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 9:60 abrogate 2:215?
PostPosted: 01 May 2010, 18:32 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
In his book لانسخ في القرآن, page 70, Dr. Ahmad Hijaazi As-Saqqa reports that Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi wrote that

was abrogated by the Zakah verse,


Dr. As-Saqqa points out two reasons why 2:215 was not abrogated by 9:60,
  • 2:215 is for voluntary spending and 9:60 for the mandatory alms. He quotes Al-Qurtubi saying the same thing.
  • 9:60 elaborates more on the categories of people deserving charity. That is, parents and kin deserve charity if they are poor.

IMHO, 2:215 does not necessarily talk about charity, but on spending, of which charity is a part. Supporting parents and kin is neither a charity nor alms, but a duty. Verse 9:60, on the other hand, deals specifically with charity, of which the mandatory alms (Zakah) is a part.

This Venn diagram may illustrate the point above,
Image

In his book, لا نسخ في القرآن...لماذا؟, page 43, Al-Jabri cites As-Suyooti saying that 2:215 was not abrogated and that several scholars have therefore ruled that Zakah may be given to parents. IMHO, spending on parents is a duty beyond the Zakah, but certainly, if they fit any of the categories in 9:60 then they qualify as such, not as parents per se.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 01 May 2010, 18:34 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
For:
As-Suddi, Ibn Abbaas (according to Dr. Abdullah Al-Husayni and Dr. zayd),
Abu-Ja`far Yazeed ibn Al-Qa`qaa`,
Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi,
Ibn Salaama.

Against:
Al-Hasan ibn Yasaar Al-Basri, Ibn Zayd, Ibn Al-Jawzi, Muhammad ibn Al-Mutahhar (according to Dr. Abdullah Al-Husayni),
As-Suddi (in another report by Dr. Al-Husayni in which he explained that As-Suddi said 9:60 elaborated 2:215),
Ibn Jurayj, Mujaahid and Ibn Zayd (according to Dr. Zayd),
Al-Qurtubi,
Al-Aloosi,
Ibn Al-`Arabi,
Ar-Raazi,
Al-Asfahaani (implied, according to Ar-Raazi as reported by Dr. Zayd),
Ibn Hazm Azh-Zhaahiri (implied, quoted by Al-Jabri),
As-Suyooti (in his book الإكليل, quoted by Al-Jabri),
Dr. Ahmad Hijaazi As-Saqqa,
Al-Jabri,
Dr. Mustafa Zayd,
Dr. Fathi Othman (implied in his book آراء تقدمية, quoted by Al-Jabri),
Dr. Az-Zalmi.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:60 abrogate 2:215?
PostPosted: 01 May 2010, 19:46 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
IMHO, 2:215 does not necessarily talk about charity, but on spending, of which charity is a part.
...
This Venn diagram may illustrate the point above,
Image

Interesting distinction!

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:60 abrogate 2:215?
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2010, 14:23 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Dr. Mustafa Zayd rejects this claim in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, volume 2, pages 153-156 (items 912-919). He asks As-Suddi two questions:

  1. What was abrogated in 2:215? That parents and kin are to be financially supported, or that charity should be given the poor and the needy? He answers that by saying: neither. Parents and kin are not recipients of charity; supporting them is a duty. There is no such duty regarding the the poor and the needy, rather, they are to be helped with charity.

  2. Does 2:215 state that parents and kin are recipients of charity? No it doesn't. Was charity to the poor and the needy mandated by 2:215? No, it wasn't. If it were, God would not have delayed saying so until people asked about it!

    So, there were no mandates in 2:215 to abrogate.

Dr. Zayd adds that if one accepts that 9:60 abrogated 2:215, then one may say that spending on parents and kin is no longer necessary!

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Consequences
PostPosted: 05 Jan 2011, 06:35 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Dr. Zayd adds that if one accepts that 9:60 abrogated 2:215, then one may say that spending on parents and kin is no longer necessary!

Al-Jabri adds, in his book لا نسخ في القرآن...لماذا؟, pages 37-43, that abrogating 2:215 means ending care for the poor and the needy, as well as charitable organizations, beyond the Zakah, when the Zakah is insufficient. He quotes Ibn Hazm Azh-Zhaahiri who states that support of food, clothing and shelter for those who need it is mandatory on Muslim citizens who can afford to give it, and may be enforced by the head of state!

I recall reading (I think it was Az-Zalmi's book) that critics of Islam have accused Muslims of weaseling out of such support by claiming that the Zakah is their only financial obligation to society.

_________________
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 42 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, 18:57

All times are UTC

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