collectionscanada.gc.cacollectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/thesescanada/vol1/qmm/tc-qmm-3329… · •...
TRANSCRIPT
INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscnpt has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films
the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
The quallty of th.. reproduction is depend.nt upon the quallty of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print. colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs. print bleedthrough. substandard margins. and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
ln the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. AJso. if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
OversiZe materials (e.g., maps, drawings. charts) are reproduced by
seetioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing
trom left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
ProOuest Information and Leaming300 North Zeeb Raad, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346 USA
800.521-0600
NOTE TO USERS
Page (s) not included in the original manuscript isunavailable trom the author or university. The
manuscript was microfilmed as received.
17
This reproduction is the best copy available.
•
•
SHAFI'I'S THEORY OF NASKHAND
ITS INFLUENCE ON THE ~ULUMAL-QUR'AN
KUSMANA
A thesissubmitted ta the Fa.culty of Gmdua.te Studies and Resea.rch
in pa.rti~ fulfillment of the requirements forthe degree of~stttof Arts
Institute of Islamic StudiesMcGill University, Montreal
2000
1+1 National LibnIIyof Canada
~nationaledu Canada
~and Acquilitions et. . . Services services bibIographiques
=-v~ ser.t 315. ,..VJeIiI__e.a- ON K1A 0N4 0Iawa ON K1A 0N4c..da c..da
The author bas granted a nonexclusive licence aIloWÎDg theNational Library ofCauada tareproduce, 10an, distnbute or sencopies oftbis thesis in microform,paper or electrODÎc formats.
The author retains ownership ofthecopyright in tbis thesis. Neither thethesis Dor substantial extracts from itmay be printed or otherwisereproduced without the author'spermission.
L'auteur a accordé une licence nonexclusive pemlettaDt à laBibliothèque Datiooale du Canada dereproduire, prêter, distribuer ouvendre des copies de cette thèse sousla forme de microfiche/film, dereproduction sur papier ou S1U' formatélectronique.
L'auteur conserve la propriété dudroit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse.Ni la thèse Di des exbBa"ts substantielsde celle-ci ne doivent être imprimésou autrement reproduits sans sonautorisation.
0-612-70603-6
Canadl
• AuthorTideDepartmentDegree
ABSTRAcr
: Kusmana: Shifi'i's Theo!)' ofNasJUJ and lts Influence on the Uâim al-Qur'a": Institute of Islamic Studïes: Mastet of Arts (M.A.)
•
•
The present thesis examines Shi6.Zi's thec!)' of ntJ.I1UJ and its influence on the 'uliim al-
Qur'an. The thesis looks at !Wo types of sources: internai and extcmal. Intcmally, the
discussion focuses on the ongins of 1IIlS1eh, the background and construction of Shifi'i's
theoq of 1IQsIUJ, tracing the ingredients of Shiti~'s thought in general and of bis theoty of
naslUJ in particular. Having esmblished Shifi~'s theory of nasJeh, the tbesis goes on ta examine
it extemallybyconsidetingShifi.i.sinfluenceonsixautborsof!lQSkhbooks(NaI..qis.sal-
1L:i:siA:h, Ibn al-'Ati'iqi's a/-Nisikh 1Va al-Mtl1I.J1ÏJ:Ji) and bis impact on the e.~egesis of eight
Qut'anic vetSes -Q.2: 106, Q. 22: 52, Q. 45: 29, Q. 7: 154, Q. 16: 101, Q. 13: 39, Q.4: 160,
and Q. 3: 7, discussed by si.~ authors of ta/sJr (faban's fQllli' al-.,laffif's AJ;1ei1ll al-
Qur'a-", Zamakhshan's aJ-KashshQ[, Ibn al-Jawii's ZafJ al-Manr, QU$bl's a/-JQmi' fj .A1Iktï1ll a/-
Qur'a;" and Su~'s al-Durral-Mtmthùl).
This thesis ugues that despite its marginality in Shifi~ OWQ rime and throughout the
ointh cennuy in general, bis theory of nasleh playcd a significant raIe in the process al
elaboating and sysœmatizing the conceptual. discOUlSC on nasJUJ in Qur'inic studies. Support
for this assertion is found in the direct quotation of Shifi'i's view by the authors discussed
herein, as well as by inference through a comparative analysis of tbeir opinion. Neverthe1ess,
this intluence W3S not carried over into the domain of e:œgesis.
• 11
RÉSUMÉ
AuteurTitreDépartementDiplôme
:Kusmana: La théorie du 1fIIj/W de ShifiZi et S011 influence sur les 'U/iim al-Qur'a-".: Institut des Études Islamiques: Maîtrise ès Arts.
•
•
Ce présent mémoire explore la théorie du naskh de Shifi'ï ainsi que son influence sur
les '(T/iim aJ-QlIT'in. La recherche couvre deu."C: sources intemes et e.'ttemes; au plan Ïnteme, le
débat se concentre sm les origines du 1f/JS1eh, le contexte ainsi que la struetUre de la théorie
Shifi~te du naslUJ, d'où l'auteur retrace les éléments de la pensée Sbifi'ite en génétal et son
NlSkh en particulier. Ayant établi la théorie shafi'ite du ItIlSJeh, l'auteur poursuit sur la partie
externe où il retrace l'influence shafi'ite de sÎ."< auteurs d'ouvnges portant sur le 1IIJSkh dont le
a/-NQsikh 1JIQ a/-MIJ1IS1I7JJ d'Na1:).l)is, le al-Ïri4J; de Makk1, le Nfl1IIisikh aI-Qllr'an d'Ibn al-Jaw2i,
le Jafipat a/-Rmikh de Shu'lah ainsi que le tJl-Nisikh JJI(J ai-MmtszlJeh de Ibn al-'Ata'iq"i. De plus,
huit versets qurinîques- Q. 2: 106, Q. 22: 52, Q. 45: 29, Q. 7: 154, Q. 16: 101, Q. 13: 39, Q.
4: 160 et Q. 3: 7- étudiés par si~ auteurs de ttifm, particulièrement lefimi' al-B'!]ân de raban,
le Ableàm aI-QItr'in de J~,~, le a/-Kashshifde Zamakhshaà, le zadai-MaJlrd'Ibn al-Jawzl, le m-
]ami' liAl;Jeam al-Qllr'in de Qutfllbl et enfin, le a/-D,I11' a/-Mtmtl»/rde Suyii~
Cette étude soutient qu'en dépit de sa marginalité durant le neuvième siècle, la théorie
sha&lïte du NJSJ:IJ a joué un rôle significatif dans le processus d'élaboration et de systématisation
du discours du 1I4Skh au sein des études quriniques. Les éléments qui soutiennent cette
hypothèse peuvent êtIe vérifiés soit grâce à une citation directe des auteurs mentionnés et qui
se rappottent aux vues de Shi6.z-1, ou soit à txavers une analyse compatative des opinions de ces
demiers. Néanmoins, cette influence ne s'étendait pas au domaine de l'exégèse.
iü
• CONTENTS
Abstraet .l
Résumé uContents ID
Acknowledgment vNote on Transliteration vuAbbrev~tion viiiINTRODUCllON 1
lfF Chapter 1TIlEOlŒ.TICAL OVEllVlE\V 9A. TFXr AND CONTFn 9
1. NasiiJ and its Related Tenns 10a. ~2: 106 11b. ~22: 52 12c. Q:.45: 29 13d.~ 7: 154 13
2. Other Terms Relate<! to the Disœssion of NmJJ 14
• a.~ 16: 101 14b.~ 13: 39 15c. Q:. 4: 160 16ci Q.3~ 7 16
B. mE UNGUIS11C SlGNlFlCANCE OF 11Œ WORD NA.fJ(}[ 171. Na.rl/z as N6J/{Copying 182. NMÎll as Tl/zGlfhplactment 193.N~ as /ht.ilor J,;J~ Abrogation 19
C. NAfKHAS ACONCEPTIIAL TERM 221. AJ aPbenomenon 222. Tbeory 24
a. Definition 24b. Conditions for N3SilJ 26c. Modes ofN~ 27d. Types of NasiiJ 28
~ Cha.ftC!-nSHAFl'I AND niEnmOllYOF NASKH 32A. NASKHlTS GENESIS UP TO SHAFrI'S TIME 32B. BACKGROUND 40
• 1. Life aud Eduation 402. Works, Thought and Methodology 46
iv
a. Works 46• b. Thought and Mcthodology 48i. Thought 48Ü. Methodology 50
c. SHAFI'Ï'S CONSTRUcnON OF THE lHEORYOF NASKH 551. Construction 5S
a. & aPhenomenon 55b. Thcory 57
2. Construction of NMih in Context 63
~ ChaptcrmTHE INFLUENCE OF SHAFI'fS TIŒORY OF NASKHIN nm 1fLUMAUlURWI 72
A. THE INFLUENCE OF SHAFfrs lHEORYOF NASKHIN 1RE SIXWORKS 721. & a Pbenomenon 742. Theory 78
a. Definition 78b. Conditions for Na.rilJ 83c. ModesofNSIJ 86
• d. Types ofNaskh 87
B. NASKHIN THE EXEGETICAL TREATISES 901. HasXh and its Related Terms 90
a. Q:. 2: 106 90b. ~22: 52 94c. Q:. 45; 29 96d. ~7: 154 98
2. Other Terms Related te the Discussion of NmiJ 99a.~ 16: 101 99b. Q:.13: 39 102c. Q:. 4: 160 103d. Q:. 3: 7 104
l'F Chapter IVCONCLUSION 106
BIBUOGRAPHY 112
•
•
•
•
v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
During the two yeats of my graduate studies at the Instirute of Islamic Studies,
McGill University Montreal, professon, institutions, and friends gave me the henefit of their
help. 1 would first of a11 Iike ta express my genuine gratitude to O1y academic advisar and
thesis supervisor, Prof. Wae1 B. Hallaq, who encouraged and assisted me in the pursuit of
scholarship. 1 am aIso grateful to him for his constructive criricism and patience in guiding
this thesis ta its completioo..
1 would like also to thank my other professors for their encouragement: Prof. A.
Oner Turgay, Prof. H.M. Federspiel, Prof. Issa J. Baullata, Prof. Nathalie Polzet, and Prof.
Faisal Ismail Thanks are aIso due to the State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN) Ciputat
Jakarta, CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency), and the lnstitute of Is1amic
Studïes for making this cow:se of study possible.
1 am grateful for the support ofmy Indonesian friends at the Institute dwing my stay
in Montreal. 1 would aIso like to thank the staff of the Islamic Srudies Ltbrary; especially
Sa1wa Fetahian and Wayne St. Thomas, who assisted me in obtaining sources for my thesis.
The efforts ofSteve Millier, who patiently helped me in editing the language of ear1ier dnfts
of this thesis into readable English, were very much appœciated as weIL
1 would like to express my appreciation to my parents Okîng Azhuri and Siti
Habsyah and my parents -ïn- law Abu Bakar Chafid and Dra. Ismawati MA. who always
supported and prayed for my academic success. My wann gratitude is also due to my
brothers and sistets Zeni N urdin, Pendi Supendi, Rani Hanifah, Syam Agus Solihin, Bubung
Lukman Hakim, Anton Firmansyah, Ina Nabila, Dani YusufAkbar and Asriati.
•
•
•
vi
Last but not least, 1 am indebted ta my beloved wife, Awa1ia Rahma, who has always
given me her wonderful support, and encouragement during my studies. Without her
patience, careful reading and criticism, the task of wating this thesis could never have been
accomplished. It is ta her that this thesis is humbly dedicated.
Montreal, May 2000
Kusmana
•vii
NOTE ON TRANSUTERATION
The system of transliteràtion of .i\mbic words and ruunes applied in mis thesis i5 that
used by the Institute of Islamic Studies McGill University. The table of
transliteration is olS follows:
b =y z =j f =Jt =~ 5 =rJ q =Jth =~ sh =,.j k =.!l
=~ ~ =~ l =Jl} =c 4 =~ ln =j
• kh =c. ~ =,1, n =0
d =~~ =J:. h =~
dh =~ =t. w =.Jr =.) gh =t =y '-!
Short : a = ~ 1 :: :-
Long - 1. 11 = ::c./
u = ~
-u = .J
•Diphthong : 20y =Vi; aw = .J 1
Nisba adjective: iyy = ~
•
•
•
AJISSBSOASElERIS!]MESJAOSIL]lv1WOEMIWSI
ABBREVIATION
Tht Anltn&ll7l Jo1lT11ll1 ofIslmnit Sfllam Saen&esB.Dtti71 oftht SdJooi ofOri,ntol tmdAfrit1J71 StNœt.iBnryl/opOte6t:l ofI.sIamThe Enqdopttitl of&litJo71I.rI4mi&ShtthUInttr1llltio7ltll]otmIfJ1 ofl.!itiJ/t Eo.st SbllJitS
] D1m1IJ/ ofth, Amm&ll71 Orit1lta/Soa~Law Lilmny ]fJ1I1'NJIJ.Y1N.rtim WorldTht OxfordBn9UoptriIJ ofth, MOMm Islami, WorldStNriitJ I.r/omÙIJ
vili
•
•
•
INTRODUCTION
Ever sinee the reve1ation of the Qur'an, Muslims have been engaged in an ongoing
effort ta comprehend and live in aceordance with its message. Shordy after the death of the
Prophet MlÙ)ammad in 11 A.H./632 A.D, the Qw:'an was compiled by thase of bis
Companions who had preserved it. The urgent need ta de6ne the sources of their religion
led Muslims to develop certain Methodologies to understand them. One of the main
problems the earliest generation faced in doing so was their diseovety of many
inconsistencies either in the F;laJlth or the Qut'in. They developed a device called naskh
(abrogation) ta resolve these paradoxes.1 Muslim scholars traeed this tenn back to its
traditional Arabie usage and its funetion in the Qur'in. There are essentially three meaniogs
assigned to the tem1 in Arabie usage: Ittlf/' (transcription), !Jalla ma1}aUahll (supersession or
replacement), and iza?a or ib.ta7 (suppression or abrogation).2 Burton notes mat the first and
third of tbese three usages ean be round in the Qur'in: /rrm.smptioll in Q. 45: 29; and
mppressiOll in Q. 2: 106, and Q. 22: 52. The second meaning was rare1y encountered; indeed,
according to Abu Muqammad Maklà ibn Ab1 'ralib al.Qaysl (d. 437 A.H./l046 A.D.), it is
Qot even applicable to the Qut'in due ta the fact that its v~es do Qat transcnbe one
1 John Bmten, ed., AIIIÎ VINiJ a/-Qàsittt b. saUam~ K. fli-NisiIdJ DIQ-!-mmuilUJ (Cambridge:E.l.W. Gibb Memorial, 1987), p. 2
z AbüM~d Makki ibn Abi ralib al-Qaysi, aI-fda7; li Nisiü (JJ-QJtr'in JI~ MansHJehihi ft
MiI'rifrJt u.mJihi JWl WJtiIiifai-Nis fihi" ed. AJ,mad aasan Fu4it cred~ Dir al-Manirah, 1986), pp. 407-54; Shams a1·0in Mulpammad ibn 'Utbmin ibn 'Ali al-Mirdïni al-Sbifirl, a/-AJjtmt ai-Zihirit 'aIQ
FfaJ/A!fit a/-Waraqil, ed. 'Abd al-Kaàm 'Ali ibn Mubammad a1·Namlah (Cairo: Dir al-~rœyn Iial-1"iba'ah, 1994), p. 182; Burton, AbN Ubaid a/-Qi.riJ1I b. SaU4mst p. 1; and Rü1ji al-Ba'labaki, alMaa'riJ: ATtlIm-E1'l1i.r1J Didioll4lJ (Beirut: Dir al·cnm li al-Maliyin, 1994), p. 1169.
•
•
•
2
another.l Those most concemed with this application in the early period of Islam were the
Hpl7sts (Muslim legal theorists). They identified three elements in 1IaslUr. the later, abrogating
te.~ (the na.rileh); the earlier, abrogated text (the ma1lSÜkh); and the process of abrogation
itself (nt1skh).~
Western scbolars are generally of the opinion that the oldest surviving documents
of Islamic litenture cao only be traeed te the second half of th:: second century Hijra, with
the exception of the Qut'in.5 According ta Schacht, schools of.ftqh emerged in the $jaz,
Iraq, and Syèa oaly in the second and third centuries.6 Some schools survived while othetS
did note Among those that clid survive was the Shifi'Îte ",adhh"b, named aftu MuI}.ammad
ibn Idns al-Shafi'i (150-204 A.H./767-820 A.D.). In his a/-Risila, Shifïfi constructed ((an
unprecedented synthesis" of reasOQ and reve1ation, composed of the Qur'in and Sunna, and
foan ulated a methodology (11/117 aI-:fiqh) which enabled scholars te deduce Islamic 1aw &om
Islamic sources. Althougb the originality of bis achicvement has been criticized, bis
contribution has been widelyacknowledged.7
J~ a/-.lt/ill. p. 45.
4 Burton,Abi Ulk:tid a/-QisitR b. SiIIJDn,'s. pp. 2-3.
5 See for example Bw:ton, Tht Saums ofblanti& Law: [sItJmiç TIJ,tris ofAImgQ/ÛJ1I (EdinbUEgh:Edinburgh Univemty Pœss, 1990), p. vii, or Joseph Sch2cht, T1H 0ri,1IS ofM1tlHmtmIltlml ]IIrispTJllinu:t(Oxford: Clan:ndon Press, 1950), pp. 21-34.
6 Schacht, Thl Ori~ pp. 21-32.
7 Wesrem scholars such as Schacht, and N.J. Coulson accept SbifiTs mIe as the 6rst ta
systemarizefi'llJ. Sch2cht, TIH Orip, pp. 6-10; NJ. Coulson, A HistIJ'Y al 1sItltIti& z..a, (Edinbu%gb:Edinb~ 1978). Wael Hallaq ÎS, OB the other han~ rather aitical of dûs opinion. He sees Shifi~'s
notion of H.pÎ/ a/-fttJb as having been adopœd only aCter the inœDectua1 c1imaœ became more &.vorablete it one centu%y larer. Nevertheless, he con6ans that Shafi'i was the 6tst in tem1S of synthetic andœconciliatory opinion. Hallaq, ''Wu al-Shifili the Muter Atthiteet of Is1amic Jurisprudence?"I]MES 25 (1993). pp. 600-1; Mehmet Paçaci, "'The Raie of Subject (MJj1llhü/) in a1-shi5~'s
Methodology: A Hermeneutic Approach," A]1SS 14 no. 3 (1997), footnote no. 4. p. 12.
•
•
•
3
Among the themes cliscussed in a/-Risa7a is the concept of 1IIJSkh, a tapic that has
rcceived much attention from Islamic scholats. For example, Zatkaslii, in bis af-Burhin Ji
7JIrïm (J/QI/ra", refers to aine authotS on the tapie of a/-"ag/eh and a/-11Ian.rüJeh: Qatida ibn
Di'amah al-SadüSl, Abü 'Ubayd al-Qisim ibn Sallim, Abü Dawiid al-Sijistin"i, Abü ]a'far al-
Na1}1}as, Hibat Allih ibn Sallim al-Qw, Ibn 'ArabI, Ibn al-Jaw~ Ibn al-Auban, and Maldà.1
i\ccording to Richard Bell, however, the concept has mosdy been exarn;ned from the
perspective of law, and not trom that of literaty criticism.9 This may be due ta the
implications tbat nasleh has for law, which must be detived from the revealed sources, the
Qur'an and fJ.mIlth. One of the first western scholars te respond to Bell's statements was
John Wansbrougb. In two of his works, Q1ir'ink Stlldiu: Sourres and Melhods of S,7iptNra/
lllferpntation (197ï), and The S«lI:rritnI MilietJ: Conte1lt and Composition ~fIs/amiç Salvation History
(1978), Wansbrough employs a literary approach in c,"(am;ning the history of the soutees and
the methods ofMuslim scriptural intetpreration. Using a textual analysis,10 he concludes that
fluSkiJ is "an apparatus of self couection/abrogation" in Muslim scripture,l1 and identifies
Shifi~'s a/-Ris4h as "the earliest treatment of the subject [naskh]."u
• Badr al-Oin MW:wnmad ibn 'Abd Allih al-Zark,sbÏ, a/-BNrhitf jfU. a/-QNr'in, vol. 2(Beirut: Dü al-Kutuo al-'Ilmiyya, 1988), pp. 33-4.
9 Richud Bell, IntroriMdion tIJ th, Qur'in (Edinbuqh: Edinburgh University Press, 1954), pp.99-100; W. Montgomely Watt, &//'s InJ1rJ4Maion /IJ JlHQtIr'iR (Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univefsity Press,1977), pp. 88-9.
10 John Wansbrough, Qur'illiç SIm/ils: Soums fl1IIi M,lhods of Smptlmz/ [lIInpntlltio-n (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1977) and Th, Statnitm Mi/ini: ConJtnt and ûmp0.riti01l of Islami& SalualionHis/D1J (Oxfotd: Oxford Univeaity PIeSS, 1978).
Il Wansbro~Th, S,dm'ÏlJn, p. 58.
u Wansbro~Q1tr_Stl/dits. p. 193 (the brackets are mine).
•
•
•
4
Few Western writea, on the other band, have paid much attention to a/-nQsikh lVQ
ul-ma1tsiikIJ.1J Those who have, according ta Burton,14 reveal an inadequate appreciation of
the Muslim discussion on 1UlS/eh. He refers to bis research on 1IIlI/eh as the first endeavor by a
Westem wtÎte! to e.'"<amine this subjeet in detail. 15 Burton bas in faet written and edited at
least three books on IItlSkh: The CO/lldioll of tIM Qur'all (1977), Abti V"'lJd al.f2tiri", b. SaDam's
[(j'aD al-Nisikh lVQ al-Mtnmlleh (1987), and The SOIlrCtS of Islamic !.A:v: Islamic Theories of
Abrogation (1990). The fiat work discusses the collection of the Qut'in and its implications
for the development of the Islamic sciences, particularly UIÜI al-ftgh. There he points out that
the theory of al-n4rikh 1IIfl fll-I1Itl1U1Î1eh first em~d during the period when the text of the
Qur'in was gathered together. He tries to determine ''whether and how these upïlal-ftt.Jh may
even have fashioned part of that Islamic Tradi.tio~ in particular, the part that recounts the
history of the collection of the Qurinic te).~."16 The second work is an edition of, and
commenwy on, Abü 'Ubayd's KiIQb a/-Nisileh 11111 aI- Ma"süleh, a work by a third-century
Muslim. scholar. In contrast ta the fitst book, the second reviews the concept of IIQs!eJJ in the
field of ta/sir (Qur'inic exegesis). The thint of Burton's works is the most comprehensive of
13 Severa! names deserve te he roentioned bere: Emest Hahn, "Sir Sayyid~ Kban's theControvetsy Ovef Abrogation (m the Qm'in): An. Annotated TcansJation:' in MW 64 (1974), pp.124-33. David Powers who wroœ two articles: "On the Abroption of the Bequest Verses," Al'llbiu29 (1982), pp. 246-95 and ''The Exegetial Gente ~asikh al-Quran wa Mansiïkhuhu.," in AppfTJQchutIJ th, HiJtIn:J oftIH l11lerfJ"'11l1i'" tfthIQtlr~ ed. Andrew Rippin (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), pp.117-38; Rippin birmelf. author of 'cAl-Zuhà, Naskh al-Quèin and the Problem of Eady TafSirTens," in BSOAS 47 (1984), pp. 2243, and DanielB~ "The Triumph of Saiptunlism: theDocuine ofNIJSJùJ and Its Modem Critics," in Th, Shapinz '.fan Amtriœn u/tmtir Dûtttllf'St: A MI1JIDriIJ//(J F~1nr Rah",~ eds. Earl H. Waugh and Fœderick Mo Deony (Atlanta: SchoWs Press, 1998), pp.49-66.
14 Burton is a Senior Leaurer in habic in the University ofSt. Andrews.
15 Burton, Th, SQ1IT&IS, p. iL
16Bu~ Tht CoUlaio" ofIhtQNr'itz (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), p. 6.
e
e
e.
s
an bis writings on this subject. In it, he e.'Ca1DÏnes 1IaSJeh as a source of Islamic hw in great
detail, covering theories of IIarleh in the Qur'in as well as in the SII7I1Itl.
Burto~ however, f3ils in the end to answer Be11's critique since he focuses bis
discussion of "mle/; on the field of 1I.sü/ a/-fitlh. Accordingly, he looks at Shifi'i's tbeoty of
nasleh from the sole perspective ofIslamic law. To remedy this deficiency at least in part, and
to extend the scope of the discussion of 1IIJS1W, wc propose ta examine Sh'ifi'i's influence
from the standpoint of Quèanic hermeneutics,17 which is a Iitetary-aitical approach.lI The
reasons for attempbng such a study are twofold: fitst, from the penpective of cua-ent
research~ and second, trom the point of view of the chaneteristic of Shâfi'i's works,
especial1y, in this case, bis a/-RirIl7a. Regarding the first focus of mis study, we refer to the
scholatship of Burton, MUftcû'i Zayd~ Wansbrougb and HaIlaq, of whom the first three
regard Shafili~s watt on 1IIIS1t:JJ ta be the earliest attempt at elaborating the field, while the last,
Hallaq, who examines the influence of shiti'i's warks in general, adopts a more aitiC3l
stance. Their views will constitute the point of depattu.re for our research, which will either
confirm or rejea them as the case may he. Burton in partic:ular cansidea Shifi'i's theoty of
naskh ta be "an intega1 aspect of the divine revelatory aetivity, motivated by a divine desire
17 Heaneneutics is a field of stUdy 1niti2l1y deve10ped for the inteq'retation of the Bible, butit is nowadays as much concemed with "the ptoblem of how te give meaning ta a cultul21 produet.nA hetmeneutic approach examines not only ''what something means simply from the thù1g itself,"but also explicates C'the contest in which it wu proèuced and in wbic:h we aœ now trying te makesense of it." See ADan G. Johnson,. TIH B,,"-U DïditJ"IIIY t( JIdD!IJgy: A USIf''.r GltiM tIJ SIdDI4!PtJi14ng7ftJgr, (Malden: Blac:kweD., 1977), p. 129.
18Literaty c:ritic:ism is a tcc:hnical teml œferring ta a process of a11alysis, interptetati~ andevaluation ofworks ofliteutuœ in Jjght ofexisting standards of tastc. or with the purpose of aeatingnew standards. The recent trend in this approac:h covetS the points of vicw of semiotics,heaneneutics, Manism, feminiSJ1\, and strueturalism. Liœaq c::r:iticism studies a wide area, mainly ofa cultural na~ covering not only ''traditional canon of genres (pla~ I1OV~~ short stoties,ete.)," but also "fedeaœ myths. autebiopphies, science 6ction, pbùosophical tœatises. historicalchronicles, and other forms of writings.ft See Hugh J. Silveanan, TlXb«1itiu bllMm Hmlllllllltia amiD'fDllStrHdÏOll (New York and Landau: Routledge, 1994), p.74.
•
•
•
6
to alleviate the burdens He had placed upon men."I. H~ even regards Shifili as "the author
of the earliest attempt ta regulatise appeals to the principle of 1UIS1eh." Like Burton,M~~
Zayd contends that Shafi'i was the founder of the scie!1ce of naskh.'JD According to him,
although Shifi'i did not fomlulate a comprehensive definition of nasleh, as 18 evident &om
the passages in which he discusses the topic, Zayd concludes that Shafi'i was aware of the
basic principle of 1I4.I/eh, i.e., abrogatillg a m/illg I!J anot!J". f'11611g nvtellerJ ill Il chrollologiœ/orrkr. To
support bis theory, Zayd points ta six post-Shiii'i scholars who followed in Shifi'i's
footsteps and perfeetcd bis detinition of 1lIJJk/r. Tabaà (d. 310 A.H./921 A.D.), Ibn Hi1il (d.
520 AIL/1124 AD.), Ibn al-Jawz1 (d 597 A.H./1201 AD.), Ibn al-lJijib (d 646 A.H./1248
A.D.), Sbitibl (d. 790 A.H./1388 A.D.), and Mardm:U Wansbrough tao adopts tbis
positi01l as we mentioned above.
On the othet hmd, Hallaq asserts that Shifi'i's aJ-Rùa~ in which he elaborated bis
theory of naskh, was marginal in its influence during the ninth century, and only began to
atttact attention at the end of the nioth century and the beginning of the œnth. Ibn Surayj (d.
306 A.H./9IS A.D.), Sayrafi (d. 329 A.H./942 A.D.), and Qaffal (d. 335 A.H./948 A.D.)
provided the impetus behind Shifi)'s proposal of the metbodology of Islamic jurisprudence
and were responsible for making it more influenti.a1 and relevant.n This observation foans
one of the premises for our ugument regarding Shifi'i's influence on the theoq of lIJlS1UJ in
19B~ TlH S'16R.S~ p. 32.
zoM~ Zayd, fll-N~JiaJ..QJJr'a fll-KatinI: DWsa TtISlm....iIJa, TinJUJ!1Ja, NfllJdi.zytI (Beirut:Dit al-F~ 1971)~p. 91.
11 Ibid.~ pp. 91-4.
~ HaUaq, "Wu al-Sbi6rl," pp. 600-1.
•
•
•
7
Qurinic studies, i.e., that it pualleled bis impact on 11}117 aJ-fùJh in coming a centmy after the
appeannce ofal-Rira7ll.
With regard ta the second Cocus, there are a number of issues that necessitate
further: examinatiofl. Firsdy, in bis book U.ml aJ-Taf.rlr 1lJQQa1IIi'iduh, Khilid 'Abd al-Ra1}min
al-Akk argues that the deve10pment of the principles of t'!lm and those of Hpl7 al-ftqh
paaJleled one another, since they both dealt with the same themes.23 One such theme was (JI-
1IIisi1tJJ wa al-lIIaJISÜkh. While other scholus see ShifiZi as a contnbutor to the development of
llpi/a/1i'lh, al-Akk, on the other hand, assumes that bis aJ-Risi/a was aiso a contribution te
the field of1I,mlai-ltJjslr. He states:
Shifi'i wrote Q/·Risa7a, discussing the f2Jir'an, the S1I1I1ItZ, and other related themes like 01MsiIUJ MI a/-1flI/1ISNIUJ, al- -am. 'RI aI-IUJ~J aI-nngllla/ JI1Q a/-,mtfQHlli, and a/-mllf' DIQ oI-nlJ1.rJ. Thesethemes are discussed in ~ fll-jt{h and upÏ/ a/-lI:(nr. This point shows the close relationbetween them Imam al-JUWilJUÏ says in bis SIuIr6 fll.Ri.sQla, rsbifi~ WU not preceded byanyone e1se in waring and undemanding the ptinciples of tbese sciences.' In faer, theprinciples of these sciences weœ not consttueted until Shifi'i came fonvard ta UDÏte them.24
Second1y, ai-lIIlSkiJ is a ''vaIid hemleneutical insttument" for understanding the sources of the
Islamic sciences. lts usefulness lies in its potential to resolve sources considered to be in
dispute.25 Thirdly, for the reason that the concept is a heaneneutical device, it would be
more appropriate to discuss it and its relation to ~1Mm a/-Qurin from the perspective of
hermeneutics.
In taking a hermeneutical approach we will draw upon Emilio Benits concept of
historical interpretationt i.e., reconsttuetive interpretation. From this perspective, sources are
24 Ibid., p. 35.
~ Hallaq, A HirtD1y ofIslantic Legal Th,oriu: An 11llTrHlMctiDn If) Stmni U.sil a/-Fiqh (Cambridge:Cambridge University Pœss, 1997), pp. 68-74.
•
•
•
8
differentiated into two groups: traces or remn ants, and representative material.Z6
Accordingly, three types of presentation - descriptive, chronological and representative-
will be employed The descriptive approach will be used when we survey the theoty of
IIflS!eh in gen~ and discuss Shifi'i's background and theoty of 1II.lS1t:h. Wc will on the other
band adopt a chronologiC2l approach when we ttaee the origins of shiii'i's NJSIeh. Lasdy, we
will make use of representative presentation when we scrutinize bis influence on larer books
on naskh as well as exegetical works. Through an analysis of tbese factors wc will not oo1y
restore the concept to its particular histoncal context, but also enlarge the notion by situating
it witbin the history of 'uliim aJ-Qur'itt. By doing so, we hopc to be able to desc:ribe Shafi'i's
notion of II11S/UJ and bis contribution to the 'u/Nm aJ-Qur'in.
Following this introduetio~ the fùst chapter provides a theoretica1. measurement in
which we discuss a theoretical overview of NlJ/eh. The second chapter attempts to trace the
ongins of 1UlS1tJJ, and te show the relation between Shifi~'s thought and bis thcoq of IIflS/eh.
In 50 doing, wc preface this chapter with a discussion of the development of flasleh prior to
ShifiZi's rime and then discuss bis background, bis concept of /k1sJ:h and our assessment on
it. In the third chapter wc will identify bis contribution to the field of )J5Î1Il aJQ~a",
especially in the arca of books on naslt.h and exegetical wotks. Ftnally, in the conclusion, we
will review the results of our analysis and that of other scholars regarding Sh'ifi~'s
contribution to 'uliim III-Qur'ill.
~ Josef BIàcher, ÛIde1ltptmJt.:J HmMtlfltlia: H".."ntlia as M,/hor/, PbillJsupl!J ad Critiq.(London: Routledge & Kegan~~ 1980). p. 42
•
•
•
9
CHAPTEIlI
nœORETICAL OVERVIEW
This chapttt deals with the theoretical. dimension of nasle.h, discussing the tetm Cm an
of ies \"anous foons) fram the standpoints of linguistic usage, litenry context and conceptual
framework. These three themes will provide a theoretical foundation upon which the
following chapters will he based, where we will e.xplore the nature, scope and boundaries of
the genre.
