Contents

Overview

Introduction

Written Language at the Time of Mohammed

Zaid bin Thabit's and Uthman's Koran Texts

Period of Free Choice

Different Readings, Meaning and Interpretation.
Comparing and Validating Readings.
Arabic Grammar
Diacritical and Vowel Points

Seven Different Official Readings

Translating the Koran

Syro-Aramaic Reading and Interpretation of the Koran

Relevant Current and Associated Works

Notes <..>, References {..} and Links

Relevant Subject Index Pages and Site Overview

Overview

The aim of this report is to assemble an objective picture of what took place and of its background, looking in some detail at how the Koran was compiled so as to show what Mohammed taught in the name of God (Allah), and how this was recorded.

What we have is the Koran and traditions collected many years after the death of the Prophet. However, some uncertainty remains and so we are here embarking on a journey of exploration which will take us through the accumulated dust of many centuries to what Mohammed actually taught, to the revealed word of Allah, of God.

The report consists of seven consecutive free-standing parts. The seven parts follow each other in an intended sequence in which each is aiding and contributing to understanding the following part. The parts are:

Introduction

In the history of Islam there have been conflicting viewpoints about the intent and substance of God's (Allah's) revelations as expressed by Mohammed's teachings.

And the first step towards resolving such conflicts and confrontations is to gain knowledge about the then developing Arabic written language, that is to understand how recorded letters and symbols were used to state the meaning of words, and about the dialects of the time.

Such knowledge and understanding is particularly important when considering what scholars and clerics have done and are doing when they are 'interpreting' the text of the Koran.

Just why there has been so much confusion about these interrelated matters can be seen from the following short descriptions:

'Reading' and 'interpreting' are closely interconnected since choice of words determines the meaning of the sentence (verse).

Written Language at the time of Mohammed

So now let us look at what is known about the Arabic language at the time of Mohammed, and then at how the written language changed in the course of time.

In the English language, the alphabet has both consonants and vowels, but at that time the Arabic alphabet had only consonants. The consonants were represented by only seventeen symbols so that the symbol for one consonant could stand for one of two or more letters. And there was no way of indicating vowels. {1, 3, 4}

There was no Arabic grammar, that is there were no recorded and accepted grammatical rules. {4}

Zaid bin Thabit's and Uthman's Koran Texts

At the time of Caliph Uthman, there was no way of distinguishing between consonants which used the same symbol. And there was no way of indicating what vowels were to be used where, so there was no way of identifying the intended pronunciation of a word. {3}

So the manuscripts of the officially approved text of the Koran, which Uthman had prepared and distributed, consisted of bare consonantal text with marks to show verse endings, but without points for distinguishing consonants and without any marks for vowels. {2, 3}

As the text of the manuscripts Uthman distributed contained no vowel points and no points for distinguishing between consonants, they did not record, affect or determine how the written text was to be pronounced, or the meaning of words containing, or consisting of, symbols representing more than one consonant. {3}

Hence what Uthman established and fixed was the basic consonantal text. {3}

And what Uthman ordered to be eliminated were variations in the basic text, which means including some variants while excluding others, changing wording, content and arrangement {3}. This was a major review as the changes made apparently included fixing the Koran's number of chapters (suras) and the arranging of these chapters into a sequence roughly according to length of chapter rather than according to the sequence of revelation or by subject.

Period of 'Free Choice' (ikhtiyar)

Different Readings, Meaning and Interpretation

Jeffery {2} has pointed out that

'Faced with a bare consonantal text the reader obviously had to interpret it. He had to decide whether a certain sign was a shin or a sin, a sad or a dad, a fa or a qaf, and so on; and when he had settled that, he had further to decide whether to read a verbal form as an active or a passive, whether to treat a certain word as a verb or a noun, since it might be either. And so on.'

How the reader 'read' the text, that is the meaning of words and sentences the reader allocated to the purely consonantal text, was his 'reading' (interpretation) of the text.

And for three centuries after the publication of Uthman's official text there existed many different accepted 'readings' (qiraat) of the Koran. This period is called the 'period of free choice' (ikhtiyar). {2}

So we have:

Comparing and Validating Readings

'Readings' of uncertain texts are interpretations, which means they amount to somehow deciding between alternative meanings, amount to suggesting or providing meaning where the text itself seems unclear, ambiguous or meaningless to the reader.

Some scholars attempted to restrict the number of circulating alternative readings by proposing rules for comparing and testing them.

According to Jeffery {2} three rules emerged, namely that a 'reading' had to:

1. Fully agree with the consonantal text.

   "Some claimed that so long as a reading made good sense it did not matter whether it came from the Uthmanic Codex or one of the other Old Codices, since they also came from the time of the Prophet."
   
