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





Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 144 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 12 Mar 2010, 06:08 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
The story of هلكت وأهلكت

Under different narratives, the story is that a man was addressing people in a religious setting and was confusing what is allowed with what is disallowed, and what is a command to do with what is a command not to do. An authoritative figure (depending on the narrative: Aly or Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with them, or someone else) came by and asked the man if he knows the abrogating from the abrogated. When the man said that he doesn't, the authoritative figure said to him " هلكت وأهلكت " which is taken as evidence of the importance of having such knowledge.

I found more details about the story in Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi's book, الناسخ والمنسوخ في القرآن,

باب. عن أبي عبد الرحمن قال مر علي رضي الله عنه على قاض فقال له أتعرف الناسخ من والمنسوخ قال لا قال هلكت وأهلكت. وعن سعيد بن أبي الحسن أنه لقي أبا يحيى المعرف فقال له أعرفوني أعرفوني يا سعيد أني أنا هو قال ما عرفت أنك هو قال فإني أنا هو مر بي علي رضي الله عنه وأنا أقض بالكوفة فقال لي من أنت فقلت أنا أبو يحيى فقال لست بأبي يحيى ولكنك تقول أعرفوني أعرفوني ثم قال هل علمت بالناسخ من المنسوخ قلت لا قال هلكت وأهلكت فما عدت بعد ذلك أقض على أحد أنافعك ذلك يا سعيد

According to this narrative, by Sa`eed ibn Abil-Hasan, the man's name was Abu-Yahya Al-Mu`arrif. He was a judge in Koofa, Iraq, and after that chastisement from Ali, he quit judging!

There are also more information in Abul-Qaasim Ibn Salaama Al-Muqri's book, الناسخ والمنسوخ,

وقد روي عن أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب كرم الله وجهه أنه دخل يوما مسجد الجامع بالكوفة فرأى فيه رجلا يعرف بعبد الرحمن بن داب وكان صاحبا لأبي موسى الأشعري وقد تحلق الناس عليه يسألونه وهو يخلط الأمر بالنهي والإباحة بالحظر فقال له علي رضى الله عنه أتعرف الناسخ من المنسوخ قال لا قال هلكت وأهلكت فقال أبو من أنت قال أبو يحيى فقال أنت أبو اعرفوني وأخذ بأذنه ففتلها وقال لا تقص في مسجدنا بعد. ويروى في معنى هذا الحديث عن عبد الله بن عمر وعبد الله بن عباس أنهما قالا لرجل آخر مثل قول أمير المؤمنين علي كرم الله وجهه أو قريبا منه

According to this quote, the man's name is Abd-ur-Rahmaan ibn Daab, a fellow of Abu-Moosa Al-Ash`ari. His nick name was Abu-Yahya. The quote also says that Ibn Umar and Ibn Abbaas said the same thing to another man.

In addition to the points you made, Pragmatic, I'd say, assuming the story is authentic, that Ali, Ibn Umar and Ibn Abbaas, may God have been pleased with all of them, were all talking about نسخ naskh in its general sense, not about abrogation, i.e., knowledge of the general and specific, the total and the exceptions, the timed and the expired, etc.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 15 Mar 2010, 04:15 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Linguistic wrote:
وقال عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه أبي أعلمنا بالمنسوخ

Translation: Umar ibn Al-Khattaab, may God have been pleased with him, said, "Ubayy (ibn Ka`b) is the most knowledgeable among us of the abrogated."

My comment is: How come we don't have what Ubayy said about it? May God have been pleased with him. Why wasn't it documented? Why didn't the abrogationists quote him? I don't recall seeing his name in any of the literature naming even one abrogation claim! The other question to ask is: How did he know it? Did the prophet (PBUH) tell him?

IMHO, the abrogated المنسوخ in this case is gone from the text, as supported by the story about the Prophet (PBUH) skipping a verse in the prayer and the ensuing discussion with Ubayy أبي بن كعب.

