TheMostReadBook.org

An English translation of the Quran that is as close as possible to the Arabic sacred text
View active topics
  Verse(s):    
View unanswered posts





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 189 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 03 Jan 2015, 19:32 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4486
Location: USA
Al-Jabri, in his book الناسخ والمنسوخ بين الإثبات والنفي, page 116, discusses the abrogation cases that Makki studied and presented in his book الإيضاح لناسخ القرآن ومنسوخه. His conclusion is that Makki approved only 6 abrogation claims. The rest of the cases Makki studied were cases of specification/exception (about 20 cases), cases of statements of fact (another twenty), cases of promises/threats, cases of abrogating pre-Islamic practices (another twenty or so) and over 30 cases where he reconciled the apparent conflict.

This is significant because all other references to Makki's studies imply that he approved over 60 claims of abrogation. So, what we have here is scholar disagreements about what other scholars have actually said!

I intend, God willing, to read Makki's book and see for myself if Al-Jabri was right in his analysis about what Makki wrote.

Al-Jabri then quickly dismisses one of the claims which he said Makki confidently approved: 60:9/60:8, on the basis of contingency. He said that Makki acknowledged the contingency but nevertheless ruled it an abrogation.

This shows, if Al-Jabri is right, that Makki disagreed about what constituted abrogation, yet he still considered some factors a valid abrogation when they really are not, such as contingency. The other five claims Makki approved, according to Al-Jabri, were the "Big Three", the Qibla change-over claim (2:115/2:144) and the blanket claim about the Zakah verse, 9:60.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 03 Jan 2015, 20:09 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4486
Location: USA
Al-Jabri makes a very interesting logical point in his book الناسخ والمنسوخ بين الإثبات والنفي, page 126. He quotes Judge Abu-Bakr from his book الانتصار, as quoted by As-Suyooti in his book الإتقان في علوم القرآن, in which he said that it is not permitted for a singular narration to abrogate what he been ubiquitously narrated, i.e., narrations cannot abrogate verses. He then extrapolates by saying that reports of abrogation conveyed by singletons cannot be accepted as evidence for abrogation of verse either! Great point.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 03 Jan 2015, 20:18 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4486
Location: USA
Al-Jabri, in his book الناسخ والمنسوخ بين الإثبات والنفي, pages 129-130, tells of something that Dr. Muhammad Al-Bahiyy said on the phone to Al-Jabri's publisher. Al-Bahiyy commented on his exegesis تفسير سورة الكهف, page 17, where he explained this verse,

that the clause لا مبدل لكلماته (There is none substituting His Words), make it clear to him that no words of the Quran may be changed or abrogated and "puts the issue of abrogation in the Quran in the position of review and re-examination of what has been said about abrogation."

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 28 Jul 2017, 01:13 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4486
Location: USA
Farghali, in his book النسخ بين الإثبات والنفي, pages 53-62, mentions several objections to the abrogation doctrine, without credit:

  • The Quran does not name any verse abrogated.

    He answers that by saying that verse 16:101 says otherwise. Also, a researcher in the Quran will find many examples of verses abrogated by other verses.

    He forgets that his interpretation of 16:101 is based on an inauthentic narration of its circumstances of revelation, and that the researcher who perceives contradictions, and explains them by abrogation, hasn't properly studied the verses.

  • The Prophet, PBUH, did not name any verse abrogated.

    He answers that by saying...get this...he abrogated his rulings on visiting the graves and eating sacrificial meat.

    He conflates. Abrogation in the Sunna did happen, but that does not prove that a similar abrogation happened in the Quran.

  • Scholars have not agreed on which verses were abrogated.

    He answers that by saying it doesn't hurt the doctrine because abrogation did happen and none can deny it but a supercilious person!

    He forgets that abrogation cancels God's commands! If scholar A tells me command x is no longer to be followed and scholar B says it must be followed, then to whom do I listen?

  • Ubayy ibn Ka`b, the prominent fellow of the Prophet, said that no abrogation had occurred.

    He answers that by saying it's a false claim. He narrates a lengthy narration, mentioned in As-Suyooti's book, الإتقان في علوم القرآن, in which Ubayy named several verses that used to be recited but are no longer in the Quran.

    He conflates again. If we accept that verses did not make it to the text of the Quran, then it means the Quran left to us by the Prophet PBUH, has none of them!

    But we don't need to accept that either, because, once again, that narration is inauthentic.

He cites the fact that hundreds of books have been written on the subject, the majority of which accepting the doctrine, is proof of the doctrine. He forgets that a majority of people may agree on a falsehood - for a variety of reasons.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 19 Aug 2017, 04:59 
Online
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1818
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Muhammad Mahmood Nada writes in the introduction of his book النسخ في القرآن بين المؤيدين والمعارضين, pages 6-7, that all types of abrogation did not make sense to him, but he hesitated to discuss it because "the elite exegetes and Imaams have taught it."

That went by until he read the explanation, by Sheikh Muhammad Al-Madani in his book المجتمع الإسلامي كما تنظمه سورة النساء (Islamic society as Chapter 4 organizes it), of 4:15-16, and how he reconciled them with 24:2. Then he read Mufti Mahmood Shaltoot's book الإسلام عقيدة وشريعة (Islam is a theology and a way of life), which confirmed the reconciliation. Nada became convinced that the abrogation doctrine may not be valid and that got him to research the subject in detail.

I got Al-Madani's book. He adopts Asfahani's view that 4:15-16 is about homosexuality, and his exposition is smooth (pages 172-175 in the 2016 edition published by the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs in Egypt). He also politely reprimands the majority for their labored attempts at interpreting these verses. The introduction of that book is excellent in its own right, and relevant to this project even if the subject matter there is quite different.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 19 Aug 2017, 05:14 
Online
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1818
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
quotes Al-Nahhas (The Abrogating and Abrogated in the Noble Quran, page 22). My translation:

Quote:
It is not permitted for a Muslim who believes in God and the Last Day to say about something the Quran or the Sunna 'this is abrogated' except with certainty. What has the possibility of not being abrogation cannot be said to be abrogating or abrogated except with a a proof that mandates concession to it.


I looked at the book by Al-Nahhas, and the above quote is not accurate. The first part "It is not permitted...except with certainty." is not there at all. Also the page number depends on which edition, but the quote is towards the end of the item discussing the second (abrogation-case) verse of Chapter 2

باب || ذكر الآية الثانية من هذه السورة

just before the start of the the third (abrogation-case) verse of Chapter 2.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 20 Aug 2017, 03:21 
Online
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1818
Location: USA
I finally found the cases that Shah Waliullah Al-Dahlawi approves of. They are in his book "الفوز العظيم" (Al-fawz Al-Azeem) except that the most commonly available copy of the book (a translated version into Arabic, like all other Arabic versions) has skipped over the whole part. Other copies skipped over other parts, and the variability in the translation is significant.

The five cases are two of the big three (58:12-13 and 8:65-66), the widow 2:234,240 (the latter abrogated by the former), the will 2:180 abrogated by 4:11 (with the "لا وصية" narration being clarifying only), and 33:50,52 (the latter abrogated by the former, which he approves of citing the widow verses as supporting example).

This makes only the two above verses of the big three common between Al-Dahlawi and Zeid. I am surprised that Al-Dahlawi approved the widow case, although as you point out, Linguistic, it is not a crisp approval.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 02 Oct 2017, 22:10 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4486
Location: USA
Afaana, in his book الرأي الصواب في منسوخ الكتاب, page 32, makes two very interesting points:

  • He quotes Ibn `Aashoor from his exegesis تفسير التحرير والتنوير, page 657, published by الدار التونسية للنشر in 1984, who said that there is no point in abrogating a recitation while keeping its ruling, and that many of the fellows of the Prophet understood that if a verse has been abrogated, it should not be written in the Quran. He used the story, reported in Al-Bukhaari, and attributed to Abdullah ibn Az-Zubayr, in which Ibn Al-Zubayr asked Uthmaan ibn Affaan (RA) why he's writing verse 2:240 in the Quran even though it was abrogated?!

    Ibn `Aashoor understood this to mean that Ibn Az-Zubayr believed that what was abrogated shouldn't be written in the Quran, which Afaana also believes is what happened. The official understanding of this narration, however, according to الدرر السنية web site is that Ibn Az-Zubayr was mistaken in that belief!

  • He quotes Az-Zarkashi, from his book البرهان في علوم القرآن, page 29, saying that "the imaams said that it wasn't permissible for anyone to interpret the Quran until he knew the abrogating and the abrogated." Afaana replies by observing that neither the Quran, nor the Sunna have pointed out what was abrogated nor what abrogated it. Therefore, Afaana concludes, no one is authorized to interpret the Quran!

The abrogation doctrine has to be the clumsiest doctrine in all of Islamic literature.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 03 Oct 2017, 22:11 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4486
Location: USA
Afaana, in his book الرأي الصواب في منسوخ الكتاب, page 33, says that the prevailing opinion of modern-day scholars regarding the abrogation doctrine is that it is invalid; that there are no abrogated verses in the Quran. He references, in a footnote, Al-Azhar Magazine, Part 3, pages 265-268, issued 1975. He also references Dr. Muhammad Al-Bahiyy in his book منهج القرآن في تطوير المجتمع, published by دار الفكر in 1974.

And he also refers to "Dr. Zayd's recommendation on page 849 of his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, published by دار الوفاء للطباعه والنشر والتوزيع, Al-Mansoora, Egypt, 1987. Did I miss that?

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Scholars opinions about abrogation
PostPosted: 04 Oct 2017, 06:49 
Online
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1818
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Afaana, in his book الرأي الصواب في منسوخ الكتاب, page 33, says that the prevailing opinion of modern-day scholars regarding the abrogation doctrine is that it is invalid; that there are no abrogated verses in the Quran. He references, in a footnote, Al-Azhar Magazine, Part 3, pages 265-268, issued 1975. He also references Dr. Muhammad Al-Bahiyy in his book منهج القرآن في تطوير المجتمع, published by دار الفكر in 1974.

And he also refers to "Dr. Zayd's recommendation on page 849 of his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, published by دار الوفاء للطباعه والنشر والتوزيع, Al-Mansoora, Egypt, 1987. Did I miss that?

Zeid's recommendation is the one that the Supreme Council revise its previous opinion (which seems anti-abrogation) based on Zeid's findings that there are abrogated verses but are only few. Not sure why Afaana would support that, but perhaps he is clinging to the "few" part of the recommendation.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 189 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Pragmatic and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently 20 Nov 2017, 05:45

All times are UTC

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group