Abrogation doctrine: for Quran not tenable, for the past there are minor changes

RE ABROGATION

2.Surah Al Baqarah

The Quranic Text & Ali’s Version:

مَا نَنسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِّنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا...

2: 106. None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar;

C107. The word which I have translated by the word "revelations" is Ayat. See C.41 and n. 15.

It is not only used for verses of the Quran, but in a general sense for Allah's revelations, as in 2:39 and for other Signs of Allah in history or nature, or miracles, as in 2:61.

It has even been used for human signs and tokens of wonder, as, for example, monuments or landmarks built by the ancient people of 'Ad (26:128).

What is the meaning here?

If we take it in a general sense, it means that Allah'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 Muhammad.

Some commentators apply it also to The Ayat of the Quran. There is nothing derogatory in this if we believe in progressive revelation. In 3:7 we are told distinctly about the Quran, that some of its versus are clear (and of established meaning), and others are not entirely clear, and it is mischievous to treat the verses that are not entirely clear and to follow them (literally). On the other hand, it is absurd to treat such a verse as 2:115 as if it were abrogated by 2:144 about the Qiblah.

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 gradual process of disuse or forgetting in evolution. This does not mean that eternal principles change. It is only a sign of Allah's infinite Power that His creation should take so many forms and shapes not only in the material world but in the world of man's thought and expression.

... أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللّهَ عَلَىَ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ ﴿١٠٦﴾

knowest thou not that Allah hath power over all things?

Other versions:

2: 105

Asad ……….but God singles out for Hid Grace whom He wills – for God is limitless in His great bounty.

Pickthall Neither those who disbelieve among the People of the Scripture nor the idolaters love that there should be sent down unto you any good thing from your Lord. But Allah chooseth for His mercy whom He will, and Allah is of infinite bounty.

Transliteration Ma_ yawaddul lazina kafaru_ min ahlil kita_bi wa lal musyrikina ay yunazzala 'alaikum min khairim mir rabbikum, walla_hu yakhtassu bi rahmatihi may yasya_'(u), walla_hu zul fadlil 'azim(i)

[ Ruby’s note: What is conveyed here is “submission” to God’s choice and His wisdom. God can choose anyone in granting revelation, or in other time knowledge, wealth, power, influence, etc. A true believer and God’s servant should have the humility and steadfastness in accepting that with gratitude and grace.

That is why there is no place for “envy” in faith. God can give everything to everyone, or other way around. He is not granting one more because He is giving less to another. He can give both more or less, as He wishes. His knowledge and wisdom is perfect, therefore one should find comfort with His Will.]

[Asad’s note 86: …..The allusion here is to the unwillingness of the Jews and the Christians to admit that revelation could have been bestowed on any community but their own.]

2: 106

Asad Any message which We annul or consign to oblivion We replace with a better or a similar one. [note 87]

Pickthall Such of Our revelations as We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof. Knowest thou not that Allah is Able to do all things?

Transliteration Ma_ nansakh min a_yatin au nunsiha_ na'ti bi khairim minha_ au misliha_, alam ta'lam annalla_ha 'ala_ kulli syai'in qadir(un).

[ Ruby’s note: About ten years ago I helped aroused a serious tempest among the Muslim community in Minneapolis regarding this issue of abrogation. This started when one wrote a piece in the newsletter that in sura Fatiha the Christians and Jews were implicated as the ones who went astray. I wrote a piece all night long to counter that idea. The Quran acknowledges that there could be righteous people coming from the followers of these and other faiths [2:62, and in Maida]. There came a many who said these verses were possibly abrogated. Because of this verse implying abrogation. I reminded them as I remind now that the Quran warned against the people who changes God’s message as the most heinous transgression. God declared that in the Quran who is more unjust than the one who changes His words. This idea of abrogation is then the most outrageous and dangerous proposition if we think it as changes in regard to fundamental ideas. The Quran says there is no change in God’s message. Nothing has been said to Muhammad that has not been said before [implying the essence of a faith].

The idea that I think is conveyed here is abrogation through change of human condition and modes operandi and through advancement of human capacity in terms of capacity and understanding as technology and knowledge progress.

The issue of slavery, alcohol, and the direction of prayer are could be some where the Quran seems to give a progressive command. These are not the essence of faith or truth, mere related to some rituals and human conditions of a people. Then the abrogation could be that there are changes in lifestyles among the earlier generations than now and in the future. The strictest code of food for the earlier revelation is relaxed in the later revelations, etc. But none of these are fundamental of a religion and fundamental to God’s truth. ]

[Asad’s note 87: The principle laid down in this passage – relating to the superseeion of the Biblical dispensation by that of the Quran – has given rise to an erroneous interpretation by many Muslim theologians. The word “ayah” (“message”) occurring in this context is also used to denote a “verse” of the Quran (because every one of these verses contains a message). Taking this restricted meaning of the term “ayah”, some scholars conclude from the above passage that certain verses of the Quran have been “abrogated” by God’s command before the revelation of the Quran was competed. Apart from the fancifulness of this assertion – which calls to mind the image of a human author correcting, on second thought, the proofs of hi s manuscript, deleting one passage and replacing it with another – there does not exist a single reliable Tradition to the effect that the Prophet ever declared a verse of the Quran to have been “abrogated”. At the root of the so-called “doctrine of abrogation” may lie the inability of some of the early commentators to reconcile one Quranic passage with another: a difficulty which was overcome by declaring that one of the verses in question had been “abrogated”. This arbitrary procedure explains also why there is no unanimity whatsoever among the upholders of the “doctrine of abrogation” as to which, and how many, Quran-verses have been affected by it; and, furthermore, as to whether this alleged abrogation implies a total elimination of the verse in question form the context of the Quran, or only a cancellation of the specific ordinance or statement contained in it. In short, the ”doctrine of abrogation” has no basis whatever in historical fact, and must be rejected.

On the other hand, the apparent difficulty in interpreting the above Quranic passage disappears immediately if the term “ayah” is understood, correctly, as “message”, and if we read this verse in conjunction with the preceding one, which states that the Jews and the Christians refuse to accept any revelation which might supersede that of the Bible: for, if read in this way, the abrogation relates to the earlier divine message and not to any part of the Quran itself.]

[ Ali’s note: 107 The word which I have translated by the word "revelations" is Ayat. See C.41 and n. 15. It is not only used for verses of the Qur-an, but in a general sense for God's revelations, as in ii. 39 and for other Signs of God in history or nature, or miracles, as in ii. 61. It has even been used for human signs and tokens of wonder, as, for example, monuments or landmarks built by the ancient people of Ad (xxvi. 128). 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 Muhammad. Some commentators apply it also to the Ayat of the Qur-an. There is nothing derogatory in this if we believe in progressive revelation. In iii. 7 we are told distinctly about the Qur-an, that some of its verses are basic or fundamental, and others are allegorical, and it is mischievous to treat the allegorical verses and follow them (literally). On the other hand, it is absurd to treat such a verse as ii. 115 as if it were abrograted by ii. 144 about the Qibla. We turn to the Qibla, but we do not believe that God is only in one place. He is everywhere. See second note to ii. 144. (2.106)

2: 106

Pickthall Such of Our revelations as We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof. Knowest thou not that Allah is Able to do all things?

Transliteration Ma_ nansakh min a_yatin au nunsiha_ na'ti bi khairim minha_ au misliha_, alam ta'lam annalla_ha 'ala_ kulli syai'in qadir(un).

[Asad note 87: The principle laid down in this passage- relating to the supersession of the Biblical dispensation by that of the Quran – has given rise to an erroneous interpretation by many Muslim theologians. The word ayah [“messssage”] occurring in this context is also used to denote a “verse” of the Quran [because everyone of these verses contains a message]. Taking this restricted meaning of the term ayah, some scholars conclude before the revelation of the Quran was completed. Apart from the fancifulness of this assertion – which calls to mind the image of a human author correcting, on second thought, the proofs of his manuscript, deleting on passage and replacing it with another- there does not exist a single reliable Tradition to the effect that the Prophet ever declare a verse of the Quran to have been “ abrogated”.

At the root of the so-called “doctrine of abrogation” may lie the inability of some of the early commentators to reconcile one Quranic passage with another: a difficulty which was overcome by declaring that one of the verse in question had been “ abrogated”.

……In short the “doctrine of abrogation” has no basis whatsoever in historical fact, and must be rejected…..and if we read this verse in conjunction with the preceding one, which stats that the Jews and the Christians refuse to accept any revelation which might supercede that of the Bible: ..the abrogation relates to the earlier divine messages and not to any part of the Quran itself.]

[Ruby’s note: I agree with Asad in this. Furthermore, these abrogation ideas are only related to the detail affairs of human life and social life as these evolved through time as knowledge and know-how progresses and the modes operandi of a society changes. These abrogation is NOT AT ALL related to the fundamental principles and elements the Quran lays down. That is why the Quran says in 41:43, “Nothing is been said to thee but what was said to all [of God’s] apostles before thy time.” ]

[Ali’s note 107 The word which I have translated by the word "revelations" is Ayat. See C.41 and n. 15. It is not only used for verses of the Qur-an, but in a general sense for God's revelations, as in ii. 39 and for other Signs of God in history or nature, or miracles, as in ii. 61. It has even been used for human signs and tokens of wonder, as, for example, monuments or landmarks built by the ancient people of Ad (xxvi. 128). 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 Muhammad. Some commentators apply it also to the Ayat of the Qur-an. There is nothing derogatory in this if we believe in progressive revelation. In iii. 7 we are told distinctly about the Qur-an, that some of its verses are basic or fundamental, and others are allegorical, and it is mischievous to treat the allegorical verses and follow them (literally). On the other hand, it is absurd to treat such a verse as ii. 115 as if it were abrograted by ii. 144 about the Qibla. We turn to the Qibla, but we do not believe that God is only in one place. He is everywhere. See second note to ii. 144. (2.106) ]

[ also see the issue of Qibla and alcohol ]