Thanks to Hani Tahir, we have obtained some interesting references which link MGA to the concept of abrogation. At a minimum…MGA would forget his own revelations…and he would say that he would get “new ones” in their place. This is from later on in MGA’s career, after 1901. Further, Noorudin rejected abrogation as early as 1877-ish, as he totally agreed with everything that Sir Syed wrote (see Noorudin, by Zaf Khan).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________Was MGA silent?

MGA and his team of writers seem to have totally avoided this topic altogether. However, Hani Tahir has posted some references that he found which apparently give us some new info..

The references
“I received this morning inspiration and I’ve been meaning to enroll him but didn’t do it relying on memory and then completely forgot. I didn’t mention although i tried hard. And He’s right: {what copy of any or forget it fine from her or like her}” (Al-Badr, Volume 2, number 7, number 6/3/1903, p. 50)

“God is capable of everything has power all the way: {God}. we believe he is not like these two. If ruled by morning, he is able to replace the other night, and it’s copy of ” any ” testify to that “. (Badr, Volume 7, number 19-20, number 14/5/1908, p. 4 )
A document created by Hani Tahir about MGA and abrogation

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allah, and that Muhammad  is His slave and Messenger.

Unlike Bashiru Din Mahmood, Mirza used to believe in Abrogation. In this essay we will concentrate on Mirza’s words confirming the Abrogation of Quran. Mainly the abrogation of Quran by Quran.

Mirza, did not say a single sentence in his books denying the abrogation of Quran by Quran.

Quotation 1:

Ludhiana Debate (Arabic), page 115. Mirza said: (The Noble Qur’an says: “The verse 2:106  مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آَيَةٍ أَوْ نُنْسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا” [2:106]
Whenever We abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or one equal to it. Do you not know that Allah is powerful over everything?  The Qur’an said in this verse very clearly that it is not possible to abrogate a verse except with a verse only. This is why, He promised that there must be revealed a verse instead of the abrogated verse ).

“يقول القرآن الكريم: {مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آَيَةٍ أَوْ نُنْسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا}. فقد قال القرآن في هذه الآية بوضوح تام بأنه لا يمكن نسخ آية إلا بآية فقط. لذا وعد أنه لا بد أن تنـزل آية مكانَ الآية المنسوخة”.

The following page in full is about denying the abrogation of the quran by the Hadith. The yellow is a confirmation of the abrogation of one Quran verse with another verse.

Quotation 2:


اختصر الله جلّ شأنه القراءة: وما أرسلنا من رسول ولا نبي ولا محدَّث” واكتفى في القراءة الثانية بكلمات: “وما أرسلنا من رسول ولا نبي”. (مرآة كمالات الإسلام)

God Almighty reduced the reading: We have not sent a messenger, a prophet, or a Muhadath” and in the second reading he was satisfied with the words: “We have not sent a Messenger nor a Prophet.” (Mirror of the Excellences of Islam) page 138

أي كان فيه كلمات زائدة، ونسخها الله.

Me: That means there were extra words, and God abrogated them.


Quotation 4:

)كل عاقل يستطيع أن يفهم أن النسخ لا يؤثر قط في الأحداث التاريخية والأخبار وما شابهها، وإلا هذا يستلزم كذب الله (وهذا يتضمن أن الأحكام يجري عليها النسخ).. (مناظرة لدهيانة)

“Every sane person can understand that abrogation never affects historical events, news, and the like, otherwise this necessitates that God is Lying (and this implies that rulings are subject to abrogation). Ludhiana Debate

Quotation 5:

“I received a revelation this morning and I intended to record it, but I did not do that relying on my memory, then I forgot it completely and did not remember it even though I tried a lot. and the truth is that: “Nothing of our revelation (even a single verse) do we abrogate or cause be forgotten, but we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof.” (Albadr, Vol. 2, No 7, 3/6/1903, p. 50)


