Similarly to the previous section, the first thing that must be done here is define the relevant terms. The basic definition of tawātur refers to the narration of a large mass of people of something they witnessed by their senses such that their agreement on a false narration is impossible due to their number. According to the vast majority of scholars of ʾIslām, anything from the Qurʾān must have both tawātur and authentic connected transmission with unanimous acceptance to be considered accepted as Qurʾān. It is for this reason that reciting with s͟hād͟hd͟h qirāʾāt is not permitted, and invalidates prayer, as those qirāʾāt by definition are the ones that do not fulfill these conditions. It has also been mentioned by scholars of tajwīd and the Arabic language that matters of the recitation of Qurʾān and the pronunciation of letters must be taken from transmission and learning directly from reliable expert scholars, and not from simple consultation and perusal of books.
Sībawayhi, after listing the basic letters and additional sounds present in the Arabic language, including the incorrect additions, said:[1] “These good and bad letters that have reached 42 in number originate from the 29 basic letters, and they are not ascertained except by being spoken face to face.” Ibn al-Jazarī also states the same thing in an-Nas͟hr, saying that proper tajwīd of letters can only be truly ascertained through their being spoken face to face, and can only be reached through practice.[2] As͟h-S͟hāṭibī also indicated that proper pronunciation of letters must be learned from the scholars who have expertise in understanding of the field, and must be refined by study and understanding of the words of past scholars.[3]
Ibn al-Jazarī, in his book an-Nas͟hr, also says that according to the verifying scholars, the “greatest foundation and most accurate pillar” of a valid qirāʾah is that it must be “from that which has spread and become widely known and unanimously accepted by the ʾUmmah with an authentic chain of narration,” even if something in it goes against the opinion of some or even many scholars of the language. He then quotes ʾAbū ʿAmr ad-Dānī saying: “The ʾimāms among the scholars of recitation [of Qurʾān] do not act in anything from the letters of the Qurʾān based on what is more widespread in the language or more accurate according to analogical reasoning in Arabic, but rather based on what is stronger and more authentic in narration and transmission, which, if established, cannot be refuted by analogical reasoning of Arabic or widespread use of language; because recitation is a followed tradition, the acceptance of and referral to which is required.”[4] Elsewhere in the book, Ibn al-Jazarī states that “there is no doubt that just as the ʾUmmah are worshipping Allāh through understanding the meanings of the Qurʾān and applying its laws, they are also worshipping Allāh through correction of its wordings and proper application of its letters in the way that is received from the scholars of recitation with connected transmission to the most eloquent Arabic Prophetic Eminence that cannot be disputed with,” and also condemns the act of a person reciting the Qurʾān using his own opinions and refusing to learn and be corrected from a scholar.[5]
Al-Mārg͟hanī mentions in an-Nujūm aṭ-Ṭawāliʿ[6] that the transmission of the Qurʾān takes precedence even over the consensus of grammarians on a linguistic matter, due to the tawātur of the Qurʾān from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. He then quotes Ibn al-Ħājib affirming this, who also adds that even if something within the Qurʾān were not mutawātir, it would still be more reliable than the opinions and transmission of grammarians, since the scholars of the Qurʾān are more trustworthy and greater in number, and because the scholars of the Qurʾān are themselves part of the scholarship and transmission of the language, so consensus cannot occur without them. Al-Mārg͟hanī further quotes ar-Rāzī and as-Suyūṭī, saying that everything transmitted as part of the Qurʾān is considered proof in linguistic matters even above the opinions of grammarians, regardless of whether it is mutawātir or ʾāħād. Al-Mārg͟hanī concludes that opinion and analogical reasoning have no place in the Qurʾān. Ibn Mufliħ al-Qalqīlī also reaffirms in G͟hunyat al-Murīd that the Qurʾān is solely based on transmitted tradition, and that opinion and analogy based on linguistic principles have no place in it.[7]
ʿAbd al-Fattāħ al-Qāḍī, in his book al-Qirāʾāt as͟h-S͟hād͟hd͟hah, provides considerable useful information on the topic of how a recitation is established to be part of the Qurʾān.[8] He mentions that the most important out of the 3 conditions of of acceptance of something as Qurʾān is tawātur, because the presence of tawātur necessarily entails the presence of the other 2 conditions. Noting the definition of tawātur, this is a clear fact that cannot be disputed.
