ing, and may not be refuted, nor would it be lawful to repudiate it; rather, it should be regarded as one of the seven l:zaifs,٧ according to which the Quran was revealed, and it is incumbent on people to accept it regardless of whether it is transmitted on the authority of the seven, or ten, leading readers [of the Quran] or any other acceptable prominent reader. However, when any [one] of these three criteria is not met, then such a reading must be designated as weak, rare, or invalid, regardless of whether it has
been transmitted by one of the seven readers or someone even more prominent.
This opinion is correct and has been maintained by leading scholars of past and present generations. It has been explicitly stated by the leading traditionist Aba Amr
Uthman al-Dani, and has been expressed more than once in writing by the religious scholar Abu Ai)mad Makkib. AbiTalib and [by] Aba al-Abbas Ai)mad b. Ammar al‌ Mahdawi. The leading traditionist Abu al-Qasim Abd al-Rai)man b. lsmaIl, known as Abu Shamma, has confirmed it as being the opinion of all the early scholars, of whom no one is. known to have opposed it.

٢. [Ibn al-Jazari continues]:

Aba Shamma writes in his book al-Murshid al-Wajlz: "One should not be deceived by every reading attributed to one of those leading [readers] and regard it as accurate and declare that it was thus revealed by God, except if it meets [the abovementioned] cri‌ teria. But if they [the readings] do not meet them, no compiler would be alone in trans‌ mitting them, nor would such a compiler limit himself to transmitting them from one of the seven, for their soundness would not be weakened if they were transmitted from someone other than the seven. The evaluation of a reading depends on how much it meets the above criteria, not on the person to whom it is ascribed. In the final analysis, all readings, whether attributed to the seven or others, are classified either as generally accepted or as rare. People feel greater confidence in the seven readers, however, be‌ cause so much of their reading has been generally accepted as sound."٨

٣. Ibn al-Jazari says further:

With regard to this criterion [i.e., sound tradition], a contemporary scholar has stipu‌ lated that the transmission must be uninterrupted [from the Prophets time], and he would not be content with a chain of transmission which is merely sound. He argues that the authenticity of the Quran is not established except through uninterrupted transmis‌ sion, and that anything that has been transmitted through a single narration cannot be considered part of the Quran. The weakness of this argument is obvious, for if unin‌ terrupted transmission were established, there would be no need for any of the other two criteria, like the text [of one of the Uthmanic codices]. This is because whatever variant is confirmed by uninterrupted transmission from the Prophet (peace be upon him) must be accepted definitively as part of the Quran regardless of whether it agrees with the Uthmanic codices or not. If we are to make uninterrupted transmission a con‌ dition in judging every instance of alternative recitation, most of the variant recita‌ tions preserved on the authority of those seven authorities and others would be dis‌ proved. Earlier, I was inclined toward this opinion; but subsequently, its weakness became obvious to me, it being better to agree with the opinion of past and present authorities.

٤. [Ibn al-Jazari continues]:

The great scholar Abu Shamma writes in his book al-Murshid: "It has become well known among the contemporary teachers [of the Quran], and a group among the fol-