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  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 24:59 abrogate 24:58?
PostPosted: 25 Feb 2010, 17:14 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4534
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi reports that Ibn Al-Musayyib said that

was abrogated by


Ash-Sha`bi disagreed and Ibn Abbaas too who said that people merely neglected 24:58 . Here is what Ibn Al-Jawzi wrote about it,

ذكر الآية السادسة: قوله تعالى "ليستأذنكم الذين ملكت أيمانكم". اختلفوا في هذه الآية، فذهب الأكثرون إلى أنها محكمة. أخبرنا إسماعيل بن أحمد قال أبنا عمر بن عبيد الله قال أبنا ابن بشران قال أبنا إسحاق بن أحمد قال أبنا عبد الله بن أحمد قال حدثني أبي قال بنا عفان قال بنا أبو عوانة قال بنا أبو بشر عن سعيد بن جبير عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما قال هذه الآية مما تهاون الناس به "ليستأذنكم الذين ملكت أيمانكم" وما نسخت قط. قال أحمد وبنا وكيع عن سفيان عن موسى بن أبي عائشة عن الشعبي "ليستأذنكم الذين ملكت أيمانكم" قال ليست منسوخة، وهذا قول القاسم بن محمد وجابر بن زيد. فقد أخبرنا إسماعيل بن أحمد قال أبنا عمر قال أبنا ابن بشران قال أبنا إسحاق بن أحمد قال بنا عبد الله بن أحمد قال حدثني أبي قال بنا هاشم قال بنا شعبة عن داود أبي هند عن ابن المسيب قال هذه الآية منسوخة. وقد روي عنه أنه قال هي منسوخة بقوله "وإذا بلغ الأطفال منكم الحلم فليستأذنوا"، وهذا ليس بشيء لأن معنى الآية "وإذا بلغ الأطفال منكم" أي من الأحرار الحلم فليستأذنوا أي في جميع الأوقات في الدخول عليكم "كما استأذن الذين من قبلهم" يعني كما استأذن الأحرار الكبار الذين بلغوا قبلهم فالبالغ يستأذن في كل وقت والطفل والمملوك يستاذن في العورات الثلاث


Ibn Al-Jawzi dismisses the claim on the basis of different issues: 24:58 talks about three particular times of the day and 24:59 talks about all the time. I agree. During the three special times, everybody must knock first before entering. At all other times, minors and servants may go in without knocking but all others must still knock.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 10 May 2010, 20:14 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4534
Location: USA
For:
Sa`eed ibn Al-Musayyib,
Ibn Jabeer (according to Al-Qurtubi, wrote Nada),
Al-Hasan,
Maalik,
Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi,
Ibn Salaama,
Ibn Al-Baarizi,
Ar-Raazi and Al-Aloosi (who suggested it was the other way around, according to Al-Qurtubi, quoted by Nada).

Against:
The majority, according to Makki and Ibn Salaam,
Ibn Abbaas,
Al-Qaasim (ibn Muhammad), Jaabir ibn Zayd, Ash-Sha`bi, Ibn `Umar,
Sa`eed ibn Jabeer (in a direct quote, per Ibn Salaam),
Abu-Haneefa (quoted by `Ataaya and Nada),
Abu-`Ubayd Al-Qaasim ibn Salaam,
Ibn Al`Arabi (quoted by Dr. Zayd),
At-Tabari, Ibn Al-Jawzi and An-Nahhaas (according to Dr. Zayd),
Al-Aloosi, Ar-Raazi (according to Az-Zalmi),
Al-Qurtubi,
Makki (implied),
As-Suyooti,
Az-Zurqaani (implied),
Ali Hasan Al-Areedh,
Dr. Mustafa Zayd,
M. M. Nada,
Dr. Az-Zalmi,
Dr. Muhammad Saalih Ali Mustafa,
Jamaal `Ataaya.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 24:59 abrogate 24:58?
PostPosted: 22 Aug 2010, 02:07 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4534
Location: USA
In his book نفس الصباح في غريب القرآن وناسخه ومنسوخه, volume 2, pages 537-538, Al-Khazraji quotes a number of opinions reported by An-Nahhaas and Makki,

  • Maalik said 24:58 was revealed for a specific reason and when the reason went away, the ruling was abrogated but the recitation stayed.
  • When Ash-Sha`bi said that 24:58 was not abrogated, people asked him, "How come people do not comply with it?" He replied, "الله المستعان" (God is to be sought for aid!)
  • Ibn Abbaas said, "Three verses in the Quran I don't see people complying with: 24:58,

    and

    Ibn Jabeer and Yahya ibn Ya`mur said likewise.
  • Some people Makki didn't name said that 24:58 is for female servants only; male servants must always knock, but most people disagreed; all servants must knock during these three periods only.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 24:59 abrogate 24:58?
PostPosted: 31 Aug 2010, 23:14 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
  • Ibn Abbaas said, "Three verses in the Quran I don't see people complying with: 24:58, 4:8, 49:11

Does this mean that people complied with the 300+ 'abrogated' verses?

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 24:59 abrogate 24:58?
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2010, 16:33 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4534
Location: USA
In his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, volume 2, pages 247-250 (items 1112-1119), Dr. Mustafa Zayd writes that Sa`eed ibn Al-Musayyib, per Abdul-Qaahir Al-Baghdaadi, has claimed that the abrogating verse is

Ibn Al`Arabi rejects that because 24:61 speaks about people helping themselves to the food of their friends and relatives, while 24:58 talks about knocking before entering bedrooms of their relatives and friends!

Ibn Al`Arabi acknowledges another interpretation of 24:61, that it talks about people who did not go out to battle for a legitimate excuse. He called that interpretation weak.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 24:59 abrogate 24:58?
PostPosted: 03 Aug 2013, 13:13 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4534
Location: USA
Dr. M. Saalih Ali Mustafa, in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم - مفهومه وتاريخه ودعاواه, page 55, refutes this claim on two grounds:

  • How can a proper etiquette be abrogated?
  • 24:59 talks about adults and 24:58 talks about children.

His first point is arguable, because if anything may be abrogated, a proper etiquette may be abrogated and replaced with an even more proper etiquette.

His second point is indeed the refutation argument. 24:59 specifies what happens when the children mentioned in 25:58 grow up. They now have to knock at all times.

Dr. Mustafa says that the impetus for abrogation is that because grown children now have to knock, that underage children don't. If that indeed is the reason why some scholars thought that abrogation took place here, then I respectfully disagree. 24:59 does not say that underage children no longer have to knock, so why would anybody think it does?

Perhaps scholars thought that servants, mentioned in 24:58, are adults, so do they have to knock in the three times only or all the time? Well, 24:59 does not speak about them specifically, so I'd say that the ruling of 24:58 stays: they don't have to knock except at those three times.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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 03 Apr 2020, 22:30

All times are UTC

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