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  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Did 73:20 abrogate 73:1-4?
PostPosted: 30 Jan 2010, 19:44 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
What I meant was: do you see this as an example of abrogation, or as an example of one contingent command ending and another starting? In other words, if a command is given for a reason, and then the reason goes away and the command is reversed or rescinded, is that abrogation?

If I answer this question at this point, my answer would not be based on enough research and thought to make it worthy. I think we correctly chose to focus on the thesis of this project, even if other questions such as the one you pose are also important.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 73:20 abrogate 73:1-4?
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2010, 06:53 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
This abrogation case is one of the two unanimous abrogation claims, and one of only 5 cases (of abrogated verses in the text of the Quran) that Dr. Mostafa Zaid supports in his book. The discussion is on pages 297-304 of volume 2. I basically agree with most of what he said, except for that it constitutes abrogation :). The reason is the dynamic/static argument. The strength of this case makes that argument crucial, so we'd better pin it down and polish it as it may be the make-or-break for our thesis.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Validation process
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2010, 15:39 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4494
Location: USA
Applying our validation rules to this case, we find that it fails the following rules on the list,

0: Neither God nor His messenger explicitly said 73:1-4 were abrogated. The word God used in 73:20 is فتاب عليكم "so, He eased on you." It may be argued that easing is abrogating and it may be argued that it's not. God used the words "abrogate" and "replace" in other verses to make the meaning clear. He could have done the same thing in 73:20 but He didn't. It is reasonable, therefore, to conclude that the reason He didn't is because easing is a different concept from abrogation.

5: The requirement in 73:4 includes, "and recite the Quran with articulation." That requirement was never abrogated. And since that requirement was not repeated in 73:20, the abrogation is not total!

11,12: The requirements in 73:1-4 address one person, the Prophet (PBUH), and 73:20 generalized that to "him and those who are with him". Thus, the scope of the ruling was expanded. That is not abrogation. It would have been if the scope was narrowed.

The fact that many Sahaaba complied with 73:1-4 even though they were not addressed by it does not change the fact that they were not addressed by it. They did it to please God, may He have been pleased with them.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 73:20 abrogate 73:1-4?
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2010, 07:23 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
Burton has an excellent analysis of this abrogation case on pages 186-188 of his book. He argues against the abrogation claim. Here are the highlights:

1. The commands in 73:1-4 are in singular form, directed to the Prophet (PBUH), while the commands in 73:20 are in plural form, directed to other Muslims as well. Therefore, the addressee is different.

2. If 73:20 came to reduce a burden, it reduces a burden on the Muslims so it would be 'abrogating' a tradition, not a command in another verse.

3. The stated practice in 73:20 is heavier than what 73:1-4 would necessitate, so the lightening of the burden may have been addressing an exaggeration that took place that is not dictated by the command in 73:1-4.

4. The directives to the Prophet (PBUH) to stay the night praying continue in other, later verses. He cites



5. The entire basis of the abrogation claim is a narration of A'isha, may God be pleased with her.

6. This abrogation case is intermingled in the theological dispute about whether only the 5 prayers are required. The opinions about that are less unequivocal than what one would expect.

7. Some prominent scholars do not see this as an abrogation case, including Ka'b Al-Ahbar, Hasan Basri, and Al-Suddi.

Disclaimer: The facts that are not self evident here need to be taken with caution as the source is a non-Muslim writer.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 73:20 abrogate 73:1-4?
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2010, 07:46 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4494
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Burton has an excellent analysis of this abrogation case on pages 186-188 of his book. He argues against the abrogation claim. Here are the highlights:
...
4. The directives to the Prophet (PBUH) to stay the night praying continue in other, later verses. He cites 17:79

This is a good argument. The burden the Sahaaba put on themselves without being asked was eased, while the burden on the Prophet, the only one addressed in 73:1-4, was not. I like that.

Quote:
7. Some prominent scholars do not see this as an abrogation case, including Ka'b Al-Ahbar, Hasan Basri, and Al-Suddi.

It is not often that I see As-Suddi rejecting an abrogation claim made by many of his fellows.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 73:20 abrogate 73:1-4?
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2010, 08:07 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4494
Location: USA
Notice how 73:1-4 have two commands to the Prophet, peace be upon him:
  1. Stand in prayer about half the night, and
  2. Articulate the Quran

Thus, in order for these verses to be abrogated, we must have commands to the Prophet (PBUH) telling him to do two things,
  1. Stand in prayer less than half the night, or not at all, or
  2. No longer have to articulate the Quran!

Has either of these happened? No. 73:20 does not actually tell the Prophet (PBUH) how much of the night to pray. And about the Quran, it says to recite whatever they can from it; it doesn't say they no longer have to articulate it.

Another point to make is that the command to articulate the Quran is not added to staying half the night. In other words, the command is not to stay half the night reciting the Quran. How do I know that? Because at the time of this revelation only two earlier Chapters of the Quran were revealed, totaling 90 verses, so reciting them would take a minutes, not half the night!

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 73:20 abrogate 73:1-4?
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2010, 08:51 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Another point to make is that the command to articulate the Quran is not added to staying half the night. In other words, the command is not to stay half the night reciting the Quran. How do I know that? Because at the time of this revelation only two earlier Chapters of the Quran were revealed, totaling 90 verses, so reciting them would take minutes, not half the night!

Good point.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 73:20 abrogate 73:1-4?
PostPosted: 09 Mar 2010, 06:20 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4494
Location: USA
This is what Ibn Al-Jawzi writes about this case,

باب ذكر ما أدعي عليه النسخ في سورة المزمل. ذكر الآية الأولى: قوله تعالى "قم الليل إلا قليلا نصفه أو انقص منه قليلا". قال المفسرون المعنى انقص من النصف قليلا أو زد على النصف فجعل له سعة في مدة قيامه إذ لم تكن محدودة، فكان يقوم ومعه طائفة من المؤمنين فشق ذلك عليه وعليهم، وكان يقوم الليل كله مخافة أن لا يحفظ القدر الواجب، فنسخ الله ذلك عنه وعنهم بقوله "إن ربك يعلم أنك تقوم أدنى من ثلثي الليل"، هذا مذهب جماعة من المفسرين، وقالوا ليس في القرآن سورة نسخ آخرها أولها سوى هذه السورة.
وذهب قوم إلى أنه نسخ قيام الليل في حقه بقوله "ومن الليل فتهجد به نافلة لك"، ونسخ في حق المؤمنين بالصلوات الخمس.
وقيل نسخ عن الأمة وبقي فرضه عليه أبدا.
وقيل إنما كان مفروضا عليه دونهم.

أخبرنا ابن ناصر قال أبنا علي بن أيوب قال أبنا ابن شاذان قال أبنا أبو بكر النجاد قال أبنا داود قال بنا أحمد بن محمد قال بنا علي بن الحسين عن أبيه عن زيد النحوي عن عكرمة عن ابن عباس "قم الليل إلا قليلا" نسختها "علم أن لن تحصوه فتاب عليكم فاقرؤوا ما تيسر من القرآن". أخبرنا المبارك بن علي قال أبنا أحمد بن الحسين بن قريش قال أبنا أبو إسحاق البرمكي قال أبنا محمد بن إسماعيل بن العباسي قال أبنا أبو بكر بن أبي داود قال بنا زيد بن أخرم قال بنا بشر بن عمر قال بنا حماد بن سلمة عن علي ابن زيد عن أبي المتوكل عن جابر بن عبد الله قال: كتب علينا قيام الليل فقمنا حتى انتفخت أقدامنا وكنا في مغزى لنا فأنزل الله الرخصة "أن سيكون منكم مرضى" إلى آخر السورة. قال أبو بكر وبنا عبد الله بن محمد بن خلاد قال بنا يزيد قال بنا مبارك عن الحسن قال: لما نزلت "يا أيها المزمل قم الليل إلا قليلا نصفه أو انقص منه قليلا أو زد عليه" كان قيام الليل فريضة فقام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم سنة، قال الحسن أما والله ما كلهم قام بها فخفف الله فأنزل آخر السورة "علم أن سيكون منكم مرضى" إلى آخر الآية. أخبرنا إسماعيل بن أحمد قال أبنا عمر بن عبيد الله قال أبنا ابن بشران قال أبنا إسحاق بن أحمد قال أبنا عبد الله بن أحمد قال حدثني أبي قال بنا عبد الوهاب عن سعيد عن قتادة عن زرارة بن أوفى عن سعد بن هشام عن عائشة رضي الله عنها قالت: كان الله افترض قيام الليل في أول سورة المزمل، فقام النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وأصحابه حولا حتى انتفخت أقدامهم، وأمسك خاتمتها في السماء اثنى عشرا شهرا، ثم أنزل الله آية فيها يسر وتخفيف فصار قيام الليل تطوعا بعد فريضة. قال قتادة نسختها "فاقرؤوا ما تيسر من القرآن" الآية. قال أحمد وبنا حجاج عن ابن جريج عن عطاء الخراساني عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما "يا أيها المزمل قم الليل" قال فلما قدم المدينة نسختها هذه الآية "إن ربك يعلم أنك تقوم أدنى من ثلثي الليل" الآية. قال أحمد وبنا عبد الصمد عن همام عن قتادة قال: فرض قيام الليل في أول سورة المزمل فقام أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حتى انتفخت أقدامهم وأمسك الله خاتمتها في السماء حولا ثم أنزل الله التخفيف في آخرها فقال "علم أن سيكون منكم مرضى" فنسخ ما كان قبلها

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 73:20 abrogate 73:1-4?
PostPosted: 05 May 2010, 20:29 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4494
Location: USA
As you, Pragmatic, mentioned in this post, quoting Burton, and as I mentioned in this post, the verses,

which were indisputably revealed after 73:20, confirm 73:1-4. Therefore, the claim that 73:20 abrogated 73:1-4 is invalid, unless one says that 73:20 was itself abrogated by 17:78-79!

The fact that the Sahaaba imitated the Prophet's night prayer, even though it was not required of them (because 73:1-4 address the Prophet only, PBUH), does not mean that the easing implied in 73:20 was an abrogation of the command given only to the prophet (PBUH) in 73:1-4. In other words, the command to the Prophet (PBUH) specified in 73:1-4 was not abrogated by 73:20 which is directed at the Sahaaba. We can tell this because of the fact that the commands in 73:20 are addressed in the plural, while in 73:1-4 the addressee is singular. To make this even clearer, God revealed 17:78-79 to reaffirm his unabrogated command to the Prophet (PBUH) in 73:1-4.

Another verse that confirms that the night prayer command to the Prophet (PBUH) continued on is,


All of this assumes that the command in 73:1-4 and 17:78-79 is a mandate, and not all scholars agree to that. Rather, some of them have said that it is a mandate for the Prophet only; for the rest of us, it is a Sunna.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 73:20 abrogate 73:1-4?
PostPosted: 07 May 2010, 03:34 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
Al-Ghazali's view

This abrogation claim is one of the 'big 3' that Al-Ghazali addressed in his book (pages 210-211). He singled them out as the cases where the wording of the verse may be construed as declaring that abrogation has taken place.

He is against this abrogation claim on the basis that the original command is directed at the Prophet (PBUH) while the later license is for his companions who followed him as a role model in obeying the command even when it wasn't directed at them. Al-Ghazali concludes that the command still applied to the Prophet (PBUH) after 73:20 was revealed.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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 16 Nov 2018, 16:42

All times are UTC

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