The opinions that have been adopted in respect to the Naskh are based upon the Adillah Ash-Shar’iyah from the Kitaab and from the Sunnah. Consequently, as such we have avoided delving into some of the irregular (Shaadh) opinions that are not based upon a Daleel Naqliy or ‘Aqliy (textual or rational evidence).

The following are in summary some of the opinions of the previous ‘Ulamaa in respect to An-Naskh:

Al-Imaam Ash-Shaafi’iy was the first to discuss An-Naskh in writing and that was in his ‘Ar-Risaalah’ which was written in the subject area of Usool ul-Fiqh.

He does not consider An-Naskh as the cancelling of the text but rather he regards it as making redundant the Hukm of the text. AshShaafi’iy said: “The Qur’aan is not abrogated except by the Qur’aan” and he used as evidence the two Aayahs that we used earlier. And he said: “It is necessary for there to be a Sunnah that makes clear and distinguishes the Naasikh (abrogator) from the Mansookh (abrogated) and that is because the Naskh (abrogation) is a type of Islamic Shar’iyah explanation (Bayaan). That requires an evidence from the Sunnah and it is necessary for the latter to be made clear and distinguished from the former in respect to the two texts whilst it is the Sunnah that makes that clear”.

Ash-Shaafi’iy disagrees with the majority of the Fuqahaa as he establishes that the Ahkaam of the Sunnah are not abrogated except by a Sunnah like it. As such the Qur’aan does not abrogate the Sunnah in his view and due to that he says: “The Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah is not abrogated except by the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah”. The reasoning behind this view, as AshShaafi’iy explained, was the fear attached to the Sunnah becoming obsolete. However, as we have explained previously the Qur’aan does abrogate the Sunnah. In addition, the followers of Ash-Shaafi’iy disagreed with the view of their Imaam and permitted the abrogation of the Sunnah by the Qur’aan.

The definition of An-Naskh according to Ibn Hazm is: “It is the Bayaan (explanation) that the time of the first matter has come to and end”. In his view the Bayaan (explanation) is divided into two categories: The Bayaan that provides Tafseel (detail) for the Mujmal (undetailed) and the Bayaan that includes Takhsees (specification) for the ‘Aamm (general). It is in this way that according to him the two texts function: The Naasikh (abrogating) text and the Mansookh (abrogated) text.

And he says: “The Naskh (abrogation) is a type from amongst the types of exception because it exempts a time and specifies it with an action that is not in other times. So for example his speech (saw): “I had forbidden you from visiting the graves but (now) visit them”. This text explains the end of the time of the forbiddance of visiting the graves and its meaning relates to the specification of time with the text that the Nabi (saw) guided to in which he forbade the visiting of the graves”.

Ibn Hazm also viewed that the Qur’aan is abrogated by the Khabar Al-Aahaad because he viewed all of the Sunnah as being Qat’iy. As such (in his view) the Khabar Al-Aahaad are Qat’iy like the Qur’aan and therefore each can abrogate the other,

Abu Muslim Al-Asfahaaniy viewed that there is no Naskh in the Qur’aan because the Qur’aan as a whole is Muhkam and that there is no Tabdeel (substitution) for the words of Allah. He presented the Aayaat that others have brought stating that they show abrogation and then attempted to remove the contradiction between the Naasikh and the Mansookh and then show that there is no abrogation within them.

These then represent three opinions of three of the ‘Ulamaa in respect to An-Naskh: Ash-Shaafi’iy, Ibn Hazm and Al-Asfahaaniy.

There are also different opinions in the branches of An-Naskh like the subject of: