Abrogation and the preservation of the Qur’an with Dr Louay Fatoohi

Read more by Dr Louay Fatoohi here: www.academia.edu/81536267/Is_...

[@celestialknight2339]

Dr. Fatoohi’s book on Abrogation practically saved my faith. When I was in college I was very religious, but struggled greatly with the concept of war & violence in Islam, especially since so many early scholars claimed that the verses of peace in the Qur’an were abrogated by the violent verses (such as the so-called “Verse of the Sword”), which supposedly now remain as the default state. This troubled me GREATLY, to the extent that I felt depressed and disturbed when reading verses of peace in the Qur’an and thinking to myself “Are these really just empty words, which have no meaning anymore? Did God just leave these verses in here for no reason, when their purpose already ended 1,400 years ago?”…It felt so wrong and I couldn’t accept it, and was starting to doubt the entire faith. Then one day, after sincerely praying to God to guide me on this matter and lead me back on the right path, I was strolling through our campus library and decided to visit the Muslim section as I did every few times a week. But this time-for the first time in AGES-they added new books. And one of them was Dr. Fatoohi’s abrogation book. I definitely believe this was a Divine Sign from God. It instantly eased my worries, and reading his fantastic book cleared all my doubts and made me realize (as I already knew inside of me) that the peaceful verses of the Qur’an were in fact NOT abrogated at all, but that the Qur’an is a beautiful timeless book that is meant as guidance for all times & all places, so that God by His mercy included wisdom & advise for times of peace, as well as for times of war and struggle, to cover all situations that humanity may find themselves in. It made perfect sense. The most important lesson I learned during those times, however, was this: God’s religion is NOT something we can, or should, leave into the hands of mere men (yes, even so-called ‘scholars’). Yes we should humbly listen and take knowledge from those who’ve studied more than us. Yes we should give weight & consideration to experts who know more. But at the end of the day, scholars and preachers themselves are just regular human beings like you and me-fallible creatures who need to wake up each morning and eat breakfast, brush their teeth, and who are as much susceptible to the influences of their times and society [both political, social, philosophical, and otherwise]-and who therefore should not and CANNOT be followed unconditionally without first thinking for yourself and doing your own research, and trusting that God will guide you to the truth; EVEN if that truth is not in what the majority believes. For as Allah Himself says in the Qur’an: *_”If you were to listen to the MAJORITY of those on earth, they would MISLEAD you away from God’s path. All they follow is opinion & assumption, and all they do is guess!”_* _(Qur’an 6:116)_ Since then, by the Grace of God, I have learned to become a much more critical thinker who studies for themselves, and have learned so much since then, and my faith has been higher than ever. So take this as an advice to anyone who is going through doubts or questions things about their faith: do NOT rely unconditionally on people’s explanations, or your small circle of religious leaders and scholars. Rather, put your trust in God. You can listen to other people’s ideas, but you must do your own homework & come to your own conclusion at the end of the day. And always pray to God to show you the truth-only He can do so. But be open to the fact that the truth may be bitter-sweet, and may lead you to realize that many of those around you are wrong and mistaken in what they do or believe. But that’s okay, because truth prevails above all, and we will each have to stand in front of God all alone on Judgement Day, and answer to our own words and deeds. • *_”Shall I seek a judge other than God, when He is the One who revealed to you the Book, explained in detail?” Those to whom We gave the Book know that it is the truth revealed from your Lord. So do not be among the doubters!”_* *_”Your Lord’s word has been been brought to perfection-with full truth and justice! There is no changing to His words! And He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing!”_* *_”If you were to listen & obey most of those in the world, they would mislead you from God’s path. All they follow is opinion, and all they do is guess!”_* *_”Your Lord knows best who strays from His path, as so too He knows best those who are properly guided!”_* _(The Noble Qur’an, 6:114-117)_

[@celestialknight2339]

@@philipcoriolis6614 By “people” do you mean Muslims or non-Muslims? Because the latter often doesn’t know better, and are misled by anti-Islamic apologists & polemicists online, who obviously want to take the most controversial & narrow viewpoint that gives them leverage in arguing against the faith, which is why they selectively cherry-pick the opinions of some early scholars who took that perspective. As for Muslims, the sad truth is that many Muslims (I’d go as far as to say ‘most’) aren’t even AWARE what ‘Abrogation’ (Naskh) is to begin with, let alone the extent to which it is taught or its proposed varieties and framework. It’s an alien concept to most everyday typical laymen, besides perhaps the abrogation of “alcohol” which is fairly well-known; but I’d easily venture to say that the VAST majority of Muslims certainly don’t hold the belief that the Qur’an’s peaceful verses have been abrogated by later ones. On the contrary, go to any Mosque’s Friday congregation sermon, and you will likely find the preacher quoting several so-called “peaceful” verses of the Qur’an, all of which are believed, recited, taught, encouraged, and practiced by most everyday Muslims daily, who again aren’t even familiar with the concept of abrogation (naskh) as a judicial term. But of course, moreover, even the world of Islamic scholarship itself is divided on this issue, where many believe-as I now do-that there is no inherent contradiction between the two genres of verses in the Qur’an, and that they are instead simply catering to two different situations that the individual believer & faith-community may find themselves in; where depending on that situation, a protocol of peace is decreed, and for the other combat is justifiably called for. And many Muslim scholars take this view, which seems to be the most sensible. The early classical scholars, SOME of which (not all) who took a firm “total abrogation” viewpoint were often living in turbulent times in the midst of empire war, where such a stance was understandable, but clearly biased and served their well-intentioned interests in rallying support for Muslim military participation. However, as Dr. Fatoohi nicely did in this presentation (and in his book), there is no reason to accept the idea of abrogation wholesale in this way, but on the contrary it ought to be rejected when one studies its historical and logical problems, as well as the Qur’anic proofs against it. Moreover-and this is something he did not mention, but I find critical-is that whenever a “peaceful” command is issued or decreed in the Qur’an, a TIMELESS reason & justification is given to anchor it, which therefore effectively renders it “un-abrogatable.” For example, God does not just say “Do not force people to believe” (Q 2:256, 10:99), but supports the decree with timeless reasons such as “If your Lord wanted, He could have made everyone a believer” and “the correct path already stands out clear from the wrong.” These timeless wisdoms which complement the “peaceful” commands, serve as permanent “anchors” if you will to those statements, which essentially make them immune from being abrogated, since it would nullify a timeless wisdom or attribute of God’s unchanging nature. And there are many more points that can be mentioned. But the point is 1) the Qur’an doesn’t explicitly teach such extreme abrogation, 2) On the contrary it contradicts it, and historically & rationally it contains problems 3) The so-called “violent” verses of the Qur’an are almost always self-defensive and only relate to specific situations of the whole community, and 4) Timeless wisdoms anchor the ‘peaceful’ commands of the Qur’an, which prove them eternally valid, useful, applicable for individual believers to practice and follow at any point in time. That’s why many Islamic scholars themselves don’t agree with the wholesale “peaceful verses abrogated” theory, and certainly most Muslim laymen justifiably reject it or aren’t even aware of it, but see the Qur’an as the wholistic and timeless book of guidance that it indeed claims to be.

[@stephenconnolly1830]

@@celestialknight2339 Professor Khaled Abou el-Fadl has addressed the issue of abrogation in the Qur'an and dismisses the entire edifice with clear and convincing scholarship/reasoning. I cannot recommend his project Illumine commentary available on KZbin highly enough to anyone looking to gain a much more coherent and profound grasp of the message of the Qur'an rather than the piecemeal, confusing and contradictory understanding most Muslims have in the present age. Fi Amanillah.

[@stephenconnolly1830]

@@philipcoriolis6614 because of faulty scholarship, vested ideological interests and laziness - these are the reason why people still believe in abrogation within the Qur'an despite there being no decent evidence for it.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

@@celestialknight2339 Wow. I'm not Muslim but I really like your comments. I also appreciate your honesty. I'm still reading your comments. Although I'm a Christian believer, I agree with a lot that you say in your comments, especially when you mention "timeless wisdoms" that are "immune from being abrogated." Excellent ! Peace of God to you... from Florida

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

@@philipcoriolis6614 I see no sense in the abrogation of peaceful verses in the Quran. The same could apply to the Gospels and New Testament. Why would Jesus, who obeys the All-Knowing Father, ever abrogate the wisdom and love of His own Father? That would make no sense to me. So I appreciate your comments. Thanks !!

[@doctr7147]

Brother Paul I would love to see you get Jeffrey Lang ..u.s mathematician to blogging theology to discuss Islam with you I'm sure many non Muslims would be interested as well

[@honeybee-callofdutymobile7786]

His lecture on the purpose of life was amazing. I'd love to see him on BT

[@AS-bm5xv]

His explanation of destiny and pre-destination was beautiful! Basically on how we are bound by the time dimension, we are at one point in time, but Allah is not limited by the time dimension like we are. So we have a present, past and a future, but Allah is not like us, stuck at one point in time. Allah is beyond such dimensional limitations. The attribute of being present at one time, or "Scrolling through time" etc would be incorrect to assume of God. When we understand this, destiny makes perfect sense.

[@aaaaaaaaaaaa9023]

This is very dangerous though. Jeffrey Lang is no scholar nor student. He is merely a muslim who found the truth.

[@AS-bm5xv]

@@aaaaaaaaaaaa9023 Why is it dangerous? Can we not learn from our fellow Muslims and their experiences? Are scholars are only source of knowledge? Of course Scholars are a necessity, but I think we can learn and benefit from anyone..? Dont you think so? Its not like Jeffrey is out there giving out fatwahs etc

[@haroonsadiq4319]

@@AS-bm5xv Exactly. Of course it’s not dangerous. Any Muslim is allowed to have a Unique Insight. What’s dangerous is “Islamic” KZbinrs (won’t mention any names) insulting those with knowledge, telling us those with Knowledge are wrong, when they (the KZbinrs) themselves have no Islamic qualifications.

[@zenityquest8402]

Each one of Paul’s guest is a gem. At times I go back to relisten and take notes. Sometimes I write ideas worth noting but I can’t make up my mind yet about them or that they require further research under the heading “non-commitment”

[@facts.explained.]

Great work, {The Glorious Qu'ran has no abrogations, it's pure and devine revelation.} That's a statement from knowledge and extensive research.

