Does Quran prohibit ?
-
I am completely loss in the argument between Sharp and OPF regarding the witnesses. Please clear my doubts. Is any of you, implying that if you get for witnesses, that you do not have to question them about how they now and check theri testominy against each of the other testimonies to see if it is true or not. Because the gist of having witnesses in all judicial matters and not just one is the fact that you can check their truthfulness against each other. The fact of having four witnesses is also obviously in order to havegreater means of checking testomony, if not for what? Of course their testomony must be checked. That is in principle what will allow, if they give false testimony to punish them with 80 lashes. May be I have got you wrong, but, please clear.
Another thing, about this four witnesses each having had intercourse with a woman but successively and it making it possible for a woman to be branded this or that, may be I have got it wrong. But you cannot, YOU CANNOT, NEVER, brand anybody anything because four witnesses, each one of them witnessing a particular event, but not the same event as any of the other, can warrant any such a thing. What it can warrant, though, is that that testimony being a self-incrimination, the witness becaomes liable for the zina punishment or the fahisha, whatever. The woman might save him saying that it is not true. But, for God sake, I hope that you are not saying that if four people happen to say and even swear to an event, and if then another three people swear to any three other events that that has any consequence for the purported author, because in that case we better throw away any concept of administering justice or legality of any kind. Mathematically, you cannot uphold a charge on a single witness, therefore 0 charge+0 charge+0 charge+0 charge = 0.
Please, relieve me saying that I have got you wrong.
Salaam
Sister huruf,
I am not sure on your first paragraph. But for the second one, I think the accusation is of not being chaste, rather than not being chaste at a particular moment. To establish if a person is not chaste doesn't necessarily imply that a person is unchaste just because in one instance she was engaged in a prohibited act and was seen by 4 people (who were not part of the act). One can also label a person "un-chaste" if she has engaged in such an act more than once, say 5 times, and has had a witness of each event.
That is my opinion of it. I hope I have been able to clarify it.
Peace
-
opf
what is it, which is so difficult to understand? or Are you mocking the Devinne wisdom?
If a sexual act is so carelessly done that there are 4 people witnessing it , the couple is termed Zanis, punished , God decrees that no one should marry such people except their own kind , or Mushriqs may take them as their spouses.
In an ideal society where people follow God's instructions , No one would marry them , and they will be left with no choice than to marry each other (if they want to) , or any other labeled as such , or the people who don't believe in God's commandments (Mushriqeen)
Scenario 2
If i get authentic reports from 4 independent resources regarding my daughter that she is up to some thing in an authorised relationship , and may be committing fahishas, I as guardian, is being advised to restrict her , so that she cant go on her spree any more , till such time that she dies , or God creates an exit for her.
This exit could be that , someone marries her and takes her into his protection, or she realises her mistake, and genuinely repents. When you get your confidence restored in her , you may call her confinement off.
Same way if i recieve report by 4 different/independent sources (whom i can trust ) regarding the character of my fiancee , there is a reasonable probability that she could not be a chaste woman, so i can exercise my jurisdiction and call of my engagment.
sikiLast I checked, your wisdom was not divine wisdom, though if it is, I do beg forgiveness from your Holiness.
If a sexual act is so carelessly done that there are 4 people witnessing it , the couple is termed Zanis, punished , God decrees that no one should marry such people except their own kind , or Mushriqs may take them as their spouses.
This doesn't concern that group.
Scenario 2
If i get authentic reports from 4 independent resources regarding my daughter that she is up to some thing in an authorised relationship , and may be committing fahishas, I as guardian, is being advised to restrict her , so that she cant go on her spree any more , till such time that she dies , or God creates an exit for her.
This exit could be that , someone marries her and takes her into his protection, or she realises her mistake, and genuinely repents. When you get your confidence restored in her , you may call her confinement off.
Same way if i recieve report by 4 different/independent sources (whom i can trust ) regarding the character of my fiancee , there is a reasonable probability that she could not be a chaste woman, so i can exercise my jurisdiction and call of my engagment.
How do you deem these sources of hearsay authentic? And supposing you take the above procedure and apply it, how are you any better than a kangaroo court? A kangaroo court at least has several people, you are playing judge, jury and executioner here.
So, if you get 4 authentic reports from hearsay sources regarding your son, that he is up to something in an authorised relationship, what is your response?
Are you going to confine him until a woman comes to take him into her "protection"?
