In the name of Allah Most Beneficent Most Gracious
Robert Spencer, the Director of http://www.jihadwatch.org/ has written a book: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). In page 21 of this book, we find:
===
Above all, no Muslim should force anyone to accept Islam: “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy handhold, that never breaks” (Qur’an 2:256).
===
In pages 24 – 25 the following is found:
===
… The relatively tolerant verses quoted above and others like them generally date from the Meccan period, while those with a more violent and intolerant edge are mostly from Medina.
Why does this distinction matter? Because of the Islamic doctrine of abrogation (naskh). This is the idea that Allah can change or cancel what he tells Muslims: “None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?” (Qur’an 2:106). According to this idea, the violent verses of the ninth sura, including the Verse of the Sword (9:5), abrogate the peaceful verses, because they were revealed later in Muhammad’s prophetic career: In fact, most Muslim authorities agree that the ninth sura was the very last section of the Qur’an to be revealed.
===
In page 26 inside a box we get:
===
Just Like Today: The peaceful verses still abrogated
The doctrine of abrogation is not the province of long-dead muftis whose works no longer carry any weight in the Islamic world. The Saudi Sheikh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajid (b. 1962), whose lectures and Islamic rulings (fatawa) circulate widely throughout the Islamic world, demonstrates this in a discussion of whether Muslims should force others to accept Islam. In considering Qur’an 2:256 (“There is no compulsion in religion.”) the sheikh quotes Qur’an , , “And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism, i.e. worshipping others besides Allaah), and the religion (worship) will all be for Allaah Alone [in the whole of the world]”, and the Verse of the Sword. Of the latter, Sheikh Muhammad says simply: “This verse is known as Ayat al-Sayf (the Verse of the Sword). These and similar verses abrogate those saying that there is no compulsion to become Muslim.”
===
Alhamdhulillah, we had shown by simple arguments that abrogation does not apply to the Holy Quran in the following URLs. The contents of the URLs have varied arguments by many. The relevant parts of our arguments are provided in the link(s) given below each URL.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/007370.php
Itikaf for ten days only.
Verse 90 of Chapter 5 abrogates none.
Verse 2 of Chapter 24 abrogates none.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/007491.php
On itikaf again
All the above discussions were using the Traditions of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. In what follows, we considered the first two Surahs of the Holy Quran (summary of the Holy Quran) and the last book of the Holy Quran (conclusion of the Holy Quran) and found immense evidence to show that each and every Verse of the Holy Quran is alive and active.
Evidences from the Holy Quran establishing the falsity of abrogation.
2:2 This is the book; in it is guidance sure without doubt to those who fear Allah.
If there are any abrogated Verses, the guidance is not sure. We need to have the additional knowledge about the abrogated Verses; that is only an expert can understand the Holy Quran, and not a simple learner.
Those who break Allah’s Covenant after it is ratified and who sunder what Allah has ordered to be joined and do mischief on earth: These cause loss (only) to themselves.
Is not the Holy Quran a Covenant between Allah SWT and Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him? Does it not then become a Covenant between Allah SWT and all believers? Did not Allah SWT collect the whole Quran and get it recited by Angel Gabriel? Did not Allah SWT join the existing Verses together in the Holy Quran? When some claim that Verse 9:5 abrogates Verse 2:256 are they not removing Verse 2:256 from the Covenant? re they not sundering verse 2:256?
“But those who reject Faith and belie Our Signs they shall be Companions of the Fire; they shall abide therein.”
What is the meaning of belie? From
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=belie
we find the following as one of the meanings:
===
to show (something) to be false or wrong
===
When some say 2:256 is abrogated, don’t they belie that Verse? How a believer practice abrogation if such a person shall be in Fire?
2:85 After this it is ye the same people who slay among yourselves and banish a party of you from their homes; assist (their enemies) against them in guilt and rancor; and if they come to you as captives ye ransom them though it was not lawful for you to banish them. Then is it only a part of the Book that ye believe in and do ye reject the rest? But what is the reward for those among you who behave like this but disgrace in this life? And on the Day of judgment they shall be consigned to the most grievous penalty. For Allah is not unmindful of what ye do.
When one says 2:256 is abrogated, he / she does not believe in that. That is she / he believes in a part of the Book. Such people would be consigned to the most grievous penalty on the Day of Judgment. Is it not clear that the Muslims are to believe in each and every part of the Book?
2:99 WE have sent down to thee manifest signs (ayat); and none reject them but those who are perverse.
Allah SWT calls those who claim that 2:256 is abrogated and thus reject it as perverse.
2:106 None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten but We substitute something better or similar; knowest thou not that Allah hath power over all things?
Verse 2:106 clearly establishes that the power of abrogation belongs to Allah SWT alone. Not only that He substitutes something better or similar to the abrogated revelations.
Narrated Anas bin Malik
For thirty days Allah's Apostle invoked Allah to curse those who had killed the companions of Bir-Mauna; he invoked evil upon the tribes of Ral, Dhakwan, and Usaiya who disobeyed Allah and His Apostle. There was revealed about those who were killed at Bir-Mauna a Qur'anic verse we used to recite, but it was cancelled later on. The verse was: "Inform our people that we have met our Lord. He is pleased with us and He has made us pleased."
What about 2:154? Could we consider that it gives the same meaning as the cancelled Verse but is more general. Quoting 2:154, we have:
===
2:154 And say not of those who are slain in the way of Allah: “They are dead.” Nay they are living though ye perceive (it) not.
===
We reiterate that the power to abrogate belongs to Allah SWT only.
2:147 The truth is from thy Lord so be not at all in doubt.
This Verse indirectly indicates that there could be no abrogation. The rule of abrogation is that a latter Verse abrogates an earlier Verse. However such information regarding the time of revelation is not available for all Verses. Thus, even if we accept the principle of abrogation – which we don’t – the absence of time stamp leads to doubt. We do not know whether a Verse is abrogated or not in case we find two Verses of opposite meanings. So there could be no abrogation so that we are free of doubt.
2:159 Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We have sent down and the guidance after We have made it clear for the people in the book on them shall be Allah’s curse and the curse of those entitled to curse.
The effect of abrogation is the same as concealment. When one says 9:5 abrogates 2:256 it simply has the same effect as though Verse 2:256 was not there at all. From the above Verse we conclude that abrogation is a sin worthy of getting Allah’s curse.
2:174 Those who conceal Allah’s revelations in the Book and purchase for them a miserable profit they swallow into themselves naught but fire; Allah will not address them on the Day of Resurrection nor purify them; grievous will be their penalty.
2:175 They are the ones who buy error in place of guidance and torment in place of forgiveness. Ah! what boldness (they show) for the Fire!
2:176 (Their doom is) because Allah sent down the Book in truth but those who seek causes of dispute in the Book are in a schism far (from the purpose).
What is the application of these three Verses with respect to the dispute over Jihad we have? If we agree that 2:256 is active, we have no permission to attack a non-Muslim country. For example, Pakistan cannot attack India as long as 2:256 is respected. The Muslims in India and elsewhere must try and convince the non-Muslims in India so that they embrace Islam because it is good. Currently such a process is on inside India. The Students Islamic Movement of India is organizing a number of camps in which the non-Muslims ask their questions and the experts in Islam clarify their doubts. Granted such meetings might not produce instant reverts, but slowly it works on them and moves them closer to Islam. Now the advantage of one who claims 9:5 abrogates 2:256 and thus marches on India with the army and wins might gain immense booty. Such gains lead to doom, as the attack on India for the sake of converting India to a Muslim land itself is not permitted.
2:231 When ye divorce women and they fulfill the term of their (‘Iddat) either take them back on equitable terms or set them free on equitable terms; but do not take them back to injure them or to take undue advantage; if anyone does that he wrongs his own soul. Do not treat Allah’s Signs as a jest but solemnly rehearse Allah’s favors on you and the fact that He sent down to you the Book and Wisdom for your instruction. And fear Allah and know that Allah is well acquainted with all things.
How can one take back a once divorced wife to injure her? Consider 2:226 For those who take an oath for abstention from their wives a waiting for four months is ordained; if then they return Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful. Consider the case of a husband with more than one wife. The husband has access to the other wife (wives) for legal sex. However, that wife regarding whom he has taken the oath of abstention has no access to legal sex. The husband can stay away from her for 3 months and 27 days and have sex with her during the day on the twenty eighth day of the fourth month. His oath of abstention is not counted as leading to divorce. He can again make the oath of abstention the next day after having had sex with her. Thus, the wife gets to have legal sex just once in 29 30 29 28 = 116 days. Is this the purpose of marriage? Is not such a husband treating the Verse 2:226 to his advantage? If causing injury to one human being leads to wronging one’s soul, what about those who claim that Verse 9:5 abrogates Verses like 2:256 and cause unjust wars to be justified? Don’t they wrong their own souls? Is not saying that 2:256 is abrogated like treating that Verse as in jest?
2:255 ALLAH! There is no Allah but He the living the Self-subsisting Eternal. No slumber can seize him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth? HE knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) before or after or behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. HIS throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them. For He is the Most High the Supreme (in glory).
What does Allah say in His Book immediately after claiming that “HE knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) before or after or behind them?” It is Verse 2:256.
2:256 Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error; whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
How can we say that 9:5 abrogates 2:256 when Allah says that believing Him is to hold a hand-hold that never breaks? How can we break that Verse itself? Can there be any abrogation if that abrogation negates 2:256 observing that 2:256 follows 2:255 immediately?
2:285 The Apostle believeth in what hath been revealed to him from his Lord as do the men of faith. Each one (of them) believeth in Allah His angels His books and His Apostles “We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His Apostles.” And they say: “We hear and we obey; (We seek) Thy forgiveness our Lord and to Thee is the end of all journeys.”
Did not Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, recite both Verse 2:256 and Verse 9:5 as part his recitation during the last Ramadan of his life? Were not Verse 2:256 and Verse 9:5 already revealed by then? Do we believe that Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, would have recited both 2:256 and 9:5 if both are not alive and active? Was it so difficult for Allah SWT to ask Angel Gabriel, peace be upon him, to drop 2:256 from the recitation of the Holy Quran after 9:5 was revealed, if indeed 9:5 abrogates 2:256? Are we more knowledgeable than Angel Gabriel, peace be upon him that we claim on the basis of our very limited intellect that 9:5 abrogates 2:256?
78:28 But they (impudently) treated Our Signs as false.
When one says 9:5 abrogates 2:256, that person makes 2:256 as false.
80:13 (It is) in Books held (greatly) in honor.
80:14 Exalted (in dignity) kept pure and holy
80:15 (written) by the hands of scribes
80:16 Honorable and Pious and Just.
The Companions of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, were indeed honorable, pious and just. They did write the Verses as they were revealed. When did writing by hand yield to some other method? From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodblock_printing we find:
===
by 1000 A.D. examples of woodblock printing appear in Islamic Egypt
===
It would be safe to assume that until woodblock printing was adopted, the Holy Quran was copied by hand. If the principle of abrogation was known, and if the scribes knew that 9:5 has abrogated 2:256, they would not have labored to copy every letter of 2:256. They could as well have written something like: “2:256 …” The fact that the Holy Quran that we have indeed has 2:256 in full implies that the so called principle of abrogation is a later day invention.
80:42 Such will be the Rejecters of Allah the Doers of Iniquity.
As per the Compact Oxford English Dictionary, iniquity means ‘injustice or immoral behavior.’ (See http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/iniquity?view=uk ) In the context of our discussion, 9:5 is claimed to sanction waging of Jihad on non-Muslims with the specific purpose of making them Muslims or Dhimmis. Even in the case of an apostate, she / he is to be given three chances to revert before killing. How can we then claim that a kafir who had not been exposed to the principles of Islam be given no chance at all and get threatened at the tip of a sword to become Muslim? Can we claim that just because we have a web site like http://www.searchtruth.com others should know Islam? Are we claiming that every individual must learn the contents of each and every web site? Any who advocate Jihad on the kafir without first educating them falls under the category of ‘Doers of Iniquity.’ Let us hasten to add, just because we educate a kafir on Islam it is not mandatory for him to become a Muslim. It is up to Allah SWT to tune the hearts.
81:27 Verily this is no less than a Message to (all) the Worlds:
How can there be abrogation of any part of the Message by the current men and women be justified, when the Message is for all the Worlds to come until the Day of Judgment? There can be no abrogation at all.
87:6 By degrees shall We teach thee to declare (the Message) so thou shalt not forget
87:7 except as Allah wills: For He knoweth what is manifest and what is hidden.
If ever any Revelation was forgotten it was by the will of Allah SWT and not even by the will of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. How come some Muslims afterwards claim that some Verses are abrogated and thus they could be forgotten?
The first two Chapters and Chapters from 78 to 114 were considered and the above evidences to show the absence of abrogation were collected. Inshah Allah the remaining 75 Chapters might have more evidences. If called upon, Inshah Allah, they also would be considered. It is hoped that the fact that abrogation is false would be accepted and thus we plan for defensive Jihad only.
In conclusion, we say:
2:159 Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We have sent down and the guidance after We have made it clear for the people in the book on them shall be Allah’s curse and the curse of those entitled to curse.
The effect of abrogation is the same as concealment. When one says 9:5 abrogates 2:256 it simply has the same effect as though Verse 2:256 was not there at all. From the above Verse we conclude that abrogation is a sin worthy of getting Allah’s curse.
2:160 Except those who repent and make amends and openly declare (the truth) to them I turn; for I am Oft-Returning Most Merciful.
This Verse has a very important message. The sin of abrogation is not as serious as sharing the god-head which Allah does not forgive. So even though one might have claimed abrogation to be true earlier, once that person recognizes his / her fault and accepts the fact that each and every Verse of the Holy Quran is alive and active, Allah SWT forgives that person.
Allah SWT knows best.