“لقد تلقيت صباح اليوم إلهاما وكنت أنوي أن أسجله ولكن لم أفعل ذلك معتمدا على الذاكرة ثم نسيته تماما ولم أذكره مع أني حاولت كثيرا. والحق أنه: {مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنْسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا}” (البدر، مجلد2، رقم 7، عدد 6/3/190


Quotation 6:

In his reply to one of the Hindus who was claiming that the VEDAS does not contain any abrogation, Mirza said : “What do I say and what I write in response to that! This person exposes the Vedas to the scandal unjustly, as he does not know until now that the nature of the human is always subject to change. The book cannot be considered from Allah unless he is concerned with these changes. Who claims to be a doctor then he gives the infant medicine with the same strength that a young man should be given, so he is not a doctor, but a lunatic. (Chashma Ma’rafat)

“ماذا أقول وماذا أكتب في الرد على ذلك! إن هذا الشخص يعرّض الفيدا للفضيحة بغير حق، إذ لا يعلم إلى الآن أن طبيعة الإنسان عُرضَة للتغير والتبدّل دائما. فلا يمكن أن يُعَدّ الكتاب مِن الله ما لم يهتمّ بهذه التغيرات. الذي يدّعي أنه طبيب ثم يعطي الرضيع دواء بالقوة نفسها التي يجب إعطاؤه الشاب فليس بطبيب بل مجنون”. (ينبوع المعرفة)

Quotation 7:

“You are still ignorant of the Muslim beliefs, do you not understand that if a person was forced and compelled by the noble Quran. Then the Quran would not explicitly command cutting off the hand of the thief and STONING THE ADULTERER, and not stoning anyone, the Noble Qur’an mentioned the choice and freedom of the man, not in one or two verses, but in hundreds of verses” Jang-e-Moqaddas, page 170, Roohani Khazain, Volume 6, Page 252.


“أنت إلى الآن تجهل عقيدة المسلمين، ألا تفهم أنه لو كان الإنسان مجبرا مكرها عند القرآن الكريم لما أمر القرآن صراحة بقطع يد السارق ورجم الزاني، ولم يرجم أحد، لقد ذكر القرآن الكريم خيار وحرية الإنسان لا في آية واحدة أو آيتين بل في مئات الآيات”. (الحرب المقدسة، ص 170، الخزائن الروحانية المجلد السادس ص 252)

Where is the verse of stoning the adulterer in Quran?

Quotation 8:

Our God is omnipotent and has all the power: (God wipes out what He wills). And we believe that the Almighty is not like astrologers. If he issues a judgment in the morning, then he is able to replace it with another one in the evening, and the verse “Whenever We abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or one equal to it.. “. (Badr, Vol. 7, No. 19-20, No. 14/5/1908 A.D., p. 4)


إن إلهنا قادر على كل شيء، وله القدرة كلها: {يَمْحُوا اللهُ مَا يَشَاءُ}. ونحن نؤمن أنه عزّ وجلّ ليس كالمنجّمين. إذا أصدر حكما صباحا فهو قادر على أن يستبدل به غيره مساء، والآية “مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ” تشهد على ذلك”. (بدر، مجلد7، رقم 19-20، عدد 14/5/1908م، ص4)

Quotation 10:

Mirza Masroor Ahmad in his book “Oswat Arassul” page 69 replied to a journalist who said: “their prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has abrogated Jihad”

Masroor said; “Yes, it is true, but PBUH abrogated the Jihad but with conditions.”

Quotation 11:

المتعة كانت قد أجيزت في صدر الإسلام لثلاثة أيام فقط يومَ كان عدد المسلمين قليلا، وثابت من أحاديث صحيحة أن ذلك الجواز كان مِن نوع جوازِ تناوُلِ الميتة للجائع لثلاثة أيام في الاضطرار الشديد، ثم حُرِّمت المتعة كلحْم الخنزير والخمر”. (آرية دهرم)


The temporary marriage (Mut’3a) was allowed at the beginning of Islam for 3 days only, when Muslims were few. And it is proven from the authentic hadiths that this permission was the same kind of permission of eating the dead animal’s meat for the Hungary for three days, for the extreme necessity, then the temporary marriage (Mut’a) was forbidden same like the pork meat and alcohol” (The Arya Dharam)


Quotation 12:

: “فهل يُعقل أن تكون أوامر الله تعالى غير ناضجة وغير ثابتة ومليئة بالتعارضات إلى هذا الحد؛ بحيث يفرض خمسين صلاة أولا……ثم يخلف وعده مرات عديدة ويَنسخ آيات القرآن الكريم مرة بعد أخرى، وذلك دون أن تنـزل آية ناسخة بحسب منطوق الآية: {نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا}”. (إزالة الأوهام)

“Is it conceivable that the commands of God Almighty are immature, unfixed, and full of contradictions to this extent? So that he imposes fifty prayers first …… then he breaks his promise many times and abrogates the verses of the Holy Qur’an over and over again, without an abrogating verse coming down according to the verse: “ (2:106)…but we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof..” (Removal of Suspicions, Izalat Alawham).

So Mirza is confirming that there must be an abrogating verse.

Quotation 13:

والعجب من قومنا أنهم كانوا يقرأون في البخاري وغيره من الصحاح أن المسيح من هذه الأمة وإمامهم منهم، ولا يجيء نبي بعد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وهو خاتم النبيين، وما كان لأحد أن ينسخ القرآن بعد تكميله، ثم نسوا كل ما علموا وعرفوا واعتقدوا وضلّوا وأضلّوا كثيرا من الجاهلين. (حمامة البشرى)

“The astonishment from our people was that they used to recite in Al-Bukhari and other Sahih that the Messiah is from this ummah and their Imam is among them, and there is no prophet after the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, who is the Seal of the Prophets, and no one had to abrogate the Qur’an after its completion, then they forgot all that they knew and learnt and believed and went astray And they took ignorant people astray. (The Dove of Glad Tidings, Hamamat Albushra)

So Mirza said no one had to abrogate the Quran AFTER its completion. So he believes that there was Abrogation during its revelation.


Refuting the Ahmadis Quotations:

One can split the Ahmadis Allegations into 4 parts:

  1. Hakim Maulvi Noor-ud-Deen Quotations:
  2. Bashiruddin Mahmoud quotations.
  3. Mubahitha Ludhiana.
  4. Texts that are talking about contradictions.

In reply to 1,2 Bashiruddin and Noor-ud-deen have Changed the religion of their own prophet in the Altafsir Alkabir and other books, and they fabricated answers about him. It seems that it is a family of lies.

  • We are asking the Ahmadis for one single sentence where Mirza himself in his books have denied the abrogation of Quran by Quran. They could not provide.
  • In Reply to 3: Ahmadis are misquoting Mirza himself, as he was denying in this debate (Ludhiana) the abrogation of Quran by Hadith. He was not denying the abrogation of Quran by Quran, in fact he was believing in it.
  • In reply to 4: What Ahmadis are providing instead; are some quotations where Mirza denying the contradictions in Quran. And All Muslims agree about that. Abrogation is not contradiction. The Hindus believed that abrogation is equivalent to contradiction, see quotation 6. and so the Jews (see Suryuti and Ibn Kathir below). And so are the Ahmadis too.
  • Ahmadis are also providing the words of Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood talking about his father. This is not what we asked for, we asked for the words of Mirza in his books. As the whole humanity was waiting for the “fair judge” since 1300 years and at the end he did not say a single line about the abrogation of Quran by Quran?
  • Why would Mirza talk about Mohammadi Begum Marriage for 20 years and at the end he did not marry her as we know, but he did not say a single line in his books about the abrogation of Quran by Quran?
  • Why did he leave this to his son?
  • Why he did not explain it in his books?