A. Text and Context
ln order to set the stage for our discussion, we will fint present the Qurinic
pas$ages which refer ta naskh, and examine them in the light of three classic works on the
occasions of revelation: Wiqidi's Asbib aJ-Nu~41 WidiZi's al-J'iJ}lJ) al-MHslttld min Asba'} a/-
NIJ~;4'!. and Suyü~s LMba-" aL-Nuqu7jiAsba'b aJ-Nu~ïi.3 These wotks will enable us to provide
a context for the usage of the tam and its derivations, and to undersand how lIQSkh was
understood to operate from a Ver{ early period in Islamic thought.
1 AbÜ~-ijasan 'Ali ibn Al)mad al-WiI}.ic& al-N"lSibWï (d. 468 A.H'/1076 AD.), Arbol aiNIl!(!ïl (BeiNt: Dir al-Kutub al-cnmiyya, 1986).
'!. Muqbil ibn Hidi al-Wâdira, a/-StJIJr'9 oi-MltS1l1lti l1tÎ1I Arbib al-N~I (Wür5e1en: Où al-NUr,1405/1984).
J Jalil al-Dïn 'Abd aI-1W)min al-SuyÜ!i (849-911 A.H./1445-150S AD.), a Shifi~te, wu aQm'inic scholar. He \WS reluetant te study phùosophy, and coocemed bimself more with Aa.biclanguage and textUa! studies. He cWmed to have masteted seven fields of Islamic studies: /lJfslr,E:lodilh,fi'lh, "., 11Ia'Q,Q, W',~ He œIt tbat bis knowledge ofJi4h wu not as authoritative asthac of bis masters. However, he wu sure tbat bis knowledge in the other six fields wu superior tabis rmsters'. He wu a prolific wDtef; bis woàs are estùnated ta amount to thœe hundœd, others say,fout" hundred and fifteen, whiIe still ometS say six hundred, in the field of linguistics, tfJ/iir, ~anicstudic:s and 1;laGJh andfifJh. Suyü~ ai-Iltjinji UIiiHIIl1-Qttr'itt, voL 1 (Cairo: Dü al-Tuxi~1985), pp.4-5.
•
•
•
10
L Naslcb and its Relatee! Tenns
1nere are four verses in the Quran in which a word based on the mot n-s-Jf.h is
employed. The first three of these take a vetbal fonn (Q. 2: 106, Q. 22: 52, Q. 45: 29) while
the last verse uses a noun (Q. 7: 154).4 Of the three verses in which it appears as a vetb, the
fUst two feature ll-s-1eh in the first foan, continuous tense.s In Q. 2: 106, for instance, it is
wntten nansalehu, which is usually ttanslated as "we abrogate," such as in the following
version of the complete verse: 'Whatever a verse do We abrogate or cause ta be forgotten,
Wc bring a better one or sim;)ar to it.',(a Others would have it understood in the sense of
"modification." 7 In the second verse, Q. 22: 52, where it is given as~ it conveys the
meaning of canal/atio", 1lI111111/i1lg or S1IJlPressioll. In our third example, Q. 45: 29, the verb is
used in the tenth foan, 1IaStatLri1ehu, and has the sense of"recording." Finally, we 6nd in Q. 7:
154 the noun foan llNSIehat, which is equivalent in meaning to the verb used in Q. 45: 29, and
thus signifies inscription or nœrd.
~ Hanna E. Kassis, A Ctmmt/tma ofthlQltr'iin (Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 1983),p. 849; MlIlfl1l1.A!f4l:. al-Qltr'i" aJ-Kaiim, 2nd ed., V. 2 (Cairo: al-Hay'a al-~yya al-'Amma li al-Ta1ifwu al-Nasbr, 1970), pp. 707-8; Naphtali Kimberg, A Lexiœn ofA/-FQTTfl~s T""';1IIJœl1 ÙI His Qr'inCoIIIJNtlltmy lIIith FuJI DtjinitiDlIS, E1Vlish S1I1111NarïU t11Id ExtINSiw Ci1lltifJ1lS (Leiden: E.J. B~ 1996). p.792; Powers, ''The Exegetic:al Gente nisikh al-Quran wa masükhuhu," in AppTD«hu ID J!JI HisIDty fJjth, bll~/pn/(JtiDn fJjIhI QItr'in, ed Anchew Rippin (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), p. 118.
S \Ve useM~ Taep al·Oin al-1JiIiIi's and Mulpmrn3d Mubsin Khin's Qut'icictnnslation, TntllSltJJion fJj JIN Met.lIIÎlIll '.f dH NtJbll Qw'Oll ill IJH EIIgIisIJ 1.4nll"lll. Madina: King FahdComplex for the Printing of the Holy Qur'in, 1996 (Ibis refeœnce will he refeued to as~Tratlslotion, fmm now on).
6 Burton prefers œading the tem1~ in chis verse in the sense of modification as itreftts te the modi.6ation of an eadier, Jewish pa.etice or bw by a laœr, Is1amic one. He supports thisassertion with seveal incidents: tIH œtmg, Djqiblll (Q. 2/155,177. 124-151), J1ilIlim'l' riJts (Q. 2/158),dielary Itm'S (Q. 2/168-74),1tJIitJ (Q. 2/178-9), blqurst (Q. 2/180-2), mdflUt (Q. 2/183-7). See JohnBUTton, Tht CDillaiD" ofth,Qur'01I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), pp. 236-7.
•
•
•
11
a. Q. 2: 106
Verse Q. 2:106 uses the verb fOnIl 1IIJ1ISaü ~e abrogate) to signify God's guaranty
of His revelation.' This guaranty is asserted in the last part of the vetSe, "Know you nat that
AUah is able to do aU tbings!' His superiority over an creatures is canfinned by the preceding
verse, Cl •• • But AUah chooses for His Mercy whom He wills. Allih is the Owner of Great
Bounty" (Q. 2:105),9 and the v~e which follows it, "Know you not that it is Allah ta Whom
belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth? And besi.des .Allih yeu have neither any
WoN" (proteetor or guardian) nor any helper" (Q. 2: 107).10
W-al).idi reports that exegetes generally agreed on the circumstances that preceded the
revelatiotl of Q.2: 106. They explained that the polytheists (1l/-11IIIShrikNn) had questioned the
inconsistencies of the IsJamjc doctrine brought by the Prophet Mul}ammad. And it was at
th:at point that .Allih revealed Q. 2:106 and Q. 16: lO1.u Suyü~ mentions anotber report
from Abu ~tim, ttansmitted br 'lkrima from Ibn 'Abbas, saying "Once the Prophet, peace
be upen him, received a revelation in the night, but he forgot it in the day, then Q. 2: 106
was revealed."u Widi'i does not mention any of the reports cited by Wihidi or SuyÜ~ in bis
book al-Salill; Il/-MuS1l4li mi. Asba1 Q/-NII~7, conceming the reve1ation of the verse. He even
criticizes Abu ~tim for bis care1essness in examining bis chams of infoanation in support
1~ TrœzsIatiI", p. 21.
9 Ibid. p. 20.
10 Ibid.t p. 21.
IL It is reported mat they saidt 'COon't you see Mul;wnma~ who asks bis Companions ta doa ching once, tbm he fotbids them te do 50, and men asks them te do the reverse on anotheroccasion. ... Wbaœver is in the Qur'in is just Mn':tammad's own sayingst that is, sayings whichcontIadict each otheL" W""a1Jidïthbibtli-NII:(!Ïl, p. 19.
u Suyü~ L,bib Q/.N1IIJ1I7, p. 20.
•
•
•
12
of bis interpretation of the Qur'in. A case in point is the stoty of Tha'laba ibn F.lirib, which
wadi"i rejeets due to the faet that its tnnsmitters were considered weak.13 We refer to their
reports in spite of questions as to thei1: authenticity, since they show how scholats hand1ed
data in relation ta their discussion of .ws/UJ.
b. Q. 22: 52
Verse Q. 22: 52, on the other band, uses the phrase f'!Jll1Uakhli Alhn. .. (But.Allih
abolishes ...) ta indicate that .Allih annuls reve1ation which bas heen tampered with by Satan.
The verse is preceded br Allih's waming that, wbaever tries to strive against His ~a
(revelatiol1), he/sbe will he condemned ta He1l-fire (Q. 22: 51).14 The verse is follawed by
aootber containing His assertion that tocme11t will he inflected on transgressors, and that
Divine direction will be bestowed on beJievers (Q. 22: 53-54).15
W-a1).idi and SuyÜ~ link the reve1ation of the verse te a story known as ai-ghari1Ùq al-
'u14 Apparendy, wben the Prophet Mu1)ammad had 6nished reciti:ng the verses of Qut'in Q.
53 up ta the 19ch and 20lh ~, in which the duee Atabian goddesses al-Lit, al-'UZZ3, and al-
Manat are recognized, the story goes that Satan made him pronounce thc following sentence:
CCVerily, they ~dols) are the cxalted maidens (ai-ghatWilq) and their inte%Ccssion is ta be hoped
for." This was taken by the polytheists as a pronouncement by their 0W11 idals. Ta rcfute
13 Widir~ "'-$ll/if; fli-M1Immi, pp. 4-5. W-adi'i points out Abü Mut}ammad Ibn~'5 findingstbat the tnnsmission of Mu'in ibn Rifi'a, Qisim ibn cAbd lW)min, cAli ibny~ and Mis&m ibnBamueweak.
1.~ TrllllShtiDII. p. 450.
15 Ibid.~ p. 451.
•
•
•
13
their daim, Q. 22: 52 was then cevea1ed:16 'tNever did We send a Messenger or a Prophet
before you but when he did recite the revelation or n2mlted or spoke, Satan threw (some
falsehood) in it. But Allah abolishes that which Satan tluows in. Then A.ll3h establishes His
revelation. And Allih is All-Knower, AlI-Wise."17
c. Q. 45: 29
Verse Q. 45: 29 features the verb faon Inna hmna "t:lSttJ1l.SiJt. .•• (Verily, We IIIm
ream/ing..•) emphasizing that the Holy Book speaks only the truth, and that A.ll3h records aIl
human deeds.11 The concept of records of human deeds was introduced in the verse
previous ta this (Q. 45: 28), while the subsequent one contains infoanation on the
consequences faced by those who obey or disobey the Holy Book (Q.45: 30-31).19 Neitber
wiÇidi, nor Widt'I, nor Suyüjï provides any due as to the circumstances that gave tise to this
verse.
cl. Q. 7: :154
The last verse, Q. 7:154, has the noun foan II1ISleha (mscription), and explains mat the
inscription brought by the Prophet MÜ5i was a Divine guidance and mercy. The previous
verse shows the possibility of A11ih's mercy being extended to those who commit evil deeds
16 W""alJidi,ArbtJ7J Q/.NII!(JÏ/' pp. 177-8; SufÜP, LM/JQD (J['N"'l7~ pp. 201-2.
17 Ibid.
11l;Iilili, Trœulatioll, p. 679.
19 Ibid.
•
•
•
14
but then repent afterwards and believc in Müsi's Gad (Q. 7:153).20 The following verse
explains how Mü&i convinces bis people of Gad's ttuth (Q. 7: 155).21 Once again, W-al}idi,
Wadi'i, and Suyü~ are ail silent on the cironnsta1lces behind the revelation of this vet$e.
2. Omer Tenns Rclated to the Discussion ofNasltb
In addition to 1IIlS1eh, there are other terms used in the Qurin that have a simjlar
memi.ng. Here, we identify four verses which contain words with the same connotation: Q.
16: 101, Q. 13: 39, Q. 4: 160, and Q. 3: 7.
a. Q. 16: 101
VetSe Q. 16: 101 Z1 uses the ward badtiIIlni which in its DOllO foan is talxGl. meaning
dJange. The verse itse1f explains the Deglïgence of disbe1ieveu' in cJ3im;ng mat the Prophet
Mu1Jammad was a liar. They had accused him of being inconsistent in asserting that for
Allih, changing one verse with anotber is His own prerogative since "He knows best wnat
He sends down" and they (disbclievers) "know not." W-alPdi links the circumstances of the
revelation of Q. 2: 106 ta those behind Q. 16: 101.:!3 By contrast, SuyÜ~ and Widi'i do not
provide any occasion of revelation for tbis vet5e.
2OI~p. 222.
21 Ibid.
22 UAnd when Wc ch2nge a verse (of the Quran) in place of anotber - and Allih knows benwhat he sends down - they (the disbeJievea) say: 'You (0 Mul}ammad) are but a muft2à(forger/liar)"· Nay, but most of them know natif. Q. 16/101, l:Iili1i, T1'I1I1.Û11tiDrI, p. 362.
Z3 WiQidi, Alba"} aJ-NN:(JÏ/, p. 161.
•
•
•
15
The context of Q. 16: 101 demonstmtes the impossibility of interpolation inco
tevelation by Satan. Verses 98-100 of the same !1m1 confum however that Satflll always strave
ta make the Prophet (and bis foIlowetS) forget or say something fareign to the Qur'in, an
effort that will nevettheless always fail because Allih maintains the integrity of scripture
thtough His servants ''who believe and put their trust ooly in their Lord (Allih).n Verses Q.
16:102-03, which follow, descnbe in greater det3il haw Allih preserves His revelation.
b. Q. 13: 39
Another verse that contains a parallel to na.r/eh is Q. 13: 39,24 where the termyaml}Ü
(derived from the root 111-11-111) is used in the sense of bœt out or mJSt.2S Here, Allih again
cantinns His sovereignty in deciding wbether to establish or et2Se whatever He wants. The
verse is preceded by a reference to God's maintenance of His prophets, and is followed by
God's assertion ta the Prophet Muqammad that he should do bis duty only and not worry
about what will happen to him.26 Neither Wil}idi nar ~adiZi provides an occasion for the
revelation of this vene, althoughW~ comes up with a report from Kalbi for Q. 13: 38,
indicating that it was revealed subsequent to an accusation made by a Jew that what mattered
to the Prophet was only women and marriage.17 According ta Suyü~ Abu }-Jitim on the
other hand recorded a report from Mu;~which suggested a telation between Q. 13: 38
24 ccAllih blots out what He wil1s tnd con6ans (wbat He wills). And with Him is the Motherof the Book" Q. 13/39, l:IiJili. TrtmShtiDR, p. 327.
25 Rü!ji BaCJabaki, fli-MI1IJ'ritJ: A MDÔlm AnzIJj(-B1Iglish DktiDlUlI:J (Beüut Dü al-cnm Ii alMaliyin, 1994), p. 983.
riW-~hM"l tJi..N~p. 158.
•
•
•
16
and Q. 13:39. Thus when the former verse wu revea1ed and the people of Quraysh said that
they did not see MuQ.~ad recei.ving any help in maint2ining His revc1ation, the latter was
revealed to set bis crities sttaight.21
c. Q. 4: 160
Verse Q. 4: 160 also has a relation ta the 1lIlskh, even though there is no specifie
ward therein tbat is equivalent to the tem1; rather, it is the vetSe itself that provides a concise
example of the function of 1lfJ!kh in Islamic doettine.29 This verse explains that Allih had
change<! the 1aw on cett3Ù1 foocls for Jews in punishment for baving suayed &om the way of
Allih.30 However, Wil}idi, SuyÜ~ and widi'i do not provide any information regarding the
d. Q. 3: 7
Finally, verse Q. 3: 731 uses the tem1 fltlÛlleamât (cl~) and 11IIItaSha7Jihât (not entirely
cleu). Powen notes that the Companions, FollowetS, and Successors of Mul]ammad had
always taken tbese tenus into account when referring to the abrogatÎ1'lg and abmgated verses.
Quoting raban's jimi" a/-BerPlI, he remarks that this W3S true of Ibn 'Abbis, Ibn Mas'üd,
21 Suyüp, Ltba"l Q/.NlIqi/, p. 171.
Z9 Mu1)ammad Silil). 'Ali MUSJau, al-NϟJi fli-Qltr'in fli-IVznm M'!fhinndnt "''' TiiiJmhll lJItI
Da'iwi/m (BeiNe Dü al-Qa1am, 1988), p.l8.
30 fJiIili, Trrms/atio", p. 137; Mul}atmmd~ 'Ali M~fi, al-Nœü Ji Ill-Qur'itt al-KtnVw:Maf/JÜnIlru Ala TiriJf.Jndnl Mf Dtl'iJwJhll (Damascus: Dis: al-Qa1am, 1988), p. 18.
11 'CJt is He who bas sent down to you the Book. In it aœ verses mat are entirely cleu III1I1}/umtit - they ale the foundations of me Book, and othea not entirely cleu -11IIIttlShibihir (rtalicsue mine). lJiIi&, Tnms/oJio~ p. 68.
NOTE TO USERS
Page (s) not included in the original manuscript isunavailable trom the author or university. The
manuscript was microfilmed as received.
17
This reproduction is the best copy available.
17
•
•
•
18
illustmtes each mea.ning with an example: naskh as 1lIlql (transcription aI: copying) in the
phrase NosokhfM o/-kitàIJ (I transcribed or copied the book);;!. a.s !JoUa malJoUoIm (supersession
or replacement) in Na.salehot oi-shtl11U (JI-~, idhio~lotiJll1lla ~Q/Iot ma!}oUoIm (the Sun teck the
place of the shadow, when the Sun superseded it and replaced it);3ci and as i~loh or i~t4'
(suppression or abrogl1tion),37 in MStlkhat al.iiI, a/-Ot/xmJ , idiJO f1~Ioth1t faiom yohqo mi7lhN
'iwtJt!MII, 1VtJ li çallat al-rZIJ mal;o11o aJ.Pthari, bill zolajtmi~ll (The \Vind abrogated the tace, when
the wind a.brogated it, no substitution for it remained, and the wind did nct suppress the site
of the trace, rather it disappeared altogether).
1. Naskb as Naql/Copying
MakQ's identification of the ward 1t/l.rk.h as TIIJ'i' 15 also an interpretation common in
other wnters. For eJW11ple, KhaIil Ibn A4nud al-FaWiidi (d. 170 A.H./787 A.D.),3S
Zamwsh~ (ci. 538 AH./1143 A.D.), 39 lamaI al-Dln ibn al-M~ (d. 711 AR.!l31!
A.D.),~ Abü Jl1':far al-Na1}4is,4t Abü I-jitim,42 md Buthin al-Dïa al_]11'ban43 aU employ 7IIISl!.h
in the sense of 1ZJ1qL
3S Makkl, ai-I.ti4.h, p. 47.
36 Ibid., p. 49.
37 Ibîd., pp. 52-3.
38M~~ Zayd, ai-Na.tkhftai~mrai.Ki111m, 2cd ed (Beù:ut: Dar ~-Fikr J 1971), p. 55.
19 Thiel, p. 56.
<tO Ibid.
41 Ibid., p. 57.
..2 Ibid., p. 58-9.
4! Ibid., p. 59.
•
•
•
19
Scholars have different views on the relation between IfIlSkh as naq/ and I14Skh in its
abrogatory raIe. Na1l1}is considea naq/ to be the basic charactet of a/-IIasïleh 1Va a/-11Iansileh.
Makk1 disagrees with b.im, however, saying that "a/-n4sikh in the Qur'an does not copy 01
11IQflSU7eh,· instead it constitutes another word and another ruIing." However, Makk1's
assessment, accotding ta M~JafiZayd who bases his view on Ibn Hi1il, does not contradict
Na1+llas's opinion, due ta the faet that "the Qur'an uses this sense in Q. 4S: 29. The Qur'an
has been ttanscnbed wholly frem 'U1II", a/-Kita77, that the whole of it was abrogated, means
that it is literally copied." Zayd considers NaQ.l1as's view to he an "'~t stand,""'" the same
view that was he1d by Abü ~tim.45
2. Naskh as Ta1}ll1/Replacement
F~ Zamakhshan, and Ibn salima do not considcr nosleh to mean ta!lGl, whereas
Aqmad ibn Fins Cd 395 A.H./l00S A.D.), Ibn Man~ür,Na41las, Abü ~atim, and ]a'ban ail
do in some instances, in confoanity' with Makk1.46 Furthermore, Na44âs considers that this
meani.ng - nasleh as tal}Gi, can he found in Q. 22: 29. He sees it as lending support te this
interpretation.
3. NasJcb as .lb.tsiJor lza,1Abrogation
Whereas neither Zamakhshan nor N~s defines NlSIt.h specifical1y as abrogation,
this is the meaning that Fatiliidi, Ibn Man;ür, Abû ~atim, ]a'bati and Ibn Salima assign te
44 Thiel, p. 57-8.
45 Ibid., p. 59.
~ Thid., pp. 55-9.
•
•
•
20
it.47 According to M~ Zayd, mast scholus regard Q. 2: 106 as supporting this
interpretation.4I
Abü 1:Iirim believes that, initially, nasitJJ has a twofold linguistic sense; fiat a/-ZQ1VQJ
o/QJïhat a/-;1I üItim (comit'lg to an end); and second a/-Zfll»o7 'Q/Qjihat al-illtiqiJ (coming to a
change). The fint sense bas two meanings: the first is nask./J i/4 batiI (lUlSkh for a
change/substitution), which bas the sense of 1Il1;G1,· while the second one is na.rkh ilâghayri
badJ (NJSkh not for a substitution). The latter requites the abolition and abrogatioo of a ruling
without supplyiog any substitution. It estabIishes lIas/eh as ;zila or ib.taI. As for the second
original sense, in which nas/eh may be taken te mean naql, it cont2ins the inference that 1UJS1eh
can result in the abrogation of a nùin~ but not the werding.49
According to M~ Zayd, the discourse on lIaskh deals fundamentally with its
original and allegorical meanings, such that scholars have differed considerably over the
question of whicb meaning is allegorical and which is original. The tint camp, represented
by Sat2khSi (d. 490 A.H'/1097 A.D.), argues tbat the three usages of the term (1IIIfJ1, ib/il, and
itila) are of a 11It1JiiZ l}aqlqa or allegorical natute. The natute of 11111/1, ib.tQI, and iZilil is to omit
the essence of a ching, whereas in nar/eh this is not the case. For example, 1II1IJ' al-ki/aD (the
replacement of the book) does not refleet this cbataCteristic, because the replacement of the
essence of the book is not manifest from one place to another; what is apparent is the
47 Ibid.
.. Ibid., p. 61.
~ Ibid., p. 59.
•
•
•
21
establishment of the like in another place. Like noq4 bath i~tai and izila aiso bear this
meaning.SO
Ghazali (d. 505 A.H./l111 AD.), who represcnted another camp, argues that nasleh
in the sense of iza7a and naqi is original. Bath the tem15 iZila and ntllJi are »IlIShtarale
(common), such as in the sentences nasakha ai-sho",s a'-~I/o (for iZiVJ) and nasle.h ai-kitafJ (for
naq~. Amïdi (d. 631 A.H./1234 A.D.) does not refute GhazaIi's opinion, he merely states
that determining which one is superior is a meaningless exercise.SI M~~fii Zayd himself
offers the opinion that iza7tJ is the original meaning of nas/eh. He supports tbis point by
tracing th!ee phenomena: its usage in Hebrew, its linguistic coot, and the Qur'aruc use of the
term.5Z
Naskh, the noun fotm of the ,rerb n-s-leh, lus frequendy been used in the Islamic
sciences to designate the theory of nasJe.h, and is used in a variety of feans in tides such as al-
Naslehfta/-Qurin,53 Nawisi!eh aI-Qur'in,~ or al-Nasileh ilia fJi-ManSllIehftor min a/-QI~a". S5
50 Ibid, pp. 60-1.
51 Ibid, pp. 61-2
5Z Ibiel, pp. 62-7.
53 For enmple,M~ Zayd, m-NaslehJiai-Qur'iR a/-Km7m.
s. For enmple, Ibn al-Jawn, Nmvisik.h ai-Q1IrtQn.
55 For enmpIe, Na4lJis, tJi-Nastkh WQ oJ.MallSÜJdJ Ji oi-QNr'ill a/-Kmlm (Caire: cAlam al-Fikr,1986), ct Hibat A1Iih ibn salima (d. 410 A.H'/1019 AD.), oi-Nisikh JWI oJ.M4nsiiJUJ IllÎlI al-Qw'itt(Cairn: M~fa al-Bili al-r.rala~ 1310 A.H/1904 A.D.).
•
•
•
22
c. Naskh as a Conceptual Tenn
1. As a Phenomenon
Here, we will discuss two points: the acknowledgment of ItIJJkh and its importance.
Regarding the fÏtst point, early and modem scbows have long argued over whether there
truly is nafleh in the Qur'an and Srt1lllO, with the majority holding that there Ï5.56 John Burton
explains that the term nas/eh 'cref~ not to one, but to severa! quite unrelated phenomena
which were gradually brought together under the one rubric, owing to a series of decisions
taken in the course of the development of what was ta prove a specracularly 'successful'
theory."S7 He portrays these phenomena, on the one hand, as problems involving
conttadietions in the textual oc revealed sources (the Qur'an and Sltllno).5I On the other
hand, he sees it as a response to the formation of the Islamic sciences, which sougbt to
elaborate the doctrine on the basis of the revealed texts during the first three centuries of the
Islamic era.59 Based on these arguments, he disagrees with. the view mat it developed simply
56 Sorne of the schol3rs who rejec:ted IlaIkh areM~d ibn B* al-A~fahi:rii (d. 322A.H./934 A.D.), a Muct2Zilî, 'Abd al-Muta'i} M~d a1-Jab~ Mul}ammad al-Gba2ili, aconœmpoary Muslim thinker from Egypt, and 'Abd al-KaDm al-Kha~, a modem Muslim scholar.Ibn Ba1J.r al-~&hirii is said te have tried te discuss an vetSes te which 1IIUk.h applied, and had comeup with a different interpretation, i.e., it is different from its literai meanings, demonsmting chatthen: is no conteldietion among the verses of the Qu'in. In 1368 AH. MuQ,ammad al-Jabun wrote abook entitled O/-NmüJiaf.Shœi'tJ a/-bl4nJi:oa !eIlImiAfltll1l. He assumed mat the vet:SeS of the Qurândo net abrogaœ one anather~ and that there is no verse suppottiog the notion of nasü. Mlll:mmmadal-G1uzi1i and ~Abd al-Karim al-Khaüb advance arguments similar ta those of the previous twoschoWs, and base their opinion an logic, ttying ta draw a comparison with the comprehensiveness ofthe Qur'in. See~ Mw,ammad S~ al-Mudarûr, "Dhikr liman Anba Thubüta al-Naskh," in 0/NisiJ:h 1IIQ a/-MtmsükJJfta/-QtI1"œ, a/-~waM4fihi ntin a/-FflTÔiI/ 1IIQ a/-S1I1II.III by Abü 'Ubayd al-Qisimal-HaraWi (Riyi4: M2ktaba al-Rushd, 1990), pp. 72-6.
57 Burton, Th, SOlmes, p. 18.
5& foid., pp. 1-8.
59 Ibid., pp. 18-9.
•
•
•
23
as a meaos to resolve contradictions in the Islamic sources by inference either through iJlIQd
(attribution) Ot circumstances. Instead, he holds that it was grounded in the gradual
development of the revelations.60
Makk1, on the other hand, argues that the phenomenon of 1laSkIJ can be proved on
the basis of logic. Taking a henneneutic approach, tberefore, he elaborates bis theoty'. Fitsciy,
he relates the acknowledgment of nas/eh to the sovereignty of Gad in know~g everything
that bas bappened, is happening or will happeo. Secondly, he argues that God revealed
Islamic religion mat is in accordance with the demands of the age. FU1ally, he explains that
the Qur.i'n was revealed in piecemeal fashion.61 Though Makkl is acknowledged to have
heen the fùst to have put forward this argument, this kind of elaboration was common
among Muslim scholars. .A4mad ~asan Fa.rl}it, in bis introduction ta Makk1's a'-~,
e.''Plains that, while it was oot the 5.tst instance of the argument in terms of content, it was
the Mt in tenns of context, in that it W2S offered in a chapter entitled &7J jihi B~" Ma'1Ifl-
al-Naskh IlIQ ~afll/m Il/a mi." '!J1IQ Jaza rlhililea (The Chapter on the Explanation of the
Meaniogs ofNasJeh, and its Method, and on what Basis it is Pennitted) from the~.
In &ct, other Muslim scholats commonly based their acceptance of the notion of
fUlSkh Qat only on logic, but on stml and shed as weIl. S(//11' üterally meaas heming, listelting or
lDIdition, but for these scholars mean that IItJSkh had long been acknowledged as entailing the
concept of abrogation. M~ammad Ibrihim 'Abd al-Rat,man Fins, basing bis argument OQ
Zarqitii, holds that the data embodied in early Islamic history ac.d in earlier religious
traditions, such as Judaism and Christianity, including inferences in its doctrines, confirm the
60 Ibid., p. 20.
61 See, Makki, al-Ï.tiiJ}, pp. 55-9; Burton too is aware of dUs understanding among Muslimscholars. See, Burton, TIN SfI1IIrIS, pp. 20-1.
•
•
•
24
acceptance of 1tQsleh.62 ShçnS litenlly means direction and jurisdi~tio/l, but here is intended to
denote how religious doctrines, including those of Islam, illustnte the phenomena of naskIJ.6J
Substantively both tenDS, sam' and shar', refer to the same thing, i.e., how 1tas/eh was
described in history and religious doctrine.
Regarding the second point -me importance of 1taskh, generally Muslim authorities
referred to the story of 'Ali ibn Ali 'ralib's prohibition against teaching the Qur'an without
mastering the theory of MSkh. They aIso used the story ta stimulate those involved Qur'aruc
studies ta study it. The story goes as fallows:
It has bcen reIa.ted about the Commander of the Faithful, 'Ali ibn Abî Tilib ... matone day he ente%ed the Friday masque in Küfa, where he saw a man known as 'Abd al1W}min ibn Dibb, a follower of the Abü Mûsi al-Ash'an. The people had gathered aroundmm in arder to ask questions, but he wu mixing commands with prohibitions, andpermissions with restrictions. cAli asked him, 'Can you dîstinguish between the abrogatingand :lbroga.ted verses?' He replied, 'No.' Then 'Ali said, cyou desuoy youne1f and youdesuoy others. Of whom ue you the famer?' He said, cr am the rather of yaqyi.' cAli said,COYau are only talking in order tO increase your œputation!' And he grabbed bis eu andtW'ÎSted it. The he said, COo not tell stories in our masque ever again. '64
2. Theory
a. Definition
There are two definitioos of ntJsk/r. one a loose and the other a more restricted
definitioQ. In tenns of the foaner definition, naskh is seen as a general term, coveri:ag oot
6Z Shu'lah, $'!ftmt fli-&isiJ:h, pp. 46-9.
6J Ibn al-J~NtJalisiü a/-Qttr' in, pp. 14-5.
64 Powers, c'The Exegetial Genre," p. 124. He quotes the stary from Ibn Salima,N~and Ibn cAti'iqÏ; Rippin, ual_Z~ Naskh al-Qur'in and the Problem of Early Tafs"ir T~~," inBSDAS 47 (1984), p. 28; Abü 'Ubayd aI·Qisim ibn Sallim al-HaxaWi, fJI-Nisikh llJfJ a/-MansiïkhJi aIQur'i7t a/-~t 11/(1 !Hijihi 1IIi1t aJ.Fam"-)i; RI Q/.S,011l1l, ed. by MuQammad Ibn~~ al-Muday&r (Riy34:Makta.ba. a1-Rush~ 1990), p. 4. Kamil al-01n cAbd al-Ral}min IbnM~ al.cAti'Uit al-I:IuIi(known as Ibn al-'AIi'iql), aJ-NQsi/eh 1Wl a/-MIlIISikh cd. by 'Abd al-Hidî al-Fudilï (Najaf MaJbacat alAdâb~ 1970), p. 22.
•
•
•
2S
otùy the abrogation of a ruling or worditlg by another ruling or wording, but aIso other
teans sucb as specification, and c-'Cception. The second deficition, on the other band,
confines itself to the abrogation of mling and wording only. The Ah/a/-sa/of-or the earliest
generatioa of Muslim scholars- he1d to the tirst definition, whereas the 1II11tfJ'akhkJJinïn/later
generation clung to the latter one.65 M~~ Zayd attributes to Shifill the credit for first
restrieting the term,66 a daim which Ibn ~iliq. al-Mudayfar rend~ ta confirm.67 Al-FaqaIi
describes the fUst group as l111'.!assiru-,,/exegetes and the second as upilists,6I saying that the
upl7i.rts define nasleh tqU71 "in the sense of 'replacing one legal ruling with another due ro the
tennination of the effective petiod of the earlier ruling'," while the exegetes define 11/lSkh
tI.1jifn by extending the Ilpl/ists' conception to embody other measurcs. These include
"specification, exception, abandoning a legal rule because circumstances bave changed, and
mutual cancellation." 69
Historically speaking, according ta M~~ Zayd, Muslim scbolars did not define
nas/eh separately until the beginning of the fourth centu!y of the Muslim calendar. He insists
that l'aban (d. 310 A.H./921 A.D.) in his fimi' a/-B'rjàn 'fl1I Ta''IIIli Ayai-Qurin was the first
to define nasleh in an exegetical sense.7D Abü 'Abd ~[u1lammad b. Aqmad Ibn ~azm 31-
65 Abü 'Ubayd al-Qisim ibn saIlim, a/-Nâsikh 1lJt1 a/-Mtl1lsiiJdJ fi a1Qur'in aI-~~ DIQ Mi/ihimi" aJ-PIZTiit/ll'tl a/-SlDIIJn (RiyiQ: Maktaba al-Rushd, 1990), pp. 53-4.
