Examination of the Views of Juynboll Concerning Qur ʾ anic Sciences

Qurʾanic studies examines issues related to understanding of the Qurʾan. The orientalist Juynboll has examined some of the most important topics in Qurʾanic studies including revelation, collection, and recitation of the Qurʾan. The present study evaluates his ideas concerning these issues. This library study takes an analytic and critical approach to the topic at hand. Descriptive methods are also utilised. Though examination of the views of Juynboll concerning Qurʾanic sciences is the focus of this endeavour, the views of Muslim scholars are also considered for completion of the study. Through examination of Juynboll’s views on Qurʾanic sciences, it is clear that he has conducted significant research on Islamic sources. However, his use of weak (ḍaʿīf) Islamic narratives has led to errors in some areas of the Qurʾanic sciences.


Introduction
The term Qurʾanic sciences is a combination of the words Qurʾanic and sciences.Sciences is a plural word meaning knowledge and the Qurʾan is the main name of the Muslim scripture.Qurʾanic sciences study the Qurʾan as a knowable phenomenon.This discipline deals with a variety of topics, the most important of which include the manner of Qurʾanic revelation, collection of the Qurʾan, recitation of the Qurʾan, lack of distortion in the Qurʾan, relationships between Qurʾanic verses such as nāsikh and mansūkh, muḥkam and mutashābih, and ʿām and khāṣ.
The aim of Qurʾanic sciences is understanding of all aspects of the Qurʾan (Saʿīdī Rawshan, 2009, pp. 19-20;Zarqānī, 1995, vol. 1, p. 31).Orientalists have been studying the Qurʾan for many years.They have published the results of their Qurʾanic research in the form of scientific articles, books, and encyclopaedias (Rezaee Haftador, 2015, p. 33).Gautier H. A. Juynboll (1935Juynboll ( -2010) ) is one such orientalist.The present study takes a descriptive and analytic approach to answer the following questions. What are the views of Juynboll with regard to Qurʾanic sciences?
 To what extent are these views congruous with Islamic teachings?
This view is unacceptable due to the following reasons.1) Prophet Muḥammad would frequently warn Muslims about forgetting the Qurʾan.The following Islamic traditions substantiate this fact.a. ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd has quoted, The Prophet of Islam has stated, "How bad it is for one of you to say, 'I have forgotten a certain verse of the Qurʾan!' Commit the Qurʾan to memory and regularly recall it."'b.Saʿd ibn ʿUbādah has quoted, "The Prophet of Islam has stated, 'Whoever memorises the Qurʾan and then forgets it shall meet God as a leper on the Day of Resurrection."'c.The Prophet of Islam has stated, "All the rewards of my people were shown to me, even the reward for taking a straw out of a mosque.Further, all the sins of my people were shown to me, and I saw no sin greater than that of a person who had memorised a chapter or verse of the Qurʾan and then forgot it" (ʿĀmilī, 1990, pp. 374-375).
Considering these traditions, it is not possible to accept that the Prophet of Islam himself forgot parts of the Qurʾan.
2) It would be the greatest of failings for the Prophet of Islam to forget a Qurʾanic verse since, had he forgotten his miracle and the purpose of his mission, his message would no longer have been reliable.In this case, prophethood would have been beyond his competence.Could the Prophet of Islam have condemned others for an attribute he himself did not possesses?Since the Prophet of Islam is truly infallible, he cannot commit any errors or mistakes (Muẓaffar, 1975, p. 415).
4) The Qurʾan is the core of the call to Islam.Even if one were to assume that the Prophet of Islam was capable of forgetting something, there is not even the slightest likelihood that this forgetfulness could exist with regard to the Qurʾan which is fundamentally linked with his message.5) Forgetfulness of Quranic verses by the Prophet of Islam would mean that he did not pay attention to requirements set by the Qurʾan whereas no reasonable person would accept that the Prophet disregarded verses of the Qurʾan (ʿĀmilī, 1990, pp. 375-376).

Collection of the Qurʾan after the Lifetime of the Prophet of Islam
According to Juynboll, the Prophet of Islam did not collect the verses of the Qurʾan in a single codex since this could have led to persistence of a verse even after its decree was abrogated (Juynboll, 2002, vol. 2, pp. 382-383).This view is not justifiable.To explain, during the lifetime of the Prophet of Islam, the possibility of a decree being abrogated while the text of the verse persisted would not have been in conflict with the collection of the Qurʾan since in the case of the abrogation of a decree and the continued existence of the related verse, it is the decree that is binding not the verse text itself, while in the collection of the Qurʾan, it is the text that is important.

The Chapters of Khalʿ and Ḥafd
Juynboll mentions two chapters by the names of Khalʿ and Ḥafd, which were included in the muṣḥaf (codex) of Ubayy ibn Kaʿb, a well-known Companion (Juynboll, 2002, vol. 2, p. 385).
The great Companion, Ubayy ibn Kaʿb, was falsely accused of adding two chapters, Khalʿ (lit.repudiation and renunciation) and Ḥafd (haste and competition), to the end of his Qurʾanic codex.
These two chapters cannot be considered part of the Qurʾan for a number of reasons. 1) Examination of the text of these two chapters demonstrates that they are inconsistent with the style and eloquence of the Qurʾan.The structure of the verses is at variance with the structure of the Qurʾan, and it is unreasonable to assume that a person such as Ubayy ibn Kaʿb would not be aware of this (ʿĀmilī, 1990, p. 329;Maʿrifat, 1990, p. 171;Rāmyār, 2001, p. 351;Balāghī, 1999, vol. 1, pp. 23-24).
2) It has never been claimed that these two chapters were submitted as part of the Qurʾan during its collection.During the period of Abū Bakr, Ubayy ibn Kaʿb personally participated in collection of the Qurʾan.If he truly believed that these two chapters were part of the Qurʾan, he should have presented them during collection of the Qurʾan.In addition, the team appointed by ʿUthmān to collect the Qurʾan transcribed only that which was a part of the Qurʾan and put aside everything else including the chapters of Khalʿ and Ḥafd.This also indicates that these chapters were not part of the Qurʾan (Rāmyār, 2001, p. 350;Maʿrifat, 1990, p. 172).
3) According to one narrative-which may or may not be correct-it seems that Khalʿ and Ḥafd were supplications the Prophet of Islam entreated during ritual prayers.As it was customary at the time to write prayers at the end of the Qurʾanic codex, Ubayy ibn Kaʿb included these two chapters at the end of his (Maʿrifat, 1990, p. 171).

The "Verse of Stoning" (rajm)
Juynboll was of the opinion that a verse, which was called the "Verse of Stoning" and claimed to have been revealed to the Prophet of Islam, was later omitted from the ʿUthmānic codex (Juynboll, 2002, vol. 2, p. 385).
A number of issues must be considered concerning the "Verse of Stoning".1) There are varied accounts concerning the original text of the "Verse of Stoning".These differences indicate that the verse is not authentic (Khūʾī, 1974, pp. 220-221).
2) Examination of the text of the "Verse of Stoning" demonstrates that it is a weak composition, which in turn shows that it is not befitting of the holy Qurʾan (ʿĀmilī, 1990, pp. 352;Balāghī, 1999, vol. 1, p. 22).