Quotation 14:

Ahmadis Misquoting Mirza’s last sentence in page 115 (Arabic) “The truth is that the (text of the) Holy Qur’an cannot be truly abrogated or added to because this would falsify it. (Ruhani Khazain, vol. 4 pg. 93, Mubahitha Ludhiana).” That is page 115 in Arabic see the last lines in the photo bellow. (I have called it sentence 6 as it is the last in the page)

Answer: in the Arabic Version it is page 115, if you read the full page it is about the abrogation of Quran by the Hadith. Mirza is denying the abrogation of Quran by the Hadith. This is why we need to read the last lines within context. What follows is an explanation of the full page context.

Sentence 6 is used by the Ahmadis to say that Mirza is denying abrogation of the Quran by Quran verse! As we will see the full page is denying the abrogation of Quran by hadiths, and one sentence (2) is confirming the abrogation of Quran by Quran. But Ahmadis don’t mind to say that the last sentence is about denying the abrogation of Quran by Quran!! They don’t mind to misquote their own prophet!

Ahmadiya misquoting their own prophet. Taken from:

The False Theory of Qur’anic Abrogation

This is why we are going to cut the page into sentences. Let us read:

Sentence 1: “They are looking at the authentic prophetic Hadiths like if they are adding to the Quran something.”  (So this sentence is about denying the abrogation of the Quran by the hadiths)

Sentence 2:

“The Noble Qur’an says: “The verse 2:106  مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آَيَةٍ أَوْ نُنْسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا” [2:106]  Whenever We abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or one equal to it. The Qur’an said in this verse very clearly that it is not possible to abrogate a verse except with a verse only. This is why, He promised that there must be revealed a verse instead of the abrogated verse”. (so this sentence is about confirmation that the Quran verse must be abrogated only by a Quran verse).


Sentence 3:

Is talking about the Hanafi Fiqh and that they believed that It is possible to abrogate a verse with a famous Hadith. (mash’hour). (so this sentence is talking about the abrogation of Quran by hadiths)

Sentence 4:

Is talking about imam Shafi and that he does not see that it is permissible that a Quran verse is abrogated by a Hadith Mutawatir. (So this sentence is denying the abrogation of Quran by Hadith)

Sentence 5:

This sentence is talking about some muhadiths who said that it is possible to abrogate the Quran verse with a hadith Ahad. (Again, this sentence is about the abrogation of the Quran by hadiths).

Sentence 6 (the last): Sentence 6 is what the Ahmadis are referring to. This sentence should be read whithin the context that means it should be about denying abrogation of Quran by Hadith, however the Ahmadis say that it is about denying abrogation of the quran by quran verse! As we have seen the full page is denying the abrogation of Quran by hadiths, and one sentence (2) is confirming the abrogation of Quran by Quran. But Ahmadis don’t mind to say that the last sentence is about denying the abrogation of Quran by Quran!! They are misquoting their own prophet.

We repeat the sentence:

“The truth is that the (text of the) Holy Qur’an cannot be truly abrogated or added to because this would falsify it.”

Notice the word Truly (الحقيقة), and the word Added (الاضافة) in sentence 6 (in question).

If we look close we find the same words added (twice) is in sentence 1 (top page): “They are looking at the authentic prophetic Hadiths like if they are adding to the Quran something.”


If we look close we find that the word Truly is in sentence 5 too.

So both “added” and “truly” are in the previous sentences which are talking about the abrogation of Quran by Hadith. So we ask the Ahmdis how do we understand the last sentence? How do we understand the word “added” and the word “truly”? Based on the previous sentences or separate from the previous sentences?

The word add is used to express that Hadith cannot add anything to the Quran. It is not used to say that Quran cannot add to Quran, because Quran is already Quran. Abrogating Quran by Quran does not make it addition.

