Part Five The role of Zayd ibn Thahbit and Rashad's conspiracy

 

Part Five The role of Zayd ibn Thahbit and Rashad's conspiracy

The appendix references the canonization process under Uthman but fails to mention the initial part of the Qur’an’s preservation. The documentation of the Qur’an into a single book happened under the leadership of Abu Bakr, less than two years prior to the prophet’s death. Abu Bakr appointed Umar the task of gathering the Qur’an together. In brief Umar appointed a small number of companions to the task who served as scribes of the Qur’an while Muhammad was alive. The motive behind this first commission was based on the awareness that many companions died in battle. Their memorization died with them and the fear was the Qur’an would be lost if it was not written in a manner conducive to written communication. (Bukhari Vol. 9, Book 89, Hadith 301) The job of these scribes was to gather the various texts that existed throughout the Islamic domain and put it in one manuscript. Zayd ibn Thabit served as Umar’s main scribe. The Qur’an composed by Zayd ibn Thabit was gifted to the care of Umar’s daughter and widow of the Prophet Muhammad, Hafsa bint Umar. It is important note that the manuscript in Hafsa’s possession was not believed to be written in the order that the Prophet Muhammad wanted yet. The job of first committee under Zayd ibn Thabit was to gather material into one place. The Qur’an manuscript of Hafsa will be important for our discussion of Islamic history and Dr. Khalifa’s claims.

The same Zayd ibn Thabit would serve on the second committee used to document the Qur’an. The committee created by Uthman 13 years after Muhammad’s death had a slightly different agenda from Umar’s committee. Uthman was obtaining reports from the newly acquired Islamic domains of discrepancies in Qur’an recitation. Uthman assembled a group of scribes who were tasked to produce multiple manuscripts of the Qur’an to send out to the various domains. (Sahih al-Bukhari, 6:61:510) The texts that did not conform to the standards of the committee were subsequently burned. The burning of the Qur’anic manuscripts by Uthman is subject to some controversy in modern polemics but this beyond the point of our discussion. However there is more to say on Uthman’s committee and it’s methodology momentarily.

Why did Dr. Khalifa fail to mention an important fact such as the first compilation process under Umar? The answer to this question is found in the statement Dr. Khalifa made about the Uthmanic committee : “a committee of scribes was appointed to make several copies of the Quran to be dispatched to the new Muslim lands. The copies were to be made from the original Quran which was written by Muhammad's hand. (appendix 24.) Dr. Khalifa alleges that the copies of the Qur’an made under Uthman’s leadership were based on the manuscript that Muhammad allegedly wrote. But there is no historical basis for Dr. Khalifa’s claim that Uthman used a Qur’an written by the Prophet. The primary text that Uthman used was the manuscript written by Zayd bin Thabit under Umar’s reign and given to Hafsa. So the manuscript of Hafsa served as the main manuscript to compose what became the “Uthmanic text.” Uthman borrowed Hafsa’s manuscript and gave it back to her once the project was completed. The relevant historical sources for these assertions are both found in the Bukhari texts we quoted above in regards to both the time of Umar and Uthman.

Many readers not familiar with Dr. Rashad Khalifa will be surprised by his claim that Muhammad wrote a manuscript of the Qur’an with his own hands. Dr. Khalifa claimed that Muhammad was not illiterate and that he did produce his own copy of the holy writ. In the appendix 28 of his translation, Dr. Khalifa said that the copy of the Qur’an Muhammad had written was in chronological order. Accordingly the prophet gave instructions to write the Qur’an down in the order that we have today, which was during Uthman’s reign as Dr. Khalifa himself testifies.

Was the Prophet Muhammad literate as Dr. Khalifa claims? Dr. Khalifa wants us to believe the prophet wrote the Qur’an himself so it would be easier to believe that God had a more direct role in writing the Quran manuscript and consequently role composing a mathematical structure to the text. But if the Prophet never wrote the Qur’an on paper the 19 theory would be more difficult to believe.

