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  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 04 Aug 2010, 04:13 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Al-Khazraji, in his book نفس الصباح في غريب القرآن وناسخه ومنسوخه, volume 1, page 197, confirms that Mujaahid and Ad-Dhahhaak both said that 2:115 was actually an abrogating verse; it abrogated the practice of the Prophet (PBUH) in facing Jerusalem in prayers.

This is a noteworthy point. I see in it a gentle preparation from God to Muslims for what will happen next when the Qibla direction is set toward Mecca. In other words, God is saying to the believers that He is wherever they turn; He is not in Jerusalem only. This will assimilate them easier when they are subsequently ordered to always face Mecca in prayer: God is not in Mecca only either. That is what I referred to elsewhere that the direction of prayer is not the direction toward God. God is beyond place.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 06 Aug 2010, 10:11 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
I see in it a gentle preparation from God to Muslims for what will happen next when the Qibla direction is set toward Mecca. In other words, God is saying to the believers that He is wherever they turn; He is not in Jerusalem only. This will assimilate them easier when they are subsequently ordered to always face Mecca in prayer

Nice.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 11 Aug 2010, 06:08 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
It occurred to me tonight, that the verse immediately preceding 2:115 is

and it speaks of the situation where enemies of the believers prevent them from praying in their places of worship or even destroy them. A believer might then ask how will he pray to God if he doesn't have a mosque. 2:115 answers that question! In other words, 2:115 states two articles of faith: (a) God is not in any one place and (b) prayer to God can be done anywhere.

Knowing this, the mandate to face Mecca in prayer, issued in 2:144, does not abrogate either article, since God is not in Mecca and facing Mecca can be done from anywhere. I am glad to read that Ar-Raazi, in his exegesis, narrating from Ali ibn `Eesa, volume 4, page 33, held the same view. Also did Al-Baydhaawi in his exegesis, volume 2, page 58, Az-Zamakhshari in his exegesis الكشاف, volume 1, page 90, and Al-Aloosi in his his book روح المعاني, volume 1, page 198. Dr. Zayd agrees with all of them, in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, volume 2, pages 128-130 (items 863-866), and adds that the authentic hadeeth backs it up. It says, "I was privileged over prior prophets that the [whole] earth was made a place of prayer and a cleansing."

The mandate to face Mecca is a ruling from God without precedence, since He has not ordered the believers before to face any particular direction in prayer.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 14 Aug 2010, 04:39 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
It occurred to me tonight, that the verse immediately preceding 2:115 is 2:114 and it speaks of the situation where enemies of the believers prevent them from praying in their places of worship or even destroy them. A believer might ask how will he pray to God if he doesn't have a mosque. 2:115 answers that question! In other words, 2:115 states two articles of faith: (a) God is not in any one place and (b) prayer to God can be done anywhere.

Great observation!

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 30 Aug 2010, 14:02 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Jamaal `Ataaya refutes this case with arguments matching mine. He lists the following reasons for rejecting this claim,

  • No conflict. 2:115 talks about God's availability, which is everywhere, while 2:144 talks about the direction of prayer. Ibn Al-Qayyim has said that the phrase "The Face of God" has never been a metaphor for the prayer direction.
  • 2:115 is a declarative statement, every part of which is and always will be true. There is no ruling in 2:115, therefore it cannot be abrogated.
  • The generality (of 2:115) cannot logically be abrogated by the specificity (of 2:144).
  • 2:115 was revealed to answer the concern of people who could not tell which direction the Qibla was. The juristic opinion (see for instance Sayyid Saabiq's landmark book Fiqh-us-Sunna) is that in such case, after a person tried all he could to determine the Qibla direction but still couldn't tell, is that any direction he settles on makes his prayer valid even if he realizes later it was the wrong direction. He does not have to repeat the prayer then.
  • The context of these verses is the change of Qibla direction from Jerusalem to Mecca. The Jews had ridiculed Muslims for that. God answered them that only idiots would say that because only idiots would assume that God is in a specific place. God is exalted above place. I'd add that God also said that the Jews already knew, from their scriptures, that this change-over will happen! (2:144)

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 16 Sep 2010, 14:50 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
This claim is another example cited by Jamaal `Ataaya in his book حقيقة النسخ وطلاقة النص في القرآن, pages 385-411, to illustrate his discussion of the significance of openness of text in the Quran. The open text in 2:115 gives the default framework of where God is! Thus, anyone who thinks that God is somewhere only is mistaken. The verse does not command anything, it sets a principle and tenet of faith, therefore it cannot be abrogated.