In Zaid's book (item 348 on page 245 of volume 1), there was a variation of Omar's narration with a twist. The narration says that

Ubbay is the "best in knowing the Quran by heart among us" أحفظنا and that "we leave out from what Ubayy says" as Ubayy says "I don't leave out anything I heard from the Prophet (PBUH)" and God has said "Whatever verse We may brogate or cause to be forgotten"

Zaid comments that Omar decided to leave out from what Ubayy says and justified it by that Ubayy would recite what he heard from the Prophet even if some of it was abrogated or caused to be forgotten and is no longer recitable Quran.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why keep abrogated verses?
PostPosted: 15 Mar 2010, 05:17 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
I came across this quote in Fiqh-us-Sunna in the context of whether one should raise one's hands after rising from a bowing (Rukoo`) in the prayer. Ibn Mas`ood said no.
قال الزيلعي في نصب الراية، نقلا عن صاحب التنقيح: ليس في نسيان ابن مسعود لذلك مايستغرب، فقد نسي ابن مسعود مالم يختلف فيه المسلمون بعد، وهما المعوذتان، ونسي مااتفق العلماء على نسخه، كالتطبيق، ونسي كيف قيام الاثنين خلف الإمام، ونسي مالايختلف العلماء فيه، أن النبي :pbuh: صلى الصبح يوم النحر في وقتها، ونسي كيفية جمع النبي :pbuh: بعرفة، ونسي مالم يختلف العلماء فيه من وضع المرفق والساعد على الأرض في السجود، ونسي كيف يقرأ النبي :pbuh: "وما خلق الذكر والأنثى" ـ

Wow. That is unusually harsh given that he is talking about a Sahabi. Is this book Fiqh-us-Sunna by Al-Sayyed Sabeq?

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why keep abrogated verses?
PostPosted: 15 Mar 2010, 20:34 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Wow. That is unusually harsh given that he is talking about a Sahabi. Is this book Fiqh-us-Sunna by Al-Sayyed Sabeq?

Yes, but it isn't necessarily Saabiq's opinion too; he just quoted the man.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 16 Mar 2010, 18:06 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
4. Showing evidence that the Quranic text cannot logically have abrogated verses.
...


This verse challenges the main premise that people used in order to decide that a verse was abrogated, namely believing that a contradiction between two verses exists that cannot be resolved if both verses are valid.

Here is a hadeeth, rated authentic by Al-Albani, that also challenges the notion of contradiction in the Quran.

. وقال ابن مردويه:حدثنا محمد بن إبراهيم حدثنا أحمد بن عمرو حدثنا هشام بن عمار حدثنا ابن أبي حاتم عن أبيه عن عمرو بن شعيب عن أبيه عن ابن العاص عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال "إن القرآن لم ينزل ليكذب بعضه بعضا فما عرفتم منه فاعملوا به وما تشابه منه فآمنوا به

Translation: This Quran was not revealed for part of it to belie another part; so what you recognize from it, abide by it; and what seems ambiguous from it, have faith in it.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 17 Mar 2010, 04:15 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Another verse that can be taken as evidence against abrogation.


It is interesting to notice the use of "من" in the phrase "من كتاب ربك" which if taken to mean "from" might imply that not all of the book was revealed. This would reinforce



and it would also fit with


which we talked about before. The common thread is that there is a 'master copy' from which God reveals, and hides, at will.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 18 Mar 2010, 15:55 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
هل علمت بالناسخ من المنسوخ قلت لا قال هلكت وأهلكت

.....
أتعرف الناسخ من المنسوخ قال لا قال هلكت وأهلكت

.....
were all talking about نسخ naskh in its general sense, not about abrogation

Agreed. Three points.

1. The expression used was "can you tell the abrogating from the abrogated" and this is a question about understanding the two parts of the concept rather than knowing the identity of the what was abrogated or what abrogated it.

2. There is nothing that says that the object of abrogation that they talked about are Quranic verses. It could be Sunna rulings.

3. If the narrations were saying "can you tell the abrogating and the abrogated" this can be used against the abrogation doctrine since nobody knows that until this very day (given the vast disagreement between scholars about which verses are abrogated) so are we all doomed? I think you alluded to that before, Linguistic.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why keep abrogated verses?
PostPosted: 18 Mar 2010, 22:28 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
  • Abrogating a ruling in a verse, but otherwise keeping the verse.

