Question on 5:38 - Theft Punishment
-
Peace
The only reason I say that imprisonment is not God's law in this case, was because it was issued by the governor's wife first. Please note, you said yourself earlier, "Since we know the punishment for adultery is not Prison"...
1232
She said, "This is the one you blamed me for falling in love with. I did indeed try to seduce him, and he refused. Unless he does what I command him to do, he will surely go to prison, and will be debased."1233
He said, "My Lord, the prison is better than giving in to them. Unless You divert their scheming from me, I may desire them and behave like the ignorant ones."1235
Later, they saw to it, despite the clear proofs, that they should imprison him for awhile.I dont think we can ignore just because the governor's wife said it first. She is not issuing an order. From 1235, it is clear that he is sentenced to jail.
Also on the same lines, for the punishment for theft.
1275
They said, "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. We thus punish the guilty."1276
He then started by inspecting their containers, before getting to his brother's container, and he extracted it out of his brother's container. We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law. But that was the will of GOD. We exalt whomever we choose to higher ranks. Above every knowledgeable one, there is one who is even more knowledgeable.If you look at the verse 1275, it is said by Joseph's brothers when they are asked for what was a just punishment if they were found guilty. And from 1276,we know it is not King's law. So it was Joseph's scheme to get his brother. Joseph did not issue the command.
And the punishment per 1275 is Slavery as i mentioned in my previous post.
Please correct me if i am wrong.
MA, I am learning a lot. Thanks !
Salaam
-
Peace Ahmed, all,
The imprisonment of Joseph was not for committing adultery but for refusing to obey the command of the governor's wife to commit adultery with her
1232 She said "This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced."
This imprisonment was clearly not God's law as is clear from 1233-35. In any case, the punishment was not for adultery but for refusal to obey someone's command.
As far as the punishment for theft is concerned, the way Joseph's brother was punished was also clearly not God's law, and we cannot use what happened to Joseph's brother as explanation for 538, so I agree with brother Ahmed here. As per 1275 and 1279, the punishment of Joseph's brother for theft was slavery, which was suggested by his brothers and accepted under the king's system. God's law for punishment for theft per 538 is to withhold the thief's resources as a compensation for what the thief gathered/acquired unlawfully.
The way 1276 is worded, it appears that the punishment given to Joseph's brother was the king's system
1276 So he began with their bags before his brother's bag. Then he brought it out of his brother's bag. It was such that We planned for Joseph, for he would not have been able to take his brother under the king's system, EXCEPT that God wished it so. We raise the degrees of whom We please, and over every one of knowledge is the All Knowledgeable.
"He would not have been able to take his brother under the king's system, except that God wished it so"; here the word "except" makes it clear that the punishment was according to the king's system, meaning that Joseph would not have been able to take his brother under the king's system if God had not wished it so.
As to how much resources should be withheld from the thief, please see the post at the following link for an interesting explanation
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=11317.msg75027#msg75027
-
Peace
The imprisonment of Joseph was not for committing adultery but for refusing to obey the command of the governor's wife to commit adultery with her
1232 She said "This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced."
This imprisonment was clearly not God's law as is clear from 1233-35. In any case, the punishment was not for adultery but for refusal to obey someone's command.
My understanding is different.
1235
But it appealed to them, even after they had seen the signs, to imprison him until a time.The ones who were judging did see Joseph was innocent of Adultery but they still jailed him.
Are you saying that the Governor's wife told the people that She tried to Joseph and that Joseph didn't agree and hence he was jailed.
The governor's wife accused Joseph of Adultery and he was jailed for that.
Please see 1251 also
1251
He said "What is your plea that you tried to seduce Joseph from himself?" They said "God forbid that we would do any harm to him." The wife of the Governor said "Now the truth must be known, I did seek to seduce Joseph from himself and he is of the truthful ones."Please let me know if i missed something.
-
Peace Ahmed,
The governor's wife accused Joseph of Adultery and he was jailed for that.
This is not correct and is not what the relevant verses say.
1235 But it appealed to them, even after they had seen the signs, to imprison him until a time.
Yes this shows that even when those who were trying to punish him saw the signs that he was innocent, they still imprisoned him. What were those signs ?
1226 He said "She is the one who seduced me from myself," and a witness from her family gave testimony "If his shirt was torn from the front, then she is truthful, and he is the liar."
1227 "And if his shirt is torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is truthful."
1228 So when he saw that his shirt was torn from behind, he said "This is from your female scheming, your female scheming is indeed great!"Thus he was not imprisoned for accusation of adultery, but because he refused the governor's wife's command to commit adultery, therefore she used her influence to have him imprisoned because of that reason. This is clearly told to us in this verse
1232 She said "This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced."
Please note that the governor's wife herself admitted that Joseph did not commit adultery and refused her advances
1232 She said "This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced."
In 1251, the governor's wife is reiterating her admission that Joseph did not commit adultery despite her attempts
1251 He said "What is your plea that you tried to seduce Joseph from himself?" They said "God forbid that we would do any harm to him." The wife of the Governor said "Now the truth must be known, I did seek to seduce Joseph from himself and he is of the truthful ones."