66 Munati Zayd, aJ-NllSkIJ, pp. 75-6.
67 ThieL, p. 55.
61 Ibn al-'Ati'iqi. fJi-NâslkIJ 1I1f1 a/-Mf11IS1ïü, p. 7.
69 Powets,c~ Exegetial Gcme," p. 122
70 Tabasi de6nes it as foDows: CC ••• mere is no naJikb/abrogating from any verse of the~in, or tepotts from the Prophet except what refutes an est2blished ruling in which WorshipefSale obliged, without tùing its literai and esoteric memings, ID take inta account other than mat If if
•
•
•
26
A11~m (c. 320 A.H./932 A.D.), mentions three definitions of naskh recognized in bis rime;
1) /xrYan intiha' nmddat ai-'iba{Jg (the explanation of the terminarion of the period of the
effectiveness of worship); 2) ~a" inqirja al-'ihidah aUoil tihara hi al-dawim (explanation of
terminating a worship whose literai word was etemal); and 3) raf al-f;1Ikm bo'do thubuÏihi
(eliminating a ruling after its establishment).71 M~plfi Zayd considers these definitions ta
be insufficiendy logical, having been coined by e.xegetes and traditionisCS."2 From the fourth
century onwards, however, the definition of naskh tended ta fall within the scope of the
'llpïlist definition.13
b. Conditions for Naslcb
Ibn al-Jawz1 sets five conditions for which nfJskh must apply in arder ta operate. The
6.rst is that the rulitlg in the nirikh and the 11/Q1Im7eh must be contnldietary, i.e., that it must be
impossible for it ta be aperative in both. In other words, the ruling of the 1trùikh bas to
abrogaœ the ruling of the monsükh. The second condition is that the ruling of the moltSU7eh
must be established before deterrnining the ruIing of the nisïkiJ. 1bis condition cao be
detem1Ïned by cither of twa methods: linguistic or historical analysis. The linguistic approach
takes as its basis the language afthe Qur'in or the Sun1lll, as in Q. 8: 66 and Q. 2: 187, or the
includes other tbat that -from which it is meant as istilh/lll-' (exception), ex khupi; (particular) and'II1M (generaI), or 11J19111al (summarized) and nnifossir (mterpretabon)-, those then all induded ta aloisikh wa al-maOlpïkh with segregation .... There is no nttmsiiJeh except when its mling bas beenestablishecLu See,M~fi Zayd, tJi·Noskh, pp. 78-9.
11 Ibid, pp. 79-80.
12 Ibid. , pp. 78-80.
7JM~ Zayd traces this development up ta the late ninth century of the Islamic caIendar.Ibid., pp. 80-4.
•
•
•
27
report From Muslim on the saying of the Prophet, 'tr prohihited you From visiting to the
grave, but QOW you can do 50." The other way is by tracing the ci.rcumstances of revelation
or Sunna. Thus, when there are two contradietory tulings which cannat both be applied
e..'Ccepr by abrogating one of them, one has to establish which is the nisileh and which the
1I1Q1fS1/JUJ by examining the formel: and the later in terms of ruling or wording (al-ta'akhle.J:nn».
The third condition is that the ruling of the mtmS1Ïkh has to be ",ashni~ i.e., obligatory on the
basis of the shana, while the fourth condition is essentially the same, though in reference ta
the nisikh. The final condition demands that the nisikh be established in a similar or better
way chan mat in which the mallsükh was established. 7"
c. Modes of Naskh
According to Makki, among the three potential meanings of the term nas/eh, i.e.,
ab!a/a, ~Q'1a "'Q~al!ilhll, and naqala, the last of these, which is 1lt1f1/, is not applicable to the
Qur'an, due to the fact mat ies verses do not transcribe one another.7S Refemng to Na1}4âs/6
MakKi argues that no verse is abrogated by a similar verse; nasleh is only operative in the
senSé of the first and second meanings (abrogale and n:plaa) which is confirmed in bis
statemen t, iZiltrt a/-QuM IlIQ ibqJ a/-/af1. (abrogation of the ruling, and continuance of the
wording).17 This mode of IIflSkh is commonly known te other autherities as nas/eh al-!Jukm
i4 Ibn al-J1wzi, NIZIlIisiIeh, pp. 234.
75 Makkï, al-Ï.da7), p.47.
76 Ibid.
77 Ibid., pp. 47-8.
•
•
•
28
duÏta ai-tiJawa (abrogation of the ruling, but not of the wording),75 the most common fotm of
abrogation in the discourse of the genre. A case in point the 'ü/do •"waiting period imposed
by God upon widows before expiq of which they may not legally contract a valid second
mamage"· refers to Q. 2:234, which is abrogated by Q. 2: 240.79 Two other modes are naskh
al-~uknJ wa al-tiltiwa (abrogation of bath mling and wording),lIO and 1IfJskh al-titawa dJi1lfJ ai-/pIkm
(abrogation of the wording but not of the ruIiorJ.ll The common example for the fonner
mode is where Anas ibn Milik (d. 92 A.H./720 A.D.) is said to have "related that during the
lifetime of M\Ù}ammad, the believers used to recite a szïra equal in lengtb to siira 9
('Repentance'), but that: he could only remember one verse from this siïra, namely, 1f the son
ofAdam had two valleys made of silver...."c The most famous example of the latter mode
of abrogation is '~the ~stoning verse', which, according ta CUmar, read as follows: 'The adult
male and the adult female, when they fomicate, stone them outright, as an exemplary
punishment from God Gad is mighty wise'.,,13
d. Types of NasJch
There are four types of naskh. First there is naskh al-Qur'in bi al-QJlr'in (abrogating
the Qu'in by the Qur'an), as in the vene on i'tifitid (period of waiting), which is set as al-
il Ibn al-Jawn defines it as mi fflISikJxJ rQS/N1lhll1lQ bfJqfya rasmufJlI. Ibn al-Ja~ NtzatisiJUJ, p.38.
79 SeeJ Button, Thf SmmtS, pp. 56-7.
10 Ibn al-Jan defines it as ma1I1ISiÜfJ rtJ.S1lnliJII1WI ~.m!nL Ibn al-JawziJ NtmIlisik.h, p. 33.
81 Ibn al-Jawzi de6nes it as mâ,lIISik.hfJ raDH1Ihllll'tl boqfytr /Plknmlm. Ibid, p. 35.
S2 Powers, 'cne Exegetic21 GenrCy" p. 125.
13 Ibid; Burton refers the stoning verses in Q. 4: 15-6. Button, The SfJ1II'CtS, pp. 122-3.
•
•
•
29
hQIIllone year in one place (Q. 2: 240) but i5 abrogated in another where it is specified as
four months and ten days (Q. 2: 234).14
Second, there is 1fiJSkIJ alQur'Qn bi al-Sunna (abrogating the Qur'an by the SzmNl). This
in itself is comprised of!Wo sub-principles: naskh al-Qu,-J';" bi al-Sunna al-A!;idi.YJa (abrogating
the Qur'an by a solitary ttadition) and nasleh al-Qur'a1l hi al-Sunna aJ.M1'ûmla/ira (abrogating the
Qur'an by a SJlIl1tO reported on the basis of multiply transmitted reports). ~Iost of the
authorities do not accept the tirst type because a lfatllth .AJ;ad is based not on cettainty but
rather on probability. And abrogating a Qur'inic ruling on the basis of probable evidence is
not valideas
On the other hand, Muslim authorities have diff~ent views regarding the second
sub-principle, naskh alQllr'in hi al-Sunna al-Mu!tJ»Ja/ira. Muqammad Ibriliim 'Abd Raqman
Fans, the editor of Shu'lah's Jajwa/ ai-RaStkh ft1/m al·Mansiikh 1l/a al-Nisikh, mentions that
Malik (d. 179 A.H./795 A.D.), Abü 1:Iariifa (d. 150 A.H./765 A.D.) and A1}mad ibn l:Ianbal
(d. 241 A.H./855 A.D.) accepted this principle. As far as l have been able to detemùne,
however, A1}mad ibn l:Ia:nbal did not in fact accept it. On the contIal:y, Ibn f.Ianbal bas two
reports quoted by 'Ali ibn 'Ubayd All3b, the teacher of Ibn al-JawZi, explaining mat Muslim
authorities in !bis case were divided ioto two camps: the first accepted it and the second did
nat.86 Ibn 1:fanbal himself, according to Ibn al-Jawz1, belonged to the second camp, and not
the &st, as Fins daims. In this report, Ibn I:Ianbal reports that Milik and Abü ~anifa
accepted this principle, arguing that the Prophec is protected by Gad (Q. 53: 3-4), and that
114 Shu'lah, St.tfa't1l a/-&i.riJUJ, p. 44. Abü ~yd quotes Ibn 'AbbasJs report an tbisinformation. See, Abü CUhayd, al-NtÏ.rikh, p. 129.
as Shu1ah, Safwat a/-&isikh, p. 44; Ibn al-Jawii, NtmJtisiJ:h, p. 27.
116 Ibid., pp. 25-6.
•
•
•
30
the task of the Prophet is ta explain God's messages (Q. 16: 44).17 OrigioaUy, since nas/eh
e~l'lains the extent ta which a man.riiJeh is effective, men a verse can be abragated by a Szmna.
A case in point is verse Q. 2: 180: a/-wap)ya li al-wQjidayll (bequest in favor of one's parents),
which i5 abrogated by the Sunna injunction, 10 I1IQ!!Jya/(J li 1ZIa-'ith (the inheritor does not
receive a bequest).11
The second camp bases its rejectioo of this principle 00 the fact that MSikh and
I1IfJNszikh te~"t sbauld be of equal status or better, as may be inferted from Q. 2: 106.19
Moreover, Daraqupii (d. 385 A.H./995 A.D.) i5 said to have quoted a fJadith from jabir Ibn
'Abd A.Uah (d. 78 A.H./697 A.D.) according ta which the Prophet said, "My saying does not
abrogate the Qur'an, the verses of the Qur'an abrogate each other.,,90 In chis camp may be
numbcred Shafi'i, Sufyan ibn SaZ"ld ibn Marzüq al-Thawli (d. 161 A.H./778 A.D.), and Ibn
f:lanbal (accordiog to Ibn al-Jawz1).91 Furtbennore, Ibn al-J3Wà prefers this group bccause
the e.xplanation of the other group faIls under the heading of e~-p1anationof the Qur'in and
not naskh. He asserts bis opinion br quoting a report from Ibn f;Ianbal, ((the S1I1Intl interprets
the Qur'an, while the Qur'an does not abrogate except the Qur'in,n and another from
ShifiZ"l, saying that "in faet, the Book abrogates the Book, and the Sunna is not the abrogation
of it (the Book)."92
17 Ibid.
sa Ibid., p. 26.
&9 Ibid.; Sbu'lah, S'!fwal aI·R4siIeh, p. 44.
')0 Ibn al-Jaw, NlZfIJisikh. p. 25-6.
91 Ibid.
92 Ibid., p. 26.
•
•
•
31
The third kind of llas/eJJ, i.e., naskh al·Sull1ltl hi al-Qur'an (abrogating the SU1UIQ by the
Qur'an), was, like the pactice of facing ai-BtrJ1 al-M1Vjaddas in prayer, established by Sun1ltl.
Thus Q. 2: 144, abrogated this tradition. Most Muslim authorities accept this kind of naskh.93
Finally, the last kind is narkh a/-Sun1UJ hi al-SulI1Zt1 (abrogating the SU1l1fQ by the SU1l1la).
It is constituted of four kinds; 1UIS1eh al-11IUlawati, hi al-lllUtawiJi, (abrogating a multiply
transmitted report by a multiply transmitted report), IlIJSkh al-aJ;ad bi al-~Qd (abrogating a
solitary tradition by another solitary tradition), naskh a/-a!;ad !Ji aJ-11111taz11iti, (abrogating a
solitary tradition by a multiply transmitted report), and nas1eJJ al-11II1tawaÏ'ir hi al-aÏ;ad
(abrogating a multiply tIansmitted report by a solio.ry tradition). Most authorities accept the
first three, but disagree over the last.94
93 Shu1ah, SrJ.f7wt a/-Râsikh, p. # .
ou Ibid., pp. 44-5.
•
•
•
32
CHAPTERII
SHAFI'I A.~D TIiE TIiEORY OF NASKH
This chapter dea1s with the ongins of llOSkh up to Shifil'j,'s rime, his ba.ckground and
his own construction of the theox:y of 11IJskh. In the fu:st pa.r4 we will tntce the genesis of
l1a.skh, surveying its early deve1opment. In the second p:1rt, we will provide a brief account of
Shah")'s lite, teachers, students, works and thought. Finally, we will examine Shi.fl)'s
construction of 11IJ.sk.h and attempt to assess if. Here, "'lé will discuss the tirst part From TWo
perspectlves: phenomenon and theory. In relation to phenomenon, we will discuss two
points: Shifi'),'s llcceptance for 1IIlskh existence md its importance. As rega.rds to theory, we
will discuss tt from Shifi~'s perspective, following IDS steps in discussing ll/lskh. In the la.st
part, we will assess the construction of ShafitL's concept of no.rkh in context.
A. NASKH: ITS GENESIS {JP TO sHAFI'ï's TIME
Naskh, which may he defmed as a. suo-science of 'ft/Hm alQNr'i1l, developed
synchronically and diachronica.lly with other Islamic sciences, particuhtrly those dealing with
Qu~ânic exegesis. Tbis may be seen for example in the relation between noskh and asba7J 01-
111l~",= for whether it is used in 'Niiim ol-Q'Hr'in or UfHl alfiqh, ,lOSkh depends on a. kno'wledge
of which verse was sent earlier and which one rater - a knowledge which is to be gained
from the circumstances of revela.tion (asbah (J'-1tJl~;~.l
1 PoV/ets, :'The Exegetical Gem:e," p. 119; Rippin, ;'The Qut'ànic .Asbib al-Nuzül MateIial:an Analysis of its Use and Development in E.xegesÏ? (PhD. dissertation, McGill UnÎVeISity: 1981).In this case, Rippin goes fuItheJ:, saying mat !lQ.!I-.h is based maIe on logic man on c:hIonology. Hecites the cases of winc drinking and the diIection ofprayet as examples.
•
•
•
33
With the pasSolge of rime and the rapid increa.se in its territory:md the number of its
adherents, Islam evolved in response ta the demands of the age --adapting, absorbing and
developing its doctrinal content. The Companions of the Prophet .md their Successors
a.tteropted to establish practices which accorded with Qu~mic teaching md the traditions of
Nru1}arnmad.:1 The EXegetes developed the Qu~anic sciences, including 1I/JSkh, by tracing
incidents from the Qur'an and the traditions, as weil as from the theories of their
contemporanes. One e.'Cample from the Qu~an is the change of the direction of pr:tyer from
al-Bayt al-rv[aqdis in Jerosalem ta the r~'b~ in N[ecCa, based on Qa.tida-'s conclusion th.lt Q.
2: 115 is abrogated by Q. 2: 144.3 Simila.rly, the change of the law of prohibiting visitation of
the graves W1lS effected by the abrogation of the same Slf11ll'/
In the period of the Companions of the Prophet l,{lÙ1ammad, the concept of llO.skh
l!1 'Hilfm al-QlIran had not yet been fu11y developed Rather, this period saw the Emergence of
a more primitive 11IlSkh, which seemed to ;'have arisen in response ta the need for [econciling
'X..ha.t appe!U:ed ta the early MusWns a.s seeming contradictions within the body of legal verses
in the Quran."s The Companions are reported ta have paid a grea.t attention ta the problem
of lItlSkh. Schows for instance [efer ta the stacy of 'Ali b. AOi T"à.lib, the fourth caliph, who
2 'AliM~~ :lFI-Jaskh, p. 25.
;; J:{atim $âliq. al-Qamin, Kitdb af-tlafi;.h wa af-MaTr_rHiP.h fi l~bA.liàh Ta'iG 'tJT! Qat.idah ib7!Di'ima tIi-sadiii (Beitut Mu-'assasat al-RisaIa, 1985), p. 32.
4 Button, The ~OHTœf) p. 3.
S Hallaq, A HiJtory, pp. 8-9.
•
•
•
34
expelled a Follower from the masque in Küfa because he gave an expianation of a passage
from the Q~an in complete ignorance of naskh. 6
The Companions, Successors and the latter's Followers (l't:i"bi'in and Tali' al- Ta7Ji
•
•
•
3S
more than fumish instances of the abrogating and abrogated ve%Ses of the Qur'in. Qatida
cites instances of naskh in 17 .riiras (chapters) with a grand total of -by my calculation- 35
cases.U Eveq case is discussed simply and briefly, stating that a given verse is abrogated by
morner verse, such as in the case of the waiting time before a divorced wife can man:y,
where Q. 2: 228 is abrogated by Q. 33: 49. U In addition, the treatise pcovides an accounting
of the division of the Qur'an's 'V'erses into madan;(revea1ed in Madina) and mow (revealed in
Mecca).13
The real construction of nl1s/eh began in the second century Hijn. From this century
onward, there were many treatises produced on 1f/JS1eh, of wbicb only a few have survived ta
this day. 'Ali Mus~{i mentions the writings of seven scholars who wrote on the topic;· of
which only one bas reached us, i.e., Zuhn's a/.Nisi!eJJ 11/(1 a/_Mansu7eh. 1S In bis "al-Zuhn,
N askh al-Qur'in and the Problem of Early Tajslr/' Rippin edits and analyzes the work, using
a litenry·historical approach.16 He himself acknowledges that the treatise is "the earliest
11 11 cases in Q.2; 4 in Q. 4: 3 in Q. 5i 1 in Q. 6; 2 in Q. 8; 1 in Q. 9; 1 in Q. 16; 2 in Q. 17;lin Q. 29; 1 in Q. 45; 1 in Q. 46i 1 in Q. 47; 1 in Q. 58; 1 in Q. 59; 1 in Q. 60; and 2 in Q. 73. I;>âmin,SilIi/oi fJl-KJI/1/b, pp. 31-51.
1: r;>inUn, Silriht ai-1VIlJlb, p. 34.
u I;>âmin, Si/silot a/-KzitJlb, pp.52-3. The Matit.zNi chaptetS are al-Baqan., Ali cr.mrin, al-Nisi'.al-Mi'ida, al-An51, al-Bara~a, al-Ra'~ a1-N~ al-I:hjr, aleNtir, al-Abzib, MuÇammad, al-Fatl1-, al·t:Iujura't,al-~~ and al-I:fadid, wbile the rest of the verses are MoJeE.
14 Al-Zuhïi, Ibn Abi CUmba., A~ ibn Muslim ibn Maysara al-Hurisârii (d. 135 A.H./753AD.), Abü al-N* M\Ù)amm2d ibn al-sitb ibn Bashr al-Kallii (d. 146 A.H./763 A.D.), Abü al-FjasanMuqitil ibn Sulaymin ibn Bishr al-Balldîi (d. 150 AR./767 A.D.), Abü 'Ali al-Fjusayn ibn Wiqid alMarwaZi (d. 159 AR./776 A.D.), and 'Abdal-~ ibn Zayd ibn AsWn (ci. 182 A.H./798 A.D.).See 'AliM~ aJ-Narkh, p. 26.
LS This treatise is preserved in Dir al-Kutub al-~yya. Ibid.
16 Sec, Rippin. ccal_Zubn":'lI pp. 22-43.
•
•
•
36
known systematic treatment of the 'UIS/eh phenomenon.,,17 The treatise presents infonnation
in a variety of ways, ranging from a "simple juxtaposition of verses to fairly careful
elaboration."IB It hegins by stressing the importance of mastering the subject of ffaskh and
then goes on to list instances of abrogating and abrogated verses, following the order of the
niras, and then concludes with a closing statement. 1? As in Qatida's treatise, Zuhà's
concentrates on legal issues,~ like the direction of prayer, changes to the law on consuming
alcoholic drinks, the law on fasting, etc.
In the third century, the discoU1'Se on lIas!eh entered a new stage, where there was an
attempt to systematize the genre. 'Ali M~tafi mentions twe1ve scholars as baving been
involved in this effort,21 [wo of them being Shafi'i and Abü 'Ubayd al-Qasim ibn sallim al-
Harawl (d. 224 A.H./839 A.D.). The former will be discussed in the following sub-chapter,
50 WC will therefore COQcentrnte instead on Abü 'Ubayd, autbor of a treatise entided al-
Nisi/eh 11/a al·Mall.r1i7ehft al-Qrn-'in al-'A:iz ilia Mifthi min ai-Fan1it,j 11/0 01-5111um. This work has
17 Powers. cCAbü 'Ubald al-Qisim b. Sallâm's Kitib al-Nisikh wa al_~n ed. JohnBurton (E.J. W. Gibb Memorial Sc:ri~, Q.S. 30) (Cambridge: Trustees of the E.J. W. Gibb MemorialTrust, 1987), pp. xv, 192. Book review in Sp,ruhoN 65 (Oa. 1990), pp. 933-4.
18 Rippin, ccal-Zuhà," p. 39.
19 Ibid., pp. 27-36.
10 Ibid.
n They are ShifiZ"l, Abü N~r 'Abd al-Wahbaè ibn cA~ (d. 204 A.H./819 AD.), AbüM~d~aijaj ibnM~dal-A~ (d. 206 A.H./821 AD.), Abü 'Ubayd, AbüM~F:Iasan ibn 'Ali Thn Fa4Qi1 al-Külï (d. 224 A.H./839 AD.), MuJ,ammad ibn Sa'ad al-'0fi (d. 230A.H./845 AD.), Ja'Eu ibn Mubashshir or Bashar ibn A1)mad al-Tbaqaii (d. 235 A.H./850 AD.), alMarwUi (d. 236 A..H./851 AD.), Ibn ~bal,Abü Daüd Sulaymàn ibn al-Ash'ath al-Sijistim (d. 275A.H./888 A.D.), Abü Isl)aq Ibtihùn ibn Isqiq al-f.{ubî (d. 285 AH./898 A.D.), and Abü MuslimIbtihim ibn cAbd .Allih ibn Muslim ibn Mi'iz al-Kaji (d. 292 AH./905 AD.). 'Ali MuspUi, a/·Naskb,p.27.
•
•
•
37
been ewted and studied by both Burtonn and al-Mudayfar.13 As may be seen From the title
of the treatise, Abü 'Ubaydts work deals with naskh in both the Qur'in and Sunna. The book
is divided into two parts, the 6.rst dealing with the meani.ng and the importance of naskh, the
second exploring nasleh in the light of twenty-nine aspects of jiqh, following the traditional
arder of books in this field beginning with..ra~ ending with al- 'amr hi al-mo/ri!wa al-nahy 'an
a/-munkcrr. The latter feature in particular distinguishes the \Vork from others which are
organi2ed according to the order of the chapters in the Qur'an. Abü 'Ubayd also follows the
traditional style of scholarship in the Muslim world, that îs, he bases his explanations on
authority. When he looks at a particular topic, for example, he explains it by referring
hierarchically ta the Prophet, the Companions, the Followers t bis own contemporaries, and
lasciy himself. The main sources used are the Qur'an, the SlInna/fJadiih, and the opinions of
the Companions and Followers?'
Like other authors on the subject, Abü 'Ubayd also mentions the story of 'AIits
prohlbition against the teacl1ing of Islamic doctrine by those who do not posses a knowledge
:!2 Button,AInï UherJd. Ths tttatise is preses:ved in manuscript in Istanbul (fopkap~~tfi, A 14-3). It wu tùst reccmied by F.E. Karatay in bis Topleopi StlT''!Ji~ Kii/iiphanui ArabfaYa~nalarKata/ogJl, v. 1 (Kuran ilimleri tafsirler, 1962), pp. 591-2 Neither Brocke1mann nor Sezginmentions this trcatÎSe.
~ Abü 't,Jbayd, Q/.Nisileh. Nowhere in its pages, however, does al-Mudayfar refer ta Burton'sAbiVbaid.
24 AI-Mucb.y&r, the editar of the ueatise, identifies five procedures or techniques in AbüC(joayd's approach: 6xst using the chain of authority; second, breùing down the themes into IsIamicsubstantive Iaw themes; third, in discussing a problem, the autho~ refers to many other opinions,decid ing which one ist according ta him, the soWldest opinion (a method in 1a.tge measure is similardut ofTabatits); fourth, taking the undemandiog of IlIlSkh of the ah! Salaf(the eadiest geneutiou ofMuslim scholars);~ expanding the discussion of nasleh to the area of the S1I1I1lIL Abü CUbayd, "alQism al-Awwal min al-Kitib," in a/-NanlUJ, pp. 46-7.
•
•
•
38
of naskh, a remark designed ta show the importance of the genre.2S The author continues bis
discussion of the teml nQsleh in the Qur'an by referring ta what bis predecessotS have said.
He refers to the tean I}ikma in Q. 2: 269, the use of muhkam as al-nan"kh and mutashaDiho as a/-
fflQflj7tkh in Q. 3: 7, the cerro Itaskh in Q. 2: 106, and the verbyaml}ziin Q. 13: 39 to anchor the
genre in the field of Qur'anic studies. These verses are discussed from the point of view of
variants in reading and interpretation. For e.xample, in addressing Q. 2: 106, Abù 'Ubayd
e..xplores the meaning of the sentences containing !IOltsakh and nttnsiha. Ibn 'Abbis for
instance intetprets the sentence 111anansakh min ~a as ma Itubaddil milt 0'0, while 'Afi' ibn AOi
Rabaq interprets it as ma nuttf/a min QlQur~. Ibn 'Abbas reads lIunsiha, in the sense of
natnlk:Jha whereas 'A~"l ibn Ab! Rabi4 reads it as nansa'h,i meaning as nuakhintha. Anather
reading is RIa nansa'ha, II1Jnsiha, /onsaha, and ntlllsakfJa. Abü 'Ubayd agrees with Ibn 'Abbas's
reading, whereby I1Ia nli1lsihimeans N!yO-"/ forger. Ul
As regards the mode of nmkh, Abü 'Ubayd believes mat this occurs in the Qur'an
and Sunna in three modes.:!7 Of the three, he ooly clearly defines two: naskh a/-l;llkm rJüno 0/-
2S He quotes two traditions. amsmitted by 'Ali ibn 'Abd al_cAm ibn al-Matzubân ibn Sibüral-Baghdidi, a.nd 'Abd al-IW,.min ibn Mahdi. Abü 'Ubayd, a'-NQ.rik.h~ pp. 4-5.
~ Ibid. y pp. 6-14.
I7 The first is NasleiJ ai-Q1IT'm, mintmi.JO'mal bibi (abrogation of the Qur'in from within itsveaes); it is a1so known as the foanula 1I4SldJ a/-lJuiuIt &1111 al-ti/QaJa (abrogation of the ruling and notthe wording). This 1IlZSJùJ is grounded in Q. 2: 106, for which Abü 'Ubayd refers to the intetpreutionsof Ibn 'Abbâs and Mujahid (Ibn cAbbis's Ibdi/ al4yai lNaMIIQ al4yaJy Muj2hid~s IIJ.IliJ al-khaI! ai-iyoJ 1Wl
I4bJi/hllkm al-iya/J. The second, 411 tmft1'a dl-iyat af.l1Itl11S1lkIJa !Ja'/a 1I~af(J/(JkJï1lllIehitijattm ntiR qu/M7Jal-Rijtil wtI min linI/nil ai-khog (the abrogaœd verse should he e1jmjmted a&et the revelation of theabrogating verse, 50 the ruling and the wording become free From the memory of the peopleLMuslimsD, is known as the foanu1a lIas/Ù) al-li/4sJa Ml a/-IjuJ:m (abrogation of the ruling and thewording). Abü 'Ubayd supplies Ibn Shihib al-Zuhri's story on the Companions who forgot onechapœr of the Quran which they had leamed by heart before. The third mode is not c1e:u1y stated byAbü 'Ubayd. It is probably, that NJSkh which me3tlS NJIlI (copy)~ Iike in the Aabic usage: lIasakhbt a/kiJtJD lIIIIlafbJJlI, is the third mode. In other authorities this is included in the foanuJa 1IQSJûJ aJ·tiJ4lw
•
•
•
39
ti/iiwa and narkh a/-lJukm 11Itl a/-ti/awtl. The third mode, nasleh tll-til4wtl ~ntl tli-lJukm, would
appear to be less frequent in the genre. This may e..'lCplain why Abü 'Ubayd does give
consideration to Ibn 'Abbis's discussion of Q. 45: 29 on Ibn Jabir's explanation of Q. 21:
105 as part of 'ibn tll-naskh. Neither of the editors of the treatise, BurtonZi and al-Mudayfar,29
moreover, observes any significandy new contributions to the genre in this work, e.."(cept
perhaps for the auangement of subjeets according to the traditional order offtqh works.
Was Abü 'Ubayd in any way conneeted with Sh'ifiZi? Ibn ~ilil} al-Mudayfar considers
ShifiZi to have been one of Abü 'lJbayd's mastets. In support of tbis view he quotes Subk1's
Tab(J(jaï al-ShÜft7where it is said that Abü 'Ubayd leamed jiqh from Shifi'i. But he was aise
critical efShafi'i. Sublà reperred that there was a debate between ShifiZi and Abu 'Ubayd on
the subjeet of al-qar), as to whether it is 1J'!J4 or not. Shifili consideted it ta be 1}t:rJ4, while
Abü CUbayd saw it as fahr, a position fUlally accepted by Shafi'i. But al-Muqayfar does not say
whether Abü 'Ubayd aetually quetes Shifi'i's opinions in bis al-Nisikh 11Ia al-ManszikIJ or
ti1Ïna Q/·hlllult (abrogation of the wording and not the tuIing). But Abü 'Ubayd does net define thethird mode. Ibid, pp. 14-7.
:!II Burton infers that Abü 'Ubayd conttibuted only a smallltJfiir to the genre. This "1eft himsomewhat non-plussed, and he pref~ed ta pass on rapidly to 'the geo.eally œcognized phenomenonof the ÜSiIUJ and the mansiiJUJ of the Qur'in. In other words~ naskh bad already achieved an accepteddefinition~ in common with 'every one else of bis geneation, being content with mat Abü'Ubayd had little intetest in alternative definitions.u
Burt~Abivhtgd, p. 64.
Z9 Al-Mudayfar considetS that Abû ~b1yd accepted the common comprehension of naskhamong ~JlQ-'in eady Islam, wheœby il Wti understood as a foan of know1edge mat cavetS not oalynasle.h, but aIso IIJkiJil! al-!Ilftl. a/_cg,Jl11J, ul-istithn4', targid a/-nnfJ/aq, and ItJlrfl1l a/-lIINjnltl/, etc. For example,when he discusses the Q. 2: 187 on boundaries in the cime of .siy8, after mentioning sevetalt:a.ditions and reports he says simply mat these are included ta the discussion of flfJSkIJ. In &et, thesef{.IJI/idJs ue moœ appropmte ta the interpœtation of the verse. Abü 'Ubayd, tJi-Nisikh, p.42
•
•
•
40
not.30 On the other hand, Burton daims that Abü 'Ubayd was unaware of ShifiZl.'s ideas on
the subjeet, based on the faet he makes no quotations or references to the latter.J1
As far as the position of the treatise in the history of the gente is coacemed, al-
Mudayfar does Dot venture any cleu opinion. He ooly notes that there was an earlier treatise
that has come down to us, aamely, a/-Nisi/eh wa a/-Manmkh by Qatada ibn Di'ima al-Sadüsl
(d. 117/118 A.H/735/736 A.D.).32 Burton goes further, painting out that it is the earliest
systematic treatise on 1IIJ,rkJJ yet discovered In his review of Burton's Abi Vb'rJd, Powers
criticizes this conclusion, oeting that it 15 no longer valid since the appeataOce of Rippin's
article on al-Zuhri in 1990. That Zuhn died in 124 A.H./742 A.D. is significant, for 'tif the
attribution 15 correct, Zuhri's text would be the earliest known systematic treatment of the
naskh phenemenon," Powers says.»
B. BACKGROUND
1. liCe and Education
Mul}ammad ibn IW:is al-Shafi~ (d. 204 A.H./820 A.D.) is one of the most important
early figures in the construetïon of Islamic jurisprudence. J4 Shifi'i was a prolific author of
JO Abü 'Ubayd, "al-Qism al-Awvr.ù min al-Kitib,u in a/-NasiJeJ1, p. 32
31 Buno~ AlnïVbtgd, p. 25.
32 As expbined above, this woù bas been edited by fJitim Silil} Qimin.
13 Powers, cCOn the Abrogation of the Bequest Verses,"SptadNtl/ 65 (1990), p. 934.
}4 Hallaq, 'Wu al-Sha6)", pp. 587-8; E. Chaumont, "al-nlifi'i," EP, vol. 9, p. 181;~üd~hJUjï: ed. 'CS"u:at al-Imam MUQammad ibn ldàs al-shifi~ wa cAsruh," in Sbifi~'s tJl-UI1I11I, voL 1(Beirut: Dir al-Kutub al-crImiyya, 1993), p. 14; Mw,ammad Ibn Alpnad Ibn 'Abd al-Hidi (d. 744A.H/1343 AD.) - known as Ibn Qadima, Mamitpb af.A'ùJmla a/-Arba'fl R4!#Jt1 Allah 'Anlmm, ed.SuIaymin Muslim al-l;arsh (n.p.: Dir al-Mu'ayyad li al-Nasm wa al-TawzïC, 1416 A.H./1996 A.D.), p.101.
•
•
•
41
wocks on jiqh, lf.adlth, aJ;kàm a/Qur'ill and poetry. It is said that Shifi'i was bom in 150
A.H./767 A.D., either in Ghazza (a town in the countryside of southem Palestine) or
'Asqalin (a town on the southem coast of Palestine, or as some sources suggest, in the
Yemen). Mafa!JÏ argues chat since Ghazza and 'Asaqa1an were contiguous, it 15 possible chat
Shi6.lï was bom in Gbazza, and as a young boy mïgrated to 'Asqalin.J5 His family descended
from the Banü Hisbim, the dan of the Prophet.J6 However, there is very little information
about his parents: bis father, Idos, died when he was ten, after which event bis mother,
Fa~ took eare of him. on ber own. In fact ms mother's role was significant, in that it
seems as though sbe was the one who urged the young Shifi'i to study.J7 She is said ta have
had brought him ta Mecca by the rime he was ten years old,3I where he was iotroduced ioto
a milieu where he had contact with the great Muslim scholars in f:Iadlth, law, and philology.
He soon became c~~ht up in this intellectual eutren~ and was initially attraeted to poetty
and, in particu1ar, archery. He went for instaDce ta Badïya where there lived members of the
clan of Hudhayl, a tribe of northem Arab~39 distinguished for theu linguistie eloquence, in
oroer to increase bis proficiency in the Arabie language. Praise has bem bestowed on his
36 His &mer was the son of Mu.~bJ a distant relative of the Prophet, bis mother WOlS aIsosaid ta have been re1aœd ta a dixect descendent of 'Ali b. Ali ralib, the cousin and son-in-law of theProphet. Ibid, pp. 15-16; Chaumont, ccal-5bifi"l," p. 181; Ibn Qadama, Ma1lllqzb, pp. 101-6; MajidKhadduri, "Shifi), al·:' in Mm:ea Eliade, ed. ER, voL 13 (New York: Macmi1lan PublishingCompany, 1987), p. 195.
