Several people called me out in my thread, saying I was wrong to...
Marijn van Putten@PhDniX
31 views
Aug 14, 2026
~1 min read
Advertisement
1
Several people called me out in my thread, saying I was wrong to say that Juynboll said that Nāfiʿ the Quranic reader was fictitious.
He doesn't say it in so many words but, he suggests pre-d. 200 AH, Medinan Nāfiʿ's *but* Ibn ʿUmar are "fictitious".
So also Nāfiʿ al-Qāriʾ.
He doesn't say it in so many words but, he suggests pre-d. 200 AH, Medinan Nāfiʿ's *but* Ibn ʿUmar are "fictitious".
So also Nāfiʿ al-Qāriʾ.
Kerr@KerrDepression
@PhDniX Surely you are mistaken? It is Nāfiʿ, the mawla of ibn ʿUmar and teacher of Mālik, that Juynboll labelled a fiction. Motzki responded to this in his article “Whither Ḥadīth Studies?”: doi.org/10.1163/ej.978…
This is a completely different Nāfiʿ than the Qur'an reciter...
This is a completely different Nāfiʿ than the Qur'an reciter...