This Is Islam Uncovered

The Qur’an’s Hidden History: Variants, Erasures, and the Making of Hafs

April 12, 2025

The Qur’an is often hailed as a miracle of preservation—every letter, every word unchanged since it was revealed to Muhammad in 7th-century Arabia. This claim anchors Islamic faith, promising divine fidelity across 1,400 years. But history tells a messier story. Ancient manuscripts reveal variations, corrections, and competing recitations. For centuries, different Qur’ans coexisted, shaped by scribes and reciters across regions. Then, in 1924, a Cairo committee chose one version—Hafs ‘an ‘Asim—and silenced the rest, creating the “Qur’an” most Muslims know today.

This isn’t divine preservation. It’s human curation—a tale of manuscripts, power, and choices that reshaped Islam’s sacred text. Through early codices, forgotten qirāʾāt (recitations), and a modern bureaucratic act, we’ll uncover how the Qur’an’s diversity was tamed, and why the Hafs version’s dominance reflects editorial control, not eternal truth.

The Claim and the Challenge

Muslims assert: “The Qur’an today is identical to Muhammad’s revelation—letter for letter, word for word, without variation.” It’s a bold promise, rooted in verses like Qur’an 15:9 (“We have sent down the Reminder and will preserve it”). Yet the historical record—etched in parchment, stone, and scholar debates—paints a different picture:

Ancient manuscripts show differences in words, verses, and structure.
Multiple qirāʾāt, with distinct meanings, flourished for centuries.
The Hafs Qur’an, used by ~90% of Muslims, was standardized in 1924, not divinely fixed.

This journey begins with the Qur’an’s earliest traces, where diversity, not uniformity, defined the text.

What Manuscripts Reveal: A Fluid Qur’an

The Qur’an began as oral revelation, memorized and recited in Arabia’s tribal mosaic. After Muhammad’s death (632 CE), written codices emerged, but they weren’t identical. Let’s examine key manuscripts that challenge the preservation myth.

1. The Sana’a Palimpsest (Yemen)

Discovered in 1972 in Sana’a’s Great Mosque, this manuscript is among the oldest, dated to the mid-7th century. It’s a palimpsest—text erased and overwritten—revealing two layers:

Lower Text: The erased layer differs from the modern Hafs Qur’an in wording, verse order, and content. For example, Surah 2:196–197 shows variant phrases and omissions not found in Hafs (Der Islam 2008, Puin).
Upper Text: Closer to Uthman’s recension (653 CE), but still not identical to Hafs.

Scholar Gerd Puin, who studied Sana’a, notes: “The differences are significant enough to show the text was not fixed.” The lower text predates standardization, exposing a Qur’an in flux—far from “letter-for-letter” preservation.

2. The Topkapi and Samarkand Codices

Often cited as “Uthman’s Qur’an,” these manuscripts—housed in Istanbul and Tashkent—date to the late 7th or 8th century, decades after Uthman (d. 656 CE). They don’t match Hafs:

Topkapi: Contains missing words (e.g., Surah 3:158 omits particles), variant orthography (no vowel markers in early script), and scribal corrections (Journal of Qur’anic Studies 2010, Sadeghi).
Samarkand: Shows similar issues—altered verse endings (Surah 5:44) and marginal notes indicating edits. It lacks Hafs’s precision, with ~10% textual variance (Islamic Manuscripts, Dutton 2004).

Neither codex has all 114 surahs in Hafs’s order, and both reflect regional styles (Hijazi vs. Kufan). If these were Uthman’s, why don’t they align with the modern text?

3. The Birmingham Fragments

Dated to 645–690 CE (Radiocarbon 2015), these folios from Birmingham University cover parts of Surahs 18–20. They’re early but limited—only 33 verses, not a full Qur’an. Key points:

Variant readings (e.g., Surah 19:19 differs from Hafs in vocalization).
No evidence of Hafs’s standardized structure or surah sequence.
Script lacks diacritics, allowing multiple interpretations.

The fragments show a snapshot of recitation, not a complete, fixed text. They contradict claims of a unified Qur’an in Muhammad’s lifetime.

4. Companion Codices: Ibn Mas‘ud and Ubayy

Early companions preserved their own Qur’ans, differing from Uthman’s:

Ibn Mas‘ud: A top reciter, his codex omitted Surahs 1, 113, and 114, deeming them prayers, not revelation (Sahih Bukhari 6.61.510). He clashed with Uthman, refusing to surrender his text (Tafsir al-Tabari).
Ubayy ibn Ka‘b: His version included two extra surahs—al-Khal‘ and al-Hafd—and reordered verses (Fihrist, Ibn al-Nadim). Ubayy’s codex was widely used in Syria.

These codices weren’t anomalies but respected alternatives, reflecting the Qur’an’s oral diversity. Their erasure, as we’ll see, was deliberate.

Manuscript Verdict

No 7th-century manuscript matches Hafs word-for-word, includes all 114 surahs, or lacks corrections. Sana’a’s variants, Topkapi’s edits, Birmingham’s fragments, and companion codices prove the early Qur’an was fluid—regional, evolving, and far from standardized.

The Qirāʾāt: A Chorus of Voices Silenced

Beyond manuscripts, qirāʾāt—variant recitations—shaped the Qur’an’s history. These weren’t mere pronunciations but carried different words and meanings. Examples:

Surah 3:19 (Hafs): “The religion with Allah is Islam.” Warsh reads: “The religion before Allah is Islam”—shifting temporal context.
Surah 5:6 (Hafs): “Wash your faces and hands.” Qalun adds: “and forearms”—altering ritual.