[@micdeymearstienbeiger37]

To understand abrogation, consider this example. You start a new job. Your boss says, "you cannot work without supervision”. As time progresses, you become more experienced and confident at your job. Your boss becomes more comfortable. So, your boss tells you “It’s okay, you can now go do your job alone.” This is abrogation. If you tell your five-year old child, "you cannot go out alone", does that mean the rule can never ever be changed? When the child grows up, you tell him "It’s okay, you can now go out alone.” This is abrogation. When the Islamic community was new, they needed time to adjust to the new belief system, a new way of life. The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ prohibited his followers from visiting graves initially because there was a significant risk that they would commit shirk (idolatrous or polytheistic acts), as was the culture of the time, when visiting graves. This is so because the former polytheists (new Muslims) were still new to the idea of monotheism. Later on, he relaxed this prohibition because the new Muslims knew how to act when visiting graves. There The risk was gone. As such, the prohibition was removed. That’s what abrogation is all about. Giving people time to adjust. You cannot dump all the rules on the people in one go and expect people to change overnight. That would not be wise and would surely backfire. Jesus, God bless him, also abrogated some of the laws of the previous scripture. He said, “And I have come to confirm what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with miracles from your Lord, so fear Allah and obey me.” Quran (3:50) God unfolds the law slowly to give people time to learn and adjust. Do people change overnight? Are people like robots? Of course not! People need time to learn and adopt to the new laws. God is merciful. Allah gave the first Islamic community lots of time to adjust. Many things in Islam were done over years to allow people to change: • Prayer wasn’t five times daily initially. • Fasting was implemented gradually. Initially, it was three days per month, and then later it was extended to the month of Ramadan (during day time only, not 24 hours). • Zakat was introduced later. • Hajj was introduced later. • Hijab was introduced at a later stage in Medina. • Prohibitions on alcohol, fornication/adultery, and usury (riba) were also implemented gradually in stages. Some people mistakenly believe that God cannot change the legal laws he Himself created. As such, they reject abrogation and see it as something contradictory that disproves religion. But that’s a rush to judgment. To me, abrogation is about change management of human behavior that takes time to change. It’s about giving people time to adjust. It’s a mercy from loving God, Allah. What about theology? Can theology change? Absolutely NOT! Only LEGAL laws change, not rational laws. Islamic theology is based on rational laws. Abrogation applies only to legal laws. More specifically, abrogation only applies to laws that contain commandments and prohibitions . Theology (aqida) does not change as it pertains to absolute truth and rational truths. It would be ridiculous if absolute truths rational truths changed. In Torah, it’s One God. In present day Gospel, all of a sudden God has a son. That’s a violation of rational truth that God is one. On the other hand, legal truths (shariah) may be changed by God because these have to do with human behavior. Similarly, morality does not change. Only a certain commandments and prohibitions were changed/relaxed as the new community become accustomed to the new way of life. This is mercy from God. It takes time for human behavior to change/adjust. It’s like raising children. It’s like training a new employee. You don’t let your child go out alone… then eventually once you feel comfortable and trust them, you let them go out. Aqida (Islamic theology) NEVER changes because it has to do with absolute truths. Absolute truths NEVER change. Legal truths (laws) may evolve, with God’s command, to give people time. Sharia (law) was gradually revealed. Once Islam was completely revealed, no more change occurred thereafter. Abrogation has to do with prohibitions and commandments, not rational or theological truths. Was anyone surprised? Was abrogation done without warning? No! In fact, Allah has stated clearly in sura Baqarah (verse 106) to inform the Prophet as well as the believers that abrogation can occur, so they don’t get surprised. No Muslim objected to abrogation. The Quran says, “When We replace a verse with another1-and Allah knows best what He reveals-they say, “You ˹Muḥammad˺ are just a fabricator.” In fact, most of them do not know. (Quran 16:101) So how many verses were abrogated? Only twenty verses. These are detailed by Imam Suyuti’s classical and authoritative work al-itqan fi ulum -alquran. He says that the purpose of abrogation is to lighten the burden. For example, initially, the Muslims were asked to fight an enemy up to ten times greater. Later on, this requirement was relaxed/eased and the Muslims were expected to fight an enemy if the enemy is double their size. If greater, then they can withdraw and not fight. “Now, Allah has lightened the burden for you. He knows that among you is weakness. So if there are one hundred steadfast among you, they will overcome two hundred. And if there are a thousand among you, they will overcome two thousand by the leave of Allah . And Allah is with the steadfast.” (Quran 8:66) Only hypocrites and ignorant people have problems with abrogation. Not a single Muslim around Prophet Muhammad ﷺ had any issues with abrogation. They totally understood it. They found it to be a blessing and mercy from God to allow them time to change. Aisha (رضي الله عنها), a wife of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, said the purpose of gradually revealing is to give people time to adjust (al-Bukhari). Of course, the hypocrites saw this as an opportunity and tried to create problems, but it was obvious what their objective was. Here’s the translation of a direct quote of Aisha (رضي الله عنها) from Arabic as mentioned in al-Bukhari: “Surely, the first thing revealed in the Quran was a sura from the mufassal (Surah 50 thru the end) which contains reminders of the Paradise and the Fire. So, when people became more conscientious of Islam, then came down the rules of halal and haram. Had it not been the case, had the people been told in the very beginning “Do not drink alcohol”, they would have said, “We will never put away alcohol”. And had they been told “Do not commit adultery/fornication”, they would have said, “We will never leave adultery/fornication”. (Bukhari: 4993). We can understand from Aisha’ statement that the rules of halal and haram came down only after the people were established in their belief in the hereafter: paradise and fire. There’s no point in telling people to follow halal and haram unless they have belief. What is the wisdom behind abrogation? As indicated by Aisha (رضي الله عنها), the wisdom is to give people time to adjust. I think there are three additional possible wisdoms behind abrogation: 1. If we return to same conditions, then some of the rules may apply. 2. A new Muslim is given time to adjust and slowly grow into the new faith. In other words, they’re not held responsible for not knowing how to pray, fast, etc. These things take times. They’re not responsible for not knowing halal and haram. They’re given time to learn from a teacher. 3. The ruler can implement laws gradually. I think it’s very loving and merciful of God to let the first community evolve and adopt. God is merciful. Once Islam was completely revealed over decades, no more legal change occurred. For future, abrogation gives us some lessons. For example, we can learn from it that if a person is addicted to drugs/alcohol, you can reduce it gradually (as per doctor recommendation). You don’t cut if off all of a sudden as it may backfire. In fact, Aisha (RA) said almost the same thing about abrogation. The addicted person might get seriously harmed if you do it suddenly. Another possible lesson we can get from abrogation is that when Islam enters into a new community, shariah is not implemented in one-go. It’s implemented in stages, gradually, over period of time. How slow to go is depends on the ijtihad of the scholars (there might not be a perfect rate). But do it gradually to allow people to change. People are not machines or computers. Again, it’s the law that was gradually introduced over time, not theological and moral truths which are true always and forever, and never subject to change.

[@livic2000]

I have no problem with your explanation of abrogation - my understanding of it is the same as well. However, there are different meanings/implications of 'abrogation of ayahs' out there - a closer look at all the replies in this thread (and also in the presentation itself) will show what I am referring to. It is these unpalatable implications of abrogation I have an issue with.

[@Visibleconfusion97]

Well said akhi, well explained

[@toushiri9476]

19:05 The PBUH warned against writing his speech with God’s speech on the same paper so they don’t get mixed up.. He didn’t forbid them from writing the Quran In the contrary he had assigned specific people and called the writer of revelation

[@BloggingTheology]

my bad!

[@WORLDNEWREALITY]

So they dont get mixed up you say 🤣

[@riz1ac]

@@WORLDNEWREALITY like the Bible 😂

[@WORLDNEWREALITY]

@@riz1ac The Prophet peace be upon him did not want to document his sayings in writings so idiots wont make a Bible of them.

[@dilshadsardardeen]

Jazāk Allāhu Khayran Dr Louay Fatoohi.. Its a difficult topic where lots of people avoid. And thank you Paul for inviting Dr to give this lecture

[@momoka863]

Thank you Paul for all of your wonderful work and guests. I had a naive info about the topic & this is an interesting start to look farther . I don't doubt the honesty of your guest but it sounds like making a case rather than asserting a fact so it was little bit confusing. Some notices i need to mention : 1- Abrogation never been through forgetting and none has claimed that and jiberal was reviewing the Quran on the prophet Muhammad pbuh every year so there is no place to say abrogation through forgetting. It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah that Faatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) said: He [the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)] told me: Jibreel used to review the Qur’an every year with him once or twice, but this year he reviewed it with him twice. He said: “I think that my death has drawn near, so fear Allah and be patient, for what a good example I am for you.” Narrated by Muslim (2450). And also According to a report narrated by al-Bukhaari (3624), Ibn Katheer said: What is meant by Jibreel’s reviewing the Qur’an with him every year is that he checked it to make sure that it was exactly as he had brought it down to him from Allah, may He be exalted, so that what was meant to remain would remain and what had been abrogated would not remain. This review was by way of verifying, ensuring and preserving, therefore the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) reviewed it with Jibreel twice in the last year of his life, and Jibreel reviewed it with him. From this, he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) understood that the time of his death was approaching. Although there is no forgetting , we see there is acknowledging to the fact that there are verses which were abrogated and not to be in the last review of the Quran. 2- the mushaf which we have today is the last review : In El-Bukhari 5019: ‘Abd al-‘Azīz ibn Rufay‘ reported: Shaddād ibn Ma‘qil and I entered upon Ibn ‘Abbās (may Allah be pleased with him). Shaddād ibn Ma‘qil asked him: "Did the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) leave anything (besides the Qur’an)?" They said: "He did not leave anything except what is between the two bindings (of the Qur’an)." Then we visited Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah and asked him (the same question). He replied: "The Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) did not leave except what is between the bindings (of the Qur’an)." 3- some of the narrations mentioned were weak and some were regarded and I think this is should have been left to someone who's knowledgeable about that matter of "TAKHRIG EL- HADITH ". 4- There is no shadow of doubt about the fact that stoning of the married adulterer and that's remain valid with the Consensus of the sahabah up to the four imams mentioned in the video and all Muslims not only through Hadith but also by the act of the prophet and Rashidan califates .

