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.  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 4:129 abrogate 4:3?
PostPosted: 11 Jan 2010, 06:40 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
It is interesting that this case is rarely mentioned even though on the surface of the two verses, a case for abrogation can easily be made. Here are the verses in question,


is claimed to have been abrogated by


In 4:3, the allowance for polygamy is contingent upon fairness, while 4:129 declares that such fairness is impossible. So, logically, that annuls polygamy. As-Suyooti explained that 4:3 speaks of treatment while 4:129 speaks of love. Love is beyond deliberation and intention, but fair treatment can be arranged and observed.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 4:129 abrogate 4:3?
PostPosted: 11 Jan 2010, 07:29 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
In 4:3, the allowance for polygamy is contingent upon fairness, while 4:129 declares that such fairness is impossible. So, logically, that annuls polygamy. As-Suyooti explained that 4:3 speaks of treatment while 4:129 speaks of love. Love is beyond deliberation and intention, but fair treatment can be arranged and observed.

Although I believe there is no abrogation here, I agree with you that an argument for abrogation in this case would be easier to make than in many of the majority list of abrogated verses. I also find it unsettling that an attempt at interpretation that is not based on the text is being employed here to reconcile the two verses (treatment versus love) where as no such attempt is employed in the other cases. Too arbitrary.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 4:129 abrogate 4:3?
PostPosted: 11 Jan 2010, 15:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Although I believe there is no abrogation here, I agree with you that an argument for abrogation in this case would be easier to make than in many of the majority list of abrogated verses. I also find it unsettling that an attempt at interpretation that is not based on the text is being employed here to reconcile the two verses (treatment versus love) where as no such attempt is employed in the other cases. Too arbitrary.

In Suyooti's defense, I'd say that there is basis in the text to back up his interpretation, namely God's use of the phrase, فلا تميلوا كل الميل (do not incline totally) which implies emotion.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 4:129 abrogate 4:3?
PostPosted: 12 Jan 2010, 06:00 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
In Suyooti's defense, I'd say that there is basis in the text to back up his interpretation, namely God's use of the phrase, فلا تميلوا كل الميل (do not incline totally) which implies emotion.

Yes, I take it back.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 22 Jan 2010, 17:51 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
For:
Unnamed.
P.S. An-Nahhaas wrote that 4:3 abrogated the pre-Islamic practice of no-limit polygamy.

Against:
As-Suyooti,
Dr. Mustafa Zayd.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 4:129 abrogate 4:3?
PostPosted: 03 Nov 2010, 16:51 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Dr. Mustafa Zayd, in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, volume 2, page 126 (item 860), reports an interesting interpretation of 4:3 by Al-Hasan and Ad-Dhaahhaak. They said that it means "Just as you worry that you cannot be equitable with orphans, worry that you cannot be equitable with your wives."

IMHO, the meaning is different and here is why. God finishes the ruling by saying, ذلك أدنى ألا تعولوا (That is closer to not being burdened). What that means is that a father of many orphans (children of deceased wives) will need help raising them. So, he is allowed to marry up to a total of four wives, who will help him raise the kids. But, this is contingent upon equity with the wives.

_________________
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.  [ 6 posts ] 


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, 18:14

All times are UTC

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