He later quotes the words of an-Nuwayrī in S͟harħ aṭ-Ṭayyibah, in reference to the view that that tawātur is not a condition for acknowledgment of something as Qurʾān, and that it is sufficient for it to be widely known and spread and unanimously accepted among scholars. An-Nuwayrī says, “This is a newly innovated view that opposes the consensus of the scholars of fiqh and ħadīt͟h and other fields, because the Qurʾān according to the majority of the scholars of the 4 schools, including al-G͟hazālī, Ṣadr as͟h-S͟harīʿah, Muwaffaq ad-Dīn al-Maqdisī, and others, is that which is between the covers of the Muṣħaf by mutawātir transmission, so tawātur is part of the definition and the reality of Qurʾān cannot be imagined without it. And consequently, it is necessary for tawātur to occur according to the scholars of the 4 schools, and none of them have disagreed with this as far as I have known after extensive research, and an endless amount of them have explicitly stated this, such as Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, Ibn ʿAṭiyyah, Ibn Taymiyyah, an-Nawawī, al-ʾAd͟hraʿī, as-Subkī, az-Zarkas͟hī, Ibn al-Ħājib, and others. As for the scholars of recitation of the Qurʾān, they had consensus on this originally, and even in the later period where none disagreed except for ʾAbū Muħammad Makkī, and some other latecomers followed him.” It should be noted here that many scholars have even doubted the attribution of this latter position to Makkī and Ibn al-Jazarī, and brought proof to argue that they retracted this view.
ʿAbd al-Fattāħ al-Qāḍī quotes an-Nawawī’s statement, showing that the relied upon position of the S͟hāfiʿī school is that it is invalid to recite with that which is not mutawātir in prayer. He later concludes the topic by summarizing that, while that which is narrated by tawātur is unanimously accepted, a small minority of later scholars also accepted as Qurʾān that which is narrated by an authentic connected chain and is widely spread and known and unanimously accepted by scholars. As for that which is narrated by an authentic chain, but has not become widespread or accepted unanimously by scholars, then he mentions that there is consensus that this is invalid and considered s͟hād͟hd͟h.
To add onto what ʿAbd al-Fattāħ al-Qāḍī mentioned, it must also be noted that as-Suyūṭī[9] and az-Zarkas͟hī[10] (in addition to others) have both mentioned that “there is no disagreement [among scholars] that everything that is part of the Qurʾān must be mutawātir in both its foundation and its parts.” They then add that even the arrangement and ordering of the Qurʾān are also mutawātir according to the scholars of ʾAhl as-Sunnah.
In numerous writings, ʾAbū ʿAmr ad-Dānī puts great emphasis on the fact that the Qurʾān must be learned from trusted scholars, and that it cannot be taken from a person’s own study or opinion. For example, in his explanation of al-K͟hāqāniyyah,[11] he emphasizes that one cannot learn the Qurʾān except from a knowledgeable and reliable teacher and that it is incorrect for a person to learn the Qurʾān from a teacher who is not knowledgeable in its sciences or through his own personal study. He says that with the Qurʾān, reliance must be upon the transmission of scholars, and that anyone who suffices with his own understanding (dirāyah) or blindly follows a single teacher who may not be reliable has in reality abandoned true knowledge and went against the tradition of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. He goes on to reiterate the importance of learning from a knowledgeable teacher with understanding of the sciences of the Qurʾān, and then states that the foundation in the Qurʾān is what the scholars agree on and is narrated by authentic chain, and that anyone who suffices with his own understanding or opinion or that of his teacher and refuses to rely on the scholars and align his recitation with them is a condemned innovator who has gone against the consensus of the Muslims, and that accurate knowledge of the Qurʾān is only present among those who have mutawātir transmission. He also quotes many ʾaħādīt͟h and ʾāt͟hār from scholars of the Salaf supporting this point in this book and in his book Jāmiʿ al-Bayān.[12] In addition to what he mentions, numerous scholars such as as͟h-S͟hāfiʿī,[13] al-ʿIrāqī,[14] and ʾAbū Ħayyān[15] have also written lines of poetry in their books harshly condemning whoever takes knowledge directly from books without relying on a teacher.
Finally, it is also important to note that, although tawātur and transmission form the fundamental basis of the Qurʾān, an excelling scholar or student must also seek to understand the reasoning and principles behind the aspects of its recitation, and a seeker of the Qurʾān must seek its knowledge from a scholar who has a proficient understanding of these areas. It must also be noted that such things must be studied under a teacher, and a person studying on their own will be highly prone to errors, which is why scholars condemn such a methodology. Makkī mentions in ar-Riʿāyah,[16] and also quotes ʾAbū ʿAmr ad-Dānī and ʾAbū Bakr ibn Mujāhid saying, that it is necessary for a student of the Qurʾān to learn it from those of religious piety and understanding in the sciences of the Qurʾān and the Arabic language and tajwīd and the transmission of narrations. When proper education and proficiency in all these areas of knowledge is combined together, this is how true scholarship in the field is reached. In contrast, a person who receives the Qurʾān blindly through pure transmission without understanding any of the relevant principles or reasoning will be prone to error, and cannot be considered reliable in recitation of the Qurʾān. As can be observed, it is necessary for one who seeks the knowledge of the Qurʾān to combine between transmission taken from scholars and understanding of the connected sciences which is mainly taken from books, such that he can become truly proficient in learning the Qurʾān.
The principles set down by past scholars that have been noted here can be summarized as follows:
- Proper pronunciation and tajwīd of letters can only be properly learned by being directly taught by scholars, and can only be achieved by practice. It is also necessary to study (under a teacher) and understand the statements of past scholars on this topic, to refine a person’s tajwīd and pronunciation and make it as accurate and precise as possible.