[@AS-bm5xv]

Abrogation is quite simple really: divine law was revealed in stages, from prophethood to prophethood, and also from within the span of each prophethood in itself, God has the power to replace divine law with something better, the divine law of Jesus is better than the divine law of Moses, the divine law of Muhammed is better than the divine law of Jesus, etc. The divine law of Jesus abrogates the divine law of Moses, the divine law of Muhammed abrogates the divine law of Jesus, etc. The same concept would apply within a single prophethood as well, ie over the span of 23 years, Islam was perfected, because Allah willed it to be revealed in such a manner and Allah created us to accept information in such a manner. Abrogation is a necessity to facilitate a step-by-step revelation (if no abrogation, then all of the whole religion in its entirety would have to be revealed at once, but God created us to learn in stages, stages of learning within each individual lifespan, and stages of learning for humanity as a whole)

[@rfarooqi]

Paul. Thanks for leading into this topic in an elegant manner. In the end everyone is free to have his or her opinion. From my side, big thanks.

[@irfanahmed6411]

Dear brother Paul Allah bless you you are doing great work on this planet and we love you

[@coachdebruyns]

I've been saying these things for years. It's good to finally hear someone else say it too. Thank you.

[@aazaahmed2852]

Alhamdulillaah. What a wonderful presentation especially for those who seek knowledge and want to do dawah with wisdom.

[@harrykuffal6516]

Love this, thank you Paul you really bring always fresh knowledge. Better to use the word "hadist" not "verse" for other than Quran ayat. this is best of the best explanation on the topic, Prof Sabeer Ally of Canada also have similar tone on abrogation. May Allah bless you all

[@coachdebruyns]

Stoning was a practice because by default the Muslims adopted the Shariah of the Jews where they felt it was applicable. That's why they faced Jerusalem as their qibla. However, then Allah revealed the punishment of flogging and then stoning was abrogated. Stoning is mentioned in the Book of Allah, the Torah is also a Book of Allah. How do I know this? The way in which the Qur'an addresses certain issues. For example, "Lawful for you on the nights of fasting are your women...." Why did it specifically state that? Well, the assumption as can be deduced from the context is that they held it as unlawful. Why? Well, because that was the previous law. There is a context the verses are formed in. Another example, "There is no sin on you if you do such and such..." That means there was fear that there was a sin in it, and where did that fear come from? And.. "Jesus came to make lawful what was previously made unlawful...." That is the trajectory of revelation. The Qu'ran in turn made lawful what was unlawful previously. Why we are not understanding things is because we are not placing ourselves as belong to a broader community of The People of the Book, and hence are unable to understand- in serious ways, our own Book. There is a trajectory of revelation and law, the Book of Allah containing all of it, it's application being made easier with the final iteration of that Book. Another simple example. The previous believers had to observe the Sabath. To make sure Muslims do not think Friday is a Sabath the Qur'an states, "When you hear the call to prayer on Friday hasten to the remembrance of Allah and stop all trade...." but then it says, "but after that go out and seek of Allah's provisions..." Why is it saying that specifically? It's because in the previous iteration of law the sabath was a day off. Whereas in effect the "new sabath" is only the Friday Congregational Prayers and not the entire day. There's loads of examples. But this will require a reading of scriptures together. Not one scripture.

[@primaquran9093]

There are some interesting theological implications here as well. Particularly for those who say that the Qur'an is the eternal speech of Allah (swt). Those that claim that the Qur'an as speech is an eternal, uncreated attribute of Allah (swt). “We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?” (Qur’an 2:106) Abrogation is omission, removal and it is impossible for that which is eternal. The idea that some part of Allah’s essence of ‘speech‘ would be ‘better‘ than other parts certainly merits pensive reflection. It is another reason why Dr. Louay Fatoohi way of understanding the verse provides a way out for this conundrum. Yet another excellent guest Paul!

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

I like your definition of "abrogation" because I'm not Muslim and the concept ( doctrine ) of abrogation really confuses me. Can you explain in a simple way what "abrogation" means in Islamic understanding? Thanks

[@israfilangel8062]

That's a bad argument, God's words remain eternal whether he abrogates some or not just like he abrogated the previous faiths, the concept of abrogation has no affect on the preservation or the eternality of the speech, It's really sad to see how people deny the concept of abrogation just because some Islamophobes using it against them! So instesd of defending it with facts and logic you people turn your face because of this person "fatoohi" who isn't even practicing the sunnah of the prophet (S.A.W)

[@primaquran9093]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 as stated omission, removal, if you have not watched I would sincerely urge you to watch the video and take notes. It is a huge part of Islamic jurisprudence. If you are able to message me I can send you a very useful link. Do watch the above video!

[@primaquran9093]

@@israfilangel8062 I am quite certain that all of us come short when it comes to the Blessed Sunnah in some respects. I do not know if you are referencing brother Paul, or brother Fatoohi. Dr. Fatoohi made some strong points. Rather than ad hominem it is best we deal with the points he presented. As regards Dr. Fatoohi he is an intellectual and has an excellent website. He was writing thought provoking articles and books when many of us were still in diapers.

[@israfilangel8062]

@@primaquran9093 I've studied this subject thoroughly for years and These are some of the most weakest points I've heard, they're not even points to begin, I just added his name so people can know that I'm referring to this liberalized "Fatouhi", when those scholars and the companions talked about this concept of abrogation this person's whole family tree didn't even exist and now he thinks he knows better than at-Tabari and the Scholars and the linguists of the past to misinterpret the verses and rejects and dismisses countless of ahadith not to mention the ahadith that he ignored in order to reject the abrogation, and he even has the audacity to say "the word sheikha doesn't exist" and he confuses Uthman with Umar etc! What a complete incompetent! I will refute him soon under his comment point by point insha'Allah.

[@Hamza00011]

I enjoyed this. We should say that there is no abrogation in the Quran and that the verses are to be interpreted in light of each other in context. The word of God cannot have parts that were removed etc, all of Allahs message is intact. We should leave abrogation in the history books

[@DrOmar11]

Dear Brother Paul, I applaud you for bringing a scholar as diligent and methodological and as non-sectarian as Louay Fatoohi. I am at work and I am not able to see the whole video. I saw tidbits of it. I read Fatoohi's book on abrogration which is by far the most scholarly work I have read on it in English. Fatoohi's book should be required reading in all seminaries of the Muslim world. Regarding 2 (106), I have a view that I hope Louay and others such as Paul and other readers to comment on....I recommend all to see the wider context in which it is embedded...it is in between the verses 85 to 113. And the passage clearly points to People of the Book having an issue of God sending an new revelation. So to my mind, 2 (106) is clearly speaking to the verses around it and responding that if God supersedes a previous ayah (that is to make an ayah (verse) in the Torah or Psalms, or Gospel, etc, to be abrograted or forgotten, then that is in God's wisdom and in the prerogative of God to whom belongs the heavens and the earth.... Please see the entire passage.... 85. But here you are, killing your own, and expelling a group of your own from their homes-conspiring against them in wrongdoing and hostility. And if they come to you as captives, you ransom them, although it was forbidden to you. Is it that you believe in part of the Scripture, and disbelieve in part? What is the reward for those among you who do that but humiliation in this life? And on the Day of Resurrection, they will be assigned to the most severe torment. God is not unaware of what you do. 86. Those are they who bought the present life for the Hereafter, so the punishment will not be lightened for them, nor will they be helped. 87. We gave Moses the Scripture, and sent a succession of messengers after him. And We gave Jesus son of Mary the clear proofs, and We supported him with the Holy Spirit. Is it that whenever a messenger comes to you with anything your souls do not desire, you grew arrogant, calling some impostors, and killing others? 88. And they said, “Our hearts are sealed.” Rather, God has cursed them for their ingratitude. They have little faith. 89. And when a scripture came to them from God, confirming what they have-although previously they were seeking victory against those who disbelieved-but when there came to them what they recognized, they disbelieved in it. So God’s curse is upon the disbelievers. 90. Miserable is what they sold their souls for-rejecting what God has revealed, out of resentment that God would send down His grace upon whomever He chooses from among His servants. Thus they incurred wrath upon wrath. And there is a demeaning punishment for the disbelievers. 91. And when it is said to them, “Believe in what God has revealed,” they say, “We believe in what was revealed to us,” and they reject anything beyond that, although it is the truth which confirms what they have. Say, “Why did you kill God’s prophets before, if you were believers?” 92. Moses came to you with clear proofs, yet you adopted the calf in his absence, and you were in the wrong. 93. And We made a covenant with you, and raised the Mount above you: “Take what We have given you firmly, and listen.” They said, “We hear and disobey.” And their hearts became filled with the love of the calf because of their disbelief. Say, “Wretched is what your faith commands you to do, if you are believers.” 94. Say, “If the Final Home with God is yours alone, to the exclusion of all other people, then wish for death if you are sincere.” 95. But they will never wish for it, because of what their hands have forwarded. God is aware of the evildoers. 96. You will find them, of all mankind, the most eager for life, even more than the polytheists. Every one of them wishes he could live a thousand years; but to be granted a long life will not nudge him from the punishment. God is Seeing of what they do. 97. Say, “Whoever is hostile to Gabriel-it is he who revealed it to your heart by God’s leave, confirming what preceded it, and guidance and good news for the believers.” 98. Whoever is hostile to God, and His angels, and His messengers, and Gabriel, and Michael-God is hostile to the faithless. 99. We have revealed to you clear signs, and none rejects them except the sinners. 100. Is it not that whenever they make a covenant, some of them toss it aside? In fact, most of them do not believe. 101. And when there came to them a messenger from God, confirming what they had, a faction of those who were given the Book threw the Book of God behind their backs, as if they do not know. 102. And they followed what the devils taught during the reign of Solomon. It was not Solomon who disbelieved, but it was the devils who disbelieved. They taught the people witchcraft and what was revealed in Babylon to the two angels Harut and Marut. They did not teach anybody until they had said, “We are a test, so do not lose faith.” But they learned from them the means to cause separation between man and his wife. But they cannot harm anyone except with God's permission. And they learned what would harm them and not benefit them. Yet they knew that whoever deals in it will have no share in the Hereafter. Miserable is what they sold their souls for, if they only knew. 103. Had they believed and been righteous, the reward from God would have been better, if they only knew. 104. O you who believe! Do not say ambiguous words, but say words of respect, and listen. The disbelievers will have a painful torment. 105. It is never the wish of the disbelievers from among the People of the Book, nor of the polytheists, that any good should be sent down to you from your Lord. But God chooses for His mercy whomever He wills. God is Possessor of Sublime Grace. 106. We never nullify a verse, nor cause it to be forgotten, unless We bring one better than it, or similar to it. Do you not know that God is capable of all things? 107. Do you not know that to God belongs the sovereignty of the heavens and the earth, and that apart from God you have no guardian or helper? 108. Or do you want to question your Messenger as Moses was questioned before? Whoever exchanges faith for disbelief has strayed from the right path. 109. Many of the People of the Book wish to turn you back into unbelievers after you have believed, out of envy on their part, after the Truth has become clear to them. But pardon and overlook, until God brings His command. God has power over all things. 110. And perform the prayer, and give alms. Whatever good you forward for yourselves, you will find it with God. God is Seeing of everything you do. 111. And they say, “None will enter Heaven unless he is a Jew or a Christian.” These are their wishes. Say, “Produce your proof, if you are truthful.” 112. In fact, whoever submits himself to God, and is a doer of good, will have his reward with his Lord-they have nothing to fear, nor shall they grieve. 113. The Jews say, “The Christians are not based on anything;” and the Christians say, “The Jews are not based on anything.” Yet they both read the Scripture. Similarly, the ignorant said the same thing. God will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection regarding their differences.

