The subject of abrogation is disputed between scholars since long time.

The key passages concerning abrogation are


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?


Other messengers before you were rejected, but they endured rejection and persecution until Our help came to them. There can be no change to God’s words. News of the Messengers has already reached you.

There is more than one question on this site explaining how and why many scholars defend the concept of abgrogation.

There are however also many scholars who do not accept the concept of abrogation in the sense that a later verse of the Quran (or even a Hadith) may invalidate an earlier verse (or earlier revelation) as being in conflict with the concept of the Word of God being unchanging and pre-existing.

What explanation patterns are genarally suggested to replace the concept of abrogation in case of a conflict?

How to reconcile Allah's infallibility with Naskh?

Not understanding the concept of abrogation (naskh)

  • The translation of [6:34] (...There can be no change to God’s words. .....) can also be or is (... no one (can) alter the words of Allah. ....). This is also the translation provided by SAHIH INTERNATIONAL.
    – AbduRahman
    Commented Oct 2, 2022 at 15:28
  • Both translations seem to be possible, translators seem to differ in the interpretation. I have chosen the one that is in line with those who reject abrogation, as that's what my question is about.
    – Jeschu
    Commented Oct 2, 2022 at 16:04
  • "many scholars who do not accept the concept of abrogation" could you mention examples so we could just look at their works? I have only heard of Abu Muslim from the Mutazilah rejecting naskh among the past generations
    – The Z
    Commented Oct 3, 2022 at 0:48


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .