Qur’on yozuvi tavqifiy bo‘lib, unga qarshi chiqish joiz emas. Buning dalili shuki, Payg‘ambar ﷺ vahiyni yozib boruvchi kotiblarga ega bo‘lgan va ular Qur’onni aynan shu yozuv asosida yozgan, Elchi ﷺ esa ularning yozuvini ma’qullagan. Payg‘ambar ﷺ davri Qur’on o‘sha yozuvda tugagan, unda hech qanday o‘zgarish yoki almashtirish yuz bermagan. Sahobalar Qur’onni yozgan bo‘lsalar-da, Usmon ﷺ xalifa bo‘lib, mo‘minlarning onasi Hafsa ﷺ huzurida saqlanayotgan sahifalarni shu yozuv asosida mushaflarga ko‘chirguniga qadar, hech kimdan uning bu yozuvga qarshi chiqqani rivoyat qilinmagan. Keyin u qolgan mushaflarni yondirishni buyurdi. Qur’on yozuvining boshqa kitoblardagi arab yozuvidan farq qiladigan jihati ham shundan kelib chiqadi: bu og‘ishish tavqifiy, ya’ni vahiy bilan belgilangan bo‘lib, odatiy qoidaga ko‘ra emas. Masalan, Qur’ondagi “ar-ribo” so‘zi nega vov va alif harflari bilan, ya’ni yo va alif bilan emas, deb so‘ralmaydi. Shuningdek, “mi’a” so‘zida qo‘shimcha alif bor-u, “fi’a” so‘zida yo‘q, nega deb so‘ralmaydi. “Bi’ayeekum” so‘zidagi qo‘shimcha ya, Hajj surasidagi “sa’aw” so‘zidagi qo‘shimcha alif, Saba surasidagi “sa’aw” so‘zida esa yo‘qligi ham so‘ralmaydi. Furqon surasidagi “‘ataw” so‘zida alif qo‘shilgan, lekin xuddi shu so‘zning boshqa o‘rnida yo‘q. “Aamano” so‘zida alif bor, “ba’ao”, “ja’ao” va “fa’ao” so‘zlarida esa yo‘q. “Ya’afo allazee” so‘zida alif bor, Niso surasidagi “ya’afo anhom” so‘zida yo‘q. Xuddi shunday, ba’zi so‘zlardagi harflarning o‘chirilishi ma’nosi, o‘xshash boshqa so‘zlarda o‘chirilmaganining sababi ham so‘ralmasligi kerak. Bu Yusuf va Zuxruf suralaridagi “Qur’on” so‘zidan alifni tushirib, boshqa o‘rinlarda saqlab qolish kabidir. Fussilat surasidagi “samawat” so‘zida vovdan keyingi alifni saqlab, boshqa o‘rinlarda tushirib qoldirish ham shunday. Nega Al-Mi’aad so‘zidagi alif saqlangan, Sura al-Anfal’dagi shu so‘zda esa tushirilgan, va nega "sirajan" so‘zidagi alif Qur’onda bu so‘z kelgan barcha joylarda bor, faqat Sura al-Furqon’dagisidan tashqari? Ma’nosida hech qanday farq yo‘q bo‘lganda, bitta so‘zning yozilishidagi bu farq bir surada boshqasidan farq qilishi, bu narsa ijtihodga yoki uning ma’nosini tushunishga emas, balki so‘zlarni eshitishga bog‘liq ekanligini aniq ko‘rsatadi. Eshitishga bog‘liq bo‘lgan har bir narsa tavqifiy (vahiy bilan belgilangan) hisoblanadi. Xuddi shuningdek, Qur’ondagi suralarning (boblarning) tartibida farq bo‘lgani rivoyat qilingan, ammo Qur’on yozuvida Payg‘ambar ﷺ huzurida yozilgan yozuvdan farq bo‘lgani rivoyat qilinmagan. Qur’on oyatlarining tartibida ham hech qanday farq rivoyat qilinmagan, bu esa Qur’on yozuvi tavqifiy ekanini bildiradi. Buni Payg‘ambar ﷺ ushbu yozuvni tasdiqlaganlari, bu masalada sahobalarning ijmoi va bitta so‘zning ma’nosi va matni bir xil bo‘lsa ham, bir suradan boshqasiga yozilishidagi farqlarning mavjudligi aniq dalolat qiladi. Bularning hammasi Mushafning yozilgan yozuvi tavqifiy yozuv ekanini isbotlaydi, unga so‘zsiz amal qilish shart. Mushafni boshqa har qanday yozuvda yozish man etiladi. Payg‘ambar ﷺ savodsiz bo‘lganlari e’tiborga olinmaydi, chunki u zotning yozuvchilari bor edi, ular yozib berar va yozuvni u zotga ta’riflab berar edilar. Shuni ham unutmaslik kerakki, u zot harflarning shaklini tanir edilar, bu haqda ba’zi hadislarda rivoyat qilingan. Uning yozuvchilari u zot nomidan oddiy arab yozuvida xatlar ham yozar edilar va ularni podshohlar hamda yetakchilarga yuborar edilar. Bu yozuv Qur’on nozil bo‘layotganda yozilgan yozuvdan farq qilar edi. Ammo ‘Usmon mushafining yozuviga amal qilish majburiyati faqat Mushafni yozishga taalluqlidir. Qur’onni iqtibos qilish yoki o‘qitish maqsadida yoxud boshqa sabablarga ko‘ra yozish joiz, chunki Payg‘ambar ﷺ ning tasdig‘i va sahobalarning ijmosi faqat Mushafga tegishli bo‘lib, boshqa narsalarni o‘z ichiga olmaydi. Bu masalada qiyos yo‘q, chunki bu tavqifiy masala bo‘lib, uning illati (sababi) yo‘q.

