Ibn Masʿūd’s Reading in Comparison with the Seven Canonical Readings
ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd was among the most influential companions of the prophet, and because of his great status in the knowledge of the Qurʾān, it is quite probable that he influenced some canonical readings. Since in that period emphasis became in conformity with that later named as ʿUṯmān’s Muṣḥaf,...
| Authors: | ; |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Brill
2024
|
| In: |
Al-Bayān
Year: 2024, Volume: 22, Issue: 1, Pages: 19-70 |
| Further subjects: | B
ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd
B seven canonical readings B Al-Kisāʾī B textual skeleton (rasm) B Ḥamza |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd was among the most influential companions of the prophet, and because of his great status in the knowledge of the Qurʾān, it is quite probable that he influenced some canonical readings. Since in that period emphasis became in conformity with that later named as ʿUṯmān’s Muṣḥaf, the reading of Ibn Masʿūd took two forms known as pre-ʿUṯmān and post-ʿUṯmān readings. The pre-ʿUṯmān readings may or may not match the textual skeleton (rasm), while the post-ʿUṯmān readings conform it. This is despite the fact that some of canonical readings are famous for their presentation Ibn Masoud’s reading in accordance with the rasm. This article examines this idea by a comparison between the reading of Ibn Masʿūd and the seven canonical readings in terms of 108 items together with a detailed examination of their 112 shared features. It reveals that the readings of Ḥamza and al-Kisāʾī were the most similar ones to the reading of Ibn Masʿūd with 97 and 79 items in common, respectively. A detailed examination of these items shows that Ḥamza has made his best effort to incorporate into his reading as most shared features with Ibn Masʿūd’s reading as possible, while orthographic limitations let him. This is why his reading has sometimes prioritized meaning over syntactic correctness. Al-Kisāʾī has disputed Ḥamza’s reading in 18 cases, because he believed that Ḥamza’s reading failed to accurately represent Ibn Masʿūd’s in them. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2232-1969 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Al-Bayān
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/22321969-20240144 |