《古兰经》的书写格式是按圣训（天启）确定的（tawqeefi），不允许违背。其依据是：先知ﷺ有书记员专门记录启示，他们正是按照这一格式书写《古兰经》的，而使者ﷺ也认可了他们的书写。先知ﷺ的时代结束时，《古兰经》仍以同一格式书写，没有任何改变或更动。虽然圣门弟子书写了《古兰经》，但从任何人那里都没有传述过他们对此书写有异议，直到奥斯曼成为哈里发，他依照这一格式将保存在信士之母哈芙赛那里的经页誊写成穆斯哈夫（经卷），并下令焚毁其余的穆斯哈夫。 另外，《古兰经》书写格式与其他阿拉伯文书籍的书写格式不同，这种偏离也只能理解为：其书写形式是天启确定的（tawqeefi），而非约定俗成的。例如，不会有人追问，为什么《古兰经》中的ar-Ribā（利息）一词用waw和alif书写，而不用ya和alif书写；为什么mi'a（百）一词多一个alif，而fi'a（群）一词没有；为什么bi'āyātikum（你们的迹象）中多一个ya，《朝觐章》中的sa'aw（奔跑）多一个alif，而《赛伯邑章》中的sa'aw却没有；为什么《古兰经》中的'ataw在《寻找真理章》中多一个alif，而同样的'ataw却没有；为什么aamanō中加了alif，而ba'ao、ja'ao、fa'ao中却省略；为什么ya'fō allazī中有alif，而《妇女章》中的ya'fō 'anhum却没有。同样，也不应追问为何某些词省略某些字母，而其他相似的词却不省略。例如，《优素福章》和《金饰章》中的Qur'ān省略了alif，而其他地方却保留；《奉献章》中samawāt（天）在waw之后保留了alif，而其他地方则省略。 为什么《艾尔-米阿德》（Al-Mi’aad）一词中的阿利夫（alif）保留着，而在《安法勒》章中同一个词却省去了？又为何“sirajan”一词中的阿利夫在《古兰经》中每次出现都有，唯独在《furqan》章中没有？同一个词在不同章节之间书写不同，而词义和用法并无差别，这清楚地表明其书写依赖于读音的传承，而非依靠伊杰提哈德（Ijtihād）或理解。凡依赖传承者，皆属于传闻（Tawqeefi）的范畴。 同样，据传载，《古兰经》各章的排列顺序有过不同，但没有任何记载表明《古兰经》的书写形式与先知穆罕默德ﷺ在世时的书写有所不同，也没有记载经文节（Ayahs）的排列顺序有过差异。这说明《古兰经》的书写是传闻性的（Tawqeefi）。先知穆罕默德ﷺ对这种书写的认可、圣门弟子（Sahaba）在此问题上的一致共识，以及同一个词在不同章节中虽然读音、词义相同却书写不同这一事实，都清楚地证明：《穆绍夫》（Mushaf）所用的书写形式是传闻性的书写形式，必须毫无疑问地遵守。以其他任何形式书写《穆绍夫》都是被禁止的。 先知穆罕默德ﷺ是文盲，这一点不影响上述结论。他身边有能够书写的抄写员，他们向他描述字形；而且据一些圣训记载，他也能辨认字母的形状。他的抄写员还代他用通行的阿拉伯文字书信，发送给各国君王和首领，这种文字与《古兰经》在降示时所用的书写形式不同。然而，遵循奥斯曼（‘Uthmani）书写形式的义务，只限于《穆绍夫》的书写。 至于为引用、教学或其他目的而书写《古兰经》，这是允许的，因为圣使ﷺ的认可以及圣门弟子的共识，仅针对《穆斯哈夫》（定本古兰经）本身，而不包括其他任何事物。在这一问题上不存在类比推理（Qiyas），因为这属于仅依经训而定（Tawqeefi）、且没有理由依据（Illah）的事项。

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).