- A person seeking knowledge of the Qurʾān and its recitation must seek out a teacher who is a scholar with proper understanding and knowledge in the fields of the Arabic language and tajwīd and in the sciences of the Qurʾān, and also with proper transmission and knowledge of narrations, in addition to religious piety.
- According to the relied upon view of the vast majority of scholars, all aspects of the Qurʾān must be transmitted by tawātur, although there is an anomalous opinion held by a few latecomers among scholars that authentic transmission together with wide spread and unanimous acceptance of scholars is sufficient.
- It is invalid and condemned for a person to make judgments in the religious sciences, especially regarding the Qurʾān, based on his own personal study without relying upon a teacher. There is also no place for personal opinion and reasoning in the Qurʾān, and it is fully dependent on transmission. A person also cannot rely upon his own teacher if his teacher is going against the consensus or mutawātir transmission of scholars.
- If there seems to be a discrepancy between reliable transmission and linguistic reasoning or linguistic opinions held by some scholars, then reliable transmission always takes precedence in the field of the Qurʾān, and reliable transmission is the most fundamental pillar upon which knowledge of the Qurʾān is based. This is especially the case for mutawātir transmission, as mutawātir transmission necessarily provides certainty of its accuracy, and itself sets definitive linguistic judgments that cannot be negated by any reasoning or opinions.
Having observed these statements and principles set by past scholars with regards to the proper methodology for knowledge about the Qurʾān, we must now apply these principles to the matter of pronunciation of the letter of ض. We must observe and judge these different claims about its pronunciation in light of their transmission and also in light of understanding of the relevant topics and research into the statements of scholars of the past. To investigate the transmissions of these claims, we must investigate their origins, and look into the chains of narration that these groups of proponents claim to have today.
First, as for the Ṭāʾī ض, then its reality is that it is a dialectical pronunciation of the letter found in Egypt and certain other regions, and in fact must have originated from the pronunciation of ظ in those regions, which ض had combined into since long ago in the common speech of most lay-Arabs, especially in Arabized regions. It is because of this that in these dialects almost the same variation observed for the sound of ظ is also found in ض; in most cases both are pronounced like a voiced version of ط (which is the Ṭāʾī ض), and in some cases are pronounced like a voiced version of ص (for example in words from the root ضبط), although the ratio between these 2 pronunciations may differ.
As has already been observed in the previous section, the unanimous and widespread statements of past scholars of tajwīd completely go against the pronunciation of the Ṭāʾī ض, which is sufficient grounds to reject it. Furthermore, it is mostly not present among even the learned scholars of the Qurʾān today, and is mainly only the act of laymen. The scholars who are well learned in the field of tajwīd unanimously considered the Ṭāʾī ض invalid, and transmit a pronunciation which goes against this one, which also unequivocally establishes the Ṭāʾī ض to be an incorrect pronunciation.
Now, for the Ẓāʾī ض, a deeper investigation will be needed. First, we must investigate how this claim first arose, and how the scholars of the time reacted to the claim and its proponents. It appears that the first person to come out with this claim was a scholar in Egypt known as Nūr ad-Dīn ʿAlī ibn Muħammad ibn G͟hānim al-Maqdisī (d. 1004 AH), who wrote a treatise on the pronunciation of ض, claiming it should sound almost identical to ظ.
Although some scholars have doubted the attribution of the treatise to Ibn G͟hānim, the past head s͟hayk͟h of reciters in Egypt, ʿAlī ibn Muħammad aḍ-Ḍabbāʿ (d. 1376 AH), mentions that after Ibn G͟hānim had finished writing this treatise in the year 985 AH, as͟h-S͟hayk͟h S͟haħħād͟hah al-Yamanī (d. 987 AH) opposed and debated him in the presence of the leading scholars of Qurʾān recitation of the time, leading to Ibn G͟hānim repenting and retracting his view.[17] After this, the claim seemed to have died down for a while, as is mentioned by many scholars, before it was revived a number of years later.
The first one to revive this claim after its disappearance was a scholar in the field of ʿaqliyyāt (logical sciences) from the city of Marʿas͟h in modern day Turkey, who was not known for expertise in the science of tajwīd, named Muħammad al-Marʿas͟hī (d. 1145 AH), also known as Saçaqlı Zāda. He wrote in support of changing the pronunciation of not only ض, but also ط and ر. Since he was more famed, as people would come to him from other regions to learn in the ʿaqlī sciences, the view gained more followers than it had with Ibn G͟hānim prior to dying out.
After the spread of the claim of Saçaqlı Zāda, many scholars in various regions wrote in response to the claim of the Ẓāʾī ض, such as the Egyptian scholars ʿAlī ibn Sulaymān al-Manṣūrī (d. 1134 AH) and al-Ħāj Maħmūd (d. ?), the Anatolian scholars Muħammad ibn ʾIsmāʿīl al-Izmīrī (d. 1160 AH), the S͟hayk͟h of reciters in Istanbul, Yūsuf ʾAfandī Zāda (d. 1167 AH), Dāwūd ibn Muħammad al-Qarsī (d. 1169 AH), and ʿIṣām ad-Dīn ʾIsmāʿīl ibn Muṣṭafā al-Qōnawī (d. 1195 AH), and the Levantine scholar ʿAbd al-G͟hanī an-Nablusī (d. 1143 AH).
