telling them that in the Surah Jum‘a verse (Q62:9), it only meant to proceed, leaving all else without having to move in haste physically. Perhaps ‘Umar heard such a clarification with the words “famdaw” and thought it had abrogated “fas‘aw”, while Ubayy and other companions realised it was only a clarification.
That the other companions realised it was only an explanation is evident not only from the agreement of established qira’at that have come down from them and the fact that all of the masahif prepared under ‘Uthman have it thus; it is also reflected in practice reported from them. When a companion of Abu Dharr quickened his pace, walking towards prayer in consideration of Q62:9, Abu Dharr slowed him down and said, “Are we not already engaged in the required action (sa‘i)?”[45] Ibn Mas‘ud is reported to have remarked that his cloak would have fallen in haste if it had been about hastening physically (wa-law kānat fas‘aw la-sa‘aitu ḥattā yasquṭ ridā’ī.).[46] On the other hand, he also stated, “The most deserving thing we should strive (sa‘ainā) towards is prayer.”[47] The two reports together show that Ibn Mas‘ud viewed sa‘i mentioned in Q62:9 in terms of prioritising it in intention and action and not in haste, as reconciled by al-Hasan al-Basri.[48] This shows Ibn Mas‘ud, too, recognised the verse with the word fas‘aw.[49] Similar reconciliation-focused statements have come from Ibn ‘Abbas, Anas b. Malik, ‘Ata b. Rabah, Mujahid b. Jabr, ‘Ikrima, Qatada, and Muhammad b. Ka‘b.[50] This confirms that all these Companions and their students recognised and understood the verse with the word fas‘aw as famdaw (to proceed) without involving physical haste in movement advised against by the Prophet (ﷺ). Malik b. Anas and al-Shafi‘i have also emphasised this understanding using multiple examples of the use of sa‘i (lit. effort) in terms of deed and action rather than running on feet or exertion.[51]
10. Conclusion
The narratives surrounding ‘Umar and Ubayy reflect a profound commitment to prophetic precedent, with ‘Umar asking, “Who taught you?” and “Did you hear it from the Prophet (ﷺ)?” “Was it part of the revealed Qur’an?” and Ubayy always insisted that he heard it from the Prophet (ﷺ) besides reminding ‘Umar that, unlike him, he had a persistent focus on receiving the Prophet’s (ﷺ) lessons in the Qur’an. Both approaches underscore the importance of direct learning from the Prophet (ﷺ) in understanding the Qur’an. While their interpretations differed, with ‘Umar getting things right in some instances and Ubayy in others, these differences highlight the complementary nature of their insights. Each exemplified a distinct yet harmonious approach to preserving the Qur’an’s integrity in word and meaning, demonstrating that their divergences were all rooted in a shared reverence for prophetic guidance. ‘Umar jealously strived not to let anything non-Qur’an mix with the formal text of the Qur’an revealed and relayed as such by the Prophet (ﷺ), while Ubayy did his best to preserve and teach all that he had heard from the Prophet (ﷺ) in person. While ‘Umar’s thrust remains evident, it also shows Ubayy, too, never exercised his reasoning regarding meaning, much less the words of the Qur’an. He might even have occasionally and unwittingly made someone deem the words of the Prophet (ﷺ) as that of the Qur’an; however, it establishes that he would never trade the revealed words for anything, even if they were the same in meaning and import.
Instructively, Ubayy and ‘Umar are also the key figures in the sab‘a ahruf reports. They took to the Prophet (ﷺ), the people they found reciting differently from them, claiming that they, too, had been taught by the Prophet (ﷺ). The Prophet (ﷺ) listened to their recitations, confirmed their claims, and reiterated the fact of the Qur’an having been revealed in seven ahruf. Their mutual interlocutions and ‘obsessive’ regard for Prophetic (ﷺ) precedent confirm their realisation that the ahruf system, which provided the framework for the multiplicity of recitations, was exclusively predicated on the Prophetic precedent to the letter.
