An Explanation for Omitting and Writing Alif in Some Words of the Qurʼan Based on the Ancient Manuscripts
ABSTRACT:
Examining the orthography of the Qurʼan shows that the letter alif was omitted in some words, while it was not omitted in similar words. Scholars have offered various reasons for eliminating alif since the early centuries. Some of them regarded the way of writing the Qurʼan as sacred or proposed ideological explanations for it. However, studying these justifications shows that they are not subject to scientific linguistic rules and are mostly personal opinions because based on the ancient manuscripts of the Qurʼan, we can find many contradictions for the proposed reasons, which show that they are not general and true in many cases. Using the reasons presented in the books of Qurʼanic sciences and some interpretations of the Qurʼan and comparing them with the orthography in the manuscripts, this study shows that the orthography of the Qurʼan, especially in the case of writing alif, is a linguistic and scribal phenomenon subjected by some factors that developed the Arabic script in its early stages.
KEYWORDS
orthography of the Qurʼan, rasm al-Qurʼan, omitting alif, manuscripts of the Qurʼan.
1 . Corresponding Author. E-mail Adress: mnshidalwadi@gmail.com
1. Introduction
Deleting or adding the letter alif is one of the issues that are shrouded in ambiguity and is not subject to a steady rule despite the attempts of scholars to find rules and explanations for it. There are also contradictory interpretations of the phenomenon of deletion and addition of alif. Discussing these issues in light of the ancient manuscripts of the Qurʼan, inscriptions, and rational arguments can open our way to solve the problem (Ibn Wathīq, 2009). Blachere (1974) said that the writing style used by scribes in writing the Qur’an was still primitive. He also indicated that the reproduction of the five basic Qur’ans existing in Islamic capitals raised a serious issue. Writing did not eliminate the need to memorize the text, thus the phonetic and morphological differences that appeared in the local dialects continued. The written text guided readers to avoid changing words, omissions, and confusion, but it was not enough to make the readers’ pronunciation complete. This fact was due to the lack of characters in the Arabic script. However, it seems that the previous statement and the claim that the style of the orthography was still primitive is not accurate, because the writing style that was found in the old manuscripts of the Qur’an represents an advanced and mature style of writing and its regulations. It was characterized by intelligence in embodying some phonetic issues by adding or deleting some letters, while the script and its rules remained constant. Regulation is a matter related to the need of the social system, and there was no urgent need to develop these systems unnecessarily although it cannot be claimed that the written system had reached the level of perfection. Some scholars represented doctrinal explanations of written or verbal phenomena. For instance, al-Zarkashī (1957, 1:389) said every alif in a word has a meaning that has a specificity in existence. Explanations like this are not evidenced by proof, neither in terms of the ancient inscriptions nor in terms of the manuscripts of the ancient Qur’ans that we have. Therefore, they are just personal opinions without evidence and reasoning. The study of the phenomena of writing alif in the light of the ancient Qur’anic manuscripts by knowing their ages and the time of their writing is very important to meet the explanations given by specialists in the books of the Qur’anic sciences and interpretations, especially since some of these manuscripts were written in the early days of Islam in the first century AH, such as the Tübingen manuscript, which is one of the ancient manuscripts. Expert analysis of three samples of the manuscript parchment concluded that it was more than 95 percent likely to have originated in the period 649-675 CE, that is, 20 to 40 years after the death of Prophet Muḥammad (University of Tübingen, 2014). The manuscript of al-Hussein Mosque in Cairo, the manuscript of Samarkand, and the manuscript of Turkish and Islamic Arts Museum are important to explore basic issues in the areas of the origins of some words and orthography of the Qurʼan (rasm al-Qurʼān) as well. There are various studies dealing with the Qur’anic pronunciation or orthography in the ancient Qur’ans that have taken an important part of the researchers’ concerns. There is no doubt that writing systems have developed over time. Those manuscripts are good examples and fertile materials for studying these issues by following the sober and purposeful scientific method without following ideological precedences or flimsy suspicions. The purpose of this study is to explore the linguistic defects that allow the addition and deletion of alif and try to study some inscriptions to understand these linguistic phenomena. The research based on ancient Qur’anic manuscripts is an attempt to justify linguistic phenomena in the light of comparing them to reach explanations for the phenomenon of writing alif in the ancient Qur’ans. The research raises the following fundamental questions. Is writing alif or omitting it subject to a single writing system? Is it possible to discuss explanations of the phenomena of writing alif in the Qur’an in the light of ancient manuscripts? The last question is whether it is possible to subject heritage issues that were considered taboo in their discussion to scientific debate in the light of the documents of ancient manuscripts, which is an application of the cognitive approach to issues of heritage. The researcher followed the method of comparing and examining the manuscripts and then evaluating them with the explanations given by the late scholars to justify adding or omitting alif.
