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  [ 178 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 18  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2010, 05:21 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Ibn Al-Jawzi reports that this verse (4:63) was claimed abrogated by the sword verse. He does not say who made the claim and seems to agree with it.

I don't get it. The subject of 4:63 are the hypocrites (given the context of 4:61-62), and the subject of the sword verse 9:5 are the polytheists. Am I missing something?

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2010, 05:28 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
He explains that حفيظا means keeper or responsible, so where is any aspect of abrogation?
If 4:80 was abrogated then it means that the mission of the prophet has changed and that he has become a keeper or responsible for all who have not accepted Islam!

Other than that, and other than "We have not sent you over them as a guardian" being a statement of fact that cannot be abrogated, and other than that it's confined to the Prophet (PBUH), they'd better abrogate the following verses while they are at it:



_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2010, 05:50 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
they'd better abrogate the following verses while they are at it:

88:21-22, 80:11-12

What makes you think they didn't? :)

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2010, 07:11 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1833
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
What makes you think they didn't? :)

Oh, no! :shock:

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2010, 02:35 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi reports that this verse,

was one of those claimed abrogated by the sword verse. He does not elaborate further,
ذكر الآية العشرين: قوله تعالى "فأعرض عنهم وتوكل على الله". قال المفسرون معنى الكلام أعرض عن عقوبتهم، ثم نسخ هذا الإعراض عنهم بآية السيف

Al-Khazraji, in his book نفس الصباح في غريب القرآن وناسخه ومنسوخه, volume 1, page 284, says that Ibn Abbaas and others made that claim and that Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi, Ibn Salaama, Ibn Al-Jawzi and Makki all agreed. Ibn Salaama added a proviso: the part that says وتوكل على الله (and put your trust in God) was not abrogated.

Ad-Dhahhaak said in his exegesis that the clause فأعرض عنهم means "do not tell their names", referring to the hypocrites. Dr. Abdullah Al-Husayni wrote that in his footnotes on Aş-Şa`di's book التبيان في الناسخ والمنسوخ في القرآن المجيد, page 95.

As in his refutation of the abrogation claim of 4:63, Dr. Mustafa Zayd rejects this one on the basis of different context: 4:83 and 4:81 talk about hypocrites, while the sword verse talks about polytheists.

Abu-Abdillah Shu`la, in his book صفوة الراسخ في علم المنسوخ والناسخ, page 127, rejects this claim. He says that "turning aside" does not mean leaving out the punishment of the polytheists, but rather it means to be upset with somebody and not show friendliness toward them. Presumably then he believes that such turning aside does not preclude fighting.

Who said what:
For:
Ibn Abbaas,
Ibn Al-Jawzi,
Makki,
Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi,
Ibn Salaama,
Aş-Şa`di.

Against:
Ad-Dhahhaak,
Abu-Abdillah Shu`la,
Dr. Mustafa Zayd.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2010, 02:43 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi reports that this verse,

has been claimed abrogated by the sword verse. He refutes that claim,
ذكر الآية الحادية والعشرين: قوله تعالى "فقاتل في سبيل الله لا تكلف إلا نفسك". قال المفسرون معناه لا تكلف إلا المجاهدة بنفسك، ولا تلزم فعل غيرك. وهذا محكم. وقد زعم بعض منتحلي التفسير أنه منسوخ بآية السيف، فكأنه استشعر أن معنى الكلام لا تكلف أن تقاتل أحدا، وليس كذلك إنما المعنى لا تكلف في الجهاد إلا فعل نفسك


He correctly argues that the meaning of the verse is what the exegetes said, namely, that each fighter is responsible for himself only in terms of fighting. No one will be questioned for whether others fight or not fight.

Who said what:
For:
Ibn Salaama, in his book الناسخ والمنسوخ في القرآن الكريم, page 52.

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

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2010, 02:55 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi reports that this verse,

was claimed by Ibn Abbaas and Qataada to have been abrogated by the sword verse. Here is what he wrote,

