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.  [ 13 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Did 5:49 abrogate 5:42?
PostPosted: 04 Dec 2010, 19:58 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Dr. Mustafa Zayd offers an uncharacteristically weak argument as he refutes this claim in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, volume 2, pages 206-210 (items 1019-1026). He says that propenents of this abrogation claim have reasoned that 5:42 was revealed early on in Medina when the Jews were many and Muslims were a few, so it made sense for the Prophet (PBUH) to arbitrate between the Jews using their own laws. They quote a hadeeth where the Prophet (PBUH) was asked by the Jews to arbitrate in an adultery case. He ruled stoning, which was the law of the Old Testament. Then later, when Muslims became the strong majority, verse 5:49 mandated that the Prophet (PBUH) judge by Islamic law between all who seek his arbitration, thus abrogating 5:42, the pro-abrogation folk argued.

Dr. Zayd refutes this reasoning with a flawed argument, IMHO. He says that stoning has become the Islamic law much later than that and it doesn't make sense for the Prophet (PBUH) to rule a punishment not yet prescribed by the Quran. The flaw with this argument is that 5:42 does not require the Prophet (PBUH) to judge between the Jews with Islamic law, it requires him to judge between them with equity. If the hadeeth is authentic, he may very well have figured that the equitable thing to do is to apply their own laws on them. In fact, I've seen versions of the same hadeeth where the Prophet (PBUH) asked the arbitrators to bring him the Torah and read it out loud to him. They did, and when the stoning verse was up, the reader covered it with his finger and skipped its reading. The Prophet (PBUH) noticed this and ordered him to lift his finger and read what he skipped. It was the stoning verse.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Consequences
PostPosted: 21 Jul 2013, 13:38 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Actually, I seem to be thinking of a non-existing verse that has the sentence "فاحكم بينهم بما يدينون". I may be confused with a reference other than the Quran. Good thing I was not among the first Muslims, or this could have become an example of abrogation of recitation. :)

Al-Jabri, in his book لا نسخ في القرآن...لماذا؟, pages 115-117, as he refutes this case, talks about how Islam lead the world in recognizing that disputes between religious minority should be settled in their courts. That, he said, is a consequence of rejecting this abrogation claim. He said that only recently has the world recognized the need for this legislative principle. He says the first to do so was the Oxford Assembly in 1882, then The Hague Convention in 1904 and lastly in Montroe Treaty in 1931.

This is interesting discussion, since this legislative principle is being challenged in the US today, where bills have been introduced and approved by several states, prohibiting the use of foreign laws in American courts. Many analysts have commented that such bills are motivated by Islamophobia and are actually unconstitutional.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 5:49 abrogate 5:42?
PostPosted: 26 Apr 2014, 19:09 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Dehlvi dismisses this claim, in his book الفوز الكبير في أصول التفسير, page 64. He correctly understood the option made in 5:42 and that 5:49 applies if the Muslim judge chooses to exercise such option.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 13 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 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 28 Mar 2024, 20:02

All times are UTC

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