Same way if i recieve report by 4 different/independent sources (whom i can trust ) regarding the character of my fiancee , there is a reasonable probability that she could not be a chaste woman, so i can exercise my jurisdiction and call of my engagment.
What if your fiancee gets suspicious reports, all independent, whom she can trust, regarding YOUR character? There is a reasonable probability for everything, does it mean it's true?
And what about the scenario I already outlined regarding your four honourable witnesses and the one whore?
OPF,
I understand your concerns regarding this issue. Can I ask you what your study of the Book has revealed to you?
Peace
It's not a complete understanding but 415 and 16 are evidently complementary to each other (dual used in one, plural in the other, punishment specified in one, no punishment specified in the other, four witnesses specified in one, nothing in the other, method specified for exiting in one, exiting clause in the other, etc). The context is clear, that mankind is addressed at the start of the verse.
Nowhere does it sanction the usage of suspicious witness and nowhere does it charge a single person with the duty. Think about it, God has declared man as an "khilafah"/envoy/successor on Earth, and here is the same mankind being addressed. Do you see diplomats or envoys from a country going to another to spy on them, especially when their leader states explicitly that suspicioun is to be wholly avoided, that there is 80% the punishment of zina for bearing false witness, and so on and so on?
As I hopefully demonstrated, the scenario becomes twice as ridiculous when the male is accused of fahisha, at least with the disputed understanding.
-
Sister huruf,
I am not sure on your first paragraph. But for the second one, I think the accusation is of not being chaste, rather than not being chaste at a particular moment. To establish if a person is not chaste doesn't necessarily imply that a person is unchaste just because in one instance she was engaged in a prohibited act and was seen by 4 people (who were not part of the act). One can also label a person "un-chaste" if she has engaged in such an act more than once, say 5 times, and has had a witness of each event.
That is my opinion of it. I hope I have been able to clarify it.
Peace
First Can you quote anything from the Qur'an to uphold this?
Second What is this labelling). Legally you are either guilty or not. There is no labelling whatsoever. Where is this labelling in the Qur'an? It si completely new to me except as a thing to avoid.
Third No. No way that you can proove anything whatsoever summing testimonies that each by itself would be void. NO WAY. Besides when you pretend that that would "label" somebody else without the witness incriminating him or herself. Again, you cannot add four void testimonies and come up with a valid one. Better do away with the concept of crime and with any legal concept at all. I have never heard of anything so astray.The closest thing with what you say that I can come up with is that if in strictly private terms someody you trust tells you this and that about a third person and you believe what this trusted person tells you and therefore avoid having whatever dealings with the third person, as a strictly private matter. No label, no judging, no branding. You, for yourself, act as you think best. For that trust is enough, no need to bring four fornicators (by their own confession) or whatever to narrate their private shenanigans.
-
Salaam huruf,
After reading the thread (good discussion), I'd like you to correct what I think you're saying to summarise
1a) There can't be 4 witnesses to different events labelling someone unchaste. Reasoning being that one needs the 4 witnesses to ONE event to consider that a legitimate prosecution/accusation as understood by the verses.
1b) If there are 4 witnesses to different events, then firstly it becomes void as one needs the 4 witnesses to one event in the first place and also because the purpose for 4 witnesses to one event is to check their testimony to the one event as being valid/true (by contrasting it against each other etc). One can't do that if there are 4 witnesses to different events (unless all four witness the different events/occurrences simultaneously as well? in which case one could take that as 4 different cases of charges or would it be one complete charge altogether?)
- One can't bring in witnesses that participated in said events (but were bystanders, so to say or accidental "happenstancers" or something like that as long as they weren't involved in the act itself)?
-
| date=1194649944]
|
(unless all four witness the different events/occurrences simultaneously as well? in which case one could take that as 4 different cases of charges or would it be one complete charge altogether?)-
One can't bring in witnesses that participated in said events (but were bystanders, so to say or accidental "happenstancers" or something like that as long as they weren't involved in the act itself)?
-
If they are simultaneous, that is what is needed, for one or for several instances of zina. Doesn't matter. I don't remember that you need a particular number of acts to acuse, or that you can acuse of four acts of zina and give 400 lashes or of 20 and give 4000 lashes of a go. Same as when you poison. If it is six months of poisoning you don't count 1 dosis a day, 180 cases of poisoning, it is just one case of poisoning.
