Academic Islam

Some humble attempts by a student of Islam

Saturday, August 13, 2005

Qur'an: Comparative Study - 2:106

"Ma nansakh min ayatin aw nunsiha nati bikhayrin minha aw mithliha…"
Saadia Malik

(The essay below is supposed to be an objective presentation of four scholars’ interpretation of the word, “ayatin” and its implication, thus, on the arguable “law of abrogation”, in verse 2:106 of the Qur’an. An abrupt ending is somewhat inevitable given the author’s resolve not to bring in any subjectivity, and hence, any conclusion must be every reader’s own personal verdict.)

Asad translates verse 2:106 of the Qur’an as follows:

"Any message which, We annul or consign to oblivion We replace with a better or a similar ones. Dost thou not know that God has the power to will anything?"


He understands the term ‘ayatin’ here to mean message, rather than verse, which he says, is wrongly construed by many Muslim theologians. Because ayah literally means ‘verse’, this Qur’anic verse has been used to derive the flimsy “law of abrogation” that argues for the possibility of abrogation of one verse by another verse in the Book. This is totally unacceptable, for the Qur’an is not a product of human effort, whereby the author errs or finds himself at the behest of his short-comings; in the end, making up for those by offering better, more appropriate laws. In addition, there is no reliable tradition going back to the Prophet, suggesting the possibility of abrogated and abrogating verses within the Qur’an. The whole debacle owes itself to the earlier scholars’ inability to reconcile one Qur’anic passage with another. The easy way out was to declare one or some of the verses in question, “abrogated”. The end result has been nothing short of hotch-potch and confusion. Now, the scholars see themselves arguing over which verses were abrogated and which weren’t.

Since the preceding verse talks about the Jews’ and Christians’ insistence on rejecting any Message superceding the Bible, the only befitting interpretation of “ayatin” in this verse is “message”, that is, the Qur’an.

Mawdudi’s translation (rendered into English by Zafar Ansari) reads:

"And for whatever verse We might abrogate or consign to oblivion, We bring a better one or the like of it. Are you not aware that Allah is All-Powerful?"


He understands this verse to have been revealed in answer to the Jews’ and Christians’ constant attempts at pushing the Muslims off their pedestals of faith. The Jews would often try to confuse and ridicule Muslims at their claims of acquiring the word of God: If, as they said, the Bible too was sent down by their Allah, why did the same Creator cause it to be out-dated, replacing it with a new book? Why did he not preserve His word and His laws? Why were there revisions? And indeed, why did He cause his followers, from among believers in the Bible, to forget certain portions of His message? Certainly, they’d tell the Muslims, those questions could not be answered, in hope that the latter would altogether shun their faith in Allah Himself. Those were the cursing times during which this verse was revealed in order to strengthen the faithfuls’ resolve in appreciating their All-Knowing, All-Encompassing Allah. Nothing was beyond Him. If He willed His servants to forget something, it would be forgotten. If He willed for a new law to be established, it would replace the older one – if not for the better, for the same. Surely, Allah is All-Powerful.

Usmani admits himself to the traditionalist stance. He understands ‘ayatin’ to mean ‘verse’. The Jews would comment that various verses in the Qur’an were abrogated by those revealed at a later date. If this is, indeed, the book by Allah, then why were some verses no more applicable? Was He ignorant of those shortcomings earlier? Through this verse, God Himself answers and declares that no revealed verse had any flaws. He reveals what He deems most appropriate at one time, and abrogates it, when circumstances demand, in favour of a stronger commandment.

Islahi understands naskh[1] to mean abrogation of one legal directive for another. The Jews would often remark that if the Qur’an accepted Moses to be the Messenger of God, and the Torah to be His reavealed Word, why would the same God change injunctions given therein? The aim was to cause dejection within the ranks of Muslims, by way of convincing them of their God’s inability to foresee the failure of His own revelation, deeming replacement imperative.

Allah answers. [As Islahi’s pupil, Ghamidi also points out] “The principles of the Torah, which were abrogated because of evolution of society and change of circumstances were replaced by better ones and the ones that were caused to be forgotten were replaced by similar ones. None of these two sorts of replacement can be objected to. The first of them was a natural requisite of the change in circumstances and the other was necessary to compensate for the loss caused by the Jews to the corpus of religion.”[2]


1. As is also used by the Qur’an in Al-Hajj:52
2. Ghamidi, Javed Ahmed. Translated: Shehzad Saleem. 2004. “Surah Baqarah (100-121).” Monthly Renaissance. Journal on-line. Available from http://www.monthly-renaissance.com/SeptQurex2y4.html Accessed November 11, 2004

12 Comments:

  • At Saturday, August 13, 2005 11:15:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Ask the common man on the street how is Islamic Law derived and he will state: Quran - > sunnah.

    Scholars have taken the law of abrogation nad made it so that Sunnah now abrogates the Quran. Unaouzobillah.

    Excellent site good article.

    Omair

     
  • At Sunday, August 14, 2005 12:03:00 AM, Blogger Saadia said…

    Thanks for your comments. To me, the Sunnah is simply the perpetual Abrahamic practices of the Prophet, carried down to us, generation from generation - such as worship rituals (salah, hajj etc.)

    But yes, I agree, Muslims have been guilty of placing hadith on a podium, where it is declared as absolute and infallible as the Qur'an. While the latter is the word of God, hadith isn't. The compilations are simply books of history, that we should strive to learn from, yes, but be careful too.

    Are you Mr. Anonymous? :)

     
  • At Sunday, August 14, 2005 1:59:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Salam

    Nice article and an interesting sie. But a humble question. ?How do you interpret these things. Whats your qualification? Is it just a work of compilation, or your conclusions. Would like to know if you wouldnt mind telling.

