Quran dialects?

[Tabassum07]

:salam2:

I was reading an article on the Tafseer of the Quran, and this following part was a bit confusing to me, especially the bolded parts:

During the reign of Caliph ‘Umar (634-644 C.E.), the Islamic state expanded beyond the borders of the Arabian peninsula into Egypt, Syria and Iraq. In the subsequent reign of Caliph ‘Uthmaan, the expansion continued on into Persia, India, Russia, China, Turkey and across North Africa. Many of the people of these regions accepted Islaam and learned the recitation of Qur’aan from the early Muslims. The Qur’aan was revealed to the Prophet (r) in seven different Arabic dialects, and the early Muslims taught the Qur’aan in its different readings.

In the Muslim provinces, some Arabs began to boast that their dialect was
superior to that of others. Also, when new Muslims made mistakes in their
recitation of the Qur’aan, it was sometimes difficult to tell whether it was really an error or whether it was one of the seven readings which were taught by the Prophet (r). These problems eventually became a source of confusion in the Muslims provinces outside of Arabia. One of the prophet’s companions
(Sahaabah) by the name of Hudhayfah ibn al-Yamaan noticed the confusion
while he was in Itaq, and feared that it might lead to a breakup of the Muslim
nation and the changing of the Qur’aan. On his return to the capital, he informed Caliph ‘Uthmaan of what he had heard and seen. Caliph ‘Uthmaan realized the seriousness of the situation and called the major Sahaabah together in order to find a solution to the problem. They decided to make official copies of the Qur’aan from the one compiled in Caliph Abu Bakr’s time and limit the people to its recitation.

This is the first time I've come across the fact that the Quran was revealed in seven dialects. Was this really so? Were there seven different ways to read every single ayah? Wasn't this confusing? I would really appreciate it if someone could elaborate or clarify this a little more.

 

[Happy 2BA Muslim]

:salam2: Sister,

There can be no doubt that the Qur’ân has indeed reached us by way of a mutawâtir line of transmission (a transmission of the general masses). The Companions learned the Qur’ân from the Prophet (peace be upon him). The Successors, in turn, learned the Qur’ân from the Companions. The Qur’ân has continued to be passed on from generation to generation in exactly the same manner until it has reached us today perfectly intact with nothing altered or omitted.

There has been unanimous consensus among Muslims throughout the ages that the text of the Qur’ân is of certain, indisputable authenticity (qat`î al-thubût). No one has ever rejected one letter of the Qur’ân that is before us today.

There is agreement that the seven modes of recitation are authentic. They have been received with acceptance by all of the Muslims. This is because they have been conveyed to us by way of authentic chains of transmission, they are all in complete harmony with the dictates of the Arabic language, and they all conform to the Uthmanî manuscript that the Companions had unanimously agreed upon.

These are the recitation styles that have been transmitted to us from `Asim b. Abî al-Nujûd, Hamzah b. Habîb al-Zayyât, `Alî b. Hamzah al-Kisâ`î – who were all from Kufah – Abû `Amr b. al-`Ulâ’ of Basra, `Abd Allah b. `Amir al-Yahsubî of Yemen, Nâfi` b. `Abd al-Rahmân b. Abî Nu`aym of Madinah, and `Abd Allah b. Kathîr of Mecca.

There are three conditions that must be met by any recitation style for it to be acceptable:

1. It must reach us by way of an authentic chain of transmission.

2. It must be in conformity with the dictates of the Arabic language, at least in some way.

3. It must be able to be accommodated by the written text of the Uthmânî manuscript.

Scholars have differed as to whether the line of transmission by which a recitation style has reached us must be not only authentic, but mutawâtir. The majority of scholars hold this view. However, Ibn al-Jazirî, Abû Shâmah, and some others did not impose such a condition.

In any event, those who do not see it necessary for a recitation style to have a mutawâtir chain of transmission still uphold the three conditions mentioned above. Moreover, none of these scholars question the authenticity of any of the seven modes of recitation. Therefore, the disagreement on this matter is of little practical relevance.

It may be of some relevance, however, in addressing the question of other recitation styles that fulfill the three conditions, like the three that bring the number of acceptable styles from seven to ten. The answer to this question – and Allah knows best – is that we can accept any mode of recitation that has reached us by way of an authentic chain of transmission, is in accordance with the Arabic language, and is accommodated by the Uthmânî manuscript, as long as there is no defect in its transmission that brings it into question or some clear and obvious irregularity. It is well known that scholars of hadîth have rejected many otherwise authentic hadîth on the basis of such defects and irregularities.

And Allah knows best.

:salam2:

 

[ShahnazZ]

This is SO COOL!

Is there any way to find out which seven dialects they were? I believe I've heard Sheikh Mishary Alafasy recite two of them, but I'd like to know the rest.

SubhanAllah you learn something new every day. JazakAllah khair for posting!

 

[Happy 2BA Muslim]

:salam2:

Firstly :

you should note, may Allaah bless you, that the Qur’aan was revealed in one style at the beginning, but the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) kept asking Jibreel until he taught him seven styles, all of which were complete. The evidence for that is the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Abbaas who narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Jibreel taught me one style and I reviewed it until he taught me more, and I kept asking him for more and he gave me more until finally there were seven styles.”

(narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3047; Muslim, 819)

Secondly:

What is meant by styles (ahruf, sing. harf)?

