And if it were obligatory that the meaning of His statement: {So when We have recited it, follow its recitation} were: "So when We have compiled it, follow what We have compiled for you therein," then it would have been necessary that neither the obligation of {Read in the name of your Lord who created} nor the obligation of {O you wrapped in garments * Arise and warn} [Sūrat al-Muddaththir: 1–2] was binding upon him before other parts of the Qurʾān were compiled along with them. And that—if anyone were to say it—would be a departure from the doctrine of the people of the religion.

And since it is established that the ruling of every verse of the Qurʾān was binding upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) to follow and act upon, whether compiled with other verses or uncompiled, it is proven correct what Ibn ʿAbbās said regarding the interpretation of His statement: {So when We have recited it, follow its recitation}, meaning: "So when We have explained it to you through Our recitation, follow what We have explained to you through Our recitation"—contrary to the statement of him who said its meaning is: "So when We have compiled it, follow what We have compiled."

And it has been said that the statement of the poet: They slaughtered an old man whose forehead bore the mark of prostration, ... who spent the night in glorification and recitation (1) its speaker means by it: glorification and recitation.

If someone says: How is it permissible for it to be called "Qurʾān" in the sense of recitation, when it is actually that which is recited?

It is said: Just as it was permissible for that which is written to be called a "book" (kitāb), in the sense of the writer's writing, as the poet said describing a document of divorce that he wrote for his wife: She hopes for a return from me, while in it ... is a writing like glue that sticks fast (2)