A study of different viewpoints about Naskh(abrogation) with a critical view on the issue of Naskh al-Telawah

Naskh is one of the most an important issues in Quranic studies and in many hadiths, been knowledgable about this issue is is considered as one of the qualifications for an interpreter of the Quran. Islamic scholars have divided naskh (abrogation) to three types: a) the abrogation of the ruling only; b) the withdrawal of both text and ruling; c) the withdrawal of text not ruling. Most interpreters and scholars have approved the occurrence of the first type but that of the other two are subject to disputes: while in the early centuries they were considered more likely to have taken place, their occurrence has been criticized later on. Studying the meaning and definition of the term ‘naskh’ and considering what Mostafa Zayd has said in this regard, this article defines the concept of ‘naskh’ and its boundaries and proves that the belief in “naskh al-telawah” is result of misunderstanding particular hadiths since the definition provided by these scholars is not consistent with the above-mentioned classification of naskh. Furthermore, there is no good reason for occurrence of naskh al-telawah, although there is no good logical reason against it, either.