Verse 2:144 is the one that has a command. That command does not contradict the open text of 2:115, but works within it. Since God is everywhere, directing the prayer toward Mecca or any other destination is directing the prayer toward God, but God wants Muslims united in their prayer as a symbol of their unity of faith and His Unity, and has specified one direction for all, Mecca.

The openness of the text of 2:115 also means that if a Muslim cannot tell which direction Mecca is, he or she can pray toward his best guess of where Mecca is.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 04 Nov 2010, 14:46 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Dr. Mustafa Zayd, in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, volume 2, pages 128-130 (items 863-866), refutes this claim and offers a strong, additional argument: A narration of Ibn Abbaas by `Ataa' ibn Abi-Rabaah and Ali ibn Abi-Talha states that verse 2:115 was revealed after 2:144, reported At-Tabari in his exegesis, volume 2, page 526.

That said, he does list this claim as a valid abrogation claim, but that 2:144 abrogated the Sunna. He contends, on page 295 of volume 2 of his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, that the initial direction of prayer toward Jerusalem was by personal opinion of the Prophet (PBUH), but he says that God approved it! And since God has subsequently mandated that Qibla be toward Mecca, that initial approval was abrogated. He says this is clear from authentic hadeeths reported by all six books of Hadeeth as well Al-Muwatta' by Maalik.

I respectfully disagree. God did not approve the initial direction; He only allowed it to go on for a while. In fact, 2:144 clearly states why: to test the compliance of the believers. Such a test is necessary to filter out the hypocrites and to strengthen the faith of the true. Whether you call it allowance or approval, it's not a command. Therefore, abrogation does not apply in the first place.

Anyway, this discussion is irrelevant to the concern of this study, which only questions if there are any verses in the Quran that have been abrogated.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 19 Aug 2012, 17:07 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
That said, he (Dr. Mustafa Zayd) does list this claim as a valid abrogation claim, but that 2:144 abrogated the Sunna. He contends, on page 295 of volume 2 of his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, that the initial direction of prayer toward Jerusalem was by personal opinion of the Prophet (PBUH), but he says that God approved it! And since God has subsequently mandated that Qibla be toward Mecca, that initial approval was abrogated. He says this is clear from authentic hadeeths reported by all six books of Hadeeth as well Al-Muwatta' by Maalik.

I respectfully disagree. God did not approve the initial direction; He only allowed it to go on for a while.

In his interpretation of 2:106, the eminent Sheikh Shaarawi, may God bless his soul, poses an interesting question: Why wasn't the Kaaba designated as the Qibla from the beginning? His answer is: because the Kaaba had idols in it! God did not want Muslims to pray toward a house of idols no matter how revered that house is. Only when the Kaaba was emptied of idols did the Qibla change.

As attractive as this argument is, it is historically inaccurate, since all accounts point to the year of conquest of Mecca, year 8 A.H., as the year when all idols in Mecca were brought down. But Chapter 2 was revealed earlier, around year 2 A.H. In fact, Shaarawi himself states that the duration of Qibla toward Jerusalem was 16 months in Medina.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 2:144 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 12 May 2013, 21:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Dr. Mannaa` Al-Qattaan, in his book مباحث في علوم القرآن, page 235, agrees with the opinion that rejects this claim. He says that 2:115 applies and still does to situations of fear or necessity, or to voluntary prayers done while riding during travel (as stated in the two authentic Hadeeth books), while 2:144, he says, applies to the five required daily prayers.

He also says that 2:144 abrogated the Sunna of facing Jerusalem during prayer.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Did 2:150 abrogate 2:115?
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2013, 13:26 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Dr. M. Saalih Ali Mustafa, in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم - مفهومه وتاريخه ودعاواه, pages 48-49, states that the abrogating verse is actually,


He presents an argument for this claim and another against it and clearly favors the latter.

His argument for the claim is the change of Qibla from Jerusalem to Mecca. How is that related to 2:115?

His argument against the claim is that narrations say that 2:115 was revealed later than 2:150. I wish he mentioned those narrations and their authenticity. He also gives a nod to Az-Zurqaani's opinion that 2:115 applies to voluntary prayers and prayers while travelling, as he stated in his book مناهل العرفان, volume 2, page 152. Agreeing with that view was Muhammad Hamza in his book دراسات الإحكام والنسخ في القرآن الكريم, page 138.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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 17 Sep 2019, 12:53

All times are UTC

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