At-Tabari denies Hafs reading

Question:

Does At-Tabari in his Tafsir deny the reading of Hafs in favour of Warsh?

Answer:

Yes, he does, as can be seen from the example of the 16th verse in chapter 70.

In Hafs’ version it says:

كَلَّا ۖ إِنَّهَا لَظَىٰ نَزَّاعَةً لِّلشَّوَىٰ

“By no means, it is a flame as a peeling (nazzāʿatan) of the scalp.”

In Warsh’s version it says:

كَلَّا ۖ إِنَّهَا لَظىٰ نَزَّاعَةٌ لِّلشَّوَىٰ

“by no means, it’s a scalp-peeling (nazzāʿatun) flame.”

Muhammad Ibn Jarir At-Tabari writes: “The correct view in our case is that “flame” is the predicate and “peeling off” is in the initial sentence, therefore in the nominative (nazzāʿatun) and the accusative (nazzāʿatan) is not allowed as a reading because of the consensus of the land recitators on its nominative (nazzāʿatun) and no reciter read it in the accusative (nazzāʿatan) in this way, even if the accusative (nazzāʿatan) makes sense from the Arabic language.” [Tafsir At-Tabari, volume 23 page 261]

قال محمد بن جرير الطبري: والصواب من القول في ذلك عندنا أن لَظَى الخبر ونَزَّاعةٌ ابتداء فذلك رفع ولا يجوز النصب في القراءة لإجماع قراء الأمصار على رفعها ولا قارىء قرأ كذلك بالنصب وإن كان للنصب في العربية وجه

Comment:

According to At-Tabari, no Gabriel (a.) ever descended from heaven reciting “nazzāʿatan” (نزَاعةً). If this were true, how could Hafs have delivered his Qur’an from the Prophet (s.)? If this were wrong, how could At-Tabari deny a Qur’an that comes from the Prophet (s.) himself?