Table Of ContentRevelation and Falsification
Texts and Studies on
"
the Qur a¯n
EditorialBoard
Gerhard Böwering(YaleUniversity)
Jane Dammen McAuliffe(BrynMawrCollege)
VOLUME4
Revelation and
Falsification
"
The Kit¯ab al-qir¯a ¯at of Ah.mad b.
Muh.ammad al-Sayya¯r¯ı
CriticalEditionwith
anIntroductionandNotes
by
Etan Kohlberg
and
Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi
LEIDEN•BOSTON
2009
Thisbookisprintedonacid-freepaper.
ArabicTypesetting:ThomasMiloandTitusNemethTypesetwithDecoTypeEmiriand
DecoTypeNaskhinWinSoftTasmeem
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Sayyari,AhmadibnMuhammad,9thcent.
[Qira’at]
Revelationandfalsification:theKitabal-qira’atofAhmadb.Muhammadal-Sayyari/critical
editionwithanintroductionandnotesbyEtanKohlbergandMohammadAliAmir-Moezzi.
p.cm.–(TextsandstudiesontheQuran)
TextinArabic;introd.andapparatusinEnglish.Includesbibliographicalreferencesand
index
ISBN978-90-04-16782-7(hardback:alk.paper)
1.Koran–Readings–Earlyworksto1800.2.Shi’ah–Doctrines–Earlyworksto1800I.
Kohlberg,Etan.II.Amir-Moezzi,MohammadAli.III.Title.IV.Series.
BP131.5.S392009
297.1’224042–dc22
2008047448
ISSN: 1567-2808
ISBN:9789004167827
Copyright2009byKoninklijkeBrillNV,Leiden,TheNetherlands.
KoninklijkeBrillNVincorporatestheimprintsBrill,HoteiPublishing,
IDCPublishers,MartinusNijhoffPublishersandVSP.
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,translated,storedin
aretrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,
photocopying,recordingorotherwise,withoutpriorwrittenpermissionfromthepublisher.
AuthorizationtophotocopyitemsforinternalorpersonaluseisgrantedbyKoninklijkeBrillNV
providedthattheappropriatefeesarepaiddirectlytoTheCopyrightClearanceCenter,
222RosewoodDrive,Suite910,Danvers,MA01923,USA.
Feesaresubjecttochange.
printedinthenetherlands
CONTENTS
Preface andAcknowledgements ...................................... vii
Introduction............................................................ 1
1. IssuesRaisedbyWesternStudies.............................. 2
2. Information,DoubtsandContradictionsinIslamicSources. 12
3. Ima¯m¯ıViewsontheQuestionoftheFalsificationofthe
Qur"a¯n .......................................................... 24
4. LifeandWorksofal-Sayya¯r¯ı................................... 30
5. Structure andContentsoftheKit¯abal-qir¯a"¯at.................. 38
6. TheEdition..................................................... 46
6.1. TheManuscripts.......................................... 46
6.2. OtherSources............................................. 50
6.3. FurtherManuscripts...................................... 51
6.4. PrinciplesoftheEdition.................................. 51
6.4.1.Text ................................................. 51
6.4.2.TechnicalApparatus ............................... 53
Notes ................................................................... 55
ListofWorksCited ....................................................291
Index ...................................................................325
Index ofQur"a¯nicQuotations.........................................355
PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
In the early #Abba¯sid period a number of Muslim scholars, both Sunn¯ı
and Sh¯ı#¯ı, composed works specifically devoted to variant readings of
the Qur"a¯n. Most of these works are now known to us only by name or
fromcitationsinlatersources.Oneoftheearliesttohavesurvivedinits
entirety is the work presented in this volume, the Kit¯ab al-qir¯a"¯at (= KQ)
bytheSh¯ı#¯ıauthorAh.madb.Muh.ammadal-Sayya¯r¯ı(3rd/9thcentury).
