“I am convinced about the veracity of my opinions, but I do consider it likely that they may turn out to be incorrect. Likewise, I am convinced about the incorrectness of the views different from mine, but I do concede the possibility that they may turn out to be correct.” — Imam Shafa’i
In this ayah Allah Ta’aala Subhaanahoo has defined HIS rules and style about abrogation of any of HIS ayahs. This topic is hotly debated and challenged in Islamic scholarship. I have ventured to find out an answer/answers to this ambiguous problem.
On the face of it, alteration, addition, replacement and abrogation of rules in any on-going organization—religious or mundane— should be taken for granted. As Mufti Mohammed Shafi points out in his remarkable tafseer Ma’ariful Quran “Every new Shari’ah and every new revealed Book has been abrogating many injunctions of the earlier shariah and of the earlier Book. Similarly, within the same Shari’ah, too, it has always happened that a certain law was in force for a time, but Divine Wisdom chose to abrogate it and to promulgate another in its place. It was some mischievous Jews who took exception to this normal practice, distorted it and made it an excuse to malign the the Holy Prophet”.
The most common translation of the word “ayah” is a “verse”. This is partly because every one of these verses contains a message. This translation of the word in the index ayah by many Muslim theologians has given rise to probably an erroneous interpretation. On this restricted meaning, they maintain that some of the verses of the Quran have been abrogated by Allah and replaced by others during the period of revelation. This reminds us of a human author who makes alterations, deletions and additions in the proofs of his manuscript in the process of his writing. On many occasions two ayahs of the Quran appear to contradict each other. Instead of digging deeper to solve this apparent anomaly, many mufassirs declared one of them as abrogated. As this is an arbitrary procedure, there is a difference of opinion among the upholders of the “doctrine of abrogation” as to how many verses and which one have been included in this process. It is also debated among the upholders of this “doctrine of abrogation”
whether the whole ayah in question has been eliminated from the context of the Quran or it is only the rule or meaning mentioned in the ayah that has been excluded.
The word ayah also means a “message”. There is, therefore a strong Muslim scholarly opinion that the word “ayah” in the index ayah is referring to previous revelations alluding “to the supersession of the Biblical dispensation by that of the Qur’an”. The Muslim scholar, Abū Muslim al-Iṣfahānī rejects altogether the mainstream definition of naskh and maintains either that naskh takes place between religions e.g. Islam in relation to Judaism and Christianity meaning that God replaces one religion with another, or that “ayah” in this verse means “miracle.” “There does not exist a single reliable Tradition to the effect that the Prophet ever, declared a verse of the Qur’an to have been abrogated” states Dr. Mohammed Asad in his excellent tafseer “the Message of the Quran”. He further categorically declares “In short, the ‘doctrine of abrogation’ has no basis whatever in historical fact, and must be rejected”. Thus the abrogation in this ayah refers to the earlier divine messages and not to any part of the Qur’an itself.
In the Qur’an the word “ayah” is used in several different senses. Scholar Mohsin Khan in his exegesis translates the word ayah in verse 61 of surah Al Baqarah as “proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.” The notable renderings for the word ayah are:
1) Most commonly, individual units of the Book of God are labelled ayah.
2) Sometimes it has even been used for human works of wonder; for example, monuments or landmarks built by the ancient people of Aad:
[3]“What, you build a monument (ayatun) on every hill merely for fun”
3) On many occasions, the phenomena of the universe are called the ayah of God because they serve as “sign”or “token” which directs one to something important.
4) At times the miracles performed by the Prophets are also termed ayah.
5) Lastly it is used in a general sense for God’s revelations.
An example where the word ayah is used for revelations:
[4] “But those who refuse to accept this (guidance) and reject Our Signs as false are destined for the Fire where they shall abide for ever.”
The sense in which the word ayah has been used in a particular verse becomes evident from the context of its occurrence.
Nasr et Al have mentioned in their modern tafseer “The Study Quran” a long list of things that are called ayah in the Quran:
1) The she-camel of the Thamūd (17:59);
2) the day and the night (17:12);
3) the Companions of the Cave (18:9);
4) Zachariah’s lack of speech for three days (19:10);
5) Jesus (19:21);
6) the white hand of Moses (20:22);
7) Mary and Jesus (21:91);
8) the destruction of Noah’s people (25:37);
9) the growth of vegetation (26:8);
10) the drowning of the Egyptians (26:67);
11) the destruction of the people of Lot (26:174);
12) the miracles of Moses (28:36);
13) the creation of the heavens and the earth (29:44);
14) the request by the disbelievers for a miracle (29:50);
15) our creation from dust (30:20);
16) a series of items in 30:21–25, none of which refer to the verses of the Quran
Allaamaa Yousuf Ali offers some important nuances on this subject: “What is the meaning here? If we take it in a general sense, it means that God’s Message from age to age is always the same, but that its form may differ according to the needs and exigencies of the time. That form was different as given to Moses and then to Jesus and then to Muḥammad……….There may be express abrogation, or there may be “causing or permitting to forget.” How many good and wise institutions gradually become obsolete by afflux of time? Then there is the gradual process of disuse or forgetting in evolution. This does not mean that eternal principles change. It is only a sign of God’s infinite power that His creation should take so many forms and shape not only in the material world but in the world of man’s thought and expression”.
According to Maulana Maudoodi, this ayah was a response to some observations put up by the Jews to create chaos in the minds of Muslim. Why have some injunctions been changed in the Quran when the earlier scriptures are also from the same God, they asked. How can Divine revelations be forgotten and lost, they further exclaimed. Allah Ta’aala, being the Absolute Sovereign with unlimited authority replies to them through this ayah “Whenever We abrogate an ayah or cause it to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or equal to it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?”
