Variant Readings & Lost Verses — Human Hands in a Supposedly Divine Text

Part 1 of the series: “Ten Evidence-Based Reasons to Doubt the Divine Origin of the Qur’an”

---

Introduction: Why the text itself matters

Muslim apologists insist that the Qur’an, unlike other scriptures, was perfectly preserved “letter for letter, word for word” from the moment it was revealed to Muhammad until today. Countless sermons, polemics, and apologetic works repeat the claim that the Qur’an exists exactly as it did in the Prophet’s lifetime, without a single change.

This claim is central: the Qur’an’s supposed textual incorruptibility is presented as the decisive proof of its divine origin, setting Islam apart from Judaism and Christianity, whose scriptures allegedly suffered corruption (tahrif).

Yet when we turn from belief to evidence, the historical record tells a starkly different story — one of multiple competing versions, lost verses, and early manuscripts that do not match today’s standardized Qur’an. Far from pointing to perfect preservation by an all-powerful deity, the evidence reveals a very human history of debate, editing, and canonical politics.

---

1. The claim of perfect preservation — a modern dogma, not an early consensus

Islamic tradition itself reveals anxiety about preservation. The Qur’an describes itself as written on a “Preserved Tablet” (Qur’an 85:21–22), and later tradition reinforced the idea of an unchanging text.

But modern claims that every letter was fixed during Muhammad’s life are anachronistic. In the first two centuries of Islam, variant readings, omissions, and differences in codices were openly acknowledged — by Muslim scholars themselves. Only much later, after political standardization, did the myth of a single fixed text emerge.

“The popular dogma of the perfect preservation of the Qur’an… was a post-factum rationalisation, rather than the historical reality.”
— Arthur Jeffery, “Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’an” (1937)

---

2. Early codices that didn’t match the “official” Qur’an

After Muhammad’s death, his companions compiled the Qur’an based on memory, personal copies, and scattered materials: bone fragments, palm leaves, stones. But several leading companions had their own codices, which often disagreed with what later became the canonical text.

Key examples:

• Ibn Mas‘ud — one of Muhammad’s earliest and most trusted reciters. His codex reportedly lacked surah al-Fatihah (the Opening, now surah 1) and surahs 113–114 (al-Falaq and an-Nas).

• Ubayy ibn Ka‘b — known as the “Master of the Qur’an,” whose codex included two additional surahs: Surat al-Khal‘ and Surat al-Hafd.

• Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari — whose codex contained a surah about gratitude (Surat al-Shukr) missing from others.

These were not trivial differences. The very number of surahs in the Qur’an varied between early codices.

Sources:

• Arthur Jeffery, Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur’an (1937)

• John Burton, The Collection of the Qur’an (1977)

• Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif (9th century)

---

3. The Uthmanic recension — political standardization, not divine preservation

Around two decades after Muhammad’s death, Caliph Uthman ibn Affan ordered all existing codices to be burned or destroyed and issued a single standardized text (the “Uthmanic codex”).

The stated reason: Muslims in Kufa, Basra, and Syria were reciting the Qur’an differently, leading to conflict. The solution was not to “preserve” the original text, but to enforce uniformity by eliminating variant traditions.

This process is recorded in authentic hadiths, including:

“Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.”
— Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 6, book 61, hadith 510

Such a political act is inconsistent with the idea of an eternal, unaltered text.

---

4. Lost verses openly admitted in Islamic sources

Muslim sources themselves record verses once recited by the Prophet and his companions, now absent from today’s Qur’an.

Examples:

• The stoning verse: "The Sheikh and the Sheikhah, if they commit zina, stone them to death."
  Reported in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sunan Ibn Majah; said to have been part of the Qur’an but later lost.

• Verse of ten sucklings: A verse instructing mothers to breastfeed an adult male ten times to establish kinship, later reduced to five, then forgotten and lost.

• A surah known as Surat al-Wad‘ (Surah of the Removal), remembered by companions like Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari.

Source: Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif; al-Bukhari, Sahih.

---

5. The problem of qirāʾāt: multiple canonical versions still exist today

Even after Uthman’s standardization, multiple qirāʾāt (canonical readings) developed. These are not mere accents or pronunciation differences; they often change the meaning.

