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. ………(Please see the Main Story)

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…………(Please see the Main Story)

Nasr et Al have mentioned in their modern tafseer “The Study Quran” a long list of things that are called ayah in the Quran: ………….. (Please see the Main Story)

Allaamaa Yousuf Ali offers some important nuances on this subject: ……. (Please see the Main Story)

According to Maulana Maudoodi, this ayah was a response to ……..(Please see the Main Story)

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 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,” ………..(Please see the Main Story)

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…….(Please see the Main Story)

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 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……..(Please see the Main Story)

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.