The Stoning Verse: Why It Was Abrogated from Recitation
Some critics allege that the absence of the stoning verse from the present-day Quran constitutes evidence of textual corruption or that Muslims invented the concept of abrogation to escape contradictions. This post demonstrates that the stoning verse was abrogated in recitation while its ruling remained operative — a recognized category of naskh established during the lifetime of the Prophet ﷺ, attested by multiple Companions, and confirmed by consensus. We examine the classical science of abrogation, the specific narrations concerning the stoning verse, the reasons for its verbal abrogation, and the parallel presence of stoning in previous scriptures.
The Reality of Abrogation in the Quran
Critics claim that abrogation was innovated by Muslims to get out of the predicament of contradictions in the verses, and that the stoning verse is “missing” because the Quran has been tampered with or is incomplete.
Abrogation was practiced in the time of the Prophet ﷺ and was not innovated after him. The Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) would not permit anyone to issue a fatwa until they learned the abrogating and abrogated verses. Furthermore, abrogation exists in all divine laws, some verses themselves indicate abrogation without any external intervention, and the ruling on a verse as abrogated has strict conditions that prevent arbitrary tampering with the text.
Abrogation in the Quran is one of the great Quranic sciences to which many books have been devoted. Comprehending all aspects of this science takes time, effort, and many pages, but here we address only one aspect: the allegation that abrogation is an attack on the Quran. In reality, abrogation is one of the beauties of the Quran, not one of its defects.
Abrogation has many rulings and functions, including the gradual introduction of legislation so that the nation is not alienated and finds it easier to accept. The most famous example is the prohibition of wine, which proceeded in stages:
وَمِن ثَمَرَٰتِ ٱلنَّخِيلِ وَٱلْأَعْنَـٰبِ تَتَّخِذُونَ مِنْهُ سَكَرًۭا وَرِزْقًا حَسَنًا ۗ إِنَّ فِى ذَٰلِكَ لَـَٔايَةًۭ لِّقَوْمٍۢ يَعْقِلُونَAnd from the fruits of the palm trees and grapevines you take intoxicant and good provision. Indeed in that is a sign for a people who reason.
The waw (and) in this verse requires a distinction between intoxicant and good provision, indicating that wine is not a good provision. Then the Quran explained that there is great harm and evil in it without yet prohibiting it:
يَسْـَٔلُونَكَ عَنِ ٱلْخَمْرِ وَٱلْمَيْسِرِ ۖ قُلْ فِيهِمَآ إِثْمٌۭ كَبِيرٌۭ وَمَنَـٰفِعُ لِلنَّاسِ وَإِثْمُهُمَآ أَكْبَرُ مِن نَّفْعِهِمَا ۖ وَيَسْـَٔلُونَكَ مَاذَا يُنفِقُونَ قُلِ ٱلْعَفْوَ ۗ كَذَٰلِكَ يُبَيِّنُ ٱللَّهُ لَكُمُ ٱلْـَٔايَـٰتِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَفَكَّرُونَThey ask you about wine and gambling. Say, “In them is great sin and [yet, some] benefit for people. But their sin is greater than their benefit.” And they ask you what they should spend. Say, “The excess.” Thus Allah makes clear to you the verses [of revelation] that you might give thought.
Then it prohibited wine during prayer times:
يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ لَا تَقْرَبُوا۟ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَأَنتُمْ سُكَـٰرَىٰ حَتَّىٰ تَعْلَمُوا۟ مَا تَقُولُونَ وَلَا جُنُبًا إِلَّا عَابِرِى سَبِيلٍ حَتَّىٰ تَغْتَسِلُوا۟ ۚ وَإِن كُنتُم مَّرْضَىٰٓ أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَآءَ أَحَدٌۭ مِّنكُم مِّنَ ٱلْغَآئِطِ أَوْ لَـٰمَسْتُمُ ٱلنِّسَآءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُوا۟ مَآءًۭ فَتَيَمَّمُوا۟ صَعِيدًۭا طَيِّبًۭا فَٱمْسَحُوا۟ بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُمْ ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ عَفُوًّا غَفُورًاO you who have believed, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying or in a state of janabah, except those passing through [a place of prayer], until you have washed [your whole body]. And if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and find no water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and your hands. Indeed, Allah is ever Pardoning and Forgiving.