The question of the prophet’s literacy is beyond the scope of this paper. However, for the sake for argument we will assume that the prophet was literate. The problem still remains that there is no historical evidence Muhammad wrote a compilation of the Qur’an. Instead, there are countless references to the Prophet dictating revelation to scribes who were given the task to put pen to paper. Dr. Khalifa’s claim that Uthman had a manuscript belonging to Muhammad is outright deceit. As we documented earlier, it was Hafsa’s manuscript that was used for Uthman’s committee, the same manuscript written by Zayd bin Thabit after the death of Muhammad.

At this point we can discuss Dr. Khalifa’s claims about Surah 9:128-129) specifically. Dr. Khalifa wants us to believe that the alleged problem of 9:128-129 as part of the Quran is unique and beyond doubt.“All classic and modern references dealing with the collection and recording of the original Qur’an have UNANIMOUSLY agreed that these two verses ARE THE ONLY VERSES IN QUR’AN THAT FAILED TO MEET THE CRITERIA SET BY ABU BAKR, OMAR AND ZEID IBN THABET (Submitters Newsletter, March 1985) What does Dr. Khalifa mean by “all classic and modern references”? Is Dr. Khalifa referring to all the hadith books or only the Sahih sittah collections? Perhaps he is referring to the books of sirah or a combination of both genres? Dr. Khalifa cites 5 sources in his newsletter for his claims. The fact that a statement may be found in some sources does not mean it will be found in all sources. But Dr. Khalifa claims that the recollection is “unanimously agreed.” While we do find reference to the two verses of Taubah in ibn Bukhari we do not find it in in the other Sahih books or all books of lesser authenticity. We are not questioning the historical event but only pointing out that the idea that the event was agreed unanimously is patently false.

Dr. Khalifa’s specific claim that 9:128-129 are forgeries is based on a narration he provides located in Bukhari and Suyut’s Itiqan. Our rest of the discussion will start here.

Dr. Khalifa argues that the methodology of the compilers made it so that “every single verse in the Quran was verified by a multiplicity of witnesses..” Dr. Khalifa states that Khuzeimah’s inclusion of 128 and 129 went against the methodology of the compilers. He also states that ,”some people questioned this improper exception.” In response to these questions, Khalifa alleges, “someone came up with a Hadith stating that "the testimony of Khuzeimah equals the testimony of two men!!!" Dr. Khalifa claims that the inject of the “false” verses of 128 and 129 was “always suspect.”

Dr. Khalifa’s brief overview of history forces us to ask several questions. Who were these individuals that compiled the Quran? Was this incident with Khuzeimah during the time of Omar or Uthman? When did this compilation process take place? Who were the people that questioned the “improper exception?” Who was the “someone” that came up with the rule equating the testimony of Khuzeimah to two men? Why are only two witnesses needed when Khalifa already said a “multiplicity of witnesses” were needed to verify every single verse? Also, who were the companions or scholars, orientalists that suspected the two verses? Dr. Khalifa does not bother answering any of these questions.

Here is the relevant hadith to help us discuss the context of the incident with Khuzai’ima.

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: Abu Bakr sent for me, so I collected the Qur'an till I found the last part of Surat-at-Tauba with Abi Khuza`ima Al-Ansari and did not find it with anybody else. (The Verses are): -- 'Verily, there has come to you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves..(till the end of Surat Bara'a) (i.e., at- Tauba).' (9.128-129) Sahih al-Bukhari 7425

The above hadith sheds light on our enquiry. Zayd bin Thabit was the person responsible for the decision to include the two verses in the Qur’an. As we discussed earlier Zayd bin Thabit was the person that was in charge of collecting the Qur’an and served as a scribe for both Umar and Uthman, in addition to being one of the main scribes for the Prophet during his life time. Zayd trusted the testimony of Khuza’ima. Zayd was the “someone” that made the “improper” exception to the “rule.” But why does Dr. Khalifa not tell us that Zayd was the “someone” who bent the rules?

