1 Vide Kor. c. 16, and c. 25. 2 See the notes on those passages. 3 Life of Mahomet, p. 31, &c. 4 Vide Kor. c. 97, and note ibid. 1 Therefore it is a mistake of Dr. Prideaux to say it was brought him chapter by chapter. Life of Mahomet, p. 6. The Jews also say the Law was given to Moses by parcels. Vide Millium, de Mohammedismo ante Moham. p. 365.
revealed, is generally agreed to have ben the first five verses of the ninety- sixth chapter.2 After the new revealed passages had been from the prophet's mouth taken down in writing by his scribe, they were published to his followers, several of whom took copies for their private use, but the far greater number got them by heart. The originals when returned were put promiscuously into a chest, observing no order of time, for which reason it is uncertain when many passages were revealed. When Mohammed died, he left his revelations in the same disorder I have mentioned, and not digest into the method, such as it is, which we now find them in. This was the work of his successor, Abu Becr, who considering that a great number of passages were committed to the memory of Mohammed's followers, many of whom were slain in their wars, ordered the whole to be collected, not only from the palm-leaves and skins on which they had been written, and which were kept between two boards or covers, but also from the mouths of such as had gotten them by heart. And this transcript when completed he committed to the custody of Hafsa the daughter of Omar, one of the prophet's widows.3 From this relation it is generally imagined that Abu Becr was really the compiler of the Korân; though for aught appears to the contrary, Mohammed left the chapters complete as we now have them, excepting such passages as his successor might add or correct from those who had gotten them by heart; what Abu Becr did else being perhaps no more than to range the chapters in their present order, which he seems to have done without any regard to time, having generally placed the longest first. However, in the thirtieth year of the Hejra, Othmân being then Khalîf, and observing the great disagreement in the copies of the Korân in the several provinces of the empire-those of Irak, for example, following the reading of Abu Musa al Ashari, and the Syrians that of Macdâd Ebn Aswad-he, by advice of the companions, ordered a great number of copies to be transcribed from that of Abu Becr, in Hafsa's care, under the inspection of Zeid Ebn Thabet, Abd'allah Ebn Zobair, Saïd Ebn al As, and Abd'alrahmân Ebn al Hâreth, the Makhzumite; whom he directed that wherever they disagreed about any word, they should write it in the dialect of the Koreish, in which it was first delivered.1 These copies when made were dispersed in the several provinces of the empire, and the old ones burnt and suppressed. Though many things in Hafsa's copy were corrected by the above-mentioned supervisors, yet some various readings still occur; the most material of which will be taken notice of in their proper places. The want of vowels2 in the Arabic character made Mokrîs, or readers whose peculiar study and profession it was to read the Korân with its proper vowels, absolutely necessary. But these differing in their
2 Not the whole chapter, as Golius says. Append. ad Gr. Erp. p. 180. 3 Elmacin. in Vita Abu Becr. Abulfeda. 1 Abulfeda, in Vitis Abubecr and Othmân. 2 The characters or marks of the Arabic vowels were not used till several years after Mohammed. Some ascribe the invention of them to Yahya Ebn Yâmer, some to Nasr Ebn Asam, surnamed al Leithi, and others to Abu'laswad al Dîli-all three of whom were doctors of Basra, and immediately succeeded the companions. See D'Herbel. Bibl. Orient. p. 87.
