cite a statement attributed to Abu Amr ibn al-Ala’, the renowned Basri reciter and linguist, alleging that he expressed shame at reciting a Quranic verse and thereby challenged the integrity of the Quran. This post demonstrates that the narration attributed to him has no chain of transmission and is therefore baseless, and that his authentic statement — preserved with a sound chain — affirms the established principle that recitation must be transmitted from teacher to student, not invented by individual preference. We examine the defective trace, the authentic report from Al-Asma’i, and the classical scholarly consensus on the transmission of Quranic readings.

The Alleged Challenge and Its Defective Chain

The narration attributed to Abu Amr ibn al-Ala’ — that he was “ashamed” to recite Inna hadhani la-sahiran (Indeed, these two are magicians) — appears in tafsir and qira’at literature without any chain of transmission linking it back to him. It is mentioned by Abu al-Qasim al-Naysaburi in Ijaz al-Bayan (2/549) and by Al-Fakhr al-Razi in Mafatih al-Ghayb (22/65), but neither provides an isnad. Without a chain, the text is merely a report of a report — hearsay upon hearsay — and cannot be attributed to Abu Amr with any confidence.

The Authentic Statement: Recitation as Received Tradition

On the authority of Al-Asma’i, he said: I heard Abu Amr ibn Al-Ala’ say: “If it were not for the fact that I cannot recite except as it was recited, I would have recited the letter such-and-such and the letter such-and-such.”What is meant by “the letter” here is the recitation (qira’ah). Narrated by Ibn Mujahid in al-Sab’ah (47), and al-Mustaghfiri in Fada’il al-Qur’an (1/373), and authenticated by al-Saloum, the investigator of al-Fada’il.

So his saying “was recited” means: I recited it to my sheikhs. A group of the imams of the Salaf used to say: “Recitation is a followed Sunnah,” meaning: “The later takes it from the earlier, and the person stops at what is heard, he does not recite as he wishes.”Proven from the hadith of Ali with a chain of transmission traceable back to the Prophet, and Zaid bin Thabit, Muhammad bin al-Munkadir, and Urwah bin al-Zubayr from their statement. See: al-Muqaddimat al-Asasiyah (180). See also al-Muqaddimat al-Asasiyah (179).

Accordingly, Abu Amr’s statement means: “I am ashamed to recite Inna hadhani la-sahiran because I cannot recite except as it has been recited — I recited it to my sheikhs — and the way to accurately recite the Quran is to hear and receive it from the mouths of the sheikhs. If it were not for that, I would recite with such and such a letter from the other letters.” Abu Amr’s shyness comes from the fact that he does not recite except as he received it from his sheikhs, while other readings were confirmed to him as is apparent from the trace, not because he believed that the verse was incorrect.

The Linguistic Reality of the Verse

The verse in question — Inna hadhani la-sahiran (Indeed, these two are magicians) [Ta-Ha 20:63] — has multiple authenticated readings, all of which are linguistically valid and transmitted from the Prophet ﷺ through the Companions. The variation concerns the pronunciation of the particle inna and the dual form hadhani.

The reading of Hafs from Asim — the most widespread today — reads in with a light pronunciation (without shaddah on the nun) and hadhani with an alif: In hadhani la-sahiran. Its explanation: the original is inna hadhani, so inna was lightened by deleting the second nun, and it was neglected as is most common when it is lightened. What comes after it is raised by the beginning and the predicate, so the alif was brought. Its equivalent is that you say: inna Zaidan qaimun (indeed, Zaid is standing), so if you lighten it, then it is more correct to say: in Zaidan qaimun, on the beginning and the predicate.

The reading of the majority — except for Ibn Kathir, Abu Amr, and Hafs from Asim — reads inna with a shaddah and hadhani with an alif. This is in the language of Bilharith bin Kaab, Khatham, Zubayd, Kinanah, and others, where they always ask for the dual with an alif. You say: jaa al-Zaydani (the two Zayds came), ra’aytu al-Zaydani (I saw the two Zayds), marartu bi-al-Zaydani (I passed by the two Zayds).

The reading of Abu Amr ibn al-Ala’ — reads in with a shaddah on the nun and hadhayni with a ya: Inna hadhayni la-sahirani. This is in accordance with the well-known traditions of Arabic, where the dual is marked with the ya ending. Abu Amr’s reading is not a rejection of the verse but one of the seven canonical readings, each with its own linguistic basis and chain of transmission back to the Prophet ﷺ.

Sources

1. Al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi (1/350).

2. Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Tahrir Ulum al-Hadith (1/24), authenticated trace of al-Qattan.

3. “The letter” here means the recitation (qira’ah).

4. Narrated by Ibn Mujahid in al-Sab’ah (47), and al-Mustaghfiri in Fada’il al-Qur’an (1/373), authenticated by al-Saloum.

5. Proven from the hadith of Ali with a chain traceable to the Prophet, and Zaid bin Thabit, Muhammad bin al-Munkadir, and Urwah bin al-Zubayr. See: al-Muqaddimat al-Asasiyah (180).

6. al-Muqaddimat al-Asasiyah (179).

7. Ibn al-Jazari, al-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-‘Ashr (1/17).

8. Linguistic analysis of inna hadhani and inna hadhayni from classical qira’at sources.

   Related

The Claim of a Grammatical Error in Quran 20:63 — A Complete Refutation