-
I was talking about the particular case mentioned by Shaarp that you have four men who had intercourse with a woman.
If not, well it would be difficult to testify to one of the two of them and not to the other.
Salaam
-
-
If they are simultaneous, that is what is needed, for one or for several instances of zina.
Thank you. I wanted clarification on what it was that was being said precisely in the posts.
- I was talking about the particular case mentioned by Shaarp that you have four men who had intercourse with a woman.
Yes.
If not, well it would be difficult to testify to one of the two of them and not to the other.
Thanks again. -
Who's arguing with who? ;D
-
Sister huruf,
First up, I apologize for using the word "label". I think I only used it for want of a better word. Let's see if I can come up with a better one. Now, let's take up our discussion. Although I am probably not as proficient as you in terms of knowledge of the Book, but I will try my best. Maybe, I'll learn something new. Secondly, I think there was a misunderstanding. When I described the second case, with a witness of each of the 5 events, I did not mean that they were the ones engaged in the act. Following from the first case I quoted, they were 5 different persons, not engaged in the act, who witnessed the act each time it was committed.
First Can you quote anything from the Qur'an to uphold this?
Second What is this labelling). Legally you are either guilty or not. There is no labelling whatsoever. Where is this labelling in the Qur'an? It si completely new to me except as a thing to avoid.
Third No. No way that you can proove anything whatsoever summing testimonies that each by itself would be void. NO WAY. Besides when you pretend that that would "label" somebody else without the witness incriminating him or herself. Again, you cannot add four void testimonies and come up with a valid one. Better do away with the concept of crime and with any legal concept at all. I have never heard of anything so astray.The closest thing with what you say that I can come up with is that if in strictly private terms someody you trust tells you this and that about a third person and you believe what this trusted person tells you and therefore avoid having whatever dealings with the third person, as a strictly private matter. No label, no judging, no branding. You, for yourself, act as you think best. For that trust is enough, no need to bring four fornicators (by their own confession) or whatever to narrate their private shenanigans.
Allow me to quote the two verses under discussion for the analysis. Please pardon me if the translations aren't agreeable to anyone. It's a Free-minds Translation
415 - "And the women who commit lewdness, you shall bring four witnesses over them from amongst you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death takes them, or God makes for them a way out." (Note the Free-minds translation translates the above with "two" women, whereas all other translations do not include the "two", so I have used the understanding of the majority.)
416 - "And the two men who commit it from amongst you, then you shall annoy them. If they repent and amend, then leave them alone. God is Redeemer, Merciful."
As we know that the Book makes everything clear, and has the best examples and explanations. To that effect, I would also like to quote an example of Yusuf (Joseph) naratted in the Book about a just and fair decision, which I think is relevant to the discussion.
1222 to 29 - "And when he reached his maturity, We gave him position and knowledge. It is thus that We reward the good doers. And the woman, in whose house he was staying, attempted to seduce him away from himself. And she closed the doors and said "I have prepared myself for you." He said "I seek refuge with God, He is my Lord, He made good my residence; the wicked do not succeed." And she desired him and he desired her, had it not been that he saw His Lord's proof; it was thus that We turned evil and lewdness away from him; he is of Our loyal servants. And as they rushed towards the door, she tore his shirt from behind; and they found her master at the door. She said "What is the punishment of he who wanted to molest your family? Is it not that he be jailed or punished painfully?" 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." "And if his shirt is torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is truthful." 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!" "Joseph, turn away from this. And you woman, seek forgiveness for your sin; you were of the wrongdoers."
What I see from the above example, is an accusation of sexual misconduct against the lady, but justice was served, not based on witnesses, but on concrete evidence and proof. So, logically, if one has such an evidence and proof, it should suffice to make the judgement. However, only in the absence of proof, does the role of witnesses manifest itself.
In the context of the first two of the above verses, I have read many people asserting that the 4 witnesses mentioned in the verse can be participants in the act. Why I don't think that is likely is because of the following verse
2402 - "The adultress and the adulterer, you shall lash each of them one hundred lashes, and do not let any pity take you over God's system if you believe in God and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment."
Under the Quranic Law, why would any rational guilty person testify against the adultress, knowing full well that (s)he is also testifying against himself/herself? The only way I can think of is that (s)he is truly repenting his/her act. But in any case, the punishment is due & just for such witnesses. So, we can conclude that the witnesses who were participants in the act, would be punished, regardless and although possible, it is very, very, very unlikely that such persons would act as witnesses.
