reynolds-the-quran-in-its-historical-context-2

186 Gerd-R. PuinHowever, neither the manuscripts consulted nor the printed editionsthis, although the orthography would not be ''wrong" in the light of the casesbelow.I propose to look at the phenomenon of a plene writing before ahamza oh a larger scale, because there are similar cases of allegedly "otiose" .in early manuscripts or in actual Qur'an editions other than the Standard Textfrom Cairo/Medina, apart from the Ia 'uqsimu verses mentioned above. .~':~{':I=GKVowel letters and ortho-epic writing in the Qur'an 181=240, 5,9-11, 14, 18,19= 1,3,4,6-8(Arabic)manuscripts= 7-13,15-19= 5, 9-13, ... JI':I =ACK15-19= 5, 7-19 ~~~ =ACG38 Jeffery/Mendelsohn write erroneously: " ... .:.;'lJ is mistakenly written . .:.;I \1. Doubtless aerror." "Orthography", 190.39 The additional a/if was inserted later. As the variant is not common, but rather seemsbe a singular amendment, it is legitimate to speculate that the one who made this "m,rre,,t;m,"did it because he had another standard in his mind ("ortho-epical"), or because he inserteda/if because of a different manuscript original which he copied and believed to beauthentic.Conclusions drawn from the ortho-epic lengthening of the short Ia/always been clear to the Muslim exegetes that the ':1 in these verses doesmean a negation but an affirmation of the following oath. Although theythe alif, rightly, to be "superfluous/za 'ida" they nevertheless retainedbecause it also evokes the prohibition "no!" In line with this~a~soc:iation an invisible question has been imagined to introduce the verse, suchould you perhaps think that I forget my promises?", which could then be':answered by a:n emphatic ''Nay! I swear ..."Evidently, in order to allow for thisisecortdary exegesis of the wording, the original orthography has not been "modemashave the cases of.&\ Jif, etc. (see above). Of course, this second interpreisnot a philologi~al one but an additional exegesis of the graphical.apjpearartce. However, the correct argument that the alif is superfluous in theseis not explained by the grammarians; it is, in fact, ortho-epic or purelyof the German translations follow this path ("Nein doch! Ich schwore.. " in Paret's translation, which follows Bergstriisser's 1914 Verneinungs­Fragepartikeln). In his English translation Bell even adheres to the negation· not by the Lord of .. .'') although verses 56:75-76 ma:ke it evident thatis intended: "So I swear by the setting of the stars. * And verily that isa great oath, if you but know" (in the translation of al-Hilali).is likely that a careful examination of the Qur'anic text will show that thereinore examples of the ortho-epic alifthan are listed above. This different interwouldnot always produce a totally different meaning, but it could help•. achieve a better understanding of the text,, as in the case of Siira 36:22:·. ·. • < ,, .!.;)I< .. ,\..;: -~lllil":i"J'\;.'.iJY""" :r , • ._,