TheMostReadBook.org http://forum.themostreadbook.org/ |
|
The lawsuit parable http://forum.themostreadbook.org/viewtopic.php?f=130&t=2682 |
Page 3 of 3 |
Author: | Linguistic [ 29 Jul 2013, 12:57 ] |
Post subject: | Re: The lawsuit parable |
Dr. Muhammad Saalih `Ali Mustafa follows a disciplined approach in his presentation of 23 abrogation claims in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم - مفهومه وتاريخه ودعاواه, starting at page 43. He simply itemizes the arguments for the claim and the arguments against it. He may or may not comment on either. To use the lawsuit parable, he leaves the judgment to the judge or the jury. This approach is not novel. Many scholars in the past, such as Ibn Al-Jawzi did likewise, albeit in a less structured manner. I like Dr. Mustafa's approach and would like to add a summary post to each claim topic using his method. |
Author: | Linguistic [ 20 Oct 2013, 19:42 ] |
Post subject: | Re: The lawsuit parable |
Pro-abrogation scholars, such as Abu-Bakr Al-Hamdaani in his book الاعتبار في الناسخ والمنسوخ من الآثار, often, I have noticed, arrive at a conclusion for abrogation though an easy argument that makes it unnecessary is obvious, at least to me. Two cases in point from his book الاعتبار في الناسخ والمنسوخ من الآثار, pages 15-16:
|
Author: | Pragmatic [ 18 Jul 2017, 07:07 ] |
Post subject: | Re: The lawsuit parable |
In satisfying the burden of proof for individual abrogation claims, one seeks an interpretation of the verses in question in a way that avoids invoking abrogation, and the burden level is such that one has a lot of leeway in doing so. This raises an interesting point. Many scholars use the circumstances of revelation as a guide to interpret a verse. Are there specific opinions about whether this aspect is mandatory? If not, that opens a legitimate door for interpreting the verse irrespective of the (alleged) circumstances of revelation, but based on the wording of the verses as revealed. If one can substantiate that approach, refuting the claims will become far easier and more compelling. Did the scholars say something about the use of the circumstances of revelation that can substantiate this approach? |
Author: | Linguistic [ 20 Jul 2017, 19:17 ] |
Post subject: | Re: The lawsuit parable |
Pragmatic wrote: Many scholars use the circumstances of revelation as a guide to interpret a verse. Are there specific opinions about whether this aspect is mandatory? If not, that opens a legitimate door for interpreting the verse irrespective of the (alleged) circumstances of revelation, but based on the wording of the verses as revealed. If one can substantiate that approach, refuting the claims will become far easier and more compelling. Did the scholars say something about the use of the circumstances of revelation that can substantiate this approach? Yes. Many of them said that knowledge of the circumstances of revelation was essential to interpreting a verse. And in some cases, it is. However, there are no such mandates in the Quran or the Sunna as far as I know. It is a flimsy argument, though, since most narrations mentioning such circumstances are not authentic. |
Author: | Pragmatic [ 20 Nov 2017, 07:31 ] |
Post subject: | Re: The burden of proof is upon the pro-abrogation folk |
Linguistic wrote: ● From Dr. Abdul-Mun`im An-Nimr, from his book علوم القرآن الكريم, pages 219-223, emphasis mine, Abdul-Mun`im An-Nimr wrote: As if the Quran has become a field for frivolity of opinions and mixing them up. What does not agree with their opinion, they seek for it a verse that abrogates it, loading it with what it cannot bear, and turn a blind eye to what differs from their opinion or stands in its way. I verified the quote in the original book. This is on page 223, two thirds of the way down. |
Page 3 of 3 | All times are UTC |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |