Does the hadith of Aisha -may Allah be pleased with her- which states that the verse of stoning and "ten definite sucklings" were revealed, and were in a parchment under her bed, then eaten by a domestic animal after the death of the Prophet -peace and blessings be upon him- constitute evidence for the incompleteness of the Qur’an and its lack of authentication?

Abrogation (Naskh) in Islamic legislation means the supersession of a previous ruling by a later ruling. This is indicated by Quranic verses, such as the Almighty’s saying: (Whatever verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it). Abrogation is divided into three types: abrogation of recitation with the ruling remaining, abrogation of both the ruling and recitation, and abrogation of the ruling without the recitation. Examples of the abrogation of both recitation and ruling include what Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, narrated concerning the verse of suckling, and what was reported about the domestic animal eating the parchment on which were verses whose recitation had been abrogated. Scholars have pointed out that the entire Quran conveyed by the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, was preserved, and what was abrogated from it was not conveyed to be written in the Quran.