manner of reading, occasioned still further variations in the copies of the Korân, as they are now written with the vowels; and herein consist much the greater part of the various readings throughout the book. The readers whose authority the commentators chiefly allege, in admitting these various readings, are seven in number. There being some passages in the Korân which are contradictory, the Mohammedan doctors obviate any objection from thence by the doctrine of abrogation; for they say, that GOD in the Korân commanded several things which were for good reasons afterwards revoked and abrogated. Passages abrogated are distinguished into three kinds: the first where the letter and the sense are both abrogated; the second, where the letter only is abrogated, but the sense remains; and the third, where the sense is abrogated, though the letter remains. Of the first kind were several verses, which, by the tradition of Malec Ebn Ans, were in the prophet's lifetime read in the chapter of Repentance, but are not now extant, one of which, being all he remembered of them, was the following: "If a son of Adam had two rivers of gold, he would covet yet a third; and if he had three, he would covet yet a fourth (to be added) unto them; neither shall the belly of a son of Adam be filled, but with dust. GOD will turn unto him who shall repent." Another instance of this kind we have from the tradition of Abd'allah Ebn Masûd, who reported that the prophet gave him a verse to read which he wrote down; but the next morning looking in his book, he found it was vanished, and the leaf blank: this he acquainted Mohammed with, who assured him the verse was revoked the same night. Of the second kind is a verse called the verse of stoning, which, according to the tradition of Omar, afterwards Khalîf, was extant while Mohammed was living, though it be not now to be found. The words are these: "Abhor not your parents, for this would be ingratitude in you. If a man and woman of reputation commit adultery, ye shall stone them both; it is a punishment ordained by GOD; for GOD is mighty and wise." Of the last kind are observed several verses in sixty-three different chapters, to the number of 225. Such as the precepts of turning in prayer to Jerusalem; fasting after the old custom; forbearance towards idolaters; avoiding the ignorant, and the like.1 The passages of this sort have been carefully collected by several writers, and are most of them remarked in their proper places. Though it is the belief of the Sonnites or orthodox that the Korân is uncreated and eternal, subsisting in the very essence of GOD, and Mohammed himself is said to have pronounced him an infidel who asserted the contrary,2 yet several have been of a different opinion; particularly the sect of the Mótazalites,3 and the followers of Isa Ebn Sobeih Abu Musa, surnamed al Mozdâr, who struck not to accuse those who held the Korân to be uncreated of infidelity, as asserters of two eternal beings.4 This point was controverted with so much heat that it occasioned
1 Abu Hashem Hebatallah, apud Marracc. de Alc. p. 42. 2 Apud Poc. Spec. 220. 3 See after, in Sect. VIII. 4 Vide Poc. Spec. p. 219, &c.
many calamities under some of the Khalîfs of the family of Abbâs, al Mamûn5 making a public edict declaring the Korân to be created, which was confirmed by his successors Al Mótasem6 and Al Wâthek,7 who whipped, imprisoned, and put to death those of the contrary opinion. But at length Al Motawakkel,1 who succeeded Al Wâthek, put an end to these persecutions, by revoking the former edicts, releasing those that were imprisoned on that account, and leaving every man at liberty as to his belief in this point.2 Al Ghazâli seems to have tolerably reconciled both opinions, saying, that the Korân is read and pronounced with the tongue, written in books, and kept in memory; and is yet eternal, subsisting in GOD'S essence, and not possible to be separated thence by any transmission into men's memories or the leaves of books;3 by which he seems to mean no more than that the original idea of the Korân only is really in GOD, and consequently co-essential and co-eternal with him, but that the copies are created and the work of man. The opinion of Al Jahedh, chief of a sect bearing his name, touching the Korân, is too remarkable to be omitted: he used to say it was a body, which might sometimes be turned into a man,4 and sometimes into a beast;5 which seems to agree with the notion of those who assert the Korân to have two faces, one of a man, the other of a beast;6 thereby, as I conceive, intimating the double interpretation it will admit of, according to the letter or the spirit. As some have held the Korân to be created, so there have not been wanting those who have asserted that there is nothing miraculous in that book in respect to style or composition, excepting only the prophetical relations of things past, and predictions of things to come; and that had GOD left men to their natural liberty, and not restrained them in that particular, the Arabians could have composed something not only equal, but superior to the Korân in eloquence, method, and purity of language. This was another opinion of the Mótazalites, and in particular of al Mozdâr, above mentioned, and al Nodhâm.7 The Korân being the Mohammedans' rule of faith and practice, it is no wonder its expositors and commentators are so very numerous. And it may not be amiss to take notice of the rules they observe in expounding it. One of the most learned commentators1 distinguishes the contents of the Korân into allegorical and literal. The former comprehends the more obscure, parabolical, and enigmatical passages, and such as
5 Anno Hej. 218. Abulfarag, p. 245, v. etiam Elmacin. in Vita