2. Omitting alif in pre-Islamic inscriptions
Tracing pre-Islamic inscriptions shows us that writing or omitting alif preceded the religious texts, so all the explanations based on religious interpretive foundations remain subject to discussion and uncertainty. The Namara inscription is a 4th-century inscription which is the epitaph of a deceased Arab king of the Lakhmids, Imru’ al-Qays ibn ‘Amr, the king of al-Manādhirah in al-Hira before Islam. The date of his death has been set to the year 328 CE. It is understood from the study of the Namara inscription, according to some specialists, the clear development from the Thamudic, Lihyanite, and Safaitic to Arabic (Muhammad 2015: 9). The original inscription is preserved by the Louvre Museum in Paris, and its translation is as follows (Figure 1).
Figure 1. The picture of Namara inscription with Dussaud's reading (Sabulhab, 2012) This is a picture of the inscription with Dussaud’s reading, which is the first published translation of the inscription in 1907 (Muhammad 2015: 9). Ẓāẓā (1990 137) said that the word kulluh in the first line was a substitute for kulluhum or kulluhā. The question here is whether the scribe forgot to write the letter mīm or whether this word was pronounced as kulluhā and there was no need to write the letter alif in it because it was the letter of madd. Another inscription that has great value among historians and researchers is the Harran inscription, which was found in Jabal al-Arab (Jabal al-Druze) in Syria in the nineteenth century (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Harran inscription (Muhammad, 2015, 95) The inscription was read as “I, Sharaḥīl, son of Ẓalimu built this martyrium in the year 463 after the destruction of Khaybar by a year[1] (Muhammad 2015: 95). We note that the first word in this inscription ana, and the word dhā were written with alif; so, this indicates that alif represented a letter from their spoken and written letters. We also note that the last word in the third line is bi‘am [2] which is read with alif bi‘ām [3], but it has been omitted from it. It seems that alif was similar to fatḥah, so they stopped writing it as if it was fatḥah, as it is well-known in Arab dialects and local languages, otherwise there is no reason why they did not write it, even though they wrote it in another word. The next inscription to be discussed is the Usays inscription, which was found in 1962/63 in Jabal Usays, a hundred kilometers southeast of Damascus (Figure 3). The Usays inscription is the most important Arabic historical inscription of the sixth century and the second most important of all pre-Islamic Arabic inscriptions as a historical document (Shahid 2015: 117).
Figure.3 The Usays inscription (Macdonald, 2010) The inscription was read as follows: Ibrāhīm ibn Mughīra al-Awsī arsalanī al-Ḥārith al-malik ‘alā Sulaymān msylḥt sanat 423 (Shahid 2015: 118). [4] As seen in the picture, alif was omitted in the word Ibrāhīm, al-Ḥārith, and Sulaymān. Therefore, there is no difference between names with Arabic and non-Arabic origins in deleting alif, because alif has been omitted in all of them in this inscription.
