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.  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 8:41 abrogate 59:7?
PostPosted: 23 Jan 2010, 04:12 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
As-Suyooti reported that some have said that the Ghaneema verse, 8:41, abrogated the "Fay'" verse, 59:7. Here are the two verses,

is claimed to have been abrogated by

The same six categories of distribution are repeated in the two verses. So, the perceived conflict must be in the allotment, if we concede that the gain referred to in both verses is identical. 59:7 may be understood to suggest that the entire booty be distributed to those categories while 8:41 commands only a fifth of it, or a fifth for God (charity) and the rest to the other five categories. That would be valid except that 59:7 specifically delegates the prophet to do the distribution as he saw fit.

So, it appears that there is abrogation here, from initially delegating to the Prophet to finally fixing the percentage of distributed shares of booty. That is if we concede that the gain referred to in both verses is identical, otherwise there would not be a conflict.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 8:41 abrogate 59:7?
PostPosted: 23 Jan 2010, 06:42 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Nice analysis. My take on this is that 59:7 did not specify the shares, so it cannot possibly be contradicted by another verse that specifies the shares (to the same recipients). The fact that 59:7 gave the Prophet (PBUH) the authority to decide the shares while 8:41 dictated the shares is not abrogation either, since the first ruling is particular to the Prophet (PBUH) and therefore is not a rule for Muslims after his death. This type of argument was explained in detail in this abrogation case.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 8:41 abrogate 59:7 or the other way around?
PostPosted: 07 Mar 2010, 06:35 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi, in his book, "نواسخ القرآن", writes that some have made the reverse claim, that 59:7 abrogated 8:41. Here is what he writes,

باب ذكر ما ادعي عليه النسخ في سورة الحشر. قوله تعالى "ما أفاء الله على رسوله من أهل القرى فلله وللرسول". اختلف العلماء في المراد بهذا الفيء على قولين:
الأول أنه الغنيمة التي يأخذها المسلمون من أموال الكفار عنوة وكانت في بدء الإسلام للذين سماهم الله هاهنا دون الغالبين الموجفين عليها، ثم نسخ ذلك بقوله تعالى في الأنفال "واعلموا أنما غنمتم من شيء" الآية، هذا قول قتادة ويزيد بن رومان في آخرين. أخبرنا إسماعيل بن أحمد قال أبنا عمر بن عبيد الله قال أبنا بن بشران قال أبنا إسحاق بن أحمد قال أبنا عبد الله بن أحمد قال حدثني أبي قال بنا عبد الصمد عن همام عن قتادة "ما أفاء الله على رسوله من أهل القرى فلله وللرسول ولذي القربى واليتامى" الآية، قال كان الفيء بين هؤلاء فنسختها الآية التي في الأنفال "واعلموا أنما غنمتم من شيء فأن لله خمسه وللرسول". قال أحمد وبنا معاوية بن عمرو قال أبنا أبو إسحاق عن شريك عن جابر عن مجاهد وعكرمة قالا: نسخت سورة الأنفال سورة الحشر. قال أحمد وبنا وكيع قال بنا إسرائيل عن جابر عن مجاهد وعكرمة قالا: كانت الأنفال لله وللرسول فنسختها "واعلموا أنما غنمتم من شيء فأن لله خمسه وللرسول".

والثاني أن هذا الفيء ما أخذ من أموال المشركين مما لم يوجف عليه بخيل ولا ركاب كالصلح والجزية والعشور ومال من مات منهم في دار الإسلام ولا وارث له، فهذا كان يقسم في زمان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خمسة أخماس، فأربعة لرسول الله يفعل بها ما يشاء، والخمس الباقي للمذكورين في هذه الآية. واختلف العلماء فيما يصنع بسهم الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم بعد وفاته، فقال قوم هو للخليفة بعده، وقال قوم يصرف في المصالح. فعلى هذا تكون هذه الآية مبينة لحكم الفيء والتي في الأنفال مبينة لحكم الغنيمة فلا يتوجه نسخ. أخبرنا ابن ناصر قال أبنا علي بن الحسين بن أيوب قال أبنا ابن شاذان قال أبنا أبو بكر النجاد قال أبنا أبو داود السجستاني قال أبنا أحمد بن محمد قال سمعت علي بن الحسين يقول روى لنا الثقة أن عمر بن عبد العزيز قال: دخلت آية الفيء في آية الغنائم. قال أحمد بن شبويه: هذا أشبه من قول قتادة، وسورة الحشر نزلت بعد الأنفال بسنة فمحال أن ينسخ ما قبل ما بعد. قال أبو داود وبنا خشيش ابن أصرم قال بنا يحيى بن حسان قال بنا محمد بن راشد قال بنا ليث بن أبي رقية قال كتب عمر بن عبد العزيز إلى أمراء الأجناد أن سبيل الخمس سبيل الفيء


