Answered by Ustadh Farid Dingle
Question: Salams, How it is possible that some traditional scholars have criticized some mass-narrated modes of reciting the Qur’an [qiraat mutawatira]?
Answer: Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh,
Dear questioner,
Not everything that is mass-narrated [mutawatir] was necessarily known to all scholars at all stages of the Islamic tradition. A hadith or mode of recital [qiraa] can be mass-narrated from the Prophet (Allah bless him and give peace), and yet take time to reach every member of Ummah.
This was the case with certain modes of the recital. After they became well known, everyone accepted them. Before that, some scholars of the Arabic language or of other disciplines criticized certain pronunciations that seemed wrong to them.
This is the case with Imam Ahmad and the mode of the recital of Hamza al Zayyat.
What is the Basis for the Ten Modes of Recitation of the Qur’an?
The Cementing of Ideas
Before Ibn Mujahid
Although the Quran was recited in all corners of the Muslim World from the very beginning of the spread of Islam, the codifying of the modes of recital did not happen immediately. Indeed, it was not until the work of Quran specialist Ibn Mujahid (d. 324 AH), and the further work of his student Ibn Khalawayhi and then Ibn al Jazari (d. 833 AH) that the various modes of recital were completely codified, recorded, and distinguished from other modes of recital.
Before this time, and indeed as part of the very process of excluding incorrect modes of recital, criticisms were launched against certain modes of recital. Modes of recital that were later identified as non-mass narrated, and therefore incorrect, were frequently quoted alongside those which were mass-narrated, without any mention of which ones were “valid” or not. This is very clear in books of tafsir from, say, before 700 AH.
For example, the great early grammarian Akhfash (d. 215 AH) cites the non-mass-narrated, invalid recital ‘malika yawmi al din’ alongside the mass-narrated, valid mode ‘maliki yawmi al din’ with which we are all familiar in Sura al Fatiha. [Maani al Qur’an, Akhfash] He does not distinguish the mass-narrated, valid mode from the non-mass-narrated, invalid mode. This just goes to show that before Ibn Mujahid, this clarity was just not there.
At the same time, in the same sura he only mentions two ways of pronouncing the word ‘sirat’: with Seen or with a Sad. [Maani al Qur’an, Akhfash] The fact that he doesn’t mention the third mass-narrated pronunciation, namely reciting with a heavy Zed [al Sad al mushamma Zayan], tells that he was simply not aware of it.
All of this reiterates the fact that not all scholars were aware of all of the various ways of reciting the Quran, even if they were genuine scholars, and even it such modes of recital were indeed mass-narrated.
After Ibn Mujahid
Sometimes even after the work of Ibn Mujahid, criticisms still made due to the lack a universal recognition of authority and finality of his work.
By way of example, the great Qur’an exegete Zamakhshari (d. 538 AH) criticized a mass-narrated mode of recital ascribed to Abu Jafar [Yazid bin Qa’qaa’], of the imams of Qur’anic recitation.
According to this mode, the words in verse 34 of Baqarah ‘And when We told the angels: Prostrate …’ is pronounced ‘lil malaikatus judu’ (with a damma on the ta marbuta).
Concerning this, Zamakhshari says, ‘Abu Jafar [Yazid bin Qa’qaa’] recited it lil malaikatus judu with a damma on the ta in keeping [with the damma in usjudu], but you cannot just displace the signs of inflection for the sake of keeping the same sound except in a very weak dialect of Arabic. It is like those who say Al hamdi lillahi.’ [al Kashaf, Zamakhshari]
Zamakhshari says that this is weak Arabic and not valid, even though the mode of recital ascribed to Abu Jafar mass-narrated.
Why did he do this? Because the authority of the work of Ibn Mujahid was still not yet fully accepted by all Muslim scholars, even two hundred years or so later. This kind of thinking would be expected by a fortiori from those well before Ibn Mujahid, such as Imam Ahmad.
Hamza al Zayyat’s mode of recital
So what was wrong with his Hamza al Zayyat’s mode of the recital?
If you have a careful listen to his mode of recital (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sngQiOXMaWs), you might notice some oddities. Certain vowels are recited in a very acute fashion, there are some pauses, and merging of certain similar, but not identical letters. All of these would seem odd to the average listener.
In reality, the student of Arabic and of the Quran knows very well that there many different ways of pronouncing Arabic words, or of certain words in series. Many of these phonological possibilities are spread out among the various canonical modes of reciting the Qur’an. Hence, there is nothing actually “odd” about any of these sounds that we hear.
Regarding scholarly criticism of Hamza al Zayyat’s mode of the recital, Ibn Mujahid mentions the reason why some scholars did not like his mode of the recital.
