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  [ 13 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 33:6 (or 8:75) abrogate 4:33?
PostPosted: 10 Jan 2010, 15:18 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Some scholars have said that an inheritance share promised to someone, as stated in 4:33 was abrogated by 33:6 which gives that share to immediate relatives instead. Here are the two verses,


is claimed to have been abrogated by


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

ذكر الآية الرابعة عشرة: قوله تعالى "والذين عقدت أيمانكم". اختلف المفسرون في المراد بهذه المعاقدة على ثلاثة أقوال:
الأول أنها المحالفة التي كانت في الجاهلية، واختلف هؤلاء على ما كانوا يتعاقدون على ثلاثة أقوال:
الأول على أن يتوارثوا. أخبرنا إسماعيل بن أحمد قال أبنا عمر بن عبيد الله قال أبنا ابن بشران قال أبنا إسحاق بن أحمد قال بنا عبد الله بن أحمد قال حدثني أبي قال قال حدثني حجاج عن ابن جريح عن عطاء الخراساني عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما "والذين عقدت أيمانكم" قال كان الرجل فبل الإسلام يعاقد الرجل، فيقول ترثني وأرثك، فنسختها هذه الآية "وأولو الأرحام بعضهم أولى ببعض" الآية. 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 المروزي قال بنا علي: كان الرجل يحالف الرجل ليس بينهما نسب فيرث أحدهما الآخر، فنسخ ذلك قوله "وأولو الأرحام بعضهم أولى ببعض". وقال الحسن كان الرجل يعاقد الرجل على أنه إذا مات أحدهما ورثه الآخر فنسختها آية المواريث.
والثاني أنهم يتعاقدون على أن يتناصروا ويتعاقلوا في الجناية.
والثالث أنهم كانوا يتعاقدون على جميع ذلك. أخبرنا إسماعيل بن أحمد قال أبنا عمر بن عبيد الله قال أبنا بن بشران قال أبنا إسحاق بن أحمد قال بنا عبد الله بن أحمد قال حدثني أبي قال بنا عبد الرزاق قال قال بنا معمر عن قتادة في قوله "والذين عقدت أيمانكم" قال كان الرجل في الجاهلية يعاقد الرجل فيقول دمي دمك وهدمي هدمك وترثني وأرثك وتطلب بي وأطلب بك، فلما جاء الإسلام بقي منهم ناس فأمروا أن يؤتوهم نصيبهم من الميراث وهو السدس، ثم نسخ ذلك بالميراث فقال "وأولو الأرحام بعضهم أولى ببعض في كتاب الله".

