Skip to main content
Refutations

Abrogation of Quranic Verses: Understanding the Ten and Five Breastfeedings Hadith

14 min read 3116 words

The Hadith of Ten and Five Breastfeedings: Does It Imply the Quran Was Tampered With?

Table of Contents

The Doubt Presented

The Doubt Some skeptics deny the hadith: “Among what was revealed in the Quran were ten known breastfeedings that prohibit marriage, then they were abrogated by five known breastfeedings…” — narrated by Imam Muslim in his Sahih on the authority of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) — citing as evidence that this verse is not present in the Quran today. They also cite Aisha’s statement that the Prophet ﷺ died while these verses were still being recited from the Quran.

From this they ask: If this is the case, then who dared to tamper with the Book of Allah and delete this verse after the death of the Prophet ﷺ — when the Quran is preserved by Allah? And how can the first ruling be abrogated by another ruling when neither of them exists in the Quran now? They conclude: this hadith must be rejected.

Their true aim is to attack the Sunnah of the Prophet and to cast doubt in Muslims’ minds regarding hadiths that are authentically reported from him ﷺ.

Overview: Two Lines of Refutation

Two Responses The doubt is refuted from two independent angles, each sufficient on its own:

First: The hadith is authentic and proven from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. The claim that it should be rejected due to the absence of the abrogating and abrogated verses in the Quran is invalid — because abrogation has several types, and one of them is abrogation of wording while the ruling remains. This is a recognised and documented category in Islamic legal theory, and the absence of the verse from the Mushaf is precisely what is expected when a verse’s wording is abrogated.

Second: Aisha’s statement (may Allah be pleased with her) — “the Messenger of Allah ﷺ died while they were among what was recited from the Quran” — does not mean these verses were deleted from the Mushaf after the Prophet’s death. Its meaning is that the abrogation was revealed very late, and some people who had not yet heard of the abrogation were still reciting the five breastfeedings as Quran. When the abrogation reached them, they stopped.

First: The Hadith Is Authentic and Abrogation of Wording Is a Recognised Category

The Hadith’s Authenticity Across Multiple Collections

The Hadith Text Imam Muslim included in his Sahih on the authority of Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr, on the authority of Umrah, on the authority of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), who said: “Among what was revealed in the Quran were ten known breastfeedings that make a marriage forbidden, then they were abrogated by five known breastfeedings, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ died while they were among what was recited in the Quran.” [1]

The hadith was also narrated by multiple authors of the Sunan collections:

  • Abu Dawud in his Sunan — authenticated by al-Albani [2]
  • Al-Nasa’i in his Sunan — authenticated by al-Albani [3]
  • Ibn Majah in his Sunan — authenticated by al-Albani [4]

No scholar has established any confusion or weakness in the hadith, and no substantive challenge to its soundness has been proven.

The Claim of Rejection Is Invalid The claim that the hadith must be rejected due to the absence of the abrogating and abrogated verses in the Quran is useless, because this is one of those hadiths in which the wording was abrogated while the ruling remained. There is no harm in abrogating the wording while its ruling remains in effect, and this does not cast any doubt on the hadith’s authenticity. There is no requirement that the Book of Allah must contain explicit evidence of every case of abrogation — as long as the Sunnah has clarified and detailed this, since both are laws that complement each other.

Abrogation of Wording While Ruling Remains: The Verse of Stoning

The type of abrogation involved here — wording abrogated, ruling remaining — is not unique to this hadith. The clearest and most famous parallel is the verse of stoning, as established from Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him):

Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA) — from the Pulpit of the Messenger ﷺ “Allah sent Muhammad ﷺ with the truth and revealed the Book to him. Among what was revealed to him was the verse of stoning — we read it, understood it, and comprehended it. So the Messenger of Allah ﷺ stoned, and we stoned after him. I fear that if a long time passes, someone will say: ‘We do not find stoning in the Book of Allah,’ and they will go astray by abandoning an obligation that Allah revealed. Stoning in the Book of Allah is a right upon whoever commits adultery if they are married, whether men or women, if evidence is established, or there is pregnancy or confession.” [5]
The Three Categories of Abrogation As Imam al-Nawawi documented, abrogation in the Quran falls into three categories: (1) that which was abrogated in wording but whose ruling remained — such as the verse of stoning and the verse of ten breastfeedings; (2) that which was abrogated in ruling but not in wording; (3) that which was abrogated in both wording and ruling. The Companions’ decision not to write abrogated verses in the Mushaf is clear evidence that what was abrogated in wording was not to be written in the Quran.

Imam al-Nawawi’s Explanation

Imam al-Nawawi — Sharh Sahih Muslim [6] “What he meant by the verse of stoning is: ‘If an old man and an old woman commit adultery, stone them both absolutely.’ This is something whose wording was abrogated but whose ruling remained. A ruling was abrogated but not its wording, and both were abrogated. That which was abrogated in wording does not have the ruling of the Quran in prohibiting it for someone in a state of major ritual impurity and the like. The Companions’ failure to write this verse is clear evidence that what is abrogated in wording is not to be written in the Quran.”

The hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) therefore indicates the abrogating and abrogated parts — the first verse (ten breastfeedings) was abrogated in both recitation and ruling, and the second verse (five breastfeedings) was abrogated in recitation but not in ruling. After the abrogation of its recitation, there was consensus that it should not be written in the Quran.

Addressing Specific Objections to This Hadith

Objection 1: If there was an abrogating verse, there should be evidence of it in the Quran “If a verse about ten breastfeedings was abrogated by a verse about five, there should be something in the Quran that indicates this abrogation.”
Response The abrogation of the second verse does not require mentioning a verse in the Quran that indicates the abrogation — the hadith of Aisha itself is sufficient both to establish the ruling and to indicate the abrogation. Both the Quran and the Sunnah are sources of divine legislation that complement each other.
Objection 2: If abrogation by a single hadith were permitted, this opens the Quran to doubt “If a verse could be abrogated without clear evidence remaining, the enemies of religion would argue that the Quran is not preserved.”
Response This objection is accepted only if there were no indicator of the abrogation — but we have stated that Aisha’s hadith provides exactly that indicator.
Objection 3: A single hadith cannot abrogate something definitive like the Quran “A single report (khabar al-ahad) is conjectural, while the Quran is definitive — the conjectural cannot abrogate the definitive.”
Response We do not accept that the verse of five breastfeedings was definitively Quranic, because the only one who reported it was Aisha — making it conjectural in transmission. It is therefore permissible to abrogate it by conjecture. Furthermore, the fact that these verses were recited during the life of the Prophet ﷺ and for a period after his death, with consensus established on both their Quranic status and then their abrogation, confirms that the recitation was mutawatir at that stage — and then abrogated by consensus.
Objection 4: A condition of the Quran is mass transmission (tawatur) — what is not mutawatir is not Quran “If this were truly Quranic, it would have been mutawatir, but it was only transmitted from Aisha.”
Response This does not detract from the tawatur of the Noble Quran. Aisha’s statement that the Prophet ﷺ died while these verses were among those being recited confirms that the recitation was present during the Prophet’s lifetime and for a period after — which establishes it as a mutawatir reading at that stage. Consensus was then reached on its abrogation, and consensus was reached that it should not be written in the Mushaf. The tawatur of the final Mushaf is fully intact.

The Rational Case for Five Breastfeedings

The Legal Reasoning Behind Five Breastfeedings The forbidden quality in breastfeeding is that which grows flesh and strengthens bones — and this purpose is not achieved by a small amount of breastfeeding. Therefore, prohibition is established by five complete, satisfying breastfeedings, because this is what achieves the purpose of creating the bond of kinship.

This is also supported by the Arab custom prevalent before the revelation of the verse of prohibitions: families would send their children to Arab tribal communities to live with wet nurses, so that connections would increase and kinship would deepen. This does not happen with fewer than five breastfeedings.

Furthermore, the hadiths indicating five breastfeedings derive their legal force from the explicit indication (dalal al-nas) of the wording, while other hadiths that might suggest a different ruling derive from implicit indication (mafhum al-mukhalafah) — and explicit indication is stronger than implicit indication as a legal proof.

Conclusion on the First Line of Refutation The hadith is authentic and proven. The verse is from the category of those whose wording was abrogated but whose ruling remains. Its absence from the Quran does not indicate any distortion or falsification — its wording was abrogated, and this is precisely what is expected and what the Companions acted upon. The claims of the challengers are refuted, and the truth is established by the grace of Allah the Almighty.

Second: Aisha’s Statement Does Not Imply Verses Were Deleted After the Prophet’s Death

The Correct Understanding of Aisha’s Statement Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ died while they were among what was recited from the Quran.” This statement does not mean that these verses were later deleted from the Quran by copyists after the Prophet’s death. Its meaning is: the abrogation of the five breastfeedings verse was revealed very late in the Prophet’s life, so that when he ﷺ died, some people were still reciting the five breastfeedings verse as Quran — because the abrogation had not yet reached them due to its recent occurrence. When the information of the abrogation reached them, they changed their minds and agreed that it should not be recited. [11]
An Important Precision in Aisha’s Wording Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) did not say: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ died while they were among what was recited of the Quran” in the sense of confirming their universal Quranic status — she said that the Prophet died while some people were still reciting them, referring specifically to those who had not yet been informed of the abrogation. When they were informed, they stopped. This is not a statement about the universal state of the community’s knowledge.

Four Issues That Confirm No Tampering Occurred

Issue One: The Quran’s Tawatur Takes Precedence It is known to anyone who has studied the continuous transmission of the Quran and the integrity of its preservation that if a hadith appears to contradict what we know of this transmission, the problem lies in the understanding of the hadith, not in the Quran. The Quran is established with absolute certainty and without doubt. When any apparent tension arises, it is not rationally permissible to doubt the Quran — and this is a basic principle of logic.
Issue Two: The Hadith Text Itself Does Not Require Pre-Death Abrogation to Have Been Universal The explicit text of the hadith does not require that the verse was known by all to be abrogated before the Prophet’s death. The most it indicates is that there were those who continued to consider it part of the Quran even after the Prophet’s death and included it in their recitation — and this was due to their ignorance of the occurrence of abrogation, nothing more.
Issue Three: The Geographic Reality of Early Islam Makes This Inevitable Whoever contemplates the state of Islam at the time of the Prophet’s death — when it encompassed the Arabian Peninsula, Yemen, and southern Syria — will realise that it is logically impossible for all Muslims to know simultaneously that any verse was abrogated. It is very likely — indeed, certain — that many people continued reciting some abrogated verses due to their geographical distance from the place of revelation. Aisha’s words are simply an acknowledgment of this reality.
Issue Four: Aisha Herself Was a Supporter of the Uthman Collection Lady Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), the narrator of the hadith, could not have intended to criticise the compilation of the Quran. She was a contemporary of that gathering and was one of its most prominent supporters — especially the final compilation under Uthman ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him). If she had any objections, she would have voiced them and objected to Uthman publicly. This did not happen — and if it had happened, we would know about it. Rather, Aisha’s position regarding the killers of Uthman indicates she never doubted his imamate and caliphate. [12]
Conclusion on the Second Line of Refutation It is not rationally or logically acceptable to understand Aisha’s statement as implying that the verses were deleted by copyists. The authenticity of the hadith is established. Abrogation here is of the recognised category: wording abrogated, ruling remaining. The challenges raised against this hadith are refuted, and the integrity of the Quran is fully upheld.