Quotation 15:

Qadiani referring to Mirza’s words: “This book’s verses and subjects are mutually supporting and similar. There is no contradiction or conflict in it. Every guidance and advice has been presented repeatedly, the purpose of which is that one verse may explain another.” (Al-Haq Mubahisa Ludhiana, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 4, pp. 37-38)

Answer :

This is about contradiction, not about abrogation. No Muslim scholar believe that abrogation is contradiction. Mirza himself does not believe that abrogation is contradiction. (See Quotation 4)

Quotation 16:

Ahmadis Referring to Mirza’s Words: “The special feature of this book is that it is mutashabih, that is, its teachings do not conflict with one another, nor do they contradict God’s law of nature; the teachings of this book are perfectly apt for man according to the excellences required for his nature and physical state.” (Karamatus-Sadiqin, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 7, p. 57)


This is about denying conflict and abrogation within the Quran, not about abrogation. No Muslim scholar believe that abrogation is conflict nor contradiction. Mirza himself does not believe that abrogation is contradiction and conflict. (See Quotation 4)

Quotation 17.

Qadiani Referring to: “The Quran is pure of any contradiction and conflict. God Almighty says in the Holy Quran, ‘Had it been from anyone other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much disagreement’ (Surah al-Nisa, Ch.4: V.83). Through this, God Almighty shows that conflicts cannot be found in the Quran for it is the Book of God and its status is far exalted than that. When it is proven that the Book of God [the Holy Quran] is pure from any conflict, then it becomes incumbent on us to not choose a method in its tafsir [interpretation] that proves conflicts and contradictions.”

Answer: again the same answer as before.

Quotation 18:

Ahmadi referring to Mirza’s Words: “And we have complete confidence in the fact that Holy Qur’an is the last divine book, and that not an iota or dot can be added or detracted from its laws, limits, commandments and orders. Now there is no revelation or inspiration from Allah that can modify, change or abrogate any command of the Holy Qur’an. (Ruhani Khazain, vol. 3 pg. 170, Izala Auham).

Answer :

The answer is in the last sentence: “Now there is no revelation or inspiration from Allah that can modify, change or abrogate any command of the Holy Qur’an

He meant that the Quran cannot be abrogated after its descent was complete. It cannot be abrogated NOW.

Quotation 19:

Ahmadis Referring to: “When I read the different discussions about Nasakh (abrogation) in various commentaries, I do not find even one verse that is abrogated. (Tafseer-e-Kabeer. Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Deen Mahmood Ahmad, under 2:107, vol. 2 pg. 98 first column)

Answer: This is Bashiruddin claim. As we said we are asking for Mirza’s books “the fair judge”. How come he did not say anything in his books and he left the matter to bashiruddin?

Quotation 20:

Ahmadis Referring to their second Caliph: “The Promised Messiahas came and told us that the Quran must be followed to the letter – from beginning to end; from the ‘b’ of bismillah to the ‘s’ of ‘al-nas’. The Holy Quran is a standing instruction for us all and it must be followed till the Day of Judgement. I vividly remember Huzooras saying, ‘If someone believes that there is a chance that certain verses of the Quran have been abrogated, then what need is there for such a person to reflect and ponder over the meanings of the Holy Quran and try to act upon them? Such a one would say, “If there are such verses in here that are abrogated, then why waste my time by trying to fathom them? It is possible that the verse I reflect on may eventually turn out to be abrogated.” But whoever says that the entirety of its text is pure from abrogation and every iota must be obeyed, they will try to understand it and in this manner the Quran will become a means of enhancing his awareness.’” (Tafsir-e-Kabir, Vol. 2, p. 97)

Answer : The same answer as before.

Quotation 21:

Ahmadis Referring to their first Caliph: There is the matter of whether there is Nasakh (abrogation) in the Holy Qur’an or not. About this, my understanding of it is such that I will say that up to now I have not seen any verse that is abrogated and yet remains within the Holy Qur’an. Neither the Holy Prophet(sa), nor Abu Bakar(ra) or Umar(ra) ever stated anything that supports the idea that such verses are part of the Holy Qur’an. (Haqaiqul Furqan, Hazrat Hakim Maulvi Noor-ud-Deen, under 2:109. Vol. 3, pg. 216)

The Answer: the same answer as before. Why the matter was not clarified by the “Al-hakam Al-aadl”

Quotation 22:

A text written in 1907 by Mohammad Ali Lahori, in the magazine ROR (review of Religion) led by Mirza. Where he denies the abrogation.