37 Shifirl, IIIQuut aIKnDWletlgl, ttans. Abu Asad (Lahore: Islamic Publications Lm., 1979), pp.1-5.
39 Chaumont, ccal.Shifi"l," p. 181.
•
•
•
42
proficiency in Arabie in a collection of poems, called fihi1J which has survived to our day.40
It is aIso said that he composed "a treatise 00 acchery, an ext!act from which was to be
produced in a section of the lGtib QI- Um11l.'~1
Geographically speaking, Shifill's quest for knowledge was largely confined to the
Ijijiz, Iraq, Yemen and Egypt. In the F:lijaz, he studied in Mecca and Medina, where he
leamed FfadIth and jiqh (Islamic law).42 He in fact resided in Mecca for at least tV/o periods:
the fust was From his childhood until the death of bis master MiIik, in 179 A.H./795 A.D.;
while the second, of about aine years J duratioo, came after his first visit to Iraq. He visited
Iraq about three rimes. The flISt visit lasted about two YeatS, and aIlowed him ta acquaint
himself \Vith the tradition of lraqi fiqh, and particularly with the thought of one of the
disciples of Abü f:lanifa, i.e., M~ammad ibn al-l:Iasan al-Shayb3iii (d. 189 A.H./804 A.D.).
The second visit was aIso about !wo years in length, and was marked by debates wîth local
scholan, wbose questions he answered confidently. This was moreover the period in which
he began ta write clown his thoughts. His final visit to Iraq lasted only a few months, during
which rime he met with Alpnad ibn ~anbal. 43
-10 Ibid., p. 181.
41 Ibid.
42 In Mec~ Shifi~ studied jiqh, for enmp1e, under Muslim b. Khilid a1-Zan~ (d. 180A:H./796 A.D.), a gteat schoJar of Isbmic law, and it wu he who convinced Sbifi~ ta tum bisattention to this subjea. He also learned F;IaJiJh from prominent schoWs such as Sa)d ibn silim alQaddil)., Daüd al_cA~Abü Sulaymin al-Maklà (d. 175 A.H./791 AD.), 'Abd al-Ma11d ibn 'Abd A.zizal-Azdî (d. 186 A.H./802 A.D.), and Sufyin ibn 'Uyayna (d. 198 AH./ 814 A.D.). In Madina, wbilestudying under Milik ibn Anas, he le2med the 1JJdJ and fi'l1J contained in bis tna5tel:'S work.\fmva!.la' fat a period ofabout ten years. See, ibid., p. 182; andMa~ "S-uat,u pp. 18-20.
43 Ibid. pp. 24-6; Chaumont, "al-Shifi'"1,u p. 182.
•
•
•
43
After completing bis studies with M3lik, he went te Najrin in north Yemen, where
he joined the partisans of the f,lasanid yaq.ya ibn 'Abd Allah. This led to accusations mat he
was a Shi'ite, whereupon he was brought ta Iraq to meet the caliph Hirün al-Risliid. He was
exonerated of aIl charges, however, attet convincing the caliph of bis loyalty, family
background and legal scholarship, assisted in the process by both bis sttength in reasoning
and the help of bis awter, al-Shaybam."
In the yeu 199 A.H./815 A.D or 200 A.H./816 AD., after bis third visit ta Iraq,
Shâfili went to Egypt, probably at the invitation of the govemor al-'Abbàs ibn 'Abd Allah. In
Egypt, he was initially welcomed as the disciple of M3l.ik. On arrivai, he stayed with the
family of 'Abd Allih ibn 'Abd al-f:!akam (d. 268 A.H./s8l A.D.), remaining wirh them until
his death in 204 A.H/820 A.D. Dwing this last stage in bis life he became a conttoversial
figure, for, on the one band, bis lectures attracted a circle of followers which larer crystallized
into a new Islamic school, white on the otha, he inspired jealousy among the followers of
MaIik due ta his popularity. lt \Vas therefore in Fus~~ that Shifi~'s teachings began to have
their greatest influence. Supported by native disciples, Sbi{.)'s influence app~ed sttooger
than Mâlik's supremacy Ï1l Egypt."'s
Sbifi~ is said to have married twice, and left behind four children; cwo sons, Abü
'Uthman (who W2S qit/f of Aleppo) and Abü al-f:las311, and two daughters, FafÎma and
Zaynab.46
... Ibid; Ma~1, "S'"uat,u pp. 21-2
45 Ibid., p. 183.
46 Ibid.
•
•
•
44
ShifiZi's teachers in the field of Arabie were highly renowned. One of them was
A~ma'i ('Abd Mulk ibn Qanb Riwiyat al-'Arab), a linguist, poet, and historian of the Arabs.
It is said that he had Shâfill correct what he had preserved of Hudhayli poetry.47 After
achieving a high leve1 of language proficiency, Shifi'i retumed to Mecc~where two scholars,
Muslim b. KhaIid al-Zan~ and f:lusayn ibn 'Ali ibn Yaiid Abü ,Ati al-Karib1s~ urged him to
study Islamie law. He took their advice and began studying Islamic law and its re1ated
sciences Ce.g. l-jadlth) under the leading teachers in the I:Iijiz. Ibo J:lajar al-'AsqaIin1 mentions
scventy-si.x scholars from whom Shafi~ leamed the Islamic sciences {al-'ztlii11l ai-Isltïm!YJa}.
Three of them were particular1y influential: Sufyin ibn 'Uyayn~ MaIik ibn Anas, and
M~ammad ibn J:lasan al-Shaybam.41 Sufyan ibn 'Uyayna was a fjadlth scholar based in
Meeca. Shafi'i praised him and Malik as the guardians of the Ifml!ths, saying mat, '~f it had
not been for M3Jik and Sufyan, the science of the l:Iijaz could have disappeared.,J49
Malik ibn Anas was a Muslim jurist and the eponymonous founder of the MaIiKi
schooL50 He was one 0 f the earliest figures ta advocate the importance 0 f te.xtual.
argumentation, blending data from revealed sources (represented by the Qur'in and F!arilJhs
of the Prophet M\ÙJ.ammad), with the opinions of authoritative scholars from the en of the
Prophet down to hi.s own rime. His distinctive thought reflected an emphasis on tem and
'7 'Abd Gharii DaqtÏ, af·lJüm al-ShâftY, Foqih Q/.s1lll1lll Q/·AJebar (Bcimt: Dir al-Qalam, 1972),pp. 250-1; see aIso footnote no. 6 on page 250 of the later work for the complete name of Asma'i.
-68 Ma~ "S'ut.n pp. 37-8. He ~o refers ta Muslim b. Kbilid al-Zanji as the teacher of
~ Foocnote no. la, ibid., p. 6.
50 Susan A. Spectorsky. "Milik ibn A:m.s,:I' inE~ voL 9, p. 145.
•
•
•
45
the pClcnce of 1'fadinan schows.S1 lvralik developed a. ma.terial and practical way of
reàsoning. subor~ting the latter to the texts (the Quran and lffleftli). Shm') opposed mis
tendency" however" developing a. more formal and technica1 way of reasoning.52
Mu1}munad f:1a.san ~-Sha.yba.nï was a r<ufan and prominent disciple of Abü I-:!mlfa.
His thought matched that of bis teacher in tha.t both placed a. hea.vy emphasis on the
"3 C'1..-vl-;;..,~importance of reasoning and on ta.king Muslim traditions Ulto a.ccount.~ ~ua./U"'4U
contributed to the development of a systema.tic reasorung which contrasted with the
IV1adinan way of thinkmg, for he ra.tionalized the interpretation of a tra.dition ~·here-.ls the
Madinans confined their intetpretation to analyzing its chain of transmission and the
reliabilit;" of its links. For exampte, on the question of retaliation for m intentlonal killing or
injury, the Medirums offered a. textual interpretation, confining themselves to saying tha.t "A
person of~ must be killed [111 ret::ùiation], md a. minor has to pay half the weregeld;"
whereas Shaybini dev~ops the interpretation sa that :l wider range of options is possible.
Shifi') àdopted Sha.ybüii' s a.pproach te reasonin~ and yet managed to create his own
method which wa.s superior to ma.t of his Kufan master.54
Since Shifi)'S dl0Ught ret1eeted ~ mHjtdhù/s opinion and was concemed with the
dialogue with ms contemporuies, he becune a controversw figure in Islmùc legal disceurse,
shocking as well as a.ttra.cting many people. 1t is said tha.t he Md many students, the mest
important ones, unong others, being: Humaydi, a. tra.nsmitter on SMfi')'s a.uthocity; Kuibïsl,
51 Ibid., pp. 145-6.
52 Schacht, Th! Origms, p. .31.3.
S3 Ibid., pp. 33-4 and 306.
54 Ibid, pp. .30S-10.
•
•
•
46
a leading schow in I-JaGth and Islamic Iaw (jiqh); ZaJfarifii (d. 260 AH./874 A.D.), a teacher
of Islamic law who transmitted Shifi'ï's Mabsuf; BuwaYli (d. 231 AH./846 AD.), a great
ttansmitter of Islamic legal authority; and Muzanl (d. 264 AH./878 A.D.), one of Shifi'i's
disciples who preserved bis doctrines.55 And it is probable that Abü Thawr (d. 240 AH./854
A.D.), a Yemeni scholar who established bis own school derived from the Shafi'ite school,
\VaS Shi6.'ï's disciple. However, it is aIso said tbat ShifiZi's treatises have, ultimately, only
reached us tbanks ta the transmission of Rabi' ibn Sulaymin (d. 270 AH./883 A.D.), himseLf
known as the ;triMai-!ulblb ai1aJlda. ,é6
2. Works, Tbougbt and Methodology
a. Works
Shafi~ was a prolific writer. It is said that bis works were preserved "in Iraq and in
Egypt, the foener being known as the 'oId' (qatilm) books, the latter as the 'new' books.nS7
Calder suspects that only the latter have been preserved.SI Among bis surviving wotks are ai
Umm, Kitib Ib.tal al-I!til}san, fll11lr1 a/-11m, M1IS1I4d ai-Imam a/-ShQji'f, I/eI;tiliif al-I-Jadlth, and al
Risa7tJ. Ai-V 111111, a book on flqh or Islamic law, was written while he was residing in Egypt.59
It represented a new deparrure in bis day in juristic waring, developing as it did a new
55 Maprjl, ceS"at,'~ pp. 38-40.
56 Calder, St1Itiiu il, Emiy MmIim fmispTlllima (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), pp. 68-9.
57 Ibid.
SI Ibid.
59 Mar.arjI,"S-mlt,U p. 33.
•
•
•
47
exegetical a.pproach [Q interpreta.tion based on textual sources. ISO Kitih Ih.tëL oL-Istil;sin, and
]01110-r ol-1/m constituted Shifi)'s writing on legal theory, besicles his Riso7a.ri1 lV!Nsnad ol-Imam
oL-ShOfiiJ and IkhtiloJ oL-Ffomth represettt Shifi).'s main works on Ifi,le5th. The former is :l
IflJmth collection,.:i2 while the la.tter is an exposition of Shafi~'s theory of the subject. Ai-
RisiloJ pemaps Shifi"):s best known work, contains ms theory on the relation between the
QU1:'an and HlJœth, :lS well as bis views on 1t.SHt ai:fiqh. In it he defmes and sets the boundaries
of interpreting the textual sources, i.e., the Quran and the fJatGth. He aIso tries to elaborate
therein the nature and scope of tra.ditions and sets rules on how ta differentia.te between
authentic and inauthentic repo!tS..,3 It is said the treatise ';~ad been sent in the fcan of epistle
ta "Abd a.l-R.ù1min ibn Mahdi (198 A.H./814 A.D.): who had asked Shifi) ta ~rrite a.
treanse on the a.uthoriutive sources of the shUi·a..n64 1t is also said that Shifï) composed two
versions of the Fisü/tr, the ronner cilled the Oid RisiIo (wllich has not survived) and the
la.tter the New &saitl. The discussion in the fanner was confmed ta the Quéan and SMnno :lS
sources of l:1W (sorne sayaIso ta ij11l0' [consensus] md q&is [analogy]), while that in the l~tter
wa.s a refmement of the fooner, covecing the whole range of sources of Islamic
60 Calder, ~t14diu,p. 84.
,~l The fonn~Iwas published with al-l'film, vii, pp. 267-77, while the lattez.: was published withthe same book, pp. 150-62; see CluumODt, "al-sbifiZi," p. 184.
U It was published by D'iI al-Fikt: in 1996. A yeaz.: later, Da: al-Fikx published MHmad al-Imama/-Shifi'iwith the thernatic ammgement of Islamic law, done by l\ful:wnmad ~Abid al-Sindi undet: thetitle TartTb fI[umad ~'·I",Om fJi.Shijz'!. M~d '.Abid al-SincG, Tmiib Mhmad al-Ima", .:z/-Shap'i(Bein1t: Di!: al-Fila, 1997).
é3 Khadduci, "Shafili," p. 196.
oj4 Khad~ "TransIatot's Inttoduction: The HistoticaI Ba~01:Ound of the RisaIa," in .41[Jllam Mu/;Ja.",mad Ilm ldiir aI-ShOfi'?r a1-F~aIo ft U~-üL aI-Frqh: T1!~'e 011 tht Ftm11Mtzo1U of I.domil.J:dispntdotaJ ttms. (Cambridge: The Islamic TCKtS Society, 1987), p. 21.
•
•
•
48
jurisprudence.65 Shifill aIso wrote a book entitled ~ktim al-Qurin, but it has nat survived.
However.. Bayhaqi (d. 458 AH'/1066 A.D.) col1eeted Shâti'i's thoughts on Uw in the Qur'ân.
and gave his work the same tide that Shifill did, i.e.,.Al;Jeam a/~lIr'in.66 Recendy, Majdi ibn
Manl?Ür ibn Said al-Shawn collected and published Shifill's intetpretatioa of 38 mras of the
Qur'an, which he has entitled Tafslr a/-Imam a/-Shiji'l. The collection itself depends heavily on
al-Risila and particularly the A4kaïn al-Qur1an of Bayhaqi.67
B. Thought and Methodology
1) Thougbt
Shifi'i's tbougbt shows the broad range ofknowledge he acquired in bis early days in
such subjeets as the Arabic language, the Qu~in, the fJarllth, legal rulings and the traditions
of local cultures. AlI these eIements were founded on the Arabic language, \~thich, far from
being limited to matters of linguistic concem, brought the whole pre- and non- Muslim Arab
tradition of euly Islam. As mentioned above, Shifi'ï leamed the Arabie language among the
Hudhayl tribe, where the purest Arabie was spoken. He aIso absorbed the practical tendency
liS Ibid., pp.22-5. In footnote no. 62 ta page 22 of the latter wOtk, I<h2dduri explains matccaaybaqi cites the twO wotks as ewo sepaate books (folio 50). Ibn ~aju states mat~ b.~bal possessed a copy of both the oid and the new RisOl4, which were œgarded as {wo diffetentwodts.n Ibid., p. 22.
66 This t:reatise is p~eserved in Dar al-Kurub al-~yya,number 715, and wa.s published in1953. See, Bayhaqi, A1)1e4m aJ-QIIr'in li a/-bllim a/-M1I'tjmn 816 ai-MlIjtllhiti ai- Mt«jadtJoJlI Ab, ~bdAJIibMtdJQ//11J/tllf ldifs ai-Sh~'f (Caïro: Makubat Nashr al-Thaqa& al-Islimiyya., 1953), p. 19.
67 Majdi ibn M~ür ibn Sayyid al-Shawri (ecL), Ta/sir a/-Immn a/-ShQji'i (Beimt: Dir al·Kutubal-cnmiyy2, 1995).
•
•
•
49
in ob~g knowledge,68 uthe liberal use of ro:i:'59 and the growing tendency ta rely on
textual sources,'0 from rus studies in the I:Uiiz and Ira.q.
Shifi'). lived in an era. when Muslims scholars were increasingiy involved in
preserving and constructing Islamic heritages.71 Differences of opinion e..xisted, however,
over the extent to which ra) (opinion) could he used in ela.boClting a. knowledge pertaining
ta the guidance of Islamic religion. Basicilly, Muslim scholc1rS wete divided into !Wo groups:
.:cthe traditionists',12 and t"the ra.tionilists."n He responded to this emerging conflict by
ttying ta bridge thi:) conflict. Hallaq describes Shifi'),'s raIe as m a!tempt at reconcilia.tion
between the !wo camps: the traditionists and the rationalists. This movement began ta be
àppuent only towa.rd the very end of the 3C'Ï /9 tb century.74
Halla.q summa.!Ïzes Sbafi)'s thought on le~ theory, on the basis of al-Risalo, in si."<
POints:
ôS The Islamic so:nces initially gœw out of ptaetical considenl.tions. In law fOI example, atuling arose out of the ptocess of question and answer between a Companion and the Prophet on acertain ptoblem.
j!} Before and during shinZi's rime, there weœ two kinds of use of n:z); 1) ,cfree reasoningbased on pmetica1 considemtion and bound by no authontative t~"t," and 2) t'nec: reasoning blilScdon such a text and moti:vatcd by practical considetation.~ Hallaq, A Hùttny, p. 19.
1{l Though it 'N-as insignificant in its emetgenee, this tendency had been growing sinee thefust centuty of Hijta and sbifi'i fotmali2ed il. 'This tendenc:y of pIojecting legal doctrines, andinfonnation on the apIamtion of Qur'm to SUcceSSOIS~Companions~and the FIophet hegan in theend of the fust centmy AH. and it developed fimùy up to the thiId centw:y. Ibid, pp. 7-18.
71 Mul:wnmad Abü Zahrah, TOIikh :z/-Madhâhib ai-IsEmix/afi a'-S~'a il/a 3/- J.:J..qJid il/a Tan;');:z1·Madhihib aI-Fiqhiyp (n.p.: DàI al-Fila al-'Arabl, 1987), pp. 475-6.
n The traditionists wet:e those who m2intained mat ':"notbing that the Muslim communitysays OI does should escape the sanction of the Qut'm and the IepOrts of the Ptophet." Ha11aq, AHi.:ttny, p. 20.
73 Rationalists were essentially those who ten&d t'to ignore the plophetic reports md insiston human Ieason as the final judge on matteI5 not .teguIated by the Qurm.;J Ibid, pp. 20-1.
14 Ibid., p. 33.
•
•
•
50
(1) that law must he œnved e..xclu::,-ively from œvea1~ scripnu:e; (2) that theProphetic Sunna constitutes a binding sautee of law; (3) that contradiction e.."<Ïsts neimeIbetween the Ssmna and the ~On nor amor.g veISes OI ~dith.r within e~ch of these wosources; (4) tba.t the t'loTO soU%Ces complement eam other henneneutically; (5) !bat a lcga1ruling denved from unambigious and widely tra.nsrn.itted texts is certain and subject ta nodisagteement, wbercas a tuling that is transfeIIed by means of ijtihGti and q#yar Iruly besubjected to disagreernent; and finaD.y~ (6) mat ijtthaJ and qryar as weil as the sanctioningÎDSttument of consensus, aIe prescnbed by th.e revealed sour~. 15
The Risaio is considered the summit of Shifi)'s thought, the pla.ee whe1:e he offe1:s
his fullest systematization of Islamic legal theory. Hallaq:s breakdown ma.kes at lea.st t'Wo
significant points: fir.st, his rhought wa.s hea.vily oriented towards texnlal ~murces, for wiuch
reason rese~chershave classified him as be10nging to the rra.ditionist camp; and secon~ his
historical consciousness was complementary/6 beca.use he depended on divine sources as the
prima.ry means of elaborating or solving a problem.
2) Methodology
As mentioned a.bove, shifi~ was equipped with expert knowledge in four key areas:
Arabie langtù1ge, the Qur'an and lfaeEth, and the traditions of loc~ culture. 1 categorize these
four elements a.s epistemological sources: language, reason, reality ::md revealed tex!.
Inferenti<ùly, we see that Shifilj, considered reason wd language as hermeneutical deviees,
reality as a progressive màterial, and revealed texts as source of juristic knowledge.
In his Ri.r.ila, for e."<ample, Shifi") uses Arabie terms with grea.t precisionïi in order to
produce a. systematie and measurable teaninology useful te constroct the relation between
;:. Ibid.: pp. 30-1.
11î Historical consciousness heIe is Sh:-tfj'i.'s considetation on the logic of things or events.
TT Though amast aD. other jutists were equal ta shafi=ï in using language precisely, this pointdeserves to be take:n into account te illustIate that he was awaxe of that.
•
•
•
51
the Qur'an and the SunlttZ, and "to establish the supremacy of the Prophetie ttadirions
together with the Qur'an as the e..~clusive material sources of the law.,,71
Language is faetually and rationally "antenor' ta reason or logic. A2meh sees both
language and logic as ''"lOstruments coaducive to the truth" with the exception of the truth
for mystics who see this as based on qalb (an inward-looking faculty) and dhowq
(transcendental sensibility).i') Language depends for its truth on grammar, while logic relies
on the consistency of its procedures of inquiry. Language however bas shortcomings due to
the fact that certain presuppositions are attached to particular languages, whereas logic is not
bound to any particular circumstances but is univ~al. For example, a presupposition cao be
linguistically correct and logically incorrect, as in the sentence every m(11l wiO nol dit. However,
language cao be a vehicle allowing the funetion of logic. In Shifill's rime, ra) was used even
at the level of independent element in legal judgment, 50 much 50 that many Muslim
scbolars warried about the dueat it posed to the use of the StlnllO. Shifi'i deconstmeted the
use of1"ll)'and reconstrueted it ta be operative ooly in iitihad or qiYis.~
&flli!} represents what is found in social and individual experience. Its elements
consist not ooly of the manifest rulings and customary law but also new problems, as
reflecting changes over rime. Sbifi) saw this as an abject of knowledge that bas co be solved.
The problem solvers themse1ves are textual (the Qur'aa and the SUIIIIlJ), and logical (jjtihiti
and qtyis). ljmil is aIso a source of law and of resolutions to problems. However, its
71 HaUaq, "Wu al-shi6ZO'I," pp. 591-2. Ifwe look al the contents af fli-Iüsilo, sbi6~ cuefullybreaks dawn every tetm inca variaus aspects. For e.umple, the tenn b'!ftn is explained in fivecategories. See, ShifiZO'~ tJi.RisilQ, ed. by Kaylâni (Caïro: Sbirkat Maktaba '" Ma~ba'atM~pfi al-Bibi:al-FJalabi wa Awlidihi, 1969), p. 265.
79 Az1z Azmeh..ArQbi~Thol«hl rmd [Slm'I;': Soaetie.s O-ondon: Croom He1m, 1986), pp. 107-8.
10 HaDaq, A His/Dry, p. 19.
•
•
•
52
mechanism and procedures, in which [ima' operates, should be based on the divine telt.~ and
logic.
The revealed texts are the Qur'an and the SZinllfJ. It is interesring that Shifi~ goes
beyond other scholats in declaring the te.xts to he the exclusive source of Islamic law.
I:Iammad ibn Sulayman (d. 120 A.H./738 A.D.), Ibn Ab! LayIi (d. 148 A.H./765 A.D.),
Abü I:Ianifa Awzi~ (d. 157 A.H./774 A.D.), Malik ibn Anas, Abü Yusüf (d. 182 A.H./798
A.D.), and A1}.mad ibn al-I:Iasan al-Shaybinl were among the pioneers who anchored the
texts ta the process of elaborating a ruling. Sbifi~ and these figures had this much in
common, in that they regarded the Qur'an as the premier source of law. However, they
differed over the status of the Sunna as a binding ten beside the Qur'an. Hallaq believes that
al-Shaybam was the fust to assCrt chat no legal ruling can be valid unless based upon a
binding text -whether the Qut'an and the Stt!l!Ul. Shifi) tried to expWlge the Companions'
reports from the construction of the law, but he did not succeed; later he relied heavily on
l-;Iodlths whose ttansmitters did not reach the Prophet, such as the f1IUrsaL Schacbt daims that
"the numerous traditions of Ibriliim N akhaZi from Ibn Mas'üd are nnmol in this sense
because Ibtiliim was Dot in direct touch with Ibn Mas'üd.,,11 Furthermore, Hallaq states
fumly chat the SI/nlla of the Prohet and the Qut'in are the sole material sources of the law.52
The Companions' reports and {jtihid in the eyes of ShifiZi are to he men into account
respectiv~y as the thitd and the fourth sources, with the consideration that they be applied
il Schach~The Origins, p. 38.
C Halla.q, A His/ory, p. 18.
•
•
•
S3
only when a nngtahùi does not find any verse or 1;Iodlth that answers a problem, and must be
based on the revealed texts.
Shifiii defines 'i/m (knowledge) as divisible into {wo categories: genen! knowledge,
which eve:ry Muslim bas to possess, such as how ta perfonn the five daily prayers; and
specialized knowledge of subsidiary duties, details which oaly a scholar is obliged ta know.83
This knowledge is acquired through deducing rules or pcinciples from divine sources, and is
the sole province, according to Shitill, of the MzdJahid. It is the latter's task to discover the
relationsbip between God and humanity and among humans themselves.
From the explanation above, it seems that shifill engages in a textual approach,
insisting that aIl problems be solved using means wbich rely heavily on divine sources as the
basis and boundaries of interpretation. Hermeneuncal means such as qiyis play a
fundamental raIe, but an operative one ooly in the area of deducing rulings from those
source~. Specifie hermeneutical devices Iike ai-niisiJeh (ahrogatingJ and a/·manszÏkh (abrogated)
are to he used only so long as they help in dating or in estahlishil'1g the history 0 f the
sources.!4
Shitilï's procedure of ïnquiry is hierarchical, flowing from the Qur'ia, the SURlia,
ij"jïJSS and qtyis,l6 in that arder. Abu Za1uah adds one other element, i.e., that of exarnioing
1) Calder, 'Uhtilif and ljma' in Shifi~'sRisila:' in SI 58 (1983), p. 56.
54 Burt~ AINVIJaiJ, p. 26.
as ljUlJ1consensus was found in pre-IsWnic rimes, and it \VaS referred ro "the consciousfoanal agreement of the tribe." Ihllaq explains mat "in the euly schools, consensus expœssed theaverage doctrine on wbich the schoWs and the eommunity, whether in a puticu1ar region or at~were in agreement." At the end of the second century, Prophetie œports were used te justify it.Shifi'i ~"tended its justification to Prophetie repotts as we1l as the Qur'an. Hallaq, A Hi.rtory, p. 20.
86 Qtyisl Analogy is 'ta method of reasoning. ta the diseovery of God's law on the basis ofthe revealed texts and of the consensus," with its opeative procedure must he based on the relatedmattelS between me problems and the existing doctrine of Islam. Ibid., p. 83. HaIlaq discusses chis
•
•
•
54
the sayings of the Companions. He bases this on Shifi):s explana.rion of the levels of
knowledge, which are enumerated as five in number: the Quran and the SHmrD; ijma~· the
sayings of the Compa.ni.ons; disagreements among the latter; and q!yas.87 Nevertheless, Abü
Zahmh points out that, substantively, there is no difference between ijmi' and the sayings
and disa.greements of the Companions, since in his discussion of ijmil, he refen to it olS the
agreeInent of the Companions on a m~ltter, like their i)md on the five prayen and the
required number of raktJ'Q's therein.53
Overall, Schacht describes Shifi')'s thought as a culmination of a long process of
theorizing on Islamic doctrine. He ugues that prior to Shifi)'s rime, there WJ.S :l
developlnent ma.rked by three phenomena.. First, the effort ta develop technica.l tetms like
SH1Ina, qtyis., rayand ijtihid intensified Second, dependence on traditions inc:re~ed, especiilly
:luthoDta'ltive.';o And third, "material considerations of a religious lUld ethical kind, which
represented one a.spect of the process of Islamizing the legal subject-maner, tended to merge
into systematic reasoning, and both tendencies became inextri~blymixed in the result.,,a9
Schacht concludes that ':Sh~fi)~s legal theory is a. tnagnificently consistent system and
superior by fax to the doctrines of the ancient schools.n90 r-J!oreover, he states that Shàfi1j, wa.s
"the founder of the N.pi/ al:ftqh, the discipline dealing Vw-ith the theoreticù basis of Islamic:
as Ibid_, pp. 466-9.
31 Schacht, _4n 1r.lTrJdm:tlon tb Idtlm~L:zUl (Oxford: Clarendon PIess: 1964), pp. 37-41.
~(J Schacht, T~ OTigùr~ p. 173.
•
•
•
S5
law.,,91 Calder doubts chis, arguing that ccthe magnificent totality of his juristic achievement
was not recognized by Muslim writers, and bad no tmgible influence on juristic thought,
before perhaps the beginning of the major schools of the fourth century.n92 Hallaq is even
more insistent in refuting Schacht's conclusion, saying that this thesis is "seriously flawed."
He argues that chat historical evidence in the early and medieval sources is conuary ta this
assumption, such that "we have no reason ta beIieve mat such a continuity ever existed; that
Shifili's Rira1:i and the theory that it embodied had very little, if any, effeet during mast of
the 9mcennuy [the 3ni cenrury A.H.]; and mat the image of shifilï as the founder of UlUJ al·
jzqh was a later creation.,,"3 He furthennore asserts that ShifiZL's achievement more properly
represents ,ca synthesis of reason and revelation" and "the first attempt at synthesizing the
disciplined e.~ercise of human reasoning and the complete assimilation of reve1ation as the
basis of the law.n94
C. SHAFI'I'S CONSTRUCTION OP THE THEORY OF NASKH
t. Construction
a. As a Phenomenon
Here, we will discuss how Shifiii' considers the acceptaoce and importance of 1ZfJS1eh.
Before discussing the acceptance of naskh, we will see where Shifi'i elaborates the notion.
91 Scbach~ An IlltnJdllaion, p. 48. Even before Scbacht, Eric. F. Bishop wrote an articledevoted co sbi6.~'s mIe as the founder ofa law school Eric. F. Bishop, "al-Shifi~ (Mulpmmad Idm)Founder of a Law School," MW" 19 (1929).
92 Calder, S!JIdies, p. 67.
93 The te,x[ in brader is miae; Hallaq, ''Was al-Sbifi~," p. 588.
94 Ibid., p. 600.
•
•
•
S6
His theory of narkh is found in ai-Umlll, the A~1eôm aJ-Qur'ill of Bayhaqi and particularly a/-
Riso/a, where he e.xplains its theoretical basis. In ai-Umm, ShifiZi gives examples of many
juristic matters, including "askh. In bis AJ;ktim al-Qur'an, Bayhacii discusses the notion
extensively, taking bis information e..xclusively From al-Umm and al-Risa7a.95 In &ll-Risa/o, Shafi~
devotes a considerable amount of space ta the theary of 1tflSkh.9fJ
Shifi'i locates the subjeet of 1IflSkiJ as the fust step m ms elahoration of the
re1ationship between the Qur'ân and the Sunna in terms of how the Prophet Mu1}ammad
should obey God and Muslims obey God and the Propher. He tries ta show how God
maintains the truth of His messages embodied in His revelation and the traditions of His
Prophet. 97 In this discussion, we see that he makes it a precondition mat his readers have a
faithful consciousness which will allow them to accept the subject of narkh.
Shafi'i begins bis discussion, by agreeing with the previous authorities in accepting
the genre as the exclusive right of God. Basing his opinion on the notion of Gad is
sovereign rigbt to establish and deconstruet His words, he quotes Q. 14: 51 and Q. 16: 91.?1
95 Baybaq"i, AlI'-, pp. 33-6. HoweÇ(~l, he defines its definition and scope in four pages (p.33-6).
l)6 15 pages in Chapter 1 under the sub-chaprers, Ibtidiz-' ai-NaSikIJ DIQ l1i-~fmu1Ïkh/Inttoduction
to a/·NisiJ:h RI al-M4IISJÏ1d (pp. 54-8), al-NQsiJ:h 1IIIl a/-Mf11ISIÏld aI-/adh1yatitdIM a/-KitlJl~ !M'tlihi Il'fJ a/SIl1lIlll '4itiIM~;/ oi·NisiJUJ 1JItl ai-Aftl1lS1ïleh, ofWhich the Book [of God] Indicates Sorne and the Slln/IQ
Othets (58-61), FtJr(i aI-$1lI6J ai-ltztJhl JaIltJ a/-Kitib ÙJ1IIII11I11 a/-Sau 'Qi4 111111I lIr.?JÏ!M 'tminl bi al- 't«Jbri 1IJfl
'aJaman li tult.talm pû4btiJlI !Ji ai-fIIlZ'!ttJt1/The Duty of Prayer [the Perfonmnce of Which] the Book ofGad and the Sunna Iodiate ta Whom itMight Not Apply Owing te [a Valid]&~ and AgainstHim Whose Payers 15 Not Acc:redited Because of [sorne Act of} Disobedience (61-8), a/-Nâsikh DIaal-MfllISIÏIùJ rli·W; tfIIlMJJM 'aûlyhi a/-SII1I1IIl1l1tl1li-ijmi'/al-NisiJUJ JWI al-MtmrMit.JJ Which he Indicaœd bythe Surma and Consensus (p. 68-71), and 10 pages in subcbapœrs WtJjh ai-AJe1Jar min ai-Nàrild D'O alMmwi1tJJ/ Other Maners on al-N4dh 1VII a/-Mmuild (p. 112-3), Wajh oi-Akhar/ Other Marœrs (p.114-6), W'!ih aJ-Alt.hflr/ Other Mattets (p. 116-22). See. Sbifi'"t. rJf-RisQla, pp. 54-69 and 112-22-
97 Shifirt. a/-Ristiftz, pp. 49-54.
91 Shifi'i, ai.Risa1o, p. 54; Baybaqi, A!JJemJl aiQzu'iB, p. 33.
•
•
•
57
Leaving aside the previous authorities' way of e.-cpressing this argument - wbich accepts the
phenomenon of the genre based on the information found in Islamic tradition either in
lfadIth or Companions- Shifi'i anchors it in bath verses, showing how it is possible for Gad
to review His words. Althougb this kind of elaboration is not new, since other authorities
had aIso considered the Qur'an as the premier source oflaw, what Sbifi~ did in the case of
naskh is more elaborate in a sense that he tries to provide the genre with a firmer foundation.
