Surah Al-Baqarah 2:106

مَانَنسَخْمِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْنُنسِهَانَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍ مِّنْهَا أَوْ مِثْلِهَا ۗ

2:106 Nansakhنَنسَخْ - “We abrogate” relates to the word Khairinخَيْر - “one better”, and the word Nunsiha نُنسِهَا - “We abandon”, relates to the word Mithliha مِثْلِهَا “the like of it”. The implication is that when Allâh abrogates with the passage of time and evolution in human intellect and societies a certain message, He brings a better one in its place. When He abandons a message, He resuscitates it in another form, more suited to that particular time and age. In this verse an argument has been brought forth in support of the fact that Qur’ânic revelation abrogates the previous revelations and is in reply to the Jewish objection raised in the previous verse.

The abrogation of some of the Qur’ânic verses themselves, though a completely erroneous notion, is due to a misconception concerning the word âyât أياة occurring in the verse. There is no doubt the word âyât (messages) in this verse is also used to denote verses of the Holy Qur’ân, as every verse contains a message. However, in this context this meaning is not applicable. In both the preceding and the following verses, a reference is made to the people of the Scripture and their jealousy of the new message. This shows that the word Âyât - the message spoken of in this verse as being abrogated, refers to the previous messages received by the Jews and others. Allâh therefore abrogated a portion of the previous Commandments, substituting them with new and better ones in accordance with the needs, changed conditions and the demands of the new social life of the people. This is the true meaning, which is consistent with the context.

Among commentators who uphold the incorrect view that some verses of the Holy Qur’ân were abrogated there is disagreement as to the verses and their number that are said to have been abrogated. According to some, not more than five verses have been abrogated (Shah Walîullah), others estimate the number to be as much as five hundred. Where one commentator considers a certain verse to be abrogated, another calls this an erroneous view, demonstrating that any discussion of such abrogation is simply a matter of conjecture. The fact is that at the root of the so-called “doctrine of abrogation” lies the inability of some of the commentators to reconcile one Qur’ânic passage with another. The Holy Qur’ân says: أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ ۚ وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِندِ غَيْرِ اللَّهِ لَوَجَدُوا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافًا كَثِيرًا “Why do they not ponder over the Qur’ân? Had it been from anyone other them Allâh, they would surely have found therein a good deal of inconsistency” (4:82). Their solution to the difficulty of not understanding the message of a verse is to declare that one of the verses in question had been abrogated. This procedure is arbitrary, and explains why there is no unanimity among the upholders of the doctrine of abrogation. This verse of the Holy Qur’ân when correctly understood, refutes the idea of abrogation.

The difficulty in interpreting this verse lies in the misunderstanding of the word âyât. The word âyât is in common use throughout the verses of the Holy Qur’ân, and many interpreters identify this word with the verses of the Holy Qur’ân. The difficulty disappears if the meaning of the word âyât is understood correctly. Âyât is the plural form of âyt, which means a sign, an apparent sign, mark, indication, message, evidence, proof, miracle, or communication (cf. 42:29; 42:32; 43:46). The same word is used to refer to the verses of the previous scriptures. Literally, âyat refers to a monument or a lofty building that should acquire renown as a sign of its greatness. It signifies any apparent thing, inseparable from another thing not equally apparent, so that when one perceives the former, one perceives the other which cannot be perceived by itself, e.g. خرج القوم بآيتهم ; Râghib; Lane)

The word in this plural form has been used in the Holy Qur’ân as many as 287 times with all those meanings mentioned above in different contexts. The difficulty arises when we limit the meaning of this word to the “verses of the Holy Qur’ân”. If we read the verse in conjunction with the context, it becomes clear that those who are addressed here are the Jews who refused to accept any revelation that might supersede that of the Torah and that was not granted to an Israelite (cf. 2:91). Their objection was, “Why was another message sent down to Muhammad (pbuh) and why was a law containing new commandments promulgated in the place of the older Mosaic Law?” The answer is given in this verse. If read in this context, the abrogation relates to the former Divine messages and not to any part of the Holy Qur’ân itself. An limited teaching with a confined mission must give way to a superior and complete Book with a universal mission.