Refuting the Claim That "And Your Lord Has Decreed" in Al-Isra 17:23 Is a Scribal Error
·12 min read·2485 words
“And Your Lord Has Decreed” in Al-Isra 17:23 Was Originally “And Your Lord Has Commanded” — the Waw Was Accidentally Attached to the Sad A narration attributed to (RA) claims that Al-Isra 17:23 originally read wa wassa rabbuka (and your Lord commanded) rather than wa qada rabbuka (and your Lord decreed), and that a scribe used too much ink, causing the waw to attach to the sad and produce the qaf, changing the word entirely. This is used as evidence that the Quran has been distorted.
This claim is refuted on three grounds established by the scholars: the weakness of every chain of transmission that carries it, the explicit rejection by the scholars of Islam, and its contradiction by the decisive mutawatir reading transmitted by the entire Ummah from the Companions. The narration cannot stand against any one of these three — let alone all three together.
The Narration and Its Sources
The claim rests on several reports attributed to Ibn Abbas (RA) and others:
Sa’id ibn Mansur narrated on the authority of Sa’id ibn Jubayr, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, that he used to say the verse was originally wa wassa rabbuka (and your Lord commanded), with the waw attached to the sad.
Al-Suyuti said: Ibn Ashtah narrated it with the wording: “The writer used a lot of ink, so the waw stuck to the sad.”
Al-Suyuti also narrated it on the authority of Al-Dahhak, who said: “That is not how we read it, nor Ibn Abbas. Rather, it is ‘and your Lord has commanded,’ and that is how it was read and written. Your writer used a lot of ink, so the waw stuck to the sad.” He then recited: “And We have enjoined upon those who were given the Scripture before you and upon you that you fear Allah” — arguing that if it were a decree, no one would have been able to reverse it, but it is a commandment enjoined upon the servants.
Al-Tabari, Abu Ubaid, and Ibn al-Mundhir narrated something similar.
Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar said regarding the report of Sa’id ibn Mansur: “It was narrated with a good chain of transmission.”
What the Books of Tafsir Record
Zad al-Masir
— Zad al-Masir, Vol. 4, p. 155 “The Almighty’s statement: {And your Lord has decreed} — Ibn Abi Talha narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas, who said: Your Lord has commanded. Al-Dahhak narrated from him that he said: It is ‘and your Lord commanded,’ so one of the two waws was attached to the ‘sad.’ This is how , , and read: ‘and He commanded.’ And this is contrary to what was agreed upon by consensus, so no attention should be paid to it.”
Tafsir al-Razi
— Tafsir al-Razi, Vol. 10, p. 30 “And narrated from Ibn Abbas that he said: In this verse the original was ‘and your Lord commanded,’ so one of the two waws was attached to the ‘sad,’ so it was read: ‘and your Lord decreed.’ Then he said: If it were about the decree, no one would have disobeyed God, because going against God’s decree is impossible. This is how al-Dahhak and Sa’id ibn Jubayr narrated it from him, and it is the reading of Ali and Abdullah. And know that this statement is very far-fetched, because it opens the door to the possibility that distortion and change have entered the Quran, and if we were to allow that, then the security of the Quran would be removed, and that would remove it from being an argument, and there is no doubt that it is a great attack on the religion. The Quran has been transmitted to us in a continuous chain of transmission from the Companions, such as Ibn Mas’ud and Ubayy ibn Ka’b, and they read ‘And your Lord decreed.’ So this report is refuted by: (1) the weakness of its chains of transmission; (2) the scholars’ denial of it; (3) the continuous contradiction of it.”
Tafsir al-Lubab
— Tafsir al-Lubab, Vol. 10, p. 270 “And Maimun ibn Mihran narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas that he said about this verse: The original was: ‘And your Lord has commanded,’ then one of the two waws stuck to the sad, so it became a qaf, so it was read: ‘And your Lord has decreed.’ Then he said: If it were up to the decree, no one would have disobeyed God, because opposing God’s decree is impossible. This was narrated by Al-Dahhak ibn Muzahim and Sa’id ibn Jubayr, and it is the reading of Ali and Abdullah. This statement is very far-fetched.”
Tafsir al-Tabari, Vol. 15, p. 63
— Tafsir al-Tabari, Vol. 15, p. 63 Yunus told me, he said: Ibn Wahb told us, he said: said regarding His statement, ‘And your Lord has decreed that you not worship except Him’: He has commanded that you not worship except Him.
Al-Harith told me, he said: Al-Qasim told us, he said: Hisham told us, on the authority of Abu Ishaq al-Kufi, on the authority of Al-Dahhak ibn Muzahim, that he read it: ‘And your Lord has commanded,’ and he said that they attached the waw to the sad, so it became a qaf.
Al-Tabari’s transmission of these reports does not mean al-Tabari believed in them; he transmitted many weak narrations without endorsing them.
Abu Hatim — as transmitted by Al-Tabarani in his tafsir — refused entirely that Ibn Abbas said this.
First Refutation — The Weakness of Every Chain
The Chain Through Yahya ibn Isa
In the wording of Ibn Masoud — transmitted through Abu Kurayb → Yahya ibn Isa → Nusayr ibn Abi al-Ash’ath → Ibn Habib ibn Abi Thabit → his father → Ibn Abbas — the critical weakness is Yahya ibn Isa:
Tabaqat al-Majruhin by “He died in the year 201 AH. He was one of those whose memory was poor and whose errors were frequent, to the point that he began to contradict the established reports in what he narrated from trustworthy people. When that became widespread in his narration, it became invalid to use him as evidence.”
Yahya ibn Isa is weak and listed in Ibn Hibban’s book of discredited narrators. This chain is inadmissible.
The Chain Through Hisham ibn Bashir
The chain through Al-Harith → Al-Qasim → Hisham ibn Bashir → Abu Ishaq al-Kufi → Al-Dahhak ibn Muzahim contains two critical problems: Abu Ishaq al-Kufi is weak, and Hisham ibn Bashir is a famous mudallas who narrates with ‘an.
Taqrib al-Tahdhib, Vol. 1, p. 574 — entry 7312 “Hisham ibn Bashir ibn al-Qasim ibn Dinar al-Salami, Abu Muawiyah ibn Abi Khazim al-Wasiti: trustworthy, reliable, often used to conceal and send narrations in secret, from the seventh generation, died in the year 183 AH.”
Tabaqat al-Mudallisin, Vol. 1, p. 47 — entry 111 “Hisham ibn Bashir al-Wasiti, one of the followers of the Tabi’in, was famous for his tadlis despite his trustworthiness. Al-Nasa’i and others described him as such. Among his wonders in tadlis: his companions said to him, ‘We want you not to tadlis for us in anything,’ so he made an appointment with them. When morning came, he dictated to them a session in which he said at the beginning of each hadith: ‘So-and-so and so-and-so narrated to us on the authority of so-and-so.’ When he finished, he said: ‘Did I tadlis for you today?’ They said: ‘No.’ He said: ‘Everything I narrated from the first, I heard it; and everything I narrated from the second, I did not hear from him.’ This should be called tadlis al-‘atf.”
— Fath al-Bari “The hadith is weak, and that is because of the chain of transmission of Hisham, who was known for forgery, even though he was trustworthy, as he did not explicitly state that he heard it from Abu Ishaq.”
^^Every chain of transmission carrying this claim is either weak, through a known mudallas narrating with ‘an, or through a narrator listed in the books of discredited transmitters. Not one chain is sound.^^
Second Refutation — The Scholars’ Explicit Rejection
The scholars who examined this claim rejected it unanimously and on principle:
— Zad al-Masir, Vol. 5, p. 22 “This is contrary to what the consensus has agreed upon, so no attention should be paid to it.”
“These narrations are weak.”
— Manahil al-‘Irfan fi ‘Ulum al-Quran, Vol. 1, p. 269 “We respond to all of that: first, with what Ibn al-Anbari responded with — that these narrations are weak. Second, these narrations contradict the decisive mutawatir, which is the reading ‘and he has decreed,’ and the decisive opposing one is invalid. Third, Ibn Abbas himself has been widely reported to have read ‘and he has decreed,’ and that is evidence that what was attributed to him in those narrations is cheap intrigues that were fabricated by the enemies of Islam. No one would cling to the tails of such a weak narration except an atheist, and no one would raise his voice about it except an enemy of Islam.”
