Saad
Surahs 7
19 & 38

You know,

the suras beginning with the Muqatt'at letters

Saad and Nuun

turn out to have a similar problem and a similar solution.

The letter Saad

is found at the start of three suras

suras 7 19 and 38

but add the letter counts for the suras,

and they come to 153,

not a multiple of 19

but not too far away,

just one letter too many.

In sura 7, however

there is a strange and interesting word in the text

which is at the heart of the controversy.

Just over a third of the way through the sura

in verse 69

there is a word "bastata"

meaning to expand or increase in excellence or power

this word can be spelled in two different ways

with a Siin or with a Saad

and in sura 2 verse 247 it is written with a Siin

but in sura 7 it is written with a Saad,

but pronounced as a Siin,

and to remind the reader of this

it has a small Siin written above the Saad,

and occasionally in some versions of the text

specific instructions

as to the difference in pronunciation.

So if you write that word with the Siin

as it is pronounced,

then the total of letters across the suras

also fits the 19 pattern,

making the total 152 8*19

which was more than enough

for some to give their opinion

that the text should be changed and 'corrected'

as it contained a now obvious 'mistake'.

It was framed as though anything that did not conform to this pattern

beautiful and precise as it might be

could only be seen as a 'mistake'

But that would assume

that God would allow mistakes

in the preservation of the Qur'an

the essential foundation of the whole of muslim civilisation

and that would seem to be rather careless on God's part.

At the same time the earliest texts were nothing like the Qur'ans that we read now

Those muslims were newly learning to read and write,

and their lettering was distinctly primitive.

Look at the messages from Muhammad

to neighbouring monarchs and political leaders

written by his scribes

and you will see better writing

from primary school children today.

The Qur'anic text recently discovered in Birmingham

shows what well written arabic script looked like

at the time of the Messenger.

Neat enough

but almost completely illegible

to most people today

as it would have been at the time

to those who did not know what they were reading.

All the pretty calligraphy came much later.

But those early texts did not need

to define each letter with precision.

There were no dots

to distinguish between letters

they didn't appear for hundreds of years

no vowel marks

but that didn't matter

because the written letters were only used as a reminder.

The text was never more than an aide memoire, a written guide to recitation

and the way that pen and ink have been used

throughout muslim history

to record that vocalisation

is its own subject of study.

This distinction

has always been recognised

with regard to the Qur'an,

vocal recitation takes precedence over written text

So demands for the Qur'an to be 'corrected' are misguided

and not needed for the number patterns to work

The reason that the text is the way that it is

is known to God alone

It is enough for the patterns to work

with the words when they are vocalised

not counting letters on a page

only the letters heard

Is that not magical enough?

The number patterns point not to the written text

but to the sounds

Everything about the text remains the same

There is no need to discredit the numbers

Scholars of the text can see what they might learn

from what the numbers show

and think of what they might imply

for understandings of the words

while mathematicians can apply their skills

to searching for symmetries and frequencies and probabilities

that might as yet be hidden

but only waiting to be discovered.