Thread by @PhDniX

iǧtabā-hu "he chose him" occurs twice in the Quran (Q20:122; Q68:50). In the modern print editions, it is spelled اجتبه/فاجتبه. This spelling is irregular in Quranic orthography. Final-y verbs (the root is √ǧby) are normally spelled with a (dotless) yāʾ.

We may compare this for example to a verb with a similar root and derivational structure like ištarā-hu 'be bought it' (Q2:102) spelled اشتريه and indeed even iǧtabā-hu "he chose him" in Q16:121 spelled اجتبيه.

Classical Arabic would spell these with ʾalif اجتباه, اشتراه.

I argue in my paper in @AENJournal , that this spelling with a yāʾ (as opposed to ʾalif, for words like دعاه daʿā-hu 'he called them), is a strong indication that these words were pronounced in Quranic Arabic with ʾimālah, i.e. ištarē-hu

arabianepigraphicnotes.org/journal/author…

Such readings are in fact found among the canonical readers, especially al-Kisāʾī and Ḥamzah. However the spelling without the yāʾ as found iǧtabā-hu of Q20:122; Q68:50 could suggest that these vowels were really pronounced /ā/, and writing it with yāʾis purely orthographic.

When the Cairo Quran goes against a theory I have, I check whether the manuscripts actually have that spelling. In this case the answer is no.

Q20:122 is with yāʾ in very ancient but also much later manuscripts.

corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/…

Q68:50 is no different, the denticle for the yāʾ is there in ancient and later manuscripts.

corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/…

Just for good measure, I made sure Q16:121, which has the expected spelling in the print text doesn't have the weird spelling in early manuscripts. Also here, the expected spelling is found.

So all is well, the rasm doesn't disprove my theory!

corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/…

But this, of course brings a long a question: Where on earth is are the modern print Qurans getting the idea from that in these two locations the word is not written like that?

The direct answer is that's how Abū Dāwūd could be interpreted...

Although the most natural reading seems to me that he says: "I have no tansmissions for this; but it should be with yāʾ, however in ancient manuscripts I have found it (in all 3 places) only written without alif and sometimes with alif. اجتبيه, اجتبه and اجتباه" are all correct.

Somehow the people who established the rasm for the standard print text read this statement to mean that Q16:121 should be written with yāʾ and the oter two without ʾalif or yāʾ. Any insight on this would be appreciated.

Interestingly Abū Dāwūd (d. 496) claims he examined ancient manuscripts. What he considered "ancient" is clearly not the same thing that we consider "ancient". 3rd-5th century AH manuscripts rarely attest the spelling with ʾalif, but nothing older and none without ʾalif or yāʾ.

The standard print text we know today is generally very conservative, and usually reflects the orthography of ancient manuscripts quite accurately. But, if you look closely you find hundreds of these small deviations from the standard spelling as found in the earliest manuscripts