3. Omitting alif in the manuscripts of the Qurʼan and its explanations
In this section, we examine positions that scholars have mentioned for omitting alif and their justifications. Alif has been deleted after bā in bism, if it is added to the word “Allāh” (Figure 4). Al-Zarkashī (1957 2:23-24) said omitting the letter alif in bism Allāh refers to the supremacy of Allah over all names and its uniqueness. Allah includes all names, and for this reason, unlike other names of God, it is only applied to God. Some scholars have said that removing the letter alif in bism Allāh is for the sake of brevity and frequent use, and it has two conditions: That the word ism is added to “Allāh” and the letter bā comes before ism. For this reason, in the phrase bism rabbik[5] (Qur’an 96:1), alif was not removed.
Figure 4. Manuscript of Rampur Raza Library (attributed toʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib), Q. 1:1 Al-Zarkashī (1957, 2: 22) claimed that omitting alif in the bism is for esoteric issues, which are understandable for people of esoteric knowledge. Here, one can ask whether the linguistic phenomenon can be justified by an esoteric explanation and whether this is accepted in the scientific method. Al-Baghdādī (1994 1:16) narrated that when alif in bism Allāh was removed, its length was added to bā to show the length of the removed alif. In addition, it was said that bā was made long because they wanted to start God’s book with a big letter. In addition, writing alif in bism in the verse (Qur’an 56:74) [6] unlike other places is due to lack of use. All these reasons are rejected according to the old manuscripts. Lengthening the bā line is not always found in the ancient Qurʼan; for example, in Qur’an 18:1, there is no extension for bā line in the Tübingen manuscript and Samarkand manuscript (Figure 5).
Figure 5. a)Tübingen manuscript, Q.18:1, (Altikulac, 2007b); b) Facsimile printing of the Samarkand Codex, Q.18:1, (Marx, n.d.) Alif was deleted after the letter wāw and fā in the verb saʼala, such as fasʼalū[7] (Q. 21:7) and wasʼal[8] (Q. 12:82).
Figure 6. a) Tübingen manuscript, Q. 21:7, (Altikulac, 2007b); b) The Sanaa manuscript, Q.12:82, (Altikulac, 2007a); c) The manuscript of al-Hussein Mosque, Q.12:82, (Altikulac, 2009) As you can see, in these manuscripts (figure 6), even the position of hamzah has been removed, while in the Tübingen manuscript, hamzah is present. It seems that hamzah was written in fasʼalū at a later time, because the color of the ink is different and hamzah was written in black ink. Alif has been deleted after interrogative hamzah, if it is maksūr, such as aṣṭafā (Q. 37:153) [9] whose origin is aʼiṣṭafā and attakhadhtum (Q. 2:80) [10] whose origin is aʼittakhadhtum (Figure7).
Figure 7. a) The Sanaa manuscript, Q. 37:153, (Altikulac, 2007a); b) Facsimile printing of the Samarkand Codex, Q.2:80, (Marx, n.d.) Alif was removed after lām in the word Allah. The omission is justified in such a way that it does not resemble the word al-lāt (Q. 53:19) (al-Tha‘ālibī, 1997, 1:159), but this reasoning is not correct, because the word al-lāt was written without alif in the Sanaa manuscript (Figure 8). In addition, other reasons have been mentioned for this deletion, such as ease (al-Tha‘ālibī, 1997, 1:159), or frequent usage (Ibn Juzayy, 1995, 1:48).
Figure 8. The Sanaa manuscript, Q. 53:19, (Altikulac, 2007a) Alif was omitted in the word al-Qurʼān in two verses (Q. 12:2; 43:3) [11], in which they are synonymous with al-kitāb. Al-Zarkashī said that alif has a meaning in every word; omitting it indicates attention to the divine and spiritual aspect, and writing it refers to worldly and lower affairs. So except in a few special cases, the word al-Qurʼān is written with alif and al-kitāb is written without alif. Because al-Qurʼān is the details of the wise verses of al-kitāb (Q. 41:3) [12], it is closer to us in terms of understanding than al-kitāb. In both cases where al-Qurʼān appears without alif, it is because al-Qurʼān is synonymous with al-kitāb and the reference of the pronoun hu of the verbs jaʻalnāhu and anzalnāhu to al-kitāb (Q. 12:2; 43:3) in both verses shows this issue (al-Zarkashī, 1957, 2: 22).