The best of the scholarly opinions concerning what is meant is that there are seven ways of reciting the Qur’aan, where the wording may differ but the meaning is the same; if there is a different meaning then it is by way of variations on a theme, not opposing and contradiction.

Thirdly:

Some of the scholars said that what was meant by ahruf was the dialects of the Arabs, but this is far-fetched, because of the hadeeth of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab who said:

“I heard Hishaam ibn Hakeem reciting Soorat al-Furqaan in a manner different from that in which I used to recite it and the way in which the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) taught me to recite it. I was about to argue with him whilst he was praying, but I waited until he finished his prayer, and then I tied his garment around his neck and seized him by it and brought him to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and said, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, I heard this man reciting Soorat-al-Furqaan in a way different to the way you taught it to me.’ The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to him, ‘Recite it,’ and he recited it as I had heard him recite it. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, ‘It was revealed like this.’ Then he said to me, ‘Recite it,’ so I recited it and he said, ‘It was revealed like this.’ This Qur'aan has been revealed in seven different ways, so recite it in the way that is easiest for you.’”

(Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2287; Muslim, 818)

It is known that Hishaam was Asadi Qurashi (i.e., from the clan of Bani Asad in Quraysh) and ‘Umar was ‘Adawi Qurashi (i.e., from the clan of Bani ‘Adiyy in Quraysh). Both of them were from Quraysh and Quraysh had only one dialect. If the difference in ahruf (styles) had been a difference in dialects, why would two men of Quraysh have been different?

The scholars mentioned nearly forty different opinions concerning this matter! Perhaps the most correct is that which we have mentioned above. And Allaah knows best.

Fourthly:

It seems that the seven styles were revealed with different wordings, as indicated by the hadeeth of ‘Umar, because ‘Umar’s objection was to the style, not the meaning. The differences between these styles are not the matter of contradiction and opposition, rather they are synonymous, as Ibn Mas’ood said: “It is like one of you saying halumma, aqbil or ta’aal (all different ways of saying ‘Come here’).”

Fifthly:

With regard to the seven recitations (al-qiraa’aat al-saba’), this number is not based on the Qur’aan and Sunnah, rather it is the ijtihaad of Ibn Mujaahid (may Allaah have mercy on him). People thought that al-ahruf al-saba’ (the seven styles) were al-qiraa’aat al-saba’ (the seven recitations) because they happened to be the same number. But this number may have come about coincidentally, or it may have been done deliberately by Ibn Mujaahid to match what was narrated about the number of styles (ahruf) being seven. Some people thought that the styles (ahruf) were the recitations, but this is a mistake. No such comment is known among the scholars. The seven recitations are one of the seven styles, and this is the style that ‘Uthmaan chose for all the Muslims.

Sixthly:

When ‘Uthmaan made copies of the Qur’aan, he did so according to one style (harf), but he omitted the dots and vowel points so that some other styles could also be accommodated. So the Mus-haf that was copied in his time could be read according to other styles, and whatever styles were accommodated by the Mus-haf of ‘Uthmaan remained in use, and the styles that could not be accommodated fell into disuse. The people had started to criticize one another for reciting differently, so ‘Uthmaan united them by giving them one style of the Qur’aan.

Seventhly:

The seven readers or reciters were:

1-Naafi’ al-Madani

2-Ibn Katheer al-Makki

3-Aasim al-Kufi

4-Hamzah al-Zayaat al-Kufi

5-Al-Kisaa’i al-Kufi

6-Abu ‘Amr ibn al-‘Ala’ al-Basri

7-Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Aamir al-Shaami*!

The ones who have the strongest isnaad in recitation are Naafi’ and ‘Aasim.

The most eloquent are Abu ‘Amr and al-Kisaa’i.

Warsh and Qaaloon narrated from Naafi’.

Hafs and Shu’bah narrated from ‘Aasim.

And Allaah knows best.

From IslamQA (with slight modifications)

:salam2:

 

[Tabassum07]

:salam2:

JazakAllahu Khayr for the beneficial explanations. However, I'm still a little confused - I think the main reason being that I was always under the impression that the Quran is one and the same since revelation, but if there are seven styles - is that seven ways of wordings, seven ways of recitations, or seven ways of however they spelled their words???

 

[Aapa]

Assalaam walaikum,

It just adds to the unification and perfection of the Quran. It is the same because it is the Word of Allah.

The human ear can hear a sound that strikes the core of the heart. A particular stressed syllable may stir the soul more than another style.

 

[ayesha.ansari]

this is first time i am listening about the different styles of Quran, the very first time, but if we change the style of recitation, would its meaning will change...??

 

[Al-Kashmiri]

this is first time i am listening about the different styles of Quran, the very first time, but if we change the style of recitation, would its meaning will change...??

As-salaamu `alaykum

In short: no, not at all. The differences are very subtle.

 

[Abu Talib]

:salam2:

JazakAllahu Khayr for the beneficial explanations. However, I'm still a little confused - I think the main reason being that I was always under the impression that the Quran is one and the same since revelation, but if there are seven styles - is that seven ways of wordings, seven ways of recitations, or seven ways of however they spelled their words???

Assalamu`alaykum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatu
May be this would answer your question.
Differences in the way of reciting the Qur'an

Apart from this if you want to study in detail then you can read the book ''An introduction to the Sciences of the Qur'aan''