Regarding 16:101

[munir rana]

Dear Forum Members

Salam.

In 16:101 Allah says:

If We exchange a sign in place of another sign; and God is more aware of what He is revealing; they say, "You are making this up!" Alas, most of them do not know.

Does this verse refer to the Mansukh verses? I believe there is no mansukh verse in the Quran. It does not match with His glory. Then what does it mean by `exchange a sign'.

Thanks for your continuous support. Sometimes it helps me a lot.

Munir Rana

[good logic]

Peace munir rana.

Please s lread this--http://www.total-loyalty-to-god-alone.co.uk/abrogation-a-big-lie/

It may be of interest to you.

GOD bless you.
Peace.

[good logic]

In case the link did not work in my last post:
http://www.total-loyalty-to-god-alone.co.uk/abrogation-a-big-lie/

[Sardar Miyan]

Salam Bro Goodlogic Why are you asking Bro Munir Rans to go to your web site instead of directing him to go through Bro Joseph Islam's Article on Abrogation? Are you better qualified than Bro Joseph?
I think this is not fair. Therefore I request Bro Rana to go through Bro Joseph's Article. Thanks

[good logic]

Peace Sardar Miyan.

Thank you for your advice.

For your information,I was not asking anyone to do anything that is not of interest to them.

Freedom of choice is for every individual.

As for qualifications,Qoran is the ultimate criterion ( Furquan) for all qualifications.

I have never claimed such as you ask.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

[Sardar Miyan]

Freedom of choice does not mean that you have to divert people from their routine path of QM Forum
on which Bro Munir Rana is posting. You have been diverting the members from QM Forum to your web site which the Moderators have to look in

[good logic]

Peace Sardar Miyan.

Thank you once again.

Please look again ,brother Munir has addressed his post to forum members.

I have answered in good faith.
Now, if brother Munir objects,then I will apologise to him  for trying to offer a point of view  to browse/ponder/check.

That is a fair and correct way to deal with what you see as a problem.
Thank you.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

[munir rana]

Dear Brothers

Salam.

Thanks for your responses. But,
I really feel embarrassed with your undue arguments on my query. I really didn't mean to make my query as an issue.

Brother Sardar, I went through the article of Brother Joseph on Abrogation. And i am agreed with his final thoughts in which he says,
From a Quran's perspective, the belief that certain Quranic verses have been abrogated is unsupportable and remains a false doctrine.
Which is also supported by the post of Brother Good Logic.

I count Brother Joseph one of my best freinds in faith, if not the best. I try to read and understand his articles, posts, answers. That does not mean that i must avoid any other views on the topics he discussed. In this forum many other members posted different articles from other places before, if i am not wrong. In fact I myself at least once did it to have a better understanding. If these posts are to be avoided then forum administration should take necessary steps. We must not debate on this issue. Thats my understanding.
please dont be hurt with my words.

Thanks again for your support.

Salam.

Munir Rana

[good logic]

Peace munir rana.

I appreciate your response. Thank you for that.

Brother Sardar says in his signature,quote:

May God s creatures be filled with peace & love & joy & light.

I offer him peace and I will treat him with love and joy.

I also hope we both follow God s light.

GOD bless you.
Peace.

[Hassan A]

Salaam Munir rana,

As usual, I give you Muhammad Asad's explanation of the verse in question, as I am not well-versed in the Quran. Forgive me, in advance, if my continuatious quoting of Muhammad Asad is not to your pleasing and falls short of anwering your inquiries. But before I cite you his explanation of the verse in question, I feel it is appropriate to first cite you verse 2:106 and his explanation of it. That said, below is his translations and explanation of 2:106:

2:106
Any message which, We annul or consign to oblivion We replace with a better or a similar ones. Dost thou not know that God has the power to will anything?

The principle laid down in this passage - relating to the supersession of the Biblical
dispensation by that of the Qur'an - has given rise to an erroneous interpretation by many
Muslim theologians. The word ayah ("message") occurring in this, context is also used to
denote a "verse;" of the Qur'an (because every one of these verses contains a message).
Taking this restricted meaning of the term ayah, some scholars conclude from the above passage
that certain verses of the Qur'an have been "abrogated" by God's command before the
revelation of the Qur'an was completed. Apart from the fancifulness of this assertion -
which calls to mind the image of a human author correcting, on second thought, the proofs
of his manuscript - deleting one passage and replacing it with another - there does not
exist a single reliable Tradition to the effect that the Prophet ever, declared a verse of
the Qur'an to have been "abrogated". At the root of the so-called "doctrine of abrogation"
may lie the inability of some of the early commentators to reconcile one Qur'anic passage
with another: a difficulty which was overcome by declaring that one of the verses in
question had been "abrogated". This arbitrary procedure explains also why there is no
unanimity whatsoever among the upholders of the "doctrine of abrogation" as to which, and
how many, Qur'an verses have been affected by it; and, furthermore, as to whether this
alleged abrogation implies a total elimination of the verse in question from the context
of the Qur'an, or only a cancellation of the specific ordinance or statement contained in it.
In short, the "doctrine of abrogation" has no basis whatever in historical fact, and must
be rejected. On the other hand, the apparent difficulty in interpreting the above Qur'anic
passage disappears immediately if the term ayah is understoood, correctly, as "message",
and if we read this verse in conjunction with the preceding one, which states that the Jews
and the Christians refuse to accept any revelation which might supersede that of the Bible:
for, if read in this way, the abrogation relates to the earlier divine messages and not to
any part of the Qur'an itself.


With that out of the way, below is his translation and explanation of 16:101:

16:101
And now that We replace one message by another [125] - since God is fully aware of what He bestows from on high, step by step [126] - they [who deny the truth] are wont to say, "Thou but inventest it!" Nay, but most of them do not understand it!127

[125] By substituting the message of the Qur'an for the earlier dispensations - and not, as
some Muslim scholars maintain, "abrogating" one Qur'anic verse and replacing it by another.

[126] The gradualness of revelation (implied in the verbal form yunazzil) corresponds to God's
plan, according to which He has gradually unfolded His will to man, substituting one dispensation
for another in the measure of mankind's intellectual and social development, bringing it to its
culmination in the message of the Qur'an.

As always, I hope that helps and peace to you.

[munir rana]

Salam Brother Hassan A

Its not at all that i am displeased  with your continuous quotation of Muhammad Asad's explanation.  In fact in my early youth i was a great fan of his books also.

But now a days, after reading several translations of great scholars and experienced the differences between them, i don't follow any fixed book of translation or explanation. Rather than, I read a few and if i am not clear then try to find out the meaning with the help of dictionaries, concordance and consult with the friends like Brother Joseph and you. After all these if i don't get it properly, i wait for His help. That's all.

The explanation you cited from Muhammad Asad is almost the same with Brother Josephs, if I don't get it wrong.

Thanks again and Salam.