"He is of the truthful ones" refers to when Joseph denied accusation of lewdness earlier
1226 He said "She is the one who seduced me from myself," and a witness from her family gave testimony "If his shirt was torn from the front, then she is truthful, and he is the liar."
1227 "And if his shirt is torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is truthful."Thus "he is of the truthful ones" in 1251 refers to when he said "she is the one who seduced me from myself" in 1226. So how can you say that Joseph was imprisoned because he was accused of adultery, when the governor's wife herself is admitting that he refused her advances (1232), and that "he is of the truthful ones" (1251), and the signs also proved his innocence (1235) ?
He was imprisoned because he refused to obey her command to commit adultery (1232). She probably used her influence to have him imprisoned because of that reason, probably due to her ego getting hurt, even though the signs proved his innocence.
-
Peace Brother,
He was imprisoned because he refused to obey her command to commit adultery (1232). She probably used her influence to have him imprisoned because of that reason, probably due to her ego getting hurt, even though the signs proved his innocence.
I agree that the governor's wife had him imprisoned because Joseph refused to obey her.
My question is what was he sent to Jail for ? What was he sentenced for ? You did not answer that.
1251 answers that.
1251 He said "What is your plea that you tried to seduce Joseph from himself?" They said "God forbid that we would do any harm to him." The wife of the Governor said "Now the truth must be known, I did seek to seduce Joseph from himself and he is of the truthful ones."
The truth is that She tried to seduce him and it was brought out years later.
Joseph's innocence was indeed proved within the household at the time of incident but the truth was hidden and no one else knew until 1251
1228
When her husband saw that his garment was torn from the back, he said, "This is a woman's scheme. Indeed, your scheming is formidable.1229
"Joseph, disregard this incident. As for you (my wife), you should seek forgiveness for your sin. You have committed an error."So in 1251, the truth comes out that Joseph did not commmit Adultery which is why he is released. Correct ?
Salaam
Ahmed
-
Peace Ahmed,
He was sentenced because he did not do as the governor's wife commanded him. His crime was refusal to obey her order. His innocence was proven even before he was imprisoned
1235 But it appealed to them, even after they had seen the signs, to imprison him until a time.
The governor's wife also admitted BEFORE he was imprisoned that Joseph had refused her
1232 She said "This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced."
The above incidence where she admits he refused was before his imprisonment, and this is a PUBLIC admission in front of all the women who cut their hands. In 1251, she admits his innocence for the first time in front of the King, after having unjustly imprisoned Joseph before.
Judging from the King's responses in 1250-51, it appears that the King was not aware of Joseph being in prison until then, and thus it must be the governor's wife who must have had Joseph imprisoned using her own authority without the King's knowledge. In 1251 the King finally comes to know about Joseph's imprisonment and his innocence for the first time and then the governor's wife seems to repent in 1253 for having imprisoned Joseph unjustly and subsequently the King orders his immediate release in 1254.
1253 "And I do not make myself free of blame, for the soul is inclined to sin, except what my Lord has mercy on. My Lord is Forgiving, Merciful."
1254 And the King said "Bring him to me so that I may employ him to my person." So when he spoke to him, he said "Today you are with us in high rank and trusted." -
Peace Brother,
The above incidence where she admits he refused was before his imprisonment, and this is a PUBLIC admission in front of all the women who cut their hands. In 1251, she admits his innocence for the first time in front of the King, after having unjustly imprisoned Joseph before.
If i tell my friends of something wrong i committed, i would not consider it Public. THe truth is brought out only in 1251 to everyone. Until then only her friends and family know.
Joseph was not innocent of disobeying but only of adultery. So his crime was of adultery only which was proven wrong finally and he was released.
IA I will stop here on this.
-
Peace Ahmed,
Joseph was not innocent of disobeying but only of adultery. So his crime was of adultery only which was proven wrong finally and he was released.
I think I'm either mis-understanding you, or Tanveer and myself are not communicating effectively. Joseph was innocent period. He was NOT imprisoned (or put in jail) for adultery. He didn't commit adultery, he knew that, the governor's wife knew that and even the governor himself knew that. He was not proven innocent and then released, he was proven innocent BEFORE he was imprisoned.
Chapter 12
26. He said ?She is the one who seduced me from myself,? and a witness from her family gave testimony ?If his shirt was torn from the front, then she is truthful, and he is the liar.?
27. ?And if his shirt is torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is truthful.?
28. So when he saw that his shirt was torn from behind, he said ?This is from your female scheming, your female scheming is indeed great!?
29. ?Joseph, turn away from this. And you woman, seek forgiveness for your sin; you were of the wrongdoers.?Please do not take this as an argument, or even as a debate, we are merely discussing, perhaps different opinions, but believe me, all of us are learning from this. )
Peace
-
Peace,
He was NOT imprisoned (or put in jail) for adultery.
Joseph was accused of Adultery and even though there were signs of his innocence, he was sent to Jail. He is finally proven innocent and released.
The King learns that Joseph did not seduce and orders the release. So it is obvious that he is sent to Jail for that only and not anything else. (Ofcourse we know that he was falsely accused).
