them against those with whom God is wrathful: About those, not a soul knows what is in store for them [in the hereafter] that would please their eyes, a reward for what they have performed."٢o
Furthermore, it has been narrated, through several chains of transmission, that the suras entitled "ai-Khal" (Absolute Shunning) and "al-I:Iafd" (Absolute Obedience) were recorded in the codices of Ibn Abbas and Ubayy, which, in part, read:

٠ God, we seek Your help and ask your forgiveness; we praise and never deny You; we shun and desert those who act wickedly toward You. ٠ God, You alone do we worship and to You we offer our prayers and prostrate ourselves. To You is our en‌ deavor, and in You we seek refuge [or we are quick to obey you? serve you?]. We hope for Your mercy, and fear Your punishment. Indeed, Your punishment to the un‌ believers is affixed.

And such other things have been related that have no significance for us to examine. ٢١
Undoubtedly, the belief in the abrogation of recitals is similar to the belief in al‌ teration and omission. In other words, the abrogation of the recital of these [Quranic] verses was decided either by the Prophet himself or by those who assumed commu‌ nity leadership after him. If those who hold this opinion intend to convey that the abrogation was made by the Messenger of God, then such an assertion is in need of proof. However, all the scholars are in agreement that it is not permissible to abro‌ gate the Book by means of a single narration (khabar al-wal:tid), and this has been stated clearly by a group of them in the works dealing with the principles of jurispru‌ dence (U$Ul al-fiqh), and in other such works.٢٢ Significantly, ai-ShafiI and the ma‌ jority of his associates, including a large number of the Zahirites, have definitely as‌ serted that the abrogation of [any part of] the Book is inadmissible even if supported by an uninterruptedly narrated tradition (sunna mutawatira). Al:lmad b. I:Ianbal fol‌ lows this view in one of the two traditions narrated on his authority. Indeed, even some of those who maintained the possibility of the abrogation of the Book by means of an uninterruptedly narrated tradition have denied that such a thing has actually happened.٢٣
Consequently, how can one correctly attribute the abrogation to the Prophet on the basis of the traditions reported by these narrators? This is not to mention that the attribution of the abrogation to the Prophet is incompatible with those tradi‌ tions which relate that the omission took place after his death. On the other hand, if they meant that the abrogation took place under those who assumed the leader‌ ship of the community after the Prophet, then this would be exactly the same as maintaining the belief in alteration (ta/:trif). On this basis, it is possible to claim that the view that the Quran was altered is the doctrine of the majority of Sunni scholars, because they maintain the permissibility of abrogating the recitation of a verse regardless of whether the ordinance contained in it is abrogated or not. It is significant that the scholars of fundamental legal theory among them have hesi‌ tated to permit the ritually unclean persons to recite those verses whose recitation was abrogated, or to permit those who were not in the state of ablutions to touch them. Some of them have actually opted for the opinion denying this permission. It is true, on the other hand, that a group ofMutazilites have upheld the impermis‌ sibility of the abrogation of a recitation.٢٤