The Effect of the Abrogating and the Abrogated on the Explanatory Weightings According to the Scientists of Hilla

Abstract

This research deals with the effect of the abrogating and abrogated in the interpretational preferences of the scholars of Hilla, after it was found that there is no sufficient evidence to determine the amount of abrogation in the Holy Qur’an, except in some resources, and this indicates that the issue is in dispute among the commentators, and the Scientists of Hilla had a clear impact on the interest in abrogation Qur’an and its definition and weighting between the explanatory statements that have been subjected to abrogation and criticize it. And we show that there is a difference in the number of abrogated in the Holy Qur’an by the Holy Qur’an, and Scientists of Hilla have a specific insight at identifying the abrogated with definitive evidence such as unanimity and the frequent text, given that the abrogated is like the Qur’an. Considering that the Qur’anic text is definitive, it is abrogated only by a definitive one.
The research explained - in its three demands - that the preponderance of the scholars of al-Hilla with abrogation was based on the statements of the commentators and the most famous saying of abrogation and consider whether it was abrogated or not.