Shah Waliullah and Naskh and Mansookh !

jazakAllahukhayran.

wasslaam.

 

for example, in the verse 83 of surah baqarah:

وقُولُوا للنَّاسِ حُسْناً
​

qatadah said that it is abrogated by the verse of the sword but aTa said that it remains unchanged because it is an exhortation to enjoin the good and forbid evil which cannot be abrogated (amr bi'l ma'aruf).

no.

the one quoted by imam suyuti is by abu ubayd al-qasim ibn sallaam (d.224 AH) and can be found here.

the book you've linked is by abu'l qasim hibatullah ibn salamah (d.410)

---
Allah ta'ala knows best.

 

salaam.

I wish to know if there are any factual errors in the following article:

http://www.sunnipath.com/library/books/B0040P0021.aspx *

more specifically, I wish to know if there has been ikhtilaf about the abrogation of any ayah, not in the sense of explaining it away but, whether the apparent hukm is still binding or not.

is the book 'an-nāsikh wa'l mansūkh by abū úbaid al-qasim ibn sallām' same as this one?

jazakAllah.
Wassalaam.

----------
* the author(s) did not care to include salawat after the Prophet's(peace be upon him) name.

 

imam suyuTi in his celebrated Al-Itqan fi `ulumi'l Qur'an, in the chapter nasikh/mansukh says:

many scholars have written on this subject [of nasikh and mansukh] among them: abu `ubayd al-qasim ibn sallam, abu dawud as-sajistani, abu ja'afar an-naHHas, ibn al-anbari, [abu Talib] al-makki, ibn al-arabi and others.

our imams have said: it is not permissible for anyone to explain [make tafsir] of the qur'an unless they know the nasikh and mansukh

sayyiduna `ali ask a qaDi [judge]: 'do you know the nasikh and mansukh verses?', the judge replied, 'no' and sayyiduna `ali said: 'you have perished and made others to perish'
​

-----

the entire nation [ummah] overwhelmingly agrees that it [abrogation] is possible; the jews deny abrogation because they assume this to be inconsistency/contradiction like a person who holds an opinion and changes/abandons it.

this is not correct because there can be a determined period for a rule like one shall live again after death and vice versa; one falls sick after being healthy and vice versa; one becomes needy after being wealthy and vice versa. all of this does not necessitate contradiction; similarly, amr and nahy [commands to do or desist] can also be for a specific period.​

------

ibn al-HaSSar said: the ruling of abrogation is possible only when there is an explicit statement from RasulAllah sallalahu `alayhi wa sallam or a companion saying that 'such and such a verse is abrogated by such and such'
​

/end of quotes from Al-Itqan.

 

please correct me if i am wrong, but does the shaykh deny the concept of nasikh and mansukh altogether? i have read the book [following the link] and this is what i gather.

the shaykh seems to dismiss that there is any abrogation [or naskh] in the qur'an. of course, there is a general agreement among scholars that abrogation of qur'anic verses is only those which are related to rulings [aHkam] as suyuTi says in itqan:

لثالثة‏:‏ لا يقع النسخ إلاَّ في الأَمر والنَّهي، ولوبلفظ الخبر. أَما الخبر الذي ليس بمعنى الطلب فلا يدخله النسخ، ومنه الوعد والوعيد. وإذا عرفت ذلك عرفت فساد صنع من أدخل في كتب النسخ كثيرًا من آيات الإِخبار والوعد والوعيد.

the third point: abrogation is not found except in commands [to do or desist, al-amr wa'n nahy] even if it is mentioned in words indicating a report. and those reports which do not imply commandments are not included in abrogation among which are the verses of reward and punishment. if you understand this principle, you will recognize the mistake of those who extended the rule of abrogation amply to include the verses that describe reports, rewards and punishment.
​

----
but as i understand, the shaykh dismisses this specific abrogation too.