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  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 8:75 or 33:6 abrogate 8:72?
PostPosted: 16 Feb 2010, 23:03 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

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

was claimed abrogated by


Here is what Ibn Al-Jawzi writes about it,

ذكر الآية السابعة: قوله تعالى "إن الذين آمنوا وهاجروا وجاهدوا بأموالهم وأنفسهم في سبيل الله والذين آووا ونصروا أولئك بعضهم أولياء بعض والذين آمنوا ولم يهاجروا ما لكم من ولايتهم من شيء حتى يهاجروا". قال المفسرون كانوا يتوارثون بالهجرة وكان المؤمن الذي لا يهاجر لا يرث قريبه المهاجر وذلك معنى قوله "ما لكم من ولايتهم من شيء حتى يهاجروا". أخبرنا عبد الوهاب الحافظ قال أبنا أبو الفضل بن خيرون وأبو طاهر الباقلاوي قالا أبنا أبو علي بن شاذان قال أبنا أحمد بن كامل قال حدثني محمد ابن سعد العوفي قال بنا أبي قال حدثني عمي عن أبيه عن جده عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما قال: كان المؤمنون على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم على ثلاثة منازل، منهم المؤمن المهاجر المرافق لقومه في الهجرة خرج إلى قوم مؤمنين في ديارهم وعقارهم وأموالهم، وفي قوله والذين آووا ونصروا وأعلنوا ما أعلن أهل الهجرة وشهروا السيوف على من كذب وجحد فهذان مؤمنان وكانوا يتوارثون إذا توفي المؤمن المهاجر بالولاية في الدين وكان الذي آمن ولم يهاجر لا يرث من أجل أنه لم يهاجر، ثم ألحق كل ذي رحم برحمه. 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 بنا أبو بكر بن أبي داود قال بنا محمد بن قهزاد قال بنا علي بن الحسين بن واقد قال حدثني أبي عن يزيد النحوي عن عكرمة عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما "والذين آمنوا ولم يهاجروا ما لكم من ولايتهم من شيء حتى يهاجروا"، قال وكان الأعرابي لا يرث المهاجر ولا يرثه المهاجر فنسخها "وأولو الأرحام بعضهم أولى ببعض" الآية. أخبرنا إسماعيل بن أحمد قال أبنا عمر بن عبيد الله قال أبنا ابن بشران قال أبنا إسحاق بن أحمد الكاذي قال بنا عبد الله بن أحمد بن حنبل قال حدثني أبي قال بنا أبو سعيد مولى بني هاشم قال بنا عمر بن فروخ قال بنا حبيب بن الزبير عن عكرمة "والذين آمنوا ولم يهاجروا"، قال لبث الناس برهة والأعرابي لا يرث المهاجر والمهاجر لا يرث الأعرابي حتى فتحت مكة ودخل الناس في الدين فأنزل الله "وأولو الأرحام بعضهم أولى ببعض في كتاب الله". وقال الحسن كان الأعرابي لا يرث المهاجر ولا يرثه المهاجر فنسخها "وأولو الأرحام بعضهم أولى ببعض".

وقد ذهب قوم إلى أن المراد بقوله "ما لكم من ولايتهم من شيء" ولاية النصرة والمودة، قالوا ثم نسخ هذا بقوله "والمؤمنون والمؤمنات بعضهم أولياء بعض"، وأما قوله "وإن استنصروكم في الدين"، فقال المفسرون إن استنصروكم المؤمنون الذين لم يهاجروا فانصروهم إلا أن يستنصروكم على قوم بينكم وبينهم عهد فلا تغدروا بأهل العهد. وذهب بعضهم إلى أن الإشارة إلى أحياء من كفار العرب كان بينهم وبين رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم موادعة فكان إن احتاج إليهم عاونوه وإن احتاجوا عاونهم، فنسخ ذلك بآية السيف


The issue was inheritance. Do migrants and non-migrants inherit from each other? Reports tracing back to Ibn Abbaas, Ikrima and Al-Hasan said that they didn't until 8:75 was revealed, hence the abrogation conclusion. However, people also said that the sentence, "But those who believed and did not emigrate - for you there is no guardianship of them until they emigrate," that sentence meant a relationship of alliance, not necessarily inheritance as the exegetes understood.