Dr. Khalifa cannot argue he has no knowledge of Zayd since he mentioned his name as being appointed to Uthman’s scribal committee. Dr. Khalifa’s reference to the hadith above where Zayd states the equivalency testimony tells us that Dr. Khalifa knows exactly who Zayd is! And what were these “rules” in reality?

Returning to our enquiry above on authenticating the verses of the Qur’an during it’s compilation, Dr. Khalifa says ,” every single verse in the Quran was verified by a multiplicity of witnesses.” Dr. Khalifa would have us assume that the Scribes were provided with manuscripts with pieces of the Qur’an and that the scribe was responsible authenticating each document. Multiple witnesses according to Dr. Khalifa would be required to prove that these texts were authentic. This is the assumption we would have over the scribal process if our only source of knowledge was Dr. Khalifa’s Appendix 24.

What was the methodology used by the scribes to compile the Qur’an? To answer this question we need exam the scribal program that took place under the leadership of Abu Bakr that occurred within two years of the Prophet Muhammad’s death and the second program initiated by Uthman 13 years later.

Abu Bakr appointed Zayd ibn Thabit to carry out the task of compiling the Qur’an after so many Quranic memorizers died in battle. Who better than Zayd, a person who served as a scribe for the Prophet, to carry out such as task? What was the criteria for Abu Bakr’s commission of the inclusion of Quranic material? Zayd ibn Thabit was to gather all the parchments , stones and whatever object had Quranic writings and compile a manuscript based on those materials. (?a??? Bukh?r?, no. 7191) Zayd was only allowed to document what was already in writing. (The ?Uthm?nic Codex: Understanding how the Qur’an was Preserved: Published: June 22, 2022 • Edited: July 28, 2022 Authors: Ammar Khatib and Dr. Nazir Khan https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/the-uthmanic-codex-understanding-how-the-quran-was-preserved) In other words, Zayd was not allowed to write a Quranic verse based on a reciter unless it was found written down already. Dr. Nazir Khan traces this assertion to ibn Ashta, a source no longer around, but recorded in Suyut’s Itiqan and ibn Abi Dawud.( ibid, footnote 15.) Rashad Khalifa uses both the Itiqan and ibn abi Dawud for his source material in the appendix.

So far we know that Quran recitation via memory did not suffice as proof to include in Zayd’s manuscript. By what method then are the Quranic materials authenticated? Suyuti gives us insight with a tradition congruent to the one found above in Bukhari:

"The people would come to Zaid ibn Thabit and he would only write a verse from two upright witnesses. Even though the end of Sura al-Baraa was not found except with Khuzaima ibn Thabit, he said: Write it, for God's messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, made his testimony as the testimony of two men. So it was written, even though Umar brought the verse of stoning and it was not written because he was alone. (Ibn Ashta in Al-Suyuti vol. 1, 58)."

Zayd ibn Thabit would only include materials into the Quran manuscript that had the testimony of two men, with an important exception. Two people were needed to authenticate the documents before Zayd would accept the material as Quranic or else the material was rejected. We will discuss this narration more momentarily.

What was the criteria for the commission set up under Uthman?

Uthman was informed about issues among the soldiers fighting in other parts of the Islamic domain. The caliph learned that differences in recitation the Qur'an were being reported. There was real fear that Quranic knowledge would diminish unless the holy writ was written down for people to study. So differences in recitaiton led Uthman to gather the scribes together for a second project ( ?a??? al-Bukh?r?, no. 4987, ibn abi Dawud Kitab al masahif 167) The fact that the oral recitation of the Quran was the motive to produce this commission is not disputed by anyone. Uthman assembled a number of scribes and Zayd ibn Thabit was included among the ranks. Uthman sent a special request to Hafsa for the Qur’an composed by Zayd ibn Thabit (Bukhari 4987) as source to copy and create multiple manuscripts.