   

2. Had to have come down from some reputable authority (isnad).

   "Some were contemptuous of isnad."
   
   

3. Be according to the laws of Arabic grammar.

   "That a reading must be sound Arabic diction <1> was naturally accepted by all."

To me these rules for comparing and testing different 'readings' relate to form rather than substance. God's revelations are neither vague, ambiguous nor meaningless. Hence our concern about the written text and language of the Koran.

Arabic Grammar

Initially there was no Arabic grammar, that is recorded and accepted grammatical rules. About the year 780 the 'grammar of written arabic was established by the Persian Sibawayh.' <2> {4}

So we have:

Diacritical and Vowel Points

What took place has been researched in considerable detail by Gilchrist {3} who records that

'It was only in the later generations that vowel marks above and below the letters were introduced to give an exact representation of the vocal text. Diacritical points were then also added above and below the relevant consonants to distinguish between them. At the same time long vowels were also distinguished where appropriate from short vowels by the use of the three weak letters (alif, wa and ya) which were otherwise considered to be actual consonants and not vowels. Also introduced in time was the marking of the hamzah.

These modifications were gradually applied to the whole text and all helped to define the actual text of the Koran more accurately. {3}

The date of the final fixing of the Koran's text ('reading'), that is of the final introduction of vowel and diacritical points, is not known, and Luxenberg concludes that the process of fixing the text of the Koran took about three hundred years, that is to the end of the 'period of free choice' (ikhtiyar). {4}

Seven Different Official Readings

The 'hamza', the 'alif' indicating 'long-a', the other vowels, and particularly the diacritical points which were added later and which fixed the underlying consonantal text, had by this time all been added to the Koran's text. Luxenberg considers that these changes to the original text by themselves resulted in the text of the Koran in many places being misread and distorted. In his thorough analysis {4} he makes the point that linguists (scholars) who inserted the diacritical and vowel points assumed that the particular 'reading' they were fixing was reliable and concludes that their assumption was now in doubt.

Jeffery {2} makes a similar point when he says

When we come to the Koran, we find that our early manuscripts <3> are invariably without points or vowel signs, and are in a Kufic script very different from the script used in our modern copies. This modernizing of the script and the spelling system, and the supplying the text with points and vowel signs were, it is true, well-intentioned, but they did involve a tampering with the text.

However,

'Over the succeeding centuries the Koran continued to be read in seven different forms until five of them largely fell into disuse. Eventually only those of Hafs and Marsh survived and, with the introduction of a printed Koran, the text of Hafs began to take almost universal prominence.' {3}

Translating the Koran

Among the main difficulties faced by Koran translators listed by Luxenberg {4} are:

Syro-Aramaic Reading and Interpretation of the Koran

Luxenberg {4} has put forward the following:

At the time of Mohammed, Arabic had not yet become a written language. There was no Arabic grammar, that is there were no recorded and accepted grammatical rules.

Syro-Aramaic was the most widely used cultural and written language at that time in the area where the Koran was created. But it was slowly being replaced by Arabic in the seventh century. Educated Arabs were using Aramaic as a written language until the Koran came into being as written language.

Hence the Koran at times combines both Arabic and Syro-Aramaic grammatical forms and to that extent the Koran followed other rules than the later 'classical Arabic'.

So he studied the extent to which the original Koran contains elements of Syro-Aramaic culture and language, to indicate the extent to which the Koran was consequently misread and misinterpreted.

Luxenberg concentrates on verses of the Koran which are doubtful to Arabic commentators, when the record says that 'commentators disagree about the meaning (of this expression)', or when it is concluded that 'Only God knows the meaning of this expression'.

His analysis appears to prove that the text of the Koran has to a considerable extent been misread and distorted.

Relevant Current and Associated Works

Back to Contents list

Notes, References and Links

Notes

References and Links

Relevant Subject Index Pages and Site Overview

• General Management  (Middle, Senior and Top Level)
• Motivation
• Community  (Social Responsibility and Accountability)
• Economics

• Judaism
• Christianity
• Islam
• Religion, Government and People

• Teachings  (Quotations, Summaries, Current Problems)
  
  
• Press Notices

• About Manfred Davidmann and his Works

• Home, Site Overview  (solhaam.org)
• Terms of Use

• Contact form   (Suggestions and Comments Welcome)

The Site Overview page has links to all individual Subject Index Pages which between them list the works by Manfred Davidmann which are available on the Internet, with short descriptions and links for downloading.

To see the Site Overview page, click Overview

Back to Contents list

Copyright    ©    2003    Manfred Davidmann
All rights reserved worldwide.

Updated   2021:
Links to 'THEME OF THE WEEK', 'BOOKS', 'Donations' and 'Privacy Notice' were added
Terms of Use
Privacy Notice