How post-ShifiZi scholars elaborated it will be discussed in chapter 3.
Shifil does not mention the story of 'Ali's prohibition against teaching the Qur'an
without a knowledge of nasleh. However, he argues with other authorities that knowledge of
naskh is one important condition of Qur'anic studies. In addition, he aIso discusses the field
with great care, making sure mat readetS can accept ie. He, first of aU, signifies ntlSleh by
declaring that it should be accepted through the medium of imin/faith, because naskh is the
exclusive right of God. He then helps the readcr sec the possibility of kno"Wing narleh in the
Qur'in or FfarlIth, showing that ai-MSi!eh/ the abrogating verse/Ffadlih cames after al-
1IItmszileh/the abrogated one. In other words, he combines !wo ingredients (faith and history
of the data) in justifying acceptaDce of JUlSkh.
b. Thcory
Ta begin with, we stan with the fact chat Shifili differentiates naskh from a/-b'!Ja;'J tak1JpÎ,
taqjld, and taJ.n-r ~ân may be defined as "a collective teml which indudes the genetaI
99 'Ali MusJUi, ai-NtlSJe.h, p. 27. A critica1 review of these temlS: btgan, takhiEi. tal{Jid, and!!5ii/ is done by Nashr~d Abü Zayd. See, Nasbr aimid Abü Zayd, a/-In/am a/.Shifi'i D'tl Ta:rlS al·I~ tJ1-wtlSll!!1Ja (Cairo: Sîni' li al-Nashr, 1992).
•
•
•
58
principles of law as weIl as detailed roles." 100 Shifizr divides the latter tenn inta five
categories, which Khadduri summarizes as follows:
The 6m consists of a specifie 1ega1 pYovision in the text of the Qur'in, such as the basicduties that are owed ta God (aeda1 witness, pmyer, payment of alms, &sting. and pilgri1D3ge).The second includes certain provisions, whose modes of obsen"ance are specified by an arderof the ProphetM~ (such as the number of ptayers each clay and the amount of a1msto be paid). The third consists of broad Iegal provisions which Mu~d particularized.The fourth indudes al1 the lega1 provisions laid down by Mul;wnmad in the absent of aspecifie Qur'inie œrt The fifth and the final category is comprised of rules which are soughtby the exetcise of ytihitJ (petsonal reasoning) by means of qty4r (amlogy).101
The term talehm (particularization) may he defined as "the exclusion from the general
of a part chat was subsumed under that general."l02 Shifi) further discusses it in relation to
tJmm (get1etal), stating that the Qur'in, in addition to other categories, is clivided iota general
and particulor nI/u. These two teons admit of, at leasr, three relations: some general rules are
intended te he genen!, c"'m which the particu1ar rules are included;" other general rules exist
in which ''both the general and particular rules are included;" and then there are other
general rules ''which are intended ta be particular ruleS."l03
TtlI'pld means qualification, and refers in this case especial1y ta "particularization by
mems of introducing into the generaL, Qot a condition, but a quality (sifa)."lCM By 'a/.sil is
meant "the explication of the foundations by extending their law [0 particu1ar cases.n1DS
100 Khadduri, tt211S., a/-lmint, p. 33.
101 Ibid., p. 34. See aIso, Shifirl, a/-Risila, pp. 15-33.
102 Halhq, A Histtny, pp. 45-6.
lOl Ibid., p. 35. See aIso, Shifirl, rJi-&i.ra7o, pp. 33-8.
lCM Hallaq,A HùtlJry, p. 46.
lOS Ibid., p. 199.
•
•
•
59
Aetually, Shifi~ does not discuss either term in isolation, but only as they relate ta the
hermeneutieal principles of the Slmna vis fi Lis the Qur'an. Khadduri explains that "Shifill's
specifie reference to the SunNl, the Prophet's sayings and decisions, ta clarify the meaning of
a particular piece 0 f Qur'inic legislation or an ambiguous text, brings L.'e Sunna into the field
of Islamic legislation and indicates its specifie role as a source of laW.u106
According to Shifi), !lfljJeh may be de6ned as an earlier ruling contained in either one
or more verses of the Quian or in one or more F;Iadlth whieh is abrogated by cither larer
verses or later I-fatllth. In other words, he sees naskh as depending on the chronological
appearance of the sourees.107 He begins bis analysïs of the genre by citing the Quèânie verses
14: 51, 16: 91, 10: 16-17, and 13: 39, which establish the sovereignty of God in everything,
induding in the area of revising His own words.1oa He next explains sorne characteristics of
the genre, referring in this instance tn the Qur'an 2:106, which apparently charaeterizes lIaJ/eh
as either mithi (similar) or 1ehtrJf' filin (superior).l09 He then reemphasizes the sovereignty of
Gad, quoting the Qur'an 16: 101 110, "And when We change a verse (of the Qur'an) in place
of anodler - and Allàh knows best what He sends down- dley say: 'You [Mul}ammad} are
but a forger.Hm Applying benneneutic analysis, he maintains mat, like nas!eh in the Qur'an,
which operates oaly within the QU!'an, naskh in the Sunna is aIso only operative on other
106 Khaddw:i, tnns., oJ-UIlOm, p. 35.
107 Ibid., p. 36.
tOi Shi6rl, fJ/.Risa1a, pp. 54-5.
109 Ibid., p. 56.
110 Ibid.
Ul ailili and~ trans.. Trll1lShtifJR, p. 362
•
•
•
60
SUllna.11'! An example of the foaner can be seen in how the duty of payer before the bve
prayers, i.e., the dawn prayer, in Q. 73: 1-4, is abrogated by verse 20 in the same sUra.113 In
the case of the Sunna, we have the example of how the death penalty decreed in the Sunna is
abrogated by another which ordains corpotal punishment.114 In short, Burton summarizes
Shifi'i's presuppositions on naskh thus:
1. The nasleh, or replacement ofan iylI is an exclusive divine prerogative.
u. An iYa an he replaced solely by another~ God bas raId us that He it is Who replacesHis vetSeS, and He spoke only of œplacing His own verses, Thus, only ~an Il1lSkhs
~ur'in,and Et;ur'in Ilask1Js only ~in.
w. ~ur'in IIIlSlehs only ~~in; S1I1I1lIJ 1IIlSkhs only S l1li1111. Kur'in does not 1I/lJJ:h StIR1ZIr, Su"nadoes not 'W/eh ~in.llS
Having established the fundamental basis of the gente, Shifi'i himself examines his
presuppositions, in an analysis which takes the fonu of a dialogue. The fitst question he
addtesses is whether there is any indication in the Sunna mat a SUllna can abrogate anothe!
S Imna, like a verse of the Qur'ân can abrogate another of equal status. Shifi'ï answets the
question by referring ta the unique status of SUllllfl- a divine source like the Qurân- which
is to be obeyed by every Muslim, a charaeteristic guaranteed by God himself. For just as a
Muslim bas ta abey the Prophet, the Prophet's Sunllfl is likewise binding. He says, "He who
follows shall never disobey what he was ordered to obey, and he who is under obligation to
111 Ibid.
L14 Burton, Th, S01l1rts, p. 7.
115 Ibid., p. 6.
•
•
•
61
obey the Sunna of the apostle shaIl not refuse ta obey it, for he is not empowered to abrogate
any part ofitU116
His second question is as follows: uIs it posStble ta assume that there was a
ttansmitted Sunna which was abrogated while the abrogating Stmna was ooc ttansmitted?Jl17
ShifiZi replies to this with a circular atgument, saying that this cannot be, since it 1S
impossible to bave a binding rule in a SII1I1ffl abrogated by a Q01l-e."<Îs1Ï11g SUlI"a, and that
there must be a replacement for an abrogated ruling.lll His cext question 15 whether the
Sun1lll cao he abrogated by the Quran. Shâfi'i answers that "if a SII1fM were abrogated by the
Quran, another Sunna must have been laid down by the Prophet making it cleu that his
earlier SUII1flJ was abrogated, sa as to demoostrate to men mat an act cao be abrogated oruy
by something of equa! status." The last question is ioquires in ta the bases of his
presupposition. He replies by siding with the notion of coofoanity between God and the
Prophet on the effectiveness of a mling; a SUlIlIa will never contradiet the Quran; a Sunna
will always go hand in band with the Qur'an. For just as the Quran abrogaœs its verses, sa
does the Sunna, and as the QUt'an does not abrogate the SlmM, ie cannat be any different the
other way around. Furthermore, he e.xplores the if type of inqt1Ùy and shows its weakness,
saying for c..'Cample that, if it is pennissible ta say that a Sunlla cao be abrogated by the
Qur'in,1l9 then it can be equally he said mat the Qurân can be a~ogatedby the Sunna.
116 Shitir" ai-RiJi/4, pp. 56-7; Khadduri, tanS., a/-I1Jltl1I1, pp. 125-6.
117 Shifi'i, ai-RiJ~p. 57; Khadduri, tta1lS., ai-lmim, p. 126.
118 Ibid..
119 Shifir" a/-Risih, p. 57-8; Khadd~ tans., a/-Imœ//, p. 127-8.
•
•
•
62
Shifill considers the SU1lna to be a vaIid source of law, alongside Quèan, ijmd, and
qryis. He devotes much more space ta the discussion of SU1l1ffJ and ffarilth in his Risa?a,
debating their respective validity and their occasionally contradictory tendencies. He tolerates
for instance the I:!adith AJ;ad (particular F;IadJth) transmitted by a reliable, sÙlgle-traosmitter
chain. Burton articulates this point cleatly:
Shifi)~s arguments bad been provoked and detemlined by the pre"-ailingcontemporuy situation in the IsJamic sciences, and mainly by criticism of the 1:ImEJb reportscurrendy in circulation. He was primarily motivated by the necessity ta place the reportsfrom the Ptophet in a special ca.tegoty out of reach of any al1egation tbat the utteQl1ces andactions of the Companions could safely he taken as the most reliable indicator of the validityof dUs regulation or the invalidity of mat. Shifi) had cliscoveted a method of navigationwhich promised saie passage through the shoals of confusion and currents of complexitywhich bedevil1ed every scholar b.nncbing on ta the ocean of the lfaGth. 12O
Shifi~ does not fonnulate explicitly the conditions of nasJeh. However, by applying
careful scrutiny we can identify four conditions implicit in his argument: 1) there should be a
conflia between the lIâsikh and the IIIllnsiikJJ,).21 2) the ruling of the ma!lS1ïkh must be
established before determining the nisileh,)J:: 3) the ItIisikh and the manszikh should be in the
area of shan'aF and 4) the nasileh has to be established in a similar or better way than mat in
wbich the f1IallsiileJJ was escablished.124
As regards the modes of flQSIeh, Shafi~ does oot bother ta orgaoize them according ta
the tIaditiooa1 categories of nosleh al-~ulem diina al-tiltlwa (the suppression of the ruling, but
not of the wording), flQS!eh al-tiltiwa dzina al-Iplkm (the suppression of the wording but oot of
120 Burton, A/nÎ V hœJ, p. 37.
Ul Shâfil"1, a'.Risola~ p. 57.
122 Ibid.~ p.
123 Ibici, p. 60.
U4 Ibici~ p. 55.
•
•
•
63
the ruling), and 1lILr/eh al-l;ukm JlItJ ai-tiJ4wa (the suppression of both ruling and wording).
Burton believes that at the rime of Shafi~ all three kinds of nas/eh were being c1iscussed125
Button 6nds that he CChad no interest in the purely exegesis-originated mode of Itoskh al
tiliwah 11Ia-l-l;ukm!'~ However, Shafi~ can still be said te recognize NlO modes of 1tfJsklr.
abrogtJtÎIIg the rulill& bIIt not the UlorrJing and abrogatÎng the 11Io1'din& bzlt not the mling. In bis The
COI1e,'"/ifJn of the Qur1a" and Abi Ubaid al-Qasi1ll b. Sa/kimls K al-nirileh wfJ-I-mansu7e1J, Burton
assumes that Shifi'i had invented the principle of abrogating the 11Iording, no/ the ruling. 127
However, he aiso argues that Shafi'i paid only seant attention to mis mode, citing the latter's
reference ta the case of rat/a' (breast feeding) reported by 'Aisha as the only example.~ In
spite of this~ however, it seems that Shafi'i for the most part applied the fi.rst mode of nas/eh.
z. ConstrUction of Naskh in Context
In our previous discussion of Shifili's construction of naslelJ, we saw mat he tried ta
establish certain underlying principles: first, it is different From b'!}an, ifJkh;;', 'atm and toqyVJ;
second, it is an abrogation of an earlier ruling by a chronologically later one; thitd, it is an
heuneneutical device; fourth, it is limited ta the Qur'an abrogating only the Qur'ân and the
SZt1lNl only abregating the S1OI1IIT, and fifth, its funetion is to abrogate a ruling and not the
wording, or te abrogate the wording and not the mling. In the following pages these points
115 Button,Abi 'Ubaid, p. 41.
126 Ibid~ p. 40.
1Z7 Ibid.;B~ The Co&criDH. pp. 89 and 94.
121 Burto~AJniVbaid, p. 40.
•
•
•
64
will he assessed from the viewpoint of its Iinguistic aspects, origin, scope, and modes within
the context of the development of the Islamic sciences.
Shifi'i's approach, as elucidated above, does not begin with an explicit definition, but
rather implies that naskh is concemed with al.fa'akhlehur (the latet' position of the nOsikh/
abrogating and the earlier position of the !11tlnsuAdJ/abrogated verses or fJtldIths, in terms of
rime). He thus conceives of the genre not from an etymological point of view, but rather
From a substantive one. As we saw earli.er, the tirst attempt at defining the practice,
according to M~~fi Zayd, was made by Taban. Accordiagly, Shafi'i begins rus discussion
with the fouadations of the genre, assuming that the Qur'inic verses imply the principles of
nQskh. He analyzes the genre in the Iigbt of other key terms, Iike 'rJmm and /eha.SfJ and e.xplaias
the relation between the Qur'ân and the S11111l1J. [n other words, he sees it as fundamental to a
Muslim's correct uoderstanding of the sources ofhis religion.
The above attitude required a certain consistency on Shifi~'s part in applying the
concept in his al-Rirtila. His concem to distinguish IftJSkh from tIlleh~i, t5 a case in point.
Powers demonsttates how Shifi) cons~tently differentiated between the two concepts,
especially in the case of the vene of bequest and inheritance, for it is said mat Q. 2: 180 and
Q. 2: 240 (the bequest verses) are abrogated by Q. 4: 11-12 (the inheritance verses). Other
Muslim scholars, like al~Qalt1.}ik (d. 105 A.H./723 A.D.), ~asan al-B~n (d. 110 A.H./728
A.D.), Ti'üs (d. 102 A.H./720 A.D.), al-'Ali' ibn Zayd and Muslim ibn Yasar (d. 100
A.H./718 A.D.), cOQsidered Q. 2: 180 not to have been abrogated, justifying this notion 00
the basis of tIlleJJilf. They argued that "the inheritance verses did Qat abrogate Q. 2: 180 but
•
•
•
65
merely specified aspects of that verse that ha<! been worded in a general manner."l1? On the
other hand, Shifi'ï held that the bequest verses were abrogated by the inheritance venes.
This finding, according te him, is clearly indicated by the report of the Prophet, "No bequest
to an heir."uo The opponents of Shifi'i criticized him for having tumed to an uaqualified
Ff.aJlth -'~o bequest to an h~," ta support his case. The proponents of Sh'ifi'i's opinions,
bowever, did occasionally advocate bis position by defending the validity of this l;Iatfith.
PowetS sho~ that, even thougb both Bukhm (d. 255 A.H./869 A.D.) and MusIim (d. 260
A.H./874 A.D.) chose not to include it in theU JQ~lJ;, it nevertheless gained considerable
support. 'Abd al-Razzaq (d. 211 A.H./826 A.D.), Ibn Sbu'bah (d 227 A.H./842 A.D.), Ibn
Maja (d. 273 A.I-I./886 A.D.), rtmÙdh1 (d. 279 A.H./892 A.D.), and al-Nasa'i (d. 303
A.H./916 A.D.) were among those who considered the report to be an important one.L31
Another case in point was abrogation of an ear/ier f'IJ/ing by il later Oltt. Shifi'i was not
alone in approving this type of nas/eh, for both bis contempoaries, Iike Abü Zayd (d. 224
A.H./839 A.D.)132 and bis predecessors, like Ibn Shîhab al-Zuhn (d 124 A.H/742 A.D.),1J3
119 Power, cCOn the Abrogation of the Bequest Veaes," in Ambim 29 (1982), pp. 247 and262-3.
130 1bis EfJJtEth is defective beause the isnOd known to shifi~ (Sufyin - Sulaymin al-.Al7:walMujihid - Mubammad) is broken/DlII1IfJO/i', mis is because "Mujihid was hem aftc:rM~ diedand could not possibly have hem in direct conClCt with the Prophet.'~shi6'i uses it as an indicator ofthe lUlSJ:1J of the bequest veaes by the inheritance verses based on the principle of ijmi' or consensus.In this case, according tO Powers, Shifi) Iowers bis standards of bis œjection the defective reports,and 1tten:1pts to Clloffset the foanal defect in the istliti by appealing ta the doctrine of consensus."Ibid, p. 272; Shifirl, ol-RiIâh, p. 69.
131 Powers, "On the Abrogation," pp. 273-9.
13Z Abü Zayd. a/-NQsikh JIItI a/·MatmÏkJJ ft a/-QIIT't111 o,-~!V ed. Ibn S~ al-MudayfU (Riyaq;Makuba al-R~ 1990). pp. 7-13.
W See, Rippin, ccal_Z~ Naskh al-Qurin and the Pmblem of Early Ta.fsir Tens,u BSOAS47 (1984), p. 29.
•
•
•
66
shared bis opinion on this point Referring ta Q. 2: 106, they infen:ed the role of ai·
/a'aIehJehurin the operation of nasJeh. However, this point was fundamental [0 Shafi'i because
the appearance the data is important not ooly ta their own integrity but to their raIe as well
Throughout his explanation of nasleh in a/-Risa7a, he consistently applies this pcinciple;
indeed, even in his treatment of the if clause, he believes that it is impossible ta have a
transmitted Sunna abrogated by a non-existing SI/1t1la, as \\re saw above.
Furthermore, Shifi'i not oaly echoes other proponents of nasleh on this point, but
likewise sees it as a henneneunical device. Prior to Shifi'i's rime, as was explained earlier, the
discourse on lIaskh was concemed with providing data on the operation of 1ItlSkh in the
Qur'an and Sunna, Tts scope embraced fx!yin, takhil/, ta/ill and taqyld, without differentiating
between the term itself and other key terms. Even bis cootemporary Abu 'Ubayd, according
to Ibn ~ililJ. al-Mudayfar, adopted chis approach to the genre.134
Shifi~ limits the Qur'an's abrogating power ta the Quèin alone and that of the
Sunna to the Sunna alone. He rejeets !lIJSkh ai-Qllr'in bi ai-Sunna (abrogating the Qur'an by the
SUlIna) or vice versa, nasleh ai-51111111l hi ai.Qur'ill (abrogating the SUll1lll by the Qur'an), arguing
chat the Qur'ân is one entity, and the Sun1lll another, each retaining its own auth0rity. The
relation between them is confined ta the role of the SUlIlltl as an agent in explaining the
Qur'ân. This opinion is supported by Sufyin ibn SaZid ibn Marzûq al-Thawn, and Aqmad
ibn I:Ianbal.us It seems that this pri!1ciple was adopted because he sought ta establish a cleu
distinction between the e.xplanative function of the S1I1111a and the Srm1la as a source of law.
Burton assumes that Shifi'i based bis presuppositions on an analogy, relying on uthe temlS
134 Abù 'Ubayd, tJi-NQsiJeh, p. 53.
135 Ibn al-JawZi, NtDJ.WikIJ. pp. 25-8.
•
•
•
67
of the Q. 2: 106: 'superiot' and 'similar'.u~ This led 5hafill to accept a restriction on the
SZi1l1ll:l of the Propher only,137 despite the equal status he otherwise accords it.
Shifill's decision to redefme the key terms is interesting. Button considers it as
marlcing a sruft in che discourse on Islamic legal theories, whereas Schacht sees it as a
continuation or perfection of an earlier process, as mentioned above, saying that Shifi'i's
effort was a culmination of the systematizatioo of theorizing Islamic docuine. It seems chat
Burton starts From the existing disputes among the scholats who preceded Shifi~1. To him,
Shifi'i deliberately offered an alternative method which maintains the exclusive authority of
the Qur'an and SUltlla. Schach~ on the other hand, sees it from the process-perspective,
apprehending the disputes as a oatutal process of the discourse. Hallaq shares Schacht's
attitude in this case, saying that "ShàfiZi's doctrine represents the culmination of this
process.,,131 One dlÎng is obvious: there is a difference between Ilpïlists and exegetes in chat
the llpÏiists in the case of 1tas!eh focus on "replacing one roling with aoother due to the
teanination of the effective period of the earlier ruling," while the exegetes "extend the
parameters of the tetm 1IIJskh to specifiC2tion, exception, abandoning a legal rule because
circumstances have cbanged, and mutual cancellation.n1.39 At this poin~ Shifilï comes from
the lep a:adition, and we cao understand why Button sees Shafi'i' s finding as representïng a
shift.
136 Burton, Th, SOHmS, p. 6.
1.37 Ibid.
1.31 Hal1aq, A His/0'YJ p. 19.
139 Ibn al-~AIi'iql, tJi-NiJiJeh, p. 7; Powers, "The Exegetial Genre,u pp. 122-3.
•
•
•
68
On the other hand, several notes can be mentioned here. FUstly, Burton criticizes
ShifiZi's analogy of the terms "similar" and "superior" in the Q. 2: 106, with the quality of
the scope of naskh, contains a weakness which is "hidden from Shifili hïmself." It originates
in bis refusai ta follow bis contemporaries in deducing legal rulings from the reports handed
down by the Prophet's Companions and later generations of scholars. Shifi~'s
cootemporaries argue that the death penalty for adulte!Y, which was allegedly introduced by
the Prophet, is a case in point where the Sunna seemingly abrogates the Qur'in. But Shifi~
insists that "the death penalty, introduced in the SU,,1IIl, had superseded a corporal
punishment previously introduced in the SII"M, and so was an instance of the nas/eh of the
Sunna by the Sunna, not of the 1tQS!eh of the Qur'an by the 51111110." Burton however
demonsttates that the eadier punishment had been established by the Qur'in 22: 2 1.-0
Furthermore, he asserts chat Shifi'ï inevitably had to quote the authority not of the Prophet
but of 'Aisha in the case of "the definition of the minimum number of breast-feedings that
establishes a life-long barrier ta the marriage of the Muslim male with any females ta wham
he is related by~' to support bis principle of the naskh of the equal status of the source.
Mcanwhile the Qut'in does not provide any evidence ofthis.l41
Another point is chat the charactetistics of Shifilï's method in the case of Mskh,
according ta Burton, are retrospeetive and normative, with the proviso that its oormativity is
not iJ:regardless of the historical dimension. In fac!, he reaaanges the procedure of inquiry so
that it is grounded in a midd1e position, where logic and divine sources rei.nforce one
another. Historically speak.ing, the phenomenon of If/ISkh relates to the raIe of the Qur'in as
•
•
•
69
a religious and legal document, in mat they bath sbare the essence of attnbution as a way ta
understand the chronological order of the verses or FJadlths. Hallaq confitms Burton's
assumption on the importance of attribution in the opetation of 1ttlSkh, holding that
questions about the chronological order became important because of the need to detemlÎne
contradietory texts.a : The importance of Hallaq's assertion is that he anchoIS naskh in logic
and context, making sense of the correlation between nas/e1J and the chronology of the
sources. Despite the rudimentary character of ms thought, Shifill's construction of naskh is
a relational device in the sense that Iftlskh is placed in relation to other key ceans as an
integral packet of systematic principles 0 methods of inquiry and of Islamic source theory.
Finally, regarding the modes of naskh, it seems to me chat Burton, in arguing the
point mat the three modes of 1lIJsIeIJ already e.~sted during the lifetime of Shifi~ leaves
considerable room for criticism. This conclusion after all contradicts his other tindings,
because in anotber passage he daims chat Shifi) and Abü 'Ubayd both recognized two
modes of naskh. 14J Furthennore, having said that Shifili invented a third mode -a!mJgating the
1lI0n/illg but Ilot the n/ling, in contrast, Burton aIso says that this mode "seems to have taken
place in the post-Shifili pcriod."l.w One reason why mis i.nconsistency occurs is mat Burton
does not verify bis conclusion by considering other figures prior to and in Shifilï's periode
However, Burton is certainly sure that Shâfili recognized [wo modes of lt4Skh, he
reemphasizes this in bis Th, SOIlTCtS of Islamic I...a1v, saying chat Shifi~ admitted oo1y two
l~ Halb.q, A Hirtoty, pp. 8-9.
143 Butto~AbN'Ubegdt p. 27.
10104 Burton, Tht SOltms, p. 102.
•
•
•
70
modes of IIQSkJ.r. abrogati1lg the 17Iang but Ilot the 1lIorr:ii1lg and fl!mJgati1lg the 1lIOrdi1lg bltt Mt the
rua1lg. 1~5
Ta sum up, Shafi'i Iived during the formative period of Islamic thought, a period
when aD. elements of Islamic society- doctrine, epistemology, theology, law, culture and
politics- were developing at a rapid rate. In the process Islam became an amalgam of the pre
Islamic custom of the Ambian Pet1ÎnsWa and elements encountered in the ~.rious lands into
which it had e.'Cpanded. The same period was marked by political disputes, often e.xpressed in
religious terms. Theology appears to have heen, at least initially, devoted more ta poutics
chan to the deve10pment of Islamic sciences. The least that can be said is chat there was
confrontation, or to put it more positive1y, a dialogue, between a liberal tendency and a
traditionalist one. Shifill felt it oecessary to patticipate in mis enterprise, in the hope of
arriving at a better way of undetstanding Islam and deducïng laws or rulings from in;
doctrines. This point sUf'~orts Burton's presupposition chat Shafi'i's thought is both
retrospective and normative. However, we fmd that Shifi~'s findings, including bis ideas on
nasJe1J, are logical, making sense the relation between the Qur'an and Sunna in relation to
theorizing Islamic doctrine. We also find that his enti.re enterprise refleets Qot only a shift, as
Burton believes, but aIso a continuation and perfection of the previous pIOceSS which
allowed Shifili's later successoa ta make their own elaborations more grounded and
systematic.
The dialogue in which Shafi'i participated led him ta distance himself &cm bath
e.xtremes, i.e., traditionalism and rationalism. However, since each of these two e.~emes
brought with it strengths and weaknesses, he tended to favaI the side which, according to
him, was the more doetrinally sound, i.e., the ttaditionist camp. In doing sa, he also
145 Ibid., pp. 203-4.
•
•
•
71
detetmi.ned what bis position on IUlSkh would he. Accordingly, bis conceptualization of
1II:lS/e.h shows a concem ta maintain the status of the revealed sources, the Qur'an and the
Sunna; as exclusive1yas posSIble.
•
•
•
72
CHAPTER m
mE INFLUENCE OF SHAFI'rS lHEORY OF lVASKH IN 1RE 1ILUMA1-QUR~!f{
This chapter will trace Shifi.'ï's influence on the construction of naskh in two genres
of Qur'anic exegetical literature: works devoted specifically to a/-nasikh 1JIQ a/-RJanszïkh and
worlts of tojsi,., where the issue of naskh is key ta the interpretation of specifie Qur'anic
verses. Our survey of the fmit category will invescigate the development of naskh from post-
Shafi'i' s up ta Suyüii's rime, focusing 00 one work from each century as represenutive of
the peri.od. Here, the discussion will be interpretive, drawing to a great extent on dle research
mat has been done by others on this genre ofwriting.1 In the case of our survey of exegetical
works, examples will be taken from authors representing each a f the four juristic schools in
Sun,,; Islam, but not from sectaOan or other authors, for reason of space.
A. THE INFLUENCE OF SHAFI'I'S THEORY OF NASKH IN THE SIX
WORKS
In this sub-chapter, si."< works on noskh from the fourth and the tenth centuries A.H.
will be discussed These works will be examined ta see how far Sbifi)'s notion of 1tQs/eh was
implemented in late! works and just bow relevant it was to the debate. The six works are: a/-
NisiJeh ilia al-~!tJnsUleh Ji al-Qm"a" a/-Kmfm by Na1.'}.4is,z aI-Ït/aJ! by Makk1,J Nawisikh a/-Q"r'a"
1 For enmples, see M~ti Zayd, tJI-Naskh and 'AliM~ ai-Naskh. In these wotks theauthors discuss naskh from theoretiaJ, doc~ and historica1 penpectives, su:rveying the genre&om its otigins te the present rime.
Z Naçl].is was a ShifiZite and a prolific writer in various Islamic sciences. It is said that bisworks arnounted ta fifty in all. It seems mat these wow covered Qut'inic studies and 'Ambielinguistic, for enmple, 1mb ai-Qw'On, Ma'Qrà tJI-QIIr'i~ [(jtab Yufassiru Asma-' Allah~ 1l/(J ]alh•AIlhbir a/-S/nâw-', etc. Originally &am Egypt, al-N~ is repotted ta have gone to Baghdad forquest of knowledge wheœ he stUdied /IfJ/pIt and Iiœrature from Abü !:Iasan 'Ali ibn Suhymin, Abü
•
•
•
73
by Ibn al-]awZi,4 $afwat af-RaSikh by Shu'lah,5 ai-NtÏsikh 11IQ ai-~[anszÏJeh by Ibn al-'Ati'iq"t,6 and
ai-Itqan by SUyüJi7 AIl of the above, with the exception of SUyÜtt, divide their treatement of
naskh into two parts; first, as introduction where they discuss the theory of 1tfJSkh in gen~
and second, a survey of instances of ai-nasikh and ai-Hlansikh in the Qur'an. In the latter
instance, mey all discuss the tapie according to the order of the siiras of the Qur'in. In the
Is1}iq al-Zujii, o1-Qjriahlthe science of reciting the Qut'in from Abü I:bsan ibn Sha.mbudh, AbüBakr al-~üriiFjasan ibn "'AIi and Bakr ibn~ and E:Iatiith from al-NasaTL Al-Nal)l:las, ol-Ni.rikh,pp. 29-32.
) A Milikiœ, Makki wu a prominent scholar from Andalusia (Spain). Ir is reported thatMakkï wu well known as a schow infllJh and r"Ml a/1i'l1J as well as in Quèinic studies. Unfortunately,bis works on law have oot come down ta us. His works are estimated to be more man one hundredin number and Abmad Hasm Ful}.it, the editor of a/-l.diJ;, collected Maklù's fragments and studiedMakkï.'s thought on Qurinic exegesis in bis Ph.D Dissertation.M~ aJ-Ïr)a);, pp. 9 and 33.
~ Ibn al-Jawn was a weU known H2nbaIite scholar fron1 Baghdid. He was a. prolific writu,bis wow cover vuious fields, including from jif{b and upÏ1 iJ/-.ftqh, Qux'inic stUdies and 'oIsir (bis workon tu/sir entided Zid aI·MtmrJi 111II ai·ToJsir;, f}mGtJJ, bistory of Arabie and non JUabic societies (biswotk on history entitled Q'-~Ji T~ a/-U11It1JII Illi/. ai- 'Amb 1JI(J aI-'Aj~, astronomy, hwo(arithmetic), and .tibb (medicine). He studied Quran and f;lQmlh from M~"U1l1'ru1d ibn N~ :1.1i:IanbaIi, II/Q'd from Abù al-Qisim al-HuaWi and Ibn a1-Zigbiirii al-ambali (cl. 527 A.H./1133 A.D.)and &om the foaner, he also studied.ft4h and f}mGtJJ. He studied jiqh and upiJ aI-JlIJh, metoric, fromAbü Bakr al-oinüà and Abü Ya'li and other authorities. Ibn al-Jawzi, NI11IIfJSil:h, pp. 3-3.
5 Shu'lah, a ~balite, wu 3. lingW5ty literary figure and jurist. Though he lived for only ashon time (he died at the age of thirty-three), he was known as a gifted and bright young scholar. Hisworks cover Quranic studies, litea.~ftqband histOlY· His $ofimt aI-Rarikh is considered as one ofthe important work on naskIJ. Shu'lah, SIlfa'at a/-&isiJUJ, pp. 17,22-3.
6 Ibn a1-'Ati'iql wu a litterateur, philosopher, and scholar who \V2S concemed with Islamicsciences. His areu of concem included fiqh, l4jiir, sufism, me~ linguistic and litetature,astronomy, logi~ md aritbmetic. Besides studying in bis native bnd in Iraq, Ibn al-"'Ari'iqi spenttwenty yeus seeking knowJedge inI~ Ia.n. Histotians mention thtee of bis UnpOrt3nt œachexs:MUQanunad ibn Maklà al-'AmîIi, known as o/-ShahUJ ai-A1v7IIa/ (786 A.H./1384 A.D.); al-~asan ibnYüsuf ibnal-M~al-IjuIi, known as a/-AlI8ma (d. 726 AR/1326 A.D.) and N~iral-Oin ...Ali ibnM~d al-IGshim (d. 755 AH./1354 AD.). His works cover vuious fields of Islamic sciencesand amount ta more than twenty, 'Abd al-Hidi ~FuQaIi, the editer, mentions twenty one of'Ati'iql's wom. Ibn al-"'AtiJiqi, a/-NisiJUJ, pp. 10-15.
1 Suyü~ a Shifil"lt~ wu known most as :l Quèanic scholar. A brief account on bim bas beenmentioned in Cbapter 1, p. 1. See,Su~ a/-lJq~ voL l, pp. 4-5.S~ discusses nasleh in bis al-I"lo"in a gteat proportion. Suyü~ a/-Itqin, vol. 3, pp. 59-77.
•
•
•
74
case of the first five of the the six autharities., we focus our discussion solely on the first part
-their e."q'ression of the theory of naskh. As for SUyÜ!l, our discussion will be based on his
l!qin, as a whole since he discusses 1IIJSkh therein e.'ttensively.a
In order ta appreciate Shafi~'s influence on their discussion of the genre, we will
construct a framework of analysis far bis theory of nasleh. To this purpose, we have chosen
two points of comparison: phenomena, and theory.
a. As a Phcnomenon
He.re, we '-'till discuss twa points: the acceptance and the estimation of the
importance of nasleh phenomena. Firstly, as we saw in chapter 2, Shififl adjudged the subjea
of naskh to be a valid field, because it is God's e.,c1usive right --inasmuch as He has
unlimited power-- to do whatevet I-Ie wants, including revising His own woros. On ~
point, although they do not quote Shifili's opinion directly, the 51."< authorities basically share
bis view, holding that IttlSleh is God's exclusive right. However, they vary on, at least, three
leve1s: sources of argumentation, techniques of elaboration, and points made to support the
argumentation.
As regards argumentation, Naq.qas, Makkï, Ibn al-Jawzl, Shu'lab and SUyÜ~ al! consider
nasleh to he based on (wo foundations: reason and the shan'a.9 Surprisingly, Ibn a1.-'AtiJiq1
keeps silent on this topie, pemaps due to the faet that the field is well known and bis treatise
is of a summary nature. On the other band, Shifiii regards it as depending on religious
doctrine alone in chat he conneets the genre te the obligation laid upon MlÙ}ammad and his
aSuyü~ aI-IlIJà, vol. 3, pp. 59-TI.
9 The definition and distinctions bet\Veen these tetms rutve bec:n e,.,,-plained in chapter 1.
•
•
•
1S
followers to obey God, direeting the reader to accept it as a matter of faim. Though Nal}.l}âs
does Qot label the two sources as shan'a and reason (Caq~, we find that on the one hand he
regards the various phenomena of naskh as having occurred in former religions, religious law,
and in previous tradition, whereas on the other he infers on the basis of logic chat nas/eh is
God's right, and that whoever denies this is no better than a liar (kirihib). 10 Makk1 sees that
the phenomenon of nIJskh cm be accepted on two levels: the religious and logical. In arguing
for its religious justification, he echoes Shafi~ saying that it is a kind of worship offered up
ta Gad which every Muslim has to accept. Logically, he follows a hetmeneutical circle in
explaining that the sovereignty of God and the piecemeal nature of His revelation support
the notion nasleh.U According ta Ibn al-JawZi, for instance, naskh can be justified on the basis
of the idea chat Gad did abrogate some of His laws found in previous religions. For
e..um.ple, martying a b170ther or sister was allowed in che rime of Adam but was prohibited
from the time of Müsi onwards. l2 Logically, he relates naskh to the vacious situations that
confront a Muslim in teans of the obligations he has to perfoon, sayiog sometimes chat he
has to do a thing, while on the other occasions he must not, just as God creates night and
day.13 Shu'lah and Suyüp accept naskh on the basis of arguments drawn fram the shan~ md
logic, although with differences in labeling: Shu'lah uses the terms sam'f (the source received
tluaugh ttaOsmissian) and oqGQogic),14 whi1e Suyû~ cansiders them ta be 1UlIfG(revealed and
10 Na4Qis. af.Narikh. p. 1.
U Maklà. al-Ï.diI}, pp. 57-9.
U Ibn al-Jawzi, N rJ1JItisikh, p. 15.
U Ibid., pp. 14-5.
l4 5hu'lah, ~ofi'fJJ fll-&isikh, p. 91; SuyÜii, al-Itqall, voL 3, p. 71.
•
•
•
76
ttansmitted sources) and ta-rileh (history). Both scholats aIso add that the fle1d is accepted on
the basis of a consensus of Muslim scholars.1S
Regarding th, technique of ,/aboration, the six authorities, with the execptian of Ibn 31
'Ati'iql, tend to rely on both shan}: and logic, wher~s Shifi.~ tends ta apply shan'a
argumentation alone in bis elaboratio~ resulting in a foanal acceptance of the genre. Shifili
precedes bis discussion of nasJeh by stating how obedience should be operative between the
Prophet and God, between Muslims and theit Prophet, and between the Propher, Muslims
and God. He holds mat God maintains the croth of rus messages embodied in His
reve1ation and the traditions of the Prophet.16 In this discussion, we see that he makes it a
precondition for readers mat they accept naskh as valid, even mough in reality they seldom
do 50.
In support of this argument, Shifili cites three points: 1) God is omnipotent, thus
implying that He cao revise and change His words; 2) nasleJJ is the exclusive: right of Gad;
and 3) accordingly to accept it is to obey GOd.17 The si." authorities confltm the first and
second points, but differ over the last one. Shifili confines bis acceptance of nasJe!J to foonal
and divine reason, whereas the othetS, except for Ibn al-'Aci'iql, anchor it aiso in history,
where support for the possibility of naskh can be found. In addition, Shu'lah and SuyÜ~
consider aIsa that the consensus of Muslim scholats has established the genre as beyond
question.
15 Shu'lah.. $afa'at a/.R4siJeh, p. 91; Suyü~ ai-Itqin.. vol. 3, p. 59.
16 Shifil"1, a/-Risila, pp. 49-54.
17 Ibid
•
•
•
77
Secondly, the six authorities assess the importance of nasleh in various ways. Nallqas
considers it to be part of the shan'a and a great matter that cao lead one into heresy.ll Maklà
deems a knowledge of the topic ta be the prime requirement in Qur'inic studies19 and a part
ofwo~hip (lbaëltr)."!fJ Ibn al-'Ata'iql shares Makk1's opinion, saying that mastering al-nasikh wa
al-111ansiikh is the first condition for someooe ta leam the 'l/Iiim ai-Qur'ilf.Z1 Ibn al-Jawzi was
stimulated to write on the genre because, according to him, rbere were many previous
authorities who had written on the subjeet with such POor results.22 Shu'lab and Suyü~ not
only consider the importance of the genre to lie in its status in Qur'aruc studies but aIso in its
position as an expression of a consensus in Mu.c;lim society.~ In addition, they all, with the
e."<ception of Makkl, refet to the report of 'Afi's prohibition against teaching the Qur'an
without understanding nasleh as a reason for encouraging people to develop proviciency in
this area of discourse.24
Setting aside the approach of eartier authorities, who tended to base their acceptance
of nasleHs validity on information found in the Ifadlth of the Prophet or the Companions,
liN~, a/-NisiltJ:J, pp. 6-7.
19 Makk1, aJ.~diJ}, pp. 45-6.
:!O Ibid., pp. 57-8.
21 Ibn al-'Ati'iq~ a/-NOsikh, p. 22.
:::!. For example, he notes Kitol Q/-,zO.rtkh MI a/-IJ/QtUHkh by Isma'"d ibn cAbd al-1WJ.min ibn AbïKatima al-Suddi (d. 128 A.H./746 A.D.) bas mixing IDater'Ws. Ibn al-]aW2Ï, NrmWikh, p. 11.
21 Shu'lah, $".fwat a/-RasiJeh, p. 91; Suyüjï, 0/-1'4;'." p. 59. Ibn al-JawZi aIso mention theconsensus of Muslim society on naskh but ooly the Q. 2: 106 as the foundation of the existence ofnaskh in Qur'an. Ibn al-Ja~NtIIJIlÜikh, p. 17.
2. Na1}.Qâs, al-NisikiJ, pp. 3-4; Ibn al-]awzï, NenWsikh, pp. 29-32; Shu'lah, Y'!fD'e/1 al-Rôsik.h, p.96-7; Ibn al-'Atà'iqï, a/-Nisikh, p. 22; SuyU~ a/-1Jq;'" vol), p. 59.
•
•
•
78
Shifi~ anchors it in both verses Q. 14: 51 and Q. 16: 91,25 showing how it is possible for
God to revise His own words. Although this does not represent the flrSt rime that the
Qurin was taken ta be the premier source of law, what Shifi) did in the case of nas/eh was
more e1aborate in the sense that he tried ta ground a specifie genre in this source.
2. Theory
Here, four themes --defUlition, condition, type and mode of naskh- will be discussed.
The discussion will focus 00 how the six authorities rcaC! to Shifili)s construction of 1IIl.I/eh in
discussing tbese four memes.
a. Definition
Based on our previous discussion in chapte! 2, wc cao see that, although Shifili does
Qat define nas/eh very rigidly, wc cao identify at least three clements in his definition of naskh:
the nature of IIt:ls!eh, al-ta'akhkhllr (the principle that the Msileh should be chronologically later
and mat by the same token the al·ma1U1Ï1eh should be earlier), and its differentiation from
other tenns (b'!YoÏt, talehill, t'!lsll and taqyUf;. As far as its nature is concemed, Shifilï holds
that 1IIlS1eh can mean abrogation or iza7a at the levels of mithl (similar) and lehayr min
(superior), which are mentioned in Q. 2: 106, as well as tabJll (change), round in Q. 16: 101.
The six authotities deal with this presupposition in diverse ways. They aIl consider
iZila/abrogation to be the essential nature of nasleh, citing a number of verses in support.
N~is, Ibn al.Jawz1, Shu'lah and SuyU~ base this expl311ation on Q. 22: 52, while Shu'lah
and Ibn al-J3WZi define it not only as iZila but also raf, which cames basically the same
2S Shifir~ o/-RisOh, ed. Mui)ammad Sayyid Kaylini. p. 54; al-Bayhaqi,A6-a/-QIIT'itI, p. 33.
•
•
•
79
meanïng. 26 Makki sees it as i~7ah, ~ whereas Ibn al.-'Ati'iqi for bis part sees it as raf. 2'
However, in the case of llaskh as tabGI, ooly Makkl, Ibn al-]awz1 and Suyü~ suggest thïs,!9
wbile Na41lis and Ibn al-'Ati'iql reject it.JO Shu'lah keeps silent on this matter, but mentions
other authorities who refute this opinion. According to chis group, the nature of Itoskh is daj'
~tting rid ot) which essentially means the same as ita7a. The advantage of ra! Q'-~ulem is not
related to the determination of the change (had!) of a ruling; the elimination of a ruling
happens without badJ. In other words, it is Gad who ends the effeetiveness ofa ruIing. If it is
sai~ ''1 obliged you in chis matter, and then l abrogated your obligation (ta do so), restoring
the situation to the way it was before you were ablige~ before the arder on this matter, and
dUs is what happened in the case of preserving the meat of at/a7;; (vietim)... without any
change/bati/ from the abrogated matter.,,31
Regarding al-Idakhlehur, Shafi'i assetts mat a/-nasikh (the abrogating) must be a later
verse or lfatillh in point of time, wbereas a/-11/Q1IJ1ïJeh must be an earlier verse or l-Jadlth. The
SL"< authorities confitm this principle and some of them elaborate upan i.t in more detail
Naill}is and Ibn al-'Ati'iq"i implicidy indude af-tt/tJlehlehur as one of the conditions for 1IaJ/eh.
:!6 N~, a/-Nisi/eh, p. 5; Ibn a1-Ja~ NaHsiJeh, p. 20; Shu~ $t.I.fiwt a/-&ïsi/eh, p. 95;SuyÜ~ Q'.IIq~ voL 3, p. 59.
27 Makk1, a/-Ï~, p. 112
21 lb -t_'A -,. - _J.1\T=-:LL .,,,nu ta aql, UN .... u.wcD, p._.
29 Makk1, a/-Ït/~, p. 112; Ibn at-Jawzi, NQDlQsikh, p. 20; SUyÜp, aI-ItqiR, vol 3. p. 59.
JON~, a/-NtiriJUJ, p. 5; Ibn al-'Ati'iq"i, a/.Nisikh, p. 22; Makk1, aI-Ïtj;q, p. 112.
31 Shu'Iah, $gftm a/-ROsiJ:h, pp. 93-4.
•
•
•
80
When Na4Qis differentiates naskh from bad/J-',J2 he declares al-nOsikh (the abrogating) to be a
later roling and a/-manmkh (the abrogated) an earlier one.J3 Ibn al-'Ati'iq"i infers this
awareness when he simply detines a/-flflSiIeh is one that eliminares the ruling of an abrogated
matter.J4
On the other hand, the rest of our authorities elaborate on this principle more detail.
Makki translates al-ta'alehlehllT into the difference between the verses revealed in Mecca
(Male/el) and the verses revealed in Madina (Madtm~, holding that Maria,,;verses cao abrogate
each other as well as MaW verses, as long as the chronology of the abrogated and
abrogating verses are in the right arder. Yet at the same rime he aotes that abrogation
berween Mak/el verses is very rare, 50 rare in faet that he cannat offer any examples. Ia
addition, he argues that ooly Mat/anlverses can abrogate Afaw Ve!5es, and not vice versa,
because~ verses obviously preceded MarJa,,; verses. He says that "these two pnnciples
(Maleli and l'vIaun, verses) are the ongins of a/·nOsiJeh and a/_11/Q7I.fU!eh."J5 Ibn al-Jawz1 for bis
part explains how the authorities arrived at the notion of chronology as a factor in the /IQS!eh
procedure, saying tbat there are two ways of recognizing it. Firstly, we know it via observing
the utterance (lUI,tq) of the~e or f:latilth. For example, Wc know that the assessment of the
fighting abilities of Muslims was downgraded in Q. 8: 65 from the daim that twenty Muslims
could dcfeat two bundred enemies, ta the daim that it would take one hundred te defeat the
same amount. The change in this observation was recorded in Q. 8: 66 "Now Al1ah has
J1 &tiQ' may basiaIly be de6ned as the appean.nce of a tempoary opinion mat bas notoccurred bef~e. The creator of this idea is human and nClt Gad as in 1lIlJkfJ. Maklà, aJ-Ï.da9, pp. 111-3.
» N~~ ai-Ntirikh, p. 8.
34 Ibn al-cAti'iqi, al-NQsikJJ~ p. 22.
35 Makki, aJ-Ï.tlQJ" p. 113.
•
•
•
81
Iightet1ed your (task), fot: He knows that there is weakness in you...." The fJarllth t:eported
by Muslim in which the Prophet says cc): prohibited you from going ta the graves but now
pIcase VÏ5it them," is another case in point. Secondly, we know it by observing the history of
transmission of the Prophetie traditions. Shu'lah states that uai-naSiIeh should come after ai-
111ansiilelJ," labeling this as the principle of ai-ta'alehkhur. He argues that the principle of ai-
to'akhur in /l(Jskh is not the same as the order in ai-ml~s4af (the Holy Quran) or ai-tilirva
(Qur'amc recitation). The chronology of the veGes daes not correspond to the order of the
chaptet:S of the Qur'an and ai-tilüwa, because the latter does not follow the order in which
circumstances led to the revelation of verses. I-Ie also confirms Makk1's principles of naskh
beeween MaJeJeI and Mariantverses.J6 Final1y, SUYÜJl infers this point 0t1 the basis of the three
reports of Ibn l:Ia!?~ar.J7 The tirst report says ullasleh is of the transmission of the Prophet,
and of the Companion who says that this verse abrogates that verse." The second asserts
that ccIUlSkh is aIso examined [as an option] when there are t\Va cOllflicting verses; wough
history, we can analyze the earlier and the later data." The lasc report says, "naskh does not
depend on weak e.'Cegetes, the [jtihid of mujtahùJu" which is Dot based on sound ttansmission,
or on a conflict [of [wo r:ulings], because nasleh involves eliminating a mling and establishing
another that happened in the era of the Propbet. The valid source for it is '''Jq// transmission
and history [of naskh], not opinion and ijJihid."J·
36 Shu~ StJ/1wt ai.&isiJeh. p. 92.
37 Ibn ~~~ir's full name wu Abü al-Fjasan ~A1i ibnM~d ibn Mul}ammad aI-An.t;anal-Kh3Zraji (d. 611 A.H./1214 AD.). Sha'bân Muqammad IsmiC"tl, ~'Muqad~J~ in a/-N4rikh byN~,p.27 .
31 SUyÜp, a/-l/qin, voL 3. p. 71.
•
•
•
As regards naskh and its distinetness from other tea:ns Cb'!)in, taJehp!, taf.si7 and kJqyÙÏj,
Sbifizt was not anticipated by previous or contemponry authorities. 0 f the si.'"< authorities,
Ibn al-'Aca'iql is entirely silent on the tapie. 'Abd al-Ha& al-Fu4afi, the editoe of Ibn al
'Ati'ïql's a/-Nisikh, considers Ibo al-'Ati'iql's definition ta be general in application,
coonoting not oaly Ilas/eh but also takh';', istithna-', etc.3!) NaQQ.is for bis part ooly
differentiates llaJ/eh from hadJ, saying that Ilaskh consists in the changing of rulings made by
God whereas badiJ is the changing of human intention only.40 Zarqirii, according ta Sha'ban
~fuQ.ammad Isma)I, the editor of Na1}l'}is's al-Nisikh, accused Na1Jq.as and others (such as
Ibn Salima and Abü 'Abd Allâh Mu4ammad ibn Hazm) of having confused Ilas/eh with
other notions in the field, such as tak!JiiI:1
On the other band,~ Ibn al-Jawzi, Shu'lah and SuyüJi aIl differentiate nasleh not
ooly from badtÏJ but aIso from other tenns, like !a/ehill, and ùtithnQ'. In the case of badQ' they
aIl assert that the changing of a ruling is buman-macle. In addition, Shu'hb and SuyÜ~ assign
chis opinion to a group whicb rejette; Ittl.rkh and which Suyü~ identifies as the Jews.~ In
distinguishing naskiJ from other teans, they consider the changing of a ruling in IlIlSleh as
applying ta the whole of it, whereas in IakhiI:r or istithntl it affects ooly part of it. Suyüp and
:i9 'Abd al-Hidi al-Fu~ 'cal_N~n in a/-Nisi/eh by Ibn 2l-'Ati'iqi, p. 8.
~ N~, al-Nisileh, pp. 8-9.
·n Sha'binM~ rStIJil"1l, ''Muqadditna,'' in o/-Nasikh byN~. p. 38.
-62 Shu'lah, $afwat o/-RO.rikb, p. 92; SUyÜii, ai-IlfJin, voL 3, p. 60.
•
•
•
83
particularly Makki engage in a long discussion on takhil:r and how diffettnt it is from lIfJSkh,
while Ibn al-Jawz1 and Shu'lah explicate this briefly.4J
What is interesting is that of the si:" authorities-who distinguish nasJeh from other
terms, not one credits ShifiZi as the first scholar ta have identified the divergence. As a
matteJ: of fact, 00 matter to which school each adheres, he keeps silent on this point.
b. Conditions for Naslcb
Though Shifili does not expIicidy foanulate the conditions of naskh, we can see from
his construction of the concept that he saw it as being formed of four conditions, i.e.: 1)
there should be a confliet betweeo al-nisikh and al-l1ta1lS1l7eh,.-44 2) that the ruling declared as al-
mansu?eh must have been established befoœ al-nisikh/s 3) mat al-1IllSikh and al-ma1lSlikh should
he in the area of shan~;tt6 and 4) that ai-1taSikh bas to be established in a similar or better way
than in which ai-lIIansük.h was establisbed.47 Like Shifirl, nomer Na4ll.is nor Ibn al-'Ati'iql
nor SUyÜJi formulates the conditions of naslt:h. Again, however, on the basis of their
discussion, wc cao identify their opinions in this regard. Thus wc find chat Naqqas confinns
aIl four of the conditions,'" while Ibn al-'Am'iqi49 and SuyüPSO approve only the tbird
43 hraklà, tli-Ï.titiJ}, pp. 85-7, 83-100, md 101-4; Ibn al-Ja~NflIIIiü.h, p. 16; Shu~ ~t1fiwlaL-&mkh, pp. 94-5; and Suyü~ al-Itqill, vol. 3, pp. 43-51.
~ Shifit"~ aJ-RisQia, p. 57.
~s Ibid.~ p.
0&6 Ibid, p. 60.
~7 Ibid, p. 55.
4 Regarding the first and second conditions, we CUl infer mis &cm bis discussion on thedefinition of NlSkh (p. 6). The third condition an he mferœd &om bis presupposition mat 1lI1Skh anbe applied ooly in 'amr (commands) and 11t1l!Y (prohibitions) (pp. 2 and 9). And in the case of the
•
•
•
84
condition, stating in effeet that IItlSkh should be applied in the area of amr (commands) and
nal!Y (prohibitions). Suyü~ adds that klJabar (information/news) which is intended as 'amr
or 1I4hy can he included within the scope of naskh.
By contrast, Makkl, Ibn al-Jawz1 and Shu'lah explicitly formulate the conditions of
nas/eh. Makki develops seven of these, of which four ratify the fourth condition but stressing
different aspects of iL. 1) in ai-ntiJikh wa al-ma1lS1l1!.b, a verse should abrogaœ anotber verse of
equal status;51 2) ai-Ilitikh should he in the rea1m of 'ilm (knowledge) and lamai (practice) as is
the case with al-manmkh,'2 3) a ruling imposing a heavier obligation can abrogate one that
imposes a weaker obligation, as in the case of Q. 8: 65, which is abrogated by Q. 8: 66;53 and
4) a weaker obligation cao aIso abrogate a heavier one, as in the case of the command to
perfeon three days fasting each month for every Muslim being abrogated by the order mat
fasting be restrieted ta in the month of Rama4On.54 Two of them confinn the second
condition: 1) the matter dealt with in ai-lttÏrikJJ should he a totally separate matter From that
in a/-mansiiJeh, mus, according to Makk1, Q. 2: 222 cannet be regarded as an instance of
nasJeh because tlùs part of the vet5e, " •..And when they have purified themse1ves, then go in
unto mem... tt and the other part of the verse, " ... till they are purified... Jt are related, se that
fourth conditi~N~ believes mat naslUJ OCcutS based on the guidance of Gad (p. 2) N~, ai·Nisikh, pp. 2, 6, and 9.
~9 Ibn al-'Ati'iqi, aJ·Nâsikh, pp. 2Cr7.
SO Suyü~ al-Itqill, voL 3, p. 61.
SI~ ai-f.diJJ, p. 107.
52 Ibid., p. 110.
53 Ibid.
)4 Thiei., pp. 110-1.
•
•
•
85
the foaner part of the vetSe cannat be regarded as ai_naSiIeh,5S a point which is echoes that
expressed in the tirst condition implied by Shifi); and 2) ol-",aflSZl7e!J cannat be related ta a
particulat rime but has to have been in effeet until being teoninated by the second IfIJI.S
(which may he from the Qur'an or Sunna), funetioning as ai-naszkh.S6 Makki's seventh and
final point seems inappropriate in this context, namely mat the messages of the prophet
Mu4ammad abrogate aIl previous religions.57 Thus Makkl cloes aot confitm shifi~'s third
condition, that o/-naSiIeh and a/-manmleh should be in the area of the Jhmi'a, at least not in bis
chapter entided Chapter on the E~1Jlanation of the Conditions of a/-Nâsikh and ai·ManS1Ïleh.
Nevertheless he cloes discuss this point in another section where he o.-plains the scope of
nask!J, saying that "naskh may accur in aJ,ktim (laws), fari'i4 (re.ligious obligations), (/'QIomir
(commands), !Ul1lIa!J; (prohibitions), ~1J(Jiid (definitions), md '1lqiibit min al;k.i1l1 ai-du'!Y0 (the
punishments stemming from warldly laws)."sa Ibn al-Jawii confirms aIl four conditions,)'>
with the difference being that he breaks the third condition do\vn into two: tirs!, (J/-mansziJeh
sbould be in the area of the jheni~ and second, that a/·naSiIeh should aIso be in the same
area.~o Finally, Shu'lah like\\ùe ratifies the four, but with certain differences: first, regarding
the ~d condition, he says oaly tbat a/·nisikJJ should be R/ashri'all (rem,ining silent on al
R/fl1IJ7Ïkh), aild second, regarding the fourth condition where ShifiZi emphasizes the equality
55 Ibid., pp. 108-9.
56 Ibid., p. 109.
57 Ibid., p. 107.
5a Maklà, al-Ïifo7l, p. 66.
59 Ibn al-Ja.wzï, Nrm,Q.rikh, pp. 23-4.
60 Ibid., p. 24.
•
•
•
86
and the supriority of al-M.rileh, Shu'lah stresses the function of al-nàsikh as a lIIuq~n
(breaker) in eliminatiog al-mansiïkh.61
c. Modes of Nask1J
ShifiZI does not discuss the modes of /tIJSJeh, but seems to admit ta there being only
two, i.e., abrogating the ruling bill not the warding and abroga/ing the llIording but no! th~ nlling.6Z In this
case, Shafil may be said to have been unique, because the sb, authorities consider anather
mode to exist abroga/ing the ruling ami the 1II0rrii1lg.63 Makkl even adds mree other modes. He
breaks down the tirst mode into three,64 and the second inta two,65 then adds yet another
mode, that is God's abrogation of the previouspraaia ofthe Propht!t and his Companions. For this he
cites the e."(ample of the Prophet M~ammad's request for forgiveness for his uncle Abü
ralib, which was abrogated by Q. 9: 113.66
61 5hu'lah, $afiwt al-Rasikh, pp. 92-3.
6:! Burton, The Collection, pp. 89 and 94; Button, AInï Vbaid, p. 40.
6J N~s, al-Nisikh., pp. 7-8; Maklà, al-Ï.t1a7}, pp. 67-71; Ibn al-Jawzi, .J."ltm'isikh., pp. 33-8;Shu~ $ajivaI fli-R4siItJJ, pp. 95-6; Ibn al-'Ati'iq~a/.NisiJeb, pp. 224; Suyü~ al·IJqOn, voL 3, pp. 6275.
64 1) AbtTJgtllillg the ntling of tl ume l!J tl11oth". tJml. and bolh vmu an mailltlrilllrJ. This mode is acommon one in the Quèin; 2) Q detti whidJ is Dhliged bwnut oflZ1I inat/enu ('ilht), lhm this obligtltioll is av".beazuse it.r iNitie,," hlJSg01ll, e.g. Q.60: 10-11; 3) DlhlZl is illfemdfnJ1I1 th, IDd, muJ il is abrogQ/ed by thtQIif'WIin whidJ ils Hniing il lllairUlZintd, e.g. it an be infeaed &cm Q. 4: 43 mat being dnmk 3lthough net inperfotming payer is allowed., and this verse wu abrogated by Q. 4: 91-Sl2 Makkï: al-ÏtJa7J, pp. 67-8.
6S 1) AbrogaJi~ tiJ, worriing and th, T1Iling mu/ ils ItllTfling by hem is gon" e.g. the amogation onechapter whicb is sim11ar with chaptet aJ-TtlIVINI in numbeE; and 2) tliJrogtllin{.tMl1'tJrding atIIi tht rulillf. amiils lea",ùrg I!J heart is nollM', like in the case 0 f breast feeding repotted by 'Aisha. Thiel, pp. 68-9.
66 Ibid., p. 70.
•
•
•
87
d. Types of NasJch
Shifilï ackowledges [wo types of IUlSleh: lIoskh a/Q1IT"a" by the Quran and Ilas/eh 0/-
SunlUl by the Sunna.67 Of the si.~ authorities, only Ibn al-'Ata'iqi is silent on the discussion of
the types of nas/eh.61 Shu'lah discusses ooly abrogating the Qur'an by the Sunna.69 Only
N~as,Makki and Ibn al-Jawz1 however mention bath types,ïO while SuyÜP mentions only
naskh a/-Qur'a" by the Qur'in.71 While Na1}l}as and Suyüp furthermore avoid passing
judgment on them, Makk171 and Ibn al-JawZi73 declare them validated by consensus. On the
other hand, Shu'lah and Ibn al-'Ati'iq"i do not mention these two types, perhaps because
their treatises are only summaries, or because they saw them as established on the basis of
the consensus of the ~1o"la'(Muslim scholars) , as Makkl and Ibn al-JawZi sure.
Among the types of nasleh which came iota dispute was abrogaJing the Qur'an f!J the
Slmna or vice versa. Shifi) categorically rejeets chis type, saying that it is not allawable,
67 Shifil"t, a/-RisiJa, p. 55.
61 NaQl:tis identifies four types of nl1S1eh disc:ussed by Muslim scholan: abrogating theQut'an by the Qur'ân, abrogating the Qur'in by the Qu:r'in and by the SNIIntl, abrogating the SIllma
by the ~an,and abrogating the S/lllI/lZ by the S1I1rna. N~, oI-Nisikh, pp. 2,4-5; Makkï adds threem01:e types: abrogating the Quèin by the consensus and analogy, abrogating the consensus by theconsensus, and abrogating the analogy by the analogy.~ a/-Ï.dàJI, pp. 77-81; Ibn al-Jawzi oo1ymentions three types: 1) ahrogating the Qut'in by the Qur'in; 2) abrogating the Qurin br theS'I1UIQ m abrogating the StI1l1Ul by the Qur'in; and 3) abrogating the SII1l1II1 by the SIJ1f1Ifl. Ibn al-JawZi.NfZllJtisiJ:/J, p. 25; and Su~ only mentions two types: abrogating the Qur'in by the Qur'in, andabrogating the Qux'in by the SlInlllZ. SuyüJi, al-It.qin. voL 3. p. 60.
69 Shu'1ah, JfI.fw"t a/-&isiJdJ, p. 93.
70N~, ai-Nankh, p. 2; Maklù, al-lrIQl" pp. 77 and ao; Ibn al-Jawzi, NaDJisikh, p. 25.
71 Suyû~ 1Il-1"lâ7r, voL 3, p. 60.
n Makkï, a/-ÏrJilJ, p. 77.
73 He caUs the consensus ittijôq "'- '"lmnü' (the agreement of Muslim schoIars). Ibn al-Jawzi,Nl11l,ei.riIeJJ, p. 25.
•
•
•
88
because the Sunna funetions onlyas "taba'll1l li ai-KitaDJ hi mithli 1IIi nu~1a IIQ!.sa1tJ ilia l'lltifas.rirat
l11a'II0111at/1IzalaAllan 11tÏlIhlljNmalan',74 (The Sunna should only follow what is laid down in the
Book, and that the SUlllf/l is intended to e..xplain the meaning of communications of general
[nature] set forth [in the BookD.15 To support his idea, Shifi) quotes Q. 10: 15, Q. 13: 39,
Q.2: 106, and Q. 16: 101, saying that it is up to God to maintain or revise His words and
chat the Prophet Mul:ammad only functions as the agent of Qur'aruc explanation, Qot as a
substitute for the Qur'an.~6 ibn al-'Ati'iqi 15, as usual, silent on this issue, while ~takk1 and
Shu'lab. discuss it but do not atttibute its first treatment ta Sbifit Mak.k1 identifies the group
that a1lows mis type as jurists from among the followers 0 f Milik ibn Anas, the ahl al- ïlm
(scholars), and the ahla/-MatIllla (people of Medina). They hold that it is true mat the Slinna is
the explaoation of the Qur'~ but 'W·here the Qur'an abrogates the SUltRa is in the area of
mm- and nahy (command and prohibition). Makkl gives one example in F;ladlth in general and
anothet: involving a I-;lmllth reported by many from many to illustrate bath t}-pes. The first
example is of abrogating th, Sunna f!J the Quran, as seen in the F;ImIlth on the .refusa! to permit
mao:i3ge ta a woman in the year of the fJudaybiyya, out of warry that she may still be a
I111JShrileah (polytheist/disbeliever). This was abrogated by Q. 60: 10, where it says that after
exàmining' ber and-aetetïni.oîng chat she is tea1lya f111Îs!imah; mm is QO re-ason not to matty
her.n The second e.xample is of abrogatillg the Qllr'ill 1!J the SUIIna, and d~ in particuhr ~;,th
7. shi6rs, aJ-Risil4, p. 55.
75 We use Khadduri's temslantion with additions enc10sed in the brackets mat are mine.Khadduri, ttans., a/-Ù1JIÏ11I Mzt~(J//I11Iad ilm [titis aI-ShifiPs a/-Risa7a Ji U.sil a/-Fiqh: Trratis, QII th,FfJNTUioJiollS of1slmllicJurispl7lt!ma (Cambridge: the Islamic Texts Society, 1961), pp. 123-4.
16 Sbifirl, al-Ririla, pp. 55-6; Khadduri, tcl11S., ai-lmam, pp. 123-6.
n Maklà., ai-Ï.diJ,,, p. 78.
•
•
•
89
the problem ofbequest. Abü al-Fanj (d. 331 or 332 A.I-L/943 A.D.) reported that Q. 2: 180,
\vhich pronounces on bequest, was abrogated by the Ff.atlith, "No bequest ta an heir.u7!
Shu'lah limits the acceptatlce of this type of 1taJ-kh to a SUftntl reported by many from many.
He proposes !WO reasons for this~ fi.rst, since one is obliged to accept the SUllfta reported by
a multiply transmitter, the acceptance of abrogating the Qur'in I!J the SII1I1Ul or vice versa, and its
application are obligarory too; and second, he regards the idea of the equality of the
revelation of the Qur'an(wahy alQur'an) and the revelation of the explaaation VJ;al[ya/-bqyilI)
as a consideration in justifying the application of chis type of lIas/eh, since the Sru/Ila is
narurally, also from God.79
Three of the six authorities -Naq.1}as, Ibn al-Jawz1, and SUYÜJl- admit that the idea
of rejecting abrogating the Qur'ill by th~ SlInna, or vice versa, belongs [0 Shifi'ilO albeit noting
that Ibn al.Jawz1 also attributes this refusai to Sufyan al-Thawn. &1 Nal}l}as and Ibn al-Jawn
coasider Q. 2: 106 n and Na1.}l}is Q. 10: 15 as weil,13 ta indicate that the Qur'àn and the
Sunna are not equaL. Naqqas mentions that due to the function of the SlinlftJ as the agent of
the Qur'an e,."planation, it cannot abrogate the Qur'an; N whereas Ibn al-Jawzi contends chat
~s Thid., pp. 78-9.
