As Islam spread, new tribes with varied dialects found it difficult to recite the Quran in the Quraysh dialect. To facilitate this, divine permission was granted to the Prophet ﷺ to teach it in seven Ahruf (seven “modalities”). These were authorized variations in recitation (pronunciation, synonyms), all considered Revelation.
After the death of the Prophet ﷺ, a large number of Quran memorizers were killed at the Battle of Yamama. Caliph Abu Bakr ordered Zayd ibn Thabit to gather all written and oral sources to compile a manuscript of the Quran using the harf of the Prophet ﷺ (that of Quraysh).
The Companions had dispersed and taught the Quran according to the different Ahruf they had learned. When their students met, disagreements arose, each thinking their version was the only correct one.
To end these disputes and unify the community, ‘Uthmān ibn Affān, in consultation with the other senior Companions, made copies of the Quran compiled under the caliphate of Abu Bakr and sent these copies to the capitals of the empire, and ordered that all other personal copies be destroyed.
Since the rasm of Abu Bakr had no diacritical marks or vowels (harakat), the Ahruf that were not compatible with this text were no longer permitted after the standardization of ‘Uthmān.
After standardization, the transmission of the Quran remained primarily oral. In each major city, great masters (the Imams of the Qira'at, such as Nafi' in Medina or 'Asim in Kufa) devoted their lives to collecting and verifying the chains of transmission (isnad) that traced back to the Prophet ﷺ.
Their work was to choose, when faced with several transmissions for the same word, the reading they judged most sound by performing academic selection (Ikhtiyar). The accumulation of these choices between the different readings gives rise to a Qira'ah.
In the 9th and 10th centuries, a scholar named Ibn Mujahid undertook a monumental academic work. He studied the many existing recitations (Qira'ah) and selected the seven he considered most reliable, based on the soundness of their chain of transmission and their eloquence.
His book on these “Seven Readings” became so popular that many people began confusing these 7 Qira'at (a human academic choice) with the 7 Ahruf (the original divine revelation).
Aware of this confusion, later scholars criticized the choice of this number and completed the list with three other equally authentic readers (Abu Ja'far, Ya'qub and Khalaf), fixing the number at ten Qira'at.
Even today, a scholar can establish their own Qiraa by combining existing Qira'at, according to the same principles of selection (Ikhtiyar) as the original Imams.
Here is an example of a difference between qiraat in Surah Al-Baqara (2:259), the same passage can be recited in two ways:
These two recitations are distinct revealed verses, and in this case complementary.
These are often phonetic variations or slight lexical nuances that do not alter the fundamental meaning of the verse. The words change, but the message remains the same.
Example: Surah Al-Fātiḥa, verse 6
The word “path” (ṣirāṭ) is read in different authentic ways that do not change the meaning, reflecting the richness of Arabic dialects:
In all these canonical cases, despite the variations in pronunciation, the word strictly means the same thing: “the path”. The message of the verse remains perfectly identical.
These variations enrich the meaning, offering additional facets and a deeper understanding of the Quranic message. The readings reinforce each other.
Example: Surah Al-Fātiḥa, verse 4
Both terms “Master” and “King” express two complementary dimensions of divine authority: absolute ownership and supreme kingship. These readings harmonize perfectly without contradiction.
Example: Surah Al-Isrā' (17:101–103)
Verse 101:
“And We had certainly given Moses nine evident signs, so ask the Children of Israel [about] when he came to them and Pharaoh said to him, ‘Indeed I think, O Moses, that you are affected by magic.’”
Verse 102 (the two readings):
It is essential to understand that a canonical reading (qirā'a) is not a simple “variant” of the same verse. Each qirā'a constitutes a distinct and authentic verse, revealed as such. We are therefore not reading two versions of a single speech, but two different revealed verses.
These two readings are not two “angles” on a single speech, but the report of two distinct speeches, delivered at two different moments of the confrontation.
1. The reading “I know” (ʿalimtu): A personal defense.
This version is the direct and logical response of Moses to Pharaoh's accusation in verse 101: “I think you are affected by magic.” Faced with this attack on his mental health, Moses defends his integrity and certainty by affirming his own unshakeable knowledge.
2. The reading “You know” (ʿalimta): A direct confrontation.
This version reports another scene: an act of confrontation where Moses attacks Pharaoh's hypocrisy. He no longer defends himself — he accuses. He reminds Pharaoh that deep down he knows the truth but denies it out of pride, a reality confirmed elsewhere in the Quran: “And they rejected them, while their souls were convinced thereof, out of injustice and arrogance.” (An-Naml 27:14).
This method of reporting distinct moments of the same event is not an exception, but a common narrative device in the Quran. Moses's confrontation with Pharaoh's magicians, for example, is told in several surahs that capture dialogues held at different moments of the scene.
First, in Surah Ash-Shu'ara, the Quran reports Moses's words before the magicians begin:
“Moses said to them: ‘Throw whatever you wish to throw.’” (Ash-Shu'ara 26:43)
Then, in Surah Yunus, it reports his words after they threw their staffs:
“When they had thrown, Moses said: ‘What you have produced is [only] magic. Indeed, Allah will expose its futility...’” (Yunus 10:81)
The fact that the Qirā'āt report two distinct dialogues fits perfectly within this narrative logic. They simply act as a different revelation mechanism, allowing the reporting of distinct moments within the same verse position.
A contradiction is when two statements concern the same subject, at the same moment, and in the same context.
Concrete example: The age of King Ahaziah in the Bible
The subject is the same (Ahaziah's age at his coronation), at the same moment (when he became king) and in the same context (Ahaziah's coronation).
Here, we face a choice:
If we accept the scribal error explanation, this resolves the contradiction problem, but it confirms that the current biblical text has not been perfectly preserved from human error.