فصل: وهل أمروا في الشريعة أن يتوارثوا بذلك؟ فيه قولان:
الأول أنهم أمروا أن يتوارثوا بذلك فمنهم من كان يجعل لحليفه السدس من ماله، ومنهم من كان يجعل له سهما غيرذلك، فإن لم يكن له وارث فهو أحق بجميع ماله. أخبرنا عبد الوهاب الحافظ قال أبنا أبو الفضل بن خيرون وأبو طاهر البلقلاوي قالا أبنا ابن شاذان قال أبنا أحمد بن كامل قال أبنا محمد بن سعد العوفي قال حدثني أبي قال حدثني عمي عن أبيه عن جده عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما "والذين عقدت أيمانكم" قال كان الرجل في الجاهلية يلحق به الرجل فيكون تابعه فإذا مات الرجل صار لأهله وأقاربه الميراث وبقي تابعه ليس له شيء، فأنزل الله تعالى "والذين عقدت أيمانكم فآتوهم نصيبهم" وكان يعطى من ميراثه فأنزل الله تعالى بعد ذلك "وأولو الأرحام بعضهم أولى ببعض في كتاب الله". قلت: وهذا القول أعني نسخ الآية بهذه الآية قول جمهور العلماء منهم الثوري والأوزاعي ومالك والشافعي وأحمد بن حنبل. وقال أبو حنيفة هذا الحكم ليس بمنسوخ غير أنه جعل ذوي الأرحام أولى من موالي المعاقدة، فإذا فقد ذوي الأرحام ورثوا وكانوا احق به من بيت المال.
والثاني أنهم لم يؤمروا بالتوارث بذلك بل أمروا بالتناصر وهذا حكم باق لم ينسخ، وقد قال عليه السلام "لا حلف في الإسلام وأيما حلف كان في الجاهلية فإن الإسلام لم يزده إلا شدة". وأراد بذلك النصرة والعون وأراد بقوله لا حلف في الإسلام أن الإسلام قد استغنى عن ذلك بما أوجب الله تعالى على المسلمين بعضهم لبعض من التناصر، وهذا قول جماعة منهم سعيد بن جبير وقد روى عن مجاهد أنهم ينصرونهم ويعقلون عنهم. أخبرنا إسماعيل بن أحمد قال أبنا عمر بن عبيد الله قال أبنا ابن بشران قال أبنا إسحاق بن أحمد قال أبنا عبد الله بن أحمد قال حدثني أبي قال بنا وكيع قال بنا سفيان عن منصور عن مجاهد "والذين عقدت أيمانكم" قال هم الحلفاء فآتوهم نصيبهم من العقل والمشورة والنصرة ولا ميراث. والقول الثاني أن المراد بالمعاقدة المؤاخاة التي عقدها رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بين أصحابه. أخبرنا ابن ناصر قال أبنا ابن أيوب قال أبنا ابن شاذان قال أبنا أبو بكر النجاد قال أبنا أبو داود السجستاني قال بنا هرون بن عبد الله قال بنا أبو أسامة قال حدثني إدريس بن يزيد قال بنا طلحة بن مصرف عن سعيد بن جبير عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما قال: كان المهاجرين حين قدموا المدينة يورثون الأنصار دون ذوي رحمهم للأخوة التي آخى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بينهم، فلما نزلت "ولكل جعلنا موالي" نسخت فآتوهم نصيبهم من النصر والنصيحة والرفادة، ويوصي لهم وقد ذهب الميراث. وروى أصبغ عن ابن زيد "والذين عقدت أيمانكم" قال الذين عاقد بينهم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فآتوهم نصيبهم إذا لم يأت ذو رحم يحول بينهم. قال وهذا لا يكون اليوم، إنما كان هذا في نفر آخى بينهم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ثم انقطع ذلك، ولا يكون هذا لأحد إلا للنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم. القول الثالث أنها نزلت في الذين كانوا يتبنون أبناء غيرهم في الجاهلية، فأمروا أن يوصوا لهم عند الموت توصية ورد الميراث إلى الرحم والعصبة، رواه الزهري عن ابن المسيب


A share of inheritance promised someone is a bequest. All that 33:6 says is that blood relatives have priority, or first right, to inheritance. It does not rule out bequests to others. Taken together, as all verses of the Quran should be taken, these two verses state that in the absence of specific inheritance laws, which were later revealed, a testator cannot deprive his blood relatives or favor over them others, but he still has to honor promises of bequests that he has given. Therefore, the case for abrogation here is quite weak. In fact, the case is null because of the practice of the prophet, peace be upon him. Saad Ibn Malik, may God have been pleased with him, consulted the prophet (pbuh) about giving two thirds of his money to charity. The prophet rejected the two thirds suggestion. Saad then suggested one half. The prophet rejected that too. Finally, Saad suggested one third. The prophet reluctantly approved. He said, "A third then and a third is still too much." That became the foundation for allowing up to one third of the estate as bequest to non-heirs, in the majority opinion of the scholars.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 33:6 abrogate 4:33?
PostPosted: 10 Jan 2010, 19:23 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Very informed response. Thank you.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 33:6 abrogate 4:33?
PostPosted: 10 Jan 2010, 23:44 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Thanks. You may also notice that 33:6 made the provision for a bequest that 4:33 did, when God says, "إلا أن تفعلوا إلى أوليائكم معروفا", so there is definitely no abrogation, only confirmation.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 22 Jan 2010, 18:01 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
For:
Abdullah ibn Az-Zubayr (implied),
Ibn Abbaas (in one report, said Al-Ghaali), Ikrima and Qataada,
Mujaahid, Ibn Jabeer, Ibn Al-Musayyib (according to An-Nahhaas),
Ath-Thawri,
Al-Awzaa`i,
Al-Hasan (according to Shu`la),
Maalik,
Ash-Shaafi`i,
Ahmad ibn Hanbal,
Muqaatil,
Ad-Dhahhaak,
Al-Qaasim ibn Salaam,
Aş-Şa`di,
As-Suyooti, but he said the abrogating verse is 8:75,

Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi and Ibn Salaama said the same thing.