Then it prohibited wine completely at all times in Surah Al-Ma’idah — one of the last surahs to be revealed:
يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓا۟ إِنَّمَا ٱلْخَمْرُ وَٱلْمَيْسِرُ وَٱلْأَنصَابُ وَٱلْأَزْلَـٰمُ رِجْسٌۭ مِّنْ عَمَلِ ٱلشَّيْطَـٰنِ فَٱجْتَنِبُوهُ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَO you who have believed, indeed, wine, gambling, [sacrificing on] stone alters [to other than Allah], and divining arrows are but defilement from the work of Satan, so avoid it that you may be successful.
On the authority of Umar bin Al-Khattab, he said: “O Allah, explain to us the cure for wine.” So the verse in Al-Baqarah was revealed:They ask you about wine and gambling… Umar was called and it was read to him. He said: “O Allah, explain to us the cure for wine.” So the verse in An-Nisa was revealed: O you who believe, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated. Umar was called and it was read to him. Then he said: “O Allah, explain to us the cure for wine.” So the verse in Al-Ma’idah was revealed: Satan only wants to cause between you animosity and hatred through wine and gambling… until His saying: Will you not desist? Umar was called and it was read to him. He said: “We have desisted, we have desisted.”
Grade: Sahih · Al-Bukhari
The gradual prohibition demonstrates that abrogation serves a legislative purpose — easing the community into compliance — not a cover for contradiction.
The Stoning Verse: Abrogated in Recitation, Ruling Preserved
Critics argue that because the stoning verse does not appear in the present-day written Quran, it must have been lost or removed, and that Muslims are covering up this gap with the excuse of “abrogation.”
The stoning verse was abrogated in recitation while its ruling remained operative. This is a recognized category of naskh (abrogation) called “abrogation of the wording, preservation of the ruling” (naskh al-tilawa duna al-hukm). It was established during the Prophet’s lifetime, narrated by multiple Companions with sound chains, and its ruling is enforced by consensus (ijma) of the jurists.
The correct formulation is not that the stoning verse was “deleted” or that its ruling is absent from the Quran, but that it was abrogated verbally while its ruling remained. This is a matter established by Sharia: the abrogation of the verbal (naskh al-tilawa) means the removal of the recitation, while the preservation of the ruling (baqa’ al-hukm) means the legal consequence continues to apply.
“How many Surahs do you count?” I said, “Seventy-three.” He said, “It was equivalent to Surah Al-Baqarah, and we used to recite in it the verse of stoning: ‘The old man and the old woman, if they commit adultery, stone them both. It is a punishment from Allah. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.’”Narrator: Ibn Jarir al-Tabari — Source: Musnad Umar, 2/873. Chain: Sound.
What is meant by “the old man and the old woman” are the married man and woman, as it is most likely that the old man is married, and so is the old woman. Otherwise, if an unmarried old man commits adultery, he is to be flogged, and if a married young man commits adultery, he is to be stoned. Perhaps this is the reason for the abrogation of the recitation of this verse.See ((Ibn Hajar)), Fath al-Bari 19/255.
The Jews came to the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, and mentioned to him that a man and a woman among them had committed adultery, so the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said to them: “What do you find in the Torah regarding stoning?” They said: “We will disgrace them and flog them.” Abdullah bin Salam said: “You have lied, it contains stoning.” So they brought the Torah and spread it out. One of them put his hand on the verse of stoning and read what came before it and what came after it. Abdullah bin Salam said to him: “Raise your hand.” So he raised his hand and there was the verse of stoning in it. They said: “He is right, O Muhammad, it contains the verse of stoning.” So the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, ordered them to be stoned. Abdullah said: “I saw the man attacking the woman to protect her from the stones.”Grade: Sahih · Al-Bukhari
“I have read it: ‘If an old man and an old woman commit adultery, stone them both.’ The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, stoned, and we stoned after him.”Narrator: Al-Albani — Source: Sahih Ibn Majah. Chain: Sahih.