Figure 9. The manuscript of al-Hussein Mosque Q. 12:2 and 43:3, (Altikulac, 2009) This criterion mentioned by al-Zarkashī is not consistent with the ancient inscriptions. In the manuscript of al-Hussein Mosque, we found that alif was omitted in both places (figure 9), however in the Sanaa manuscript, alif was written (figure 10). In fact, this explanation needs to be reconsidered, because the manuscripts of the ancient Qurʼan are reliable documents that do not support this explanation.
Figure 10. The Sanaa manuscript, Q. 43:3, (Altikulac, 2007a) The word kitāb appears without alif everywhere in the Qurʼan except in four places (Q. 13:38; [13] 15:4; [14] 18:27[15]; 27:1[16]) where the word kitāb appears with a characteristic that makes it different from the general kitāb. For example, in (Q. 13:38) the word kitāb refers to the book of ages, which is different from the general kitāb that is added to Allah (al-Zarkashī, 1957, 2: 23-24). However, in the Sanaa manuscript, kitāb was written without alif.
Figure 11. The Sanaa manuscript, Q. 13:38, (Altikulac, 2007a) In addition, in (Q. 27:1) and (Q. 15:1) [17], although the word kitāb appears in similar sentences, it is written with alif in one place and without alif in another place. Here the question arises, what is the difference between kitāb in these two places. It is interesting that in the manuscript of Sanaa, contrary to what al-Zarkashī said, in both places kitāb is written without alif.
Figure 12. The Sanaa manuscript, Q. 15:1 and 27:1, (Altikulac, 2007a) Alif was deleted in non-Arabic proper nouns such as Ibrāhīm [18], Ismā‘īl [19] (Q. 2:125), Isḥāq (Q. 2:133) and Luqmān [20] (Q. 31:12). Al-Zarkashī (1957, 2:24) said that the reason for deleting alif from names of non-Arabic origin, such as Ibrāhīm, is due to redundant meaning that is not apparent in Arabic language, because non-Arabic words in relation to Arabic words are somehow hidden, so alif is omitted from them. Thus, al-Zarkashī's theory, which many followed, is based on the distinction between Arabic and non-Arabic words. If the word has an Arabic origin, the letter alif is written, and if the word is of non-Arabic origin, the letter alif is deleted. Likewise, Ibn al‐Bannā’ (1990, 69) said that this issue has been agreed among scholars. However, the Qur’an manuscripts do not support this theory. The names such as Sulaymān, Ṣāliḥ and Mālik are of Arabic origin, but the letter alif has been omitted in them (table 1).
|}Table 1. Arabic names written without alif Therefore the rule that al-Zarkashī and Ibn al‐Bannā’ claimed that it had been agreed upon, does not conform to what is found in ancient manuscripts. When this rule does not apply, he resort to another theory, which is the frequent use, and make it a reason to delete the letter alif. He also said that non-Arabic names that contrary to his theory, were written with alif such as Ṭālūt[21] (Q. 2:247), Jālūt[22] (Q. 2:249), ya’jūj[23] and Ma’jūj[24] (Q. 18:94), are also because they were rarely used. However, we have noticed that there is no evidence for all these sayings, and the ancient manuscripts contradict all of them. Alif was deleted in the name Mīkāl[25] (Q. 2:98). Al-Rajraji (n.d. 1: 487) said that although the letter alif is not omitted in non-Arabic names with little use, there is a consensus that alif was removed in the case of Mīkāl. However, scholars differed about the reason for the removal. Some said it is because Mīkāl is a word that was read differently in diverse readings. Nāfi‘ recited it with hamzah and without yā as Mīkā’l [26]. Ḥafṣ and Abū ‘Amr recited it without hamzah and yā as Mīkāl [27]. Four other readings of the seven readings recited with hamzah and yā as Mīkā’īl [28] (Ibn Mujāhid, 1979, 166-167). There are also two other readings, one of which read it with two yā as Mīkāyīl [29] and the other with a yā and without alif as Mīkīl [30] that seems to be supported by the manuscript of al-Hussein Mosque and Samarkand (figure 13). Therefore, due to the several variations of this word, the letter alif has been removed.