3) There is no verse in the Qurʾan indicative of the decree of stoning, and if Islamic narratives discussing the "Verse of Stoning" are correct, it would indubitably mean that a verse has been omitted from the Qurʾan.This would prove distortion of the extant Qurʾan.However, using cogent arguments, scholars have proven that the Qurʾan has not been distorted (Fakhr Rāzī, 2000, vol. 19, p. 123;Ṭabarī, 1992, vol. 14, p. 7;Thaʿlabī Nīshābūrī, 2002, vol. 5, pp. 331-332;Ibn Kathīr, 1999, vol. 4, p. 453;Maʿrifat, 1990, vol. 2, p. 145;Khūʾī, 1974, p. 226;Jawādī Āmulī, 2011, vol. 1, p. 99).4) Concerning the "Verse of Stoning", it was claimed that it was part of the Qurʾan but that the text was abrogated while the Islamic decree necessitating stoning remained.This claim is tantamount to claiming distortion.Akhbār āḥād (narratives from single transmitters) cannot be used as evidence in the issue of abrogation.There is consensus among Muslims that just as the Qurʾan, in part or as a whole, cannot be validated by a narrative from a single transmitter, abrogation of the Qurʾan cannot be established by such a narrative either.In addition to consensus among Muslims, it is the nature of sensitive and important topics to spread among the people very quickly.Therefore, the report of an important event through a narrative by a single transmitter itself proves that the event did not occur and that the transmitter either lied or made a mistake.When an important event occurs, many people report it and it becomes widely known among the people.Considering this, how can a narrative by a single transmitter prove that the "Verse of Stoning" was originally a Qurʾanic verse that was omitted from the Qurʾan while its decree remained valid?ʿUmar ibn Khaṭṭāb asserted a statement as the "Verse of Stoning" claiming that it was part of the Qurʾan.However, since he was the only one to quote this verse, the Muslims did not accept or include it in the Qurʾan.Some scholars later claimed that the text of the verse was abrogated from the Qurʾan while its decree remained (Khūʾī, 1974, p. 304;Burūjirdī, 1996, p. 111).
5) It is reported that during the collection of the Qurʾan after the time of the Prophet of Islam, ʿUmar ibn Khaṭṭāb quoted the "Verse of Stoning" to Zayd ibn Thābit.However, Zayd did not accept the verse since ʿUmar was the only one to quote it and did not have any evidence to support his claim.This proves that the "Verse of Stoning" was not part of the Qurʾan since the Prophet of Islam had scribes to write down verses when they were revealed.The Companions also had codices of the Qurʾan that they had written during the period of the Prophet of Islam.Furthermore, many people had memorised the Qurʾan during the period of the Prophet, and no part of the Qurʾan had been lost.If the "Verse of Stoning" was actually a part of the Qurʾan, why did not any of the Quranic scribes, Companions, or memorisers of the Qurʾan validate ʿUmar ibn Khaṭṭāb's claim (ʿĀmilī, 1990, p. 348)?
6) The unanimity of the Companions in opposition to ʿUmar's notion led him to doubt the verse.For this reason, even during his rule, he did not issue the command to add the "Verse of Stoning" to the Qurʾan.The pretext that ʿUmar's fear that the people would say he added something to the book of God prevented him is unreasonable since it is generally known that when ʿUmar ibn Khaṭṭāb resolved to do something, fear of the people did not deter him.Thus, even the one who originally claimed that it was a verse of the Qurʾan was not certain (Maʿrifat, 1993, p. 162).
7) The following report completely undermines the idea of the decree of stoning as a Qurʾanic verse.It is reported that ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib flogged Sharāḥah Hamdāniyyah on Thursday and stoned her on Friday.ʿAlī declared, "I flogged her in accordance with the book of God and stoned her in accordance with the tradition (sunnah) of the Prophet of Islam".This report shows that the decree of stoning is a Prophetic tradition not a Qurʾanic verse (Balāghī, 1999, vol. 1, p. 23).8) Concerning the "Verse of Stoning", it is claimed that the text of such verse has been abrogated while its decree has remained valid.The following criticism is directed at this claim.The only way to prove a decree is through its text.Therefore, with the loss of the text, the decree is also rendered invalid.There does not seem to be any sense to invalidation of the text only.What is the benefit to abrogation of the text only while the decree persists (ʿArīḍ, 1973, p. 224)?If benefit (maṣlaḥat) necessitated the revelation of this verse and the verse covered a fixed religious decree, on what basis must the text of this verse be abrogated while benefit requires persistence of the text to act as evidence for the religious decree (Maʿrifat, 1990, vol. 2, p. 287).