“God sent Muhammad with the truth and revealed the Book to him, and among what God revealed was the verse of stoning, so we read it, understood it, and memorized it. The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, stoned, and we stoned after him. I fear that if time passes for the people, someone will say: ‘By God, we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of God,’ and they will go astray by abandoning an obligation that God revealed. Stoning in the Book of God is a right upon those who commit adultery if they are married, whether men or women, if evidence is established, or pregnancy occurs, or a confession occurs.”Narrator: Al-Baghawi — Source: Sharh al-Sunnah, 5/460. Chain: Authentic.
On the authority of the Mother of the Believers: “The old man and the old woman, if they commit adultery, stone them both.” It was equivalent to Surah Al-Baqarah in length.Grade: Sahih · Al-Bukhari
Al-Hakim narrated on the authority of Katheer bin Al-Salt who said: Zaid bin Thabit and Saeed bin Al-Aas were writing in the Mushaf and they came across this verse. Zaid said: “I heard the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, say: ‘The old man and the old woman, stone them both.’” Umar said: “When it was revealed, I went to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, and said: ‘Write it down.’ It seemed that he disliked that.” Umar said: “Don’t you see that if an old man commits adultery and is not married, he is flogged, and if a young man commits adultery and is married, he is stoned.”Narrator: Ibn Hajar — Source: Fath al-Bari, 12/143.
From this hadith we learn the reason for abrogating its recitation: because the action is not based on the apparent generality of the wording. The phrase “old man and old woman” could be understood to apply to all elderly people regardless of marital status, but the ruling of stoning applies only to the previously married (muhsan). To prevent confusion and misapplication, the wording was abrogated while the ruling — stoning for married adulterers — remained firmly established through the Sunnah and consensus.
[!scholar] Ibn Hajar — Fath al-Bari (9/65)
“This is supported by what was proven from a group of the Companions who mentioned things that were revealed from the Quran, then their recitation was abrogated, but their ruling remained or did not remain, such as the hadith of Umar: ‘If an old man and an old woman commit adultery, stone them both.’ And the hadith of Anas in the story of the readers who were killed in the well of Ma’unah, he said: So Allah revealed about them a Quran, ‘Convey from us to our people, We have indeed met our Lord.’ And the hadith of Ubayy ibn Ka’b, ‘The confederates were the size of the cow.’ And the hadith of Hudhayfah, ‘They did not recite a quarter of it,’ meaning Bara’ah. And all of them are authentic hadiths.”
There is no disagreement among the jurists regarding the obligation of stoning the married adulterer, whether male or female. Stoning is established by the text, consensus, and reason. See Ibn Abidin 3/145–146, Al-Kasani Al-Bada’i’ 7/39 and following, Al-Zarqani Sharh al-Zarqani 8/82, Al-Nawawi Rawdat al-Talibin 10/86, Ibn Qudamah Al-Mughni 8/161.
[!scholar] Ibn Hazm — Al-Muhalla (11/234)
“On the authority of Abu Dharr, he said: The two old men are to be flogged and stoned, the previously married men are to be stoned, and the two virgins are to be flogged and banished. And on the authority of Ubayy ibn Ka’b, he said: They are to be flogged and stoned, they are to be flogged but not stoned. Qatada explained it and said: The married old man is to be flogged and stoned if he commits adultery, and the married young man is to be stoned if he commits adultery, and the young man who is not married commits adultery. And on the authority of Masruq, he said: The two virgins are to be flogged and banished, the previously married men are to be stoned but not flogged, and the two old men are to be flogged and stoned.”
“His saying (the old man and the old woman) means the previously married man and woman.”