I don't see anything relating to inheritance in either verse. 8:72 clearly talks about alliances. And all that 8:75 adds is that blood relations have more priority over alliances. That may sound obvious, but remember that the Prophet, peace be upon him, has declared migrants as brothers to their supporters (Al-Ansaar), so it was natural to ask if these new brothers have become real brothers. 8:75 says they haven't. God knows best.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 8:75 or 33:6 abrogate 8:72?
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2010, 01:32 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
The conclusion cannot be escaped that people were eagerly searching for something that they can claim to be abrogated, even if that takes an indirect argument. Whether this was done by the people who are attributed to, or by someone who attributed that to them, is not clear.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2010, 03:17 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4534
Location: USA
For:
Ibn Abbaas,
Qataada, Ikrima, Mujaahid, Al-Hasan and An-Nahhaas (they all said the abrogating is 33:6),
Ikrima and As-Suddi (according to Dr. Zayd),
Al-Qaasim ibn Salaam,
Makki,
An-Nahhaas (implied, per Dr. Faaris),
Abu-Abdillah Shu`la,
Abdullah ibn Al-Husayn (who said the abrogating is 33:6), Al-Qaasim ibn Ibrahim Al-Hasani and An-Naasir Al-Hasan ibn Ali (according to Aş-Şa`di),
Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi,
Ibn Salaama,
Ibn Al-Jawzi,
Professor Ahmed Ibrahim.

Against:
Az-Zuhri and Qataada (implied by their interpretation of alliance as support in battle rather than inheritance, according to Dr. Zayd who quoted their narrations),
Fakhr-ud-Deen Ar-Raazi (in his exegesis التفسير الكبير, volume 15, page 210, quoted by Dr. Zayd),
M. Rasheed Ridha (in his exegesis تفسير القرآن الحكيم, volume 10, page 128, according to Dr. Zayd),
Dr. Mustafa Zayd,
Dr. Az-Zalmi.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Did 8:75 or 33:6 abrogate 8:72?
PostPosted: 17 Aug 2010, 14:34 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4534
Location: USA
AL-Khazraji, in his book نفس الصباح في غريب القرآن وناسخه ومنسوخه, volume 1, page 376, states that Qataada made this abrogation claim and that the majority agrees. Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi too.

Professor Al-Mi`yaar Al-Idreesi, who presented the book, notes that scholars have not fully quoted the abrogating verse, so it could be

Which is what Qataada, Ikrima, Mujaahid, Al-Hasan and An-Nahhaas stated. Those who have not been specific include Al-Khazraji, Makki, Ibn Salaama and Ibn Al-Jawzi.

The context of both verses is defense alliances. IMHO, there is no abrogation because the two verses speak about two different sets of conditions for rushing to aid fellow Muslims:

  1. Muslims who migrated to Medina and those who fostered and helped them must always come to each other's aid in battle. That's what 8:75 speaks about.
  2. Muslims who did not migrate to Medina may only be aided in battle if two conditions are met:
    1. They ask for help, and
    2. Muslims do not have a peace treaty with the enemies of the non-migrating Muslims asking for help. The peace treaty trumps the obligation to help fellow Muslims in this case! Talk about honoring your word and keeping a promise!
    That is what 8:68 is speaking about.

Thus, the two verses together make up this one consistent ruling,
"Muslims must rush to help fellow Muslims who have been attacked by enemies, unless the helpers have a peace treaty with the enemies of the fellow Muslims asking for help but have chosen to remain in Mecca and not join the prophet (PBUH) by migrating to Medina."

Why is that? Because God wanted all Muslims who can to migrate to Medina. In Medina, they would be protected physically and spiritually and would learn the many new laws that are revealed there. Choosing to stay behind in Mecca risks losing all that and there is no worldly reason that can make up for that. God has made this point clear in several verses, for example,

And

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 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 13 Jul 2020, 10:11

All times are UTC

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