The historians give us a picture of the Uthman commission that appears different in organization and methodology. In the first place Abu Bakr’s commission was created ad hoc to address the real threat of the Qur’an being lost. The manuscript was put together within a period of two years. Uthman’s commission was set up in response to current events but was not as rushed. While leaders of the Uthmanic period were worried about losing the Qur’an they had time on their hands. In fact it took the scribes in this commission around ten years to complete their project. Also, while a number of people were appointed to Uthman’s commission, only Zayd ibn Thabit was in charge of manuscript production under Abu Bakr’s reign.

Rashad Khalifa believes that the 2 ayats of Surah Taubah are suspect because the scribes recorded it based on the testimony of one person, Khuzeimah. These were not the only verses recorded that relied on one witness. Zayd ibn Thabit did not only take two verses of Taubah but some verses from Surah Azhab as well:

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit: When we collected the fragramentary manuscripts of the Qur'an into copies, I missed one of the Verses of Surat al-Ahzab which I used to hear Allah's Messenger (?) reading. Finally I did not find it with anybody except Khuza`ima Al-Ansari, whose witness was considered by Allah's Messenger (?) equal to the witness of two men. (And that Verse was:) 'Among the believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah.' Sahih Bukhari 4784

Here we have Zayd ibn Thabit accepting information from Khuzeima about a verse in Surah Azhab. Zayd ibn Thabit reportedly compiled a verse from Khuzeima based on his testimony alone despite authenticating other based on two witnesses. The same individual who documented verses from Taubah based on one witnesses also documented a verse elsewhere in the Qur’an based on the same criteria. In both cases the verses were brought by the same person! Dr. Khalifa falsified Taubah 9:128,129 based on what he considered a flawed methodology but is he willing to also falsify the verse from Surah Azhab based on the same criteria? There is nothing to make the authentication of the verse in Azhab any stronger than the two at the end of Taubah.

Was Zayd ibn Thabit’s inclusion of the above verses “improper”? If our only source of information was Appendix 24 then we would be forgiven to assume that a committee of scribes set academic standards to weight evidence for inclusion of Quranic evidence. But the standard of having “multiple witnesses” was set by Zayd ibn Thabit for himself. For Zayd, “multiple” witnesses meant only two persons were needed to authenticate a document. Islamic sources do not indicate anywhere that other people required to abide by this standard. Recall that Abu Bakr only authorized Zayd to use written objects to compile the Qur’an. It was up to Zayd ibn Thabit to make his own judgment on what other criteria was needed. If Zayd trusted Khuzeimah so much that he was willing to count a piece of evidence he brought, despite not seeing it elsewhere, that was within his right. If Dr. Khalifa feels it is unfair then he would have no choice but to dismiss parts of Surah Azhab too.

Did Zayd ibn Thabit make an error in judgement by trusting Khuzeimah? A strawman of our Egyptian PHD would not make such a lousy argument. Dr. Khalifa paints Ali as the lone-wolf into this battle with scribes that never took place. If it could be shown that Khuzeimah had some dispute with Ali then it maybe feasible to surmise such a conspiracy. But Khuzeimah was known to be among Ali’s partisans. Not only Shia sources cite Khuzeimah as one of the defenders of Ali’s right to the caliphate but he also fought with Ali in the battle of Saffin, years after the alleged dispute with Uthman’s scribes.

There are some questions about the authenticity of the narrations between Zayd and Khuzeimah on the two verses of surah Taubah. Ibn abi Dawud has a narration discussing the inclusion of the said verses that is led by Ubay ib Kaab (ibn Abi Dawud Volume 2, 30.) Suyuti also cites a variant of this story. Neither Zayd or Khuzeimah are mentioned in these variants. So who really had this conversation about Surah Taubah? There are also questions about the timing of the events. A famous Shia scholar, Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei, explains that some traditions of the event point to Abu Bakr while others point to the time of Omar. (The Collection of the Qur'an. Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei

https://www.al-islam.org/al-bayan-fi-tafsir-al-quran-prolegomena-quran-sayyid-abu-al-qasim-al-khoei)