What about the person who originally accused the women? If (S)he cannot produce 4 appropriate witnesses, what happens to him/her?
244 & 5 - "And those who accuse the independent women and they do not bring forth four witnesses, then you shall lash them eighty lashes and do not ever accept their testimony. Those indeed are the evildoers. Except those who repent after this and do right, then God is Forgiving, Merciful."
This is a pretty grave punishment because not only are they lashed 80 times, nobody will EVER accept their testimony. So, even if someone you "trust" tells you something about someone's chastity (which is an accusation, no matter how you look at it) and fails to produce any evidence or the requisite witnesses, you should NEVER trust their word/testimony again, in addition to the 80 lashes, unless they repent and do right, of course. Things are getting really difficult now for the accuser, aren't they? But wait, that is just the worldly punishment? What about the Lord's punishment?
2411 - "Those who have brought forth the false accusation were a group from within you. Do not think it is bad for you, for it is good for you. Every person amongst them will have what he deserves of the sin. And as for he who had the greatest portion of it, he will have a great retribution."
I don't know about anyone else but personally I would think 1000 times before accusing anyone of adultery, without proof. How serious a matter this is, is understood from the following verses.
2412 to 17 - "If only when you heard it the believing men and women should have thought good of their own selves and said "This is an obvious lie!" If only they had brought four witnesses to it. If they did not have the witnesses, then these with God are the liars. And had it not been for God's favour upon you and His mercy upon you in this world and the Hereafter, a great retribution would have touched you for what you have spoken. For you have cast it with your tongues, and you say with your mouths what you have no knowledge of, and you think it is a minor issue, while with God it was great. And when you heard it you should have said "It was not right for us to speak of this. Glory to You, this is a great lie." God warns you not to repeat something similar to this ever, if you are believers."
Please excuse me, as I am not including the cases of married couples accusing each other of adultery. In summary, I think they can avert punishment by taking themselves as witness 4 times with an oath by the Lord and 5th oath for the curse of the Lord to be on themselves if they lie.
Even suspicion of such an accusation is frowned about in the Book, as follows
4912 - "O you who believe, you shall avoid much suspicion, for some suspicion is sinful. And do not spy on one another, nor shall you backbite one another. Would one of you enjoy eating the flesh of his dead brother? You certainly would hate this. You shall observe God. God is Redeemer, Merciful."
So, what is the conclusion that I have been able to draw from this discussion?
(1) If there is an accusation of lewdness (which includes but is not limited to just one act/event of lewdness), it must be backed up by concrete evidence.
(2) In the absence of concrete evidence, there must be 4 witnesses.
(3) The 4 witnesses practically cannot and will not be persons who were engaged in the act of lewdness.
(4) It is possible that each of said 4 witnesses have witnessed 4 seperate acts of lewdness by the accused.
(5) I could not find in the Book any verse which specifies verification of the character of the witnesses. Therefore, I will NOT put my words in it and thus, do not say that the reason for 4 witnesses/testimonies is primarily to cross-check each other's testimonies. For all we know, if they have coordinated among themselves, then the cross-check test is bound to fail. I will welcome any input from the Book, relevant to witnesses in this scenario.
(6) If all the above conditions are met, justice must be served with Allah as witness and punishment must be administered accordingly.I thank you for initiating this discussion and welcome your input in this regard. This indeed is a wonderful opportunity to learn for me.
Peace
(P.S. - I have also read the subsequent posts. I think probably the only point of contention is the object of accusation. Verse 415 above addresses accusing women about committing lewdness, not just one act of lewdness. In that case, in relatively conducive circumstances, if a guilty woman wishes, she can just keep on commiting the act throughout her life, even if there happen to be one or two witnesses of each event.)
-
Salaam, Sharp001,
Thanks for all clarification and excellent post.
Regarding the use of other evidence in this matter, I would like to know more and better informed opinions than mine. I am not sure that evidence should suffice. It was so in the case of Joseph in the court of Pharaoh, the punishment was also different. On the other hand the sura An-nur goes to such great lengths, insist so much in saying that what it says is what there is and is so silent on evidence that I do think, it is purposefully excluded in this cases. Indeed, I think given the circumstances, the possibility of misuse or fabrication of evidence would be a no lesser danger than loose testimony. To me, evidence in these cases doesn't count.
The other part about lewdness being perpetrated the whole life, I still think that four witnesses must be for the same event. Lewdness could happen the whole life but you could have innmerable women accused without four witness.
And coming to the purpose and sense of this whole thing, it is clear that the sexual morals come in a completely different department as any crime. It is clear that punishment as crime is purposefully restricted, while morally they are very intensely condemned. And I think that that is inmensely wise. You cannot impose morality through the law without giving rise to hypocrisy and slander and putting in danger everybody's peace of spirit. Here, as opposed to theft or murder, every individual is called to take the responsibility of having a healthy society. I think the punishments are an indication of the danger of those coducts, but that to avoid them is mostly in the domain of individual behaviour. There is indeed very little that cand be added to the ayas that you have quoted on this aspect. We are called to exert good judgement and restraint, and we are called to help the people by giveng good example and good counsel and trust and let that people do their own moral journey. We have to respect that. We have to respect from where other people start and how they advance or (go back) in life, but we must not destroy their life, nor stabb them when may be they are making tremendous effort to overcome their faults. Sas they say noweadys, they have to haver their space to develop.
Salaam Sharp001
-
What I see from the above example, is an accusation of sexual misconduct against the lady, but justice was served, not based on witnesses, but on concrete evidence and proof. So, logically, if one has such an evidence and proof, it should suffice to make the judgement. However, only in the absence of proof, does the role of witnesses manifest itself.
Salaam Shrp001
I agree with the rest of your post. However, this part which relates to Joseph story has nothingto do with "zina". This is more of a "rape" accusation, where someone did not give their consent. The woman is accusing Joseph of attempted rape. This can be proved or refuted by any evidence, not necessarily by even one witness.
Zina can only be proved by four witnesses. If any other evidence is permissible, God would not have mentioned a method, or a specific method, to prove it.
No specific evidence is mentioned for murder for example, nor for theft, which are both punishable crimes in human courts. They could be proved by any means.
-
Salaam Shrp001
I agree with the rest of your post. However, this part which relates to Joseph story has nothingto do with "zina". This is more of a "rape" accusation, where someone did not give their consent. The woman is accusing Joseph of attempted rape. This can be proved or refuted by any evidence, not necessarily by even one witness.
Zina can only be proved by four witnesses. If any other evidence is permissible, God would not have mentioned a method, or a specific method, to prove it.
No specific evidence is mentioned for murder for example, nor for theft, which are both punishable crimes in human courts. They could be proved by any means.
It escaped me that indeed though we know that no rape was involved the accusation was one of attempted rape. Yes, it is a different story.
-
Regarding the use of other evidence in this matter, I would like to know more and better informed opinions than mine. I am not sure that evidence should suffice. It was so in the case of Joseph in the court of Pharaoh, the punishment was also different. On the other hand the sura An-nur goes to such great lengths, insist so much in saying that what it says is what there is and is so silent on evidence that I do think, it is purposefully excluded in this cases. Indeed, I think given the circumstances, the possibility of misuse or fabrication of evidence would be a no lesser danger than loose testimony. To me, evidence in these cases doesn't count.
Salaam Shrp001
I agree with the rest of your post. However, this part which relates to Joseph story has nothingto do with "zina". This is more of a "rape" accusation, where someone did not give their consent. The woman is accusing Joseph of attempted rape. This can be proved or refuted by any evidence, not necessarily by even one witness.
Zina can only be proved by four witnesses. If any other evidence is permissible, God would not have mentioned a method, or a specific method, to prove it.
No specific evidence is mentioned for murder for example, nor for theft, which are both punishable crimes in human courts. They could be proved by any means.
Salaam to you as well, sister huruf and sister Samia
Thank you pointing out your views on Joseph's story. But I think there is a misunderstanding between us. My point of view is that there are two accusations in this story, not just one.
(1) The woman accusing Joseph of molestation/forced sexual misconduct.
(2) Joseph accusing the woman of seduction.Now that I reflect on my post, I think that the example of Yusuf (Joseph) might have been out of context, as Joseph's accusation is that of seduction, not that of "lewdness", per ce. But then again the definition of lewdness is so broad, encompassing indecency as well, that seduction, an indecent act, can be considered lewdness. I don't know but maybe an analysis of the word "Al-fahasha" in verse 415 might clarify matters in this regard.