Notes & References:
[1] Al-Bukhari, Al-Sahih, Hadith 4679, 4986, 7191
[2] Ibn Majah, al-Sunan, Hadith 154 Ahmad b. Hanbal, al-Musnad, Hadith 12904; Ibn Sa’d, al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, Vol.2, 260; Vol.3, 379 (the Prophet (ﷺ) termed him the best reciter of his ummah) / Al-Bukhari, Al-Sahih, Hadith 3808; 4999 (counted among the four the Prophet (ﷺ) recommended to learn the Qur’an from)/ Al-Bukhari, Al-Sahih, Hadith 3810 (he was among the four Ansar, Anas knew, who had memorised the entire Qur’an during the lifetime of the Prophet (ﷺ)) / Al-Bukhari, Al-Sahih, Hadith 4959-4961 (the Prophet (ﷺ) told him that Allah had asked him to recite the Qur’an to Ubayy) // Abu Dawud, al-Sunan, Hadith 907a; al-Maqdasi, Diya, al-Ahadith al-Mukhtara, (Beirut: Dar al-Khadir, 2000) Hadith 1135-7 (The Prophet (ﷺ) showed his confidence on the memory and attention of Ubayy vis-à-vis the Qur’an)
[3] Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, Hadith 4481; also, Ahmad b. Hanbal, al-Musnad, Hadith 20185
[4] Ahmad b. Hanbal, al-Musnad, Hadith 21086; Ibn Abi Shaiba, al-Musannaf, Hadith 30755; Ibn Sa’d, al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, (Beirut: Dar al-Kotob al-‘Ilmiyah, 1990) Vol.2, 259; Ibn ‘Asakir, Abu al-Qasim, Tarikh al-Damishq, (Beirut: Dar al-Fekr, 1995) Vol.7, 325; Vol.42, 402; See also; Al-Sindi, Abu al-Hasan, Hashia Musnad al-Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, (Qatar: Ministry of Auqaf and Religious Affairs, 2008) Vol.12, 324
[5] Ibn Abi Shaiba, al-Musannaf, Hadith 30755
[6] Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, Hadith 5005; Ahmad b. Hanbal, al-Musnad, Hadith 20184; also, Al-Sindi, Hashia Musnad al-Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Vol.12, 324;
[7] Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh al-Damishq, Vol.7, 325;
[8] Zaghlul, al-Shahat al-Sayyid, Ubayy bin Ka‘b – al-Rajul wa al-Mushaf, (Alexandria: Dar al-Ma‘rifa al-Jami‘a, 2023) 86-88, 212-215;
Also, Al-‘Asimi al-Khurasani, Abu Muhammad Ahmad b. Muhammad, Kitab al-Mabani li Nazm al-Ma‘ani, Ed. Dr Ahmad bin Faris al-Salum (Dubai: Dar Al Ber Society, 2022) 305-306, 327, 329, 332-333
This citation of a recent scholarly edition of Kitab al-Mabani covers its muqaddima (introduction) and up to Surah al-Hijr (no. 15). Earlier, its muqaddima, along with the muqaddima of Ibn ‘Atiyya’s (d. 542/1148) tafsir, was published by Arthur Jeffery (d. 1959) as Muqaddimatan fi ‘Ulum al-Qur’an (Cairo: Matba‘a al-Sunnah al-Muhammadiyah, 1954). Jeffery did not identify the author of Kitab al-Mabani. The present editor, Dr Ahmad al-Salum, has a detailed discussion to conclude the author’s identity as a 5th-century Hijra scholar from Khurasan who died circa 450/1058. See, Kitab al-Mabani, 9-23, 37
[9] Al-‘Asqalāni, Ibn Hajar, al-Maṭālib al-‘Aliya, Edited by Sa’d b. Nasir al-Shathri et al. (Riyadh: Dar al-Asima, 1998) Vol.15, 118 Hadith 3683. Reference to the house of ibn al-Ajma’ was apparently about the proximity of the market place. Another report with a different context also mentions ‘Umar presence there. See, Abu ‘Awana, Ya‘qub b. Ishaq, al-Mustakhraj, (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifa, 1998) Hadith 5381;
[10] Al-San‘ani, ‘Abdul Razzaq, al-Tafsir, (Beirut: DKI, 1419 AH) Vol.3, 32 No. 2317
[11] Ibn Shabbah, Abu Zaid, Tarikh al-Madina, (Jeddah: Syed Ahmad Mahmud, 1399 AH) Vol.2, 708;