By the 8th century, dozens of qirāʾāt circulated—Hijazi, Kufan, Basran, Syrian. Scholars like Ibn Mujahid (d. 936 CE) canonized seven in his Kitab al-Sab‘a, later expanded to ten by Ibn al-Jazari (d. 1429 CE). Names like Warsh, Qalun, and Al-Duri joined Hafs, each tracing to a reciter, not Muhammad.

Did Muhammad Authorize Qirāʾāt?

The claim that Muhammad taught multiple versions (via seven ahruf, Sahih Bukhari 6.61.513) lacks historical backing:

No record shows Muhammad naming reciters or teaching contradictory verses.
Ahruf’s meaning—dialects, modes, or styles—is vague, debated by scholars like al-Tabari (Jami‘ al-Bayan).
Qirāʾāt were formalized 300–800 years later, reflecting post-Muhammad regional splits.

The diversity of qirāʾāt mirrors early Islam’s pluralism but clashes with claims of a single, preserved text. Their survival, until 1924, tells the real story.

Uthman’s Recension: The First Standardization

The Qur’an’s fluidity became a problem after Muhammad’s death (632 CE). By 650 CE, companions recited differing versions, sparking disputes (Sahih Bukhari 6.61.509). Caliph Uthman acted decisively:

Compilation: He tasked Zayd ibn Thabit with collecting recitations, producing one codex (~653 CE).
Destruction: Per Sahih Bukhari 6.61.510: “Uthman sent to every province one copy and ordered all other Quranic materials, whether fragmentary or whole, be burned.”
Resistance: Ibn Mas‘ud refused to comply, valuing his codex; others, like Ubayy’s followers, lost theirs (Tafsir al-Qurtubi).

Why Burn?

Uthman’s fires weren’t about preservation but power. Variant Qur’ans fueled factionalism—Ali’s supporters, Syrian tribes, and Kufan reciters held rival texts (History of the Qur’an, Nöldeke 1860). A single codex aligned the Umma under Uthman’s caliphate, but it erased evidence of diversity.

Gaps in Uthman’s Text

Incomplete: Sana’a’s lower text predates Uthman, showing variants he didn’t capture (Der Islam 2008, Puin).
Regional Drift: Even Uthman’s codices varied—Damascus vs. Medina scripts differed by ~5% (Islamic Awareness, 2002).
No Diacritics: Early Arabic lacked vowels, allowing multiple readings (e.g., yaktubu as “he writes” or “they write”).

Uthman’s Qur’an wasn’t final—qirāʾāt and manuscripts continued evolving, proving no “perfect” text existed.

The 1924 Cairo Committee: Modern Erasure

Fast-forward to 1920s Egypt. Qur’anic diversity persisted—students recited Hafs, Warsh, Qalun, or others, with inconsistent texts causing confusion. Al-Azhar University intervened, forming a committee to standardize the Qur’an.

The Decision

In 1924, they chose Hafs ‘an ‘Asim—not for divine merit, but prevalence. Hafs dominated Ottoman and Indian circles, making it a practical default. The 1924 Cairo Edition was born, printed en masse, and distributed globally.

Consequences

Suppression: Non-Hafs qirāʾāt—Warsh (North Africa), Qalun, Al-Duri—were excluded from Egyptian schools and publications. Warsh clings on in Morocco (~10% of Muslims), but others are near-extinct (Qur’anic Recitation, Shady 2019).
Global Reach: Saudi Arabia’s King Fahd Complex adopted Hafs, flooding mosques and apps with one text. Today, ~90% of Muslims recite Hafs, unaware of alternatives.
Erasure: By halting non-Hafs printing, Cairo silenced the Qur’an’s historical chorus, creating a “One Qur’an” myth.

This wasn’t preservation—it was censorship, echoing Uthman’s fires but with presses, not flames.

Logical Breakdown: The Preservation Myth Unraveled

The evidence demands scrutiny. Here are three logical arguments exposing the myth:

Syllogism A: Editorial Control

A divinely preserved book requires no human standardization.
The Hafs Qur’an was standardized by Uthman (653 CE) and Cairo (1924).
∴ The Qur’an was edited, not preserved.

Syllogism B: Manuscript Mismatch

A perfectly preserved text matches its earliest manuscripts.
Hafs differs from Sana’a, Topkapi, Samarkand, and companion codices.
∴ Hafs isn’t perfectly preserved.

Syllogism C: Qirāʾāt’s Late Canon

If Muhammad taught multiple qirāʾāt, they’d be documented from the start.
Qirāʾāt were canonized by Ibn Mujahid (936 CE) and later scholars.
∴ Qirāʾāt reflect scholarly choices, not prophetic instruction.

These syllogisms align with history: the Qur’an’s variants, burned codices, and 1924’s monopoly point to human shaping, not divine fixity.

Conclusion: A Qur’an Transformed

The Qur’an before Hafs was a tapestry—Sana’a’s variants, Ibn Mas‘ud’s omissions, Ubayy’s additions, and dozens of qirāʾāt wove a rich, pluralistic text. After 1924, it became a monolith—Hafs ‘an ‘Asim, enforced by Cairo’s committee and Saudi presses. Uthman’s bonfires and Al-Azhar’s presses didn’t preserve the Qur’an—they curated it, silencing voices that echoed Muhammad’s era.

This transformation mirrors Islam’s broader arc: from an inclusive community uniting diverse believers to a faith divided by rigid texts and sects. The Hafs Qur’an, far from eternal, is a 20th-century artifact, built on choices that buried its origins. What does this mean for Islam today? Can a faith rest on a text so reshaped by history? The manuscripts wait for answers.