A New Perspective on the Evidence for the Possibility and Denial of Abrogation through the Approach of Modern Contextual Revelation

The concept of abrogation is one of the most critical topics in Qur'anic studies, extensively debated by classical scholars who questioned the divinely ordained nature of certain abrogated verses. This study revisits and critiques both the affirmative and negative evidence surrounding abrogation through a descriptive-analytical method, utilizing the deductive exegetical perspective as one of the contemporary approaches to the Qur'anic exegesis. The contextual revelation methodology (al-Tafsīr al-Tanzīlī) critically examines arguments for rejecting abrogation and develops evidence supporting its possibility by considering the cultural and social contexts of the society. By analyzing the reasoning of proponents and opponents of abrogation, this research evaluates the responses provided by both sides based on the standards of contextual revelation. These responses are either rejected, affirmed, or refined. Additionally, the contextual revelation approach strengthens the rationale for conditional abrogation, emphasizing the necessity of a wise approach to societal transformation, fostering an independent religious and social identity for the Islamic community, and testing the obedience and submission of believers.