As salamu `alaykum,
I had someone check and Imam Suyuti says the following in his masterpiece, al-ItiqanImam Suyuti does however quote Ibn Jazari as saying that if tawatur had been required for every single letter and vowel in the Qur'an, it would have excluded from it many of the well-established, sahih variants in reading. Imam Suyuti's words in the Itiqan quoted in the original article in question have to do with the ahruf, not the qira'at. It is an affirmation that the dialect of the Quraysh is what was the revealed Qur'an and what most of the Companions recited. It has nothing to do with the qira'at, as Imam Suyuti in a separate part of the book clearly affirmed their validity, as is referenced above. So if Imam al-Suyuti was the basis for the objections regarding the validity of more than one qira'at, it seems that his words have been misunderstood.Al-Jazari truly mastered this chapter to perfection, and I have determined that the canonical readings fall into the following types:
First, the mutawatir, which is what was transmitted by a group who could not possibly have colluded on a lie, from an identical group, and so forth to the end of its chain. Most of the readings are of this type.
The second type is (i) what is sound in its chain without reaching the level of tawatur, (ii) conforms to Arabic (iii) and script as well as (iv) being well-known among the canonical readers who consider neither a mistake nor an anomaly, (v) and being recited [as Qur'an, e.g. in prayer]. ... Its examples are what the paths from the Seven have differed in transmitting, some of the narrators transmitting it and some not. (Al-Itiqan, 2:502-504)
Regarding Hafs and the credibility of the reciters of the Qur'an in general, Imam Dhahabi says,And Imam Dhahabi's meticulousness in his art is well-known to you and they are especially important because he was also considered an imam of the qira'at in his time. Qira'a was the knack of the imams of recitation and rawis, not hadith."As for al-Daraqutni's statement that he [Hafs] was da`if, he meant in the recension (dabt) of reports. When it comes to canonical readings, he is most trustworthy (thabt) - an Imam! Likewise, a group of the canonical readers are all athbaat in Qira'a but not hadith, such as Nafi`, al-Kasa'i, Hafs: they rose up to the difficulties of the Qur'anic wordings and they ascertained them. They did not do this for hadith, just as a number of the hadith masters meticulously mastered hadith but not Qira'a. This is the case for everyone who excels in a particular discipline exclusively of others, and Allah knows best." (Siyar A`lam al-Nubala')
So the claim that the main qira'at are not mutawatir is mistaken and a very serious allegation against this ummah. Their number being reduced to ten personalities is only an identification of the main students of the Companions - those who were most well-known for the beauty and mastery of their recitation, in the same way that a mutawatir hadith often is only directly attributed to a few Companions at first glance. The fact that there are numerous qira'at, more than the ten which are accepted as authentic, means absolutely nothing. Rather, like the existence of forgeries in the hadith science, it only proves the veracity of the discipline. The notion that the recitation of Medina was only through Nafi` and Abu Jafar, for example, is silly. If you simply glance at the three chains that the article quotes from `Asim, you find no less than 5 Companions that `Asim transmitted from. The words of al-Zarkhasi were responded to, yet the author mentions nothing about the scholars who disagreed with him.
The Qur'an was read, memorized and transmitted by all and the fact that certain imams were recognized for their expertise in this means only that; unless it is your claim that scholars like Malik were more meticulous in their authenticity of hadith than the Qur'an. For Malik for a surety described the recitation of Nafi` as sunna and are you seriously suggestion that he would take "a thousand from thousand over one from one", except when it related to the Book of Allah? Never that...
And Allah knows best.