Revelation of the Qurʾan in Seven Readings
Discussing revelation of the Qurʾan in seven readings (qirāʾāt or aḥruf), Juynboll writes, "On various occasions the Prophet is supposed to have taught his followers one particular wording of a qurʾānic [sic] fragment at one time and at other times other wordings, concluding: '… recite it in the way that is easiest for you.' ...When ʿUmar was once reported to have voiced his anxiety as to what is truly qurʾānic [sic] and what not, the Prophet is said to have reassured him with the words: 'Every phrase that is purported to be part of the Qurʾān is correct as long as forgiveness...is not confused with chastisement...or chastisement with forgiveness,' and 'Each of the seven aḥruf is 'sufficient and restores health' (kāfin shāfin).'"(Juynboll, 2002, vol. 2, p. 385).
A number of issues must be noted concerning revelation of the Qurʾan in seven readings.The most significant narratives in this regard are presented and discussed below.
1) Ibn ʿAbbās quotes the Prophet of Islam as saying, "Gabriel presented the Qurʾan to me in a single reading (ḥarf), and I asked him to provide me with more.He provided further readings, and I asked him for more.He continued to increase them until there were seven readings" (Nīshābūrī, 1954, vol. 6, p. 101;Bukhārī, 1986, vol. 4, p. 555;Ṭabarī, 1992, vol. 1, p. 27).
2) Ubayy ibn Kaʿb has stated, "I was in the mosque when a man entered and started praying.He performed his prayer with a reading that I did not favour.Then, another man entered and performed his prayer with yet another reading.Together, the three of us went to the Prophet of Islam.I said to the Prophet, 'This man came to the mosque and recited the Qurʾan differently from the other.'The Prophet asked both of them to recite the Qurʾan as they had.After they finished their recitation, the Prophet of Islam praised both of them.This outcome caused me to experience doubt.When the Prophet of Islam saw my distress, he placed his hand upon my chest, which was sweating profusely due to embarrassment.I felt as if in my fear I could see God.Then the Prophet stated, 'Ubayy ibn Kaʿb!I was commanded to recite the Qurʾan in a single manner.I requested ease for my people.The same command was repeated.Again, I requested ease for my people.The third time, I was commanded to recite the Qurʾan in seven manners"' (Nīshābūrī, 1954, vol. 6, pp. 101-103;Ṭabarī, 1992, vol. 1, p. 32).
3) Ubayy ibn Kaʿb has commented, "I entered the mosque and heard a man recite the Qurʾan.I asked him, 'Who taught you the Qurʾan?'He replied, 'The Prophet of Islam.'I took him to the Prophet of Islam and said, 'Ask this man to recite the Qurʾan.'The man recited, and the Prophet declared, 'Good job!' I said, 'O Prophet of God!You taught me to recite the Qurʾan like so...' He responded, 'Good job to you too!' I stated, 'O Prophet of God!Even though our readings differed, to both of us you say good job?'The Prophet placed his hand upon my chest and declared, 'Oh Lord! Remove doubt from the heart of Ubayy ibn Kaʿb.'I was bathed in sweat from embarrassment and my whole body was suffused in fear and panic.Then, the Prophet of Islam stated, Two angels came to me.One of them said, 'Recite the Qurʾan in a single manner.'But the other said, 'Increase the readings!'Therefore, I asked him to increase them.The angel said, 'Recite it in two ways.'And he continued increasing them until the readings numbered seven.Then, he said, 'Recite the Qurʾan in seven readings'" (Ṭabarī, 1992, vol. 1, p. 29).