Figure 13. a) The manuscript of al-Hussein Mosque, Q. 2:98, (Altikulac, 2009); b) Facsimile printing of the Samarkand Codex, Q. 2:98, (Marx, n.d.) On the other hand, some said that because of the number of letters in this word, alif has been removed. Others believe that alif was removed due to the combination of this word, which is made from two words mīkā meant servant and īl meant God, so Mīkāl is equivalent to Abdullah. Al-Ṭalamankī said that the word al-rīyāḥ in the Qurʼan was always written without the letter alif, except in one case (Q. 30:46) where all scholars agree that it should be written with alif (Radman, 2019, 118). In table 2, the mentions of the word al-rīyāḥ in the verses are given and compared with the way they were written in Sanaa and al-Hussein Mosque manuscripts. Table 2. The word al-rīyāḥ in the Sanaa manuscript (Altikulac, 2007a) and al-Hussein Mosque manuscript (Altikulac, 2009)
However, in (Q. 30:46) contrary to what was claimed that all the scholars agreed on, we can see that in Sanaa and al-Hussein Mosque manuscripts, the word al-rīyāḥ was written without alif. Another contradiction is in the verse (Q. 15:22) that in al-Hussein Mosque manuscript, al-rīyāḥ was written with alif, but the script was different in terms of writing the letter rā. It differs from the rest of the al-rīyāḥ in terms of shape, as well as the presence of red ink in the calligraphy, which indicates that it was either blurred and written at a later time, or for a specific reason it was re-written with the letter alif. The letter alif was removed in some words such as what is shown in Table 3. Table 3. Omission of alif in some words based on Manuscript of Turkish and Islamic Arts Museum (Altikulac, 2007c)
In the names Hārūt and Mārūt, alif was omitted in the first and written in the second, even though they are both non-Arabic names, so this cannot be the cause for deletion of alif (figure 14).
Figure 14. a) The al-Hussein Mosque Manuscript, Q.2:102, (Altikulac, 2009); b) Facsimile printing of the Samarkand Codex, Q.2:102, (Marx, n.d.) In addition, the frequency of use is not the reason as well, because these two names were used to the same extent. Therefore, the phonetic explanation remains the closest to acceptance. Alif came in Hārūt after the letter hā. It is like the alif in hādhā[31] omitted because it is pronounced with facilitation, which is the pronunciation of alif near fatḥah. As for Mārūt, alif was written after the letter mīm just like al-māʻūn (Q. 107:7) [32], although alif was omitted after the letter mīm in al-mākirin in Q. 3:54[33] (Figure 15).
Figure 15. The manuscript of al-Hussein Mosque, Q. 107:7 & 3:54, (Altikulac, 2009) What is the difference between these words that the letter alif has been removed in some and not in others? It seems that the scribe was afraid of confusion in Mārūt with another word, so he wrote alif, but he was not afraid of confusion in al-mākirīn, so omitted alif, although there is no difference in the pronunciation of Mārūt, al-māʻūn or al-mākirīn and all of them are pronounced with facilitation. Thus, when alif was written, it is to indicate a warning so that the word does not mix with another, and that has nothing to do with another issue. Alif is not a letter from the alphabet, but rather is a vowel that evolved from fatḥah. The way we pronounce it now differs from the Arabic pronunciation of it before, as there was no alif but a fatḥah. Alif was a sign of hamzah at the beginning of the speech, and it was a sign not to confuse the words with each other. Writing this sign caused confusion until scholars removed hamzah and found a difference in the number of letters. Anyone who counts alif and hamzah together in the number of letters makes 29 letters, and if hamzah is removed, he makes 28 letters. The inscriptions and old manuscripts of the Qurʼan confirm our statements, remove the ambiguity, and eliminate the difference. One of the clear examples to prove this claim is the way of writing alif in the word ātaynā (Q. 4:63) [34], where it was written with two alif in the manuscript of al-Hussein Mosque (Figure 16).
