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  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Which Verses?
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2010, 04:40 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4434
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Abrogation Claims accepted by Makki

...and ended up approving only 6 cases
  1. Chapter 60 (سورة الممتحنة), and I assume he means verse 60:10, based on the expiration of the cause. Al-Jabri comments that expiration of the cause does not imply abrogation since the verse mandates something based on that cause, so the verse itself is valid. I agree, but I have no idea why Makki singled out this case since there are various other verses that apply only during the life of the Prophet (PBUH).
  2. The "private consultation" verse, 58:12 (abrogated)
  3. The change of Qibla verse, 2:144 (abrogating)
  4. The The "night prayer" verses, 73:2-4 (abrogated)
  5. The "steadfast" (musabara) verse 8:65 (abrogated)
  6. The Zakat verse (abrogating all charity verses).

This is very different from the information in this web page (Admin note: protect your computer whenever you visit external web sites),
http://www.freewebs.com/islamicworldnews/nasikhandmansukh.html
which states that Makki's cases are 24 and that 8:65 is not one of them! I'd trust Al-Jabri's information over some web page, but the discrepancy is so big, it's almost as if they are talking about two different people.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Which Verses?
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2010, 04:42 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1784
Location: USA
Zero Consensus

On page 117 of his book, Al-Jabri discusses the opinions of his contemporary scholars about which verses in the text of the Quran were abrogated. He cites the thesis of Mostafa Zaid, the Master's thesis of Al-Areedh (whom Al-Jabri talks about with reverence), and the Doctoral thesis of Muhammad Mahmoud Farghali. He mentions that the latter two have read and reacted to the first edition of the book (but not Zaid since his thesis was earlier).

The most important statement is that Farghali's approved cases (Al-Jabri did not mention which or how many) and Zaid's approved cases are mutually exclusive. In fact each has specifically refuted the other's cases. Al-Jabri draws comfort from that in saying that this shows that having an anti-abrogation stand does not go against a consensus since none exists, hence it is allowed.

I think we should try to get Farghali's thesis, since the implication of what Al-Jabri says is that Farghali has refuted the "big 3" abrogation claims, since they are among the 5 claims approved by Zaid.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Which Verses?
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2010, 04:50 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1784
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
This is very different from the information in this web page ... which states that Makki's cases are 24 and that 8:65 is not one of them! I'd trust Al-Jabri's information over some web page, but the discrepancy is so big, it's almost as if they are talking about two different people.

This is certainly irreconcilable. Is it the same Makki? The full name is the same. I noticed in Al-Jabri's book that at one instance he refers to an Ibn Hazm and says "not the Andalusi" so could there be some mistaken identities in some of this?

I have to say that Al-Jabri's statement that I posted earlier to the effect that it was Imam Al-Shafeiy who established the notion of the abrogating and abrogated casts doubt in my mind about the accuracy of what he says at times.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Which Verses?
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2010, 05:04 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4434
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Zero Consensus
...
I think we should try to get Farghali's thesis, since the implication of what Al-Jabri says is that Farghali has refuted the "big 3" abrogation claims, since they are among the 5 claims approved by Zaid.

According to this web site, http://www.qurancomplex.org/Display.asp?section=1&l=arb&f=nwasekh004, a brief review of Dr. Farghali's book suggests that no analysis of individual cases was made by the author, but rather a refutation or support of scholars differing opinions. The same site, page 3, confirms that it was Imaam Ash-Shaafi`i who first wrote analysis of the abrogation issues.

BTW, Dr. Farghali is (or was) the dean of the Faculty of Sharia and Law, Al-Azhar University.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Which Verses?
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2010, 05:08 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4434
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Is it the same Makki? The full name is the same. I noticed in Al-Jabri's book that at one instance he refers to an Ibn Hazm and says "not the Andalusi" so could there be some mistaken identities in some of this?

Yes, there is an Ibn Hazm Az-Zhaahiri, a different one from Al-Andalusi. The former is actually the better known one and he was squarely against the use of analogy and other techniques as valid deduction methods. I will be quoting his opinions soon insha-Allah in the Deduction Methods forum.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Which Verses?
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2010, 19:50 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1784
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Yes, there is an Ibn Hazm Az-Zhaahiri, a different one from Al-Andalusi. The former is actually the better known one and he was squarely against the use of analogy and other techniques as valid deduction methods. I will be quoting his opinions soon insha-Allah in the Deduction Methods forum.

Al-Jabri elaborates on page 122 that there are actually 3 Ibn Hazm's

  1. Abu-Abdullah Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Ibn Hazm Al-Ansary - died 320 H., wrote the Book "Knowing the Abrogating and the Abrogated" which is mentioned in the margins of the Exegesis of the two Jalals.

