their original sense, are verbal nouns: “talā tilāwatan (‘he recited a recitation’) and qara'a qirā'atan (‘he read a reading’), like qur'ān (‘recitation’).” However, these terms can designate the speech itself, just as “Quran” does. In that case, reading is what is read, and recitation is what is recited.

Recitation and reading may instead mean the verbal noun denoting the act. In that case, reading and recitation are not what is read and recited, but necessarily entail it. They may also mean both together. In that case, recitation is not identical to what is recited, because it includes the act; nor is it separate and distinct from what is recited, because what is recited forms part of it.

This applies when reading and what is read concern a single, specific instance, such as the Lord’s reading and what He reads, or the servant’s reading and what he reads. But if “reading” means the servant’s reading—that is, his movement—while “what is read” means the Lord’s attribute, then undoubtedly the servant’s movement is not the Lord’s attribute. Yet this is a strained distinction. Rather, the servant’s reading is what he reads, like his recited text. If his reading of the Quran means the Quran itself, then it is what he reads. If it means his movement, then it is not what he reads. If both are intended, neither statement may be made without qualification.

For this reason, among those who identify with the Sunnah, some say, “Reading is what is read”; others say, “Reading is other than what is read”; and others refrain from stating either