[@louay.fatoohi]

Dear Omer, Thank you for your kind comments about the book. There is merit to your interpretation of 2:106. I personally think that Muhammad Abduh’s interpretation that the reference is to a “miracle” or “sign” is convincing. He notes that verse 2:108 refers to an incident in which Moses’ followers asked him for a “sign”. This incident is mentioned in more detail elsewhere: "The People of the Book asked of you to cause a book to come down on them from heaven. They asked of Moses a greater thing, saying: “Show us Allah openly.” So the thunderbolt caught them because of their wrongdoing. They then took the calf [for a god] after the proofs had come to them, but We forgave that. We gave Moses a manifest authority." (4.153) As you have said, the view a person is inclined towards depends on assumptions they make, such as what surrounding verses are directly linked to 2:106. Thank you.

[@jamilahmad2675]

May Allah reward you brother Paul for your efforts. Amin. May I suggest you get the renowned scholar sheikh Imran Hosein on your channel especially on topics like this and the study of the Quran in general. Keep up the good work.

[@ninjadebruyns8577]

Ayaat can also refer to ahkaam as explicitly stated in 3:7 Ayaat al Mukamaat is the mother of the Book (Umm al Kitab). So saying that Ayaat generally refers to more than just rules is true, but it also qualifies ayaat as Ahkaam.

[@israfilangel8062]

Salam alaykum brother Paul, I'd like to say that I've dived too deep into this subject and I studied it thoroughly for a long time in Arabic, so with all due respect, These are some of the most weakest points I've heard from this liberalized person "Fatouhi" when it comes to this subject, with all due respect this person thinks he knows better than at-Tabari and the Scholars and the linguists of the past and he misinterprets the verses and rejects and dismisses countless of ahadith without mentioning the ones that he ignored in order to reject the abrogation, and he even had the audacity to say "the word sheikha doesn't exist in Arabic" And he even confuses Uthamn with Umar! What a complete incompetent! I will refute him soon under his comment point by point insha'Allah.

[@shooooo6200]

We will be waiting 🤝

[@twitjunkie6007]

So you think Quran is abrogated?

[@israfilangel8062]

@@twitjunkie6007 not the Quran as a Whole but some verses are abrogated as God told us in the Quran

[@pindigheb100]

The Quran , has not and cannot be changed ,and the responsibility for its preservation has been assumed by its Author. Good and meaningful discussion.

[@nobodynobody4389]

But it was and has been changed multiple times even uthman had to get rid of many competing qurans in order to make sense of them. This however did not stop people from having different versions of it.

[@syedziaulhaq1706]

Thanks brother Paul It was a nice , balanced and informative video. What we believe is ذالك الكتاب لا ريب فيه This book, there is No doubt in it... Can be said only and only about Quran. No other book doesn't even claim to be so. So how can we make Quran controversial to protect and safe guard some of our traditions.

[@allykhan8594]

Subhana Rabbi al A'laa. Such an important topic and perhaps contravercial.

[@Martingale021]

Hi Paul, can you invite Mohammad Baqir from Paramadina Foundation to be in your podcast? He's an amazing Islamic Perennial philosophy lecturer based in Jakarta. Great vlog as always.

[@AS-bm5xv]

Does he have a KZbin channel or lectures online?

[@HD13POWER]

Allah said in Surah Al-Ala (we will make you recite then you will not forget unless Allah wishes). So, abrogation can made due to two things: The Prophet remembers the old revelation statement and receive a new revelation statement or simply Allah make the prophet ﷺ forget the old revelation statement and receives a new revelation statement.

[@ahmadbairat9553]

i liked this, thank you

[@mehdid.1022]

Important clarification on what the Qu’ran is at around 39:00. The Qu’ran (the oral revelation) which is believed to be perfectly preserved, is often conflated with the physical book (Mus’haf).

[@samimas4343]

Most verses can be explained. The widow one can be easily understood about minimum and maximum periods of a woman staying at the late husband's house. So she has to stay a minim of 4 months and ten days. And she can stay up to a year before the inheritors can ask for the house.

[@Potato-enthusiast]

Abrogation exists because of OUR imperfections as mortal prisoners of time and space; not because Allah (SWT) is imperfect (na’udhu bilLah).

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

I did not know that the Quran was "revealed over 22 years." Interesting. Also... I did not know that Abrogation is considered a doctrine within Islam. My knowledge of the Quran is insufficient for the purpose of making any decisions regarding Islam. Peace

[@Tysseer]

both facts are mentioned in the Quran by the way :)

[@stephenconnolly1830]

John, abrogation is not a valid concept whatsoever other than the Qur'an abrogating the bits of the Bible which it contradicts. I have already referred you to Professor Khaled Abou el-Fadl's project Illumine commentary of the Qur'an on KZbin where the subject is covered at different places related to the key chapters involved.

[@covenantofthebook6795]

@@stephenconnolly1830 Thats wrong and against the Quran itself

[@stephenconnolly1830]

@@samkb6374 - there are no missing verses and no abrogation of verses within the Qur'an. It's simply a lie. Do some homework by viewing Professor Khaled Abou el-Fadl and his project Illumine commentary on the Qur'an on KZbin.

[@letmetalk2240]

@@stephenconnolly1830 >>>> there are no missing verses and no abrogation of verses within the Qur'an. It's simply a lie. ---------------- Agreed. 👍👍👍

[@nejmcabdudsalaam168]

Typing this after 13:21... It's not true that the sunnah doesn't explicitly mention abrogation. For example, "I used to prohibit you from visiting graves, now visit them." This is mentioned in basic texts.

[@kadrunnazareth5913]

Thanks for the video bro paul.

[@ninjadebruyns8577]

The Will verses are two different cases. The one that specifies the obligatory shares refers to will intestate, whereas the other verse talks about wills that are written by the person in his or her lifetime. IT's very clear.

[@sparephone8228]

If anyone reads 'The Message of the Qur'aan' by Muhammad Asad, they will get a full explanation of why NO verses of the Qur'aan have been abrograted. He also makes it clear that there is NO single ahadith which can be traced all the way back to the Prophet[saw] which can be classified as sahih [authentic] which claim any part of the Qur'aan has been abrograted.

[@stephenconnolly1830]

Professor Khaled Abou el-Fadl has also stated there is no evidence of abrogation of verses within the Qur'an in his ground breaking 2020 Project Illumine Tafsir \ commentary (ongoing) on KZbin.

[@sparephone8228]

@@stephenconnolly1830 I have read some articles by Dr Khaled. He is an intelligent scholar, though I was bit disappointed he did not condemm outright female genetil mutilation.

[@Anas0473]

I haven't read the book, but the holy Qur'an itself, speaks about abrogation... for example "We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?" (Qur'an 2:106) Another example of abrogation can be found in the following verse: "And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse - and Allāh is most knowing of what He sends down - they say, "You, [O Muḥammad], are but an inventor [of lies]." But most of them do not know." (Qur'an 16:101). There are many more, but inshallah you get the idea.

[@sparephone8228]

@@Anas0473 The word 'ayah' does not always mean verse. Various meanngs, 'sign', message etc. It would be hard to believe any part of the Qur'aan is abrograted, since Asad points out there is not one single sahih ahadith which can be traced all the way back to the Prophet[saw ] which claims any part of the Qur'aan has been abrograted. The word 'ayah' in what youqouted is refferring to the Bible, as its legal laws are no longer valid for human beings e.g. eye for an eye etc, tooth for a tooth.

[@Anas0473]

@@sparephone8228 thanks for the correction brother :). But what i am dating is that you don't even need a hadith to tell you that there are abrogations in the Qur'an, as the Qur'an ITSELF clearly states this.

[@samkb6374]

What is interesting which Paul also mentioned, is that we don’t have Quranic manuscripts which contains these bits of “abrogated” verses. This is also something which is going through my mind for a longer time. The Birmingham manuscript as well the inferior(under)text of the Sanaa Palmsest which is a text before the condification of Uthman ibn Affan, doesn’t contain any “abrogated” bits which are mentioned in all these Ahadith. So Christians as well as other critics really need to come with empirical evidence regarding “missing” verses. Only citing Ahadith about abrogated verses is not enough for a objective discussion.

[@nobodynobody4389]

Your own history points to this in order for uthman to try to make one koran (which he failed at) there were multipule competing recitations and editions of it isn't it shirk when you need people to tell you what exactly Allah words were?

[@samkb6374]

@@nobodynobody4389 Uthman ibn Affan Ra failed to produce one standard codex? Where are you from? From Mars or what? First learn a bit of Arabic so you may understand what a rasm is which Uthman SUCCEED to codify. Marijn van Putten demonstrated in his latest book(2022) that all manuscripts goes back to 1 Utmanic archetype. Michael Cook demonstrated the (regional)variant readings through a stemma which From that one rasm we extract multiple reading(recitations) which proves the variants were NOT made up. These readings have a prophetic trace back. ALL variant readings are extracted empirically from THE codified Uthmanic archetype and you want to claim Uthman ibn Affan RA failed??!!😂😂😂 Go on boy go on you know nothing. As you name already suggests, you’re nobody.

[@meself8478]

This video is more than 1 hour. If we get this in podcast it would be more easy for us to listen

[@livic2000]

Thank you. The subject of 'abrogation' had irritated me for a long time because it was inconceivable to me that the One who can create the complexities of quantum entities, of galaxy clusters, of enzymes and cellular structures couldn't create a Qur'an without having to constantly erase and amend it, as if on the hoof. What nailed it for me is the final observation that you kindly penned in red ink - the oldest surviving manuscript of the Qur'an (admittedly only a tiny fraction of the whole, found in one piece and now on display for all to consider), miraculously reminds us of the fact that "there can be no change in the words of the Qur'an". What are the chances that this, of all the hundreds of other themes present in the Qur'an, should be preservedfor display reminding us of the immutability of the Qur'an?!

[@ninjadebruyns8577]

53:3 refers to the Wahi and the Qur'an calls itself the Wahi, so it is obviously not referring to any other inspiration. This isn't to deny that the Prophet (s) was in general inspired. However, there is a long Hadith where the Prophet (s) asks one man about the pollination of plants and the man thought the Prophet (s) disliked the manual pollination and so didn't do it the following year, whereupon the Prophet (s) stated that it was just his observation and that only if he orders with a command from Allah, then it is binding.

[@ayyazsiddique5381]

JazakALLAHukhairan

[@jomangeee9180]

He sets a disclaimer after the first slide that he is a historian and is not a qualified Jurist to inform us about the issue! He is just recounting the historical context, "the best he can", without preaching the substance of the subject, and even if he did, he is "not qualified to do so" and can't be taken seriously. I think he was set up for failure and achieved that goal with flying colors

[@toushiri9476]

See it as an introduction to the topic for those he never heard about the subject.. At least he was honest from the get go

[@jomangeee9180]

@@toushiri9476 A non Jurist might say the Quran tells us not to pray "O you who have believed, do not approach prayer" while a Jurist will say otherwise (4:43) O you who have believed, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying"]. If you are sick you go to a physician when you have religious question go to a trained Jurist. With all due respect to the guest, he is not even a trained historian

[@toushiri9476]

@@jomangeee9180 I agree

[@suryaya441]

You don't need to know fiqh to know that you need to pray, the example you used to show that a non-jurist could come to that conclusion is frankly absurd. You literally just need to finish reading that verse to know that it's talking about coming to pray while drunk, i.e. exercise basic reading comprehension and some respect for language. You should evaluate arguments based on their merit rather than handwaving about credentials.

[@jomangeee9180]

@@suryaya441 that's exactly the point. It is the difference between a Jurist and a non Jurist. A non Jurist will come up with all kinds of absurdities easily refuted by someone who has knowledge of Fiqh, hadith, Quran, non of which the presenter here posses! Reading material (mostly fringe groups, unauthentic hadith, and misinterpretation of Quran) and collecting it into a presentation does not make it either reliable nor informative, why doesn't he do that with COVID? He will be deleted and demonetized immediately!? but religion,,,, I guess no one cares

[@islanmohamed390]

Mr Paul you must invite sh abdutahman to revise this topic again.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

Sir Paul, do you think the concept ( doctrine ) of "abrogation" is also implied within Christianity? In particular, I am referring to the scriptures in the Gospels where Jesus the Christ often said, "But I say to you..." Although my knowledge of Islam is very insufficient, this topic is interesting to me because 1) I want to understand better what the Quran states about "abrogation"; 2) I think that abrogation can apply to some Ancient Near East religious beliefs and 3) the foundational doctrines of Christianity can never be abrogated because this type of negation would imply that Jesus was not the Messiah, the anointed One who said "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life." Peace

[@tahahagar7664]

Hi John. I think one could say abrogation in Christianity is that laws in the Old Testament i.e.. Mosaic laws like putting to death anyone that breaks Sabbath or curses parents are abrogated by the New Testament which is something Paul said in his epistles that the (Mosaic) law is no longer necessary for salvation after Jesus' sacrifice. So maybe this is the abrogation concept that you could say is similar to the one in Islam.

[@huzaifahali412]

Assalamu alaikum dear sir. Salaam to Dr. Fatoohi as well. I request you to please explain again the abrogation which starts at 18:30 regarding use of tools used in brewing by Jews. It went quickly and I couldn't comprehend though I got to the gist of that but the details were missed unfortunately. Jazakallaah

[@hafiz5001]

Masha Allah nice stream

[@ninjadebruyns8577]

2:106 Clearly refers to previous revelations and or verses that were revealed during the lifetime of the Prophet (s) that didn't make it into the final iteration of the Quran. It is also noted in Bukhari that companions woke up and forgot entire verses that refers to "caused to be forgotten" and then there are companions who said there was the ruling they remembered but then the Qur'an has a different ruling, that is similar or better. There are examples of this. For example adultery carried the punishment of stoning the the Qur'an has the punishment of lashing for the same crime.

[@letmetalk2240]

I didn't read any rulings of stoning as a punishment in Quran. If the reference is hadiths, I believe hadiths cannot supersede the Quran.

[@coachdebruyns]

There is also the scholarly opinion that ayaat that are ratified in the Qur'an abrogate verses of the Torah and Injeel. For example, the Bible orders stoning to death for adultery, whereas the Qu'ran stipulates 100 lashes. In other words, the Qur'an abrogated the previous ruling of the Bible. Remember the Qur'an says, "Who believes in this revelation sent to you, and the revelations before you..." In other words, this revelation is building on what was already revealed. Anyone who has read the Bible will notice that sometimes the Qur'an refers to things in the Bible but doesn't give the full story because it presumes some knowledge of what went before. It's very consistent with the Qur'an's constant referencing the children of Israel.

[@OmarOsman98]

It’s all one book. The Quran is the guardian over previous scriptures though

[@OmarOsman98]

It’s all one book. The Quran is the guardian over previous scriptures though

[@ninjadebruyns8577]

16:101 is clearly talking about verses and isn't talking about a sign generally and the proof of that is that it continues to say, "you are only a forger" and that refers to the part where the verse says, "what He sends down" and so it cannot mean anything else. This is despite the fact that ayah is used with various shades of meaning. However, in this verse the meaning is verse, because Allah sends down verses, and the Qur'an is replete with that.

[@coachdebruyns]

87:6-7 is not using forget in the same context as 18:23-24. The first context is forgetting verses of the Qur'an (made to be forgotten as Allah Wills for him), whereas the latter context is forgetting that everything happens by the Will of Allah and so promising to do something tomorrow without remembering that is ill advised. You cannot transpose one aya onto another aya just because they use the same word!

[@coachdebruyns]

2:160 he questions the meaning of aya to say that it doesn't typically mean rules or ahkaam, but the Qur'an also talks about ayaat al muhkamaat (law giving verses). The verse 26:154 aya is used as a sign and that is also a usage of the word. How would you have understood verse 2:160 if you took aya as sign in that context? He didn't offer an interpretation. One explanation for 2:160 is that the verses that were abrogated are forgotten or not in the Qur'an. All those verses were replaced with similar verses or better verses. Better verses can mean that they are more concise, or fit more in with a particular textual context even if they convey similar meanings. We see in Hadith that people woke up having forgotten verses during the time of revelation.

[@nobodynobody4389]

The aya conandrum seems like a poor excuse for forgetting and losing verses rather than allah intervention. This sounds exactly like fundamentalists in us being embarrassed when their end of the world prediction didn't manifest so they come up with excuses.

[@karzan4784]

27:25 wasn't temporal marriage abborgated by sunnah? I just checked it out and apparently it's mistranslation used by Shia saying that it's allowed in Quran. But it was permitted by sunnah.

[@laylaali5977]

Interesting

[@aftabahmad8658]

Brother Paul, Asselam Alaykum warahmatullah wabarakatuh, i would be glad if you invite Well read and qualified muslim scholars to discuss such vast matters. Scholars like - Shaykh Abdal Hakeem Murad, Dr. Umar faruq or shaykh Hamza Yusuf etc.

[@coachdebruyns]

The only flaw in his presentation is the assumption that the possibility of verses having been forgotten would make the Qur'an incomplete. That's simply not true. The final compilation only took place towards the end of the 23 year period. When that happened, there were many things deliberately left out because of verses similar to it already (as if to say, we've already got that covered) and or better (as if to say we have a better more complete or more concise statement). This explanation I am giving is consistent with the Qur'an itself 2:160 which he more or less dismissed and failed to offer an explanation on. But I agree with him, of course, as all Muslims do that the Qur'an is complete and has never been changed. I don't believe there is abrogation in the Qur'an itself, meaning one verse abrogates another verse that we find in the Book we now have. I think it was relevant to retain the verse 2:160 because it was known that people would come forward (as is mentioned in the Hadith) and say that there was more revealed than is currently found in the mushaf. They're not wrong. That's fine. It all makes sense.

[@UAM-]

Alhamdulillah Paul is doing abrogation verses Lot to learn even though I was born Muslim I don't know that much about abrogations

[@ninjadebruyns8577]

The case of the word of Allah mention in Al Kahf this doesn't refer to verses of the Qur'an. "If oceans were ink and the trees were pens" shows that obviously the words of Allah here isn't referring to the Qur'an. It refers to the reality of what is normative for Allah in His Decree. The verses are called ayaat, not Al Kalimaat. You can't be fast and loose with words, otherwise it weakens your case. Ayat can mean verses and you can still argue a good case against abrogation in the Qur'an.

[@hassanabdur-rahman1559]

The critical word is نَنسَخْ. That word doesn't mean to abrogate. The word نسخ means to copy or transcribe.

[@shooooo6200]

Please get another opinion upon the same topic.