Although Dr. Zaid accepts that some abrogated verses remained in the text of the Quran, he inadvertently argued against that possibility in item 351 on page 248 in volume 1 of his book, when he was countering an unrelated argument by Al-Asfahany. Here is the translation of what he said.

We have said before in explaining the linguistic meaning of النسخ that its origin is purging الإزالة, and the style of the verse (2:106) necessitates that this is the meaning in it, as it is explicit in bringing a substitute in the case of abrogation. Since the substitute does not coexist with the substituted-for, the statement of bringing it (the substitute) requires that the substituted-for has been purged, and that's what abrogating it means.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2010, 16:28 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
In his book فتح المنان في نسخ القرآن, Ali Hasan Al-Areedh lists 13 evidences that he believes prove that abrogation did occur in the Quran. So, let's go through them.

1. Verse 16:101. Pragmatic has shown clearly that this verse unambiguously proves that the abrogated verse is no longer in existence. Thus, the verse cannot be used to prove the abrogation doctrine, i.e., that there are abrogated verses in the written text of the Quran. The verse can only prove that replacement of verses has occurred.

2. Verse 2:106. We've shown that it only proves that abrogation may occur, not that it has. We also showed that the context clearly refers to abrogation of the Torah, an interpretation which most exegetists agree on.

3. Verse 13:39. This verse asserts the general unlimited will of God. It cannot be narrowed down to prove that abrogation did occur, only that it can. We've also shown that it proves replacement, not abrogation. Pragmatic further discussed its context in this post.

4. Verse 4:160,

This verse clearly proves that abrogation did occur in the law of Moses. It doesn't even prove that it occurred in the Torah! So, how can that be used to prove that it occurred in the Quran?

5. Verses 87:6-7,

These verses only prove that some verses may be caused to be forgotten. They do not prove that verses can be or have been abrogated. Even Al-Areedh himself lists the consensus of scholars, such as Ibn Katheer, Al-Khaazin, Al-Baghwi and Abus-Su`ood on that interpretation.

6. Verse 10:15,

This verse, he asserts, proves that replacement of Quranic verses is possible. Sure, but it doesn't prove that it was done. We've discussed this verse in this prior post.

7. That there are abrogated verses in the Quran. That's right, he proves X is true by observing that X is true! He asserts his five cases as if they are clear evidence, when in fact each one can be refuted.

8. That abrogation occurred in the Sunna. How can that prove that it did in the Quran?

9. Consensus of the scholars. We've shown that the consensus is not there because the scholars in fact agree on only one abrogation case, 58:13/58:12. Al-Areedh admits that in addition to Al-Asfahaani, many modern scholars, such as Imaam Muhammad Abduh have rejected the abrogation doctrine.

He asks, "How can the opinions of glorious Sahaba and their followers and prominent scholars be set aside?" Well, the scholars set aside each other's opinions. He did the same by narrowing down the number of abrogation cases to five, so shouldn't he ask that question to himself first?

10. Logically, it is possible. Sure, but how can that prove it happened?

11. If prior revelations were not abrogated then they are still valid. Prior revelations were abrogated by the Quran, but how does that prove that the Quran has abrogated verses. It only proves that the Quran has abrogating verses.

12. That anti-abrogation folk accept that timed rulings come to an end. Al-Areedh says that abrogated verses are timed rulings, except that we did not know they were timed and only God knew. Nice theory, but the question is: how did he know they were abrogated or timed?

13. That abrogation did occur in prior laws. That does not automatically lead to the conclusion that it has happened in the Quran, only that it can happen in Islamic law.

I hope I did not imply any disrespect to the sheikh and if any of what I said comes across as such, I apologize. I only wanted to point out the flaws in the evidences he quoted.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 19 Apr 2010, 22:41 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
In his book فتح المنان في نسخ القرآن, Ali Hasan Al-Areedh lists 13 evidences that he believes prove that abrogation did occur in the Quran. So, let's go through them.

...

I hope I did not imply any disrespect to the sheikh and if any of what I said comes across as such, I apologize. I only wanted to point out the flaws in the evidences he quoted.

You did a fantastic job. Your answers are perfectly to the point. Thank you for taking the time to produce such a polished post.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 144 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 15  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests


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:  
cron
It is currently 29 Mar 2024, 15:42

All times are UTC

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