If you're new here, you may want to get regular updates via如果你是新這裡，你可能想通過定期更新 RSS feed RSS提要 . 。 Thank you for visiting!感謝您訪問！

Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi 阿布安瑪爾亞西爾Qadhi

An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur'aan , pp. 一個介紹科學的古蘭經 ， 頁。 384-388 (1999) , Al-Hidaayah Publishing and Distribution. 384-388（1999），基地Hidaayah出版發行。 Compiled by Usman Sheikh 編制烏 茲曼謝赫

Jeffery's own work is an almost four hundred pages long compilation of the different recitations of certain Companions and Successors who were known to have written mus-hafs.杰弗裡自己的工作，是一項長期將近 400頁的彙編的不同複習某些同伴和後繼者誰是已知有書面畝的教法規定。 He compiled information regarding fifteen codexes from the Companions, and thirteen from the Successors.他編譯的資料 15 codexes從同伴，13名來自接班人。 By a 'codex' he meant mus-haf.由一個'手抄本'他的意思誦讀。 He lists all the readings in these mus-hafs that do not conform to the present day mus-haf (although in reality many of them do conform with the mus-haf of `Uthmaan; they are merely different from the mus-haf written in the qiraa'a of Hafs).他列出了所有的數據，在這些古蘭經的教法規定，不符合當今誦讀（儘管其中許多人在現實中不符合誦讀的`歐斯曼，它們只是從不同的誦讀書面在qiraa'a的阿布哈夫斯）。

Jeffery divides the work based on each codex, and under each codex, he lists, in order, all the verses where a different recitation occurs.杰弗裡劃分工作的基礎上每一個法典，並根據每個法典，他列出了，為了所有的詩朗誦會出現一個不同的地方。 The most important and longest of them are the codexes of Ibn Mas'ood and Ubay ibn Ka'ab.最重要的，時間最長，他們是codexes伊本麥斯歐德和烏拜伊本Ka'ab。

Jeffery compiled this information from over thirty classical Islaamic texts, some authentic and some not.杰弗裡編撰了這本資料來自超過 30經典 Islaamic文本，有些真實，有些不是。 The sources range from classical lexicons, to the famous works of tafseer, to the works on the qira'aat.來源範圍從古典詞彙，著名的作品tafseer，該項工程的qira'aat。 Unfortunately, for each variant recitation, he did not list the exact reference work that it was obtained from.不幸的是，每一個變種朗誦，他沒有列出確切的參考諮詢工作，這是獲得。

To give an example of what Jeffery compiled, we will quote from Ibn Mas'ood's Soorah Faatihah.舉個例子，什麼杰弗裡編譯，我們將引述伊本麥斯歐德的文一樣 Faatihah。 He read, according to Jeffery, with the following differences他讀，根據杰弗裡，有以下區別

1) ' malik ' as ' maalik ' 1）' 馬利克 '為' 馬力克 '

2) ' ihdina as-siraat al-mustaqeem ' as ' arshidna as-siraat al-mustaqeem ' 2）'ihdina為- siraat基地mustaqeem'為'arshidna為- siraat基地mustaqeem'

3) ' siraat alladheena an'amta 'alayhim ' as ' siraat man an'amta 'alayhim ' 3）'siraat alladheena an'amta'alayhim'為'siraat男子an'amta'alayhim'

4) ' ghayril maghdoobi ' as ' ghayral maghdoobi ' 4）'ghayril maghdoobi'為'ghayral maghdoobi'

Jeffery continues in a similar manner for the rest of the Qur'aan.杰弗裡繼續以同樣的方式對其餘的古蘭經。 Obviously, what Jeffery is trying to prove is that there are variant readings to the Qur'aan which were not preserved.顯然，杰弗裡是試圖證明是有不同的讀法，以古蘭經其中不保留。 He writes, “…it is quite clear that the text which Uthmaan canonised was only one out of many rival texts…”; therefore the purpose of Jeffery's book is to, “..investigate what went before the canonical texts.” 813 His supposition is that the 'original' text was tampered with by the Companions, and only one chosen.他寫道，“...這是很清楚，歐斯曼封聖的文本只是一出許多競爭對手文本...”，因此其目的杰弗裡的書是“出了什麼 ..調查前的典型文本。”813他的假設是'原始'的文字被竄改的同伴，只有一個選擇。