[12] Abu ‘Ubaid, Qasim b. Sallam, Fada’il al-Qur’an, (Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir, 1995) 322
[13] The dropping and, by relevance, abrogation mentioned here does not necessarily mean formal abrogation, as in being considered a part of the Qur’an before formal repealing; rather, it could simply mean “left out,” as in clarified that it was not meant as a formal part of the Qur’an. On this point see, Al-‘Asimi, Kitab al-Mabani li Nazm al-Ma‘ani, 360
That the Prophet (ﷺ) was to the believers akin to a father is mentioned outside the Qur’an in his saying, “I am like a father to you.” Abu Dawud, al-Sunan, Hadith 8; al-Nasai’i, al-Sunan, Hadith 40l Ibn Majah, al-Sunan, Hadith 313
[14] A case in point could be the understanding of the word Zulm (lit. injustice/wrong) in Q6:82. As related by Ibn Mas‘ud, “it was hard on the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), and they said, ‘Which of us has not confused his belief with wrong?’” before the Prophet (ﷺ) clarified that it meant “attributing partners to Allah” (i.e., shirk) citing Q31:13. See, Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, Hadith 4776, 6918. ‘Umar seems to have missed this occasion as he later asked the same question to Ubayy, who clarified it the way Prophet (ﷺ) had done, referring to Q31:13. See, Al-Hakim, Abu ‘Abdullah, al-Mustadrak, (Beirut: DKI, 1990) Hadith 5330; Al-Suyuti, Jalal al-Din, al-Durr al-Manthur fi Tafsir bi al-Ma’thur, (Cairo: Markaz Hijr, 2003) Vol.6, 117-8
[15] Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, Hadith 2062
[16] Ibn Shabbah, Tarikh al-Madina, Vol.2, 712
[17] Another narration that al-Suyuti records on the authority of ibn Durais mentions that a sub-narrator added, “It was as if Ubayy was uncertain whether it was a saying of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) or revealed Qur’an.” See Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur fi Tafsir bi al-Ma’thur, Vol.15, 574
[18] Ibn Shabbah, Abu Zaid, Tarikh al-Madina, (Jeddah: Syed Ahmad Mahmud, 1399 AH) Vol.2, 706; al-Duri, Abu ‘Umar Hifs b. ‘Umar, Juz’ fi Qira’at al-Nabi, (Madina: Maktaba al-Dar, 1988) 109 no. 59; Al-Mustaghfiri, Abu al-‘Abbas, Fada’il al-Qur’an, (Beirut: Dar Ibn Hazm, 2008) 324 no. 365; al-Hakim, Abu Ahmad, al-Asami wa al-Kuna (Cairo: Dar al-Faruq, 2015) Vol.3, 216-217; It is also found in the hitherto unpublished collection of Abu ‘Ali b. Shadhan’s reports. See, Al-Thamin min Ajza’ Abi Ali b. Shadhan (1:97 – Maktaba Shamela)
One version of the report says that Ubayy responded in the affirmative to ‘Umar’s inquiry about adding it. It was, apparently, only a paraphrase by some sub-narrator unaware of the fuller narration. See Ahmad b. Hanbal, al-Musnad, Hadith 21111; al-Maqdisi, Dia’ al-Din, al-Ahadith al-Mukhtara, Hadith 1209; Al-Razi, Ibn Abi Hatim, al-‘Ilal, (Riyadh: Humaidy Press, 2006) Vol.4, 691-692 no. 1739. Also see Ahmad, al-Musnad, Hadith 21110; al-Shashi, al-Musnad, Hadith 1431; Al-Busti, Ibn Hibban, al-Sahih, (Beirut: Al-Resalah Publishers, 1988) Hadith 3237; Ibn ‘Asakir, Abu al-Qasim, Tarikh Damishq, (Beirut: Dar al-Fekr, 1995) Vol.5, 93
[19] Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, Vol.9, 332; Abu Ya‘la’s extant works do not have this narration, and the published part of Ibn Mardawayh’s tafsir does not cover surah no. 17 or no. 4. Accordingly, we do not have access to its chain of narrators.
