[^31] It needs no great intelligence to see that this theory...

[^31] It needs no great intelligence to see that this theory of abrogation of recital cannot be of any use in such cases. If a surah or verse was recited in the life of the Prophet and then it was lost either because the reciters were killed in a battle, or because a goat devoured it or for any other reason, then the question arises: Who had the right to abrogate a Qur'anic verse after the Prophet's death? Had any other prophet come after Muhammad (peace be on him and his progeny)?

That is why Sayyid al-Khu'i has said, "It is clear that the theory of abrogation of recital (naskhu 't-tilawah) is exactly the same as belief in alteration in and omission from the Qur'an." [^32] Therefore we have to strictly adhere to the well established principle that any hadith going against the Qur'an must be discarded and 'thrown to the wall' - if it cannot be reinterpreted in an acceptable way. [^29] For the verse of stoning. see Sahih al-Bukhari, vol 4. p 179. 265: Sahih Muslim,vol. 3. p.

1317: Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol 1 (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami. 1969) p. 40: Sunan Ibn Majah, vol. 2 (Cairo edition) p 853: Muwatta, Imam Malik, vol 2.p 623.For the verse of suckling, see: Sahih Muslim, vol. 4. p. 167: As-Suyuti, ad-Durru 'l-Manthur, vol. 2. p. [^30] Sahih Muslim, vol 1. p. 167: As-Suyuti, ad-Durru 'l-Manthur, vol2. p. 135. [^31] Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal. vol. 6. p. 269: Sunan Ibn Majah, p. 626: Ibn Qutbah, Tawil Mukhtalafi 'l-Hadith (Cairo: Maktaba al-Kulliyat al-Azhariyya.