intended by it, and even if the verse’s apparent wording did not indicate it. Indeed, that meaning might not be understood from the verse at all, yet some people had understood it that way. They would therefore call whatever removed that ambiguity and misapprehension “abrogation.” This terminology, however, is not reported from every one of them.

This originates in Satan’s insinuations, after which Allah makes His verses firm. When Satan cast into people’s minds the supposition that a verse indicated a meaning it did not indicate, these scholars called whatever removed that supposition “abrogation.” Thus, they described His words:

“Fear Allah as much as you are able”

as abrogating His words:

“Fear Allah as He should be feared.”

Likewise, they described His words:

“Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear”

as abrogating His words:

“Whether you reveal what is within yourselves or conceal it, Allah will call you to account for it. Then He forgives whom He wills and punishes whom He wills.”

There are other examples whose detailed discussion does not belong here. The point is that they agreed that nothing could be set against the Quran except the Quran itself—not opinion, rational argument, or analogy, nor spiritual taste, ecstatic experience, inspiration, or unveiling.

The earliest innovations, such as “the innovation of the Khawārij,” arose only from their misunderstanding of the Quran. They did not intend to oppose it, but understood it to mean something it did not indicate. They thought it required declaring those who committed sins to be disbelievers, on the grounds that a believer is a righteous, Allah-fearing person.

They said: “Whoever is not righteous and Allah-fearing is therefore a disbeliever and will remain in the Fire forever.”

Then they said: “And ‘Uthmān