THE GENESIS OF THE AUTHORIZED REDACTION OF THE KORAN UNDER THE CALIPH ʿUTHMĀN

The Established Tradition1 [ii/47]

During the campaigns in Armenia and Azerbaijan the warriors from and quarrelled about the genuine form of the text of the Koran. The soldiers from Ḥimṣ (Emesa) considered their text traced back to Miqdād b. al-Aswad to be the best. The Damascenes and the Syrians respectively pre- ferred their own text.2 The Kūfans recognized as the authority only the read- ing of ʿAbd Allāh IBN MASʿŪD, and the Baṣrans only that of Abū Mūsā AL- ASHʿARĪ.3 When the renowned commander Ḥudhayfa [Ibn al-Yamān]4 was back at Kūfa after his campaign in Armenia and Azerbaijan, he complained to the governor, Saʿīd b. al-ʿĀṣ, about this situation which, according to his view, seriously threatened the future of . Many members of the theocratic elite agreed with him; only the followers of Ibn Masʿūd stub- bornly insisted on the authority of their master. Upon Ḥudhayfa [Ibn al- Yamān’s] return to Medina, he reported to Caliph ʿUthmān on what he had observed. After he had consulted with the old Companions of the Prophet, there was unanimous agreement with the commander’s view of the sit- uation. Thereupon the Caliph appointed a commission consisting of the Medinan Zayd b. Thābit and three respected Quraysh, ʿAbd Allāh b. al- Zubayr, Saʿīd b. al-ʿĀṣ, and ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. al-Ḥārith,5 and ordered them

1 al-Bukhārī, Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān §3; al-Tirmidhī in the Tafsīr on sūra 9 at the end; al-Khaṭīb al-Tibrīzī, Mishcát, Faḍāʾil al-Qurʾān, faṣl 3 §5; Fihrist, ed. Flügel, p. 24sq.; ʿIzz al-Dīn IBN AL- ATHĪR, al-Kāmil fī l-taʾrīkh, vol. 3, p. 85sq.; Ibn Khaldūn, al-ʿIbar, Cairo ed., vol. 2, p. 135sq.; al-Naysābūrī, Gharāʾib al-Qurʾān in al-Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, 1st edition, vol. 1, p. 23; ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn, vol. 1, p. 6sq.; al-Dānī, Muqniʿ; K. al-Mabānī li-naẓm al-maʿānī, fol. 6sqq.; al-Qurṭubī, fol. 20r; al- Suyūṭī, al-Itqān, p. 138sq. Cf. Silvestre de Sacy, “Mémoire sur l’origine et les anciens monu- ments de la littérature parmi les Arabes,” p. 426sqq. 2 These are the general terms used by Ibn al-Athīr, Usd al-ghāba, vol. 3, p. 86, to describe it. al-Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, vol. 1, p. 20, says that the Syrians followed the reading of Ubayy b. Kaʿb. Cf. also, above, p. 237 n. 17. 3 Cf. above, p. 235sq.; A. Jeffery, Materials for the history of the text, pp. 209–211. 4 “He was appalled by the different ways in which his warriors and those from Syria recited the Qurʾān,” Juynboll, Encyclopedia, p. 231, col. 2. 5 Juynboll, Encyclopedia, p. 232, col. 1; Sezgin, GAS, vol. 9, p. 6. 252 the koran under the caliph ʿuthmān

to procure copies of the codex of the Koran in the possession of Ḥafṣa bt. ʿUmar.6 After the work was completed, Ḥafṣa’s original was returned, and the copies were dispatched to various foreign destinations to serve as the authorized, model recension. The older collections, however, were destroyed. It seems that the populace everywhere obediently accepted this decision. Only the ever-unruly Kūfans under the leadership of Ibn Masʿūd offered resistance. [ii/49] When exactly this happened can only be guessed. The respective cam- paigns are usually dated 30/650.7 But their connection with other battles reported by the chroniclers in the same region with identical actors8 is by no means explicit. If Ibn Masʿūd indeed lived to see the completion of the ʿUth- mānic recension, this must have happened before 32/652 or 33/653,9 dates which are given as the years of his death. The latest date is the death of ʿUth- mān, which occurred at the end of 35/655 (18 Dhū l-Ḥijja). According to the unanimous tradition, the initiative for the project came not from the Caliph but from one of his most renowned commanders who, in the wake of disagreements about the correct recitation of the Holy Text, feared for the unity of Islam and for the Islamic theocratic government.10 In any case, it remains the undeniable merit of ʿUthmān to have followed upon the advice and sped up the realization of the plan. He thus accomplished his most reasonable act of government, and the only one through which he won fame. The insurgents, of course, later reproached him for this benef- icent decision (al-Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, vol. 1, p. 2952). On the other hand, outstand- ing persons like ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿUmar and ʿAlī, although personal and political opponents, allegedly agreed with him in this particular case.11

6 Cf. above, pp. 225sq., and 228sqq. In Ibn ʿAṭiyya, and al-Qurṭubī, fol. 20r it reads after al-Ṭabarī: “The leaves in the possession of Ḥafṣa served as a model (juʿilat imānan) for this second collection.” 7 al-Ṭabarī, vol. 1, p. 2856; Ibn al-Athīr, Chronicon, ed. Tornberg, vol. 3, p. 85; Ibn Khaldūn, ed. Cairo, vol. 2, append. 135; al-Dhahabī, Taʾrīkh al-Islām, vol. 1, cod. Paris, fol. 151 [sic] (according to Caetani). Cf. J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena zur ältesten Geschichte des , p. 110. 8 Cf. L. Caetani, Chronographia Islamica, 32/652 §4; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Annales, ed. Juyn- boll, vol. 1, p. 97; Abulfedae Annales moslemici, ed. Reiske, vol. 1, p. 204; and al-Nuwayrī (Nihāyat al-arab) give the year 29/649. When al-Suyūṭī, al-Itqān, p. 139 (according to al- Qasṭallānī, vol. 4, p. 438) mentions 26/646, this is confused with an earlier campaign. Cf. Leone Caetani, loc. cit., 25/645, §3. 9 This would correspond to Eutychios, Annales, ed. Cheikho, vol. 2, p. 341. 10 Juynboll, Encyclopedia, p. 231, col. 2. 11 Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil fī l-taʾrīkh, vol. 3, p. 87.