Ibn Al-Jawzi reports two important points here:
  1. According to Ahmad ibn Shabaweh, Chapter 59 was revealed a year after Chapter 8, thus 8:41 cannot possibly abrogate 59:7, and
  2. Ibn Al-Jawzi opines that 59:7 addresses property gained without war while 8:41 speaks of spoils of war, thus there can be no abrogation.

Dr. Abdullah Al-Husayni says in his commentary on Aş-Şa`di's book التبيان في الناسخ والمنسوخ في القرآن المجيد, page 154, that Chapter 59 was revealed about Banu An-Nadheer, a Jewish tribe who breached their treaty with the Prophet (PBUH) six months after Badr and before Uhud. He expelled them from Medina.

Indeed, the consensus is that Chapter 59 was revealed after Chapter 8, which was revealed about the battle of Badr. I agree with both points above.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 27 Aug 2010, 13:50 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
For:
Ibn Abbaas (in one report by `Ataa', according to Al-Jabri),
Qataada,
Yazeed ibn Roomaan,
Mujaahid, Ikrima (in one report),
Ad-Dhahhaak, Ibn Al-Musayyib (according to Al-Jabri).

Against:
Ibn Abbaas (in another report quoted by Al-Jabri),
Ikrima (according to Al-Jabri),
Abul-`Aaliya, Mujaahid (quoted by Al-Jabri),
The majority, according to Aş-Şa`di,
Umar ibn Abdil-Azeez,
Ahmad ibn Shabaweh,
Yahya ibn Ya`mur (quoted by Al-Jabri),
Mu`ammar (quoted by At-Tabari in his exegesis, volume 28, page 25, per Dr. Zayd),
Ibn Hazm (Az-Zhaahiri?), according to Al-Jabri,
At-Tabari (implied by his interpretation, quoted by Dr. Zayd),
Al-Bukhaari (according to Al-Jabri),
Ibn Al`Arabi and Abu-Ja`far An-Nahhaas (according to Dr. Zayd),
Ibn Al-Jawzi,
Ibn Salaama (who said there are no abrogated verses in Chapter 59),
Aş-Şa`di,
Makki (according to Dr. Faaris),
Abu-Abdillah Shu`la (implied),
Al-Jabri,
Dr. Mustafa Zayd,
Dr. M. Ibrahim Faaris.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 8:41 abrogate 59:7?
PostPosted: 10 Dec 2010, 17:38 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
So, it appears that there is abrogation here, from initially delegating to the Prophet to finally fixing the percentage of distributed shares of booty. That is if we concede that the gain referred to in both verses is identical, otherwise there would not be a conflict.

That is the understanding of Qataada, writes Dr. Mustafa Zayd in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, volume 2, pages 261-263 (items 1146-1151), and it is the basis for this claim. Dr. Zayd rejects it, however, by showing scholars opinions that الفيء, referred to in 59:7 means income or revenue, while الغنيمة, mentioned in 8:41 means booty. The former is obtained without fighting, while the latter is obtained only after a battle. At-Tabari mentions this interpretation, favors it and backs it up by a narration attributed to Mu`ammar.

Dr. Zayd also states that Ibn Al`Arabi's and An-Nahhaas opined similarly and stated that there is no abrogation her. And he concurs. Dr. M. Ibrahim Faaris also concurs in the footnotes of page 178 of his book صفوة الراسخ في علم المنسوخ والناسخ and attributes this analysis to Makki and implies that Abu-Abdillah Shu`la agrees as well.

_________________
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.  [ 5 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 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, 23:51

All times are UTC

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