by IA Khan · Cited by 1 — The original Arabic term for abrogation is al-Naskh. In defining this term, Muslim scholars have said so many things, leaving the term undefined in a categorical
13 pages

151 KB – 13 Pages

PAGE – 1 ============
By Dr. Israr Ahmad Khan Introduction manipulated source of law. and progressively more complex interpretative and legislative contemplation. One group of scholars their thoughts and to condemn the rival approach. The theological and Ummah to divide into various camps that have most of the time been at odds with each other over most is sues. and in particular have been aggressively hostile to one another over , one favoring the abrogation and the other negating it. Both of them insist on their respective opinion on the abrogation. Neither of the two groups of scholars is prepared to give up its stand, each stating it represents the truth while the other is totally o n the wrong side. Despite the lapse of fifteen fresh today as it might have been at its early stage. Logically, there are two probabilities concerning the cl aim over abrogation by the two groups: either both the groups of scholars have mistaken the issue of abrogation or only one of them stands for the truth. Both can in no way be on the right side. Innumerable books have been written on this subject. Yet, the matter remains unsettled. The basic factor for this situation is the traditional approach of scholars. They almost despise the rational and critical approach on nts The original Arabic term for abrogation is al – Naskh . In defining this term, Muslim scholars have said so many things, leaving the term undefined in a cate gorical manner. Anyone – Ibn al – – – – AH), and al – on issue will feel confused regarding its definition. Ibn al – Al – Naskh literally signifies two things: (1)removal and lifting up; for example, the sun removes (carries naskh ) the shadow because withthe light of the sunrise the shadow recedes; one such naskh copying a document in anotherplace, for example, they say tha

PAGE – 2 ============
application of al – naskh up of a command whichwas initially obligatory for the people denotes its removal with or without its replacement. [1] Al – of scholars to define al – Naskh . He found the discussions on its meaning in the sources of different nature, and hence saw no wisdom in referring to them. He coined a definition of abrogation that he claimed more of an Islamic command by a legally valid argument ( – – ). [2] and was not content with the controversies of Muslim scholars over the definition of abrogation. [3] Ibn al – Ja ruling in the abrogating verse and the abrogated verse should contradict each other. Second, the abrogated ruling should chronologically precede its abrogating ruling. It could be known either through divine statement or through historical information. Third, the abrogated ruling should have been initially part of Islamic law. Fourth, the abrogating ruling should also be a confirmed part of Islamic law. Fifth, the justification f or an abrogating ruling should be either as strong as that of its abrogated ruling or stronger than that of the abrogated one. In case of the tenuous strength of the abrogating in comparison to the abrogated one the abrogation will not occur. [4] The proponents of abrogation do not seem to be very clear as to the arguments approach to abrogation makes the proposed a rguments controversial hence not altogether valid. Arguments advanced for abrogation are numerous due to the classification of abrogation into various categories. All these arguments are of two kinds, those strengthening the concept of abrogation in genera Regarding the validity of abrogation in normal life and in Islamic law, there is actually no controversy among Muslim scholars. Ironically, the advocates of abrogation focus more a nd this general rule. This category of arguments is not within the purview of this study. The scope of this study is confined to the arguments for abrogation in – – , views of , and claim of consensus. [5] anic Verses abrogate any verse or cause it to be forgotten but W e bring another verse either similar to it or God Himself. Undoubtedly, this verse forms a substantial evidence for abrogation. However, the

PAGE – 3 ============
question is if for exultation. ion is found in the have been used 86 times, only once, and 296 times respectively. These usages do not signify just verse of the mark (3:97); symptom (19:10); masterpiece (30:21), (36:33); lesson (10:92); miracle (20:22), irrefutable proof (30:2 2). this revelation seems a far – rse came in response to the Jewish objection to the change of direction in prayer from Jerusalem to Makkah. [6] The Prophet beginning of his mission, whereas (2:115) ) here s ignifies the understanding of the ) and unclear ( ) [7] The e checked whether literally connotes practical and methodological understanding of knowledge. teach the Book refers to, among other things, s all lack any To get to the import of the word in the above verse (2:269), one has to read the entire context that spreads over verses (2:267 – 283). In these seventeen verses, one can see three main messages: charity work is of great benefit for believers; usury – based monetary transaction is baneful for man; and monetary loans are to be properly documented and reliably testified. All thes e matters are financial. (2:269) is a part of that context. This particular verse communicates that understanding the objectives and advantages of these wealth – related acts is wisdom; one who understands it is ever prepared to be generous for the sake of A blessed with wisdom, they should have irrefutable arguments at their disposal. Conversely, the surely identify and then that are the essence of the divine writ, and others that are verse refer and . Aside