As I have stated earlier, the common rendering of the word “ayah” is an ayah/verse of the Quran. With this meaning, the concept of abrogation has led to much controversy and bickering in the Muslim scholarship from right at its inception till our present time. It has given rise to questions like: Does the presence of abrogation in any way imply “a shortcoming or defect in the Holy Qur’an or Islam” and many others: Mo’tazilah tried to explain away the whole question of Naskh. They conceded the possibility of abrogation on logical grounds but maintained that no verse in the Quran has been abrogated and no verse tried to abrogate another. This view is attributed to Abu Muslim al-Asfahani. The Ulama in general have rejected this opinion. Thus, “Ruh al-Ma’ani, 30-volume of the tafseer of the Quran, by the 19th century Iraqi Islamic scholar Mahmur Al-Alisi declares “The people belonging to all the shari’ahs are unanimous in accepting the validity of abrogation and its actual occurrence”. Abu Muslim al-Istahan says that it is rationally possible, but has not actually taken place. According to Imam al-Qurtubi, a famous mufassir, muhaddith and faqih scholar from Cordoba of Maliki origin in the thirteenth century: “It is essential to understand the question of abrogation, and great benefits flow from such an understanding, which no scholar can dispense with, and no one can deny abrogation except the ignorant and the dull-headed.”
Mufti Mohamed Shafi declares dogmatically “In short, all the authentic and authoritative Ulamaa, from the days of the blessed Companions down to our own day, have always affirmed not only the possibility, but also the actual occurrence of abrogation. This has been the position of all the Ulama of Deoband too, without any exception”.
Naskh could mean“to erase” or “to obliterate,” often described as the action that the sun performs on a shadow, the wind upon dust, or even old age upon youth. The root n-s-kh appears four times in the Quran: in this verse; in 7:154, referring to the inscription of the tablets of Moses; in 22:52, where God effaces the work of Satan; and in 45:29, in regard to the recording of human actions. It is widely accepted in the Islamic religious sciences, naskh can occur only in matters of commands and prohibitions, but not in teachings of Faith and doctrine.
In the terminology of the Holy Quran and the Hadith, Naskh signifies either a change or a repeal or replacement of an ayah; this could involve the actual text or the message contained therein or both. As an example of the naskh of both text and ruling, a report (riwaayah) attributed to the Prophet’s wife Ayesha states that there were commands in the Quran relating to suckling that are now neither acted upon nor part of the Quran. The example most often cited for naskh of the text despite a continuation of its ruling is the punishment of adultery by stoning. In a report attributed to Umar, a verse commanding stoning was part of the Quran, but now is not, even though the command of stoning for adultery remains in effect according to “many, if not most, jurists”. (I personally feel these reports, on the face of it have to be weak and unreliable if not forged. They sound appalling as they cut thorough our very proud belief (and fact) that the Quran has reached us exactly as taught and given by the Holy Prophet, without the minutest alteration or modification. In fact, this is one of the main reasons why we claim that the Holy Quran is a miracle of Allah Ta’aala Subhaanahoo. It is ironical to attribute such a riwaayah to the famous icon and hero of Muslims Sayyidna Umer.) As to the other form of Naskh mentioned in this verse where in sometimes Allah made the Holy Prophet and the blessed Companions forget a certain verse altogether, there are commentators who have cited actual instances when the the Holy Prophet and his companions had no clue of a previous verse.
The mainstream upholders of naskh are careful to differentiate it from (1) specification, where a verse does not contradict but provides specification regarding the general ruling of another verse; (2) the simple accumulation of law, which may or may not amount to an abrogation; and (3) the disappearance of the circumstances or causes behind the ruling, its sabab or ʿillah (“effective legal cause”).
The early scholars of Islam, based on the general and broad meaning of Naskh had designated some five hundred verses of the Quran as abrogated. The commentator Imam Ibn al-Jawzī, a great intellectual, religious and political figure of the twelfth century and propagator of the Hanbali school in his native Baghdad named no less than 247. On the other hand, working on a restricted meaning of the word ayah, the later ulema of Islam could classify merely twenty ayahs as abrogated. Still later in the eighteenth century, the famous Islamic thinker and reformer Shāh Walī Allāh of Delhi reduced this number to only five.
Mufti Mohammed Shafi describes and interesting incident in the words of Imam Al Qurtubi, a famous mufassir, muhaddith and faqih scholar from Cordoba of Maliki origin in the thirteenth century:The fourth Khalifah Sayyidna Ali saw a man preaching in the mosque. He asked the people what the man was doing. On being told that he was preaching, the blessed Khalifah said: “He is not doing anything of the sort, but only announcing to the people that he is such and such a man and the son of such and such, and asking them to recognize and remember him.” Calling the man to his side, he asked: “Do you know the injunctions which have been abrogated and those which have abrogated the earlier ones?” When he confessed that he did not, the khalifah turned him out of the mosque and ordered him never to preach there.
The eminent research scholar and mentor Javed Ahmed Ghamdi directly translates the index ayah as “(They are objecting why are we making any alteration in the shari’ah of the Taurat? Tell them) when we abrogate an ayah (of this Book) or cause it to forgotten, we replace it (in the Quran) with one better than it or similar to it“ (my translation). Obviously he is translating the word “ayah” as a previous revelation without any formality.
In summary: In the index ayah, abrogation of “ayah” is referring to previous revelations. This is based on rational thinking and knowledge of the Quran and hadith and supported by eminent Muslim scholars and mufassirs. However the mainstream Ulema relate abrogation to individual verses of Quran on the grounds of taqleed—literal following—and uncritical conformity to Hadith, leading to sharp controversies about which ayahs and how many have been abrogated.
……..and Allah knows best.
May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding–“fahm”–of our Deen, Aameen.
Dr. Khalid Mitha
