So building on everything we have just walked
through about Abdullah ibn Masud and Ubay ibn
Kab, there is a really important tension we need
to face, honestly. And it boils down to this
simple question. Can the Quran, as Muslims understand
it today, really be both absolutely complete
and divinely inspired in the way they usually
claim? Or do the historical facts force a choice
between those two ideas? Let us start with what
we have already seen about Ubay ibn Kab. In the
early sources, he is not a minor figure. In Ibn
Sad's great biographical work called Kitab al
-Tabaqat al -Kabir, Volume 2, page 441, there
is a report where Anas ibn Malik says that the
Prophet declared, The best reader of the Qur
'an among my people is Ubay ibn Kab. Because
of that, later Muslims even gave him the title
Sayyid al -Qurra. meaning the master of the readers.
So if anyone in that early period knew what Quranic
style sounded like, it would be Ubay. Then, in
Jalal al -Din al -Suyuti's book Al -Itqan Fi
Ulum al -Quran, on pages 152 through 154, we
saw that Ubay's codex contained two additional
surahs, known as Surah al -Khal and Surah al
-Hafd. These are short prayers that sound very
much like Quranic chapters. Suyuti tells us that
these two surahs were written in the codex of
Ubay ibn Kab, that they began with phrases like,
O Allah, we seek your help, and O Allah, we worship
you. He also says that these surahs were found
in the codex of Ibn Abbas and were read by Abu
Musa as well. That is Al -Itqan fi Ulum al -Quran,
pages 152 to 154. Yet these two surahs are not
part of the Uthmanic codex that Muslims use today.
So here is the tension. If the current Quran
of today, based on Zayd ibn Thabit's redacted
codex, is complete and perfectly preserved, then
by definition, those two extra surahs in Ubayy's
collection must not be genuine revelation. At
the same time, modern Muslims also believe the
Quran's own challenge about its uniqueness. In
Quran chapter 2 verse 23, in the translation
of Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall, it says, And
if you are in doubt concerning that which we
reveal unto our slave, meaning Muhammad, then
produce a surah of the like thereof, and call
your witnesses besides Allah, if you are truthful.
That is Surah Al -Baqarah, chapter 2, verse 23,
as translated by Pickthall. The idea is that
no one can produce a chapter equal to the Qur
'an in style and substance. Now put those pieces
together. Ubay ibn Kab, the man whom the hadith
calls the best reciter of the Qur 'an, believed
that there were two surahs which he treated as
Qur 'an, which are not in Zayd's codex and not
in the modern Mushaf. If those two surahs really
were genuine revelation, then the current Qur
'an is incomplete. Because it is missing chapters
that God actually sent down that would destroy
the claim of completeness and perfect preservation
But if those two surahs were not genuine revelation
then what follows it means that prayers which
were written in Quranic style preserved in respected
codices and Accepted as Quran by the greatest
reciter among the companions were in fact human
compositions in that case Someone did produce
surahs that were close enough to Quranic quality
to convince the very expert whom the Prophet
himself singled out as the best reader. That
undercuts the Quran's own challenge that no one
can produce anything like it. So from either
direction there is a problem. If Ubay was right
about those two surahs, then the modern Quran
is incomplete. If Ubay was wrong about those
two surahs, then the Quran's claim in chapter
2 verse 23 about the impossibility of imitating
a surah is seriously weakened, because the best
reciter in the early community could not tell
the difference. And remember, Ubay was not some
uneducated villager. The hadith and early histories
consistently describe him as a foremost expert
on the content and recitation of the Quran. Ibn
Usad calls him the best reader among the people.
Suyuti records extra surahs tied to his text.
Umar acknowledges that he was the best in recitation,
even while admitting that the community chose
to leave aside some of what he recited. So the
dilemma is sharp. If you insist that the current
Zayd Uthman text is absolutely complete, then
you must say that the master of the readers,
Ubay ibn Kab, was deeply mistaken about what
counted as Quran. But if someone of his caliber
could be mistaken, then the criterion for recognizing
a true surah is not as clear and supernatural
as many Muslims claim. On the other hand, if
you honor Ubay's testimony and treat his extra
surahs as genuine, then you must admit that the
modern Quran is missing inspired material and
is therefore not complete. That is why I call
this section, Complete or Inspired, You Cannot
Consistently Have Both. in the way the popular
Muslim narrative states it. The historical evidence
from Ubay's Codex forces you to choose. Either
the book is complete and the greatest early expert
was wrong about its contents, or the greatest
early expert was right, and the book as we have
it today is missing chapters and cannot honestly
be described as perfectly preserved from the
time of Muhammad down to our own day.