PAGE – 4 ============
– signifies abrogated in the Q [8] makes clear that these two categories of are of permanent nature; the will forever remain and the will not change at any s tage of the time into non – . Yet here in the abrogation system, the scholars keep changing their stand on the will keep changing its position to ? Is it fair to superse bring the point home. is ordained for you, when death approaches any of you and he is leaving behind much wealth, to ma ke bequests in favor of his parents and near of kin in accordance with what is fair: this is considered as – – e same command (2:180) is not abrogated and hence is . [9] One should not refer to the same verse as as well as . as abrogated – of narrators ( sanad ). Two of these chains contain anonymous reporters and hence, these reports are weak. The two other chains are also defective du e to the availability of weak reporters considered reliable. The other – – – Nubayt, Juwaybir, al – – Farj, and Salmah ibn Nubayt respectively. The word hereafter and many other things unseen to man. To describe the unseen facts God has used metaphor ic language to bring the picture of the unseen close to human perception. All places in . [10] or them certain good – – making of lawful into unlawful signifies abrogation. [11] or Torah? There should not be any confusion over the meaning of the verse 4:160. It indicates how the Jews were puni shed due to their belligerent approach to their religion. In one such this verse (4:160) reminds us of the fact that the Jews carried out some changes in Torah, making certain things unlawful on their own. vivid picture of this divine sta tement it is desirable to read not only the whole verse but also its to you the Book with truth which confirms the Book before it and serves as its guardian: so j udge

PAGE – 5 ============
willed, He would have made you a single people but (His plan is) to test you in what He has only source of law for the people; and decision of any dispute is to be made in the light of the se sends a message beyond any doubt that the the truth. This ve rse (5:48) and its preceding and succeeding verses give a repeated call to reject r confirms that the previous laws revealed in the previous Scriptures are no longer valid; and that the laws revealed refers to the abrogation of the previous [12] He wills not to abrogate. Both the abrogated and the abrogating are in the mother of the Book. [13] [14] The chain through which Ibn , which means effacement and total removal; wherever the takes place, noth ing remains in place. Abrogation theory emphasizes that If we read the whole – (13), we can see the surah consoles the Prophet and his followers, and also rebuts various suppositions developed by the opponents; i.e., Quraysh. The above verse (13:39) forms an answer to the objection raised by the men of Quraysh that with the presence of the previous heavenly Scriptures revealed to previous prophets, there did not arise any need for the new Scripture. In the answer it was stressed that God willed to efface the previous Scriptures as the sources of law and send new Scripture; i.e., the [15] ajal ) has had its (13:38). The statement in (13:39) connects to the previous one. In this way, (13:39) is not advocating the theory of abrogation but rather the prerogati ve of God to annul the previous then, wonderfully strange to suggest this verse alludes to abrogation theory. The concept of nah where a new society based on Islamic laws was being developed. — best what He reveals in stages — they say: You are but a forger! Nay, but most of them do not understa

PAGE – 6 ============
Makkan revelations one may not find such progression in the laws. (16:1 01) itself refers to the and presented them in stages in the name of God. The men of Quraysh could not have raised the question of abrogation of laws in Makkah. This verse reminded Quraysh that it was not Makkan revelations one could see the same message in different styles and arguments that are once. He mainta ined that the Makkan revelations do not have the progression in Islamic laws. [16] efers to the power of God to lift up His own command, but it does not prove that God sent a revelation in — — ut of His bounty on the Last Prophet would never take away what He revealed to him. This verse speaks only about the possibility of answer to a question raised by The Spirit is of the command of my Lord. And you were not granted of this knowledge but very ends with (17:87). The Spirit is actually revelation entirely at the discretion of Allah as to where, when, what, and to whom to send down. Makki made (17:86) as the basis to claim ents, [17] which is gross speculation, and speculation does not substitute for the truth (10:36). at Satan casts in, and verse is talking about the abrogation of something cast in the hearts of the prophets by Satan, and verses. , while interpreting this verse, brought in a story about Satan putting into the mouth of the Prophet some of his own verses that admired the goddesses of Quraysh, and proved how God deleted those Satanic insertions into revelation. Mufa the revelation does not merely signify that after the revelation but also before and during its revelation. To claim that Satan managed to interfere into the process of revelation of – Najm (53) is to falsify the divine guarantee for the safety of revelation from any corruption whatsoever made in (15:9). Arguments Based on the – [18] Ibn al –

PAGE – 8 ============
normal women and men, but for the pregnant and the sick, he did not find the ruling abrogated. – instead. [23] Argument Based on the Existence Al – [24] Is this an argument? Who said this verse or that verse was abrogated? Did God clearly indicate to the abrogated revelation in the uch – practically invalid forever. Ironically, the identification of abrog miserably failed to refine the principles of abrogation so as to give them universal shape. Di fferent scholars developed their own which verses are abrogated. Behind this declaration there is a hypothesis that the number of abrogated verses might be reduced f – number of abrogated verses from twenty – one to only five. This narrowing down of the abrogated verses took place based on interpretation of the verses concerned. According to al – [25] Interestingly, these five verses have been declared by others from the proponents of abrogation as non – abrogated. [26] of al – Argument Based on the Claim of Consensus of Muslim Ummah – have the [27] Al – people rejected the existence of abrogating and abrogated verses in the Ummah [28] Al – cons [29] Al – generations of Muslim scholars ( salaf al – ummah ) had consensus of opinion over the fact that In the statement of al – N – who rejected the abrogation theory. Does this situation refer to consensus? They have themselves dispute d their own stance. Consensus occurs only when all the scholars, without any exception, agree to the issue concerned; even the dissent of one single scholar makes the matter controversial. Al – n, although he knew very well the nature of the situation. He frequently borrowed ideas and information from

PAGE – 9 ============
al – – – sue of abrogation? Al – abrogator of the previous Scriptures, and not of its own revelations. Al – kinds of contradictions. To substantiate [30] Al – in Islamic law and describe s disagreement of other scholars from early to modern times. [31] scholars are divided into groups, one supporting it and the other negating it. In addition, the claim of cons ensus controverts the reality in history today. Al – [32] – – n – Muslims – – Muslim fighters) withdraw from you, and fight not against you, and offer peace to you, then Allah open ed no way for you against Sacred Mosque lead you to transgression. Help you one another in righteousness and piety, but help you not one another in sin and rancor with what they (non – Disposer o These verses and many others advise the Prophet and his followers to be patient with the insolent approach of the enemies, to be generous towards non – believers, and to be just towards non – Muslims. Yet the stalwarts of abrogation dared declare a ll such commands of the Most truth among the people of Scripture until they pay the jizyah with willing submission and feel themselves al – sayf and al – . with the disbelievers stands abrogated by the – sayf and al – [33] As per the calculation of Ibn al – – ten verses that promote leniency, kindness, patience, and generosity towards non – believers are considered abrogated by – sayf al – . He did not agree to this number but supported the abrogation of only twelve of them. al – sayf and al – came down in connection with the situation of war. As for the and Arabs, parti cularly Quraysh, and other warring parties for peace serve as enough evidence for the peaceful coexistence policy of Islam. It seems that the image of Muslims in the west as terrorists is consequent upon the abrogation of generosity towards non – Muslims.

PAGE – 10 ============
– According to al – 2). He declared the abrogation theory a falsehood ( ). [34] Is his stance correct? Al – al – ), and not falsehood ( ). Al – give any evidence to prove the authenticity of his belief except (2:106), which states that God carries out abrogation (we have already discussed the message of this — in the previous s criptures al – ) because the theory of abrogation insists on the existence of conflict ( and ). The notion of conflict between one revelation of t – maintained that abrogation denotes permanent suspension of practical validity of a verse but [35] Al – lieving its authenticity as the part of the as the most sa cred; it is to be recited as a command of God; and it is to be acted upon wherever it is relevant. Yet abrogation theory throws its validity for practical purpose. It is certainly it false. The Al – death approached any of you, if he leaves wealth, that he makes bequest to parents and next of interpreted it to remain practically valid, saying that the bequest, as the verse suggests , should be as per reasonable manner ( bi al – ). He explained that al – meant here in accordance with the command of God as stated in the inheritance verses ( ayat al – (4:7 – 14). Al – does not certainly mean according to the prevalent cu his suggestion seems quite rational. With this method e practical validity of the so called abrogated verses can be traced. The in its entirety is ever relevant in human life. speaks about three attri ibutes. Abrogation

PAGE – 11 ============
guidance is not sustainable. there are legal rulings that are contradictory to each other. Now, it is a matter of choice between ts to the existence of have I perfected your With the revelation of this message, the Prophet and his followers were assured of the perfection imperfect. ) and then explained in detail from One who is All – Wise, Well – is very cle — and — are full of wisdom. No lacuna remains in either of the two kinds of verses whereby imperfection of h is cure and mercy for the proclaim. (36:2 decla ration in (39:28) are two contradictory dimensions. Which one is, then, acceptable and which one is to be rejected? Naturally, the information conveyed in (39:28) represents the truth.

151 KB – 13 Pages