4) The Prophet of Islam has stated, "Gabriel said, 'Recite the Qurʾan in a single manner.'Michael said, 'Ask him to increase the readings.'Gabriel said, 'Recite it in two ways.'This continued until the readings numbered seven.Then he said, 'Each of these readings is sufficient on the condition that a verse of punishment is not recited as a verse of mercy and a verse of mercy is not changed into a verse of punishment"' (Ibid, p. 38).5) ʿUmar ibn Khaṭṭāb has stated, "I heard Hishām ibn Ḥukaym reciting the chapter of Furqān.I listened to his reading.Upon realising that he recited the Qurʾan in a way that the Prophet of Islam had not taught me, I hastened toward the man, who was engaged in prayer.I waited patiently for him to pray.When he finished his prayer, I clutched his collar and asked, 'Who taught you to recite this chapter in this manner?'In response, he claimed that the Prophet of Islam had taught him so.I declared, 'By God, you are lying!'I dragged him to the Prophet of Islam.I said to the Prophet, 'Hishām ibn Ḥukaym recites the chapter of Furqān in a way that you have not taught me.'The Prophet of Islam said, 'O Hishām ibn Ḥukaym!Recite this chapter!'He recited it in the way that I had previously heard from him.The Prophet of Islam stated, 'This reading has been revealed in this manner.'Then he asked, 'ʿUmar ibn Khaṭṭāb, recite!' I recited in the manner that the Prophet of Islam had taught me.The Prophet stated, 'It is correct.This reading has been revealed in this manner.The Qurʾan has been revealed with seven readings.Therefore, recite as much [of the Qurʾan] as you can"' (Bukhārī, 1986, vol. 3, p. 257;Nīshābūrī, 1954, vol. 6, pp. 98-99;Tirmidhī, 1987, vol. 5, pp. 177-178).
6) Ubayy ibn Kaʿb has commented, "One day, the Prophet was beside the pond of Banī Ghaffār.Gabriel came to him and said, 'God commands you to teach your people the Qurʾan with a single reading.'The Prophet of Islam said, 'I ask God for forgiveness and tolerance.My people are not capable of doing this.' Gabriel came to him a second time and said, 'God commands you to teach your people the Qurʾan with two readings.'The Prophet of Islam said, 'I ask God for forgiveness and tolerance.My people are not capable of doing this.'Then, Gabriel came to him a third time and said, 'God commands you to teach your people the Qurʾan with three readings.'Again, the Prophet of Islam said, 'I ask God for forgiveness and tolerance.My people are not capable of doing this.'Then, Gabriel came to him a fourth time and said, 'God commands you to teach your people the Qurʾan with seven readings.Any of these seven readings that they use is sufficient and correct"' (Nīshābūrī, 1954, vol. 6, pp. 103-104;Ṭabarī, 1992, vol. 1, p. 35).7) Ubayy ibn Kaʿb has stated, "The Prophet of Islam met Gabriel near Aḥjār al-Mirāʾ.The Prophet stated, 'I have been appointed to an illiterate people composed of youths, servants, and old men and women.'Gabriel replied, 'Thus, let them recite the Qurʾan in seven readings"' (Ṭabarī, 1992, vol. 1, p. 31).8) Abū Hurayrah has reported, "The Prophet of Islam stated, 'This Qurʾan has been revealed in seven readings.Therefore, you can recite it in any of these seven readings and there is no problem.Just pay attention that you do not alter a verse of mercy to a verse of punishment or a verse of punishment to a verse of mercy!"' (Ibid, p. 40).9) ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd has commented, "We had a debate about the number of verses in one of the chapters of the Qurʾan-whether there were 35 verses in it or 36.We all went to the Prophet of Islam.He was engaged in a secret discussion with ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib.We said, 'O Prophet of God!We have differences in our recitation of the Qurʾan.'The Prophet's face turned red in anger and he said, 'Truly, past nations were destroyed due to differences that arose among them!'He then quietly said something to ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, who then said to us, 'The Prophet of Islam commands you to recite the Qurʾan as he has taught you"' (Ibid, p. 23).10) Ubayy ibn Kaʿb has reported, "The Prophet of Islam stated, 'O Ubayy ibn Kaʿb!I recited the Qurʾan, and I was asked, 'With one reading or two?' The angel that was before me said, 'Say: with two readings.'Then, I was asked, 'With two readings or three?'The angel that was with me said, 'Say: with three readings.'Similar questions were repeated until seven readings was reached.Then, I was told, 'It is sufficient to recite the Qurʾan in any of these readings on the condition that a verse of punishment is not confused with a verse of mercy and a verse of mercy is not confused with a verse of punishment''' (Qurṭubī, 1999, vol. 1, pp. 32-33;Abū Dāwūd Sajistānī, 1952, vol. 2, p. 102).

