This study uses a descriptive-analytical method and sanad-textual criticism to evaluate three narrations in al-Ṭabarī’s Jāmiʿ al-Bayān claiming that the Peace Verse (al-Anfāl 61) is abrogated by the Sword Verse (al-Tawbah 5). The findings, on three interconnected levels, refute this claim. First, sanad criticism: all three narrations are weak due to unreliable narrators (e.g., Ibn Ḥumayd al-Rāzī), narrators with confused memory (Saʿīd b. Abī ʿArūbah), and being mawqūf, thus cannot prove Quranic abrogation. Second, content criticism based on ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s framework: the abrogation claim fails three filters. The Umm al-Kitāb principle treats the Peace Verse as a decisive (muḥkam) and innate ruling, while the Sword Verse only targets treaty-breakers. The theory of iʿtibāriyyāt classifies peace as a general construct rooted in the permanent need to preserve life and property, making its abrogation a repugnant violation of purpose and divine wisdom. The definitive prophetic sīrah, especially the post-revelation Najrān pact in 9 AH, confirms that the Prophet never abrogated peace, serving as the decisive separator. Third, methodological criticism: al-Ṭabarī, despite asserting that the Quran cannot be abrogated by solitary reports, falls into a clear contradiction by prioritizing narrative fame over his own principle. The conclusion is that the Peace Verse remains unabrogated and among the Quran’s decisive verses.Methodological Criticism: Despite his explicit affirmation of the principle that ‘the Quran cannot be abrogated by a solitary report (khabar al-wāḥid),’ al-Ṭabarī, in practice and under the influence of narrative fame and the atmosphere of his exegetical school, falls into a clear contradiction.