The Qur’ānic script is tawqeefi and it is not allowed to go against it. The evidence for this is that the Prophet  used to have scribes who wrote down the revelation and they actually wrote down the Qur’ān according to this script and the Messenger  approved of their writing. His  period came to an end with the Qu’ran in the same script in which no change or alteration occurred. Even though the Sahaba  wrote the Qur’ān, it has not been reported from anyone that he differed with this writing until 'Uthman  became the Khalifah and he transcribed the sheets that had been preserved with Hafsa , the mother of the believers into mushafs according to that script, and he ordered that any remaining Mushafs be burned. What also came from the Quranic script that is different from the Arabic script in other books was the deviation from the Arabic script, and there could be no reason for this other than the form of the script being Tawqeefi and not conventional. For example it is not asked why the word arRiba in the Qur’ān is written with the letters waw and alif and not with the letters ya and alif. It is also not asked why there is an additional alif in the word mia’a but not in the word fia’a, why the additional ya in the words bi’ayeekum and the extra alif in the word sa’aw in Sura al-Hajj but absent from the word sa’aw in Sura Saba. Why is the alif added to the word ‘ataw but missing from ‘ataw in Sura al-Furqan. The alif is also added in the word aamano but omitted from the words ba’ao, ja’ao and fa’ao in the Quran. It is added in the word ya’afo allazee but absent from the word ya’afo anhom in Sura an-Nisa. Likewise it should not be said what is the sense of deletion of certain letters in some words but not in other similar words. This is like omitting the alif from the word Qura’an in Sura Yusuf and az-Zukhruf but keeping it in other places, and keeping the alif after the waw of the word samawat in Sura Fussilat but omitting it in others. So why is the alif in the word Al-Mi’aad kept but omitted from the same word in Sura al-Anfal also why the alif in the word sirajan exists wherever this word is mentioned in the Qur’ān except in Sura al-Furqan. This difference in the writing of a single word between one Sura and another, even though there is no difference in the meaning clearly suggests that this depends on the hearing of the words and not on Ijtihād or their understanding. Anything that depends on the hearing as such is i. Likewise, a difference in the order of the Sura’s (chapters) in the Qur’ān was reported, but there was no reported difference in the Quranic script from the script writing recorded in the presence of the Messenger of Allah . Nor was there any difference reported in the order of the Ayahs (verses) in the Qur’ān, indicating that the Quranic script is Tawqeefi. This is clear from the Messenger of Allah’s  acknowledgement of this writing, the consensus of the Sahaba  on this issue, and the existence of differences in the writing of a single word between one Sura and another despite the same wording and meaning. All this is clear evidence proving that the script in which the Mushaf has been written is Tawqeefi script, which must be adhered to without fail. Writing the Mushaf in any other script is prohibited. That the Messenger of Allah  was illiterate is not considered for he had scribes who could write and they described the script to him, not to forget that he could recognise the forms of letters as reported in some ahadith. His scribes also wrote letters on his behalf in normal Arabic script which he sent to the kings and leaders, this script being different from the script used to write the Qur’ān whilst it was being revealed. However the obligation to follow the ‘Uthmani script of the Qur’ān is specific only to the writing of the Mushaf. As for the writing of the Qur’ān by way of quotation or for teaching purposes or for any other reasons this is permissible because the approval of the Messenger  and consensus of the Sahaba is in concern to the Mushaf alone to the exclusion of everything else. There is no Qiyas on this matter because this is an issue of Tawqeefi without an Illah (reason).