Third Refutation — Contradiction by the Mutawatir Reading
The reading wa qada rabbuka (and your Lord has decreed) is mutawatir — transmitted by the entire Ummah through the Companions without interruption. This includes Ibn Abbas himself, Ibn Masoud, al-Hasan, and Qatadah — the very figures the weak narrations claim supported the alternative reading.
Abu Hayyan said in Al-Bahr: “The mutawatir is ‘and he has decreed,’ and it is widely reported from Ibn Abbas, al-Hasan, and Qatadah — meaning he ordered. Ibn Masoud and his companions said it means he commanded.”
The narration attributing the alternative reading to Ibn Abbas is therefore directly contradicted by the widely reported narration from Ibn Abbas himself affirming the standard reading. A mutawatir reading cannot be overturned by a weak chain narrated through a discredited transmitter.
Fourth — There Is No Contradiction Between the Two Meanings
Even setting aside the weakness of the chains and the scholarly rejection, the argument collapses linguistically — because qada already carries the meaning of command and enjoining as one of its established Arabic senses. There is no scribal error that needs to be explained, because the word in the mushaf means what the alternative reading also means.
Mukhtar al-Sihah, Vol. 1, p. 226, under the root q-d-y:
Qada — Mukhtar al-Sihah, Vol. 1, p. 226 Qada, yaqdi, with the broken form qada’, meaning: ruling. From this, the Most High said: “And your Lord has decreed that you not worship except Him.” It may also mean: finishing. You say: He fulfilled his need and struck him, so he killed him, as if he had finished with him. And he fulfilled his desire — he died. It may also mean: paying and concluding. You say: He completed his debt. From this, the Most High said: “And We decreed to the Children of Israel in the Book.” And the Most High said: “And We decreed to him that matter” — meaning We completed it to him and conveyed it to him. Al-Farra’ said in his statement: “The Most High said: Then carry it out to me” — meaning: go to me, as it is said: So-and-so died, meaning he passed away. It may also mean: making and estimating. It is said: qada’a, meaning he made it and estimated it. From this, the Most High said: “So he appointed them seven heavens in two days.” From this comes al-qada’ wal-qadar, and the chapter of all is what we have mentioned. It is said: So-and-so was appointed a judge. And the prince was appointed a judge with the shaddah, like amir, and anqadah al-shay’ and taqdā mean: necessitated. His religion and its rulings mean: he decided; his milk means: he decided it; and the falcon pounced — and its origin is taqaddudh, so when the letters dad became numerous, they replaced one of them with a ya’. So the making and the estimation are one of the meanings of the ruling and are not limited to it — so ponder.
The word qada encompasses ruling, ordering, willing, completing, making, and commanding. The supposed contradiction between qada (decreed) and wassa (commanded) does not exist — they overlap in meaning, and qada is the broader and more complete word.
This meaning of qada as command appears in the Quran in other places:
“And it is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should have any option in their decision.”
Here qada means judgment and command — not pre-eternal decree.
“But no, by your Lord, they will not truly believe until they make you judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in full, willing submission.”
“Indeed, it is We who sent down the Quran and indeed, We will be its guardian.”
There is no room for doubt in the Noble Book of God, which He promised to preserve. The claim that a scribe accidentally attached a waw to a sad and altered the word of God — and that this alteration went unnoticed and uncorrected across the entire Ummah through every Companion, every Tabi’i, and every generation of reciters — is not a historical claim. It is a fantasy that contradicts the mutawatir transmission of the Quran and the explicit promise of its Lord.
The claim that Al-Isra 17:23 was altered by a scribe’s excess ink fails on every level. Its chains are weak — through Yahya ibn Isa (discredited by Ibn Hibban) and Hisham ibn Bashir (a famous mudallas narrating with ‘an through a weak Abu Ishaq al-Kufi). Every scholar who examined it — al-Razi, Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn Adel, Ibn al-Anbari, al-Zarqani — rejected it unanimously, and al-Razi identified it explicitly as an attack on the religion. The mutawatir reading wa qada rabbuka is reported from Ibn Abbas, Ibn Masoud, al-Hasan, and Qatadah themselves — the same figures the weak narrations claim supported the alternative. And linguistically, qada already carries the meaning of command, ordering, and enjoining — making the supposed need for a scribal correction nonexistent.