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  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 6:121 abrogate 5:5 or the other way around?
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2010, 05:10 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
This case is about eating meat slaughtered by the People of the Book. The verses in discussion are

is claimed to have been abrogated (and some say it has abrogated)


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

ذكر الآية الثانية: قوله تعالى "وطعام الذين أوتوا الكتاب حل لكم". اختلف المفسرون في هذه الآية على ثلاثة أقوال:
القول الأول أنها أنها اقتضت إباحة ذبائح أهل الكتاب على الإطلاق وإن علمنا أنهم قد أهلوا عليها بغير اسم الله أو أشركوا معه غيره، وهذا مروي عن الشعبي وربيعة والقاسم بن مخيمرة في آخرين وهؤلاء زعموا أنها ناسخة لقوله تعالى "ولا تأكلوا مما لم يذكر اسم الله عليه". قال أبو بكر وبنا حرمي بن يونس قال أبنا أبي يونس بن محمد قال بنا حماد ابن سلمة عن حميد عن الحسن قال قيل له إنهم يذكرون المسيح على ذبائحهم قال قد علم الله ما هم قائلون وقد احل ذبائحهم. قال أبو بكر وبنا زياد بن أيوب قال بنا مروان قال بنا أيوب بن يحيى الكندي قال سألت الشعبي عن نصارى نجران فقلت منهم من يذكروا الله ومنهم من يذكر المسيح قال كل وأطعمني. قال أبو بكر وبنا إسحاق بن إبراهيم بن حبيب قال بنا يحيى عن سفيان عن ابن جريح عن عطاء قال كلوا وإن ذبح للشيطان. قال أبو بكر وبنا محمود بن خالد قال بنا الوليد قال أبنا ابن جابر قال سمعت القاسم بن مخيمرة يقول لا بأس يأكل ما ذبحت النصارى لأعياد كنائسها ولو سمعته يقول على اسم جرجيس وبولس. أخبرنا المبارك بن علي قال أبنا أحمد بن الحسين بن قريش قال أبنا إبراهيم بن عمر البرمكي قال أبنا محمد بن إسماعيل بن العباس قال أبنا أبو بكر بن أبي داود قال بنا يعقوب بن سفيان قال بنا أبو صالح قال حدثني معاوية بن صالح عن علي بن أبي طلحة عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما "وما أهل لغير الله به" ما ذبح اليهود والنصارى أحل لكم ذبائحهم على كل حال. قال أبو بكر وبنا محمد بن بشار قال بنا يحيى قال بنا عبد الملك عن عطاء قال إذا ذبح النصراني باسم المسيح فكل، قال أبو بكر وبنا عبد الله بن سعيد قال بنا ابن أبي غنيمة قال بنا أبي عن الحكم قال لو ذبح النصراني وسمعته يقول باسمك اللهم المسيح لأكلت منه لأن الله قد أحل لنا ذبائحهم وهو يعلم أنهم يقولون ذلك.
والقول الثاني أن ذلك كان مباحا في أول الأمر ثم نسخ بقوله تعالى "ولا تأكلوا مما لم يذكر اسم الله عليه".
والقول الثالث أنه إنما أبيحت ذبيحة أهل الكتاب لأن الأصل أنهم يذكرون اسم الله عليها فمتى علم أنهم قد ذكروا غير اسمه لم يؤكل، وهذا هو الصحيح عندي، وممن قال إذا سمعت الكتابي يسمي غير الله فلا تأكل علي بن أبي طالب وعبد الله ابن عمر وعائشة وطاؤس والحسن وعن عبادة بن الصامت وأبي الدرداء كهذا القول وكالقول الأول فعلى هذا القول الآية محكمة ولا وجه للنسخ


To begin with 6:121 cannot abrogate 5:5 because it was revealed before it. Ibn Al-Jawzi concludes that the right answer is neither verse is abrogated, but rather complement each other. That is: We can eat meat slaughtered by the People of the Book unless we know that they mentioned other than the name of God before the slaughter.

