It is known in the science of jurisprudence that abrogating is a symptom of judgment, and specification/restriction is a symptom of verbal words, but abrogating and restriction share in lifting the injunction, so if the lifting is complete then it is abrogating, and if it is partial it is the specification/restriction. This sharing prompts us to search for differences between them - as there is a need to do so - in order to avoid confusion/mis-interpretation. With the similarities between abrogating and restriction there are, however, fundamental differences between them, and this research presents these differences.
I have divided the research into three groups according to the following considerations: The first: The differences between abrogating and restriction, considering their reality. Second: The differences between abrogating and restriction, given the power of the abrogator and the restrictor/assignor.
The third: the differences between abrogating and restriction, considering their belongings. From this research we conclude that the abrogating differs from the restriction in its reality and its effects/belongings. The abrogation is spoken, separate, delayed, raises the verdict, has little occurrence. Restriction does not combine these attributes/qualities.
Abboud, Mahmoud and Bikai, Fathi
"The difference between abrogation and restriction,"
Al Jinan الجنان: Vol. 13
, Article 8.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.aaru.edu.jo/aljinan/vol13/iss1/8