On 'abrogation' of Quranic Verses

The Noble Quran makes it clear that every Divine "Hukum" or Commandment that it contains must be accepted because the Quran must be accepted & followed in its entirety. Allah also says in the Quran that His laws never change, that is, whatever laws stated in the Quran must be implemented. There's nothing in the Quran which is 'extra' or 'superfluous' that can be discarded or taken lightly. There's no evidence within the Noble Quran that indicate to us that any of its ayats were "abrogated" nor "abrogated and replaced" by another ayat during revelation. This aspect has been exaggerated by the ulemas and modern critics, each, for reasons of their own.

Let's check the topic on "abrogation" carefully as follows.

The aspect of abrogation is discussed in the Quran briefly only in two verses, which are 2:106 and 16:101-102.

"Such of Our revelations as We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof. Knows you not that Allah is Able to do all things?" 2:106

"And when We put a revelation in place of (another) revelation,--and Allah knows best what He revealeth--they say: Lo! you are but inventing. Most of them know not.
Say: The holy Spirit has revealed it from your Lord with truth, that it may confirm (the faith of) those who believe, and as guidance and good tidings for those who have surrendered (to Allah)."

The mention of abrogation in these verses does not refer to cancelling the already revealed verses of the Quran. It refers to certain laws which formerly forbade certain things for the Jews, but since those forbidden laws were not included in the Quran, therefore what might have formely been forbidden to them was now annulled because the Quran being the final Scripture, it carried the total set of valid laws for implementation which could override certain aspects for former Scriptures. Of course only Allah knows best. But to any perceptive person, this is what abrogation evidently refers to in the Noble Quran.

In other words, the term 'abrogation' in the Quran concerns changing a few minor laws pertaining to society for a certain community, as and when deemed proper by Allah, from Scripture to Scripture. It does not refer to changes of laws within a certain Scripture, and surely not within the Quran itself.

As, for instance, mentioned earlier, the Noble Quran has made lawful to people things that were previously prohibited to a certain community. In Surah Al-An`am, we read: “ Say: I find not in that which is revealed unto me aught prohibited to an eater that he eat thereof, except it be carrion, or blood poured forth, or swineflesh for that verily is foul or the abomination which was immolated to the name of other than Allah. But whoso is compelled (thereto), neither craving nor transgressing, (for him) lo ! your Lord is Forgiving, Merciful. Unto those who are Jews We forbade every animal with claws. And of the oxen and the sheep forbade We unto them the fat thereof save that upon the backs or the entrails, or that which is mixed with the bone. That We awarded them for their rebellion. And lot We verily are Truthful.” (Al-Anam:145-146)

If you read the last few lines of the above verse carefully, Allah mentions that the Jews were formerly forbidden to eat the fat in the meat of beef and sheep. That means, they were only allowed lean meat of these animals. But now, since we Muslims are not forbidden to eat the fat from the meat of these animals, and neither does the Quran mention anywhere that the Jews must continue this former prohibition, therefore it would be valid to conclude that the Jews can now consume all those foods made valid for Muslims in the Noble Quran. The above verse very clearly refers to the same. Thus, that former law forbidding the Jews from eating the fat of meat from oxen and sheep could be referred to as 'abrogated' after the revelation of the Noble Quran.

Abrogation of verses of former Scriptures apparently had a certain purpose, that is, lifting of certain laws (I would think minor laws) at a future time, whenever Allah deemed it proper. Also, it is pre-ordained by the Divine Power, firstly because He is fully aware of the future, and because He neither forgets, nor does He overlook any issue and nor does He err.

Furthermore, there is no verse in the Quran that implements a particular law by cancelling a previous law implemented by a previous verse of the Quran. This is definite. And, there's no evidence nor any reported events nor historical information to suggest this .. not even to consider it as a possibility.

The idea of abrogation of verses from the Quran has been introduced by our scholars and ulemas for the purpose of making the Quran match with the contents of various Hadith rulings. The ulemas refer to abrogation as 'Al-Naskh.' For this reason, the so-called 'evidence' for every 'al-Naskh' or 'abrogation' of a verse claimed by Hadith ulemas comes from nowhere but the Hadith narrations which are further detailed by stories through fatwas.

Another example. The Noble Quran states in clear terms, one hundred lashes as penalty for the crime of adultery. The Noble Quran mentions NOTHING about any sort of abrogation concerning this law. Also, the Quran states NOTHING about different punishments for single and married people in this regard. But the Hadith disagrees. Hadith, in co-ordination with the Old & New Testaments, says that lashes are only for unmarried people guilty of sexual misconduct. Hadith adds that if married individuals commit adultery, the punishment for them is death by stonng. Their standard excuse for this lack of compatibility with the Quran is their false claim that death penalty for adultery in the Quran was "abrogated." But when people bring up such false ideas without any evidence from Allah Almighty, they show their cracks & faults one way or another. The question for our scholars and ulemas here is ---- if any verses were really abrogated, in that case, in accordance with the meaning of the term 'abrogation' which means to discard or to cancel, these "abrogated" verses should then not be implemented at all. In other words, if the 'scholars' and 'ulemas' mean that certain laws of Hadith ensue from "abrogated" verses of the Quran, then those Hadith laws must also be abrogated.

A 15th century Egyptian imam named Jalaluddin Al-Suyuti also known as Ibn al-Kutb (son of books) who was supposed to be religious scholar & teacher wrote in his book 'al-Itqaan' that, "twenty-one verses in the Qur'an were abrogated; some were agreed upon, while others are not. These abrogated verses are in the following Surahs: Al-Baqarah, Al-'Imran, An-Nisa', Al-Ma'idah, Al-Anfal, At-Taubah, An-Nur, Al-Ahzab, Al-Mujadilah, Al-Mumtahinah and Al-Muzzammil." Apart from the fact that no one knows which verses al-Suyuti is referring to (because he never mentioned those verses), there's absolutely NO evidence in the Noble Quran in any of these Surahs that any of the verses have been "abrogated" nor 'abrogated and replaced with another verse.' This means that Allah never states directly nor indirectly with reference to any particular verse nor verses that these have been removed or replaced by Him. Therefore we have NO grounds to make such a presumption of any Quranic verse.

Also, there's no consistency among 'scholars' about their choice of the so-called "abrogated" verses. Different 'ulemas' keep picking different verses they claim to be "abrogated" with not a shred of evidence from the Quran. Despite every careful research, I have found that their only obvious purpose appears to be to defend the legality of various Hadith rulings that do not conform with the Quran - and indeed majority of the Hadith rulings don't.

May Allah (The Highest) grant His guidance to believers to follow the truth and nothing but the truth. Ameen.