There are three points to be made concerning this.有三點必須作出有關本。

1) On the supposition that Jeffery's theory is absolutely correct — that the text of the Qur'aan as `Uthmaan preserved it was chosen by him from amongst many variant texts — what are the implications of this from Jeffery's work? 1）在假定杰弗裡的理論是完全正確的 - 該文本的古蘭經歐斯曼保存的`這是他選擇了從文本當中有很多變種 - 有什麼影響這個由杰弗裡的工作？ Even if we allow for all these readings that Jeffery compiled to be authentic, and representing legitimate variants from the text of Uthmaan, not a single reading actually contradicts another one in meaning.即使我們允許所有這些數據的加法編譯為真實，合法的變種，代表從文本的歐斯曼，而不是一個單一的閱讀一個又一個矛盾，其實在意義。 No verse is added, no ruling contradicted, no law repealed.沒有詩是說，沒有執政的矛盾，沒有法律廢除。 There are literally thousands of differences mentioned in this book, each one of which merely rephrases a certain verse of the Qur'aan.從字面上有數以千計的分歧提到這本書，其中每1只rephrases一定的古蘭經經文。 814 Therefore, the question must be asked, what is gained by substantiating these 'variant' texts? 814因此，我們必須要問，什麼是得到了充實這些'變'的文本？ Agreed, if what Jeffery claims is true, this would imply that the actual text of the Qur'aan that is present is only one of a number of authentic texts, but what presumption or theory can be advanced based on this claim?商定，如果什麼杰弗裡說法是正確的，這將意味著該實際文本的古蘭經是目前是only一個數字的真確本，but什麼假設或理論可以be先進的基於這一說法？ Of course, this is supposing that Jeffery's basic premise is true, and to this we do not agree.當然，這是假設杰弗裡的基本前提是真實的，並為此我們不同意。

2) More importantly – and this is the greatest flaw of the book – the authenticity of these recitations has to be established. 2）更重要的是 - 這是最大的缺陷書 - 朗誦的真實性，這些已經建立起來。 In other words, how can the reader be assured that these recitations were actually recited?換句話說，如何才能讀者放心，這些複習實際上背誦？ Jeffery himself admits, “The question arises, of course, as to the authenticity of the readings ascribed to these old Codices.杰弗裡自己也承認，“現在的問題出現，當然，作為對真實性的讀數歸因於這些舊古抄本。 In some cases it must be confessed that there is a suspicion of readings later invented by the grammarians and theologians being fathered on these early authorities in order to gain prestige of their name.在某些情況下，必須承認，有懷疑的數據，後來發明的語法學家和神學家的父親正在對這些早期當局，以便獲得威望的名字。 The suspicion is perhaps strongest in the case of distinctly Shee'ite readings…” 815懷疑可能是最強的案件明顯 Shee'ite讀 ...“815

From a Muslim standpoint, we have recourse to the isnaad.從穆斯林的角度來看，我們可以訴諸於傳述。 Jeffery, however, believes the isnaads to hold very little, if any, value.杰弗裡，但是，認為 isnaads持有很少，如果有的話，價值。 Due to this opinion, he does not quote isnaads for each variant reading.由於這種意見，他並沒有引述isnaads每個變種閱讀。 Therefore, in order to find out the authenticity of a certain reading, it is neccessary to go back to the thirty works from which Jeffery compiled his work, verify which one of them mentions this reading, and then check its isnaad for authenticity.因此，為了找出某一個閱讀的真實性，就必須回到30杰弗裡 compiled作品，其中他的工作，確認其中一人提到這本閱讀，然後檢查其傳述系統的真實性。 (This is supposing that the original work even mentions an isnaad, for some of these recitations are merely referenced in later works without any isnaad). （這是假設，原來的工作，甚至提到一傳述系統，對部分引用這些朗誦只是在後來的作品沒有任何傳述）。

