Does Quran prohibit ?
-
NO. Period. Unless, the "until Allah makes for them a way out" is related to "a mushrik/zani marries a mushrik/zani", and hence they escape by marrying another adulterer (I can see some wisdom in that).
There are two or more possible scenarios as far as I see here.
One - Zina is specific
For instance, I have a cookbook. It says "take any fruit you like, and cook it." However, 5 steps before that, it says "if you are using an orange, slice it into halves and peel it". Does that mean I boil the orange after doing such and such? No.
An orange is a fruit, but nobody cooks it within reason. However, we have cooked apples and bananas.
Two - Zina is a fahish act and takes both punishments
So, we have these adulterers lashed for their crime then imprisoned for life. They either die, or have a way made out for them by God or repent and are released. The way made out would thus be a marriage with a fellow adulterer, even the person they did it with.
In addition, scenario three
415 and 416 refer specifically to homosexuality as indicated by the dual in 416, and life imprisonment but not 100 lashes is incumbent upon them.
-
Brother OPF,
Thanks for your input. Strangely, I was a little relieved when you said "No. Period" and effectively shut any further doors for discussion for me. But then you added "unless" and followed that up with 3 possibilities that you see, which means, in your eyes any one of them could be right, but only 1 of them has to be right, unless all of them are wrong.
Possibility 1 I apologize before hand if I am replying out of context to the possiblity that you meant to communicate, but I find it really unfair to compare the Book, which claims to have verses that complement and explain each other, with a cook book, which has different and unrelated recipes for food on each page, sometimes more than one unrelated recipes on the same page. I am sorry but I am unable to relate to this possibility.
Possibility 2 This is the possibility that I am alluding to. So you believe that my understanding might be the right one?
Possibility 3 I have put that question to myself as well as sister Samia, but haven't reached any conclusions about it as yet. Let's see what happens.
Peace
-
...so unless we arrive to the understanding of the meaning of verses 415-16, we will not know
the exact "fahisha" other than "zina" which is punishable
what exactly is its the punishment
why there are two different punishments to the same fahisha
or perhaps the fahisha in verse 15 is different from that of verse 16Until then, all we can be satisfied with (its understanding) is the punishment by 100 lashes for zina on both parties evidenced by 4 sound witnesses.
-
I believe it deals with homosexuality, as I said earlier, the verses are entirely complementary to each other. Look at 242, where it mentions a man and a woman (2 people) and likewise, in 416, 2 males.
-
and what's verse 415 about?
Same.
Take into consideration the biological differences and how they relate
-
Sister Samia,
Yup, like I said, back to square one. Br. OPF's understanding of the word, "Al-Fahasha" is the same
Same as what?
Same.
Take into consideration the biological differences and how they relate
You mean about lesbianism? Then why is the punishment different (based on gender), and even more severe for lesbians?
-
Same as what?
You mean about lesbianism? Then why is the punishment different (based on gender), and even more severe for lesbians?
Where's the "even more severe punishment"? I only see one punishment in those 2 verses.
-
Life imprisonment?
-
Life imprisonment?
This one is for women, 15, more like house arrest.
16 speaks of "aathuuhuma punishing/hurting" but nothing specific.
If it was the same punishment, why not just put them in the same verse as that of "zina"?I also wonder if it is the same crime Why does the first verse speak of women in the plural and the second of men in the dual?
-
I don't know where you can find it; but here is the meaning
415 and those (feminine plural)
416 and the two (masculine dual)Pardon me, Sister Samia, but what is a "masculine dual"? Because this is the only instance in the book where this word is used. What is the root word for it?
Peace
-
dual = 2
masculine = male
allathaani = 2 allathi 2(he who) = the two who,
You also find it in 4129 in the accusative form (as object) allathayn "...Our Lord! show us those among both jinn and humans who led us astray..."Peace sister Samia,
Thanks for the clarification. One more question though, is allathayn also a masculine form?
-
Yes, it is masculine. It is allathaani itself, just grammatical difference, like the difference between al kitaabu and al kitaaba (the book)
Sister Samia,
An honest question, then. If allathayn is masculine but which is meant to address both men and women, then is it possible that "allathaani" ("the two who" could stand to mean a man or a woman? or am I mistaken in someway? I apologize for being a bother.
Peace