[@mmmukhtar9242]

Real Quran is what is in the hearts of the Muslims, Huffaz. All manuscripts are copies. They are not original. There was never a complete manuscript of the Quran in the time of the Prophet. There were only people who have memorised the Quran. The prophet never advocated the compilation of the Quran in book form. After his demise the 1st Caliph Abu Bakr was reluctant to compile it book form but finally accepted to do so on the insistence of Umar RA. In fact written Quran came into existence when Umar RA expressed his fear that the original Quran, which was in the memories of the Huffaz, was in danger as many of them were dying in the battlefield. So if you want to verify the accuracy of the manuscript you have to call the Huffaz to verify the manuscripts and not vice versa . The manuscripts are not a means of verifying the original Quran, which in its original form, was in the heart of the Prophet. It was transmitted from his heart to the hearts of the companions. In fact this is what was done to produce the first written Quran,i.e. from heart to manuscripts. What is a miracle is that the Quran is not assembled in chronological order i.e in the order of its revelation, yet it was memorised and assembled in its present order as directed by Allah Ta'ala through His Prophet. I challenge anyone to learn the pages of any book by heart in a disorderly manner and then recite it from memory in its proper order. The Quran is a reading book in rhythmic tones and the lyrics are precise. If a reader omits or changes a word the listener will automatically notice it. Just like in any famous song the listener will automatically notice any distortions in the lyrics or word omissions. Similarly the listeners of the Quran will notice any variations in the recitation. While the prophet was alive he was reciting it in the daily prayers. Recitation of the Quran from memory is part of the daily prayers. Once the prophet made a mistake in recitation in one prayer and he was immediately corrected by one companion named Ubay ibn Kaab. After the prayer the Prophet asked who corrected him. He was told " Ubay bin Kaab" and he said: I guessed it was he. " Allah orders the Muslims in the Quran thus: "and recite the Qur'an in slow measured rhythmic tones." THE LEADERS OF THE QURAYSH LISTENED TO THE RECITATION OF THE QUR’AN IN SECRET. While the Prophet was praying at home one night, the leading figures of the polytheists such as Abu Sufyan, Abu Jahl and Ahnas, stood hidden in the darkness and listened to the recitation of the Qur’an. Unaware of one another’s presence, they were so absorbed in the Prophet’s recitation that they remained there until dawn. As they were about to leave at dawn break, the three men noticed one another. Each began to condemn the other for listening to the Qur’an, and agreed not to do such a thing again saying that this would certainly raise suspicion and doubt if they were seen by others. But this happened again the next day, and on the third consecutive day the three men said “We cannot continue doing this!” so each of them vowed not to go there again. Clearly, the hearts were unable to escape from the delightful, fascinating effects of the Qur’an. However, aspects such as tribal ties, personal vengeance, the battle for leadership and jealousy was preventing them from embracing Islam. In fact the enemies of the Prophet were convinced that the recitation of the Quran has a mesmerising effect on its listeners. They warned everybody not to listen to its recitation lest they succumbed to its 'magical' effects. kzbin.info/www/bejne/o2mpfWWVf9mAZqs And when they listen to the revelation received by the Messenger, thou wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears, for they recognise the truth: they pray: "Our Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses. (Quran 5:83) Yes, I have cried before and still do occasionally when reading the Quran. The first time I read it was when I was still a christian and I remember I was crying at one point thinking that these are the literal words of God, and then when I read the verse that said the christians will recognize this as the truth and tears will roll down their faces, which is exactly what I was doing, it made me feel so ashamed and embarrassed that I didn't know God before this, I then fell down on my face for the first time ever and tried to pray as the Quran tells us to. I'm sure I didn't pray exactly as the traditionalists would like but I did it as best I could, I cried to God to forgive me for forgetting him, for not knowing him, or worshipping him, and for associating others with him as I used to do. I swore that I was a Muslim and that I will die as a Muslim then and there, God willing I will. Kurt Comparison of available Quran manuscripts This point is raised by non Muslims who are not used to books committed to memory. The Quran was intended to be memorised. It was not intended to be written otherwise the prophet Muhammad SAW would have been ordered to do so by Allah Ta'ala. In fact when the Prophet SAW wanted to speed up his lecture in order not to forget the verses Allah Ta'ala warned him not to do so as the preservation of the verses was solely under the control of Allah Ta'ala. (75:16) (O Prophet), do not stir your tongue hastily (to commit the revelation to memory). (75:17) Surely it is for Us to have you commit it to memory and to recite it. (75:18) And so when We recite it,follow its recitation attentively; (75:19) then it will be for Us to explain it. So the Quran is not like any other books. Its authenticity can only be ascertained by listening to its recitation. We can challenge anyone to put in writing any dictated text and definitely the scribes are bound to make spelling mistakes or omit some words. So the methods of testing the authenticity of the Quran cannot be based on comparison of manuscripts. Manuscripts are not the original Quran. They are just handwritten copies. The original Qur'an is a verbal recitation and not a written book. We, Ourselves, (the Creator) have sent down the reminder (the Quran) just as We are safeguarding it. ١٦

[@coachdebruyns]

To sum up, the matter is clear to me. The Qur'an was revealed over 23 years. Many verses were revealed in relation to historical and indigenous circumstances but became irrelevant to the Book to be compiled in its final format at the end which is to remain relevant until the end of times. Hence there are verses and rulings revealed that is not found in the final compilation because it was not meant to be. Just like the laws were gradually implemented and the system became more and more completed, the tools that were needed for its development were then discarded (although revealed). This is the nature of anything that is developed over time. I may recommend medication for a recovering drug addict that would be bad for the same person once he reformed. When the Muslims were reformed from what afflicted them and the system became fully fleshed out, much of what was used to get there in the past was no longer needed. The religion could now be understood in its entirety. That's why there is abrogation. It was meant for the time in which the project was being developed.

[@TastelessKiwi]

1:43:41 Option C : Those weren't Quran , as you said all of the oldest manuscripts didn't contain those supposedly forgotten verses and these hadith suggest that they weren't even written by the prophet's order , why ? Obviously they weren't Quran God knows best Zaid said: We used to recite the sheikh and the sheikh. . Marwan said, “Should we not put it in the Qur’an?” He said: “No, do you not see that the two young men are being stoned?” He said, “They mentioned that, and among us is Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him.” He said: “I will cure you of that.” Write me the verse of stoning, he said, so I came to him and I mentioned him. He said, then he mentioned the verse of stoning. He said, “O Messenger of God, write me the verse of stoning.” He said, “I can’t do that Albani 6/974 Ibn al-Aas and Zaid bin Thabit were writing the Qur’an, so they passed by this verse, and Zaid said, “I heard the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, say, the sheikh and the sheikh.” . . Umar said, “When this was revealed, I came to the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, and said, ‘Write it to me. Shubah said it was as if he hated that. Umar said, “Do you not see that if an unmarried old man , he will be flogged, and that if a young man commits adultery and he has been married, he will be stoned?” "Sahih" Albani 6/974 "google translated" source : www.dorar.net/h/9e1b13519b57729cfcfc339060b599b9 www.dorar.net/h/25d348cb215b497394ba5aca05c5fe51

[@phrama22]

this videos should be paid in order to watch it. it should not be free.

[@hassanmirza2392]

Dear Paul, The new version of NRSV, which is called NRSVue, has diluted the words and made the translation more LGBTQ friendly, maybe you can talk about it. Christianity is really diluting now! Apparently, the state of Judaism is as much liberal/secular as Christianity, as proved by these headlines. 'Most US Jews believe in God, but don’t think He judges them' 'Must a Jew Believe in God? The centrality of God in Judaism may not be as straightforward as you think' 'Jews in the U.S. are far less religious than Christians and Americans overall, at least by traditional measures

[@BarisTitanX]

Interesting talk, but I find that he is emotional in quite a few aspects of finding the truth. Who says stoning equals the absence of forgiveness?

[@kayakkayak9568]

Assalamualaikum Salam from Indonesia 🇮🇩

[@BloggingTheology]

Wa alaykumu s-salam

[@coachdebruyns]

Inexistent verses is not inconsistent with the Qur'an at all. I disagree with him and I don't think it's at all preposterous or outrageous. It just means that the final compilation happened towards the end of the life of the Prophet (s). That's perfectly fine.

[@rinlizer2605]

paul can u invite syaikh shadee elmasry to here,to talk about maliki madhab

[@coollife6360]

الأخ استشهد بالايه سنقراءك فلا تنسى ولم يكمل الآيه الا ماشاءالله الأخ لم يفرق بين النسيان والاستراجاع كالذي يخفظ القرآن وعندما ينسان كلمه وترجعها بسرعه وهناك فرق بين هذا وبين حديث البخاري الذي يتكلم عن الناس في يوم القيامه اللذين نسوا القرآن بالكامل ولم يعد في قلوبهم ولا ذاكرتهم وتجاهلوه تماما. هاذا للتوضيح. لان الأخ شكل معتزلي الأشياء التي لم تعجبه من باب راحه البال

[@socratesson4320]

Abrogation stands in odds with the "No contradictions" challenge in the Quran.

[@mrpostman98765]

may Allah SWT protect us from being of those who reject sahih ahadith, after listening to this in full it seems clear to me that Fatoohi has a warped manhaj that has resulted in this bizzarre presentation.

[@Russ007able]

🌹❤️🌹

[@Mahad921]

I don't want to make the brother's arguments sound redundant but he picks and chooses want he wants the audience to hear and says i feel uncomfortable so I will not believe saheeh hadith which I believe should be more worrisome to him

[@Sunsrise7]

My unscholary mind: How to justify abrogation with an all knowing, omnipotent God and a Quran that is a guidance for all time and final? Are we to understand that God changes his mind and or gets things wrong or can make mistakes? How to reconcile the contradictions, discrepancies and disturbing verses like the stoning and breastfeeding ones to mention a few… Abrogation doesn’t sit well Thanks

[@asrafnauman4327]

Al hijr 19:5, should be al hijr 15:9 Fussilat 41:42 is correct

[@mmmukhtar9242]

The Muslims bless Abraham more than anybody else in their 5 daily prayers. As a result they are blessed according to the bible for doing so.(I will bless those who bless you and curse those who treat you with contempt. All the families on earth will be blessed through you.” Genesis 12:3 Let us translate this blessings of Abraham in their daily prayers by Muslims using Google translate : اللهم صل على محمد، وعلى آل محمد كما صليت على إبراهيم وعلى آل إبراهيم، إنك حميد مجيد، اللهم بارك على محمد، وعلى آل محمد كما باركت على إبراهيم، وعلى آل إبراهيم، إنك حميد مجيد O God, bless Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, as You blessed Abraham and the family of Abraham, You are Praiseworthy and Glorious. O God, bless Muhammad and the family of Muhammad as You blessed Abraham and the family of Abraham.

[@janbarstow]

Abrogation is in the Quran. His argument is not a doctrinal stance. Though it brings comfort to some, there are many schools of thought within Islam. Needless to say, such differences are a problem.