We find that these scholars mention that the claim was completely unknown prior to Ibn G͟hānim al-Maqdisī, and that Saçaqlı Zāda was known to have come up with claim solely from his judgment based on his own reading of books, without a chain of transmission or teacher. Al-Izmīrī mentions that this was widely known, and that Saçaqlı Zāda’s own teacher admitted that this view was taken solely from investigation of books, and not directly from any preceding scholars.[18] Al-Izmīrī also mentions that Saçaqlı Zāda claimed to have received recitation of the Qurʾān from this very same teacher, who he claimed had received it from the scholars of Egypt. Considering the facts available, it is completely implausible for this pronunciation to have been truly received from the scholars of Egypt.
This issue of the Ẓāʾī ض later came up numerous times among the scholars of the Qurʾān in Egypt. Aḍ-Ḍabbāʿ lists these occurrences,[19] starting with what happened in the year 1280 AH, when Sulayman ʾAfandī al-Bursawī became convinced by Ibn G͟hānim and Saçaqlı Zāda’s points, causing a great dispute in al-ʾAzhar. The matter was then brought to Muħammad ʿUlays͟h, the muftī of the Mālikīs at that time, who judged for al-Bursawī to be beaten and imprisoned, and then brought the matter to the head of the reciters in al-ʾAzhar, K͟halīfah aṣ-Ṣafatī, who spoke to him and his followers and asked them to repent, and they then repented and retracted their claim. Then, in 1293 AH, a man in al-ʾAzhar named Muħammad ʿAlī al-ʾAsyūṭī also began propagating this claim. The s͟hayk͟h of the reciters at the time, al-Mutawallī, brought his matter up to the s͟hayk͟h of al-ʾAzhar at the time, Muħammad Mahdī al-ʿAbbāsī, who judged for him to be expelled due to refusing to repent after the matter was explained to him and his repentance was sought.
Next, in 1317 AH, the scholar Muħammad Bayyūmī al-Mīnāwī also became convinced by the claim, so the matter was brought up to the S͟hayk͟h Ħassūnah an-Nawāwī, who set a gathering to discuss the matter which was attended by the s͟hayk͟h of reciters of the time, ʾAħmad ar-Rifāʿī, leading to al-Mīnāwī repenting and retracting his position. Finally, in 1355 AH, the scholar ʿAbd al-Ħamīd ʿAlī began calling to this view, and the previous s͟hayk͟h of reciters, Muħammad ʿAlī K͟halaf al-Ħusaynī, was asked for a fatwā on the topic, and judged for him to be punished. He was then brought and spoken to and asked to repent, and ended up repenting and retracting his view.
ʿAlī al-Manṣūrī also adds that his teachers and senior scholars all rejected the Ẓāʾī ض, mentioning Sulṭān ibn ʾAħmad al-Mazzāħī, ʿAlī ibn Nūr ad-Dīn as͟h-S͟habrāmullusī, and Muħammad al-Baqarī among his teachers who explicitly taught the proper ض and considered the Ẓāʾī ض invalid.[20] ʾAħmad ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz az-Zayyāt, the most senior of recent scholars of the Qurʾān in Egypt, also mentions that he had not received the pronunciation of the Ẓāʾī ض from anyone,[21] and that the scholars of his time were unanimous[22] on the pronunciation of ض, and aḍ-Ḍabbāʿ also mentions similar things in his treatise.[23] Al-Mutawallī himself also mentions consensus of the scholars in his time on pronunciation of the letter.[24]
Considering this information on the history of the Ẓāʾī ض, it appears that there cannot even be any authentic connected chain of transmission for it, let alone the wide spread and unanimous acceptance, and most definitely not the tawātur, that the past scholars have agreed on requiring for anything that is considered part of the Qurʾān. This information can be confirmed by investigation of the chains of the current proponents of the Ẓāʾī ض. Although it would be impossible to find the chains of every single person holding this view, especially since many of their chains cannot be found online, it is sufficient to take a look at some of the most major examples to see the clear issues that are present. It also must be noted that not many of these scholars explicitly claim to have received this pronunciation from their teachers, so the use of the chains as proof in such cases is at best questionable in the first place.
One of the most major proponents of the Ẓāʾī ض today is the scholar ʿUbayd Allāh al-ʾAfg͟hānī. If we observe his chain of transmission for the Qurʾān in the way of ʿĀṣim, we find that it contains S͟haħħād͟hah al-Yamanī and Sulṭān ibn ʾAħmad al-Mazzāħī, who both condemned this claim as has been observed already. Even besides those explicit attestations, masses of reciters in Egypt have chains going through these scholars, none of whom apply the Ẓāʾī ض, and observation of the history of the Ẓāʾī ض makes it absurd to consider that they recited with it. Considering these facts, it is absurd to claim this chain has any weight.
