Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

Link to the actual post: phdnix.wordpress.com/2025/10/13/t...

In recent months I’ve been very busy exploring the concept of šāḏḏ within the literature of Quranic Reading Traditions. This term is frequently translated as “non-canonical”, and …

phdnix.wordpress.com

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

If you want to read the argument and the details of al-Kirmani's transmission in more detail, make sure to check out the unabridged version of this thread on my blog: phdnix.wordpress.com

PhDnix's Blog

phdnix.wordpress.com

1 2

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

One thing is clear here though, rather than a gradual appearance of a transmission path in the Šawāḏḏ as they stopped being canonical. Here we see the exact opposite trend.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

Shady Nasser says: "more and more readings would enter the Though the "other transmissions [than the canonical two] attributed to the eponymous Readers were in circulation at some point, they gradually died out and started to appear in the literature of the shawādhdh."

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

But this šāḏḏness of Warš is not a weird quirk of Ibn Ḫālawayh. Al-Kirmānī explicitly considers a subgroup of the transmission of Warš to be šāḏḏ as well.

I go into Kirmani in the blogpost version of this thread.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

Warš likewise reconstitutes the vowel of the 1sg object suffix -nī in Q44:21 fa-ʿtazilū-nī (rasm: فاعتزلون). This reading is also attributed to Warš in Ibn Ḫālawayh’s šawāḏḏ.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

Warš is the only one among the canonical transmissions paths of the seven to reconstitute the 1sg ending -ī absent in the rasm (نكير) for Q22:44 nakīr-ī (also in Q34:45, Q35:26 and Q67:18). This reading is also attributed to Warš in the Šawāḏḏ of Ibn Ḫālawayh.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

To read the preposition liya with a fatḥah rather than lī at Q20:18 for Warš ʿan Nāfiʿ is included in Ibn Ḫālawayh’s šawāḏḏ.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

There are also other special treatments of hamzah attributed to Warš, for example he reads liyallā where other readers read liʾallā (Q2:150, Q4:165, Q57:29) . This is attributed to Warš in the Šawāḏḏ of Ibn Ḫālawayh.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

Warš is likewise unique in dropping the hamzah whenever it is intervocalic and the first root consonant. This too is attributed to Warš for Q7:44 muwaḏḏinun in Ibn Ḫālawah’s Šawāḏḏ.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

Ibn Ḫālawayh frequently cites this phenomenon in the šawāḏḏ, namely for Q2:4 bi-l‿āḫirati (not bi-l-ʾāḫirati), Q2:71 al‿āna, Q5:32 min‿aǧli, Q27:66 bal‿adraka, Q28:27 ʾan‿ankiḥka, Q67:4 yanqalib‿ilayka, Q114:1 qul‿aʿūḏu.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

One of the notable, and unique features of Warš is his naql. Whenever a word-initial hamzah directly follows a vowelless consonant, this hamzah is dropped.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

But what is even more surprising is that Warš does occur in the šawāḏḏ . His reading, whenever it differs from others transmitters from Nāfiʿ is explicitly šāḏḏ Ibn Ḫālawayh in the section.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

This is perhaps surprising from our perspective. The 2 canonical transmissions of Nāfiʿ today are Qālūn and Warš, whereas ʾIsmāʿīl b. Ǧaʿfar is non-canonical. Yet, Warš is absent as a transmission path for kitāb al-badīʿ and ʾIsmāʿīl b. Ǧaʿfar is the main transmitter in the book.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

For Nāfiʿ, he transmits via his student ʾIsmāʿīl b. Ǧaʿfar, and he also includes a transmission path Qālūn, but does not systematically distinguish between them.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

Essential to our understanding of what Ibn Ḫālawayh is doing in his šawāḏḏ is to understand that they are the marginal notes of his kitāb al-badīʿ. This, itself is a book on eight Quranic readings. But for each of these readings he usually only includes one transmission path.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

So, while Ibn Ḫālawayh certainly is not stating “this is not recognised as a valid recitation by consensus”, he makes a distinction between well-known and more isolated readings.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

“I have placed the šāḏḏ variants attributing each one with a name. This is in order to not obscure for the reader of this book of ours the what is isolated of the readings (šāridahā) and what is well-known (maʿrūfahā).”

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

Al-Kirmānī never defines šāḏḏ. Ibn Ḫālawayh is not forthcoming about the term either in the published form of the muḫtaṣar. However, the muḫtaṣar were originally the marginal notes to kitāb al-badīʿ. In this work he gives us something to work with:

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

This obviously should make us wonder whether “non-canonical” is a particularly apt translation of šāḏḏ. What did they mean by šāḏḏ? Did they mean: “this is not recognised as a valid recitation by consensus”? That is what I would understand a term “non-canonical” as.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

Both of these works include many readings that never make it into the canon as we know it today: ten readings with two transmitters each. However, both of them also include many readings that do make it into the canon.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

The two most relevant works in this discussion are:

1. Ibn Ḫālawayh’s (d. 370) muḫtaṣar fī šawāḏḏ al-qurʾān min kitāb al-badīʿ
2. Al-Kirmānī’s (d. 563) šawāḏḏ al-qirāʾāt.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

This literature is actually surprisingly small. There are far more works that collect all kinds of readings without labelling them anything, than there are works that explicitly declare things šāḏḏ.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

This concept of canonicity is then expanded to the so-called šawāḏḏ works. Medieval works that have long lists of variant readings that are labelled šāḏḏ.

1 1

Marijn van Putten @phdnix.bsky.social · 1d

In recent months I’ve been very busy exploring the concept of šāḏḏ within the literature of Quranic Reading Traditions. This term is frequently translated as “non-canonical”, and thus the šāḏḏ readings are “non-canonical readings”.

1 4