[20] al-Tabari, Abu Ja’far, Jami‘ al-Bayan fi Tafsir ay al-Qur’an, Ed. Mahmud Muhammad Shakir (Beirut: al-Resalah Publishers, 2000) Vol.8, 137 no. 8943;
[21] Al-Gharnati, Ibn al-Zubair, Malak al-Ta’wil, (Beirut: DKI, 2020) Vol.1, 102-3
[22] ‘Abdullah b. Wahb, al-Jami’ Tafsir al-Qur’an, Ed. Miklós Murányi (Beirut: Dar al-Gharb al-Islami, 2003) Vol.2, 145; al-Hawfi, Abu al-Hasan, Al-Burhan fi ‘Ulum al-Qur’an, Ed. Ibrahim ‘Enani ‘Atiyya (Madina:Jami’a al-Madaniyya al-‘Alimiyya, 2015) 175
[23] Al-Mawardi, Abu al-Hasan, al-Nukat wa al-‘Uyun, (Beirut: DKI, n.d.) Vol.3, 47; al-Qurtubi, Shams al-Din, al-Jami‘ li Ahkam al-Qur’an, (Cairo: Dar al-Kutab al-Misriyya, 1964) Vol.9, 208. Cf. Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, Vol.8, 280 (an israeli narration from Ibn Ishaq)
[24] Al-Dhahabi, Dr Muhammad Hussain, al-Tafsir wa al-Mufassirun, (Cairo: Maktaba Wahba, 2000) Vol.1, 86-88; al-Uthaymin, Muhammad b. Salih, Usul fi al-Tafsir, (Riyadh: Dar ibn al-Jawzi, 2008) 43
[25] Ibn Abi Dawud, Abu Bakr, Kitab al-Masahif, Ed. Salim b. ‘Eid al-Hilali (Kuwait: Gheras, 2006) 606-7 no. 498 – classified as sahih.Also al-Nasa’i, Abu ‘Abdul Rahman, al-Sunan al-Kubra, (Beirut: al-Resalah Publishers, 2001) Vol.10, 263 Hadith 11441; Al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, Hadith 2891; Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh al-Damishq, Vol.7, 337-8; Vol.68, 101-2;
[26] Ibn Shabbah, Abu Zaid, Tarikh al-Madina, Vol.2, 709
[27] Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, Vol.13, 506
[28] Al-Samarqandi, Abu Laith, [Tafsir] Bahr al-‘Ulum, (Beirut: DKI, 1993) Vol.3, 319; al-Qushairi, ‘Abd al-Karim, Lata’if al-Isharat, (Cairo: Hai’ya al-Misriyya, n.d.) Vol.3, 430; Al-Wahidi, Abu al-Hasan, al-Wajiz fi Tafsir al-Kitab al-Aziz, (Damascus: Dar al-Qalam, 1415 AH) 1012; al-Baghawi, Abu Muhammad, Ma‘alim al-Tanzil fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, (Riyadh: Dar Taiba, 1997) Vol.7, 32; al-Qurtubi, al-Jami‘ li Ahkam al-Qur’an, Vol.16, 289; Al-Tunisi, Ibn ‘Ashur, al-Tahrir wa al-Tanwir, (Tunis: Dar al-Tunisia, 1984) Vol.26, 194
[29] Al-‘Asimi, Kitab al-Mabani li Nazm al-Ma‘ani, 338-340
[30] He was Lahiq b. Humaid (d. 109/728). The rightful pronunciation of his name is Abu Mijlaz and not Abu Mijliz, as is sometimes put. See, Patni, Muhammad b. Tahir, Al-Mughni fi Dabt Asma’ al-Rijal, Ed. Muhammad Talha Bilal Ahmad Minyar (Britain: Ismaeel Books, 2022) 399
[31] Ibn ‘Adi, Abu Ahmad, al-Kamil fi al-Du‘afa al-Rijal, (Beirut: DKI, 1997) Vol.1, 118; Ibn Shabbah, Abu Zaid, Tarikh al-Madina, Vol.2, 709; Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, Vol.5, 581
[32] Al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, Hadith 2932. It is thus in the recitation traditions of Hafs, Qalun, Warsh, Ibn Kathir, al-Duri, al-Susi, Ibn ‘Amir, al-Kisa’i, and Abu Ja‘far. See, Al-Ma’asrawi, Ahmad ‘Isa and Kahila, Muhammad al-Dasuqi, Al-Jadul al-Mufassal fi al-Qira’at al-‘Ashar al-Mutawatira, (Cairo: Dar al-Salam, 2020) Vol.1, 315
[33] Al-Farisi, Abu ‘Ali, al-Hujja li al-Qurra’ al-Sab‘a, (Damascus: Dar al-Ma’mun, 1993) Vol.3, 269
[34] al-Tabari, Jami‘ al-Bayan,Vol.11, 202 no. 12976-7. It is thus in the recitation traditions of Shu‘ba, Hamza, Ya‘qub, and Khalaf. See, Al-Ma’asrawi, and Kahila, Al-Jadul al-Mufassal fi al-Qira’at al-‘Ashar al-Mutawatira, Vol.1, 315
[35] Al-Samin al-Halabi, Abu al-‘Abbas, Durr al-Masun fi ‘Ulum al-Kitab al-Maknun, (Damascus: Dar al-Qalam, 2016) Vol.4, 473
[36] Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, 236 no. 106
[37] al-Tabari, Jami‘ al-Bayan,Vol.14, 438 no. 17117; also see Al-Tha‘labi, Abu Ishaq, al-Kashf wa al-Bayan ‘an Tafsir al-Qur’an, (Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabi, 2002) Vol.14, 10-11