As for the chain in the way of Qālūn from Nāfiʿ, then although it does not contain anyone known for explicitly rejecting this claim, it does contain the famous Algerian scholar Muħammad ibn ʿAlī as-Sanūsī (d. 1216 AH). As-Sanūsī mainly studied the Qurʾān and other sciences in Jāmiʿ al-Qarawiyyīn in Fās and in al-ʾAzhar in Egypt. Proponents of the Ẓāʾī ض from the past state that the reciters in the Mag͟hrib region all used the well known “Egyptian ض,” such as in a question attributed to a man known as Muħammad at-Tilmisānī (d. 1163 AH) where he (after also mentioning that the “Egyptian ض” was ubiquitous everywhere across Muslim lands in his time) even explicitly states this about al-Qarawiyyīn and Fās in general,[25] also adding that the few who supported the Ẓāʾī ض in Tilmisān had all converted to that view on their own rather than having received it from their teachers, and it is also already a well established fact that this known ض was being used among the scholars of Egypt and those who opposed it were being harshly condemned. At-Tilmisānī even goes as far as claiming that the tawātur of the pronunciation of ض has been cut off and ceased entirely!
Muħammad Fāl ibn Bāba (d. 1349 AH), an early proponent of the Ẓāʾī ض in Mauritania, also mentioned that the entirety of those in Egypt and the Mag͟hrib region had the same pronunciation of ض, which he viewed to be incorrect.[26] There is no record at all of as-Sanūsī going against this, which is especially strange considering he met with the leading scholars of al-ʾAzhar. As-Sanūsī also had many students and even his own ṣūfī order, and those who received the Qurʾān from them do not use the Ẓāʾī ض. To add to this, al-ʾAfg͟hānī chain for Qālūn also goes through the same teacher as his chain for ʿĀṣim, bringing more doubt to the claim of connected transmission for the pronunciation.
As for Muħammad Yaħyā S͟harīf al-Jazāʾirī, then he is a student of al-ʾAfg͟hānī, and the rest of his teachers can either easily be found on recordings reciting with the well known ض, have chains that go through such scholars, or have chains that go through scholars known for explicitly condemning the [27] Ẓāʾī ض.
The chain of the Raħīmī/Pānīpatī reciters, who are known for using the Ẓāʾī ض, contains both S͟haħħād͟hah al-Yamanī and Muħammad al-Baqarī. The same issues apply here as with al-ʾAfg͟hānī’s chain, and it cannot be given weight.
Regarding the scholars in Egypt who were known for this view, such as ʿĀmir as-Sayyid ʿUt͟hmān, ʾIbrāhīm S͟haħħātah as-Samannūdī, and ʿAbd Allāh al-Jawharī, then there are many attestations of them retracting these views and admitting that they did not receive them from their teachers, in addition to the fact that their chains go through scholars like al-Mutawallī who explicitly condemned the Ẓāʾī ض. ʿAbd Allāh al-Jawharī was part of a council in 1417 AH that came to an agreement on condemning the [28] Ẓāʾī ض. As for as-Samannūdī, then various students and contemporaries of his, such as ʾAyman Suwayd[29] and ʿAbd al-Ħakīm ʿAbd al-Laṭīf,[30] narrate that he retracted his view on the Ẓāʾī ض and admitted it was taken directly from books and not from any of his teachers. To add to this, ʿAbd ar-Razzāq Mūsā mentions that he used to spend most of his time in the Institute of Qirāʾāt with ʾIbrāhīm S͟haħħātah as-Samannūdī and Sulaymān ʾImām aṣ-Ṣag͟hīr, and that they never applied or taught the Ẓāʾī ض in this period.[31]
The scholar ʿAbd ar-Rāfiʿ Riḍwān also records that ʾIbrāhīm S͟haħħātah as-Samannūdī and ʿĀmir as-Sayyid ʿUt͟hmān were among those who he asked about the pronunciation of the ض, who all confirmed the well known pronunciation of the letter.[32] Furthermore, scholars such as ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ʿAbd al-Ħafīẓ and ʿAlī Dawīdār confirm that it was well known that ʿĀmir as-Sayyid ʿUt͟hmān himself stated that he was originally convinced of the Ẓāʾī ض by Muħammad as-Sibāʿī ʿĀmir, rather than taking it from one of his own teachers.[33] For ʿĀmir as-Sayyid ʿUt͟hmān, there are even more attestations that he did not recite or teach with the Ẓāʾī ض, indicating he must have retracted it, and this is attested to by many of his students such as Rizq K͟halīl Ħabbah, ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd ar-Raħmān al-Ħud͟hayfī, Ras͟hād ibn ʿAbd at-Tawwāb as-Sīsī, ʾIbrāhīm al-ʾAk͟hḍar, ʾIbrāhīm ad-Dawsarī, ʾAħmad Muṣṭafā, and Muħammad ʾAbū Rawwās͟h.[34] Finally, with respect to Muħammad as-Sibāʿī ʿĀmir, then he was alone in his time in the Institute of Qirāʾāt holding this view, and was treated harshly for it by people, indicating its obscurity.[35]
Another argument used by the proponents of the Ẓāʾī ض is to claim that the scholars and reciters of Makkah and al-Madīnah were applying the Ẓāʾī ض in the relatively recent past. Some of them tried to get around the fact that this pronunciation is not found now by claiming that the spread of radio and cassette tapes caused the pronunciations of Egyptian reciters to spread, leading to scholars and reciters across the world abandoning their own traditions and embracing the incorrect “Egyptian ض.” Besides the fact that it is entirely absurd to claim that such large masses of reciters and scholars across the world abandoned their traditions for such flimsy reasoning, there is both direct proof that the scholars of Makkah and al-Madīnah did not apply the Ẓāʾī ض and attestation from the proponents of the Ẓāʾī ض before the spread of radio or cassette tapes that their pronunciation was obscure and nowhere to be found in Muslim lands.