Figure 16. The manuscript of al-Hussein Mosque, Q. 4:63, (Altikulac, 2009) Pay attention to the way of writing the first hamzah ( ), which has a different slope from the sign of the second hamzah ( ) that came immediately after it. This is to show the extension of the sound by pronouncing the hamzah or to facilitate it for proper articulation. Ibn Jani (1993, 19 & 57) said that fatḥah is a part of alif, kasrah is a part of yā and ḍammah is a part of wāw. The previous scholars of syntax used to call fatḥah as small alif, kasrah as small yā and ḍammah as small wāw. According to lexicographers, the original letters of the alphabet are twenty-nine letters, the beginning of which is alif and the last is yā, except for Abū al-ʻAbbās, who counted it as twenty-eight letters. He considered the first of it as bā, removed the letter alif from its beginning, and said alif is the same as hamzah, which does not have a fixed shape, so I did not include it among the letters whose shapes are fixed. Ibn Jinni did not accept this opinion, although he admitted that alif is a voiceless letter in the alphabet and cannot be pronounced in the beginning, so they placed a lām before it. This means that alif cannot be pronounced with ḥarakāt (Arabic diacritics), and if it wants to be pronounced so, it will turn to the closest letter to it, which is hamzah. This intolerance of ḥarakāt is another evidence against Ibn Ibn Jani not in his favor. Sībawayh (1988, 4:176-177) said, alif is one of the letters of madd (prolongation) and līn (softness), which are voiceless, and their articulation points are wider than other letters. When it is stopped on them, the lips, throat and tongue are not affected like other letters, and the sound extends until it stops at the position of hamzah. Al-Khalīl said that this is the reason why the Arabs put an alif after wāw in verbs such as ẓalamū[35] and ramū[36]. He also said that some Arabs pronounce the word rajulan[37] with hamzah as rajula[38]’ because the letter alif is close to hamzah. Ibn al-Sikkīt (1987, 132) gave the name of alif to hamzah, and Ibn Fāris (1997, 64) called hamzah name of alif as it came in his book al-Ṣāḥibī. As it seems, the linguists did not distinguish between the hamzah and the alif, but rather confused them at all, and they meant the hamzah as mentioned above.
4. Conclusion
The scholars have offered various explanations for eliminating alif in some words of the Qurʼan since the early centuries. Some said that the Arabic script was primitive and the lack of letters in it caused the written text to be insufficient for the correct pronunciation of the Qurʼan. Another opinion is based on the ideological explanation that the orthography of the Qurʼan is sacred in such a way that removing the letter alif represents the spiritual and divine aspect and writing it refers to the worldly and material aspect of the word. Some have paid attention to the origin of the names and believe that alif was omitted in non-Arabic names and written in Arabic names, while there are many contradictory examples to these claims. Therefore, some have turned to the explanation that alif was removed due to frequent use of the word or ease of pronunciation. However, as numerous examples of pre-Islamic inscriptions and manuscripts of the Qurʼan show, none of these reasons can be recognized as a general criterion that is correct in all cases. By tracing the positions of omitting and writing alif, become clear to us that it was not treated as a letter like the rest of letters, but rather a sign used for purposes of distinction and fear of confusion. They did not write it everywhere, and did not pronounce it as we pronounce it now. The sound of alif was tending towards fatḥah that the way it was pronounced changed due to the mixing of Arabs with non-Arabs societies, because their language tended to amplify this sound. In addition, some scholars gave in lexicons the name of alif to hamzah, which made this confusion in use and ambiguity between the sound of alif and the letter hamzah. What we presented, was an attempt to remove the ambiguity and confusion in the knowledge of orthography of the Qurʼan relying on the ancient manuscripts, which were discovered in the twentieth century. Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Professor Alba Fideli and her rich contributions in this field, and I would thanks my brother, Dr. Ahmed Falih, who is presenting his doctoral thesis in a philological study, as he provided me with some manuscripts.