Conclusion

Summary The hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) — “Among what was revealed in the Quran were ten known breastfeedings that forbid marriage, then they were abrogated by five known breastfeedings…” — is a sound hadith narrated by Imam Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa’i, and Ibn Majah, and no substantive challenge to its soundness has been established.

Abrogation is established in the Noble Quran, and among its types is abrogation of wording while the ruling remains. The ruling of stoning was established in the Quran in recitation, then its recitation was abrogated while the ruling remained — and the same applies to the ruling of five breastfeedings prohibiting marriage, according to the view of al-Shafi’i and the correct view of the school of Ahmad.

The Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) agreed unanimously that abrogated verses should not be written in the Mushaf. Some people continued reciting the five breastfeedings verse as Quran after the death of the Prophet ﷺ — before they were informed of the abrogation. When the abrogation reached them, they agreed to leave it and not write it in the Quran.

Aisha’s statement (may Allah be pleased with her) — “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ died while they were among what was being recited in the Quran” — does not indicate in any way that these verses were deleted from the Quran after the Prophet’s death by the actions of narrators and copyists. It indicates that the abrogation was revealed very late, so that the Prophet ﷺ died while some people were still reciting these verses before knowing about their abrogation.

Footnotes

Sources and References [1] Sahih Muslim with al-Nawawi’s commentary, Book: Breastfeeding, Chapter: Prohibition by Five Breastfeedings, 5/2254, No. 3533.

[2] Sahih: Narrated by Abu Dawud in his Sunan with Awn al-Ma’bud’s commentary, Book: Marriage, Chapter: Does less than five breastfeedings prohibit marriage?, 6/47, No. 2062. Al-Albani authenticated it in Sahih and Da’if Sunan Abi Dawud, No. 2062.

[3] Sahih: Narrated by al-Nasa’i in his Sunan, Book: Marriage, Chapter: The Amount of Breastfeeding That Prohibits Marriage, 2/539, No. 3320. Al-Albani authenticated it in Sahih and Da’if Sunan al-Nasa’i, No. 3307.

[4] Authentic: Narrated by Ibn Majah in his Sunan, Book: Marriage, Chapter: One or Two Suckings Do Not Prohibit Marriage, 1/625, No. 1942. Al-Albani authenticated it in Sahih and Da’if Sunan Ibn Majah, No. 1942.

[5] Sahih Muslim with al-Nawawi’s commentary, Book: Punishments, Chapter: Stoning a Married Person for Adultery, 6/2630, No. 4335.

[6] Sharh Sahih Muslim, al-Nawawi, edited by: Adel Abdul Mawjoud and Ali Mu’awwad, Nizar Mustafa al-Baz Library, Makkah al-Mukarramah, 2nd ed., 1422 AH/2001 CE, 6/2633.

[7] Ibid., 5/2258, with some modifications from the words of the investigators.

[8] Islamic Jurisprudence and Its Evidence, Dr. Wahbah al-Zuhayli, Dar al-Fikr, Damascus, 3rd ed., 1409 AH/1989 CE, 7/710.

[9] Sahih Muslim with al-Nawawi’s commentary, Book: Breastfeeding, Chapter: Prohibition by Five Breastfeedings, 5/2254, No. 3534.

[10] Same as [2].

[11] Sharh Sahih Muslim, al-Nawawi, edited by: Adel Abdul Mawjoud and Ali Mu’awwad, Nizar Mustafa al-Baz Library, Makkah al-Mukarramah, 2nd ed., 1422 AH/2001 CE, 5/2257.

[12] Al-Mufassal fi al-Radd ‘ala Shubah A’da’ al-Islam, compiled by: Ali ibn Nayef al-Shahood, 10/460, with some modifications.

Primary Reference: Liberating the Mind from Transmission, Samer Islambouli, Dar al-Awael, Damascus, 2001.

This article is part of the OpenIslam Wiki — Quran Preservation and Hadith Sciences series.