There are different approaches toward anomalous readings, one of them belongs to Abu ʾUbaid Qasim bin Sallam. Bin Sallam reported that his masters have used and interpreted anomalous readings to express canonical reading. Since such approach has given literary-semantic dimension to the readings and ...
Read More
There are different approaches toward anomalous readings, one of them belongs to Abu ʾUbaid Qasim bin Sallam. Bin Sallam reported that his masters have used and interpreted anomalous readings to express canonical reading. Since such approach has given literary-semantic dimension to the readings and their being, it can draw attention to reexamine. It is worth noting that a century later – in Ibn Mujahid’s era- the readings have got tradition (Hadith) dimension. A new discourse emerged because of such changing approach, as a result the anomalous readings and their being met new challenges. Consequently, two centuries later, Ibn Hazm reported that the roots of anomalous readings lied in the delusion of Readers and denied any difference between Ibn Masʾud’s and canonical codifications. In order to approve Abu ʾUbaid’s viewpoint, we have examined his reading through Farrā’s Maʾāni al-Qurʾān (who was one of his masters) and concluded that the latter have used Ibn Masʾud’s reading as a literary-semantic aspect. The usage of Ibn Masʾud’s reading to express other literary aspects of a given Qurʾānic verse, considering it as a proof to other readings, reciting it as a specific “meaning” of a given verse letters, and finally approving or denying other reflections based on this reading all are witness to our above-mentioned claim.
