7:137 ‒ the main change from al-Ḥaddād to aḍ-Ḍabbāʿ

I get not tired to repeat: al-Ḥaddād copied many thinks from a Faz print.
allah without written /ā/ is most striking.

كلمة in 7:137 is remark­able too. ad-Ḍabbāʿ writes ت; the Libyian muṣḥaf has ت, but all Warš copies and the two Tunisian Qālūn maṣā­ḥif have ـة. I don't see a com­pelling reason for the 1952 change. ad-Dānī does not mention the Kufan muṣḥaf, the one ʿĀṣim follows.

You might say: "These are just 16 manuscripts, probably there are 16 others with tāʾ." I looked at the manuscripts, in which Marijn van Putten found niʿmah and niʿmat, raḥmah and raḥmat in iḍāfah/status constructus, and I found only one form.
Okay, ad-Dānī says: "-t", and Ibn Naǧāḥ: "-h"

So it should be "-h" =

aḍ-Ḍabbāʿ's reason is this:

In view of the old manuscripts I say: al-Ḥaddād is right, and aḍ-Ḍabbāʿ is wrong.
And I am not astonished seeing that in all Warš maṣāḥif only the one with his seal of approval (left middle, with the verse number) writes /waliyyiya/ (7:196) with a nor­mal tooth (with the normal stroke instead with a straight stroke after­wards) for the gem­minated yāʾ: only the Algerian print super­vised by the chief reciter of Egypt does not "know" that it does not belong to the rasm.

‒ ­