However, from Jeffery's own position on the concept and reliability of isnaad, he contradicts himself.然而，從杰弗裡自己的立場的概念和可靠性傳述，他違背自己。 If he does not believe in the authenticity of the isnaad system, then from where are all these readings obtained?如果他不相信其真實性的傳述系統，然後再從哪裡獲得這些數據？ After all, it is through isnaads that all of the readings of the Companions and Successors has been handed down to us.畢竟，它是通過 isnaads，所有的讀數和接班人的同伴已經傳給我們。 If Jeffery were to apply his standards and implement his belief of the isnaad system, all of these readings should be doubted, just like their hadeeth counterparts!如果加法裡是要適用於他的標準和執行其信仰的傳述系統，所有這些數據應該是毋庸置疑的，就像他們的聖訓同行！ But, not surprisingly, Jeffery concludes, “On the whole, however, one may feel confident that the majority of readings quoted from any reader really go back to the early authority.” 816 This clear double standard on Jeffery's part is not surprising; whenever an orientalist finds some information that he feels can be used to discredit Islaam and cast doubts on it, then he will use it, no matter what the context, authenticity or actual implications of the texts may be.但是，毫無疑問，杰弗裡的結論是，“總的來說，然而，人們可以有信心，大多數人的閱讀引述任何讀者真正回到早期的權威。”816，這顯然雙重標準對杰弗裡的一部分並不奇怪，每當1東方發現了一些資料，他認為可以用來詆毀 Islaam及演員懷疑它，然後他會使用它，無論什麼情況下，真實性或實際意義的文本可能。 As Jeffery so clearly and unabashedly states, “Much of the material given by Ibn Abee Daawood regarding the正如杰弗裡如此明確和毫不掩飾地指出，“大部分的材料給予有關伊本阿比Daawood history歷史 of the text of the Qur'aan, though extremely unorthodox, yet agrees so closely with conclusions one had reached from quite other directions that one feels confident in making use of it, however weak orthodoxy may consider its isnaad to be.” 817 Therefore the reason that these narrations are authentic, according to Jeffery, is because they agree with preconceived conclusions that were arrived at from 'quite other directions'; unnamed and unknown directions, it should be pointed out!案文的古蘭經，雖然非常不正統，但同意如此緊密，已達成的結論來自其他方向，一個很自信的感覺是利用它，但是薄弱的正統可考慮將其傳述系統。“817因此，理由是這些敘述都是真實的，根據杰弗裡，是因為他們先入為主的結論，即同意的決定，從'完全不同的方向';無名和未知的方向，應該指出的！

3) The question obviously arises as to the valid interpretation of these variant readings. 3）出現明顯的問題，以有效解釋這些不同的讀法。 After all, Jeffery compiled these readings from various books of tafseer and qira'aat.畢竟，杰弗裡編制這些數據從各種書籍的tafseer和qira'aat。 How, then, are they to be explained?那麼，如何向他們解釋？

The explanation of these variant readings is very simple, and relies upon the understanding of the ahruf and qira'aat of the Qur'aan, as was explained previously.在解釋這些不同的讀法是很簡單，依賴於理解的ahruf和qira'aat的古蘭經，就像前面解釋。 It is noticed that many of these variant readings are found in the qira'aat of today – the saheeh, da'eef and shaadh ones.人們注意到，其中許多不同的讀法是發現在qira'aat今天 - 的可靠的，不可靠和shaadh的。 If anything, this actually further strenghtens the belief of the Muslims regarding the qira'aat, since these differences have come down to this generation from the Companions, who all learnt from the Prophet(P).如果有的話，這其實進一步 strenghtens穆斯林的信仰有關 qira'aat，因為這些差異歸結為這一代的同伴，誰所有記者從先知（規劃）。 The existence of the saheeh qir'aat at the time of the Companions is something that does not need to be proven, but in doing so, Jeffery has 'confirmed' that the ten qira'aat originated from the Companions (and hence the Prophet(P)) and not from the latter authorities.其存在的確鑿可靠qir'aat當時的同伴是不能用的東西需要證明，但在這樣做，杰弗裡已'證實'的10 qira'aat源於同伴（因此先知（ P））和不從後者當局。 An example of this is Ibn Mas'ood's recitation of 'maliki' as 'maaliki'.這是一個例子伊本麥斯歐德的背誦'馬利基'為'maaliki'。 As was quoted earlier, this difference is still existent in the authentic qira'aat, thus merely proving their origin.正如較早前的話說，這種差異依然存在的真實 qira'aat，因而只不過是證明其來源。 As for those variants which are considered da'eef qira'aat, they cannot be accepted as the Qur'aan, and as such there is no use in quoting such material as 'variant' to the text of the Qur'aan, since the authenticity of these da'eef qira'aat is not established.至於那些被認為不可靠的變種 qira'aat，他們不能接受的古蘭經，因此沒有使用這種材料報價為'變'的案文的古蘭經，因為這些不可靠qira'aat真實性是不成立的。 As for the shaadh qira'aat, they used to be recited by the Companions before their recitation had been abrogated.至於 shaadh qira'aat，他們以前是由同伴背誦背誦前已經被廢除。 These cannot be considered as part of the Qur'aan anymore, as was mentioned earlier, and thus to quote them as having been left out of the Qur'aan is true, but they were left out at the command of the Prophet(P).這些不能被視為部分古蘭經了，正如前述，從而引述他們視為已被排除在古蘭經是真實的，但他們被排除在命令的先知（規劃） 。 Likewise, those recitations that are shown to be authentic but are not a part of the qira'aat, such as Ibn Mas'ood's reading of 'ihdina' as 'arshidna', are only examples of the ahruf of the Qur'aan that were not preserved by the command of the Prophet(P).同樣，那些複習是證明是真實的，但不是部分qira'aat，如伊本麥斯歐德的閱讀'ihdina'為'arshidna'，是僅有的例子是ahruf的古蘭經的人不保留該命令的先知（規劃）。