This composition, also known as Kit¯ab al-tanz¯ıl wa-l-tah.r¯ıf (The Book of
Revelation and Falsification [of the Qur"a¯n]) or al-Tafs¯ır (Commentary
on the Qur"a¯n), is among the oldest Ima¯m¯ı Sh¯ı#¯ı texts to have reached
us.ForsomeSh¯ı#¯ısthesubject ofqir¯a"¯at hasaneven greatersignificance
than for the Sunn¯ıs. These are Sh¯ı#¯ıs who believe that the text of the
Qur"a¯n was intentionally corrupted in order to delete all reference
to the rights of #Al¯ı and his successors. Such views, though not often
expressed in recent decades, were widely held in the first centuries of
Islam. In the work presented here, al-Sayya¯r¯ı quotes many passages
from the Qur"a¯n where the text is alleged to have been altered. For
this reason, KQ is of major importance both for the doctrinal history
of Sh¯ı#ism and, more generally, for the history of the redaction of the
Qur"a¯n.
CopiesofthefirsttwomanuscriptsofKQ whichwesaw(mss.Mand
T)wereobtainedbyAmir-Moezzi,anditwasasaresultofhisinitiative
that, in 2002, we began the preparation of an edition. Working jointly,
we produced a first draft of the Arabic text, and tracked down a few
of the Sh¯ı#¯ı sources in which similar material appears. At this stage,
we gained access to copies of two further manuscripts (mss. B and L),
which necessitated a major revision of the text. This work, together
with the composition of the Notes, was carried out by Kohlberg. We
divided up the writing of the Introduction: sections 1 to 3 are by Amir-
Moezzi,and4to6are byKohlberg.
It is our pleasant duty to thank those who have contributed to the
making of this book (although it goes without saying that we alone
are responsible for all errors and oversights). Photocopies of the manu-
scripts were supplied to us both by the officials of various Iranian
viii prefaceand acknowledgements
libraries and by some of our Iranian colleagues. We would like to
express to all these our heartfelt gratitude for their generosity, and
to salute here their devotion to the spirit of disinterested scholarship
and international cooperation. Frank Stewart gave the entire text writ-
ten by Kohlberg a close reading and, as so often in the past, made
numerous suggestions that have improved both its style and content.
Simon Hopkins and Wilferd Madelung willingly responded to ques-
tions relating to the Arabic text. Others who have helped us in various
ways include Meir M. Bar-Asher, Rémy Boucharlat, Rainer Brunner,
MichaelCook,PatriciaCrone,HassanFarhangAnsari,GerdGraßhoff,
Fariborz Hakami, Isaac Hasson, Bernard Haykel, Philippe Hoffmann,
Judith Loebenstein-Witztum, Sabine Schmidtke, and the staffs of the
Institute for Advanced Studies of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem
and the Institute of Ismaili Studies in London. We are grateful to our
editors Jane Dammen McAuliffe and Gerhard Böwering for their help-
ful advice. Special thanks go to our families for their patient support
throughouttheyearsinwhich workonthisprojectwasinprogress.
INTRODUCTION*
The prophet Ma¯n¯ı, presenting himself as a successor of Buddha, Zoro-
aster and Jesus, put forward in Sh¯ab¯urg¯an—the only Iranian text at-
tributed to him—two main reasons for the decadence and corruption
of past religions. The first is that each messenger preached only in his
own country and his own language. The second reason is that these
messengers did not write down their teachings in a book ne varietur, as
a result of which these teachings remained intact only as long as the
messengers were alive; upon their death the community, having split
into sects, falsified these sacred texts and led religion into decadence.1
Ma¯n¯ıthusshares withthemodernscholarcertain fundamentalnotions
regarding scriptures: these are that scriptures are subject to changes
due to social, geographic and linguistic factors, historical events, the
vagaries of reception and of the writing of transmission; in short, that
they have a history and that the alteration of the prophetic message, its
“falsification”accordingtoMa¯n¯ı,isanintegralpartofthishistory.The
concept of alteration also lies at the heart of the text of al-Sayya¯r¯ı, and
will be addressed in the following pages. The aim is to place the text of
al-Sayya¯r¯ıwithinthebroadercontextofearlydiscussionsandpolemical
debates on the Qur"a¯nic text held between Muslim scholars of various
political-religious persuasions. These fruitful exchanges, revealing an
unexpected plurality of views, were passed over in silence by later
“orthodoxy”,forobvious ideologicalreasons.