I respectfully disagree, because that is not what 6:121 says. It says that we should not eat meat when the name of God is not mentioned before the slaughter, not when other names are mentioned. In other words, if no name was mentioned, do we eat? 6:121 says no.

Can that be reconciled with 5:5? Sure. 5:5 provides the only exemption: the People of the Book. Whatever they mention or not mention, their slaughtered meat is permissible for us to eat. 6:121 still applies to other than the People of the Book. God knows best.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 6:121 abrogate 5:5 or the other way around?
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2010, 05:23 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Can that be reconciled with 5:5? Sure. 5:5 provides the only exemption: the People of the Book. Whatever they mention or not mention, their slaughtered meat is permissible for us to eat. 6:121 still applies to other than the People of the Book. God knows best.

Totally agree, the same way "But whoever is forced, neither desiring nor transgressing, there is no sin upon him." in


provides an exemption. No abrogation.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2010, 04:12 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
For:
Abud-Dardaa', `Ubaada ibn Aş-Şaamit (quoted by Shu`la),
Ibn `Umar (who said that 6:121 abrogates 5:5, according to Shu`la),
`Ataa', Ash-Sha`bi and Rabee`a (implied, per Shu`la).

Against:
Ali, `Aa'isha and the majority (according to Shu`la),
Yahya ibn Al-Husayn aka Al-Haadi (according to Aş-Şa`di),
Abu-Abdillah Shu`la,
Ar-Raazi, Al-Aloosi (according to Az-Zalmi),
Dr. Az-Zalmi.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 6:121 abrogate 5:5 or the other way around?
PostPosted: 23 Sep 2013, 18:40 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Linguistic wrote:
Can that be reconciled with 5:5? Sure. 5:5 provides the only exemption: the People of the Book. Whatever they mention or not mention, their slaughtered meat is permissible for us to eat. 6:121 still applies to other than the People of the Book. God knows best.

Totally agree, the same way "But whoever is forced, neither desiring nor transgressing, there is no sin upon him." in 2:173 provides an exemption. No abrogation.

Abu-Abdillah Shu`la also agrees, in his book صفوة الراسخ في علم المنسوخ والناسخ, pages 131-132. But he makes some interesting distinctions as he propounds the opinions of the scholars, as follows:
  • `Uwaymir ibn Zayd Al-Ansaari, better known as Abud-Dardaa' and `Ubaada ibn Aş-Şaamit, may God have been pleased with both, have ruled that meat slaughtered by the People of the Book is lawful for Muslims to eat even if the name of God was not mentioned at the slaughter. `Ataa's, Ash-Sha`bi and Rabee`a all agreed.

  • `Ali, `Aa'isha and the majority have ruled that mentioning the name of God at the time of meat slaughter is necessary. They interpreted 5:5 to mean that the People of the Book customarily do that. But if one knows for certain that they did not, then one cannot eat their slaughtered meat, evidenced by 6:121. They stated that neither of the two verses, 6:121 and 5:5 are abrogated.

Shu`la himself rejects the abrogation claim as an example of exception and specification, but does not quite say which of the above two opinions he favors as the reason.

In other words, the rulings of two verses still apply, but the reconciliation of them remains unclear. There are three possibilities regarding the mention of the name of God during a meat slaughter:
  1. The name of God is mentioned. In which case, no one has disputed that such meat is lawful to eat, except Ibn Umar, whom Shu`la cited saying that 6:121 abrogates 5:5.
  2. The name of God is not mentioned. In which case, one has to decide if 5:5 okays that for the People of the Book as an exemption, or if, as Ali and `Aa'isha have ruled, 5:5 does not actually imply it.
  3. Other than the name of God is mentioned. In which case, IMHO, the meat is not lawful to eat because of

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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, 12:15

All times are UTC

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