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.  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Did 65:1 abrogate 2:229?
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2010, 18:23 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
This case is about two issues: Whether 2:229 abrogated any ruling regarding divorce, and whether it was itself abrogated. Here are the two verses,

is claimed to have been abrogated by

Here is what Ibn Al-Jawzi reported about this case and his opinion refuting it,

ذكر الآية الثلاثون: قوله تعالى "الطلاق مرتان"، قد زعم قوم أن هذه الآية نسخت ما كانوا عليه من أن أحدهم كان يطلق ما شاء. أخبرنا ابن ناصر قال بنا علي بن أيوب قال أبنا ابن شاذان قال بنا أبو بكر النجاد قال بنا أبو داود السجستاني قال بنا أحمد بن محمد قال بنا علي بن الحسين عن أبيه عن يزيد النحوي عن عكرمة عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما قال: كان الرجل إذا طلق امرأته فهو أحق برجعتها وإن طلقها ثلاثا فنسخ الله ذلك فقال "الطلاق مرتان". وروى عن سعيد عن قتادة في قوله تعالى "الطلاق مرتان" قال فنسخ هذا ما كان قبله وجعل الله حد الطلاق ثلاثا. قلت وهذا يجوز في الكلام يريدون به تغيير تلك الحال، وإلا فالتحقيق أن هذا لا يقال فيه ناسخ ولا منسوخ وإنما هو ابتداء شرع وإبطال لحكم العادة. وزعم آخرون أن هذه الآية لما اقتضت إباحة الطلاق على الإطلاق من غير تعيين زمان نزل قوله "فطلقوهن لعدتهن"، أي من قبل عدتهن، وذلك ان تطلق المرأة في زمان طهرها لتستقبل الاعتداء بالحيض. وهذا قول من لا يفهم الناسخ والمنسوخ، وإنما أطلق الطلاق في هذه الآية وبين في الأخرى كيف ينبغي أن يوقع. ثم إن الطلاق واقع وإن طلقها في زمان الحيض فعلم أنه تعليم أدب والصحيح أن الآية محكمة


He correctly dismisses the claim that 2:229 abrogated the pre-Islamic practices of divorce. This is not abrogation, but rather an initiation of ruling. Any and all practices before Islam are abrogated by Islam, but that's not the type of abrogation in discussion. The type of abrogation in discussion is abrogation of verses of the Quran.

Next, he discusses whether 65:1 abrogated 2:229 by forbidding divorce while the wife is in her period. He said that some have said that فطلقوهن لعدتهن means "divorce them only after their grace period ends." He disagrees with them and says that divorce is valid even when the wife is menstruating.

Once again, I don't see why there is a misunderstanding. 2:229 talks about one thing and 65:1 talk about another. 2:229 talks about how many times can a man divorce his wife, while 65:1 talks about when divorce is final. As for the meaning of فطلقوهن لعدتهن, it is obvious to me that it does mean "divorce them only after their grace period ends", evidenced by what God says next, "وأحصوا العدة" (and count the days of the grace period). But that simply defines when divorce is final, not when divorce starts. It can start anytime.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 65:1 abrogate 2:229?
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2010, 20:16 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1839
Location: USA
This is a textbook case for one of the validation rules that the scholars required for making an abrogation case. Here is the relevant rule from that post

Quote:
(3) The abrogated ruling must be explicit in a text. If the ruling is established just by custom or consensus, then an explicit ruling that overrules it would not be abrogating it per se, but rather establishing a ruling in the first place.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Who said what
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2010, 19:03 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
For:
Unnamed by Ibn Al-Jawzi,
Ibn Al`Arabi (implied, according to Dr. Zayd).

Against:
Ibn Al-Jawzi,
Dr. Mustafa Zayd.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 65:1 abrogate 2:229?
PostPosted: 01 Nov 2010, 15:44 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4558
Location: USA
Dr. Mustafa Zayd, in his book النسخ في القرآن الكريم, volume 2, page 108 (item 835) says that Maalik reported in his book الموطأ, in the divorce chapter, the section about the divorce of a slave, that a slave may only divorce his wife once. Dr. Zayd quotes Ibn Al`Arabi, from his book أحكام القرآن, volume 1, page 191, for the claim that this narration and others similar to it abrogated 2:229. Dr. Zayd argues that it is a specification, not abrogation.

For reference, here is the hadeeth as it appears in Al-Muwatta',

عَنْ مَالِكٍ، عَنْ نَافِعٍ، أَنَّ عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ عُمَرَ، كَانَ يَقُولُ إِذَا طَلَّقَ الْعَبْدُ امْرَأَتَهُ تَطْلِيقَتَيْنِ فَقَدْ حَرُمَتْ عَلَيْهِ حَتَّى تَنْكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ حُرَّةً كَانَتْ أَوْ أَمَةً وَعِدَّةُ الْحُرَّةِ ثَلاَثُ حِيَضٍ وَعِدَّةُ الأَمَةِ حَيْضَتَانِ

Translation: According to Maalik, according to Naafi` that Abdullah ibn Umar often said, "When a slave divorces his wife twice, she has become unlawful to him, until she marries another husband, be she a free woman or a slave. The waiting period for the free woman is three menstruations and the waiting period for the slave woman is two menstruations.

As is the case with most narrations in Maalik's book, this one traces back to Ibn Umar, may God have been pleased with him, and is not attributed to the Prophet, peace be upon him. Therefore, it can be Ibn Umar's ruling, not necessarily something he heard the prophet (PBUH) say.

_________________
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.  [ 4 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 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 29 Mar 2024, 13:34

All times are UTC

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