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  [ 12 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 9:113 abrogate 17:24?
PostPosted: 05 Jan 2010, 21:50 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi reports that Ibn Abbaas, Al-Hasan, Ikrima, Muqaatil and Ad-Dhahhaak have said that

was abrogated by


Here is what Ibn Al-Jawzi writes about this case,

باب ذكر الآيات اللواتي ادعي عليهن النسخ في سورة بني إسرائيل. ذكر الآية الأولى: قوله تعالى "وقل رب ارحمهما". قد ذهب بعض المفسرين إلى أن هذا الدعاء المطلق نسخ منه الدعاء للوالدين المشركين، وروى نحو هذا عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما والحسن وعكرمة ومقاتل. أخبرنا المبارك بن علي قال أبنا أحمد بن الحسين بن قريش قال أبنا أبو إسحاق البرمكي قال أبنا محمد بن إسماعيل بن العباس قال أبنا أبو بكر بن أبي داود قال بنا محمد بن قهزاد قال حدثني علي بن الحسين بن واقد قال حدثني أبي عن يزيد النحوي عن عكرمة عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما في قوله "إما يبلغن عندك الكبر" إلى قوله "كما ربياني صغيرا" نسختها "ما كان للنبي والذين آمنوا أن يستغفروا للمشركين". قال أبو بكر وبنا محمد بن سعد قال حدثني أبي عن الحسين بن الحسن بن عطية عن عطية عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما "إما يبلغن عندك الكبر" إلى قوله "صغيرا" فنسخها "ما كان للنبي والذين آمنوا أن يستغفروا للمشركين". قال أبو بكر وبنا أحمد بن يحيى بن مالك قال بنا عبد الوهاب عن سعيد عن قتادة نحوه. أخبرنا ابن ناصر قال أبنا ابن أيوب قال أبنا ابن شاذان قال أبنا أبو بكر النجاد قال أبنا أبو داود السجستاني قال أبنا أحمد بن محمد قال بنا عبد الله بن عثمان عن عيسى بن عبيد الله عن عبيد الله مولى عمر عن الضحاك "وقل رب ارحمهما" نسخ منها بالآية التي في براءة "ما كان للنبي والذين آمنوا أن يستغفروا للمشركين".

قلت وهذ ليس بنسخ عند الفقهاء إنما هو عام دخله التخصيص، وإلى نحوما قلته ذهب ابن جرير الطبري


Ibn Al-Jawzi's opinion is that, as the scholars of Fiqh (jurisprudence) have said that this is not abrogation, but specification. He said Ibn Jareer At-Tabarai said something similar.

IMHO, the matter is a lot simpler. God clearly gives in 9:113 the condition for prohibiting Muslims from praying for their polytheist parents when He says "after it has become clear to them that they are the companions of Hellfire." He further explains this in the very next verse,

to give an example from the story of Abraham, peace be upon him. In

God tells us that Abraham promised his father that he will ask God to forgive him. God tells us in 9:114 that Abraham did that but "when it became clear to him that he was an enemy to God, Abraham cut ties with him."

Thus, the two verses together make this consistent instruction,
"Ask God to be merciful with your parents as they have been merciful to you when you were young, but if it becomes clear to you that they insist on disbelief, then do not ask God to forgive them because God has determined to send disbelievers to the Fire."

If disbelieving parents are still alive, a Muslim child is encouraged by 17:24 to ask God to have mercy on them. The best mercy is to guide them to Islam. But if those parents have died as disbelievers, it is too late to forgive them, and that is what 9:113-114 talk about.

So, with all due respect for Ibn `Abbaas, may God have been pleased with him, 9:113-114 do not abrogate 17:24. 9:113 specifies an exception to the general command of 17:24 and 9:114 gave an example of that. In other words, 17:24 still applies. If 17:24 has been abrogated then what that means is that Muslims no longer have to "lower to their parents the wing of humility out of mercy and say 'Lord, have mercy on them like they raised me when I was young.'" Obviously, that's not the case.

9:113 only says that it is improper for Muslims to ask God to forgive their polytheist relatives. It does not say it's a sin to ask or that they would be punished if they did. The reason it's improper is that God has already decided that the pagans of Mecca are "the companions of the blazing fire."

Dr. Mustafa Zayd's refutation, on pages 112-113 (item 842) of volume 2 of his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, is that 9:113 is a specification of the generality in 17:24. He probably meant an exception.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:113 abrogate 17:24?
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2010, 05:25 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
First, I agree with you about a verse being either abrogated or not abrogated, but never half abrogated. IMHO, there is no contradiction between the two verses. The positive command is for mercy while the negative command is for forgiveness. If you think that I am splitting hair here, consider what God said about forgiveness:



so asking God to do what He said He wouldn't do is the problem. Like someone asking to never die, or to bring back to life a person who died.

Now, consider what God said about mercy:



His mercy encompasses everything. Everything means everything. No exceptions. Of course it is His decision how He will exercise His mercy, but one would not be asking Him to do something that He said He wouldn't do if one asks Him to have mercy on anyone.

One more point that is not completely related to abrogation, Verse 17:24 specifies the supplication "My Lord, have mercy upon them as they brought me up [when I was] small." I find it fascinating that those who were abondoned or abused by their parents when they were little can still follow the command ordering them to make that supplication in its exactness. :)

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:113 abrogate 17:24?
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2010, 14:22 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Great points. No splitting of hairs at all. These are two distinct concepts, like when a judge exercises leniency on a convicted felon but still sentences him to prison.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2010, 19:31 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
For:
Ibn `Abbaas (in one report), Al-Hasan, Ikrima, Muqaatil,
Qataada,
Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi,
Ibn Salaama,
Ibn Al-Baarizi.

Against:
Ibn Abbaas (in another report where he used the word 'excepted', quoted by Ibn Salaam),
Mujaahid (implied),
Ibn Al-Jawzi,
Ibn Jareer At-Tabari,
An-Nahhaas, Makki,
Al-Asfahaani,
Abu-Abdillah Shu`la,
Dr. Mustafa Zayd,
Dr. Az-Zalmi,
Dr. N.A. Tantaawi.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:113 abrogate 17:24?
PostPosted: 23 Feb 2010, 08:24 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
If disbelieving parents are still alive, a Muslim child is encouraged by 17:24 to ask God to have mercy on them. The best mercy is to guide them to Islam. But if those parents have died as disbelievers, it is too late to forgive them, and that is what 9:113-114 talk about.

I believe that 17:24 is absolute, with no exception whatsoever. The difference between mercy and forgiveness was discussed in this post. The treatment of parents in Islam has a remarkable emphasis as evidenced by the opening in this verse,


If there was an exception to the command in 17:24, that would be the exception implicitly included in the verse itself "have mercy upon them like they brought me up when I was little" (emphasis added). JMHO, and God knows best.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:113 abrogate 17:24?
PostPosted: 23 Feb 2010, 16:43 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
I believe that 17:24 is absolute, with no exception whatsoever. The difference between mercy and forgiveness was discussed in this post.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that God may show mercy to people without forgiving them? I do see that the two concepts, mercy and forgiveness, are different. Mercy precedes forgiveness. I suppose one meaning of mercy without forgiveness is if God eases their torment in the Hellfire, like the hadeeth says about Abu-Taalib.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:113 abrogate 17:24?
PostPosted: 23 Feb 2010, 17:31 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Pragmatic wrote:
I believe that 17:24 is absolute, with no exception whatsoever. The difference between mercy and forgiveness was discussed in this post.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that God may show mercy to people without forgiving them?

Exactly. The two notions are uncontroversially different. God's mercy encompasses everything. It doesn't mean that offenders will get a free ride.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:113 abrogate 17:24?
PostPosted: 06 Jun 2010, 05:10 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
In refuting this claim, Dr. Az-Zalmi, in his book التبيان لرفع غموض النسخ في القرآن, pages 301-303, draws attention to the closing of verse 9:113, claimed to be the abrogating verse, which says "after it has become clear to them that they (the relatives) are the companions of Hell." Az-Zalmi says that is impossible for anyone to know until the relative dies without accepting Islam.

Great point, and I'd add that being kind to polytheist parents and asking God to forgive them may just be the factors that appeal to those parents and reconcile their hearts to Islam. Certainly, the opposite will not help that noble cause.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:113 abrogate 17:24?
PostPosted: 06 Jun 2010, 06:36 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
In refuting this claim, Dr. Az-Zalmi, in his book التبيان لرفع غموض النسخ في القرآن, pages 301-303, draws attention to the closing of verse 9:113, claimed to be the abrogating verse, which says "after it has become clear to them that they (the relatives) are the companions of Hell." Az-Zalmi says that is impossible for anyone to know until the relative dies without accepting Islam.

Fabulous point!

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:113 abrogate 17:24?
PostPosted: 08 Sep 2010, 15:05 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Al-Qaasim ibn Salaam, in his book الناسخ والمنسوخ في القرآن والسنة, pages 208-209, quotes both Ibn Abbaas and Mujaahid explaining 9:113 saying that Abraham, peace be upon him, kept asking God to forgive his father until he died, then he stopped asking. With that explanation, it is clear they did not believe that 17:24 was abrogated. They understood that the prohibition in 9:113 is contingent upon certainty that a polytheist parent is an enemy to God and that certainty can never be until the parent dies as a polytheist. That means that a Muslim can ask God to forgive his disbelieving parents as long as they are alive, because while there is life there is hope.

Ibn Salaam also quotes Ibn Abbaas using the word "excepted", not "abrogated" to explain 9:113 in relation to 17:24. There are many other examples where the two words were used by Ibn Abbaas interchangeably.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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 07 Dec 2019, 17:28

All times are UTC

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