References
Al-Baghdādī, ʻAlī ibn Muḥammad (1994). Lubāb al-ta’wīl fī maʻānī al-tanzīl. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al- ʻīlmīyah.
Al-Rajrājī, Ḥussayn ibn ‘Alī (n.d.). Tanbīh al-‘aṭshān ‘alā mawrid al- ẓam’ān fī al-rasm al-qur’anī. Libya: Elmergib University.
Al-Thaʻālibī, Abū Zayd ‘Abd al-Raḥmān (1997). Al-Jawāhir al-ḥisān fī tafsīr al-Qur’ān. Beirut: Dār Iḥyā’ al-Turāth al-ʻArabī.
Altikulac, Tayyar (2007a). Al-Muṣḥaf al-Sharīf attributed to ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān: The copy of Sanaa. Istanbul: Center for islamic studies (ISAM).
Altikulac, Tayyar (2007b). Al-Muṣḥaf al-Sharīf attributed to ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān: The copy of Tübingen. Istanbul: Center for islamic studies (ISAM).
Altikulac, Tayyar (2007c). Al-Muṣḥaf al-Sharīf attributed to ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān: The copy of Turkish and Islamic Arts Museum. Istanbul: Center for islamic studies (ISAM).
Altikulac, Tayyar (2009). Al-Muṣḥaf al-Sharīf attributed to ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān: The copy of al-Mashhad al-Husseini in Cairo. Istanbul: Organization of the Islamic Conference: Research Center for Islamic History, Arts and Culture.
Al-Zarkashī, Badr al-Dīn (1957). Al-burhān fī ʻulūm al-Qur’ān. Beirut: Dār Iḥyā’ al-kutub al-ʻArabīyah.
Blachere, Regis (1974). The Qur’an, its revelation, codification, translation and impact. transl. Reda Saadeh. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-Lubnānī.
Ibn al‐Bannā’ al‐Marrākushī, Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad (1990). al-Dalīl min marsūm khaṭ al-tanzīl. Beirut: dār al-Gharb al-Islāmī.
Ibn al-Sikkīt, Abū Yūsuf Yaʻqūb ibn Ishāq (1987). Iṣlāḥ al-manṭiq. Egypt: Dār al-Maʻārif.
Ibn Fāris, Abū al-Ḥusayn (1997). al-Ṣāḥibī fī fiqh al-lughah al-‘arabīyah wa masā’ilihā wa sunan al-ʻarab fī kalāmihā. Beirut: Manshūrāt Muhammad Ali Biyḍūn.
Ibn Jinnī, ʻUthmān (1993). Sirr al-ṣināʻah al-ʻArabīyah. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al- ʻīlmīyah.
Ibn Juzayy al-Kalbi, Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad (1995). Al-Tashīl liʻulūm al-tanzīl. Beirut: Dār al-Arqam ibn Abi al-Arqam.
Ibn Mujāhid, Aḥmad ibn Mūsā (1979). Kitāb al-sab‘ah fī al-qirā‘āt. Cairo: Dār al-ma‘ārif.
Ibn Wathīq al-Ishbīlī, Ibrāhīm (2009). Al-jāmiʻ limā yaḥtāj ilayh min rasm al-muṣḥaf. Jordan: Dār ʻAmmār.
Macdonald, M.C.A. (ed.) (2010). The development of Arabic as a written language. Supplement to the Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 40. Oxford: Archaeopress, 141–143.
