Talk:Naskh (tafsir)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Not a "few scholars"

"...directed at the [sic] what a few scholars historically believed might be a problem of seemingly contradictory material within or between the twin basises of Islamic holy law... Naskh has been criticized by many scholars, who state that it is a term used by those who dislike Islam to attempt to prove it wrong.

Taking this out for the following reasons:

• 1) Assertions are completely uncited

• 2) Assertion that only a "few scholars" recognized naskh is absolutely false. There are literally dozens of exegetical works devoted specifically to naskh, only some of which are mentioned in the article. This is in addition to the many more general works of tafsir which contain discussions of the topic. The reality of Qur'anic/Sunnic abrogation was acknowledged by most of the major legal and scholarly authorities of classical Islam: Qurtubi, Shafi'i, Malik, al-Ghazali, Suyuti, Tabari, etc. In fact, in my research I did not find mention of one classical authority who completely rejected the doctrine. If you find one, though, please include it in the article.

• 2) Naskh has been criticized by many scholars, who state that it is a term used by those who dislike Islam to attempt to prove it wrong. Who are these scholars? And why historically believe? If you have evidence the doctrine is rejected by most contemporary Islamic jurists please add a section on modern attitudes with references to contemporary authorities. Yet in any case this does not change the fact that naskh was recognized in Islamic jurisprudence throughout almost its entire history; the article should not misleadingly make it appear that what would be a very novel attitude towards the doctrine is somehow historically normative.

Jleybov 06:35, 20 December 2005 (UTC)