(To everybody reading this post, please correct me if I am wrong)
"Al-fahasha" is derived from the root FA-HA-SHA(or SHIN). I searched the meaning for that root in Lexicon Lane, where it is described to mean, "became excessive/immoderate/enormous/exorbitant/overmuch/beyond measure, foul/bad/evil/unseemly/indecency/abominable, lewd/gross/obscene, committing excess which is forbidden, transgress the bounds/limits, avaricious, adultery/fornication."
So, in my opinion, it is very plausible that seduction as well as molestation/forced sexual misconduct form part or are aspects of "Al-fahasha". In fact, correct me if I am wrong but "Zina" is a very specific act which is also encompassed in that definition of "Al-fahasha" but "Zina" does not encompass the whole of "Al-fahasha". I apologize if I am saying anything out of context. Please point it out, if that is the case.
The punishment in Pharoah being different was emphasized, to which I agree. But the interesting thing about the chain of verses 1222 - 29 is the last verse ends on the verdict, i.e. she was judged guilty. The next verse (1230) then describe the reaction of the ladies of the city and the following verses the conversation they have with the guilty lady. Her punishment was not described in the verses following.
This just tells me what lesson was to be learned from the example. You mentioned Surah An-nur. It mentions punishments of the people involved AFTER the verdict has been passed, and no so much the process of judgement. As for silence about evidence, the same Sura An-nur reads
2434 - "And We have sent down to you clarifying revelations and an example of those who came before you and a lesson for the righteous."
As regards to fabrication of testimonies and evidence, then I should say that there would be no end to accusations and counter-accusations, e.g.
A says B is accused of lewdness.
B says Bring your proof.
A says We have video evidence.
B says It is cleverly forged.
A says We also have 4 witnesses.
B says Their testimonies are fabricated.
The judge says I don't know who is right and who is wrong and thus, cannot pass a judgement.I am sorry for the crude example, for I have tried to keep it simple. What I tried to imply is the role of the judge is to judge with justice.
458 - "God orders you to deliver anything you have been entrusted with to its owners. And if you judge between the people, then you shall judge with justice. It is always the best that God prescribes for you. God is Hearer, Seer."
1690 - "God orders justice and goodness and that you shall help your relatives, and He deters from evil, vice, and transgression. He warns you that you may remember."
I apologize if I have missed something in the Book, but I am not sure if it mentions what specifically to do if one has evidence and/or 4 witness. We have been told what is needed to pass the judgement (i.e. evidence, witnesses) and what the punishment should be for the guilty. The judgement in the middle should be just and equitable as indicated in the two verses above, and in order to make such a judgement is to objectively consider the evidence and the witnesses' testimony, use our resources (eyes, ears, reasoning, etc.) to arrive at an unbiased and fair conclusion to the best of our abilities.
The part about lewdness being perpetrated the whole life, I suppose we have between us a difference of opinion. I can only hope and pray that God reveals the Truth to both of us and forgives us for any wrong conclusions that we might have arrived at because of our limited knowledge.
And coming to the purpose and sense of this whole thing, it is clear that the sexual morals come in a completely different department as any crime. It is clear that punishment as crime is purposefully restricted, while morally they are very intensely condemned. And I think that that is inmensely wise. You cannot impose morality through the law without giving rise to hypocrisy and slander and putting in danger everybody's peace of spirit. Here, as opposed to theft or murder, every individual is called to take the responsibility of having a healthy society. I think the punishments are an indication of the danger of those coducts, but that to avoid them is mostly in the domain of individual behaviour. There is indeed very little that cand be added to the ayas that you have quoted on this aspect. We are called to exert good judgement and restraint, and we are called to help the people by giveng good example and good counsel and trust and let that people do their own moral journey. We have to respect that. We have to respect from where other people start and how they advance or (go back) in life, but we must not destroy their life, nor stabb them when may be they are making tremendous effort to overcome their faults. Sas they say noweadys, they have to haver their space to develop.
Salaam Sharp001
Very well said. Thanks for the post
Salaam sister huruf and sister Samia
-
Salaam Sharp001
The fact that the accusation of zina is the only accusation where an accuser will be punished for not bringing 4 witnesses makes it clear that it is only 4 witnesses that is accepted. If I accuse someone of murder and my evidence was not accepted by the court, would I be punished? The main lesson of bringing 4 witnesses is to prevent people from slandering others. It is a societal disease. No one is harmed because two people decided to have illegal sex that nobody witnessed. The society will be harmed if two people, even married, engage in public sex. A husband/wife is an exception and they are exempt of bringing 4 witnesses. God here specified their evidence 4 oaths. No other evidence is required nor accepted.