79 Shu~ $t1ft'QJ a/-'&isikh, p. 93.
80N~, ai-NiJiJeh, p. 4; Ibn al-J~NrmWikh, p. 25; and Suyü~, aJ-Itqall, vol. 3, p. 60.
Il Ibn al-]awzï, Nœvisikh, p. 25
lSZ N-L.L.=- ~IAT:.:r.L -. Ib al.I - 7\.r - 'LL ..,-- '41;U~, UI-j,"lWUCI.I, p. ~, n -JaWZl, ,L ... awaSlIf;lJ, p. -~.
13N~, a/-NiIiJeh, p. 5.
M Ibid.
•
•
•
90
the Sunna and the Quran have different statuses, 50 mat either can abrogate the other.85 In
addition, Ibn al-Jawzl cites a report from Dâraqu~ to the effec! mat ]abir ibn 'Abd Allih
(c. 78 A.H./692 A.D.), said that the Prophet said "My words do Qot abrogate the Qur'an, the
verses of the Qut'in abrogate each other."M On the other hand, SuyU~ does not e1aborate
on this point; he simply quotes shâfi'i who said, "If it 5hould occu! that the Qur'an is
abrogated by the SImna, still there i5 with it [the Sunna] the Qur'ân 5UPPOrtitlg ('a.did; it, and if
the Sunna is abrogated by the Qur'an, still. there is with it [the Qut'in] the Sunna supporting
it. By this explanation, it is clear that the Qur'in 1S in accordance with the SURIIQ••• ,,17
B. NASKHIN THE EXEGETICAL TREATISES
Eight Qurinic verses will he discussed in tbis section in the light of their treatment
in works by representatives of the four SllIlnt schoo1s:SI for the Ijanafites, Zamakhshan's
KashshiJ s, and J~~isJs ~kim al-Qur'an; 90 for the Milikites Ququbi's fam' li .AJ;Jeam al-
as Ibn al-Jawzi, NIJ1j~, p. 26.
86 Ibid.
57 Suyü~ ai-Itqin, voL 3, p. 60.
III Sayyid MuQammad 'Ali lyizi 1ists exegeœs based on the backgrounds of the authou. See,I~ al-Mz(IlSSiM:~ Wtl kfjllh~ (n.p.: Wizirat al-Thaqm W3. al-Itshid al-Islini, 1373A.H./1967 AD.), pp. 830-2, 834.
59 ZamakhshuÏ (467-538 A.H./1075-1144 A.D.) wrote a/-Kashshâjin Aabic language in fouxvolumes, was written in the period of time between 526-8 A.H./1132-4 A.D.), and was published inmany versions. Ibid., p. 573.
?O J~~~'s full name was Abü Bùr~d ibn 'Ah al-Rizï a1-Jq~ (305-370 A.H/918-783A.D.). His l'!fsJr survived and \Vas initially printed in thtee volumes in 1347 AR. and reprinted in fivevolumes in 1985. IbùL, p. 109.
•
•
•
91
Qur'a;,s'l for the ShifiZites Taban's ]imi' ai-Bçgatl' and Suyü~'s Dun- ai-Mantl»ir?3 and for the
l:Ianbalites Ibn al-]awz1's Zad ai-Mastr.94 In the case of the ij:anifite category, we have chosen
to include ]~~is's AllIeOm ai-Qur'a;, in addition ta Zamakhshan's work because of bis
interesting interpretation of Q. 2: 106. 95 As for the Shifi1te schoo~ we have included two
works in consideration of the faet tbat since the object of mis research is to investigate the
legacy of ShafiZi's theory of nask1J, it would be useful to see how earlier and later Shifi~te
scholars responded to ie. In addition, SUyÜ~'s works on Qur'inic studies are considered by
many to be among the standard works in the field
1. Naskb and its Re1ated Terms
a. Q. 2: 106
The six authorities ail agree that this verse bas an important bearing on the field of
naskh.96 AU except J~~~ provide the circumstances for this yerse, and these relate the verse
91 ~bi~ full mme wu Abü 'Abd AllihM~ ibn~al-~ al-~bï
(580-671 AH'/1184-1273 AD.). His lIJfilris in twenty volumes, and was initWIy published in 1952and was reprinted sevet2l rimes since then. Ibid, p. 408.
91 Tabm's full name wu Abü ]a'fu Mu1}ammad ibn]w al-1;aœn (224-310 A.H./739-825A.D.). His I4fslris in twe1ve volumes, and lw; been reprinted seven1 times. Ibid., p. 399.
93 SUyÜ~'s full name wu Jalil al-Dm 'Abd al-Ral,min al-SuyÜP (849-911 A.H./l44S-150SA.D.). His tafsiris in eight volumes and bas heen reprinted severa! cimes. Ibid., p. 458.
9. Ibn al-Jaurzi's full tWne was Jamil al-01n 'Abd al-RaPmin ibn '~ ibnM~d al]a~ (510-597 AH./1116-1201 A.D.). His ttlfiiris ineightvolumes. Ibid.,p. 391.
9S J~~Ï{i, A1JUm aI-QItr'in, 3 vols. (Beirut: Dar al-Kitib al-'Aabï, 1335 AH./1929 A.D.).Janis only discusses two of the cine vetSeS; Q. 2: 106, voL 1, pp. 58-78; and Q. 3: 7, vol. 2, pp. 2-45.He: discusses the fonowing chapters: Q. 4, voL 2, pp. 46-292; Q. 7, voL 3, pp. 28-44; Q. 13, voL 3, pp.180-2; Q. 16, voL 3, pp. 183-194; Q. 22, voL 3, pp. 224-8; and Q. 45, voL 3, p. 338, but he does netexplain the discussed verses.
96 J~~~,Abk.im aJ.Qur'Q", voL 1, 59; Zamakhshaii, a/.Karhshij; voL 1 (Beitut: Dü al-Macri&.,ad.), p. 87; Ququbi, III-JâIJti'6A1)u", III-QIIr'i1l, voL 2 (Caim: Dir al-IGtib al-cAr4Lbï li al-Tibi'a wa al-
•
•
•
92
to naskh. Ibn a1-Jaw2i~ Q~bl, and Zamakhshan cite the similar reports~ stating that the
verse was revealed when the Prophet Muqammad was accused of being inconsistent because
he oftea changed his orders. The specifie example given here is the change of direction of
the qibla from Jerusalem ta Mecca. They do not mention who accused the Prophet of this)
but Ibn al-Jawii and QUrfUb"i identify the accuser as having been a Jew (al-Yahutt;.9i Taban
mentions one report from Thawr ibn 'Abd ..'\!Eh al-'Anb~ indicating that IlfJskh may accur
due to n~an (forgetfulness) implanted by God in the mind of the Prophet and his Follawers,
after which Gad replaced the abrogated ruling with a similar or better one.91 SuyùJi provides
two reports - one from Ibn 'Abbis and another from Ibn 'Umar which are similar to the
report mentioned by raban.99
AIl 51."( authorities intetpret Q. 2: 106 in the light of naskh as a suh-science of the
Islamic sciences. They randomly discuss the veae from the following points of view: the
canonical reaclin& linguistic usage of the term Izaskh, def1nitions, scope~ modes) types and
conditions. QUrJ:Ublloo and SUyÜptOl aIso mention the story of how 'Ali ibn Abl ~ilib forhade
Muslims to teach the Qur'an without a prior knowledge of al-nisile.h ilia al-fI1rmsükh. None of
them, however, e."(cept Q~b1, refeIS to Shifi.ll in the course of chis cliscourse from the
Nashr., 1967), p. 61; Taban, fion' a/.Bttytin 'flTI TI.I'Ml a/QNr'in, voL 2 (Caire: Dir al-M2.'irif, n.d.), pp.471-2; Suyü~ a/-Durr tJi-MlJRlhiirJial-Tafsir ai-MtI'thir, voL 1 (BeiNe Dit a1-Kutub al-~ 1990),p. 197; and Ibn al-Ja~ ZtJ(Ja/-ManTft Tint a/.T'!fsir, voL 1 (Beimt: Al-Maktab al-Islmi, 1984), p. 127.
97 Ibn al-Jawzi, Zid al-lv1a.rlr, \-"01 l, p. 127;~~ aI-Jimi', voL 2, p. 61; Zamakhshaà, alKashshif, p. 87.
98 Taban,]iJni' al-B'!Jin, vol ~ p. 472.
99 Suyü~, a/-DIIfTai-Manthiir, vol. l r p. 197.
100 ~b1,aI-}timi', vol 2, pp. 65-6.
101 Suyû~ a/-Dltrr al-klanthiir, vol 1, pp. 200-1.
•
•
•
93
point of definition and modes of naskh, only SuyÜ,l who does not provide them. Taban
draws bis definition of nfJSkh from this verse, describing it as the change of a ruling in a verse
by mat in another;l02 he then oo1y admits, here, one mode of naskh, i.e. abrogating the ruling tInd
Ilot the 1l/ording. 1OJ On the other hand,J~~i~defines naskh as "the explanation of the period of
the effeetiveness of the ruling and the wording." Accordiogly, he draws from the verse two
modes of Itosleh: ahrogating the lIJording and not the n,Jing and abrogating the nlling, and not th!!
Z1Iordùrg. I04 Though Ibn al-Jaw~ defines naskh as abrogation/os and Ququbi and Zamakhshan
see it as rpla&t11Iellt,t1YJ they aIl mention the tluee modes of n'lJleh,tD7 while in addition, Ibn al-
Jawzt identifies the sautees 0 f the thtee modes as Ibn 'Abbas and Ibn Mas'üd. It is said mat
al-Suddi (d 128 A.H./746 A.D.) reported that Ibn 'Abbis (d. 68 A.H./687 A.D.) had spoken
of the mode a!mJgating the llIortfjng and the ruli,,& while Muqatil ibn Sulaymin (d. 150 A.H./767
AD.) had identified the mode labdiJ al-iya bighqyriha (changing a verse by another), in other
words, abrogg/ing the llIording and not fhe fllJing as stemming from Ibn 'Abbas. Finally, ~{ujihid
Cd 104/722) reported mat Ibn Mas'üd (d. 33 A.H./653 A.D.) had first mentioned the
rernaining mode, abrogati1lg the mling and nol the rwrrfjng. IOI
HP. Tabaà, Jiimi' aI-B'!);", voL 2, p. 482
103 Ibid, p. 487.
lOS Ibn al-Jawzi, Zad a/-MfJJir, vol 1, p. 127.
106 Qur!:ubï, ai-Jâmi', voL 2, p. 64; Zamakhshaè , al-K/lshshtij, vol 1, p. 87.
107 Ibn al-Jawii, ZQJ al-Masir, vol 1, p. 127; Qur!:ubi, ol-JQmi', vol 2, p. 66; Zamakhshati, 0/Kmhshij; voL t, p. 87.
101 Ibn al-Jawii, ZofJ a/Matir, voL 1, p. 127.
•
•
•
94
In conneetion with the types of IIl1Skh, Qur!:ubl andJ~!i~ discuss the reasons offered
by the camp that rejeeted abrogating the QI/r'a" l!J th~ SIJnlltl and vice versa. Q~bl for this
part disagrees with their position. He asserts that bath Shiti~ and Abü al-Faraj al-Malik' (d.
331 or 332 A.H./943 A.D.) advocated this idea, arguing mat a ruling deduced either from
the Ql.1t'an or the SUllNl is in fact trom Gad He further buttresses bis idea by gi,,-ing
examples. The first example is of abrogatillg the Qur'o" l!J the S1I1lIlQ, illustrated by the ruling
that lashing the zaitt (the adulterer) is not applicable ta an elderly offender because the
Prophet abragated it. The second example is of abrogating the SUllno I!J the Q1I1"in, illustrated
by the case of the change of direction of the qibh wbich had been established by SlIlIna to
that which was decreed in the Qur'in.10lJ Qw+ub1 does nat identify the verse in question, but
Ibn al-Jawz1 in his NawaszïeJJ alQz/rJan clarifies that this tradition was abrogated by Q. 2: 143-
145.no
On the other band, J~~a~ disagrees with the others on the rejectioc of the foanula
of abrogating the Qur'in I!J the SIIIIIUI or vice versa. Forh~ those who disagree with this point
are negligent, but he makes this statement without identifying who he had in minci. He offers
three reasOQS in support his argument. First he states that it is not allowed to interpret the
term ccbi !eht:rJrùI millhd' (better than it/this verse) in Q. 2: 106 as applying tO reotation and
composition ("al!") because of its parallel with a/-ntisileh and ai-fIItl1l.f1/kh in the inimitability of
composition.111 Second, the consensus of the early scholars (sa/afJ he1d mat this principle
does nct disprove the lUIt'" of the Qur'an, having interpreted this verse (Q. 2: 106), as
109 ("\,,~_.J.:: -I_r -.. L ? 6~-6X--!,WIJA, rM:JQ11IZ , vo -, pp. ;) .
uo Ibn al-Jawzi, Nem1isilW, p. 26.
111 J~~~,AJJIeim aI-Qur~ voL 1, p. 60.
•
•
•
9S
meaning one of two things: taJ:hjiJ (mitigating) or fIIlJllaJ;a (advantage). In this purpose, the
Qur'an has certainly been abrogated by the SUlIna or vice versa. And none of ahl al-salafsaid
mat the term "hi 1ehr;yri1l minhi" was meant to refet to ai-tilDwa (recitation), sa that the
indication in Q. 2: 106 permitting the abrogation of the Qur'in by the SUlI1Ia is stronger that
any indication ta the contrary.llZ 3) AccordinglY,Ja!}~~ e.xplains chat
... the nature of Q. 2: 106 a:u1y requires abrogaring the wording (naskh 8/-tildnla) andthe verse does not refer co its m1ing. because Gad says. f'Whatever a verse (~a) do Weabrogate," The 98 is ttUly irnJ a/.tiJ.izva (the name ofwording'J Uld there is nothing in naskh altilmw tbat obliges it ta refer ta RtlSkiJ al-I;IUuIl (abrogating the tuling). If it is the case, it ispermissible to interpret its meaning as: whatever the wording of a verse do We abrogate orcause to be forgottt.n, We bring a better one for you from a cettain source from the Sm11lt1 oralike (the Qur'in].I.U
b. Q. 22: 52
None of the authorities appeal ta Q. 22: 52 as a device ta explain the science of
!trJSkh. They treat it merely as an example of the usage of the ward ntlJkh and a confirmation
on God)s part that He protel.1s His words from the intervention of devils (sh'!Y.faÏt).1l4 Nor do
mey mention 5hifill in mis connection.
Basica11y, they translate the word as meaning ib.til (annulment). Taban and QUI1=Ubl
conceive of it as ib.ta41l5 while Ibn al-Jawzl and Zamakhshan see it as ib!iI and idhhab
(eliminating),1.16 J~~~ as iZillJ, ibli/and ibdal(replacement),117 and Suyüp as abroga/Îoll. 111
112 Ibid
1.13 Ibid.
11. Ibn al-Jawii. Ziti ai-Maiir, voL S. p. 443; Ta~ ]imi' al-B'!}Qir, voL 17 (Beirut: Dir alMa'~ 1987), pp. 134-5; QutJub~ l11-Jinti', voL 12, p. 86; Su~ aJ.Durr fl/.MtmthtÏr. voL 4, p. 664;Zamakhs~ aI-IVJshshij; vol 3, p. 37; andJ~~~,AlJk.Ont a/-QIIf''in, voL 1, p. 58.
us Taban, jimi' d-Btgin. voL 17, p. 134; QurplD1, a/Ji/Iii', vol. 12, p. 85.
116 Ibn al-]awzi, Zado/-Maslr, voL 5, p. 443; Zamakhshaii, a/-Kashshif, voL 3, p. 37.
•
•
•
96
Ail, e.xcept J~~~, devote their discussion 1argely to the circurostances of the
revelation of the vetse Q. 22: 52. In e:\."Plaining the cante.,'t of the verse, by my calculation,
Taban provides eight reports,U9 Quq:ub"i ten,12O and SUyÜ]i thirteen in all. l21 Zamakhshan and
Ibn al-JawZi summarize the stacy toid by the exegetes in illustrating Q. 22: 52,122 without
mentioning their e.uet source. The eïrcumsta1lces re1ated ta this verse are however
debatable. Ququbl himself adroits that, "there is nothing valid in the traditions that report
on the circumstances of this verse.ut:] These reports were considered invalid because the
transmitters were weak. In 3ddition~ he confi..cms that Bukhaà and Muslim do not include
any report on the occasion of its revelation.1:!4 Prior to him, Ibn al-Jawz1 had been aware of
this, and had said mat the editars 0 f fJadith (a/-1!I11I}aqqiqiin) believed that the reports related
U7J~~~tAQ~a/-Quù;" volt, p. .58.
ua Suyii~ al·DtITT a/-Ma1lJhIÎT, voL 4, p. 664.
119 1) Al-Qisim &om Mw,ammad ibn Ka'ab al-Q~i; 2) Ibn 'Abd al-A'li frem Abü al-Atiyya;3) Ibn al-Muthanni &am Abü al-Aliyya; 4) Ibn Bashar fram SaCïd ibn JabÏrï 5) Ibn al-Muthanni fromSa'id ibn Jubayr; 6) MuJ;wmmd ibn Sa'ad from Ibn 'Abw; 7) Husayn &cm al-~ and 8)YÜDUS from Ibn Shihib. Taban,Ja;,,;' ai-Begin, vol 17, pp. 131-3.
1:'0 1) Al-Layth; 2) Qatida; 3) Wiqiâ.; 4) Bukhan; 5) Ibn 'Apyya; 6) Bukhati and Muslim; T)Abü ~bï, Sba'ba and Abü Basb2r from Sa'id ibn Jubayr and Ibo 'Abbas; 9) al-Kalbl from Ibn'Abbis, and 10) The tt2l1Smitter is nat mentioned. ~bi, aI-]im;', voL 12, pp. 80-2.
ln 1) 'Abd ibn Ijumayd and Ibn al-AnbaÏi from Ibn Abbas; 2) Ibn Abil;Iitim from Sa'adibn Ibriliim ibn 'Abdal-~ ibn 'Auri; 3) Ibn al-Mandhur and Ibn Am ~tim &am Mujihid; 4)'Abd b. l:Iumayd &om Abû ~~ S) Al-Bazar, al-Tabârii. Ibn Marda\Viw and al-Dayyi' from Sa'idibnJubayr and Ibn 'Abbis; 6) IbnJ3Ïir, Ibn al-Mandhur. Ibn Abi I:Iitim, and Thn Matdawiyya &omSit"Id ibn Jubayt; 7) Ibn Janr and Ibn Mardawiyya &om Ibn 'Abbis; 8) Ibn Mudawiyya; 9) 'Abd ibn~umayd and Ibn Jaiir from Ibn Shihib; 10) Ibn Am Ijâtim From Ibn shihib; 11) al-Bayhiqi fromMüsi ibn CUqba; 12) al-Tabani from 'Urwa, and 13) Sar'Id ibn~ and Ibn Jaiir. Suyü~ a/-Dtm'a/-Manthir, voL 4, p. 661-2
122 Ibn al-JawD, Zid tJi-Manr, voL 5, p. 441; Zamakhshan, aL-KashshiJ, voL 3, p. 37.
~ Qut1ub1, al-fümi', voL 12, p. 80.
l24 Ibid.
•
•
•
97
to this verse were invalid because the Prophet Muq,ammad was infallible.l~ However, the
reports continued ta draw the attention of the exegetes. A case in point 15 the faet chat Ibn
(Abbas's report i5 quoted by l'aban, Qurplbl, and SuyÜa. While raban does not judge the
report, QurPlbi grades it as uncertain, yet alIows people to repeat the story. SUyÜii for chis
part says chat the cransmitters of chis report were qualified. 1:!6
c. Q. 45: 29
As with Q. 22: 52, the discussion of Q. 45: 29 by the sigbt interpreters is likewise
empty of any comment on the theory of nas/eh, and wherever the word is referred to it 15
used only in the ~cnse of irtiltSik!J, or ropying. Taban and Zamakhshan qualify the word as
istiktab (dietation),127 while Ibn al-Jawii and Ququb"t translate it as naskh (copying),111 and
J~~as and Suyü~ identify it as lIaql (copyillg).I19 None of them provide any circumsunces of
revelation. Howe,"er, witb the exception ofJ~~a~ and Zamakhshaà, they interpret the verse
in the light of the traditions of the Companions. Taban provides four reports,1JO Qu~bl
SL"{1Jl and Suyü~ nme.L3! Ibn al-Jawz1 on the other band directiy interprets the verse without
125 Ibn al-Jawzi, Zida/-Nfaiir, vol. S, p. 441
U6 Taban, ]â1Jli' ai-B'!JaR, vol. 17, p. 133; ~bl, ai-JànJi', vol. 12, p. 82; Suyüp, Q/-D1Irr alMallthir, voL 4, p. 661.
121 Tab~Jaïni' al-B'!Jin, vol. 25, p. 94; Zamakhs~ a/-lVJshshij, voL 3, p. 440.
121 Ibn al-Jawz1, Zôti o!-Maiir, voL 7. p. 365;~bi, al-Jimi', voL 16, p. 175.
1291~~, A1Jkam ai-Qltrin, voL 1, p. 58.
130 1) Abü l<aJib from Ibn 'Abbas; 2) Ibn I:Iumayd from Ibn 'Abbas; 3) Ibn I:Iu.mayd fremIbn 'Abbas, and 4) Al-J:Iasan ibn 'Ir&h &am cAli ibn Am ralib. Tabaii,Jônti'a/-Baytitr, voL 25, p. 94-5.
131 1-3 &onl Ibn 'Abbas; ~) Al-l:Iasan; 5 and 6 the transmitters are net mentioned. QutJllbi,a/JùllIÎ', vol 16, pp. 173-6.
•
•
•
98
reference ta tr.lditiOQs. Regarding the word istinsa"lh, he refers ta the exegetes ~-ithout
identifying them, saying that this kind of istin.sa7eh cornes from the !aw~ fll-,'Ull#t (the
preserved tablets), on which the angels record the deeds of human beings every year (111
other reports, every day) and he mentions two opinions reparted respectively by al-Farri'
and al-Zujaj.1J3 Al-Faui' explains that the two angels inscribe the record of the deeds of
every persan, and then Gad detennines which is ta he rewarded and which punished, and
deduets any mistake (Ioghrv). Al-Zujaj makes a similar point without identifying thase who
record the deed.1J4
d. Q. 7: 154
This verse uses the ooon fonn nuskhaJ (mscription), and e.\."Plains that the inscription
brought by the Prophet Müsi was a Divine guidance and mercy. Once again, the six
authocities, e."icept J~~as, treat the word in a linguistic sense, interpreting it as equivalent ta
fUVJI (copy).lJ5 Ibn al-Jawii, quoting Ibn 'Abbas and Ibn Qutayba, e.xplains that by "1IIa.f
nusk!JfJtihJ' (and in its inscription) can be meant cither "Jl/QJima baqtJQ mi1lh(J' (and from the
[est of it) or "WQfll1li IUlsikha jfhrl' (and itam what is recorded). 136 SUyU~ shares Ibn al-JawZi's
LJ~ 1 and 3 Ibn Jaiit &cm Ibn 'Abbis; 2) Al-Mundbîr &am Ibn 'Abbas; 4) IbnJw &am 'Aliibn Abï TaIïb; 5) Ibn Mardawiyyu &am CUmar ibn Khanab; 6-7) Ibn Manhwiyya &am Ibn 'Abbis~ 8)Ibn Mardawiyya and Abü NaZjm from Ibn 'Abbas, and 9) al-T:abtinl from Ibn 'Abbas. Suyü~ a/·DtITrai·,\1.anlhlfr, voL 5, pp. 760-1.
133 Ibn al-Jawzi. Z4d a/-Masir, voL 7, p. 365.
1:U Ibid.
1)5 Ibn al-J:awà, Z4d al-MaiIr, vol 3, p. 267; TabaD, lion' aI-Bayill, vol. 9, p. 49; Zamakhshati,a/-KashshOf, vol 2, p. 96; QurJu1:ii, ai-Jimi', voL 7, p. 293; suyiip., oi·Vmra/-i.'Wtmthm-, voL 3, pp. 236-7.
136 [bn al-Jawzi, ZidaI-Maiir, vol 3, p. 267.
•
•
•
99
stand in that he quotes Ibn 'Abbas's opinion from Ibn Abl f:Iâtim, accepting that it means
"1IItl jUna- baqtya I1IÎnhJ' (and from the rest of it).137 Meanwhile, Taban, Qurplbi and
Zamakhshaè. share Ibn Qutayba's opinion, which Ibn al-JawZi. aIso quotes, i.e., that it me3!lS
"1110 pm.i ntlsikf;a jihJ' (and from what is recorded).138 In faet, wherever the word nuskhat in
chis verse has been interpreted, it has been seen as referring not to the discussion of al-nasz"kh
and ai-mallsiikh, but to the recording of the guidance and mercy of Gad.
2. Other Terms Related ta the Discussion of Naskb
a. Q.16: 101
A.ll authorities, e.'Xcept ]a~~â~, anchor this verse 1fi the discussion of fZas!eh,
interpreting the word tabdli (the noun foan of b--d-~ as naskh.1J9 raban confines his
interpretation of the ward ta "replacement of a ruling."IoW Q~bl shares Taban's opinion
mat the word labrill signifies replacing the ruling of a verse only.l~l Zamakhsban and Suyü~
do not say whether the abrogation is of the ruling, or of the wording, or heth of the ruling
and the wording together:4:! Ibn al-Jawz1 clarifies the fact that the replacement of a verse
137 SUyÜrJ, a/-DIDf' a/-MmrtJM, vol 3, pp. 236-7.
l3a raban. fion' a/-Bayan, vol. 9, p. 49; ZamakhshaO, a/-KarhshOf, vol 2, p. 96; QurfUbi, ailimi', voL 7, p. 293.
139 Tabaii, Jimi' ai-Bayan, voL 14, p. 118; Zamakhshaii, al-KashsiJi,{, voL 2, p. 344; Ququbï, aifQmi', vol 15, p. 176; Ibn al-Jan, urial-MtzslT, voL 4, p. 491; SUyÜ~ tJi..Dwr al-MfJnJhm-, voL 2, p. 246.
1..c Tabaà,fci«i' al-Bigi., vol 14, p. 118.
141 ~bl, al-]inJi', \"oL 15, p. 176.
1~ ZamakhshaD, a/-Kttshshij, voL 2, p. 344; SuyÜ~ a/-D1l1T al-Manthiir, vol 2, p. 246.
•
•
•
100
here can consist in either abrogating the ruling and wording, or abrogating the ruling and not
the wording.141
Suyüp cites a Ffadith to illustrate the occasion of revelation of Q. 16: 101,1# one that
seems to have no relation at ail ta naskh. In fact, SuyÜ~ in bis LJiba?J al-NI/qii'Ji Asbat, a'-
N1I\Jïi takes no notice of the circumstances behind chis verse.145 Ibn al-Jawz1 on the other
hand provides a circumstance reported by Abü ~iliQ from Ibn 'Abbas, stating that God in
this case revealed a verse and chen revised it. Furthermore, according to the report, he
explains that the disbelievers of Quraysh believed that verily Mw,ammad had obliged his
Companions to do a thing, once, and then prohibited them from daing so another rime. For
these r~asans Q. 16: 106 was revealecL l46 The rest of the authorities are silent on the
circumstances surounding th.is verse.
Taban, Zamakhshan and Ibn al-Jawzl relate aIso that naskh occurs because Gad
effers it as one of the advantages for Muslims. They accuse those who do Qot believe in
IUlSkh of being ignorant; Taban suspectS chem as well of being ignorant of the nature of
nasklJ,l.ï while Zamakhshan cOQsidea them ta be simply ignorant of the science of lfasleh. l41
LoO Ibn al-Jawzi, Zaa a/-Marir, vol 4, p. 491.
144 Suyüti quotes a report of Abü OiwÜd in his work al-Nisikh, Ibn Marcb.wi~ and alF:rakim from Ibn ~Abbis when he explains Q. 16: 101 and 110. Ibn ~Abbis said that 'Abd A11ih ibnAbï Sart]. wrote [a letterJ ta the Prophet MuJ::wnmad, the satan dispersed him and met with thedisbelievea. The Prophet ordered bis Companions co kill him inYfmll!l a/fotl} (the day of \l'Ïctory), but'Uthman, the Companian, asked him te release 'Abd Allih ibn Abl Suih the Prophet released him.Suyü~ a/-DIItT tJl..MallthKr, vol 2, p. 246.
145 Suyü~, uba1J tJl-Nltf{lï4 pp. 176-7.
1"6 Ibn al-JaW?i, Zad a/-Maiir, vol 4, p. 491.
1~7 Taban,]œlri" a/-B~Qn, voL 14, p. 118.
1-41 ZamakhshUi., a/-Kashshij. vol 2, p. 344.
•
•
•
101
Ibn al-Jawz1 says that they were ignOtant because they did not know that Gad had revealed
the Qur'an with IIaskh, and because they did not know its advancages.lol9 Zarnakhshaà and
Ibn al-Jawzl bath daim that the provision in the nisileh cm be either hatSher or milder than
mose in the 11J~/.5lJ according to the former, this is because al-1tIlSikh is based on the
advantages (mtl!/aJ;al) embodied in it.151 Q~bi on the other hand insists that most of the
authorities (juJ'JIh~ considered that al-nasiJeh shauld be hasher than al-fJfallsükh. lS2
None of the six authorities mentions Shifi'ï as a source in discussing Q. 16: lOlo
However, Zamakhshan does take the opportunity to aff101l the principle 0 f abrogating the
Qur'(i,z i!J the Sun1ù1 and vice versa, which Shafill had originally advocated. According to
Zamakhsh~ "the Quèan abrogates a similar thing and 50 there is 00 impediment ta the
Qur'an's being abrogaœd by another thing [the S:n:na}. In f:let, the Sunna, whea reported
multiply (Sunna al.f111llin1atira) is like the Qur'in in mat one is obliged to know it; thus, the
Qur'an cao be abrogated by the SJtnna/' Moreover, he maltes it clear that timi', q{yis, and
Sl/ltna not reported by many are dissimi.1ar ta the Qur'aa. Accordingly, these cannat abrogate
the Qur'an.1!i3
149 Ibn al-Jawzi, zœai-MaJir, vol 4, p. 491.
150 Ibn al-Jawzi,. ZQd al~Masirl vol 4, p. 491; Za.makhshaQ, al.KtJJh.shij, voL 2, p. 344.
151 Zamakhshaà, oI-KmhshiJ, vol. 2. p. 344.
152 Ququli, al-Jünti·, vol 15, p. 176.
153 Zamakhshaà, al.&Shshif, vol. 2, p. 344.
•
•
•
102
b. Q.13: 39
This verse is unique in chat the e:cegetes state severa! different vie\vs in reference ta
it. Ibn al.-J3wZi classifies the interpretations of the verse into eight opinions: 1) as 'imm, in
that Gad blots out and establishes whar he wills, incll'lding ri~, ''!il (appointed cime), sa'iria
(happiness), and shaqiwa (sadness); 2) as al-lIisileh and al-manmkh; 3) God blots out and
establishes what he Votili, except shoqawa, fa 'ida, life, and death; 4) God blots out and
establishes what he wills, except shaqillla and sa tid4; 5) God blots out those whose rime has
come [death], and establishes wbose rime bas not come; 6) God entses cne's sin and grants
one forgiveness, or confians one's sins and does not grant forgiveness; 7) Gad erases any sin
done by a human being if he perfomls tawba (repentance) and replaces it with !;asanat
(,,;tues); and 8) Gad etaSes whatever is on the preserved tablet (diwan QI·~aJ(J!i.a) chat does not
entai! rewards or punishments, and establishes what :lre rewards and punisbrnents.154
In chis case, we focus our discussion of the verse on the explanation related ta
naskh. Although he does not choose to interpret the verse in the light of ItaSkh, raban
summarizes the camp advocating this explanation, which is that God abrogates and
establishes His rolings according ta Fris wilL Tc support bis review, he quotes four reports. 1S5
Zamakhshan interprets the verse in the light of naskh at the first place, saying tbat God
abrogates what He wi1ls and establishes tes replacement based on the advantages embodied
in the abrogating verse, or leaves them unchanging.l56 Ibn al-Jawzl simply repeats tilat God
154 Ibn al-Jawzi, üüJ aJ-MoJir» voL 4, pp. 337-8. Simïb.r discussions are found also in raban,fimi' oi-B'!JOn, vol 13, p. 111-5; Qur!:ub1, a/-Jilni', vol 9, pp. 329-33; Zamakl1sllaii, al-Kashshij; voL 2,p. 291; SuyÛp., aJ·DIITf' a/-ManlhNr» vol. 4, pp. 122, 125-6.
15S 1) Al·Muthanni from Ibn 'Abbâs; 2) MuQammad ibn 'Abd A'Ii from Qatida; 3) Yünus&cm Ibn Zayd, and 4) al-Qisim fromIbn]aiij. TabUi»Jimi' aI-Bt!}'in, voll3, p. 111-4.
l56 Zam3kbsba~ a/.Kmhshij, vol 2, p. 291.