A Number of Criticisms Apply to These Accounts
1) Contradictions exist among narratives concerning revelation of the Qurʾan in seven readings (Muʾaddab, 2008, p. 46).Some of these contradictions are as follows.
a. Some narratives in this regard indicate that Gabriel recited a single reading of the Qurʾan for the Prophet of Islam.The Prophet asked Gabriel that recitation of the Qurʾan not be limited to one reading.Thus, Gabriel increased the readings until they reached seven.Some of these narratives indicate that the increase in readings was gradual whereas others state matters differently.Some of them report that after the third request of the Prophet, the number of readings was immediately increased to seven while according to other narratives, after the Prophet of Islam's third request, God commanded him to recite the Qurʾan with three readings, and after the fourth request, God commanded him to recite the Qurʾan with seven readings.b.Some of these narratives indicate that the increase in number of readings occurred in a single sitting such that the angel Michael advised the Prophet to ask for additional readings and Gabriel continually increased to them until it reached seven readings.However, in other narratives, every time the Prophet of Islam asked for additional readings, Gabriel would leave and return until seven readings was reached.c.Some narratives report that Ubayy ibn Kaʿb entered the mosque and saw a man reciting the Qurʾan differently from him, but others state that Ubayy ibn Kaʿb was already in the mosque when two men entered and recited the Qurʾan differently.
2) In the ninth narrative, transmitted by ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd, the question and answer lack congruity.According to the narrative, ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd and a group of others had a difference of opinion regarding the number of verses in a chapter of the Qurʾan.They took their dispute to the Prophet of Islam.ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, who was beside the Prophet, declared, "The Prophet of Islam commands you to recite the Qurʾan as he has taught you."Obviously, this response is inconsistent with the question of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd and those who were with him.Additionally, this response does not provide a solution to their problem (Khūʾī, 1974, pp. 194-195).
3) These narratives suggest that the reason for the multiplicity of readings was to make the job of Muslims easier since all Muslims could not recite the Qurʾan with a single style and reading.With this in mind, the Prophet of Islam asked God to increase the readings of the Qurʾan for Muslims which led to the sevenfold readings.However, the existence of multiple readings did not make anything easier upon the Muslims, but rather caused confusion, trouble, and division to the extent that some Muslims denounced (takfīr) others as unbelievers.This eventually led ʿUthmān to limit the Qurʾan to a single reading and burn other Qurʾans that caused conflict among Muslims.Thus, difference in readings of the Qurʾan was in fact a calamity for the Islamic community, which manifested itself in the time of ʿUthmān.How can it be said that the Prophet of Islam asked God for something that led to corruption and dispute within the Islamic community?How is it possible for God the All Wise to accept such a request while many Qurʾanic verses and Islamic narratives prohibit dispute?(Ṭabāṭabāʾī, 1996, vol. 3, p. 369;Sūyūṭī, 1983, vol. 2, pp. 60-61;Kāshānī, 1954, vol. 2, pp. 285-287;ʿArūsī Ḥuwayzī, 1991, vol. 1, pp. 377-378;Ṭayyib, 1999, vol. 3, p. 303).Dispute leads to destruction of the community, and some Islamic narratives indicate that when the matter of difference in readings was discussed in the presence of the Prophet of Islam, his face would turn red.4) According to narratives concerning revelation of the Qurʾan in seven readings, the reason the Prophet of Islam provided for the increase of readings was that his followers did not have the ability to recite the Qurʾan with a single reading.This is absolutely false, and it is unreasonable to attribute such statements to the Prophet of Islam.After the period of ʿUthmān, Muslims were able to recite the Qurʾan with a single method despite their vast differences in language and race.Hence, how can one claim that in the period of the Prophet of Islam, when the Islamic community was composed of fluent speakers of Arabic, one method of reading was difficult?(Khūʾī, 1974, pp. 198-199;ʿĀmilī, 1990, p. 182) 5) ʿUthmān forced a single reading upon the Muslims and great Companions such as ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib endorsed this act (Ḥujjatī, 2006, p. 444).If the Qurʾan was truly revealed with seven readings, it would be appropriate for great Companions such as ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib to object to this measure by ʿUthmān on the basis of narratives of sevenfold readings.The fact that they did not confirms the falseness of the sevenfold readings (ʿĀmilī, 1990, p. 181).6) Basically, the idea of revelation of the Qurʾan in seven readings is unreasonable and futile.By examining such narratives, nothing useful is achieved (Khūʾī, 1974, p. 195).

