Is it permissible for a person to recite more than one recitation in a single surah?

The questioner : Is this permissible?

The Shaykh : Who says?

The questioner : The questioner .

The Shaykh : We need to see what his question is aiming at. Is it permissible? The answer is yes, but it might be...

The questioner : I mean, other than the recitation of Hafs is permissible, but here, yes, there is some mixing between the recitations. I mean, it is permissible in the same surah that I recite the first verse according to the recitation of Hafs, and the second, and so on, and then I come to a verse from the text of the surah with a recitation other than Hafs.

The Shaykh : Did you understand it from him like that?

The questioner: Yes, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Okay, perhaps that is what the shaykhs from whom you received the Qur'an told you.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : Of course, I told him that some shaykhs say...

The Shaykh : No, it is not your turn; it is my turn now, hehehe.

The questioner: Hehehe.

The Shaykh : But you mean, Sīn and Jīm, is that not what the shaykhs told you?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : So do not be surprised by his question, because this is the prevailing opinion among the shaykhs. Look, my brother, your question, according to what is known among the accomplished shaykhs, the reciters, or the teachers, is this. You, for example, received the recitation of Hafs and you adhere to it; you do not mix it with another recitation unless you recite another recitation on its own, in which case you recite it on its own. But this is most like some of the issues in Islamic jurisprudence which are independent legal reasoning and opinions of some scholars, for which there is no evidence from the Book of Allah or from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). In that case, the Muslim is free to take from this and leave that, or the opposite, take from that and leave this. Why? Because they are opinions not based on a verse or a Prophetic hadith, or on what the Salaf al-Salih (the earliest generations) did, as we mentioned earlier. This is from the negative side. From the positive side, the recitation of Hafs, the recitation of Warsh, and others of the famous reciters are most like what the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah calls "a difference of variety" and not "a difference of contradiction." Do you know this phrase? It is like this: a difference of variety and a difference of contradiction. I mean, you do not need an explanation for it.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Very clear. Okay, let us give an example of a difference of contradiction to make the issue clear for all those present. Abu Hanifah says, "A little blood came out from here, so the ablution is broken." The Shafi'i says, "Blood came out from here, but the ablution is not broken." You must be on the opinion of one of these two, or on the school of one of these two, because they are contradictory and conflicting. It is not permissible to do it this way one time and that way another time; that would be playing with the religion. Of course, the Muslim, as He (Glorified and Exalted is He) said: with me, ah, I and who, with me.
The student : .

The Shaykh So that we may be on clear understanding, when we hear two conflicting statements like these, we must be discerning and ask: "What is your evidence for saying it is broken?" and "What is your evidence for saying it is not broken?" In the end, you must settle on a statement that your soul is at peace with and your chest is open to. What is this? A difference of contradiction. The type where this recitation and that recitation are not of this type, but of the second type. Imam Abu Hanifah says the opening supplication is "Allahu Akbar": and so on. The Shafi'i says: No, . The people of hadith say: No, . Those who compiled the schools of jurisprudence and studied them, and it became clear to them that what Abu Hanifah said is correct, and what the Shafi'i said is correct, and what the people of hadith said is correct; so you open with this one time and with that another time, and there is no objection. Likewise, the supplications of the tashahhud, the formulas of the tashahhud, the formulas of sending blessings upon the Messenger (peace be upon him), and the dhikr in the ruku' and sujud... of this kind. So if you do it this way in one prayer and that way in another prayer, there is absolutely no objection. Likewise, if you recite in the first rak'ah and you recite in the second verse , you have mixed good words with good words. You have contradicted Hafs, because when you recite with the recitation of Warsh, for example, or another, you have contradicted him. But that does not matter to you, because the important thing is that you have agreed with the recitation of the Messenger (peace be upon him). So this is a difference of variety and not a difference of contradiction. Therefore, there is absolutely no objection to reciting a verse in a form established from the Messenger (peace be upon him), and another verse in another rak'ah, or even in the same first rak'ah, there is no objection to reciting with another recitation, because in any case you are reciting the Qur'an in a letter by which it was revealed. The answer is clear.

The questioner : If the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed and recited with , can we ask that Hafs did not recite with ?

The Shaykh : No, we cannot. No, they did not encompass everything. The imams, each one transmitted what reached him to his students. And may the peace of Allah be upon you.

The questioner : May Allah bless you, O Shaykh.
The student : May Allah reward you with good.