  2. Abu-Muhammad Aly Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi - Author of the book Al-Muhalla.

  3. Abu-Bakr Muhammad Ibn Amr Ibn Hazm - Ruler of Medina at the time of Omar Ibn Abdul-Aziz, who was commissioned by Omar together with Ibn Shihab Al-Zuhry to transcribe the Hadeeths of the Prophet (PBUH).

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Tally of verses claimed abrogated by 9:5
PostPosted: 02 May 2010, 19:36 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4434
Location: USA
I'll keep in this post a tally of the cases that have been claimed abrogated by the sword verse, 9:5, as I find writings about it. For details, discussion and refutation arguments, please refer to the topic dedicated to this category of claims.

The list:
2:83, 2:109, 2:139, 2:190, 2:191, 2:192, 2:217, 2:256 (subtotal: 8),
3:20, 3:28, 3:159, 3:186 (subtotal: 4),
4:63, 4:80, 4:81, 4:84, 4:88, 4:90, 4:91, 4:92, 4:99, 4:141, 4:145 (subtotal: 11),
5:2, 5:2 (another claim), 5:13, 5:92, 5:99, 5:105 (Subtotal: 6),
6:66, 6:68, 6:70, 6:91, 6:104, 6:106, 6:107, 6:108, 6:112, 6:135, 6:137, 6:158, 6:159 (subtotal: 13),
7:180, 7:183, 7:199 (subtotal: 3),
8:38, 8:61, 8:61 (Another claim) (Subtotal: 3),
9:1, 9:2, 9:5, 9:7, 9:36 (Subtotal: 5),
10:20, 10:41, 10:46, 10:99, 10:102 10:108, 10:109 (subtotal: 7),
11:12, 11:86, 11:121, 11:122 (subtotal: 4),
13:40,
15:3, 15:85, 15:88, 15:89, 15:94 (subtotal: 5),
16:82, 16:106, 16:125, 16:126, 16:127 (subtotal: 5),
17:25, 17:54,
19:39, 19:75, 19:84 (subtotal: 3),
20:130, 20:135,
21:109,
22:49, 22:56, 22:68, 22:69 (subtotal: 4),
23:54, 23:96,
24:54,
25:43, 25:63,
27:92,
28:55,
29:46, 29:50,
30:44, 30:60,
31:23,
32:30,
33:48,
34:25,
35:23,
36:76,
37:174, 37:175, 37:178, 37:179 (subtotal: 4),
38:17, 38:70, 38:88 (Subtotal: 3)
39:3, 39:15, 39:23, 39:36, 39:39, 39:40, 39:41, 39:46 (Subtotal: 8),
40:12, 40:55, 40:77, (Subtotal: 3),
41:34,
42:6, 42:15, 42:39, 42:40, 42:48 (subtotal: 5),
43:41, 43:83, 43:89,
44:59,
45:14,
46:35,
47:4,
48:2, 48:25,
50:39, 50:45,
51:54,
52:31, 52:45, 52:48 (subtotal: 3),
53:29,
54:6,
60:8, 60:9, 60:10, 60:11 (subtotal: 3),
64:14,
68:44, 68:48,
70:5, 70:42,
73:10, 73:11,
74:11,
76:8, 76:24,
86:17,
88:22,
95:8,
109:6.

Total so far: 161 claims affecting 159 verses.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Which Verses?
PostPosted: 24 May 2010, 02:53 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1784
Location: USA
I have edited the OP of this thread to include a list of the abrogation claims that we need to address in the final writeup. Please edit that post to add/delete/reorder.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Which Verses?
PostPosted: 27 May 2010, 19:08 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4434
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Important Abrogation Claims:
...
The Main List

  1. Private consultation: 58:12/13
  2. Steadfastness: 8:65/66
  3. Night prayer: 73:1-4/20

Those three, which you have dubbed "the big three", Pragmatic, are all categorized by Dr. Az-Zalmi as licenses after resolutions. He writes that in his book التبيان لرفع غموض النسخ في القرآن, page 57. Examples of licenses after resolution are many in the Sharia, e.g., allowing breaking the fast for the sick and the traveler, combining prayers for the traveler, or allowing ablution with dust in the absence of water. The fact that there is a license does not negate the resolution mandate when the condition of the license does not apply.

BTW, Az-Zalmi mentions, on page 54, that Moosa Jawaad Affaana, in his book الرأي الصواب في منسوخ الكتاب has refuted all five cases confirmed by Dr. Zaid. We should try to get that book.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Which Verses?
PostPosted: 27 May 2010, 19:19 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4434
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Linguistic wrote:
Ali Hasan Al-Areedh settles on five cases,

2:187/2:183,
...

This is a pretty weak case. Strange that it survived as one of five.

If you ask me, this case should be added to "the big three". The reason being, as I discussed in this post in comment on Al-Areedh's sound argument for it, is that 2:187 does include many of the words that imply abrogation, the same words used in the big three.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users 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:  
cron
It is currently 26 Jun 2017, 15:39

All times are UTC

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