Distortion of the Qurʾan
Juynboll has written, "Among the better known examples of instances where the Shīʿites accuse the Sunnites of having introduced alterations (taʿrīfāt) in the final redaction of the Qurʾān is the suppression of the word aʾimma, the plural of imām, and substituting for it umma, 'community'" (Juynboll, 2002: vol. 2, p. 396).
With the aid of a number of Companions of the Prophet of Islam, ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān, the third caliph, collected the final version of the Qurʾan, and sent manuscripts to the two important regions of the Islamic empire (Ibn Ḥajar ʿAsqalānī, 2000, vol. 9, pp. 15-18;Ibn Abī Dāwūd Sajistānī, 2004, p. 34;Zarkishī, 1956, vol. 1, p. 240).However, omission of a term and its replacement with another term in the final version of the Qurʾan-in other words, belief in distortion of the Qurʾan-cannot be accepted due to the following reasons.
1) During the incumbency of ʿUthmān, Islam had developed to such an extent that it was not possible for ʿUthmān or anyone else to change any part of the Qurʾan (Khūʾī, 1974, p. 237).
2) When ʿUthmān insisted that a word from verse 9:34 be omitted, Ubayy ibn Kaʿb strongly objected and even threatened ʿUthmān that he would draw his sword and fight.ʿUthmān was forced to withdraw his opinion (Suyūṭī, 1983, vol. 3, p. 419).Considering this, how is it possible for ʿUthmān to delete a word from the Qurʾan and replace it with another without any of the Companions protesting?
3) If ʿUthmān had distorted the Qurʾan, it would have been a very apposite excuse for those who wished to murder him.If this case had been true, they would not have needed to use the pretexts that ʿUthmān violated the traditions of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar and squandered the public treasury among others in order to openly murder him.
4) If the Qurʾan had been distorted by ʿUthmān, when ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib became caliph, he would have changed it back to the way it was recited in the time of the Prophet of Islam, Abū Bakr, and ʿUmar.Such an act would not have been criticised or protested by anyone.In fact, it would have been clear proof against his opposition, the supporters of ʿUthmān.Thus, the silence of ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib concerning the version of the Qurʾan that was widespread among the Muslims during his rule is proof of the fact that there was no distortion in it (Khūʾī, 1974, pp. 237-238).

Conclusion
Juynboll believed that Muḥammad, the Prophet of Islam, forgot parts of the Qurʾan and that he did not gather the entire Qurʾan into a single codex during his lifetime due to the possibility that the Qurʾanic text would remain even after its related decree was abrogated.Juynboll was of the opinion that the Qurʾan had been distorted.Specifically, he was convinced that the "Verse of Stoning", which is not included in the extant Qurʾan, was part of the Qurʾan.Furthermore, he accused the Shia of believing in the distortion of the Qurʾan, with the term aʾimmah having been replaced with the term ummah.Examination of the views of Juynboll concerning Qurʾanic sciences indicates that he performed significant research in Islamic sources.However, his undeniable mistakes demonstrate that he either did not have all reliable Islamic sources available to him or was not aware of them.Due to Juynboll's use of unreliable Islamic narratives, his opinions concerning Qurʾanic sciences are weak.