The Daleel An-Naasikh (Abrogating evidence), whether it is an Aayah or a Hadeeth, must have a Shar’iyah proof to indicate that it is abrogating, otherwise it would not be considered to be as such. The mere appearance of a clash or contradiction between two evidences does not mean that one is abrogating the other as it could be possible to reconcile between them in which case there would not actually be a contradiction between them.

The Shar’iyah Hujjah (proof) to identify the Naasikh and the Mansookh is as follows:

1 – That the later evidence states that it is a Naasikh for the previous evidence in its Lafzh (wording) or in its meaning like the statement of the Messenger (saw): “I had forbidden you from visiting the graves but (now) visit them” (Ad-Daaru Qutniy 259/4) or like the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

2 – If two evidences are contradictory from every angle and it is not possible to reconcile between them, then the latter of them abrogates the former. That is in the case where the latter is of the same strength (or weight) as the former or stronger than it.

3 – The Naasikh can be identified by the action of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and an example of that is when he (saw) stoned Maa’iz who had committed Zinaa and did not lash him with one hundred lashes. This action of his (saw) establishes the abrogation of his speech: “The Thayyib (married) with the Thayyib (married), one hundred lashes and stoning with rocks”. Here, his action (F’il) abrogated his speech (Qawl).

Therefore, the claim of the occurrence of An-Naskh (abrogation) is not accepted unless the Shar’iyah proof was from amongst one of those proofs mentioned above. If none of these three Hujaj (proofs)

then there is no abrogation.