     
  • At Sunday, August 14, 2005 2:33:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    @Sadia

    No I am not Anon.

    Good, then tell me what do you believe is the punishment for adultery in Islam?

    @Anonymous
    Qualifications thats interesting.

    Seek knowledge from only those with degreees from good accredited universities.

    Omair

     
  • At Sunday, August 14, 2005 4:46:00 AM, Blogger Saadia said…

    @Anonymous I agree with Omair on this. I donot believe in formal qualifications to be able to speak; an educated and sincere approach - that's what I work hard on. But as an aside, I have had a fair bit of exposure to scholarly discourses on Islam.

    Anyhow, the comparative study here isn't my interpretation; just a presentation of exegetes' (differences in ) understanding of various ayahs of the Qur'an.

    @Omair I believe the Qur'an clearly outlines the punishment for zina. It doesn't differentiate between fornication and adultery - as the modern world does. Both forms of zina are equally illegitimate, as a general rule.

     
  • At Sunday, August 14, 2005 11:26:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I did not ask for university qualifications. I dont think that the scholars of Islam need not necessarily be who are univesity educated. I think there are Ulema of whom Imam Ghazzali had spoken who just worked for the fame and name and for rulers. But there are the ulema who are the real inheritors of the prophet. Their actions are right, their words are strictly according to the sharia. The sharia is above all human made laws. Now, If interpretations are from unqualified mind (By qualification, I mean the Ijaza fro m the sheiks who knows what Islam is, they would give you ijaza to give rulings after verifying if you really understand what you speak), then there is possibility of shaithan in it.

    At one stage, when we are capable of speaking English, Have universtiy degrees attached to us as tags, and we can read up scientific manuals and if we have read some books on Islam and some philosophy, we might think that we are scholars and we will abuse the traditional Ulema, saying that they have ruined the religion. (From my personal experience). But it is our childishness and better inspiration from Shaitan that leads us to that path.

    Now coming to the qualification to speak, I dont think you need qualification to speak, but better to think about what purpose it will serve. If you want it to be compilation as a tool for learning (for any purpose), it is fine. But it might be a good idea to refrain from talks where you try to interpret the ideas of Ulema, if you arent qualified to do so (It just helps shaitan to grow in your mind).

    Anyway, I hope I havent accused you of doing anything bad. Please pardon me If you felt bad. That wasnt my idea.

     
  • At Sunday, August 14, 2005 12:51:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Peace Saadia

    Thanks for your post thanks for your time.

    @Anon
    (By qualification, I mean the Ijaza fro m the sheiks who knows what Islam is, they would give you ijaza to give rulings after verifying if you really understand what you speak),

    Peace Blogger,

    Thanks for your post thanks for your lesson.

    We have two different positions:

    Here is a position:
    How many of the qualified scholars you speak of have contributed towards Islam in the last century?

    Here is a query:
    Who decides who is a qualified sheikh? Is Islam only meant to be learned and understood by a select few?

    Here is restating my position:
    Why then do we have an intellect and the ability to reason if we are only meant to follow a qualified sheikh.

    As I see it you have but two options, remain as you are and be happy, understand another's position and be happy...
    Seems to me you are winning both ways...

    Peace be unto you and your house
    Omair

     
  • At Sunday, August 14, 2005 10:34:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Salam Omair

    Here there is no matter of winning or losing or of supporting any position. The whole intention is we need to be on the winning side at the day of judgement. As a brother or sister in the religion we have that duty towards each other. If by any of our actions or our arrogance we say something and be proud of that fact we are not going to win.
    Ok, So regarding your queries there are some articles that I found useful.

    http://masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/madhhab.htm

    http://masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/studyh.htm

    and yes, my intention is not a debate and If I had fed my ego with that thoughts, May Allah forgive me for that. I apologize even now if I hurt anyone's feelings.

     
  • At Sunday, August 14, 2005 11:54:00 PM, Blogger Saadia said…

    Even if you guys want to have a debate, I see no harm. So long as we can sincerely be flexible and open to change of opinion, in the light of a better, well-substantiated argument, its all good. Enjoy the diversity, meanwhile! :)

    As for my opinion, I do not believe in ijaza as a requirement for anybody to speak on religion. To me, the most important parts are the approaches of the speaker/writer and the listener/reader. If I say something in the name of Islam, that is not corroborated by the Qur'an or Sunnah, you should not consider my thoughts at all. On the other hand, if I obviously draw from the original, primary sources of Islam, then people should lend me an ear, and if they see themselves convinced, good. If they don't, they can sound their objections, and insha'Allah, I shall listen. Its simple. Ijaza, in a way, formalises Islam, just like Christianity did through the theocracy of its Church.

     
  • At Monday, August 15, 2005 2:00:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Peace Blogger,

    You misunderstood.

    There is no winning and losing if you are always winning. You are always winning if you understand others position.

    Its not necessary to take the position but to understand it.

    " Ask those who recall, if you know not " (Qur'an 16:43)

    Who are those?

    Peace
    Omair

     
  • At Monday, August 15, 2005 2:11:00 AM, Blogger Saadia said…

    I agree. It is most essential that we are forever searching, and abiding by what convinces us in the light of the Qur'an and Sunnah. Another person might very well have the same approach, but reach a different conclusion. No problem. The conclusion doesn't make us successful, the approach does. It is hoped, insha'Allah, that in the end, we'll be judged on the basis of our sincerity. Differences are inevitable. Humans are so diverse in their thinking and backgrounds, and we should enjoy that.

    I appreciate both of you for putting forward your viewpoints, and being patient with the other. Debates are very healthy, so long as they are conducted peacefully.

    :)

     
  • At Wednesday, March 13, 2013 11:27:00 PM, Anonymous About Islam said…

    There can be many views about how to approach Islam and Quran.

    Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home