The answer: this is not written by Mirza, rather it is written by Mohammad Ali.

  • Why would Alhakam Al-adl leave this important matter to somebody else? Why he did not write it in his books by himself?
  • Why would humanity wait for 1300 years and then Al-hakam Al-aadl does not clarify the question? And he leaves such a big crime and bad doctrine (as per Ahmadis Description) unanswered?
  • If Mirza retrated his words about abrogation without mentioning that, then this is high treason.

Quotation 23 :

Mirza Mahmoud denial of Abrogation:

Mirza Mahmoud said: “The doctrine of abrogation in the Holy Qur’an is a very bad doctrine and completely contrary to Islam. ” (Tafsir Surat Anour)

Questions to the Ahmadis:

Question 1: Why Mirza did not write a single line in which he denied Abrogation? In which he denied this bad doctrine?

Question 2: Were the previous Mujadids, with a bad doctrine of Quran because of the doctrine of abrogation that they unanimously agreed upon?

Question 4: If the doctrine of abrogation is even so disastrous, is he not a traitor who did not write a line about it to retreat his previous statements clearly, while writing a thousand lines on the authority of Muhammadi Begum?

An introduction of Naskh, Abrogation: from Islam Web

An-Naskh, i.e. abrogation or repeal, has two meanings in Arabic: (1) transformation and shifting from one place to another, and (2) cancellation and repeal.

In Islamic terminology, An-Naskh means to cancel and abrogate some fixed Sharee’ah rulings and to replace them with new rulings and orders.

An-Naskh can be in the Quran and the Noble Sunnah. Allah Says (what means): {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?} [Quran 2: 106]

Allah also Says (what means): {And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse – and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down – they say, “You, [O Muhammad], are but an inventor [of lies].” But most of them do not know. Say, [O Muhammad], “The Pure Spirit has brought it down from your Lord in truth to make firm those who believe and as guidance and good tidings to the Muslims.”} [Quran 16: 101-102]

As for an-Naskh (the abrogation of some verses) in the Quran, it can be in any of the following modes:

1) To cancel a ruling and keep the text for reading (preference). Such as: (1) the verse of the will on behalf of relatives [2: 180]; (2) Surah al-Baqarah: 240; and (3) the verse of easing the task of fighting, Chapter 8, vese 65.

2) To cancel a ruling and the text as well, like: “It was among the recitation (of the Quran): ten known times of suckling. This was about ruling of a child’s suckling.” [Al-Bukhari and Muslim]

3) To cancel only the text not the ruling, such as the verse concerning stoning the married one who commits Zina (adultery). It was as fallows: The married man and the married woman should be stoned if they commit Zina.
An-Naskh is only related to orders and prohibitions not the tidings.

As for number of An-Naskh, as-Suyooti said in his book al-Itqaan that, ‘twenty-one verses in the Quran were abrogated; some were agreed upon, while others are not. These abrogated verses are in the following Surahs: Al-Baqarah [Quran 2], Al-‘Imran [Quran 3], An-Nisaa’ [Quran 4], Al-Maa’idah [Quran 5], Al-Anfal [Quran 8], At-Taubah [Quran 9], An-Noor [Quran 24], Al-Ahzab [Quran 33], Al-Mujadilah [Quran 58], Al-Mumtahinah [Quran 60] and Al-Muzzammil [Quran 73]

As for the wisdom behind An-Naskh, scholars of Islam said: “Change is the nature of existence, and beings and abrogation is one of the Divine ways to address these changes. If An-Naskh is reasonable to apply to beings, then it should not be considered as strange concerning rulings about them since the Ummah is still developing and advancing towards what is better. In addition, Allah is Able to do everything and He is the Only Owner of this universe and He can do whatever He Wills. Allah Says (what means): {He is not questioned about what He does, but they will be questioned.} [Quran 21: 23]

Thus, An-Naskh constitutes a step towards what is better and superior. An-Naskh is often a means of bringing ease and relief, since Muslims were required to follow what is higher, stronger and better in the first stage of education and building the Ummah. At first, it was obligatory to perform Qiyam al-Lail (prayer at night) or that 20 Muslims were to face 200 of the enemy.

