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.  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 9:60 or 9:103 abrogate 9:34?
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2010, 02:39 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi reports that some people stated that

was abrogated by

And others, such as Umar ibn Abd-il-Azeez and Irak ibn Maalik opined that it was abrogated by


Here is what he wrote about that,

ذكر الآية الرابعة: قوله تعالى "والذين يكنزون الذهب والفضة ولا ينفقونها في سبيل الله". اختلف في هذه الآية على ثلاثة أقوال:
الأول أنها عامة في أهل الكتاب والمسلمين قاله أبو ذر والضحاك.
والثاني أنها خاصة في أهل الكتاب قاله معاوية بن أبي سفيان.
والثالث أنها في المسلمين قاله ابن عباس والسدي.

وفي المراد بالإنفاق ها هنا قولان:
الأول إخراج الزكاة وهذا مذهب الجمهور والآية على هذا محكمة. أخبرنا عبد الأول بن عيسى قال أبنا محمد بن عبد العزيز الفارسي قال أبنا عبد الرحمن بن أبي جريج قال أبنا عبد الله بن محمد البغوي قال بنا العلاء بن موسى الباهلي قال أبنا الليث بن سعد عن نافع أن عبد الله بن عمر قال ما كان من مال تؤدي زكاته فإنه الكنز الذي ذكره الله عز وجل في كتابه.
والثاني أن المراد بالإنفاق إخراج ما فضل عن الحاجة وقد زعم بعض نقلة التفسير أنه كان يجب عليهم إخراج ذلك في أول الإسلام ثم نسخ بالزكاة وفي هذا القول بعد. وقد 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 عبد الله بن سعيد قال أبنا أبو أسامة عن عمر بن راشد أو غيره أن عمر بن عبد العزيز وعراك بن مالك قالا في هذه الآية "والذين يكنزون الذهب والفضة" نسختها الآية الأخرى "خذ من أموالهم صدقة".
اهـ


Ibn Al-Jawzi says that the majority opinion is that the spending referred to in 9:34 is the required alms (Zakah) and hence no abrogation.

IMHO, 9:34 talks about different things than 9:60 and 9:103. Verse 9:34 warns hoarders of money, while 9:60 states to whom charity is to be given and 9:103 authorizes the Prophet, peace be upon him, to collect the Zakah. There is no conflict to resolve between the three verses; they talk about different issues.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:60 or 9:103 abrogate 9:34?
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2010, 02:55 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Ibn Al-Jawzi says that the majority opinion is that the spending referred to in 9:34 is the required alms (Zakah) and hence no abrogation.

Clearly no angle for abrogation here, since there is nothing in the alleged abrogating verses that contradicts the alleged abrogated verse. The only interesting point in this case is the interpretation of 9:34 on its own. My reading is that it is wholly about religious leaders who raise money in the name of religion and accumulate it without spending it for the purpose they raised it for. Many striking examples of that happening in our time, let me leave it at that.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 05 Jun 2010, 20:14 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
For:
Umar ibn Abdil-Azeez, Iraak ibn Maalik (both said the abrogating is 9:103),
Jaarullah Az-Zamakhshari, Ibn Umar (according to Dr. Al-Husayni),
Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi (according to Al-Jabri),
Ibn Salaama.

Against:
The majority (according to Ibn Al-Jawzi) including:
Abdullah ibn Umar,
Ibn Shihaab (according to Makki).
Mu`aawiya ibn Abi-Sufyaan (implied),
Ali ibn Abi-Taalib, Muhamamd ibn Al-Mutahhar and Al-Haakim (according to Dr. Al-Husayni),
As-Suddi (implied, quoted by Al-Jabri),
Makki,
Al-Jabri,
Dr. Mustafa Zayd,
Dr. Az-Zalmi.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:60 or 9:103 abrogate 9:34?
PostPosted: 30 Sep 2010, 16:17 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
In his book التبيان في الناسخ والمنسوخ في القرآن المجيد, pages 115-116, author Abdullah ibn Hamza Aş-Şa`di Al-Yamaani cites two narrations that confirm that what is considered hoarded is property on which Zakah is not paid, thus refuting this abrogation claim,

  • The Prophet (PBUH) said, "What you paid the Zakah on is not a hoarded treasure", narrated by Ibn Umar and Anas ibn Maalik and reported by Al-Bayhaqi.
  • Ali ibn Abi-Taalib, may God have been pleased with him, said, "What you paid the Zakah on is not a hoarded treasure, even if it is buried, and whatever is not paid Zakah on is hoarded treasure."

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:60 or 9:103 abrogate 9:34?
PostPosted: 16 Oct 2010, 17:57 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Abdul-Muta`aal Al-Jabri, in his book لا نسخ في القرآن...لماذا؟, pages 60-61, reports two opinions about women's jewelry,

  1. Ash-Shaafi`i opined that women's jewelry is not hoarded treasure. He based that on his rule that a generality mentioned in a praise or loathing context is not general, but is meant for persuasion. This was reported by Ash-Shanqeeti in his book دفع إيهام الاضطراب عن آيات الكتاب, page 65.
  2. Ash-Shawkaani opined, in his book نيل الأوطار, that women's jewelry is property on which Zakah is due, though he did not see it as treasure either. He cited several hadeeths that confirm that women's jewelry earns Zakah. Does that mean that Ash-Shaafi`i exempted women's jewelry from the Zakah?

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:60 or 9:103 abrogate 9:34?
PostPosted: 25 Oct 2010, 00:35 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
  • Ali ibn Abi-Taalib, may God have been pleased with him, said, "What you paid the Zakah on is not a hoarded treasure, even if it is buried, and whatever is not paid Zakah on is hoarded treasure."

At-Tabari favored that interpretation in his exegesis, wrote Dr. Mustafa Zayd (in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, volume 1, pages 484-498, items 668-692) who fully agrees. He also concludes that what the claimants had in mind by naskh was detailing the brief, not abrogation. That's because, he writes, there is no other way to reconcile the two narrations attributed to Ibn Umar. The first one was quoted in the above post, and the other being,

"We went out with Abdullah ibn Umar and he said: That was before Zakah was sent down, then when it was sent down, He made it a purification of wealth.", narrated from Ibn Umar by Khaalid ibn Aslam and reported by Al-Bukhaari.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Consequences
PostPosted: 31 Jan 2011, 20:47 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Al-Jabri, in his book لا نسخ في القرآن...لماذا؟, pages 57-61, argues that some of the consequences of accepting this abrogation claim, which he rejects, are:

  1. Hoarding wealth leads to a class society, something which has sparked communism in many countries.
  2. Hoarding wealth discourages the rich from financing projects whose benefit reaches all citizens.
  3. That makes governments and business starters entertain the thought of borrowing the money with interest, which is prohibited usury in Islam.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:60 or 9:103 abrogate 9:34?
PostPosted: 15 Feb 2011, 21:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Ibn Salaama, in his book الناسخ والمنسوخ في القرآن الكريم, page 69, actually adds

to this abrogation claim. If the claim for 9:34 had any merit, and it doesn't, what possible reason is there to include 9:35 in the claim? What was abrogated in 9:35? That those who hoard wealth will no longer taste the punishment for hoarding wealth?

_________________
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.  [ 8 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 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 29 Mar 2024, 08:43

All times are UTC

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