An Evaluation in the Context of Rasm al-Mushaf on Ignaz Goldziher’s Claims Regarding the Different Qirāats of the Qur’ān

Abstract

The majority of orientalists have quite different approaches to the issues related to the source and preservation of the Qur’ān from the generally accepted opinion in the Islamic world. In the context of the revelation and its recording, one of the main issues that orientalists base their views on is the difference between the Qur’ānic qirāats and the issue of Rasm al-Mushaf. Ignaz Goldziher is regarded as one of the most prominent orientalists in the field of Qur’ānic studies. He made significant contributions to the study of the Mushaf and the various qirāats of the Qur’ān. He posits that it is unlikely that the verses of the Qur’ān were written down during the Prophet's lifetime. Consequently, there is no text to guarantee the correct reading of the verses. This demonstrated that the Qur’ān had been subjected to various distortions through different readings. He acknowledged the shortcomings of the Arabic script employed during the period in which the Mushaf was compiled, the lack of distinguishing features in letters that are similar in shape, and the practice of writing words without harakah as the underlying cause of the discrepancies observed in qiraat. Additionally, he posited that during the tenure of Caliph ‘Uthman, the Qur’ān was written with the intention of reducing the number of qiraat to a single recitation. However, this objective was not achieved, and he regarded the work of istinsāh as an attempt to restrict the growth in the number of qiraat. This study analyses the claims made by the author in question, based on the Arabic translation of his work Die Richtungen der Islamischen Koranauslegung, which is titled Mazāhib al-Tafsīr al-Islāmī. The verses cited by the author as examples are analysed in terms of qirāat, while the narrations he cites as evidence for his claims are evaluated by comparing them with the information contained in the main sources of the subject. This study is significant in that it seeks to ascertain the veracity of the author's assertions regarding the distinctions between qirāat. The findings of the research indicate that the information presented in the sources does not corroborate the author's claims, and the narrations he presented as primary evidence do not meet the criteria for authenticity in terms of the science of Qirāat.