Q62:3: “And to others from them who did not join them so far, and He is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise,”
Q59:10: “And (fai‘ is also) for those who came after them saying, ‘Our Lord, forgive us and those of our brothers who preceded us in faith,’”
Q8:75: “Those who believed later on and emigrated and carried out Jihad along with you, then, they are joined with you”
[38] Abu ‘Ubaid, Fada’il al-Qur’an, 301. The is another report of the incident from Abu Usama and Ibrahim al-Tamimi. See, Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, Vol.7, 494-5
[39] Al-Busiri, Ahmad b. Abi Bakr, Itḥāf al-Khayyirah al-Muhrah bi-Zawāʼid al-Masānīd al-ʻAsharah, (Riyadh: Dar al-Watan, 1999) Vol.1, 203 Hadith 274; Al-‘Asqalāni, Ibn Hajar, al-Maṭālib al-‘Aliya, Edited by Sa’d b. Nasir al-Shathri et al. (Riyadh: Dar al-Asima, 1998) Vol.13, 675 Hadith 3290. Both al-Busiri and Ibn Hajar pointed out the disconnection in the isnad, i.e., between al-Hasan al-Basri and ‘Umar.
[40] Abu ‘Ubaid, Fada’il al-Qur’an, 314; Ibn Shabbah, Tarikh al-Madina, Vol.2, 711; al-Jahḍami, Abu Ishaq, Ahkam al-Qur’an, (Beirut: Dar Ibn Hazm, 2005) 194 No. 304; Ibn Abi Shaiba, al-Musannaf, Hadith 5605
[41] al-Jahḍami, Abu Ishaq, Ahkam al-Qur’an, 195 No. 307. Also, Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, Vol.14, 475 (citing ‘Abd b. Humaid)
[42] al-Qurtubi, al-Jami‘ li Ahkam al-Qur’an, Vol.18, 102. Al-Qurtubi quoted Abu Bakr Ibn al-Anbari (d. 328/940), saying about ‘Umar’s position in the instant case: “When a companion solitarily goes against a community’s understanding of the verse, it is due to his forgetfulness” (fa-idhā infarada aḥadun bimā yukhālifu al-āyah wa al-jamā’ah kāna dhālika nisyānan minhu)
[43] See, al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, Hadith 936, 2058, 2064, 4899; also see, Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, Vol.14, 481-485; also, Vol.14, 477 (narration from Muhammad b. Ka‘b quoted from ‘Abd b. Humaid). One report mentions that the passage in which the verse falls was revealed when Dahya al-Kalbi arrived with the trading caravan before he became a Muslim. See, al-Baihaqi, Abu Bakr, Shu‘ab al-Iman, Ed. Dr ‘Abd al-Aliy ‘Abdul Hamid Hamid (Riyadh: Maktaba al-Rushd, 2003) Vol.8, 450 Hadith 6075 – isnad graded as la-ba’sa bihi (acceptable). See also Al-‘Asqalani, Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari, (Beirut: Dar al-Ma‘rifa, 1379 AH) Vol.2, 423. Al-Halabi (d. 1044/1635) also places it in the events soon after migration. See al-Halabi, Nur al-Din, Insan al-‘Uyun fi Sira al-Amin al-Ma‘mun, (Beirut: DKI, 1427 AH) Vol.2, 82
[44] Muslim b. Hajjaj, al-Sahih, Hadith 602 (151-154); Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, Hadith 636, 908; in some of these reports, Abu Huraira says “I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say ..” (sami‘tu rasul Allah sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam ..) and since Abu Huraira embraced Islam in the year 7 AH/628, it tells us that the instruction came years after the revelation of Q62:9. Other reports say this happened after an incident when people coming in haste for prayers made a noise that disturbed those in prayers. Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, Hadith 635; Muslim b. Hajjaj, al-Sahih, Hadith 603 (155). See also al-Busti, Ibn Hibban, al-Sahih, Vol.5, 517-522. For the year of Abu Huraira’s conversion to Islam, see al-Dhahabi, Shams al-Din, Siyar al-A‘lam al-Nubala, (Beirut: al-Resalah Publishers, 1985) Vol.2, 576.