Why the Recitation Was Abrogated
Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) anticipated precisely the objection that modern critics raise:
“I feared that a long time would pass until people would say, ‘I do not find stoning in the Book of God,’ and they would go astray by abandoning one of God’s obligations. Stoning is a right if a man is married and there is evidence, or there is pregnancy or confession.”
“If it were not for it to be said: ‘Umar added to the Quran,’ I would have written the verse of stoning.”Grade: Sahih · Al-Bukhari
Umar’s statement is significant: he knew the verse by heart, had memorized it, and witnessed the Prophet ﷺ applying its ruling. Yet he refrained from inserting it into the written Mushaf because the abrogation of its recitation was itself a divine instruction — not an act of human omission or textual loss. The ruling remained in force through the mutawatir Sunnah and the consensus of the jurists.
Stoning in Previous Scriptures
Stoning was not an innovation of Islamic law; it was prescribed among previous nations, including the Jews and Christians, as their own scriptures attest.
“Stone him with stones until he dies, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the yoke of slavery.”
“Then bring out that man or that woman, who committed that sin, outside the city, and stone him with stones that he die.”
“But if the accusation is proven true, and the girl is not a virgin, then the girl shall be brought to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones to death, because she has committed an abomination in Israel, and has committed adultery in her father’s house. Thus you will root out evil from among you. And if a man meets a girl… and if a woman be betrothed to another man in the city, and he lie with her, then bring them both out into the open square of the gate of that city, and stone them with stones to death…”
“And Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. And it came to pass, that at daybreak he returned to the temple, and the multitude of the people gathered about him, and he sat down and taught them. And the teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought to him a woman who had been caught in adultery, and they set her in the midst. And they said to him, ‘Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. And Moses in the law commanded us to stone such people to death. What do you say?’ They asked him this, trying to find something to accuse him of. But he bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger. But because they pressed him with his questions, he straightened up and said to them, ‘Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.’ Then he bent down and wrote on the ground. When they heard this, they all went away, one by one, beginning with the elders. And Jesus was left alone, and the woman stood still. So he sat up and said to her, ‘Woman, where are they? Has none of them condemned you?’ She answered, ‘No one, Lord.’ And he said to her, ‘Neither do I condemn you. Go, and sin no more.’”
The Gospel of John passage is particularly noteworthy: the Pharisees explicitly cite Mosaic law commanding stoning for adultery, and Jesus does not deny the law’s validity — he intervenes on procedural grounds (the accusers’ own moral standing), not on the substance of the penalty. This confirms that stoning for adultery was a recognized part of the Torah that the Jewish community acknowledged, even if they were reluctant to apply it.
Definition and Terminology
In language: throwing stones. It is used in other meanings, including killing; slander based on absence or suspicion; and cursing, expulsion, insults, and desertion. In Islamic terminology, it is the stoning of the married adulterer with stones to death.
[!scholar] Ibn Qudamah — Al-Mughni (8/161)
“There is no disagreement among the jurists regarding the obligation of stoning the married adulterer, whether male or female.”
Conclusion
The Sharia was completed with the death of the Prophet ﷺ, and it is impossible for anything to be abrogated after his death. The hadith of Umar in Bukhari is explicit that the verse of stoning was lifted during the time of the Prophet ﷺ himself — not lost later through negligence or corruption. The abrogation of the stoning verse’s recitation while preserving its ruling is a documented, multi-narrated case of naskh al-tilawa duna al-hukm, recognized by the Companions, enforced by consensus, and applied continuously from the Prophet’s time to the present.
The stoning verse was not “lost” or “removed” from the Quran; it was abrogated in recitation by divine instruction during the Prophet’s lifetime while its ruling remained binding through the Sunnah and ijma. This is not a gap in the Quran but a recognized category of abrogation — one of the beauties of Quranic legislation, not a defect. The same penalty exists in the Torah, was applied by the Prophet ﷺ, and is enforced by the unanimous agreement of the Muslim jurists.