The first thing that must be noted about the claim of the presence of the Ẓāʾī ض in Makkah and al-Madīnah is that all of those who wrote treatises against the Ẓāʾī ض mention in their treatises that, in all their visitations to this region, and all of their interactions with those living in and near them, they did not encounter the Ẓāʾī ض there at all. Many of them also visited other regions, and mention not finding the Ẓāʾī ض in any of these other regions either. The proponents of the Ẓāʾī ض refer to a response attributed to al-Ħasan ibn ʾIbrāhīm as͟h-S͟hāʿir (d. 1400 AH) and ʾAħmad ibn Ħāmid at-Tījī (d. 1368 AH), two of the leading scholars of recitation of the Qurʾān in Makkah and al-Madīnah, to a question about the pronunciation of the ض, which seems to confirm the Ẓāʾī ض. Although what is in the question and the answers seems to be in support of the Ẓāʾī ض, the reliability of this attribution and/or the apparent of it must be brought into question.
This is because ʾIbrāhīm al-ʾAk͟hḍar, the contemporary head of reciters in al-Masjid an-Nabawī, explicitly states that none of his teachers ever taught or recited with the Ẓāʾī ض, and that he never heard this pronunciation from any of them.[36] We find that al-Ħasan as͟h-S͟hāʿir (who himself learned the sciences of the Qurʾān in al-ʾAzhar in Egypt[37]) was the first one of his teachers, and that ʾIbrāhīm al-ʾAk͟hḍar received the 7 Qirāʾāt of the Qurʾān from him with ʾijāzah.[38] It is also worth noting that ʾIbrāhīm al-ʾAk͟hḍar’s 2nd teacher was ʿĀmir as-Sayyid ʿUt͟hmān. Indeed, we also find that ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn Ṣāliħ, who seems to be one of the only major students of al-Ħasan as͟h-S͟hāʿir with available audio recordings of recitations, also does not recite with the [39] Ẓāʾī ض. As for ʾAħmad at-Tījī, we find that he told his students to go to al-Ħasan as͟h-S͟hāʿir to continue their studies if he died,[40] and we also find that all of his major students[41] with available recordings, who have ʾijāzāt from him in many Qirāʾāt, recite with the well known ض. These include ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ʿUyūn as-Sūd,[42] Muħammad al-Kaħīlī,[43] Sirāj Qārūt,[44] and ʿAlawī ibn ʿAbbās al-Mālikī.[45] ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Qārī also mentions that none of his teachers ever taught or used the Ẓāʾī ض, among whom was his father ʿAbd al-Fattāħ al-Qārī, who was one of the major students of ʾAħmad at-Tījī.[46]
Finally, to add onto this and go back to the claim of the well known ض being spread by radio and cassette tapes, we will observe the statements of major proponents of the Ẓāʾī ض, from before the time of the spread of radio and cassette tapes, clearly indicating that the Ẓāʾī ض was nowhere to be found among scholars of the Qurʾān. Muħammad al-Muk͟htār walad Abbāh, in his book Tārīk͟h al-Qirāʾāt fil-Mas͟hriq wal-Mag͟hrib, mentions how his father, who was the first to try to spread the Ẓāʾī ض in the land of S͟hinqīṭ in Mauritania, received this pronunciation.[47] He states that when his father, Muħammad Fāl ibn Bāba, went for Ħajj in the year 1307 AH, he met a man in al-Madīnah who was from Constantinople and went by the name Muħammad ibn ʾAħmad aṣ-Ṣūfī. He found this man to be knowledgeable in the field of Qirāʾāt, and to have a connected chain to Ibn al-Jazarī, so he went to seek knowledge from him, only to find that he pronounced the ض in a way that he assumed was a ظ. To his surprise, when he recited back to him replacing ض with ظ, aṣ-Ṣūfī told him that it was incorrect, and taught him to recite with the Ẓāʾī ض. The clear implication of this story is that Muħammad Fāl had not found anyone in Makkah or al-Madīnah prior to aṣ-Ṣūfī using the Ẓāʾī ض, and that they were all using the ض he had previously known in S͟hinqīṭ!
