The foundational jurists have knowledge of the history of revelation.

knowledge of the history of revelation,

but they perhaps make

the consensus of the righteous pious predecessors

or the agreement of the majority of scholars

upon a matter as a sign for abrogation

and thus they rule accordingly.

Many jurists have done this,

and it is possible that in such places

there is that to which the verse truly applies

other than what the consensus corresponds to.

[Obscurity in the narrations of the abrogating and the abrogated:]

And in summary, indeed the narrations and traditions

that speak about abrogation,

and inform about it

contain a great ocean,

it is difficult to reach its depth and abyss.

Traditions pertaining to other matters:

And for the hadith scholars among the exegetes

outside of these things

are other matters,

which they likewise bring in their exegeses,

such as:

the debate of the Companions - may God be pleased with them -

in a matter from the matters

and their citing a verse as evidence or exemplifying an issue with a verse

from the verses,

or the recitation of the Prophet - may God send blessings and grant peace upon him -

of a verse from the noble verses

for citation or the narration of a hadith

that agrees with the verse in the origin of its meaning.

Or the method of pronunciation and reading for a verse,

transmitted from the Prophet - may God send blessings and grant peace upon him -

or his companions - may God be pleased with them - all of them.