-
Salaam Sharp001
The fact that the accusation of zina is the only accusation where an accuser will be punished for not bringing 4 witnesses makes it clear that it is only 4 witnesses that is accepted. If I accuse someone of murder and my evidence was not accepted by the court, would I be punished? The main lesson of bringing 4 witnesses is to prevent people from slandering others. It is a societal disease. No one is harmed because two people decided to have illegal sex that nobody witnessed. The society will be harmed if two people, even married, engage in public sex. A husband/wife is an exception and they are exempt of bringing 4 witnesses. God here specified their evidence 4 oaths. No other evidence is required nor accepted.
Salaam sister Samia,
Ah... Now I see that I have erred in my conclusions. In light of your explanations, I revise my conclusions of my understading of this topic as follows (If you feel that I have still erred in my conclusion, I ask you to please point it out)
(1) In order to judge over the accusation of "Al-fahasha" towards women, one has to have 4 witnesses (in accordance with (7) below), REGARDLESS, of whether there is any evidence or not, i.e. even if one has concrete evidence, 4 witnesses are still required to pass the judgement under God's Law.
(2) If a woman is found guilty of the above, she is to be confined to her home until death takes her or God makes a way out for her.
(3) However, if a woman is specifically found guilty of "Zina", one of the acts which constitutes "Al-fahasha", in addition to the punishment mentioned in (2) above, she is to be lashed with 100 lashes.
(4) The 4 witnesses to "Zina" practically cannot and will not be persons who were engaged in the act of "Zina" with the guilty woman.
(5) The 4 witnesses should testify against the woman of have committing "Al-fahasha", not necessarily just the one act of "Al-fahasha", as the accusation of commiting "Al-fahasha", not just one instance of committing "Al-fahasha", i.e.1 act of "Al-fahasha" = 4 witnesses to that event
2 acts of "Al-fahasha" = Possible witness ratio for each act 04 , 13 , 22
3 acts of "Al-fahasha" = Possible witness ratio for each act 004 , 013 , 022 , 112
4 act of "Al-fahasha" = Possible witness ratio for each act 0004 , 0013 , 0022 , 0112, 1111
More than 4 acts of "Al-fahasha" = Possible witness ratio for each act 00004 , 00013 , 00022 , 00112, 01111, etc.(6) All accusers who cannot back up their accusations against chaste woman (as opposed to woman guilty of "Al-fahasha" and not just restricted to "Zina" with 4 witnesses they are to be lashed 80 times and nobody is EVER to accept their testimony.
(7) One of the traits of the 4 witnesses must be that they must not have falsely accused anyone of "Al-fahasha", as described in (6) above, because their testimony is invalid forever, unless they repent and do right.Peace and thank you again for indulging me in my discussion.
-
Salaam Sharp001
Yes, that's it, except for number 3
- However, if a woman is specifically found guilty of "Zina", one of the acts which constitutes "Al-fahasha", in addition to the punishment mentioned in (2) above, she is to be lashed with 100 lashes
Punishment for zina is just 100 lashes, as per 242 (and applies to men, too ;D).
I did not understand number 5, but looks like I do not agree!
If they witness the first incident, she/he gets punished. Period. Crime removed from his/her file. Start afresh. Second incident start anew with 4 witnesses (doesn't matter if they are the same, since they are not declared unsound)..etc
-
Salaam Sharp001
Yes, that's it, except for number 3
Punishment for zina is just 100 lashes, as per 242 (and applies to men, too ;D).
I did not understand number 5, but looks like I do not agree!
If they witness the first incident, she/he gets punished. Period. Crime removed from his/her file. Start afresh. Second incident start anew with 4 witnesses (doesn't matter if they are the same, since they are not declared unsound)..etc
Sister Samia,
I apologize but I don't think that I have been able to clarify myself in all of conclusions. I much rather prefer a face-to-face discussion than one over the forums as the understandings have a tendency of not being completely comprehended by the other person. But in summary, you feel that all my conclusions are sound based on the Book, except (3) and (5). I'm not a hundred percent in agreement with your view on (3) but I'll get back to that after I make another attempt to clarify (5) below
(5) Let us suppose that there are 2 women, A & B. (Please understand that I am not trying to discriminate the women, in any way. Just trying to illustrate my understanding of 415. I am well aware that the same understanding may be applied to 416)
Case 1 Woman A commits an act of "Al-fahasha" and is accused of commiting "Al-fahasha". There are 4 different legitimate witnesses who testify to her act. Judgement is passed and punishment executed. Case closed for Woman A.
