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  [ 144 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 06 May 2010, 17:36 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
If the intended meaning was placing a verse out of order, the words would have been وإذا بدلنا مكان آية, but the words used are وإذا بدلنا آية مكان آية, so it is the verse that has been replaced, not its place.

Nice!

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 13 May 2010, 04:53 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
A fourth verse

In his book, Nada mentions on page 34 that pro-abrogation scholars have used as Quranic evidence of abrogation, in addition to 2:106, 16:101, and 13:39, the verse


The verse is obviously not talking about the Quran, so it is not evidence for the abrogation doctrine.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 13 May 2010, 18:36 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4532
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
A fourth verse

In his book, Nada mentions on page 34 that pro-abrogation scholars have used as Quranic evidence of abrogation, in addition to 2:106, 16:101, and 13:39, the verse 4:160.

The verse is obviously not talking about the Quran, so it is not evidence for the abrogation doctrine.

True, but I'd also debate that it is evidence of abrogation either. The verse clearly states the contingency (العلة) for the new ruling, that the Jews wronged. That means, as the discipline of Usool-ul-Fiqh states, that once the contingency is no more so is the ruling.

Applying this principle to this verse means that if the Jews stop doing wrong, those forbidden foods will be allowed again. The only way for that to happen is for them to accept the Quran and Muhammad, peace be upon him, which they promised Moses they would do.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why keep abrogated verses?
PostPosted: 28 May 2010, 05:00 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
I always thought why is 2:106 more famous than 16:101 in the abrogation doctrine (and the one that gave it its name)? Verse 16:101 is much easier to use in proving that some Quranic verses had been canceled and replaced by other verses, which is really the essence of what the "change of mind" attacks were about. It also is more pointed in defending such replacement against the attacks. I think the reason is that, since 16:101 specifically talks about substituting a verse in place of another, that leaves no room for the "abrogate the ruling but keep the verse" line of thought, and that is why 2:106 is promoted to its prominent position since it is perceived as having some slack in that direction.

I am not the only one who views 16:101 as stronger evidence for abrogation than 2:106. On pages 297-298 of his book, Ihab quotes comments by Dr. Muhammad Saleh Aly Mostafa about the Quranic evidence for abrogation saying that 16:101 is direct evidence because of the part that says "God knows better what He reveals" while 2:106 is less indicative even though the term naskh is taken from it.

Dr. Mostafa also says that naskh can apply to verses as well as signs while substitution applies only to verses. This disagrees with some interpretations of 16:101 (by Al-Ghazali for instance) and disagrees with my main objection about interpreting 2:106 as talking about miracles which I discussed in this post.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2010, 00:11 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
Al-Ghali is up to a good start in his book which is anti-abrogation. In the introduction on pages 5-13, he discusses his struggle with countering the consensus opinion about abrogation, and cites good quotes by scholars who support criticism of other opinions (similar to Malik's famous quote, but he doesn't mention that one) and discourage blind imitation of what people say.

He seems to be careful and conservative, reiterating his belief in the fundamentals of religion as he counters the established views about abrogation. The book (so far) has the best tone among the anti-abrogation books that I have read. It sets a good example.

He also talks about reciting without following and imitating without understanding as cultural habits of the Muslim nations even outside of religion, which was alluded to in this post in another thread. He mentions how abrogation enabled extremists to justify their approach (the book is relatively recent, written in 2005).

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2010, 01:24 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4532
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
He (Al-Ghaali) mentions how abrogation enabled extremists to justify their approach (the book is relatively recent, written in 2005).

Dr. Az-Zalmi, author of التبيان لرفع غموض النسخ في القرآن, mentioned a charge against Islam that I never heard before, and the charge uses abrogation to support its premise. Using the claim written many times in classic Muslim literature that the Zakah verse, 9:60, has abrogated all charity verses, the charge alleges that the verse was designed to privilege the rich by not requiring them to do any more charity other than the mandatory Zakah.

The charge is insipid of course because the command to spend is ubiquitous in the Quran and spending is the superset of charity which is a superset of Zakah. The Zakah verse abrogated nothing, it only specified the categories of those deserving of charity. It didn't even say how much each category gets, nor that each must get something. In other words, what the verse really did was prohibit giving charity to other than the eight categories it named. But non-charity mandatory spending is still there, such as a man spending on his wife and children, a widow provided for by her late husband's estate, etc. It's only when the people commanded to spend can't afford it, that's when the government may use collected Zakah to fill those needs and Islamic history is filled with examples of the government helping widows and orphans, for instance, from the Zakah treasury when their guardians could not provide for them.

In his book لا نسخ في القرآن...لماذا؟, page 54, Al-Jabri reports that Abu-Zharr (Al-Ghafaari), may God have been pleased with him, was a staunch advocate for charity that goes beyond the Zakah. One day he and Ka`b Al-Ahbaar were sitting with Calif Uthmaan ibn Affaan, may God have been pleased with him, who asked those present, "What do you say about him who has given alms due on his property, is there any more right in it for others?" Ka`b answered, "No, O Leader of the Faithful." Abu-Zharr pushed Ka`b in his chest and said, "You lie!" And recited,

Then he said, "He mentions the Zakah after He mentioned giving charity to the needy and others, being good to them and alleviating their needs."

IMHO, Abu-Zharr was right, but not for the reason he gave. The goodness verse, 2:177, speaks of benevolent acts, including mandates, while Uthmaan's question was about rights. The reason Abu-Zharr was right is that Muslims are obligated to support their wives, dependents and their kin. Only when a man cannot afford it does the government step in and support those from the collected Zakah.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why keep abrogated verses?
PostPosted: 01 Jun 2010, 16:54 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Of the companions of Ibn Masood, I have been able to learn the following names,

حدثنا وكيع عن سفيان عن منصور عن إبراهيم قال: كان أصحاب عبد الله الذين يفتون ويقرءون القرآن: علقمة والأسود وعبيدة ومسروقا وعمرو بن شرحبيل والحارث بن قيس.
علقمة هو:علقمة بن قيس، والأسود هو: الأسود بن يزيد

Source: http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/disp ... 10&ID=4175

Alqama ibn Qays (d. 102 A.H.),
Al-Aswad ibn Yazeed (d. 75 A.H.),
Uabayda,
Masrooq,
Amr ibn Shurahbeel,
Al-Haarith ibn Qays,
Ibraaheem An-Nakh`i (d. 95 A.H.) and
Ash-Sha`bi (d. 105 A.H.).

In the book "Exegesis and Exegetes" by Dr. Muhammad Hussain Al-Thahabi (الذهبي), the history of exegesis among the followers (التابعين) is detailed. There were three schools of exegesis, and the companions of Ibn Masseoud were stationed in Kufa, Iraq. The other two schools were the Mecca school of the companions of Ibn Abbas (including Mujahid Ibn Jabr who is often quoted citing the companions of Ibn Masseoud, if he is the same Mujahid) and the Medina school of exegesis scholars.

The author credits the establishment of the Kufa school to Ibn Masseoud, and provides a short biography of 7 of its members, which include companions of Ibn Masseoud and include Al-Hasan Al-Bassry as well. The names he mentions as prominent are:

  • Alqama Ibn Qays Ibn Abdullah Ibn Malik (Al-Nakh'i Al-Kufi). Born during the life of the Prophet (PBUH) and reportedly died ca. 61 H. at the age of 90.

  • (Abu-Aisha) Masrouq Ibn Al-Ajda' Ibn Malik Ibn Umayya (Al-Hamdani Al-Kufi Al-'abed), a.k.a Masrouq ibn Abdul-Rahman, died ca. 63 H.

  • (Abu Abdul-Rahman) Al-Aswad Ibn Yazeed Ibn Qays (Al-Nakh'i), died ca. 74 H.

  • (Abu-Ismaeel) Murra Ibn Sharaheel Al-Hamdani (Al-Kufi), died ca. 76 H.

  • (Abu-Amr) Amer Ibn Sharaheel Al-Shu'abi (Al-Hameeri Al-Kufi), born ca. 20 H., died ca. 109 H.

