mentioned above, namely: that this text was among what was recited during his lifetime ﷺ, then its recitation was withdrawn and it was abrogated.

On this basis, al-Hafiz supported the possibility that I had previously deemed more likely in explaining Abu’s statement cited above under hadith 2907—“We thought”—saying (11/258): “It is definitively among that whose recitation was abrogated, even though its ruling remains in force.” He said: “This possibility is supported by what Abu ‘Ubayd recorded in Fada’il al-Quran from the hadith of Abu Musa, who said: ‘I recited a surah approximately like Bara’ah, and retained from it: “If the son of Adam...”’—the rest of the hadith—and from the hadith of Jabir: ‘We used to recite: “If the son of Adam had a valley full of wealth, he would desire another like it.”’—the rest of the hadith.”

I say: I have not seen this hadith of Jabir in the printed Lebanese edition of Fada’il al-Quran, which was based on a poor manuscript and edited by Wahbi al-Ghawji; it is devoid of any scholarly editing worthy of mention! If this hadith of Jabir is established, it should be added to the five hadiths mentioned above.

In sum, these hadiths from these five Companions instil certainty that the text cited in them was Quran that was recited—even in the prayer—then withdrawn. That annotator of Musnad Abi Ya‘la (4/448) was ignorant of this fact when commenting on Ibn ‘Abbas’s statement, concerning which he wavered as to whether it was Quran or not. He said: “I say: Ibn ‘Abbas’s statement and Abu’s hadith prompted devotees of abrogating and abrogated texts to claim that this hadith was Quran, then was abrogated by Surat al-Takathur. They say this despite knowing that the Quran is established only through tawatur...” and so forth.

It is clear that he does not distinguish between the Quran preserved between the two covers, for which the tawatur he mentioned is required, and recitation that has been abrogated, such as that which is under discussion here,