[@aksalafi]

I respect the Shaykh and he knows more than me but his opinion seems completely wrong to me. He has rejected some authentic (or at least on in Saheeh Muslim showing abrogation in the time of the prophet) hadeeth based on his not being able to reconcile that with his understanding that the Quran being a complete record. You can not simply reject authentic hadeeth because you can not intellectually reconcile a matter. In that case you hear and obey and just submit and try to look into other scholars works. Also, the Quran being abrogated in the time of the prophet before his final review with the angel Jibreel is total fine. The reason being every Ramadan the prophet would review the Quran with Jibreel in his final year of life Jibreel reviewed the Quran with the prophet twice, Abdullah ibn Mas‘ood and Zayd ibn Thaabit witnessed this review. In this review, Jibreel made sure that whatever the prophet recited and was recorded by Zayd was the final Quran. So, this review(s) made sure that even if abrogation had gone before this, it would not harm the completion of the Quran as no more revelation nor abrogation would come after this point. The Sahaba had ijmah (100% unanimous agreement) that this was the complete final Quran, and all they had learnt before had to be in accordance with this recitation. Whatever they knew of the Quran before that was not in this recitation was considered abrogated. In fact this recitation during the last two reviews of the Quran with Jibreel in front of Zayd (the hand picked Quran scribe of the prophet) is what Abu Bakr put in the 1st ever complete mushaf after the prophets death. This is what Uthman put in the mushafs we have today. Uthman just arranged the surahs in the correct order were as Abu Bakrs 1st Mushaf had all the surahs and verses correct but he did not order the surahs in any particular order. Uthman ordered them in the order the prophet did and the sahabah had ijmah upon. All of what I said was just to highlight abrogation before these two reviews in the prophets final year of life was totally plausible. Allah revealed verses appropriate for that time frame and then replaced them with ones that he knew were better for us. Therefore, he made all the Muslims know, learn, recite and act upon the non-abrogated verses until the final hour. We do not need to know the content of those verses because he has given us something better (the verses we recite in our Mushafs today). Plus they have no long lasting bearing on Islamic creed or islamic law we need to be aware of. If they had an impact on the creed or law that we needed to be aware of Allah would mot have abrogated them. And Allah knows best.

[@islaam541]

slam alikom

[@BloggingTheology]

Wa alaykumu s-salam

[@Cemukay]

"Follow Cemukay, who has over one hundred videos on Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Everything is discussed openly, to the point and without bias. You won’t find videos like these…

[@HitoMr]

Good evening Dr. Paul Williams. In many instances or occasions, the Islamic scholars always reference to the Sahabas, the followers of the prophet. Some of the followers do contribute as scribes to the prophet’s revelations. Please Mr. Williams, we would like to know who among the scribes are the most important to the prophet? Is Ali among the scribes of the prophet? Why was he loved so much by the prophet, and hated by the rest of the followers …

[@SAM_KBI]

Which followers hated Ali RA so much if I may ask..?

[@Muhammad.Saifuddin]

thr words of the qur'aan are the qur'aan itself

[@mostaq9779]

Only 4 pages yet the only Ayah talking about no one can change the Quran is amongst this manuscript. Amazing sign for rejectors.

[@mostaq9779]

@@noorjahan1333 People have been trying for 1400 years but failed and I think it’s because God promised to guard it from corrupt and misguided people like you.

[@my_veideo]

Do you think stoning in Islam could means Distance them do not let them in the community or bar them to participate.

[@samkb6374]

That’s a very verryyy veryyyyy long stretch bro..

[@allykhan8594]

Qu'ran 3:85 And whoso seeketh as religion other than the Surrender (to Allah) it will not be accepted from him, and he will be a loser in the Hereafter. Did this verse abbrogate taking Christians and Jews as believers?

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

Good question. I don't "seeketh" any religion. I am simply trying to understand God. By the way, I'm not a Muslim. However I think people who seek the guidance of God, no matter what "religion" they profess, are opening their hearts to "surrender" to God. But what does the word "surrender" mean in Islam? Peace to you

[@allykhan8594]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 peace to you. Submission to his Laws; sharia. Making religion pure for Him.

[@allykhan8594]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 To answer my own question...Islam (submission) was always the Religion of the believers; Abraham, Moses and Jesus pbuT. Therefore, Christian and Jews who have NOT committed major heresy (an example would be associating partners with God; disbelief) would be considered believers.

[@allykhan8594]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 That is for every individual to strive for by God's permission and guidance. Surely, by obeying his commands we become on that path of purification?

[@allykhan8594]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 a mystery of love??? That is a new one. Please quote bible about trinity explicitly...chapter, verse and version.

[@adamibrahimmuhammad5610]

Yes abrogation occured. And abrogation was not a doctrine. I think with due respect, the Dr is only trying to make Islam look like Christianity. What do I mean, Dr Fatoohi did not mentioned that the Quran is a recital first before it was a mushaf. In fact towards the end he stated that the Quran is Muhammad SAW. No sir. Abrogation was done by Allah to both some of Quran ayats and some ahadith. To that there is no dispute. And this was done during the time of the Prophet and ended with his death. As to the number of ayats or ahadith abrogated, we may have the total number according to what was made available to us by the Prophet through authentic narrations, which it seems you have most of them but choose to state only three that you have not said how authentic they are. We have a final compiled Quran that has 114 suras from fatiha to nas. This was written down first by Prophet's scribes, then by Abubakr RA and then by Usman RA. Even if this is composed of 1% of the total verses revealed by Allah and the other 99% abrogated it will suffice His creation. And all we will say is alhamdulillah, and accept His disposition. You said it yourself, that He is the doer of what He wills. Umar RA standing on the pulpit and saying those words was his right, given to him as one of the khulafaurrashidin, by non other but the Prophet himself. He has right, by ijma, to introduce new things into the Deen even. I just hope we get a good scholar to refute all that you have said here point by point, so that this issue of abrogation that the orientalists and Christian apologetics are using to cause harm to Islam will be laid to rest.

[@peaceforhumanity1886]

Are there still Muslims out there believing the old lie of Allah regarding the supposedly preservation of Quran?? Sahih Muslim 1452 a 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur'an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) died and it was before that time (found) in the Holy Qur'an (and recited by the Muslims). Show us the disgusting verse of breastfeeding for adults in Quran! Spoiler alert: you won’t find it. It is lost! Allah lied to you all the time as he promised to protect Quran! Why? He wants your souls to get lost!

[@allykhan8594]

A caveat should not be considered as an abrogration, surely?

[@nejmcabdudsalaam168]

I'm stopping at 27:55 giving the rest a miss. This sounds likely to be deviant... God knows best. The guest said that he doesn't know of any other sunnah that abrogates an ayah and it's ahad (singular), but it's famous that Imam Abu Hanifa was opposed to wiping khuffs while the Qur'ān says to wash the feet, until he had received over 40 reports of Companions wiping their footwear rather then washing. Also, when it came to the ayah that he said all that discussed in agree that it's a case of abrogation, but he invited discussion on why he disagreed. Very suspect. Allah knows best. Peace

[@semakulaatibu4564]

Abrogation is in our mental schema not in the Quran.

[@taqveemtahir143]

Can't help but say that in contrast to the other session swith Mr fatohi, this presentation is too hasty, it does not go into the heart of the matter, does not objectively analyze the opinion of other sides (leaning towards abrogation) and depends heavily on his own opinions and ideas and the sheer liberty with which he categorised everything that goes against his opinions as 'forgeries' and 'implausible'. Quite dogmatic and unscholarly. Specially, in the last bit he seems to be jumping too fast to conclusions. I strongly recommend other sessions with other learned guests to have a balanced and well grounded information on this topic.

[@enoughisenough1478]

🌎💦🌾🐓🤲☝🙏Nevertheless Isllaam is Isllaam nooooooo sizes since 🌴 😍 MEMORIAL OURS ELDERLY INNOCENCE ANCESTORS STRUGGLING FOR THE WHOLE INTERNAL UMMAH IN THIS PLANET ✍ 👨‍👩‍👧‍👦 (AL QURAN KAREEM🌎)

[@matishakabdullah5874]

Muslim-Believers must first know that AlQuran abrogated all previous Books of Allah all according to principles accorded in Q(2: 106).

[@letmetalk2240]

Not abrogated but superseded.

[@matishakabdullah5874]

@@letmetalk2240 Read Q(2:106).The alQuranic manhaj of abrogation.

[@letmetalk2240]

@@matishakabdullah5874 QS 2.106 In no way do We abrogate any ayah (i.e. verse, sign) whatsoever or cause it to be forgotten (except that) We come up with (i.e., bring) a more charitable one or the like of it. Do you not know that Allah is Ever-Determiner over everything?

[@Tony-jj9zb]