Muħammad Fāl then went back and tried to propagate this view in S͟hinqīṭ, and was met with harsh resistance by most, although he gained a few followers. Ibn al-ʾAmīn as͟h-S͟hinqīṭī (d. 1331 AH) mentions that prior to his return, the scholars in S͟hinqīṭ were unanimous upon the well known pronunciation of ض. He also mentions that he had met with some scholars of the Levant, who informed him that a scholar by the name of ʿAbd al-Ħakīm al-ʾAfg͟hānī rejected the pronunciation of ض being used in Damascus, which was a view they rejected from him. When Ibn al-ʾAmīn mentioned that Muħammad Fāl had said the same thing in S͟hinqīṭ, and that he himself believed it to be the apparent of what is present in the books of tajwīd, the Levantine scholars told him to be quiet about this view, or else he would be kicked out of the city. Ibn al-ʾAmīn goes even further to claim that the pronunciation of ض was “incorrect” among the people of all regions![48] In a similar statement, we also find that Muħammad Ras͟hīd Riḍā (d. 1354 AH) claims that the supposedly correct ض was not found among reciters anywhere outside of Tūnis and al-ʿIrāq (which are places he is not known to have ever visited), and among the bedouins of the Levant.[49] Despite having travelled multiple times throughout the Arabian Peninsula, and the region of al-Ħijāz specifically, he made no mention of the Ẓāʾī ض having any presence in these regions!
Having gone into the chains and history of the Ẓāʾī ض, it becomes apparent that their claim to having any reliable connected chain of transmission is questionable at best. They cannot come close to fulfilling the conditions given by the minority view held by scholars such as Makkī, as this pronunciation is neither widely spread and known nor does it have any consensus on its acceptance; rather, the generality of scholars of the Qurʾān condemn it. This is a far cry from fulfilling the tawātur that is required by the vast majority of scholars for anything that is considered part of the Qurʾān, as the Ẓāʾī ض does not come anywhere near tawātur. We also find that the claims of the proponents of the Ẓāʾī ض to try to avoid the problems in their transmission and the transmission of the well known ض do not hold up to criticism. Furthermore, observation of the history of the Ẓāʾī ض shows that its proponents mostly arrived at this view based on methodologies that are unanimously considered invalid and condemned by the scholars of the past. Rather than submitting to the mass transmitted pronunciations received from their traditions, they formed their own judgments based on statements found in books, which has never been considered an acceptable methodology, especially for the Qurʾān.
As for the well known pronunciation of the ض, we find that it is widely spread among the leading scholars of all Muslim lands, and the evidence indicates this has been the case for many centuries at minimum. The vast majority of scholars believe in its validity and transmit it from their teachers with connected chains, while even those who promote the Ẓāʾī ض were taught by such teachers before changing their views, and also validate the recitations of contemporaries and students of theirs who recite using the well known ض. The history of the Ẓāʾī ض also indicates that scholars were unanimous on acceptance of the well known ض before Ibn G͟hānim and Saçaqlı Zāda disputed it.
There is no doubt that this well known ض fulfills the criteria of having reliable connected transmission and being widely known and spread and unanimously accepted by scholars. On top of this, it is also clear that it fulfills the condition of tawātur, as it is entirely absurd for all of these vast masses of the most astute and learned scholars in widespread regions to have independently arrived at the same incorrect ض. This tawātur provides a clear and unequivocal judgment indicating that the well known pronunciation of the ض can be the only valid one, and invalidates the Ẓāʾī ض and the Ṭāʾī ض. This is made even more decisive by direct comparison to the Ẓāʾī ض; if one were to attempt to claim that the Ẓāʾī ض fulfills either of the criteria, it would necessitate that the well known ض also fulfills these criteria, since it far surpasses the Ẓāʾī ض in all these areas, leading to contradiction. On the other hand, acknowledging the fulfillment of the criteria for the known ض does not entail any such contradiction.
Indeed, the tawātur of the well known pronunciation of the ض is part of the tawātur of the Qurʾān itself. Claiming that the mass transmitted ض among the scholars of the Qurʾān is a distorted pronunciation is tantamount to claiming the Qurʾān has been distorted. Although orientalists may not have an issue with such a claim, any Muslim must realize the gravity of what this entails. The claim that mass transmitted ض was a mistake by Egyptians that spread, as mentioned by Saçaqlı Zāda,[50] cannot be upheld, as it is absurd to claim that the masses of scholars in all regions abandoned the pronunciations they had received for the pronunciation of Egyptians. It also cannot be claimed that this happened due to the spread of radio, as the mass transmitted ض was already ubiquitous before the spread of radio in Muslim lands.
One may justify such a claim by arguing that past scholars mentioned that the majority of people did not properly pronounce ض, and modern times are more worthy of such a mistake being widespread, but such an argument does not actually address the matter at hand. It is not disputed that the vast majority of people do not pronounce ض properly at all, and it is even unproblematic to this point if the majority of reciters do not pronounce ض with full accuracy and precision. Rather, the claim being made is that the proper ض is mass transmitted through the expert scholars of the Qurʾān and tajwīd across regions, who all claim to receive this same pronunciation from their teachers through connected chains back to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.