Against:
Ibn Abbaas (in another report by Al-Bukhaari),
As-Suddi (according to At-Tabari),
Mujaahid, Sa`eed ibn Jabeer (in another report by An-Nahhaas),
Abu-Haneefa,
Al-Asamm, Al-Hasan and Ibn Al-Musayyib (implied, quoted by Al-Jabri),
Al-Jassaas,
Al-Asfahaani,
At-Tabari (leaning),
Al-Qurtubi,
Al-Bukhaari (implied, quoted by Al-Jabri),
An-Nahhaas,
Makki,
Ibn Al-Jawzi,
Ar-Raazi,
Al-Aloosi (according to Az-Zalmi),
Shah Waliullah Dehlvi,
Az-Zurqaani,
Muhammad Abduh,
Muhammad Al-Khudhari (Bek),
M. Rasheed Ridha,
Dr. Mustafa Zayd,
Al-Jabri,
Dr. Ahmad Hijaazi As-Saqqa,
Ali Hasan Al-Areedh,
M. M. Nada,
Dr. Az-Zalmi,
Husaam Al-Ghaali,
Dr. Muhammad Saalih Ali Mustafa,
Ihab Hasan Abduh,
Jamaal `Ataaya.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 33:6 abrogate 4:33?
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2010, 16:12 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
In his book, فتح المنان في نسخ القرآن, Ali Hasan Al-Areedh narrates the argument of Abu-Muslim Al-Asfahaani in refuting this case. It demonstrates once again that Al-Asfahaani, rahimahullah, was the genius everybody said he was! He said that what is meant in 4:33 by الذين عقدت أيمانكم are spouses. He said the verse itemizes all kinds of relationships that entitle an heir to inherit from: Parents, other blood relatives, and spouses. Thus, his translation of the verse is,
"We have made heirs to what parents, relatives and spouses leave behind, therefore give the heirs their share."

How brilliant! I'm amazed that a Persian man was able to master the Arabic language better than some native Arabs. I'd add support to Al-Asfahaani's argument that God has called marriage a "knot", عقدة in 2:235 and 2:237, and that in Arabic a contract is called عقد as in 5:1 for instance. Once a reasonable interpretation is found that makes an abrogation claim unnecessary, it should be given more priority than abrogation, since the claim of abrogation is also based on interpretation, in this case, of what the words الذين عقدت أيمانكم meant and there is no real consensus about that either.

Al-Areedh doesn't seem to give that interpretation much weight, leaning once again, to what other scholars opined. He propounds their opinions and they are much varied as quoted in the OP above. Some thought that the words الذين عقدت أيمانكم refers to slaves. Iraqi jurists advocate that. Others said it meant foster children. Others, such as Abu-Ja`far, Ibn Abbaas and Mujaahid, said it meant virtual brothers as was the case immediately after Hijra to Medina. Others, such as Sa`eed ibn Jabeer, Mujaahid, Ataa', Al-Hasan, Ibn Al-Musayyib, Abu-Saalih, Sulayman ibn Bishr, Ash-Sha`bi, Ikrima, As-Suddi, Ad-Dhahhaak, Qataada, Muqaatil, Ibn Hubbaan, Al-Aloosi in his exegesis, Abu-Ja`far and Abu-Haneefa, they all said it means allies.

I said earlier that the words imply to me a bequest, and Al-Areedh accepts that as one valid interpretation. I still think that's a reasonable interpretation, but I now see Al-Asfahaani's interpretation more compelling. What I would do, however, is not limit the words to those contracted for marriage, but those contracted in general, verbally (promise) or in writing, and by virtue of the contract are entitled to or have been promised a share in the estate. That would include promises made to slaves, all bequests, all debts, virtual brothers, allies, etc. In fact, that is what one would reasonably understand from the phrase من بعد وصية يوصى بها أو دين which is repeated several times in the inheritance verses, making the inheritance verses elaborating, rather than abrogating of 4:33.