Examples:

Verse	Hafs reading	Warsh reading	Meaning change
2:184	“a ransom, feeding a poor person”	“feeding poor people”	singular vs. plural
6:115	“words of your Lord were fulfilled in truth and justice”	“in truth and fairness”	different word choice

There are ten canonical qirāʾāt recognized by Sunni Islam today, each accepted as equally Qur’anic — yet they differ in words and grammar.

Sources:

• Shady Nasser, The Transmission of the Variant Readings of the Qur’an (2012)

• G. S. Reynolds (ed.), The Qur’an in Its Historical Context (2008)

---

6. Earliest manuscripts reveal scribal editing and differences

The oldest Qur'anic manuscripts — like the Sana’a palimpsest discovered in Yemen — show evidence of:

• Texts erased and overwritten (palimpsest)

• Variations in verses and orthography

• Corrections made centuries after supposed revelation

Example: the lower text in the Sana’a manuscript sometimes diverges from today’s Qur’an, showing that the text evolved before standardization.

Sources:

• Gerd-R. Puin and Elisabeth Puin, “Observations on Early Qur'an Manuscripts” (1996)

• Behnam Sadeghi and Uwe Bergmann, “The Codex of a Companion of the Prophet” (2010)

These archaeological findings directly contradict the myth of a single, fixed text from the time of Muhammad.

---

7. Memory problems admitted by early Muslims

Several hadiths record that companions forgot entire surahs or verses. One hadith states:

“We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to Surah Bara’ah (9). I have forgotten it, except this verse…”
— Sahih Muslim, Book 5, Hadith 2286

Another narration admits entire chapters were lost because no one remembered them after those who memorized them died in battle.

Sources:

• Sahih Muslim

• John Burton, The Collection of the Qur'an (1977)

Such losses make little sense if an omnipotent deity guaranteed perfect preservation.

---

8. Why this matters: the contradiction between faith claim and historical record

Islam teaches the Qur’an is the literal, unchanged speech of God — perfectly preserved. Yet:

• Early codices disagreed.

• Verses were lost or forgotten.

• Political standardization suppressed variants.

• Archaeological evidence shows textual evolution.

If we are intellectually honest, the preservation claim collapses under scrutiny.

“What we call ‘the Qur’an’ today is the product of human selection, editing, and canonization — not a pristine text sent down from heaven.”
— John Wansbrough, Quranic Studies (1977)

---

9. The apologetic response — and its weaknesses

Muslim apologists respond:

• “Qur’an was revealed in seven ahruf (modes).” But no one knows exactly what these were; early scholars disagreed.

• “Variant readings enrich the meaning.” Yet the Qur’an says it is clear (Qur’an 12:1); clarity is undermined by conflicting meanings.

• “Verses were abrogated.” But abrogation is an admission of change, incompatible with perfect preservation.

These responses evade the core fact: the historical evidence shows multiple competing texts and human editing.

---

10. The reasonable conclusion: a human text, not an eternal tablet

The Qur’an’s textual history looks like every other human scripture: debates, variants, lost passages, and late standardization.

If a text truly came from an all-powerful deity, we should see something different:

• No lost verses.

• No contradictory codices.

• No need for political standardization or destruction of rival texts.

• No surviving archaeological evidence of variants.

Instead, what we see is the opposite.

“The history of the Qur’an, when critically examined, is that of a document which, far from being transmitted word-perfect, shows the marks of human intervention.”
— Arthur Jeffery, 1937

---

🔍 Conclusion: What survives — and what was lost

What Muslims recite today is the product of a human process: memory, debate, editing, and state enforcement. That is historically demonstrable.

Faith may insist that God protected the meaning despite human error. But the claim that every word was preserved unchanged from the lips of Muhammad simply does not survive critical scrutiny.

In a world committed to intellectual honesty, belief must be tested against evidence. And here, the evidence points clearly: the Qur’an’s text was shaped by human hands.

---

📚 References & suggested further reading:

• Arthur Jeffery, Materials for the History of the Text of the Qur'an (1937)

• John Burton, The Collection of the Qur'an (1977)

• Shady Nasser, The Transmission of the Variant Readings of the Qur’an (2012)

• G. S. Reynolds (ed.), The Qur'an in Its Historical Context (2008)

• Behnam Sadeghi and Uwe Bergmann, “The Codex of a Companion of the Prophet” (2010)

• Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif

• Sahih al-Bukhari & Sahih Muslim (various hadiths)

---

💡 Next in the series:

Part 2 — Moral & Scientific Errors: Echoes of a 7th-Century Worldview