Even if 99.99% of the millions of learned reciters of the Qurʾān around the world were said to be making errors in the pronunciation of ض, then the remaining 0.01% who are the highest experts in the field across different regions of the world, the vast majority if not the entirety of whom all transmit the same pronunciation of ض, are far more than sufficient to achieve tawātur. Since the difference between the mass transmitted ض and the Ẓāʾī ض is apparent and audible, this mass transmission and agreement cannot be explained except by the fact that they indeed received this pronunciation correctly from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, and not that they all somehow were made to comply with a mistake made by Egyptians against their own teachers. The lack of mass transmission of the Ẓāʾī ض is also proof of its falsehood, since if it were truly the correct pronunciation, it would have been found transmitted by masses of scholars across different regions throughout history, which is far from what we observe to be the case.
CITATIONS:
[1] – الكتاب لسيبويه – ج4 ص432
[2] – النشر لابن الجزري – فصل في أحكام الميم الساكنة
[3] – شرح أبي شامة على الشاطبية – ص744
[4] – النشر في القراءات العشر لابن الجزري – ج1 ص10-11
[5] – النشر في القراءات العشر لابن الجزري – ص211
[6] – النجوم الطوالع للمارغني – ص 145-146
[7] – غنية المريد لابن مفلح القلقيلي – ص51
[8] – القراءات الشاذة لعبد الفتاح القاضي – ص6-10
[9] – الإتقان في علوم القرآن للسيوطي – ج1 ص264
[10] – البرهان في علوم القرآن للزركشي -ج2 ص252
[11] – شرح الداني على القصيدة الخاقانية – أبيات 5-7 – ص16-69
[13] – https://www.aldiwan.net/poem24615.html
[14] – https://shamela.ws/book/1779/478
[15] – https://www.aldiwan.net/poem84490.html
[16] – الرعاية لمكي – ص89-90
[17] – رسالة العلامة الضباع في حق الضاد – ص51
[18] – إعلام السادة النجباء بأنه لا تشابه بين الضاد والظاء لأشرف محمد فؤاد طلعت – ص36
[19] – رسالة العلامة الضباع في حق الضاد – ص53
[20] – رد الإلحاد في النطق بالضاد لعلي المنصوري – ص1
[21] – الظائيون الجدد لخالد بن مأمون آل محسوبي – ص76
[22] – إعلام السادة النجباء لأشرف محمد طلعت – ص8
[23] – رسالة العلامة الضباع في حق الضاد – ص54
[24] – رسالة الضاد للمتولي
[25] – فتوى في مسألة الضاد منسوبة إلى أبي الصلاح علي نور الدين الصعيدي – ص16-17
[26] – تاريخ القراءات في المشرق والمغرب لمحمد المختار ولد اباه – ص725
[27] – ترجمة المقرئ الجامع محمد يحيى شريف الجزائري
[28] – الجامع الكبير في علم التجويد لنبيل بن عبد الحميد بن علي – ج2 ص349
[29] – الفوائد التجويدية لعبد الرزاق موسى – ص125
[30] – الجامع الكبير في علم التجويد لنبيل بن عبد الحميد بن علي – ج2 ص347
[31] – الفوائد التجويدية لعبد الرزاق موسى – ص125
[32] – الظائيون الجدد لخالد بن مأمون آل محسوبي – ص78
[33] – رسالة العلامة الضباع في حق الضاد – ص56
[34] – الظائيون الجدد لخالد بن مأمون آل محسوبي – ص76-79 , الأقوال الجلية في الضاد الظائية والضاد الطائية للسيد بن أحمد بن عبد الرحيم – ص5-13
[35] – الفوائد التجويدية لعبد الرزاق موسى – ص125
[36] – الظائيون الجدد لخالد بن مأمون آل محسوبي – ص79
[37] – ترجمة حسن بن إبراهيم الشاعر
[38] – زاد المقرئين لجمال بن إبراهيم القرش – ج1 ص150
[39] – مرئي | صلاة العشاء قبل36سنة بتلاوة محبرة للشيخ عبدالعـزيز بن صالح واقامة للشيخ ابو السعود ديولي
[40] – ترجمة الشيخ أحمد حامد التيجي
[41] – ترجمة الشيخ أحمد حامد التيجي
[42] – https://youtu.be/-43d4GsJt2o , https://youtu.be/ZkM2Uuqo8Ek , https://youtu.be/YNBZ3YIEk4c
[43] – https://youtu.be/Vc3Y0IaUSD8
[44] – https://youtu.be/AgWVw1mYiSg
[45] – https://youtu.be/Om5O1vYEjmY
Note: although this video is a recitation of a duʿāʾ and not of the Qurʾān, it is the closest thing that could be found, and is indeed an attestation for the pronunciation of ض in the relevant contexts, as it is being recited in fuṣħā Arabic with tajwīd.
[46] – الظائيون الجدد لخالد بن مأمون آل محسوبي – ص77
[47] – تاريخ القراءات في المشرق والمغرب لمحمد المختار ولد اباه – ص725
[48] – الوسيط لابن الأمين الشنقيطي – ص517
Leave a Reply