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  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did consensus abrogate 65:2?
PostPosted: 08 Jul 2010, 01:57 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Ihaab Abduh, in his book استحالة وجود النسخ بالقرآن, pages 168-169, states that the majority of the scholars have said that a man may divorce his wife without witnesses, and they said that there is no evidence from the Sunna or the sayings of the Sahaaba that witnesses are required. Ihaab counters with

which clearly require two witnesses of the divorce and emphasize that ruling with the words ذلكم يوعظ به من كان يؤمن بالله واليوم الآخر (With that are instructed those who believe in God and the Final Day).

Ihaab refers to the scholars opinions as quoted in Sayyid Saabiq's famous book فقه السنة (Jurisprudence of the Sunna). I looked it up and here is a summary of what Saabiq wrote,

  • The majority said that because divorce is the right of the man only, no witnesses are necessary for him to assert his right. What logic is that?

  • No report from the Prophet or the Sahaaba that witnesses are required. How about the Quran? There is no need for a report. How can the Prophet (PBUH) or the Sahaaba say differently from the Quran?

  • Imaami Shia quote 65:2 as evidence that two witnesses are required for divorce.

  • Ali, Imraan ibn Haseen, Al-Baaqir, Ja`far As-Saadiq, `Ataa', Ibn Jurayj, Ibn Seereen all said that witnesses of divorce are required.

  • Saabiq said that what the scholars claim to be a consensus is a consensus of scholars of one school of thought, not a proper consensus. I say this applies to countless juristic issues where consensus is claimed.

Aside from the obvious, that no consensus can possibly abrogate the Quran (or the Sunna for that matter), the opinions quoted above prove that 65:2 was not abrogated. Abrogation is not done by failure to make a new ruling, it's done by a new ruling that explicitly cancels an old one!

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did consensus abrogate 65:2?
PostPosted: 10 Jul 2010, 19:04 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
News to me. I took that no witnesses were required for granted because of the prevailing practice in predominantly Muslim countries. I didn't pay attention to the implication of 65:2.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 07 Oct 2010, 18:11 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
For:
The majority, according to Ihaab Abduh and Sayyid Saabiq.

Against:
Ali,
`Imraan ibn Ħaşeen,
Al-Baaqir,
Ja`far Aş-Şaadiq,
`Ataa',
Ibn Jurayj,
Ibn Seereen,
Ibn Salaama (who said there are no abrogated verses in Chapter 65),
Aş-Şa`di and Dr. Al-Ħusayni (who said Chapter 65 contains no abrogated verses),
Ihaab Abduh.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 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 12 Nov 2019, 01:16

All times are UTC

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