Abd al Malik and His Role in Quran’s Canonization

By Arshad Alam, New Age Islam 23 February 2023 Why The Reluctance To Talk About It When It Is Attested By Multiple Traditions? Main Points: 1. Islamic narrative says that the third caliph Uthman canonized the Quran. 2. But Uthman was killed in his own house by fellow Muslims; apparently, he never had the moral authority or the political power to impose his will. 3. In order to have one text imposed over all other existing ones, we must assume a powerful state and it was only the Marwanid state, under caliph Abd al Malik, which possessed the power to do so. 4. In the whole of early Islamic literature, there is only one source (al Zuhri) which links Uthman to Quranic compilation. 5. And even this source is dubious; making the claims of an Uthmanic standardization highly unlikely. 6. In contrast, there are multiple sources (both Islamic and non-Islamic) attesting the roles of Abd al Malik and his strongman Hajjaj ibn Yusuf in standardizing the Quran. ------ Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan ibn al-Hakam was the fifth Umayyad caliph, ruling from April 685 until his death in October 705. ------ The Islamic tradition tells us that the Quranic compilation started shortly after the Prophet’s death in 632. Some traditions state that the codification of the text was already underway during the time of the first caliph, but his death in 634 put this process to a temporary halt. Some hadiths debunk this claim by stating that Abu Bakr himself was reluctant to codify it as a book, as the Prophet himself didn’t do it in his lifetime. But there is almost near unanimity within the Islamic tradition that the process was completed during the time of the third caliph, Uthman. This unanimity though is only within what is called the ‘Sunni tradition’; the Shia texts tells a very different story regarding the process of compilation. Leaving this important Shia story for some other time, let us concentrate only on the Sunni narration of events for the time being. The claim is that Uthman not only selected one codex (Mushaf) from the existing ones but also commanded that all others be destroyed. It was this Uthmanic codex, sent to all parts of the expanding empire, which till today continues to be treated as the standard Quran. Islamic tradition also tells us that Uthman died a violent death at the hands of Muslims, primarily Egyptians, but amongst the murderous mob were also second-generation Muslims, like the son of Abu Bakr. Uthman was killed in his own house in 656, after being surrounded and threatened for days together by an angry Muslim mob outside who thought that he had betrayed them. In the city of Medina itself, the caliph could not summon enough people to guard him. What kind of political authority did Uthman hold then? Logically, this authority must be extremely limited, otherwise it is simply impossible that he would be killed in his own dwelling. All of this story comes from our Islamic tradition. And yet the same tradition also tells us that Uthman had the authority to confiscate variant readings of the Quran and burn them; that he had the power to make one variant of the text the standard version and that everyone accepted this imposition. Can a man who could not protect his own dwelling be powerful enough to enforce his will across the empire? It doesn’t seem likely. The Islamic state was in a very nascent state; the assumption that Usman wielded the authority to enforce one standardized Quran looks very far-fetched, though not impossible. Given the limited authority of caliph Uthman, his codex can only be understood as regional rather than national and it competed with other codices that were extant at the time. Moreover, the reason why Usman was killed has to do with his nepotism, corruption, etc. The fact that he destroyed all other codices was not the reason for protests against his rule. How shall we understand this? If early Muslims were so devoted to the Quran as it is made out to be, then surely, they must have protested against this imposition by Uthman. But they did not. This possibly means that the story of Usman being the compiler of the Quran does not have a sound basis. But if all that Uthman was attempting to do was to have a regional codex, then there would’ve been no need for early Muslims to be offended as they must have known about the existence of competing codices. There is therefore sound basis not to end the story of the canonization of the Quran with Uthman. There is another memory which is part of the Sunni Islamic tradition itself which places this standardization fifty years later, during the time of the Marwanid caliph Abd al Malik. This is part of the Islamic memory because early Muslims themselves have written about it. Scholars like Baladhuri and others have mentioned this in their works. Building upon this tradition, modern scholarship is arguing that the standardization of the Quran must be seen as a process, which did not end during the time of Uthman. Rather there were much later interlocutors who had decisively intervened in this process. They argue that the interventions made during the reign of Abd al Malik (785-705) and his regime henchman al Hajjaj ibn Yusuf (d. 714) were of critical importance. Al Hajjaj was the governor of Iraq and it is to him that many of the Quranic improvements are attributed during the period (702-705), but certainly it would not have been possible without the consent of the caliph Abd al Malik. Omar Hamdan has argued that al Hajjaj was aided in this endeavour by a committee of Ulama, all of whom came from Basra. He further argues that Hajjaj wanted to get rid of the variant codex of Ibn Masud which was popular in Kufa, another Iraqi city. Thus, Hamdan hints that this new codification led by al Hajjaj should be understood as a Sunni theological revival against the restive followers of Ali located largely in the province of Kufa. After the process was complete, Hajjaj gave orders to destroy all the variant codex, assigning this task to three people who would be paid 60 dirhams for each such codex destroyed. Thus, we find much similarity between Usman and Hajjaj’s handling of the varying readings of the Quran. It is beyond doubt that as compared to the times of Uthman, the state under Abd al Malik was in a position to enforce its writ through a loyal army which had levelled all opposition. Hajjaj had himself led the expedition to rout the rival caliphate of Abdullah ibn Zubayr based in Mecca not so long ago. However, it is also a fact that Abd al Malik himself proclaimed in Medina that he did not produce a new Quran; rather he was only re-introducing the Uthmanic Quran. The Sunni scholarship has mostly accepted this claim as true without any interrogation. But what about all the memories associated with al Hajjaj and his destruction of the variant Qurans which survive in Islamic and non-Islamic sources? And what was the need of such a proclamation? Can it be that he was trying to allay the fears and anger of the Medinan Muslims due to his redaction of the Quran? How should we understand this? It is a fact that the early Islamic literature does not have any recollection of Uthman’s attempt at codification. Islamic literature recollects this Uthmanic effort only much later in middle of 8th and some in the 9th centuries, by which time, al Hajjaj’s codification had already finished (705). What is more interesting is that all those who write about the Uthmanic codification ultimately go back to one source for their information: al Zuhri. Al Zuhri is mightily intriguing figure in early Islamic history, who is a contemporary witness to whatever Abd al Malik and al Hajjaj were doing. So in that sense, he is important but at the same time, he is the only source through which we came to know about the Uthmanic Quran. Harold Motzki, the famous Hadith scholar, has given a solid argument which traces the tradition of Uthmanic collection very strongly to al Zuhri. But as we have seen, this is the one and the only source on which this entire narrative edifice is based. It is part of the Islamic historiography that truthfulness of a particular tradition should be attested by those who are of an exemplary character. So, it is logical to ask who was this al Zuhri and how exemplary was his character. Al Zuhri was extremely close to the Umayyads and under Abd al Malik, he held various official positions as a judge and even a tax collector. Contemporary scholars of the times have accused him of being a shock trooper of the Umayyads and denounce him as an axle of falsehoods. His being in service of the Abd al Malik certainly comprises his position as someone who could have maintained his intellectual integrity for long. The fact that al Zuhri will eventually retire with a gift of an estate tells us that he was never on the wrong side of the caliph. It is entirely possible therefore that al-Zuhri’s attempt to make Uthman as the first successful collector of Quran was aimed at benefitting Abd al Malik. But why would Abd al Malik want to do so? Abd al Malik would do this because his deputy al Hajjaj had recently besieged Medina and hence it was important to allay their fears so that the caliphate does not face any fresh resistance. Abd al Malik would also do so to proclaim the superiority of Umayyads; the first one to do so was Uthman and he was perfecting the work of his predecessor. Thus, although the revelation came within the Hashemites, but it would be the Umayyads who would make the Quran into an insignia of an imperial state. It is important to recall that the Umayyads do not trace their origin from Muwaviya, rather they trace it from Uthman. Moreover, by this time, the Arab empire had come into day to day contact with Christians who had a book which the Arabs did not possess or if they possessed had too many variants. If we look at Abd al Malik’s reign, we see the process of Arabization: the use of Arabic rather than Byzantine coins, the encouragement of Arabic as the court language, etc. The Arabic Quran was the gift of this imperial state to its people. But so as not to effect a rupture within the Umayyad legacy, Uthman became important and hence credited with the first attempt at codifying the Arabic Quran. Abd al Malik seems to be proclaiming that the Umayyads not just gave them the Quran (canonized) but also gave the Muslims the power to spread the Quran by establishing an Islamic state. Multiple sources exist for what Abd al Malik and al Hajjaj did with the Quran. These sources are not just contemporary and Islamic but also from outside the Islamic tradition. Omar Hamdan lists a whole host of Muslim names who collaborated on this project with the Umayyad state at that time. From outside the Islamic tradition, we have John of Damascus (675-749) writing about the Quran with reference to the redaction of Abd al Malik. The exchange of letters between the Byzantine emperor Leo III (717-741) and Umayyad caliph Umar II (717-720) also has a reference to this episode. There is consensus in the Islamic world that it was Uthman who produced the first standardized Quranic codex although the claim is very thin as it based on a single source and too of a dubious character. But there is near silence on the second standardization during the time of Abd al Malik which is attested through multiple sources, both Islamic and non-Islamic. In terms of modern historical scholarship, it will only be the latter which will be taken as more credible. More importantly though, why is it that Muslims do not want to acknowledge the contribution of Abd al Malik and Hajjaj ibn Yusuf in the canonization of the Quran? Is it because it will place the standardization of the Quran at a much later date and this will upset many of their traditional formulations? ------ A regular contributor to NewAgeIslam.com, Arshad Alam is a writer and researcher on Islam and Muslims in South Asia. URL: https://newageislam.com/islamic-personalities/abd-malik-quran-canonization-umayyad-caliph/d/129179 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism