Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence by MH kamali

Does this amount to the abrogation of the original

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: of the original ruling. A hypothetical example of this would be to add another unit (rak'ah), or an additional prostration (sajdah) to one or more of the existing obligatory prayers. Another example would be to add to the existing requirement of releasing a slave in expiation for breaking the fast, a new condition that the slave has to be a Muslim. Does this kind of addition amount to the abrogation of the existing law? The ulema have differed on this, but once again the majority have held the view that it does not amount to abrogation as it does not seek to overrule the original text. The Hanafis have held, however, that such an addition does amount to abrogation. It is on this ground that the Hanafis have considered the ruling of the Ahad Hadith on the admissibility of one witness plus a solemn oath by the claimant to be abrogating the Qur'anic text which enacts two witnesses as standard legal proof (al-Baqarah, 2:282). The abrogation, however, does not occur, not because the Hanafis consider the new addition to be immaterial, but because the Ahad cannot repeal the Mutawatir of the Qur'an. [38. Amidi, Ihkam, III,170; Hitu, Wajiz, p.256.] The majority opinion does not regard this to be a case for abrogation. For the Qur'anic text on the requirement of two witnesses does not preclude the possibility of proof by other methods. Since the original Qur'anic text does not impose an obligatory command, it leaves open the possibility of recourse to alternative methods of proof. The Argument Against Naskh [39. Amidi, Ihkam, III, 175; Hitu, Wajiz, p. 257.] Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence ~ Kamali 150 As already stated, the ulema are not unanimous over the occurrence of naskh in the Qur'an. While alSuyuti has claimed, in his Itqan fi `Ulum al-Qur'an, twenty-one instances of naskh in the Qur'an, Shah Wali Allah (d. 1762) has only retained five of al-Suyuti's twenty-one cases as genuine, stating that the rest can all be reconciled. [40. Subhi al-Salih (Mabahith, p.280) records the view that only ten of al-Suyuti's twenty-one instances of naskh in the Quran are genuine and that all the rest can be reconciled.] Another scholar, Abu Muslim al-1sfahani (d. 934) has, on the other hand, denied the incidence of abrogation in the Qur'an altogether. 110.] [41. Abu Zahrah, Usul, p.155; Denffer, 'Ulum, p. The majority of ulema have nevertheless acknowledged the incidence of naskh in the Qur'an on the authority of the Qur'an itself. This is the conclusion that the majority have drawn from the relevant Qur'anic passages. However, it will be noted that the counter-argument is also based on the same Qur'anic passages which have been quoted in support of naskh. The following two ayat need to be quoted again: None of our revelations do We abrogate nor cause to be forgotten unless We substitute for them something better or similar [ma nansakh min ayatin aw nunsiha na'ti bikhayrin minha aw mithliha] (al-Baqarah, 2:106). Elsewhere we read in sura al-Nahl (16:106): When We substitute one revelation for another, and God knows best...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online