•
•
•
103
abrogntes al-l11tJllszïleh and establishes af-niSikh and identifies the reporter of chis view as Ibn
'Abbas. L57 Qurp.tb"i mentions two reports: 1) from Qatad~ Ibn Zayd, and Sa)d ibn ]ubayr,
and 2) From Ibn 'Abbas, conftrming similar point that of Ibn al-Jawzi's quotation with an
addition chat the tenn UI1InJ ai-Kita7J in the verse translated as al-nasikh and a/_mallsu"}J,.151
SUyÜ~ reviews mis camp by quoting four reports which are similar ta those in Qurt:ub1's
quotations, and one report by Ibn Jaùc from Qatada which equates the meaning of Q. 13: 39
with Q. 2: 106.159
c. Q. 4: 160
Ja~~as 15 silent on tbis verse, while the other authorities discuss it but do not relate it
to ""skh. One point that is made 15 that God replaced ms ruling when humms did wrong (aI-
;J,lm) Jnd al-Iadd 'ait saMfAUàh (hinderi:ng from the way of Allah). The exegetes explain mat
the pronoun htl1'1/ ethey) in the verse refers tO the Jews, whom Ibn al-Jawz1 calls ahl al-
Tmvra.L60 In this verse, Gad explains that He changed the law of certain good foodstuff from
lawful to unlawful, because the Jews cammi.tted tJ/-~"" and hindered people from the ~-ay of
Allah. Zamakhshan classifies a/-~Im here as refeaing to great wrongdoings (ai-kabi'i'lj, while
Ibn al-Jawz1 clarifies al-lJI"" by quoting Muqatil who interpreted it in the light of the
follo'wing verse Q. 4: 161, saying mat al-~Int may be meant, here, as spending another's
157 Ibn aI-Javni~Zad a/-Ma.iir, vol 4, p. 337.
153 Qurt:u~ &1fJinri'~ vol 9, p. 331.
139 Suyü~ fli-Dttrr a/-MlJ1Ithiïr, vol 4. pp. 125-6.
l60 raban, Jm' al-B'!Jo-", voL 6, pp. 17-8; Zamakhshari, o/-Koshshâf, vol l, pp. 12-3; Ibn aJJaw7.i, Zid a/.Mœir, vol 6, p. 250; QurJuIi, ai-JiiJai~ vol. 6, pp. 329-33; SuyÜp, a/-Dun- eti-MIl1Ithiir, vol2, p. 434.
•
•
•
104
propeny unlawfully and bribery. Overa1l, l'aban, Zamakhshan, Ibn al-JawZi, Qurr:ubl, and
SuyU~ in no way relate the verse ta the discussion of !:askh. Nor do they refer ta Shafi'i in
this conneetioo.
d. Q. 3: 7
Though Ja~~a~ is silent on Q. 3: 7, the other exegetes treat it in a variety of ways.
Zamakhshan simply rejeas noskh as one possible interpretatian ta chis verse.161 Ibn al-J3Wii
focuses on the interpreœtion of t'Wo key teans of the verse: ;;yi! mupleamaï (clear verses) and
ayài m:tlashatnhat (unclear verses). According to hîm, there are eight interpretations for the
phrase iyat !II1lJ;leamat and seven interpretations for ~tit f11lItasha77ihaï.16~ We will focus oaly on
the interpretation of these two key terms in 50 far they are related ta naskh. Like Ibn al-jawzi,
~aban, Qutplbl, and Suyüti relate iyat nnl!)leomàt ta iyit nasi/ehat and tiyit 11111/asha77ihrit to (iyrit
nJ"'lS/ïkhaï. Ibn al-Jawzl, 1;abaà, Qur~ubl, and SUyÜii cefer ta Ibn 'Abbas as the source and al!
but SuyüP-' refer also ta Ibn Mas'iid and Qatida. "raban and Qu~bl alse refet al-Qai}l}.ik
Ill! Zam;akhstwi, Q/-Kashsh~voL 1, pp. 174-6.
162 The eight intetprctations of iJOt IJllI1IUlitit are: 1) aI-Jltisilt.h, from Ibn Mas'Üd, Ibn CAbbas,Qatid~ al-Saddi, etc.; 2) a/.qfJI4J (la,,-fu1) and a/-{Jor- (unbwful), &am Ibn 'Abbis and Mujihïd; 3)that is what scholus know its inteqm:tatio~ Jibir ibn 'Abd ADih mentioned it; 4) the verse which isnet abrogated, &omal-~ 5) the veue which is net open te many intetpreutiODS, &cm IbnZayd; 6) the verse which is dcar and theœ is no need for explanation, from~ ibn i:bnbal.Shâfilï and Ibn al-AnbaD said tm.t dUs verse does not need any int~etations except one; 7) thewhole Qur'in except a/-/pIri( a1-IN:«{fJ/Itl'tl (mysterious lettea); 8) it is a/·fJ1l1r (commami)~ fli-nllhy(prohtbttion), tzI-_'4 and al-woU (promise and threat), fli-~oI4l and aI-l}armN, &cm fli-qâ.ii Abü Ya'li.And there are seven inœrpretations fut the meanings of igaï JII1ItIlshibiho; 1) it is m-mlZ1lSlÏ1elJ, Erom IbnMas'üd, rbn 'Abbis, Qati~ al-Sad~ ete.; 2) it is a verse mat scholars do not have a way [0 know ielike the clay of hereafter, &cm Jibir ibn 'Abd Al1ih; 3) it is a/-Puri! fli-IIlUljl1/.1fl4 (mysterious letters),trom Ibn 'Abbis; 4) it is a verse which its meaning is uncleu, &om Qatida; 5) it is a verse that basmany wordings, &cm Ibn Zayd; 6) it a verse mat bas many interpretation5, Ibn al-Anbaà said mat aIDnlljkmn is vetSe chat does not open te MOUS ïnterpretations and al-nlUltlShaDihi is vice versa; 7) it isaI-q/ljQ.f (staries) and a/-fI1IIt1JiJ, !rom ai-qll7iAbü Ya'li. Ibn al-Jawzi, 'Zada/.Masir, voL 1, p. 350-1.
•
•
•
lOS
and al-Rabi' as weIl in this conneetion. In addition, Ibn al-JawZi mentions aIso al-Suddi and
makes obscure reference le ot.hm. SUyÜp mentions the sources orny from Ibn 'Abbas.lM
Here, Shifi'i was consulted by Ibn al-JawZi and SUyÜp, but not in relation ta the discussion
of nasleh.
163 TabaD,Jœm' tIi-Btgin. vol 4, pp. 114-5; QurJ:ub~ ai-fimi'. voL 3" p. 10; Ibn al-Jawzi, Zid aiMœir, voL 1" p. 350-1; Suyü~ al-DurrrJI-Mtl1IJh:ïr, vol 2, pp. 6-7" 10" and 12.
•
•
•
106
CHAPTERIV
CONCLUSION
When treating writings on 1UlSkh as Iiterary works, one cannat negleet the faet that
they deal with principles rooted in divine revelation. Like other authors on nas/eh, Shifill
based his epistemology on this perspective. We find that Shifill's theory of nasleh refleeted
the wish of the author ta take part in the dispute between the traditionists (ahl al-F;IadIth) and
rationalists (ahl al-ra'j. As he had in the case of I-Jadlth, ShaIiZi foanalized the subjeet of
naskh in such a way that it should form a part of a Muslim's application of his faith. To
achieve this, he made naskh a re1ational device, in that he considered 1UJ.J!eh ta be conneeted
ta other key tenns such as /aleJJi[; and isti!hna-' and treated it as an integral packet of
systematic principles of method of inquiry and Islamic source theory.
In short, Shâfi'i's theory of nasleh represents a new step, though one still at the
developmental stage. His theory of 1Iar/eh is comprised of three basic elements (abrogating a
juristic ruling by another one, al-ta'a/ehkhHr, and differentiating the term 1ItlSkh from other key
terms), based on four conditions (that there should be a confliet between al-nOsileh and al
mansiikh; that the ruling of a/-mansiikh must be established before determ;c;llg al-nQs;kh; that
al-1Iasikh and al-lIItmSlÏkh should be in the area of shan'a; and chat al-Ifisileh has to be
established in a similar or better way than in which a/-mansuleh was established) and
chamcterized by two modes (abrogatÎ1Ig the rtJ/illg but 111)/ the 1:IIording and abrogating the wonli1lg bul
Ilot the ntliniJ and [wo types of naskh (ahrogati1lg theQur'a1l i!J the QtlrJa-" and abrogating the Sun1la
by the S1I1111a)•
•
•
•
107
From our discussion of the introduetoty sections of 6.ve works -al-Na1?Jtis's al
NÜJikh wa a/-MtlItIiiIeh, Makk"i's a/-I.da7;, Ibn al-JawZi's Nr.nvisileh, Shu'lah's $afivat a/-Rasi/eh, Ibn
al.-"Aca;iqI's a/-Nisikh DIa a/-Mllllsii/eh, and the section on nasleh in SUyÜii's a/-IJqaÏl- we found
that in geneol shifi~'s theory of nasleh was rnrely consulted. The only rime where Shafi~ is
mentiooed is in order ta refute bis rejeetion of abrogating the Q,,"'an by the SUItlIll or vice versa.
Na4q.ïs, Ibn al-JaW21, and Suyü~ accept tt, while Makkl and Shu'lah refute this opinion but
they do not identify who advocated it. Ibn al-Jawzl attributes this idea not only ta Shifili but
~SC) to Sufyan al-Thawà. MakKi allows the Qur'ân be abrogated by a I-Jadith whether this
latter has been multiply reported or not, but ShuCWl confines its usage only ta the Srmna
reportcd multiply.
From a comparative point of view, wc fmd chat in acccpting the existence of nasle.h,
Sh:ifi~ and the si.~ authorities share the same opinion in that they consider IItlS!eh ta be che
exclu:iiye right of God. However, with the exception of Ibn al-'Ata'iql, chey propose a
slightly different view from Shifi'i in that they seek both logical and religious proofs, while in
addition Shu'lah and Suyü~ add consensus as a factor in justifying the subjeet. Meanwhile,
Shafi) holds that nasJeh is part of religious obedience. In evaluating the importance of /tI1s/eh,
Shati'i restricts llimse1f to the Qur'an, quoting Q. 14: 51 and Q. 16: 9, whereas the si.",
::lUthorities go further, and base themselves not ooly on reIigious doctrine, but aIso on the
l1isrorica! report referred ta above that c.-\li ibn Ali ~alib had prohibited preachïng on the
Quran without knowing about RIlSIeh. In addition, Shu'lah and SuyÜ~ interpolate the
consensus ofprevious Muslim expetts as another point in favo! of naskh.
Regarding the theory of naskh, of the si.~ authorities, oaly Ibn al-cAti'iql does not
discuss types of nasleh or differentiate it from other key tetInS, like badQ' or takhPi In
•
•
•
lOS
approaching the same topie, Na1}.l}is only distinguisbes nasleh from bada'. Others differentiate
xt l1fJt only from bada-' but aIso from tokJJ;ls. However, none of them acknowledge Shafi~ as
ü.~c: nne who initiaIly formulated this distinction.
Shafili's insistence on t\Vo modes of naskh, furthemlore, is consistently refuted by the
SL., aurhorities in that they posit three such modes. Makkl, even adds three other modes,
exrcnding the tirst mode (abro,gating the ming and /lot the Q/ordiniJ into three and the second
(abrogptillg the llIorriing t:l1Id ru/ingJ into two, and adding a new mode, God's obrogaJion ofthe prtlcfiœ
0I the Pmphel altd his Companicns in llIhkh th!] did il bifore.
Finally, like ShàfiiWl, Nal}q.as, Ibn al-'Aticiql and Suyü~ negleet ta formulate the
conditions of naskh. However, Nal!.4âs ratifies four of them, while Ibn al-'Ata'iq"i and SUyÜ~
nnly r:ltify the third. Shu'lah for bis part adopts Shifi)'s formulations. Yet MakKl and Ibn aI
J~l\:\"zl go further, deriving still other conditions. Ibn al-Jawzl for instance separates the third
forml.1btion into two, while Maklù breaks them down into seven, even as he notes mat the
sc'·cnth seems ineligible for inclusion.
The phenomenon of naskh in the Qur'an, as discussed in chapter 1, can be explained
ln cicher of two ways: as motivated by Gad or as stipulated by the Qur'inic conte."<t.
.L\.ccording co the 6.rst view, God, as the "awner" of the Qur'an, is concerned with His
rcyebtion. His concem is expressed in his confinnation that He maintaitls His revelations, as
is ret1ccted in the following venes: Q. 2:106, Q. 22: 52, Q. 45: 29, and Q. 7: 154. Moreover,
the VC1"$es that precede and follow the narkh-verses and the citcumstances behind the
rcvclation of the latter illustrate a sense of maintenance, modification, correction and
annulling/abrogation. This nuance is confirmed by the related tenns discussed in Q. 16: 101,
Q. 13: 39, Q. 4: 160 and Q. 3: 7.
•
•
•
109
From our examination of the treatment of eight verses (Q. 2: 106, Q. 22: 52, Q. 45:
29, Q. 4: 154, Q. 16: 101, Q. 13: 39, Q. 4: 160, and Q. 3: 7) discussed in si.~ tafslTS
(Zamakhshan's al-Kashshij, J~~is'S ~kQ11I al-Qur'~ Q~bl's al-]amit li .Abkal1l af-Qurin,
Tabart's Jamie al-B'!]till, SuyÜii's al-Du" al-Man/hiir, and Ibn al-]awzl's zid al-Afaiir, we found
th~t ShafiZI was rarely consulted. Of the six authors (faban, J3.{)~~, Zamakhsban, Ibn al
]awzl, Ququbl, and Suyüp) only Qw:p.1bl mentions Shati) and Abü al-Faraj as belonging [0
the camp mat rejected the application of abrogatillg the Qttrin by the Sunna or vice v~a, which
he refutes when he discusses Q. 2; 106. J~~a~ also refutes this idea in the same verse but
does nut mention Shafi'i. Zamakhsban also refutes it when he interprets Q. 16: 101. When
discussing Q. 3: 7, Ibn al-Jawzl and SuyÜ~ coasult Shafi'i but not in relation to the discussion
of na,J'kA Only Q. 2: 106 and Q. 16: 101 are iaterpreted by the si.x authorities in the light of
Ilt.Jskh as a science. All. e..'Ccept]~~~, interpret Q. 13: 39 and Q. 3: 7 in the light of IttlSkh, but
only as one possible iaterpretation. Once agaia, with the e."{ception ofJ~~as, they review Q.
4: 160 not in relation to IU/skh, but in explanation of God's replacement of a certain ruling
because the Jews had done did wrong and suayed from the path of God. The si."< authorities
discuss the test of the verses in the light of their linguistic function, and thus respectively
incerpret the \vord nasle.h in Q. 22: 52 as abrogation, in Q. 45: 29 istinJtikh and Q. 7: 154
f/11.'iJehat as copy. Nas/eh as tabrlll (replacement) is judged to be the meaning of Q. 2: 106 and
Q. 16: lOlo
Having summarized Shifizt's theory of naskh and its influence in the 'u/iim alQur'in,
$eyeral points Carl be mentiooed hete. Firstly, we find that Burton's, Wansbrough's, and
Mu~~afa Zayd's insistence 00 the assumption of Sbifi~ having been the earliest ftgure ta
systcmatize the discourse 00 ll/lSkh fails to take into account the Caet mat there was an eadier
•
•
•
110
attempt done by the previous authorities. Qatida ibn Di'ama's al-Nisileh 1IIa al-Manszikh and
Zuh!ï's a/-Nisikh 11/a a/-MansiikIJ were two similar attempts that cannot be neglected. What
cao be said however is that shifi~'s theory of 1tflS!eh represents the earliest attempt ta regulate
the field, but in me sense mat rus achievement does not diminish Qatida's and Zuhn's
contribution.
It can also be said mat Burton's assumption chat shifi~ inveoted one mode of Ilas!eh,
i.e., abrogating the wording and the f'llling is negligent. As far as we can detetmine, Burton fails to
point out that Ibn al-JawZi discovered mat Ibn 'Abbis named this mode. Moreover, Ibn al
Jawz1 believed that three modes of 1lOSkh had came inta being before Shàfi'i's rime, crediting
Ibn 'Abbas with having mentioned the mode of abrogating the wording and the ntling, and Ibn
Mas'üd the mode of abrogrJ/ing the ntling and not the Il/ording.
Our aoalysis confirms Hallaq's opinion that al-Risa7a was marginal in Shafi'i's rime
and remained 50 up ta the lare ninth cennuy. Abü 'Ubayd, who died twenty years after
ShafiZi does not quote the latter in bis Ki/Ob a/-NiSileh Il/a a/-M(J1lsileh. Though Burton
assumes chat Abü 'Ubayd did not know of shifiZI's contribution, another editor of this
treatise, al-Mudayfar, asserts that he was aware of this. He even infoons us that the ewo
figures were in dispute OVe! juristic matters. However, the fact that Abü 'Ubayd does not cite
Shafi) in his work is a cleu signal of the marginality of Shifi~'s theory of fllJSkh in his own
day. Another finding is that, ofail the authorities that we discuss in the case of distinguishing
naskh from other tenns, :lot one credits Shifi'i as the fu:st schola! to have identified the
divergence. As a matter of faet, no matter to what school each commentator adheres, he
kceps silent on this point. However in the case of the rejeetion of abrogating the Qur'an by
the Sunnfl or vice versa, the background of the authors is closely conneeted ta their approach
•
•
•
III
to the question, with the exception that Ibn al-Jawz1 (a l:Ianbalite) shares with N~as (a
Shifilite) and Suyüii (a Shifilïre) in rejecting it. This may have been because the teacher of
Ibn al-Jawz1, A1}mad ibn I:Ianbal, had the same idea as ShifiZi. Thus Shu'lah (a fJanbalite),
Maldà (a Milikite),J~~~ (a Ijanafite), Zamakhshan (here, we classify him as a I:Ianafite) and
Qurr:ub1 (a Malikite) aU disagree with mis rejection. J~~~ and Zamakhshan even fail to
mention the camp mat rejeeted this principle.
However, as far as we are concemed, shifilï's nasleh played a significant role in a
sense that its significance lies in the boundaries and systematization he set up to allow it to
operate within the areas of deduetion of law, as weIl as in its interpretation of the Qur'an but
with more controllable patameters. Wa Allih a'lam.
•
•
•
112
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abü 'Abd Allih, ~{ul}.ammad. KitaD jJ Marrifal ai-NisiJe.h DIa ai-AJa!tJiikh. Printed on themargins ofMallalIi's Ta/sr,. a/-JaGhyn. Cairo, 1342/1924.
Abü Zayd, N~r I:Iimïd. AI-Imam al-Shifilllltl Ta'sls aI-Ïr1fpili!jtJya al-Wasa!i.Jya. Cai!O: Dar alTaba'a al-Mutamayyiza, 1996.
'Afiinah, Jawâd Musa Mulfammad. AI-Ray a/f(J1JlfJfJ Ji Man,fu7eh fJI-Kitoo. Amman: Dar alBashir, 1991.
~ KhaIid 'Abd al-Raçman. U.sii/ ai-TafsJrllloQawi;cduh. Beirut: Dar al-Nafi'is, 1986.
Ansa11, Zafar Ishaq. ''Islamic Juristic Tenninology before Sifi): A Semantic Analysis withSpecial Reference to Küfa." Arubka 19 (1972): 255-300.
Asna'\v=i, lamaI al-Dm 'Abd al-R.aQmân. Tabaqat a/-Shijiftya. Ed. 'Abd Allah Jubun. 2 vols.Baghdad: Ri'asat Diwan al-Awqaf, 1970-71.
Azami ale, M.M. On SdJQ,h,'s Ongins of MI/~amm(Jthn ]llrispnuJellt:e. Riyadh: King SaudUniversity Press, 1985.
Azmeh., Aziz. Arabz",: Thought (Jnd lslamic Soaeties. London: Croom Helm, 1986.
-------."Islamic Legal Theory and the Appropriation of Reality.u In Aziz Azmeh, ed.,[J'lamie !..oaJ: Soaoland HisllJrÜal COlltexts. London: Routledge, 1988: 250-65.
Baljon, ].M.S. Modern Musim Kortm Inmprttation (1880-1960). Leiden: E.J. Brill. 1968.
Bell, Richard. IntrodMe/ioll to theQuran. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1954.
Bernard G. Weiss, review of "Approacbes ta the History of the Interpretation of theQur'an," by Andrew Rippin,JAOS 3 (1991): 155-7.
---, review of "the Sources of Islamic Law: Islamic Theories of Abrogation," by JohnButton,JAOS 113 (1993): 304-306.
Blacbèrc, Régis. Illtrodz,,,1ion azl Corail. Paris: Éditions Besson & Chantemerle, 1959.
Bleicher, Josef. Contemporary Hmnmtllties: Hermenmtit:s (JS AJethod, PhiltJsopl!Y and Critique.London: Roudedge & Kegan Paul, 1980.
Bro\vn, Daniel "The Triumph of Scripturalism: the Doctrine of Naskh and its ModemCritics." In The Shaping ofail AmtrÎal1l IsJami& Dis&OlIrre: A Memorial /0 FazlMr R.aJJ11Iall,eds. Earl H. Waugh and Frederick M. Denny. Atlant3~ Scholars Press, 1998: 49-66.
•
•
•
113
Burton,John. The ColkctiOIl oftheQur'an. Cambridge: Catnbridge University Press, 1977.
-----. The Sollms of Islamic Law: Islamic Theories of Abrogation. Edinburgh: EdinburghUniversity Press, 1990.
----, ed Abi Ubaid al-Qisim b. Sa/lam's K al-Nisileh 11Ia al-Mf11tS1Ïkh. Cambridge: E.J.W.Gibb Memorial Trust, 1987.
Coulson, NJ A History of ls/mnic l.aw. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1964.
------. ConJlicts and Tensions in Islami,· Jurisprudence. Chicago: The University of ChicagoPress, 1969.
Culler, Jonathan. On DefonstnJI.tion: Theory tmd Criticisl1l after Struct1lra/ism. Ithaca and NewYork: Comell University Press, 1983.
Daqri, 'Abd al-Gham. Al-Imam ai-Shdfi'l Faqth al-Sunna al-Akbar. Damascus: Dar al-Qalam,1976.
Ellis, John M. Against Deconstruction. Princeton and New Jersey: Princeton University Press,1989.
Esack, Farid. Qur'a" Liberation & Phlmlism: An lslamit: Perspective of[ntemligious SolùJan~ againstOppns.sjoll. Oxford: Oneworl~1997.
---. "Quèinic Heaneneutics: Problems and Prospects." MW83 (1993):118-41.
Gatje, Helmut. The Qur'in and ifs Exegesis: Sekaed Te>.'1s with Chssical and J.\1odmt Ml/sBmInterpretations. Berkeley: Univenity ofCalifornia Press, 1976.
Goldziher, Ignaz. 1ntrodllaio1l tJJ 1slamk Theology and Law. Trans. Andras and Ruth Hamon.Princeton, New Jeaey: Princeton University Press, 1981.
------. The ?ooms: Their Doctrine tJnd Thtir History. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1971.
Goldfcld, Y. "The Development ofTheory on Qurinic Exegesis in Islamic Scholarship." SI(1988): 5-27.
Gron~Jean.. SOIlmS ojHmtltflGlJia. New York: SUNY, 1995.
Hallaq, Wad B. A History of Islam;c ugal Theories: An Introdu,tion to SI/n1l1 U.sziI ai-Fiqh.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
----. "Was al-Shifill the Master Architeet of Islamic Jurisprudence?" IJlvŒS 25 (1993):587-605.
•
•
•
114
-----. 'The Primacy of the Qur'an in Shi~bl's Legal Theory." In Islamic S/udie.r Pmm/edID Char!e.sJ. Adams, 00. Wael B. Hallaq and Donald P. Little. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991:69-90.
------. Ibn Ttrjm!1la against the Greele Logidans. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.
Hann, Emest. "Sir Sayyid ~ad Khan's 'The Controversy over Abrogation' (m theQurin): An Annotated Translation." 1\&64 (1974): 124-133
Hamm, Nissreen. 'Cf"our Scholars on the Authoritativeness of SuntÙ Juridical Qiyas.JJ ~{.A.
thesis, McGill University, 1988.
I:Ias2n, A~ad. '~e Theory of Naskh.Jl IS 4 (1965): 181-200.
I:Iusaynl, Abü Bakr b. f-lidayat Allah. Tabaqaï a/-Sha]i'lI)'a.2nd Ed. 'AciiI NÜ1ùq. Beirut: Dar alAfiq al-Jadida, 1979.
Ibn al-'A~'iqi, Kami! al-Dm 'Abd al-Ra4min. AI-Nirikh wa a/-Mansiikh. Najaf: Ma~ba'at alAdab,1970.
Ibn al-Ja\,,·zl, JamaI al-Ota Abü al-Farnj 'Abd al-Ra~man. NawiJ-ifeh al-QlIr'an. Beirut: Dar alKurub al-'llmiyya, n.d.
------. Zad a/-A{asZr ft 11m a/-Tafslr. 8 vols. Beirut: al-l\laktab al-IslatIÙ, 1984.
Ibn Warrnq, ed. The On'gins of the /(oran: Clasni: ESJ'~s on IslamJs HolY Book. Amherst, NewYork: Prometheus Books, 1998.
Iyazl, Mu4ammad 'Afi. AJ-Mufassinin, lfayaïuhll1JZ ilia Manhajlmllm. N.p.: Mu'assasat al-Tiba'awa al-Nashr W1Zârat al-Thaqafa wa al-Irshàd al-IsIam1, 1373/1974.
J:l~~as.A!)kam a/-Quran. 3 vols. Beirut: Dâr al-Kitib al-'Arabl, 1335 A.H./1929 A.D.
Johnson, Allan G. The B/ockweU Dictionary of Sod%!): A User's Cllide fD Soa%gÙ'ai lAnguage.~hlden: Blackwel1, 1977.
JU'vayn'i, Imam al-Ijaramayn 'Abd al-Malik Abü al-Ma'afi. A/-Bllrha-"fi UpÏl a/-Fiqh. 2 vols.Ed. 'Abd al-'AzÙD Dib. Cairo: Dir al-An~ir, 1400/1980.
Juynboll, G.H.A. S/lidies 011 the OrigilLî and Uses of Islamic Ijaelith. Hampshire, Great Britain:Variorum, 1996.
--------, ed. Sil/dies on the First Cenl11'Y of lslamic Sodery. Carbondale: Southem IllinoisUniversity Press, 1982.
•
•
•
115
----, ((Some Notes on Islam's First Fuqahi' Distilled from Early I-Jadith Literature."Arabica 39 (1992): 287-314.
Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. Principks ofblamk]lIrispmden,·e. Revised ed. Cambridge: IslamicTexts Society, 1991.
Khadduri, Majid. ccShafi~l, al" ER vol. 13. Ed. Mircea Eliade. New York: MacmillanPublishing Company, 1987: 195-8.
Khin, Qamaruddin. ''Incidence of Abrogation (Naskh) in the Qur'an." Iqbell15 (1966-1967):8-46.
Makdisi, George. ('The Juridical Theology of Shafi'i: Origins and Significance of U~ alFiqh." SI 59 (1984): 5-47.
~rakdisi, John and Marianne Makdisi. ('IsIamic Law Bibliography: Revised and Updated Listof Secondary Sources." LL] 87 (1995): 69-191.
~Iakki, Abu Mu1:}ammad. AI-Ït!a~ li Nisikh al-Qllr~n /Va i.\1am1ïkhllhtl /vo l.\fa'rifa/ L~siilihj /VaIkhtilOfal-Nasfthi Jeddah: Dâr al-Manara, 1986.
~faIik, Anas ibn. Ai-Mlnva.fJa'. Trans. from the compilation of Yal}ya ibn Yal].ya al-Laythl.Cambridge: Diwan Press, 1982.
-----. AI-MuUlana'. Transmission of Su(aid ibn Sa'id al-Hadathan1. Babrain: Idarat alAwqif al-Sinîah, 1994.
Melchert, Christopher. The Formation of/he Slinni S,hool of1.Jnv, 9th_lOch Centuries C.E. Leiden:Brill, 1977.
Meron, Y. ''The Development ofLegal Thought in Hanafi Text." SI 30 (1969): 73-118.
M~eyerhoff, Hans, ed. The Phiiosophy of His/ory in Olir Timt: An Antho/t;gy. New York:Doubleday,1959.
Mir, l\fustansÎr. Dt'aionary ofQltr'ink Terms and Co"t'epts. New York: Garland Publishing !nc.,1987.
------. "TafSir." In OEL\'IIrJ7. VoL 4. Ed. by John L. Esposito, New York: OxfordUniversity Press, 1995: 169-176.
~ru~Ia6, Mul}ammad S~ 'Ali. AI-Nasleh .fi aiQlJr'tÏiz ai-Kmim: A10Jhiinnm ma TankfJlIh waDa'Qivao. Damascus: Dar al-Qalam, 1988.
al-Muzaru, Abü Ibriliim, IsmiJU ibn Yaq.ya. al-~lllkhtl1far. Printed on the margins of Shifi'I'sKa/-Umm,l-4.
•
•
•
116
Nal}qas, Abü Dja'far, ~{lÙ1ammad ibn Alpnad. K a/-Nisikh wa a/-MoltS/ïkJJ Ji a/-Qur'i"n 01Ktm11l. Caïre: ~Iaktabat 'Alim al-Fikr, 1986.
Noms, Christopher. Deronstruaion: Theory alld Practict. London and New York: Roudedge,1991.
Ouyang, Wen-Chio. Literary Cri/idsm ill Mediet'fJ/ Arabk-Islmnic Cul/lirt: The Maleing of aTraditioll. Edinburgb: Edinburgh Univenity Press, 1997.
Pasçaet, Mehmet. "The RaIe of Subjeet (MujtahirJ) in al-Shifili's Methodology: AHermeneutic Approach." ApSS 14 no. 3 (1997): 1-15.
Powers, David S. "The Exegetical Genre Nasikh al-Qut'in wa-Mansük.huh." la AndrewRippin, ed., Approa,'hes 10 the HiJtory of the Interpretation of the QlIr'an. Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1988, pp. 117-38.
-------. "On the Abrogation of the Bequest Verses." Arabica 29 (1982): 246-295.
Qaysi, Abi Muqammad Makki. a/-I.da7} 1i-~1VtÏsiJeh al-QIIT'in 1lI0-}.,t[anszïkh1Jhri. Ed. Aq.mad f:lasanFarqar. Jeddah: Dar al-Manirah, 1986.
Ququbl, AI-Jami' li A!)kom al-Qrlr'On, 20 vols. CaiI:o: Dar al-Kitib al-'Arablli al-Tiba'a \Va alNash!,1967.
Ra1}man, Fazlur. Is/am. 2r.d ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.
Rippin, Andrew. "al-Zuhfi, Naskh al-Qur'an and the Problem of Early Tafstr Texts."BSOAS 47 (1984): 22-42.
------. ''The Present Status ofTafslr Studies/' MW 72 (1982): 224-38.
Rippin, Andrew and Jan Knappert, eds. Textz/(l/ SOlines for the Study of Islam. Totowa, NewJersey: Bunes & Noble Books, 1986.
SadüSi, Qatada ibn Di'ama. Kita) a/-Nasikh 11/a a/-Mansrïkh Ji Ki/a], Allao Ta'a7a". Ed. fjatimS~Qimin. Beirut Mu'assasat al-RisaIa, 1985.
Schacht, Joseph. The Ongins off't'Ilihaml'l/adan JllrispTlldmœ. Oxford: Oxford University Press,1950.
------. An Introdu,tiolt to ls/amic L.azv. Oxford: Oarendon Press, 1991.
al-5hâfiii, Abii 'Abd Allih. Muqammad ibn ldès. al-Umm, 7 vols. Bülak, 1321/1903, or in 8vols., Beirut: n.ci.
•
•
•
117
---. A/-Rira7t.z. Ed. ~mad MuI)ammad Sbikir. Cairo: Maktabat wa Ma~ba'at M~taG
al-Bibi al-~b1wa Awliduhu bi ~r, 1940.
---. A/-Ririla. Ed. MlÙ}ammad Sayyid Kaylanl Cairo: Maktabat wa Ma~ba'at ~Iu~pf'i
al-Bibi al-l:Ialabi wa Awliduhu bi ~r, 1969.
--. A/-Imim Mu~Q1'I/mod ibn lrilir al-Shiji'Ps a/-Risila fi U.sü/ al-Fiqh: Trealise on theFOlllltiatioIU of Islamic Jurisprudence. Translated with an introduction, notes, andappendices by Majid Khadduri. Cambridge: The Islamic Texts Society, 1961.
~--. Al)k4m a/-Qur'i1L Compiled by Baybaqi al-~1Sibun. voL 1. Cairo: Maktabat Nashral-Thaqifa al-Islamiyya, 1953.
--------. Tartlb A1uslUld a/-Imam al-Shr1fi'l. Compiled by Muqammad 'Abid al-SanacU. Vol. 1.Beitut: Dar al-Fikr, 1997.
------. In Qum oflvlOwl4dge. Trans. Abü Asad Lahore: Islamic Publications, 1980.
Sharabasl, Al,mad. A/-A'immah al-Arba'ah: AbzïFfanffah, MaRie ibn Anos, al-Sh(ffi';' Al;mad ibnIfanbaL Beitut Dar al-I:IilaI, 1964.
Shaybam, Mul}ammad ibn I-fasan. Mmva,tla' Imam Milik. VoL 1. Cairo: al-Majlis al-A'la li-alShu'üo al-IsIimiyyah, 1967.
Shu'lab, Abü 'Abd Allih. $aft!at a/-&iJilehJi 1/m a/-Mansu7eh wa a/-Nisikh. Ed. MuqammadIbrihim 'Abd al-RaQmin Fins. N.p. Maktahat al-Thaqafa al-D1niyya, 1995.
SïlvellIlan, Hugh J. Texhlalitie.r be/1Veen Hmllenmtzes altd Deconstnldion. New York, London:Routledge, 1994.
Smarr, Janet Levarie. ed. HistO'Ù'tl/ Critidsm and the Challenge of Theory. Urhana and Chicago:University of Illinois Press, 1993.
Spectorsky, Susan A. ~'Milik ibn Anas." In Mircea Eliade, ed., ER. vol. 9. New York:MacmilJan , 1987: 145-6.
SUyÜtt,Jalil al-D1n cAhd al-RaQmân. a/-ItqinjfVin", al-Qur-an. 2 ~ols., 1354/1935.
-----. AI-Dri" af.ManthrÏr jJ al-TafSir al-!Vfa'thiir. 8 Vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'llmiyya,1990. .
--. LRbiba/-NuqüljiAsbabal-Nu'?JÏL Beiruc Dar al-Ma'rifa, 1997.
raban. Jimila/-Bayait lall Ta'wl! al-Qur'in. 12 vols. Cairo: Dar al-~ra'anf, n.d.