Then, An-Naskh of those rulings constituted a form of relief, of soothing, and cancellation of hardship. Another wisdom behind An-Naskh is to bring obedience to the Divine Orders.

Here, we state that abrogated rulings should not be put into practice, since they were revealed for some fixed period of time. For example, it is not allowed to put a doer of Zina in jail since such a ruling was abrogated. Another example is that it is not allowed for a woman whose husband has died to enter into Iddah (awaiting period) as stated in Surah 2: verse 240 since it is abrogated by verse 2. 234.

Finally, An-Naskh was done only by revelation and completed during the life of Allah’s Messenger ; it is completely incorrect to be done by consensus or analogy.


(from Islam Web)





The Ahmadi Mujadid Believed in Abrogation of Quran by Quran.

7th Century: Taqī ad-Dīn Ahmad Ibn Taymiyyah (1263 – 1328 CE)

Ibn Taymiyah, Shafi3i, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal. ابن تيمية, الشافعي, احمد ابن حنبل, و كلهم مجددون للاحمدية


Majmou’3 Fatwa Ibn Taymiyah, V17, P 195. And from this verse it is conculded that that “nothing abrogate Quran But Quran” as it is Math’hab Shafi’3i, and this saying is the most famous Riwayat from Imam Ahmad “That nothing abrogates Quran But Quran that Comes after it”

Majmu3 Alfatawa, Volume 20, page 399. Shafi’3i and Ahmad and the rest of the Imams make it obligatory to work with the Sunnat Muatwatir even if it includes the abrogation of some verses of the Quran, But they say that “nothing abrogates Quran But Quran”. So the abrogation is not simply because of Sunnat (Meaning there is a quran verse supporting it)

8th CenturyIbn Hajar al-Asqalānī (1372/773 – 1448/852 CE/AH)


9th CenturyJalāluddīn al-Suyūtī (1445/849 – 1505/911 CE/AH)

Al-Itqaan fi Ouloum Alquraan, P462. “Muslims unanimously agreed about its permission (meaning Naskh, abrogation), and the jews denied it thinking that it is about-turn (climb down) in the opinion,  similar to the one who has an opinion then he changes it, and in fact this is not true (meaning the Jews opinion). Because it shows the duration of the decision, such as making alive after death and its opposite, and disease after being healthy and its opposite, and being poor after being rich and its pposite, and this is not “about turn” (Climb down), and similarly, the orders and prohibitions.

Suyutti, Itqaan fi Ouloum Alquraan, Page 463, Shafi’3i said: “Wherever there is abrogation of Quran with sunnat, there is with it Quran supporting it, and wherevere there is abrogation of sunnat with Quran there is with it Sunnat supporting it, so it becomes clear that there is agreement between Quran and sunnat.”


2nd century Imam Shafi’i; Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal

وسئل الإمام أحمد بن حنبل رحمة الله عليه.: أتنسخ السنة شيئا من القرآن ؟ قال : لا ينسخ القرآن إلا بالقرآن “جامع بيان العلم وفضله, صفحة: 1194


“Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, R.A. Does Sunnat abrogate anything of Quran? He said: nothing abrogates Quran except Quran” Djaami3 Bayan Al’ilm wa Fathlihi, Ibn Abd Albar. Volume 1, Page 1194

_____________________________________________________________________________________________Links and Related Essays

FriedmannJihād in Ahmadī ThoughtISBN 965-264-014-X, p. 227

#ahmadiyya #ahmadiyyatrueislam #ahmadiapartheid #Ahmadiyyat #rabwah #qadian #meetthekhalifa #muslimsforpeace #ahmadiyyafactcheckblog #nolifewithoutkhalifa #AhmadiMosqueattack #AhmadiyyaPersecution #trueislam