Manuscript of Rampur Raza Library: No. 1, Korankodex (attributed toʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib). Berlin: Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences. ed. Michael Marx. viewed from: https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/878/page/1v?sura =2&verse=1
Marx, Michael (n.d.). Facsimile printing of the Samarkand Codex. Berlin: Manuscripta Coranica. Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences. viewed from: https://corpuscoranicum.de/en/manuscripts/141/page/17r?sura=2&verse =102#manuscript_page
Muhammad, Zakaria (2015). Nuqūsh ʻArabīyah qabl al-islām. Jordan: Dār al-Nāshir.
Radman, Hemod ibn Muhammad (2019). Sayings of Al-Imam Attalamanki on Othmanic drawing Cases. Journal of Imam Al-Shatibi Institute for Qurʼanic Studies, (28) 107-173.
Sabulhab (2012). Namara inscription. viewed from: https://commons.wiki media.org/wiki/File:Dussad_Namara.jpg
Shahid, Irfan (1995). Byzantium and the Arabs in the sixth century. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Trustees for Harvard University.
Sībawayh, Abū Bishr ʻAmr ibn ʻUthmān (1988). Al-kitāb. Cairo: Maktabah al-khānajī.
University of Tübingen (2014). Koran manuscript from early period of Islam. viewed from: https://uni-tuebingen.de/en/university/news-and-publications /press-releases/press-releases/article/koran-manuscript-from-early-period-of-islam/
Ẓāẓā, Ḥassan (1990). al-Sāmīyyūn wa lughātihim. Damascus: Dār al-Qalam.
- ↑ أنا شرحيل بن ظلمو بنيت ذا المرطول 463 بعد مفسد خيبر بعام.
- ↑ بعم
- ↑ بعام
- ↑ It should be noted that this inscription has been read in other ways as well (see Macdonald, 2010: 141-143).
- ↑ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ
- ↑ فَسَبِّحْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ الْعَظِيمِ (الواقعة/74)
- ↑ فسئلوا
- ↑ وسئل
- ↑ أَصْطَفَى الْبَنَاتِ عَلىَ الْبَنِين (الصافات/153)
- ↑ أتخذتم
- ↑ الر تِلْكَ ءَايَاتُ الْكِتَبِ الْمُبِينِ * إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ قُرْءَنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ (یوسف/1-2) وَ الْكِتَبِ الْمُبِينِ * إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْءَنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُون (الزخرف/2-3)
- ↑ كِتَبٌ فُصِّلَتْ آياتُهُ قُرْآناً عَرَبِيًّا لِقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ (فصلت/3)
- ↑ لِكل أَجَلٍ كِتَاب (الرعد/38)
- ↑ وَ مَا أَهْلَكْنَا مِن قَرْيَةٍ إِلَّا وَ لهَا كِتَابٌ مَّعْلُوم (الحجر/4)
- ↑ وَ اتْلُ مَا أُوحِىَ إِلَيْكَ مِن كِتَابِ رَبِّك (الکهف/27)
- ↑ طس تِلْكَ ءَايَاتُ الْقُرْءَانِ وَ كِتَابٍ مُّبِين (النمل/1)
- ↑ الر تِلْكَ ءَايَاتُ الْكِتَبِ وَ قُرْءَانٍ مُّبِين (الحجر/1)
- ↑ ابرهيم
- ↑ اسمعیل
- ↑ لقمن
- ↑ طالوت
- ↑ جالوت
- ↑ يَأْجوج
- ↑ مَأْجوج
- ↑ ميكَل
- ↑ میکئل
- ↑ میکَل
- ↑ In میکَئیل
- ↑ میکییل
- ↑ میکِیل
- ↑ هذا
- ↑ وَ يَمْنَعُونَ الْمَاعُون (الماعون/7)
- ↑ والله خير المكرين (آل عمران/54)
- ↑ وءاتينا داود زبورا (النساء/63)
- ↑ ظلموا
- ↑ رموا
- ↑ رجلاً
- ↑ رجلأ