Collection Traditions and the Alteration (Ta/Jfif) of the
Quran through Addition

If these traditions were authentic, and if it were possible to use them as evidence that alteration through omission (naq)
ever made this deduction would take them as evidence of alteration through addition (ziyada). The reason is that the method presumably employed in collecting the Quran entails this corollary. It is not possible for anyone to deny this on the grounds that the extent of inimitability of Quranic eloquence precludes the possibility of adding to its text, and for that reason no analogy can be drawn between alteration through addition and alteration through omission. The reason that such an argument cannot be made is the fact that while the Qurans inimitability can preclude the possibility of matching a whole sura, it cannot prevent the addition to its text of a word or two or even a full verse, especially if it were a short one. Had such a possibility not existed, there would have been no need for the testimony of two witnesses, as related in the collection traditions, for a verse brought by a single person could have proved itself, by its eloquence, to be part of the Quran. Therefore, whoever maintains that ta/:trif occurred cannot avoid the corollary that additions have occurred as well, and this is absolutely against the consensus of the Muslims.
To conclude, the attribution of the collection of the Quran to the caliphs is an imagined view, contrary to the Book of God, the Sunna of the Prophet, and reason. It is not possible, for those who believe that ta/:trif occurred, to use this belief in their arguments and assertions. Even if we were to admit that AbU Bakr was the one who collected the Quran during his caliphate, then we should have no doubt that the method of collection described in thes!! traditions is fallacious, and that the collec‌ tion of the Quran was based on its uninterrupted transmission among Muslims. All that happened, in other words, is that the collector recorded in a codex what was preserved in the memories by means of successive transmission from the Prophet.
There is, however, no doubt that Uthman collected the Quran during his time, not in the sense that he collected the verses and the suras in one volume, but in the sense that he united the Muslims on the reading of one authoritative recension, destroyed all the other texts that disagreed with it, wrote to the other regions of the empire to [have them] destroy all the copies in their possession, and forbade people to dispute the manner of reading the Quran. These facts have been accepted explic‌ itly by a large number of Sunni scholars.
Al-I:Iarith al-Mul_lasibi writes:

The prevalent view among people is that the one who collected the Quran was Uthman, but they are wrong. Uthman compelled people to read [the Quran] in a uniform way on the basis of a selection which he agreed upon with the Muhajirun (Emigrants) and An$ar (Helpers) who were present at the time. He did this because he feared the out‌ break of sedition as a result of the dispute between the people of Iraq and Syria regard‌ ing the "styles" (/;arfs) of the readings. Before this, several versions of the text existed, based on the seven l;arfs in which the Quran was revealed...."٢٠

As for the one reading on which Uthman united the Muslims this reading was the one in circulation among Muslims, and which reached them through uninterrupted transmission from the Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny). Moreover, he