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  [ 151 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 16  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2010, 02:51 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4492
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
Interpretation by Dr. Mostafa Zaid
...
* He concludes that "Quranic verse" is the only plausible meaning for the word "آية" (verse) as used in 2:106. He specifically excludes the other related meaning which is "verses in previous holy books", based on the fact that such meaning is not mentioned in Arabic dictionaries. We have already addressed this point. (I disagree)
...
* He spent quite a bit interpreting the verses leading up to 2:106, but with a twist. The effort seems directed at treating 2:105 as a culmination of the verses before it, rather than a preamble to the verse after it, which is 2:106. I am not sure what role this argument could possibly play in his effort to interpret 2:106 other than to preempt the use of 2:105 as a preamble to 2:106, thus dismissing its evidence that the word 'abrogation' in 2:106 is about previous holy books, not the Quran, without having to address that evidence directly. (I disagree)

Did he regard the opinions of the exegetes, such as Ibn Katheer and Ash-Sha`raawi? They all said the verse speaks of the Quran abrogating the Torah, and that this was the circumstance of revelation.

It surprises me that he would not call previous revelations signs (آيات). We showed earlier in this topic how many things God said were signs of His. How can a holy scripture He revealed be excluded from the list of signs?

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2010, 03:09 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Did he regard the opinions of the exegetes, such as Ibn Katheer and Ash-Sha`raawi? They all said the verse speaks of the Quran abrogating the Torah, and that this was the circumstance of revelation.

It surprises me that he would not call previous revelations signs (آيات). We showed earlier in this topic how many things God said were signs of His. How can a holy scripture He revealed be excluded from the list of signs?

The answer to the first question is that he did not cite Ibn Katheer explicitly in this instance, or Ash-Sha`raawi at all (he predated Ash-Sha`raawi or at least his fame). He did not mention the use of 2:105 as a preamble to interpreting 2:106 as addressing abrogation of previous books, period. He argued only that 2:105 was about the enemies of Islam, and that the link to 2:106 was that 2:106 addressed Quranic abrogation which is a subject of attack by the enemies of Islam. It looked like he was avoiding 'the elephant in the room'.

The answer to the second question is that his sole argument was the absence of such definition from Arabic dictionaries. It sounded like going overboard with excluding previous holy books, as it is conceivable that 2:106 is talking about both the Quran and previous holy books, which can still accommodate the abrogation doctrine, but he seemed keen on excluding even the possibility of previous holy books.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2010, 03:32 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
The interpretation of "قدير"

Pragmatic wrote:
8. He interprets the purpose of end of the verse (the description of God as most capable "قدير") as to threaten the disbelievers and to warn the Muslims about them. (I disagree)

I thought I'd elaborate on what I am disagreeing about in this interpretation by Zaid. I believe that the description of God as most capable "قدير" at the end of 2:106 relates to His ability to bring a better verse when He abrogates a verse. There is a discomfort with the notion that some verses are better than others, based on the simplistic assertion that "all the verses are equally good" which IMHO survives only because nobody would dare challenge it lest they should sound like saying that some of the verses are not that good :astaghfir:. What is true is that we cannot ascertain that a verse is better than another والعياذ بالله but God can certainly create whatever He wants because "didn't you know that God is most capable of everything?" He is the one who decrees what is better, like He did when He decreed that the Quran abrogated the Bible and the Torah. Of course the disbelievers and the People of the Book will attack that notion by asking how could a revelation of God be better than another? God answers them with this rhetorical question at the end of 2:106.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2010, 18:10 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4492
Location: USA
Pragmatic wrote:
The answer to the second question is that his sole argument was the absence of such definition from Arabic dictionaries.

But has he considered the Quran? How does he explain these verses?

Clearly, 28:43-45 name verses of the Torah as آيات. What else and who else but Moses was reciting to the people of Midian?

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2010, 20:05 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
Clearly, 28:43-45 name verses of the Torah as آيات. What else and who else but Moses was reciting to the people of Midian?

Bingo!!!! Even if it wasn't Moses and the Torah, 28:45 is explicitly referring to a previous revelation that is recited by the word "آياتنا" (Our verses, referring to God). That seals it. It is even stronger than the other case you brought up before:


Since this case uses "tell" (as in tell a story) rather than "recite" so it is conceivable that the telling is about signs of God in general, not necessarily verses.

Great find, Linguistic.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 11 Feb 2010, 09:17 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
I think this one is a formidable example of the use of the word "آية" in reference to the revelations of the People of the Book:


Two other plausible examples:


Abraham (PBUH) is describing the revelations that are recited as "آيات". Although he is referring to the upcoming Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) hence these will be verses in the Quran, it would be a highly labored interpretation that the use of "آيات" is specialized for the revelations of the Prophet Muhammad but not to the revelations of Abraham or other prophets, and that Abraham knew that word ahead of time.


It is very plausible that "آيات" refers to the contents of the listed books that include the Torah and the Bible. Avoiding that interpretation is also possible, but less plausible.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 11 Feb 2010, 20:11 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
Linguistic wrote:
I believe that there is a direct correspondence in the verse: the phrase بخير منها (one better) corresponds to ننسخ من آية (remove, or abrogate a verse), while أو مثلها (or one like it) corresponds to أو ننسها (or cause it to be forgotten). Thus, when God abrogates a verse, He brings a better one; when He causes a verse to be forgotten, He brings one similar to it.

I have been thinking about this comment since I like it a lot. I wonder if it can be substantiated further, so that it is not attacked as something unfounded. Even if attacked, that is not going to affect the main thesis of the project, since one can plausibly attribute 2:106 to only the previous books and rely on 16:101 and 87:6-7 to explain all instances of the Quranic verses that were gone due to different narrations.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 13 Feb 2010, 19:15 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 04 May 2009, 16:10
Posts: 4492
Location: USA
In his exegesis, professor Ahmad Mustafa Al-Maraaghi, explains this verse as follows,

النسخ في لسان الشرع: بيان انتهاء الحكم المستفاد من الآية المتلوة، وحكمته أن الأحكام ما شرعت إلا لمصلحة الناس، وهي تختلف باختلاف الزمان والمكان، فإذا شرع حكم في وقت كانت الحاجة إليه ماسة، ثم زالت الحاجة فمن الحكمة نسخه وتبديله بحكم يوافق الوقت الآخر فيكون خيرا من الأول أو مثله في فائدته للعباد، وما مثل ذلك إلا مثل الطبيب الذي يغير الأغذية والأدوية باختلاف الأزمنة والأمزجة، والأنبياء صلوات الله عليهم هم مصلحو النفوس، يغيرون الأعمال الشرعية، والأحكام الخلقية، التي هي للنفوس بمثابة العقاقير والأدوية للأبدان، فما يكون منها مصلحة في وقت قد يكون مفسدة في وقت آخر


Brief translation:
Abrogation is making clear that a previous ruling has ended. The reason for this is that rulings are made for the benefit of the people and they differ by time and place. So, when a dire need is there, a ruling may be given, then when the need is gone, so is the ruling.

My comment:
If we apply this yardstick, then all verses in the text of the Quran must be unabrogated, because this text is for all people, all times, all places and all situations. It cannot be if it contains temporary or local rulings.

_________________
A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 16 Feb 2010, 04:23 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
One more decisive example of the use of the word "آية" in reference to previous revelations before the Quran:


Ironically, this verse includes the word "نسخ" (in present tense).

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Interpretation of the Abrogation Verse 2:106
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2010, 04:56 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 May 2009, 00:16
Posts: 1831
Location: USA
The interpretation of نسي

Verse 2:106 mentions a mode other than abrogation for annuling a verse, and that's causing it to be forgotten (ننسها). Variations of the interpretation of ننسها have been discussed at length in various books, based on different readings of the verse and narrations of different exegeses. There is one alternative interpretation that is worthy of mention here which is interpreting the verb نسي as 'abandon' rather than 'forget'. The basis is sound:


Since God cannot possibly forget, the use of نسي in 9:67 can only mean abandon (or something similar). There is nothing wrong with "cause to be forgotten" in 2:106 and there is perhaps evidence that this is what actually happened historically. It also fits 87:6,


but I thought this alternative interpretation is worth mentioning since it is based on solid evidence within the Quran itself.

_________________
To translate is the best way to understand


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 151 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 16  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 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 14 Aug 2018, 23:32

All times are UTC

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