Case 2 Woman B commits 2 acts of "Al-fahasha" and is accused of commiting "Al-fahasha". There were 2 different legitimate witnesses of the first act who testify to the first act and 2 different legitimate witnesses of the second act who testify to her second act. Total of 4 witnesses testifying in favour of the accusation against her of commiting "Al-fahasha", of not being chaste.
I think we both agree on the first case. What is your view on the second case?
As for (3), is your understanding that that "Zina" is separate from "Al-fahasha"? If so, then I understand your point of view, but to which I don't think I am in agreement with.
I am more inclined towards "Zina" being a form of "Al-fahasha", in which case, the 100 lashes for "Zina" in addition to confinement in the homes makes sense, because this illustrates that off all the forms of "Al-fahasha", "Zina" is the most serious and thus warrants an extra-punishment. Just punishing a person guilty of "Zina" with just 100 lashes implies that the person, after receiving the punishment is free to roam about. But a person who is found guilty of a lesser act of "Al-fahasha", let's say seduction, is destined to confinement to homes for life, which now seems to me a harsher punishment than that for "Zina". Now you might argue that Zina is a more painful punishment than house arrest for life, but I'll just have to say that is a matter of perspective. Assuming that there is no repentence, the pain will go away with time and afterwards there is freedom. But for the seductress, there is claustrophobia, confinement and house arrest FOR LIFE. Personally, I would conclude that the punishment for the seductress is much harsher that the adultress, whereas adultery is a much more serious offence than seduction.
But that is just my view of it, which I have no intention of imposing on anyone. May the Lord guide me if I am wrong.
Peace
-
In case 2, insufficient witness for either act.
But realistically, surely that would be treated as 1 act, in that 2 witnesses + 2 witnesses = 4 witnesses, per act of zina.
-
Salaam Sharp001
Case 2 Woman B commits 2 acts of "Al-fahasha" and is accused of commiting "Al-fahasha". There were 2 different legitimate witnesses of the first act who testify to the first act and 2 different legitimate witnesses of the second act who testify to her second act. Total of 4 witnesses testifying in favour of the accusation against her of commiting "Al-fahasha", of not being chaste.
My belief is that no matter how many acts of fahisha she commits, each act must have 4 witnesses.
As for (3), is your understanding that that "Zina" is separate from "Al-fahasha"? If so, then I understand your point of view, but to which I don't think I am in agreement with.
I do not say it is different. It's a kind of fahisha. But fahisha is not necessarily zina. Just like saying ornge is a kind of fruit but fruit is not necessarily oranges.
As for the punishment by confinement, I agree with you that it is much harsher than that of zina. So perhaps we do not understand this verse correctly. I could not come to a conclusion regarding it.
-
In case 2, insufficient witness for either act.
But realistically, surely that would be treated as 1 act, in that 2 witnesses + 2 witnesses = 4 witnesses, per act of zina.
Salaam Sharp001
My belief is that no matter how many acts of fahisha she commits, each act must have 4 witnesses.
So the person, who has committed more acts of "Al-fahasha", without 4 witness in each case, goes scott-free, even if there has been different witness to each act, totalling 4?
Maybe this will help a bit. Let's rephrase the accusations. Kindly tell me which one is Book alluding to, in your understanding. That should be able to clarify the difference of opinions
(1) I accuse him/her of commiting an act of lewdness.
(2) I accuse him/her of being lewd.I do not say it is different. It's a kind of fahisha. But fahisha is not necessarily zina. Just like saying ornge is a kind of fruit but fruit is not necessarily oranges.
You'll have to excuse me if I am not utterly convinced by that analogy at the moment.
As for the punishment by confinement, I agree with you that it is much harsher than that of zina. So perhaps we do not understand this verse correctly. I could not come to a conclusion regarding it.
Let us hope that God guides us. There is no confusion or doubt in the Book. Just in our minds and hearts. I have always found that it is better to take a step back and re-analyse our thought processes. Maybe it'll help.
Peace