[45] al-Baihaqi, Abu Bakr, al-Sunan al-Kubra, (Beirut: DKI, 2003) Hadith 5869
[46] Abu ‘Ubaid, Fada’il al-Qur’an, 314; al-San‘ani, ‘Abdul Razzaq, al-Musannaf, (Dabhel: Majlis al-‘Ilmi, 1983) Hadith 5349; Ibn Abi Shaiba, al-Musannaf, Hadith 5604.
[47] Ibn Abi Shaiba, al-Musannaf, Hadith 7476.
[48] Ibn Abi Shaiba, al-Musannaf, Hadith 5603. See also, Al-Tahawi, Abu Ja‘far, Ahkam al-Qur’an, (Istanbul: İslam Araştırmaları Merkezi, 1995) Vol.1, 150; al-Qurtubi, al-Jami‘ li Ahkam al-Qur’an, Vol.18, 102.
[49] One may highlight the reports mention Ibn Mas‘ud “qara’ – ‘recited’” it famdaw. It is essential to consider that the early scholars did not always mean formal recitation when they used the word “qara’”. This word was also used to refer to their pronouncements for explanation. ‘Amr b. Dinar (d. 126/744) said he heard ‘Abdullah b. al-Zubair yuqra’ Q5:52 with some additional words and then remarked, “I do not know whether it was by way of recitation or he interpreted it.” (fa-lā adrī kānat qirāʾatan, am fassara) See, al-Jawzjani, Sa‘id b. Mansur, al-Sunan, Ed. Sa‘d b. ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abdulaziz Al-Humaid (Riyadh: Dar al-Somaie, 1997) Vol.4, 1500 no. 765. It thus conveys that he was open to considering it an explanation despite relating it with the word “qara’”. Alo see, [49] Al-‘Asimi, Kitab al-Mabani li Nazm al-Ma‘ani, 313, 329, 333. The point was highlighted by Dr Mahmud Shakir (d. 1997) as well. See, Shakir, Mahmud, al-Ahruf al-Sab‘a, (Cairo: Shirkah al-Quds, 2022) 69-70. A detailed qualification of this point using multiple examples will be taken up in a subsequent write-up, in-sha’Allah.
Even though the same word is used in reports from ‘Umar, including those that say he continued to ‘recite’ the verse with the word famdaw till his death, this idea does not seem to apply to the case of ‘Umar because he termed the word fas‘aw as abrogated, and his son related that he never heard him recite the verse except with the word famdaw. See, Al-Shafi‘i, Muhammad b. Idris, al-Musnad, (Tartib al-Sindi), (Beirut: DKI, 1951) Hadith 399; al-San‘ani, ‘Abdul Razzaq, al-Musannaf, Hadith 5348; al-Tabari, Jami‘ al-Bayan,Vol.23, 381;
[50] Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur, Vol.14, 476-477; A word may be used with variant nuances in focus in different contexts across the Qur’an and hadith. A pertinent example is the use of the word mubashara (lit. coming into contact), which is used for intercourse in the Qur’an 2:187 for the nights of Ramadan and merely for hugging in hadith about the Prophet’s (ﷺ) interaction with his wives during fasting hours. See al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, Hadith 1927. Abu Bakr ibn Khuzaima used this example in the same vein as the two kinds of sa‘i across Q62:9 and the hadith prohibiting physical haste towards prayers. See, Ibn Khuzaima, Abu Bakr, al-Sahih, (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami, 2003) Vol.3, 243. Also, al-Busti, Ibn Hibban, al-Sahih, Vol.5, 522-523
[51] Malik b. Anas, al-Muwatta, (Abu Dhabi, Moassasah Zaid bin Nahyan, 2004) Vol.2, 147; al-Baihaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra, no. 5868
