Clarification of the Doubt: The Tradition of the Goat Eating the Paper and the Preservation of the Quran
Doubt
In a hadith, Umm al-Mu'minin Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) says that the verse of stoning and the verse about giving milk ten times to an elderly man were revealed, and both these verses were written on a paper under my cot. When we were busy with the passing of the Prophet ﷺ, a goat came and ate that paper.
Reference: (Sunan Ibn Majah: 1944)
This hadith conflicts with the verse of the Holy Quran:
إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ
Reference: Al-Hijr: 9
Translation: Indeed, it is We who sent down the Quran and indeed, We will be its guardian.
How is it possible that some verses of the Quran, whose protection Allah Himself has taken responsibility for, get lost in this way?
Answer to the Doubt
First Point
The aforementioned hadith with these words is present in Sunan Ibn Majah
Reference: (1944)
and Musnad Ahmad
Reference: (26316)
, etc. Many hadith scholars have declared these words weak due to the error of the narrator (Muhammad ibn Ishaq). The same hadith is also present in Sahih Muslim
Reference: (1452)
and other books, but not with these words; rather, its wording is as follows:كَانَ فِيمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ عَشْرُ رَضَعَاتٍ مَعْلُومَاتٍ يُحَرِّمْنَ، ثُمَّ نُسِخْنَ بِخَمْسٍ مَعْلُومَاتٍ، فَتُوُفِّيَ رَسُولُ اللهِﷺ، وَهُنَّ فِيمَا يُقْرَأُ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ
Translation: It was revealed in the Holy Quran that ten definite sucklings established a permanent prohibition. Then this was abrogated to five definite sucklings, and until the death of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, some people recited it as if it were from the Quran.
These words do not mention any Quranic verse about a goat eating. Most narrators of the hadith have mentioned these words, indicating that the story about the goat is not correct but rather an error of the narrator.
Second point
When it was proven that the story of the goat eating the Quranic verses is not true, the question of this hadith conflicting with the Quranic verse does not even arise because before proving a conflict between any two things, it is necessary that both be established.
Third Point
Even if the mentioned words of the hadith are accepted as correct, there is nothing in this story that compromises the protection of the Quran because the two verses mentioned, which the goat had eaten, had already been abrogated in recitation. Therefore, they were no longer part of the Quran, and their loss did not cause any deficiency in the Quran.
Fourth Point
The question of the Quran's preservation would only arise if the entire preservation of the Quran depended solely on writing it down. But as is known, the preservation of the Holy Quran was not only through writing; it was also preserved in hearts. In fact, until the Prophet’s ﷺ passing, the Quran was not compiled into a single Mushaf (book form). Therefore, the loss of a page in this manner is not a significant matter, nor does it affect the preservation of the Quran in any way.
Fifth Point
Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) stating that certain verses were on that page is evidence that she had memorized those verses. Therefore, if it had been necessary to have those verses written in the Quran, she could have had them written from her memory. But since she knew that their recitation had been abrogated, she did not arrange for them to be written.
Sixth Point
As mentioned earlier, since the recitation of these two verses had been abrogated, the divine wisdom behind their disappearance could be that these two verses were not included in the Quran. Thus, this incident serves as evidence for the preservation of the Quran, not for its lack of preservation.
Seventh Point
Here, it is also extremely important to know that the abrogation of certain verses of the Holy Quran is entirely legitimate, and there are three types of such abrogation:
❀ The recitation of a verse and the ruling contained in it are both abrogated.
An example of this is the verse that established breastfeeding as a means of fostering kinship after ten feedings. Now, neither this verse exists nor does its ruling remain. Observe the words of the Hadith at the beginning of the answer.
This was the first verse which, according to the Hadith, was eaten by a goat.
❀ The recitation of a verse is abrogated but the ruling remains.
Its example is the verse about stoning a married adulterer. Now that verse does not exist; its recitation is abrogated, but its ruling remains until the Day of Judgment.
Umar ibn Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said that Allah sent Muhammad (peace be upon him) with the truth and revealed the Book to him. Among what was revealed to him was the verse of stoning. Accordingly, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) carried out stoning, and after him, we also carried out stoning. However, I fear that when a long time passes over people, some will say: We do not find the ruling of stoning in Allah’s Book. Such people will be misguided due to abandoning a duty revealed by Allah. Beware! When the adulterer is married and witnesses are present, or the woman with whom adultery was committed becomes pregnant, or the adulterer himself confesses, then stoning becomes obligatory. See:
Reference: Sahih Bukhari (6830), Sahih Muslim (1691), Jami` at-Tirmidhi (1432)
.This is the other verse which, according to hadith, was eaten by a goat.
❀ The recitation of a verse may continue, but its ruling may be abrogated.
There are many examples of this. For instance: Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 240, in which the widow's 'iddah (waiting period) was stated as one year, which was later abrogated by four months and ten days. See:
Reference: Sahih Bukhari (4530)
.