ذكر الآية الثانية والعشرين: قوله تعالى "إلا الذين يصلون إلى قوم بينكم وبينهم ميثاق". قوله تعالى يصلون يدخلون في عهد بينكم وبينهم ميثاق. والمعنى ينتسبون بالعهد أو يصلون إلى قوم جاؤوكم حصرت صدورهم، أي ضاقت عن قتالكم لموضع العهد الذي بينكم وبينهم، فأمر المسلمون في هذه الآية بترك قتال من له معهم عهد أو ميثاق أوما يتعلق بعهد، ثم نسخ ذلك بآية السيف، وبما أمروا به من نبذ العهد إلى أربابه في سورة براءة. وهذا المعنى مروي عن ابن عباس وقتادة. أخبرنا ابن ناصر قال ابنا ابن أيوب قال أبنا ابن شاذان قال أبنا أبو بكر النجاد قال أبنا أبو داود السجستاني قال بنا الحسن بن محمد قال بنا حجاج قال قال ابن جريج وعثمان بن عطاء عن عطاء عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما "إلا الذين يصلون إلى قوم بينكم وبينهم ميثاق" وقال "إذا جاءكم المؤمنات مهاجرات فامتحنوهن" وقال "لا ينهاكم الله عن الذين لم يقاتلوكم في الدين" نسخ هذا "براءة من الله ورسوله إلى الذين عاهدتم من المشركين"، "فإذا انسلخ الأشهر الحرم فاقتلوا المشركين حيث وجدتموهم". أخبرنا إسماعيل بن أحمد قال أبنا عمر بن عبيد الله قال أبنا ابن بشران قال أبنا أحمد بن إسحاق الكاذي قال بنا عبد الله بن أحمد بن حنبل قال حدثني أبي قال بنا عبد الوهاب عن سعيد عن قتادة "إلا الذين يصلون إلى قوم بينكم وبينهم ميثاق" الآية قال نسخ ذلك في براءة، ونبذ إلى كل ذي عهد عهده، وأمر الله نبيه أن يقاتلهم حتى يشهدوا أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمدا رسول الله، وقال "فاقتلوا المشركين حيث وجدتموهم" الآية


He also says Ibn Abbaas claimed abrogation by the sword verse of these two verses,

And


I am speechless. Al-Jabri, in his book لا نسخ في القرآن...لماذا؟, pages 101-104, rejects this claim and shows evidence that verse 4:90 was revealed about Hilaal ibn `Uwaymir Al-Aslami, who, according to Mujaahid, had a treaty with Muslims then his people sought his help against Muslims. A report attributed to Ibn Abbaas adds Suraaqa ibn Maalik Al-Mudliji, and the tribe of Banu Juzhayma ibn `Aamir ibn Abd-Manaaf to the people who were in the same bind. The practice of the Prophet (PBUH) was to honor those treaties. In fact, Al-Jabri mentions more details about the encounter with Suraaqa. The man learned that the Prophet (PBUH) was about to send Khaalid ibn Al-Waleed to fight Banu-Mudlij, Suraaqa's tribe. He came to the Prophet (PBUH) asking him to make a treaty with them instead. He suggested that the terms of the treaty include that if Quraysh (the Prophet's tribe) accepted Islam that Banu Mudlij will too! The Prophet (PBUH) liked that and said to Khaalid, "Go with him and do as he wants."

Al-Jabri finishes his discussion of this claim, by saying that, far from being abrogated, verse 4:90 confirms the call to peace, in

I couldn't agree with him more. And knowing the integrity and knowledge of Ibn `Abbaas, may God have been pleased with him, the odds are, if the narration is authentic, that what he meant by "naskh" is update or confirmation, not abrogation.

Dr. M. Ibrahim Faaris, in his book صفوة الراسخ في علم المنسوخ والناسخ, page 127 in the footnotes, quotes Abu-`Ubayd (Ibn Salaam) saying something quite serious: that Chapter 9 eliminated the truce period and severed pledges. What a horrible thing to attribute to God! God started Chapter 5, which was almost the last Chapter revealed of the Quran, with the unambiguous order to honor all contracts.

See also this related post and topic.

Who said what:
For:
Ibn Abbaas, Qataada,
Ikrima, Al-Hasan (according to At-Tabari, says Dr. Zayd),
Mujaahid (according to Dr. Al-Ghaali),
Ibn Uways, An-Nahhaas, Makki (according to Al-Khazraji),
At-Tabari (quoted by Dr. Zayd),
Ibn Salaama, Ibn Hilaal and Al-Karmi (according to Dr. Zayd),
Ibn Al-Baarizi (according to Dr. Al-Ghaali),
Ibn Al-`Arabi (implied, according to Dr. Al-Ghaali),
Abu-Abdillah Shu`la,
Dr. M. Ibrahim Faaris (implied).

Against:
Al-Qurtubi (who said that it is about honoring treaties),
Abdul-Qaahir Al-Baghdaadi (according to Dr. Zayd),
Al-Asfahhai and Al-Jabaa'i (according to Dr. Al-Ghaali),
Muhammad Abduh and Rasheed Ridha (implied, according to Dr. Al-Ghaali),
Ar-Raazi (according to Dr. Al-Ghaali),
Al-Jabri (in his book لا نسخ في القرآن...لماذا؟, page 102),
Dr. Mustafa Zayd,
Husaam Al-Ghaali.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2010, 03:01 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi reports that this verse

has been claimed abrogated by the sword verse. Here is what he writes,
ذكر الآية الثالثة والعشرين: قوله تعالى "ستجدون آخرين يريدون أن يأمنوكم ويأمنوا قومهم"، والمعنى أنهم يظهرون الموافقة للفريقين ليأمنوهما، فأمر الله تعالى بالكف عنهم إذا اعتزلوا وألقوا إلينا السلم وهو الصلح، كما أمر بالكف عن الذين يصلون إلى قوم بيننا وبينهم ميثاق، ثم نسخ ذلك بقوله "فاقتلوا المشركين حيث وجدتموهم"
اهـ


In his book التبيان في الناسخ والمنسوخ في القرآن المجيد, page 96, author Abdullah ibn Hamza Aş-Şa`di Al-Yamaani wrote that this verse was revealed about Na`eem ibn Mas`ood Al-Ashja`i, and others like him, who pretended to be Muslim and vowed loyalty to the Prophet (PBUH), only to turn around and transmit to the polytheists inside information about Muslims.

See also this related post and topic.

Who said what:
For:
At-Tabari (quoted by Dr. Zayd),
Ikrima, Al-Hasan and Qataada (according to At-Tabari from his exegesis, volume 9, pages 24-25, per Dr. Zayd),
Ibn Al-Jawzi,
An-Nahhaas, Ibn Salaama, Ibn Hilaal and Al-Karmi (according to Dr. Zayd).

Against:
Abu-Ali (Al-Jabaa'i?) and Abu-Bakr Al-Aşamm (according to Dr. Al-Husayni),
Abdul-Qaahir Al-Baghdaadi (according to Dr. Zayd),
Dr. Mustafa Zayd.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 07 Feb 2010, 03:14 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi reports that this verse,

has been claimed abrogated by the sword verse. Here is what he writes about that,

ذكر الآية الرابعة والعشرين: قوله تعالى "وإن كان من قوم بينكم وبينهم ميثاق فدية مسلمة إلى أهله". جمهور أهل العلم على أن الإشارة بهذا إلى الذي يقتل خطأ فعلى قاتله الدية والكفارة، وهذا قول ابن عباس والشعبي وقتادة والزهري وأبي حنيفة والشافعي، وهو قول أصحابنا، فالآية على هذا محكمة. وقد ذهب بعض مفسري القرآن إلى أن المراد به من كان من المشركين بينه وبين النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وهنة إلى أجل، ثم نسخ ذلك بقوله "براءة من الله ورسوله إلى الذين عاهدتم من المشركين" بقوله "فانبذ إليهم على سواء"
اهـ

He correctly says that the verse is not abrogated and it simply means what the exegetes said, namely, the verse speaks of negligent homicide. He says that's the majority opinion, such as Ibn Abbaas, Ash-Sha`bi, Qataada, Az-Zuhri, Abu-Haneefa and Ash-Shaafii. But, he said, others said the verse refers to polytheists who have a treaty with the prophet (PBUH).

I wonder if folks have read verses such as the goodness verse, 2:177, (آية البر) which praises those who "keep their promises!" Isn't the sweeping claim of the sword verse directly contradictory to the goodness verse? Or is the goodness verse abrogated too?

Who said what:
For:
Unnamed exegetes (according to Ibn Al-Jawzi who said that they claimed that the abrogating is 9:1 and 8:58),
Ibn Uways (according to Al-Khazraji).

Against:
The majority, according to Ibn Al-Jawzi,
Ibn Abbaas,
Qataada, Az-Zuhri,
Abu-Haneefa,
As-Shaafi`i,
As-Sha`bi (according to Ibn Al-Jawzi),
Maalik ibn Anas (quoted from his book الموطأ by Dr. Zayd),
Ahmad ibn Hanbal (according to Dr. Zayd),
Dr. Mustafa Zayd.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did 9:5 abrogate 124 verses?
PostPosted: 11 Feb 2010, 00:17 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4520
Location: USA
Ibn Al-Jawzi mentions that this verse,

has been claimed by some to have been abrogated by the sword verse. He dismisses that. Here is what he wrote,

ذكر الآية السابعة: قوله تعالى "ما على الرسول إلا البلاغ". اختلف المفسرون فيها على قولين: الأول أنها محكمة، وأنها تدل على أن الواجب على الرسول التبليغ وليس عليه الهدي. والثاني أنها تتضمن الاقتصار على التبليغ دون الأمر بالقتال، ثم نسخت بآية السيف والأول أصح

Ibn Hazm Al-Andalusi, however, agrees that 5:99 was abrogated by the sword verse.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 178 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 18  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 06 Dec 2019, 23:23

All times are UTC

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