Sharia has absolutely nothing to do with Islam. Sunnah of Muhammad has absolutely nothing to with Islam. The System (in Arabic "Sunnah") of Almighty Allah (in English God) is an Unchangeable System. Almighty God teaches the following: Quran, 33:62, سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ فِى الَّذينَ خَلَوا مِن قَبلُ وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبديلًا This is God's eternal system, and you will find that God's system is unchangeable. [End] Quran, 35:43, استِكبارًا فِى الأَرضِ وَمَكرَ السَّيِّئِ وَلا يَحيقُ المَكرُ السَّيِّئُ إِلّا بِأَهلِهِ فَهَل يَنظُرونَ إِلّا سُنَّتَ الأَوَّلينَ فَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَبديلًا وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَحويلًا They resorted to arrogance on earth, and evil scheming, and the evil schemes only backfire on those who scheme them. Should they then expect anything but the fate of those who did the same things in the past? You will find that God's system is never changeable; you will find that God's system is immutable. [End] Quran, 48:23, سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ الَّتى قَد خَلَت مِن قَبلُ وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبديلًا Such is God's system throughout history, and you will find that God's system is unchangeable. [End] ***The Quran has no contradictions and for an individual to make such a claim only exposes that his faculties such as the hearing, the eyesight, and the mind is veiled and prevented from understanding the truth when the truth is perfectly clear. The verses from the Quran on the top eliminate the fabricated teachings attributed to the final prophet which is known today as the sunnah of Muhammad. It is easy for those who seek guidance from Almighty Allah alone to listen and obey only Almighty Allah by rejecting the Sunnah of Muhammad. If Almighty Allah teaches that the Sunnah of Allah is unchangeable, never changeable and immutable then believers hear the call and never dare invent or accept such fabrications as truth! Quran, 6:113, وَلِتَصغىٰ إِلَيهِ أَفـِٔدَةُ الَّذينَ لا يُؤمِنونَ بِالـٔاخِرَةِ وَلِيَرضَوهُ وَلِيَقتَرِفوا ما هُم مُقتَرِفونَ This is to let the minds of those who do not believe in the Hereafter listen to such fabrications, and accept them, and thus expose their real convictions. [End] It's not difficult to understand the simple truth, yet satan invites multitudes of human beings to allow for their ego and the whisperings of the devil to influence their thought process and possibly leads to following a path written by the creation and falsely attributed to Almighty Allah, as the Perfectly Clear Revelations from Almighty Allah goes discarded. Quran, 24:15, إِذ تَلَقَّونَهُ بِأَلسِنَتِكُم وَتَقولونَ بِأَفواهِكُم ما لَيسَ لَكُم بِهِ عِلمٌ وَتَحسَبونَهُ هَيِّنًا وَهُوَ عِندَ اللَّهِ عَظيمٌ You fabricated it with your own tongues, and the rest of you repeated it with your mouths without proof. You thought it was simple, when it was, according to God, gross. [End] Ask yourself, do you support this wicked behavior of accepting others to abrogate the Word of Almighty Allah? How can you accept to being a Sunni or a Shia or a Sufy or any other title that is not found in the Quran? Quran, 2:146, الَّذينَ ءاتَينٰهُمُ الكِتٰبَ يَعرِفونَهُ كَما يَعرِفونَ أَبناءَهُم وَإِنَّ فَريقًا مِنهُم لَيَكتُمونَ الحَقَّ وَهُم يَعلَمونَ Those who received the scripture recognize the truth herein, as they recognize their own children. Yet, some of them conceal the truth, knowingly. [End] We are all to devote our entire worship practices to Almighty Allah alone. We do not sever what Almighty God commands to be joined. Hence, we do not separate ANY of the messengers. They all believed in Almighty God. Consequently, there is no god worthy of worship except the One and Only True God. The final prophet never promoted others to mention his name alongside the name of Almighty God. We are to not sever what Almighty God commands to be joined. Same concept with the People of the Scripture. The Divine Revelations prior to the Quran are the Word of Almighty God and as a Muslim one is obligated to establish faith in his/her heart and mind in the Divine Revelations sent by Almighty Allah to the Children of Israel. The concept taught in all Scriptures is devoting our entire worship practices to Almighty God ALONE! Almighty Allah is rarely mentioned in your video's and it would be honest and ethical if before you start the video, you can inform others what sect you belong to. That's called honesty. If you read sunni books then your a Sunni. Same goes for the remaining sects. Those who preach the Quran alone go by the term Muslim. When you people preach hadith which is fabricated teachings attributed to the final prophet, the result is you people are repelling others from the path of Almighty Allah. But if you refer to your titles like Sunni, Shia, Sufy, etc., then at least the teachings you are sharing to the world can be reconciled to the teachings external to the Quran. For example, the final prophet marrying a six year old and having intercourse with her at the age of nine. The entire Quran teaches the prophets wives to being referred as "Woman/Women." Not a single verse in the Quran teaches the final prophet married a child. So the fair way to accurately identify those who teach this rhetoric which is Un-Islamic is to simply identify them as Sunni's. Those Sunni's cannot use the Title Muslim too! There is a built in code that clearly proves the Quran can only be from The Lord of the Universes. Miracle 19, which is provided for us in the Quran, Surah 74, Verses 30-35, is indeed among the Great Miracles from Almighty Allah. Every single letter, word, verse, and surah of the Quran, is mathematically composed by the number 19. For example: There are 114 Chapters/Surah's that make up the Quran. If we divide 114 by 19 the result is without a decimal, 6. (19 x 6) There are 6,346 Verses in the Quran. If we divide 6,346 Verses by 19 the result is 334 without a decimal. (334 x 19) There are thousands of examples that if a soul is sincere will see how Amazing this Miracle is. The Quran is the only source we need for it is a Perfect, Complete, Clear, Fully Detailed Scripture that makes up the Word of Almighty God. Quran, 6:114, أَفَغَيرَ اللَّهِ أَبتَغى حَكَمًا وَهُوَ الَّذى أَنزَلَ إِلَيكُمُ الكِتٰبَ مُفَصَّلًا وَالَّذينَ ءاتَينٰهُمُ الكِتٰبَ يَعلَمونَ أَنَّهُ مُنَزَّلٌ مِن رَبِّكَ بِالحَقِّ فَلا تَكونَنَّ مِنَ المُمتَرينَ Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed? Those who received the scripture recognize that it has been revealed from your Lord, truthfully. You shall not harbor any doubt. [End] Quran, 34:44, وَما ءاتَينٰهُم مِن كُتُبٍ يَدرُسونَها وَما أَرسَلنا إِلَيهِم قَبلَكَ مِن نَذيرٍ We did not give them any other books to study, nor did we send to them before you another warner. [End] Quran, 45:6, تِلكَ ءايٰتُ اللَّهِ نَتلوها عَلَيكَ بِالحَقِّ فَبِأَىِّ حَديثٍ بَعدَ اللَّهِ وَءايٰتِهِ يُؤمِنونَ These are God's revelations that we recite to you truthfully. In which Hadith other than God and His revelations do they believe? [End] All Glory, Praise, Exaltation belongs to Almighty Allah alone. None Equals our Lord and Master.

[@twitjunkie6007]

Are you a Quranist? A honest question to you - Is it ok for me to believe in Quran and not the sayings attributed to the person on whom the Quran was revealed?

[@twitjunkie6007]

Bookmark 1

[@artf2651]

1. Abrogation is a fact, from Muta marriage to the cases he cited 2. He seems to suggest that the verse 2:106 mentioning Ayah- Sign is general as in universal signs, hehehe well, I seem baffled how can Sun, Moon, water, man....be abrogated, be forgotten ?! 3. This is what u get when bring "it seems logical to me" sense, in islamic arguments a) The quran we have today is what god intended for us to have b) abrogated verses are not part of quran anymore c) Before the day of judgement the quran will be lifted - the humans wont read quran anymore duh

[@egyptianplayerstv891]

I agree. This guy’s interpretation goes against the consensus of the Salaf (the students of the companions and the righteous predecessors). Literally everyone accepted abrogation except the deviant like the Mu’tazilites. I find it extremely hard to believe all of the Salaf had a wrong consensus and this Lou’ai convert got it right. He’s picking up interpretations from here and there to support his argument but, he isn’t consistent with a single interpreter. If this guy is right then we will have some problematic Hadiths that we have to reject although they’re authentic. Also, we will have to not trust the salaf so much. This interpretation he makes doesn’t make any sense.

[@Oxygen11115]

@@egyptianplayerstv891 The Mutazila did not reject abbrogation, Except for one individual, a Mufassir of the Qur'an Abū Muslim al-Iṣfahānī.(868-934). But his opinion was rejected by the Mutazilis, as Abu Bakr Al Jassas reported: The man (Abu Muslim al-Isfahani) who had held this view( denying abbrogation) was endowed with knowledge of rhetoric and Arabic language, but he had no knowledge of jurisprudence and the principles of jurisprudence. Although it could not be doubted that he was perfect in faith, he deviated greatly from the right path by declaring this dogma, since no one had reported this before him.

[@dabbetul]

I think the writing down of ahadith was forbidden, not the Qur'an.

[@BloggingTheology]

oh right yes!

[@munibcodm]

Farid has a good video refuting David Wood demonstrating how abrogation is in fact a proof for Islam (which DW tried to prove to the contrary); I believe the speaker in this video has some flawed assumptions throughout.

[@stephenconnolly1830]

This is simply rubbish - abrogation is a totally speculative invention which contradicts the Qur'an. It is the refuge of rogues and therefore damnably satanic. Kindly refer to Professor Khaled Abou el-Fadl and his current ground breaking Tafsir series, project Illumine on KZbin (Usuli Institute).

[@shooooo6200]

Link to the video brother?

[@munibcodm]

@@shooooo6200 It's Farid's video titled, 'Lost Quran Chapters!? - Thank You, David Wood' Definitely worth the watch, and what you'll realise is how uncharitable this speaker is towards the traditional view. He managed to turn what should be a proof for Islam (as he cites the same hadith) into a problem (just as David Wood did) due to his lack of insight.

[@Al-Bruni]

Why is it so difficult to comprehend? ALLAH has the right to command which of His Speech to be included in the Qur'an and which not to, before the Prophet (pbuh) returned to his Lord after completing his prophetic mission. In his last Ramadan, he went through the whole Speech of ALLAH that was to be included as the Qur'an with the Angel Gabriel (pbuh), twice, and the Prophet did the same with some of his Companions. So what exactly is the problem here? Muslims do not need to discard a whole "genre" of ahadeeth. The problem some have with this matter is likely the result of unnecessarily focusing too much on semantics in the texts of certain ahadeeth,

[@nobodynobody4389]

The problem ls that it's the same when supposed mormon prophet Joseph smith has been tested by his benefactor to write book of moromon once more and the same as was given to him by angel moroni he reacted with similiar excuse as Mohammad did saying that it has angerd God and he made a new fabrication just as mohammed when faced with missing verse recitations which were too many for him to remeber so he came up with an exucse of abrogations to save his lies.

[@Al-Bruni]

Muslims do not take supposed Mormon excuses as our fundamental beliefs. No excuses in Islam. Only explanations. Some grasp it. Others don't. There are hundreds of thousands of Muslims if not millions over the world that have memorized the Qur'an from cover to cover. This miracle is enough of an explanation to those who could comprehend.

[@nobodynobody4389]

@@Al-Bruni arguemnt about milions of folowers has no bearing on truthfulness of revelations as it stands now Muhammad was just like Joseph smith he either repurposed stories he heard from others or made things up as he went along doesn't matter how many people believe/disbelieve him

[@Al-Bruni]

Like I said, not everyone can comprehend the argument. Let me try to simplify for you. If millions of Muslims can today memorize the Qur'an from cover to cover, no reason why they cannot memorise the verses that were not included in the Qur'an. Unless, it was as the various hadith indicated. But all that is a non issue. The same collection of hadith stated that the Prophet, in the year that he died, went through the whole of the Qur'an with a selected number of his Companions and finalized it's content. Is that still too difficult to comprehend?

[@nobodynobody4389]

@@Al-Bruni if muhammad did so how come uthman had to do the same again ?

[@afanbaig7173]

First

[@sergeyastov6353]

I hereby present you with this gold medal 🥇 Well done, for Your hard work and dedication

[@BloggingTheology]

@@sergeyastov6353 😆