One of Hamza’s students once attended a lesson of Abdullah ibn Idris (a reciter of the Qur’an and hadith narrator, d. 192 AH) and recited some verses with extremely long vowels and various other somewhat artificial characteristics. At this, Abdullah ibn Idris expressed his dislike of the recital and criticized it. [Kitab al Saba fi al Qiraat, Ibn Mujahid]
Imam al Dhahabi narrates in his short biography of Abdullah Ibn Idris that he actually directly rebuked Hamza al Zayyat. He said to him, ‘Fear Allah! You are a man who is trying to play God! This recitation is neither the recitation of Abdullah [Ibn Masud] nor of anyone else!’ He added later, ‘I do not hold it permissible for anyone to say that Hamza is on the Sunna.’ [Siyar Alam al Nubala, Dhahabi]
So it is clear that Ibn Idris, and probably Imam Ahmad following suit, felt that his model of the recital was not based on learning [talaqqi] but rather based on his own made-up style, a style that seemed very artificial.
However, Ibn Mujahid mentions that the scholars said that such artificial elongation was actually also disliked by Hamza al Zayyat himself, and not recited thus by his skilled students. [Kitab al Saba fi al Qiraat, Ibn Mujahid]
Commenting on this event, Dhahabi says, ‘Thus did Ibn Idris’ denunciation [of Hamza] spread. May Allah forgive him [Ibn Idris]: Muslims have wholeheartedly accepted every letter [of his mode of recital], and today there is consensus on it.’ [Siyar Alam al Nubala, Dhahabi]
Here Dhahabi clarifies that these objections, although sincere, were actually out of place and that as a mass-narrated mode of the recital, we all accept it as Qur’an.
Imam Ahmad’s View of Hamza al Zayyat
Imam Ahmad disliked the modes of recital [qiraah] of Hamza al Zayyat and that of his student Kisai, and he also disliked the idgham kabir [merging of two similar letters even if the first is not silent] of the Quran reciter Abu Amr. [Sharh Muntaha al Iradat, Bahuti]
That said, it is actually valid in Hanbali school to recite even a non-mass narrated mode of recital [qiraa shadha] as long as the chain for it is sound and it conforms to the Uthmanic mushaf. [Sharh Muntaha al Iradat, Bahuti] This is most definitely found in these aforementioned modes of the recital.
This tells us that one can actually recite these modes of the recital in the Hanbali school, as we shall explain later.
The View of Others
One of the many illustrious students of Hamza al Zayyat was the famous Sufyan al Thawri. He was once sitting in his circle of students, and Hamza came and then left. He said of him, ‘Do you see this man? He never recited a single letter of the Qur’an save that it was based on precedent [athar].’ [Kitab al Saba fi al Qiraat, Ibn Mujahid]
Clearly, his student (Thawri) knew that there was nothing “creative” about his mode of recital but it was all taken from his teachers, and from them back to the Followers and Prophetic Companions.
Ibn Mujahid also quotes the position of Ibn Dawud [hadith narrator, d. 213] regarding Hamza al Zayyat. He said, ‘Have you heard what the scholars of Basra say? Who is there that has more knowledge than Hamza of how it [the Qur’an] is recited and the subtleties thereof?’ [Kitab al Saba fi al Qiraat, Ibn Mujahid]
It is evident that Ibn Dawud, and in fact the scholars of Basra, held Hamza and his mode of the recital in high esteem.
And it is sufficient enough that Kisai, the actual founder of the Kufan school of Arabic grammar, was his student and narrator of his mode of the recital. If there was anything odd or linguistically invalid about it, Kisai would definitely be the first one to point it out.
You can hear a sample of Kisai’s recension from Hamza here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7aAit-6i20
Conclusion
Imam Ahmad, exercising his brilliant and valid Islamic scholarship in a period before the Ten Modes of Recital were properly known and codified, like many other scholars, criticized Hamza al Zayyat because of what was ascribed to him of his apparent unorthodox way of reciting the Quran.
After it became clear to the whole Umma that his recital was perfectly fine, and that it was mass-narrated and based on the recitals of the Early Muslims, the objection leveled no longer bore any weight.
I pray this helps.
[Ustadh] Farid Dingle
Checked and Approved by Shaykh Faraz Rabbani
Ustadh Farid Dingle has completed extensive years of study in the sciences of the Arabic language and the various Islamic Sciences. During his studies, he also earned a CIFE Certificate in Islamic Finance. Over the years he has developed a masterful ability to craft lessons that help non-Arabic speakers gain a deep understanding of the language. He currently teaches courses in the Arabic Language.