In conclusion, from a Muslim's prespective, Jeffery's collection is only useful insofar as it lists many of the variant readings – the authentic and the inauthentic ones.總之，從穆斯林的石鋒，杰弗裡的收藏是唯一有用的，因為它列出了許多在不同的讀法 - 真實和不真實的。 A critical analysis of the authenticity of each and every variant reading must be established before the book can be of any great value.一個關鍵的真實性分析每一個變種，必須建立在閱讀的書可以是任何偉大的價值。 Also, the variant readings quoted in Jeffery's book (at least the authentic ones) are all part of the ahruf of the Qur'aan, some of which still exist in the qira'aat, and some of which have been abrogated by the Prophet(P)).此外，不同的讀引用杰弗裡的書（至少真實的）都是部分ahruf的古蘭經，其中一些仍存在qira'aat，有些已被廢除的先知（ p）項）。 Obviously, Jeffery absolutely ignores the concept of the ahruf and qira'aat, for if he were to take this into account, then these readings would be explained without recourse to the theory that the Qur'aan is incomplete.顯然，杰弗裡完全忽略了概念的ahruf和qira'aat，因為如果他要藉此考慮，那麼這些數據將被解釋無追索權的理論，古蘭經是不完整的。 In other words, Jeffery's work is an example of an Orientalist taking a concept (the concept of ahruf and qira'aat), distorting it, and then presenting it in a sinister light in order to cast doubts upon Islaam.換句話說，杰弗裡的工作就是一個例子東方採取的概念（這一概念的ahruf和qira'aat），扭曲它，然後把它在一個險惡的光線，以產生懷疑時 Islaam。 Had he only understood the correct interpretation of this concept – an interpretation that is claimed by him to be “largely ficticious” 818 without any explanation why – it would have saved him the trouble of compiling his work.如果他只懂得正確的解釋這個概念 - 的解釋，聲稱他是“主要是虛構的”818沒有任何解釋為什麼 - 這將有可能挽救他的麻煩，他的編制工作。

The second book in Jeffery's collection is his editing of 'Abdullaah Ibn Abee Daawood's (d. 316 AH) Kitaab al-Masaahif .在加法裡的第二本書的收藏是他的編輯'Abdullaah伊本阿比Daawood的（草316啊） 摘自基地Masaahif。 The author is none other that the son of the famous collector of the Sunan, Aboo Daawood as-Sijistaani (d. 275 AH).筆者是沒有其他的兒子，著名收藏家的蘇南，Aboo Daawood為 - Sijistaani（草275啊）。 However, he did not enjoy the same prestige as his father, and he has mixed reviews from the scholars of hadeeth.不過，他並沒有享有同樣的聲譽作為他的父親，他已經從學者的評論褒貶不一的聖訓。 Nonetheless, the book is an excellent reference, and it contains the neccessary isnaads for each narration, so the authenticity of each narration may be ascertained.然而，這本書是一個很好的參考，它包含必要的isnaads每個敘述，使每一個敘事的真實性，可確定。 It deals, as its title indicates, with the mus-haf; it discusses the writing of the wahy, the various mus-hafs of the Companions and their differences; the writing of the mus-haf, and certain aspects of fiqh related to the mus-haf.它處理，正如其名稱所示，與誦讀，它討論了書面的wahy，各畝的教法規定的同伴和分歧;文字的誦讀，和某些方面相關的教律誦讀。