* An earlier version of the Introduction was published in French (Amir-Moezzi-
Kohlberg,“Révélationetfalsification”).
1 See Schmidt, Kephalaia, pp. 7–8; Asmussen, Manichaean Literature, p. 12; Puech,
Manichéisme, pp. 88–89. See also the accounts in B¯ıru¯n¯ı, A¯th¯ar, p. 207 (cf. pp. 23 and
27)=B¯ıru¯n¯ı,Chronology,p.190.
2 introduction
1. Issues Raised by Western Studies
The notion of the falsification of sacred scriptures of the past is known
from the Qur"a¯n itself (e.g. Q 2:59, 2:75, 2:159, 2:174, 4:46, 6:91 and
otherverseswhichareofteninterpretedinthissense).TheQur"a¯nmay,
either directly or indirectly, have inherited it from the Manichaeans,
or perhaps from the pagans (Celsus, Porphyry, Emperor Julian), the
Christians (Tatian, Marcion), the Samaritans and the Ebionites, all of
whom used this notion to discredit their adversaries and their adver-
saries’ scriptures.2 The issue of falsification of the revelations received
by the Prophet Muh.ammad is of course closely linked to the history
of the Qur"a¯n and the date at which it was put into writing. Evidently,
the nearer the definitive redaction of the text is to the time of revela-
tion, the lesser the risk of alteration. This is the main reason why the
most widespread “orthodox” traditions maintain that the decision to
collect the Qur"a¯n was made during the time of Abu¯ Bakr, just after
the Prophet’s death in 11/632, and that the official version, completely
faithful to the revelations received by Muh.ammad, was produced dur-
ing the caliphate of #Uthma¯n, barely thirty years after the death of the
Prophet. Against this background it is important to investigate when
and under what circumstances the Qur"a¯n was put into writing in the
formconventionallyknownasthe#Uthma¯niccodex.
It would be natural to turn first to the manuscript tradition of the
Qur"a¯n, but thus far this has not proved very helpful. There is no auto-
graph of Muh.ammad3 or his scribes. The oldest complete manuscripts
of the Qur"a¯n probably go back to the 3rd/9th century; there are some
rare older manuscripts of parts of the Qur"a¯n, but their fragmentary
nature makes precise dating difficult. The few fragments which have
come down to us on papyrus or parchment have been dated by some
scholars to the end of the first or beginning of the second century hijra,
but this dating is not accepted by all. For over a century now, no par-
ticular theory about the date of the earliest manuscripts has gained
unanimousscholarlyapproval.4
2 See Andrae, Origines, pp. 203–204; Caspar, “Textes”; Baarda, “Harmonization”;
Stroumsa,Savoir,pp.238–242;Petersen,Diatessaron,pp.75–76;Simon,“Ma¯n¯ı”,pp.134–
138;Hengel,Gospels,pp.24ff.;EI2,art.“Tah.r¯ıf”(H.Lazarus-Yafeh).
3 The meaning “illiterate” given to the term umm¯ı and hence the dogma of the
illiteracy of the Prophet are almost certainly late. See Goldfeld, “Prophet”; Calder,
“Umm¯ı”;Rubin,Beholder,pp.23–30andindex,s.v.umm¯ı.
4 E.g. GdQ, III, pp. 249–274 (chapter 3: “Die Koranhandschriften”); Grohmann,