If Adultery was not the crime, why was he sent to Jail ? (Request you to please put yourself in the judge's position and write down the sentence for Joseph informing of the crime and the punishment.)
Request you to please clarify.
Peace
-
You know I saw this debate here about theft punishment and I read your meanings given to cutting of body parts. in sura 538. So I was wondering if you could please explain these verses to me
Qur'an 533 "The punishment for those who wage war against Allah and His Prophet and make mischief in the land, is to murder them, crucify them, or cut off a hand and foot on opposite sides...their doom is dreadful. (new sentence)They will not escape the fire, suffering constantly."
Tabari VIII122
Ishaq515 "The Prophet gave orders concerning Kinanah to Zubayr,saying, ?Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah's chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him."Ishaq550 "The Muslims met them with their swords. They cut through many arms and skulls. Only confused cries and groans could be heard over our battle roars and snarling." ???
Qur'an 537 "The disbelievers will long to get out of the Fire, but never will they get out there from; and theirs will be an enduring torture."
Ishaq595 "The Apostle said, ?Get him away from me and cut off his tongue.""
Ishaq312 "Umar said to the Apostle, ?Let me pull out Suhayl's two front teeth. That way his tongue will stick out and he will never be able to speak against you again.'"
-
An intresting debate, i would vote for brother Ahmed's understanding of yousaf's charge.
yousaf was not prisoned for adultery , but probably for an attempted rape.(could that be the punishment for a rape or an attempted rape?)
i am still confused about cutting the hand/marking /cut off resources of thief etc , nobody has a satisfactory explanation,especially when in 5-33 God is commanding us to consider severing the hand and a foot of the people who commit horrendous crimes , as one of the option???? i think this requires more work.
sikandar -
Salam Jonny,
The verse 1231 (as well as 533, and 7124) all use the word Qattiu (with a shadda on the
ta) which is correctly translated ascut/severVerse 538 uses the word Iqtau (without the shadda) which is translated correctly as
stop/suspend/withhold(see 1325 for the useage of the same word).Hi sorry for bringing up an old topic. But since the word used is Iqtau that means the verse becomes
And the male thief/robber and the female thief/robber, stop/suspend/withholdĄ??B? their (B)'s hands, a reward?AlU because (of)
what they (B) gathered/acquiredBJn? , severe exemplary punishment from God, and God (is) glorious/mightyl?l? ,
wise/judicious*?θYWhich could only mean imprisonment. Hangcuff their hands and send them to jail.
-
An intresting debate, i would vote for brother Ahmed's understanding of yousaf's charge.
yousaf was not prisoned for adultery , but probably for an attempted rape.(could that be the punishment for a rape or an attempted rape?)
i am still confused about cutting the hand/marking /cut off resources of thief etc , nobody has a satisfactory explanation,especially when in 5-33 God is commanding us to consider severing the hand and a foot of the people who commit horrendous crimes , as one of the option???? i think this requires more work.
sikandarHello
Actually, it seems both parties have valid point, I lean to agree that he was not improsined for adultry but possibly the women conspired with the governor wife to put him in jail, this was after they cut their hands,
Logically speaking he can't be accused of anything in the first incident when his shirt was ripped by the governor wife, because when an expert witness testified about where the shirt was ripped, it clearly proved Yusuf innocence, the governor even confirmed his wife mistake, later on when the rumour started to circulate in town, the governor wife made her plot to bring those women who talk about her love to Yusuf and let them see Yusuf so she may be excused, in this second event I believe it caused his charges, I guess cutting their hands might have been used somehow, at the end of the day we dont really need to know the charges because the Quran never mentioned it, but we know that it was his request from Allah to be jailed and Allah made it true for him and we also know that he was a great prophet who was never involved in any ill conduct.
Regarding cutting off the hands of thieves, I was actually a believer that the hand of thieves must be cut off, then I stumbled into Joe proposition for 538-39 about 3 years ago which was very convincing due to the fact mentioned in 539 that if they repent and do good then Allah will forgive them, so I started promoting his understanding.
Later on as I read in the Quran, I found that taking it as cutting resources may cause a few contradictions regarding the word "Qataa", so i did further studies and truly believe in a revised understanding that use the word literally as cut off but at the same time the hands will not be cut off under a couple of conditions that must be met, in a way it is about showing compassion and giving the thief a chance to repent and do good without cutting off the hands but if the thief insists on stealing then the hand must be cut off.
This is not my wishful thinking, in fact it is very logical if we consider the other severe punishment regarding adultery which is 100 lashes in public, the same verse ordered us "NOT TO SHOW COMPASSION" when we punish the adulterers therefore there is nothing that can't stop us from showing compassion to the thieves by giving them a chance to repent and do good and if they do then everyone is happy and Allah will forgive them as 539 told us, most importantly they can blend in the society again normally this is because no hand is cut, but if they don't then they have to lose their hand because it has been proven that they are malice thieves.
This is what I settled on regarding the punishment for theft in the Quran and I do feel very comfortable with it
Allah knows best
Salam