Abdul-Muta`aal Al-Jabri, in his book, لا نسخ في القرآن...لماذا؟, pages 62-63, fully agrees with Al-Asfahaani and adds that prior to Islam, wives were inherited! Islam established their dignity and their right to inherit from their husbands. He also says that there is a wisdom behind transferring money from one family to another: that people recognize that property is not and should not be confined in one family or tribe. Money needs to be moving and not concentrated in the rich, per

Al-Jabri was big on social justice, which he called socialism, but was adamantly against communism and capitalism. He believed, and I agree, that Islam has perfectly outlined the practical actions that lead to social justice.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 33:6 abrogate 4:33?
PostPosted: 25 May 2010, 20:48 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
In his book, فتح المنان في نسخ القرآن, Ali Hasan Al-Areedh narrates the argument of Abu-Muslim Al-Asfahaani in refuting this case. It demonstrates once again that Al-Asfahaani, rahimahullah, was the genius everybody said he was! He said that what is meant in 4:33 by الذين عقدت أيمانكم are spouses. He said the verse itemizes all kinds of relationships that entitle an heir to inherit from: Parents, other blood relatives, and spouses. Thus, his translation of the verse is,
"We have made heirs to what parents, relatives and spouses leave behind, therefore give the heirs their share."

How brilliant!

Dr. Ahmad Hijaazi As-Saqqa, in his book لانسخ في القرآن, pages 124-126, sees this case the exact same way as Al-Asfahaani did. Al-Ghaali, in his book بالحجة والبرهان لا نسخ في القرآن, pages 119-123, says that Imaam Muhammad Abduh also understood it the same way.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 33:6 abrogate 4:33?
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2010, 05:35 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Dr. Az-Zalmi, in his book التبيان لرفع غموض النسخ في القرآن, pages 216-219, refutes this case. Among his arguments is Al-Asfahaani's argument, but once again he does not credit him for it, but rather quotes Al-Asfahaani's student Ar-Raazi, who said that the phrase والذين عقدت أيمانكم means that people with whom mutual promises of a share of inheritance were made, they have their own heirs who have more priority.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 33:6 abrogate 4:33?
PostPosted: 13 Aug 2010, 01:57 
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 282, quotes An-Nahhaas saying that both Sa`eed ibn Jabeer and Mujaahid interpreted the share to give to allies as promised help and support and that's why they rejected the abrogation claim.

I respectfully find that an unlikely interpretation, because the word نصيب means share; it does not mean help or support.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 33:6 abrogate 4:33?
PostPosted: 16 Aug 2010, 21:57 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Dr. Muhammad Saalih Ali Mustafa, in his article النسخ في القرآن الكريم مفهومه وتاريخه ودعاواه, offers a remarkably simple refutation of this abrogation claim,

الإحكام: إن تقديم أولي الأرحام لا يعني حرمان غيرهم، ولا يفيد إسقاطهم وإنما هو ترتيب لأصحاب الحقوق

Translation: Advancing kin does not mean depriving others, nor result in dropping their shares. It is only a prioritization of eligible heirs.

Muhammad Al-Khudhari (Bek) sees it the same way, in his book أصول الفقه, page 253. That also was the opinion of Abu-Haneefa, wrote Abu-Abdillah Shu`la in his book صفوة الراسخ في علم المنسوخ والناسخ, page 126.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 33:6 (or 8:75) abrogate 4:33?
PostPosted: 05 Sep 2010, 15:24 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Jamaal `Ataaya has a completely different angle in refuting this claim in his book حقيقة النسخ وطلاقة النص في القرآن. On pages 220-226, He interprets 4:33 as follows,

Jamaal `Ataaya wrote:
If parents and kin have promised something to their servants, or you contracted with some people, then give those what they have been promised.

He doesn't see either of the three verses talking about inheritance at all. He sees 8:75 talking about good relations with all fellow Muslims with priority to kin. He sees 33:6 saying the same thing but adds a recommendation to do good to allies. He points out that doing good to allies, stated in 33:6, is exactly what 4:33 enjoins, so how can one abrogate the other if they're saying the same thing?

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  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 06 Dec 2019, 01:03

All times are UTC

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