  • (Abu Al-Khattab) Qutada Ibn Du'ama (Al-Sudusi Al-Akmah). died 117 H. at the age of 56.

The information is in Section 2 of the book.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 02 Jun 2010, 19:52 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
I found on the web some early interpretations of 2:106, and I am quoting those involving the companions of Ibn Masseoud:

وقال ابن أبي نجيح ، عن مجاهد : ( ما ننسخ من آية ) قال : نثبت خطها ونبدل حكمها . حدث به عن أصحاب عبد الله بن مسعود .

وقال مجاهد عن أصحاب ابن مسعود : ( أو ننسئها ) نثبت خطها ونبدل حكمها

Of course there is no guarantee of authenticity here, but I find it strange that the narrations by Mujahid attribute the interpretation to two different parts of 2:106.

I found a book dedicated to Mujahid which provides some clues. The book is called "Exegesis of Imam Mujahid Ibn Jabr - died 102 H." by Dr. Muhammad Abdul-Salam Abu-Al-Neel and was published in 1989 by Dar Al-Fikr Al-Islami Al-Hadeetha." On pages 123-124, the author discusses some abrogation claims due to Mujahid, and summarily refutes most of them. He then writes:

From this it is understood that Mujahid, may God have mercy on him, counts specializing the general, detailing the undetailed, restricting an absolute, and emphasizing an issue, counts them as abrogation the same way the scholars of his era did.

This is another point of calibration for the confusion about the meaning of نسخ, in this case at a later stage since Mujahid was born in the year 21 H. and died in 102 H., so he interacted with Ibn Abbas and was still alive when Abu-Haneefa was born. The most important aspect for the issue at hand is that this is evidence that نسخ did not necessarily mean abrogation for the person who is relied upon in citing the exegesis of 2:106 by the companions of Ibn Masseoud as saying نثبت خطها ونبدل حكمها which is the basis for the abrogation doctrine.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2010, 09:10 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
I found this information about the exegesis of Ibn Masseoud at an exegesis web site, and I decided to copy it here (I did not verify the information). There is similar information on the site about exegeses of companions of Ibn Masseoud.

تفسير عبد الله بن مسعود

فضله:

هو من أوائل المسلمين الذين شهدوا تنزيل القرآن كله، وهو من المبشرين بالجنة. ويكفينا ما جاء في صحيح البخاري من فضله: قال رسول الله r: «استقرئوا القرآن من أربعة: من عبدِ الله بن مسعود، وسالم مولى أبي حُذَيْفَة، وأُبَيِّ بن كعب، ومُعاذِ بنِ جَبَل». وفي صحيح مسلم عن أبي الأحوص قال: «كُنا في دار أبي موسى مع نفرٍ من أصحاب عبد الله (بن مسعود) وهم ينظُرون في مصحف. فقام عبد الله، فقال أبو مسعود: "ما أَعْلَمُ رسول الله r تَرَكَ بعدهُ أعلمَ بما أنزلَ اللهُ مِن هذا". فقال أبو موسى: "أما لئِن قُلتَ ذاكَ، لقد كان يشهدُ إذا غِبنا، ويؤذَنُ له إذا حُجِبنا"».

وأخرج مسلم كذلك عن شقيق عن عبد الله بن مسعود أنه قال: {وَمَنْ يَغْلُلْ يَأْتِ بِمَا غَلَّ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ} (آل عمران: من الآية161). ثم قال: «على قراءةِ مَنْ تأمروني أن أقرأ؟! فلقد قرأتُ على رسول الله r بِضعاً وسبعينَ سورةً. ولقد عَلِمَ أصحابُ رسولِ اللهِ r أني أَعْلَمُهُمْ بكتابِ الله. ولو أعلمُ أن أحداً أعلمُ مِنّي، لرَحلتُ إليه». قال شقيق: «فجلست في حَلَقِ أصحاب محمدٍ r فما سمعتُ أحداً يرُدُّ ذلك عليه ولا يعيبُه». وأخرج مسلم عن مسروق عن عبد الله قال: «والذي لا إله غيرُهُ، ما مِن كتابِ اللهِ سورةٌ إلا أنا أعلمُ حيثُ نزَلَت. وما مِن آيةٍ إلا أنا أعلمُ فيما أُنزِلَت. ولو أعلمُ أحداً هو أعلمُ بكتابِ اللهِ مِني –تبلُغُهُ الإبِلُ– لركبتُ إليه».



الطرق التي روي بها تفسيره:

1- طريق الأعمش، عن أبي الضحى، عن مسروق، عن ابن مسعود. وهذا أصح الطرق وقد اعتمده البخاري. وكذلك طريق الشعبي وأبي وائل عن مسروق عن ابن مسعود، صحيح.

2- طريق الأعمش عن أبي وائل، عن ابن مسعود. وهذا الطريق قد اعتمده البخاري.

3- طريق مجاهد، عن أبي معمر، عن ابن مسعود. وهذا الطريق قد اعتمده البخاري.

4- طريق أبي ورق، عن الضحاك (مرسلاً)، عن ابن مسعود. وهذا طريق منقطع.

5- طريق السدي الكبير (شيعي متهم بالكذب) عن مرة الهمداني (ثقة) عن عبد الله بن مسعود. وهذا طريق ضعيف، وفيه من المنكرات والإسرائيليات الشيء الكثير.

6- وما أرسله إبراهيم النخعي عن ابن مسعود فهو مقبول (ما لم يكن فيه نكارة) لأنه لا يرسل عنه إلا عندما يأتيه بالخبر أكثر من واحد. لكن تفسير النخعي الموقوف عليه فيه نظر لأن النخعي كان يلحن ولم يكن من أهل اللغة. وأهم من يروي عن النخعي: مُغيرة بن مِقْسَم (فقيه ثبت، لكن عامة ما رواه عن إبراهيم مُدلّس) و منصور بن المعتمر (ثقة ثبت).



تلاميذه: علقمة، والأسود بن يزيد، ومسروق، والشعبي، والحسن البصري، وأبو وائل، و عبيدة بن عمرو السلماني، وأبو يزيد الثوري الربيع بن خثيم، وأبو الأحوص عوف بن مالك، ومرة الطيب، وآخرون. وكل هؤلاء ثقات أثبات. قال علي بن المديني: «لم يكن في أصحاب رسول الله أحدٌ له أصحابٌ يقومون بقوله في الفقه إلا ثلاثة: ابن مسعود وزيد بن ثابت وابن عباس

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Origins of the abrogation doctrine
PostPosted: 05 Jun 2010, 06:28 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1838
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
On page 204, Burton mentions that Al-Tabari, in his interpretation of 22:52 was emphatic that نسخ means أبطل (the very specific word).

I looked up Al-Tabari's exegesis, and on page 71 of Part 17, here is the relevant passage:

الاَيات التـي أخبر الله جلّ ثناؤه أنه يحكمها، لا شك أنها آيات تنزيـله، فمعلوم أن الذي ألقـي فـيه الشيطان هو ما أخبر الله تعالـى ذكره أنه نسخ ذلك منه وأبطله ثم أحكمه بنسخه ذلك منه.
فتأويـل الكلام إذن: وما أرسلنا من قبلك من رسول ولا نبـيّ إلا إذا تلا كتاب الله، وقرأ، أو حدّث وتكلـم، وألقـى الشيطان فـي كتاب الله الذي تلاه وقرأه أو فـي حديثه الذي حدث وتكلـم. فَـيَنْسَخُ اللّهُ ما يُـلْقِـي الشّيْطانُ يقول: تعالـى فـيذهب الله ما يـلقـي الشيطان من ذلك علـى لسان نبـيه ويبطله. كما:
حدثنـي علـيّ، قال: حدثنا عبد الله، قال: ثنـي معاوية، عن علـيّ، عن ابن عبـاس: فَـيَنْسَخُ اللّهُ ما يُـلْقِـي الشّيْطانُ فـيبطل الله ما ألقـى الشيطان


This was to substantiate the argument against the abrogation doctrine that is based on:


_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 144 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 15  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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 28 Feb 2020, 08:44

All times are UTC

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