THEFT PUNISHMENT
-
yeah , if someone cuts ur hand, u cut his hand . but punishment for theft is also taht .
That doesnt make sense...
Its like saying, if someone spills drink on your dress you burn their house down. ? (an over the top punishment that is completely unrelated to the offense comitted)
the punishment for adultery and homosexuality also sounds over-the-top to many people . because they try to be more merciful than God .
-
Salam beatnik,
If there was no doubt about the translation, I wouldnt be in this thread, the only thing I am sure of is the concept of equivalence that is promoted numerous times in the Quran.
Main points of debate here to sum up
- Definition of equivalence.
- Accuracy of the word 'hand' or 'resources' in translation.
I think these two verses 564, 511 bring additional information for 538
- And the Jews said ?The hand of God is tied-down!? Their hands will be tied-down, and they will be cursed for what they have said. No, His hands are wide open spending as He wills. And for many of them, what has been sent down to you will increase them in rebellion and rejection; and We have cast between them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. Every time they ignite the fire of war, God puts it out; and they seek to make corruption in the land; and God does not like the corrupters.
When the hands are wide open , it means spending liberally money and wealths..
In contrast whith The hands chained to the neck means stinginess...
This action "to cut their hand" could have several meanings prevent the thiefs to steal, to spend what they have stollen and restitute what they have stollen.
Like "fakaffa aydiyahum/He restrained their hands from you" which doesn't imply a physical contact with their hands.Bashir
511 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! Remember the Blessing of Allah. There were people who had aggressive designs against you but He withheld their hands from you. (Due preparation against danger is a strong deterrent (471), (860)). Remain mindful of Allah?s Laws. Then, in Allah let believers put their trust. -
It is not different. The hands in 538 are not to be taken as physical hands no more than the hands in 3845 and 3817 are physical hands. The story of Youssef provides a clear example of the punishment decreed in 538 on the thief.
538 is the only verse that tells us how to punish the thief . and it is crystal clear . 1275 is about joseph's time . the koran has replaced all the laws and scriptures . that is what i understand .
Do you take "hands" in 3845 and 3817 to be physical hands? Why or why not? Why should 538 be any different?
Please let us know.
Ayman
-
Do you take "hands" in 3845 and 3817 to be physical hands? Why or why not? Why should 538 be any different?
Please let us know.
salam dear Ayman .
no i dont take "hands" in 3845 and 3817 to be physical hands .but just like verse 538 , the verses 2071 , 2649 , 533 , 7124 , 1231 all use the words "cut" and "hands" , and all of them mean physical hands . so why should 538 be any different ?
salam.
fahad. -
salam all.
?It goes as follow. Chance should be given to the thieves to come forward, acknowledge their crime, and give back what they have stolen to the victims. They might even get a reward. If they do not come forward, prove should be found who are the thieves. Thieves should then work to pay the fees involved for the whole thing. What was stolen, if found, should be restituted to their owners. Otherwise, thieves should work for them until what they have stolen is repaid.?http//www.free-minds.org/articles/quranic/theft.htm
According to the interpretation of the article at http//www.free-minds.org/articles/quranic/theft.htm , if the thief has stolen an object worth 1000 dollars , he will work to repay the 1000 dollars to the owners.
But verse 1275 says no such thing
1274, "They said, "What is the punishment for the thief, if you are liars?"'
1275, "They said, "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. We thus punish the guilty."'Malik They replied "The punishment of he in whose pack you find the royal cup will be to make him your bondsman, that's how we punish wrongdoers."
Pickthal They said The penalty for it! He in whose bag (the cup) is found, he is the penalty for it. Thus we requite wrongdoers.
Yusuf Ali They said "The penalty should be that he in whose saddle bag it is found should be held (as bondman) to atone for the (crime). Thus it is we punish the wrongdoers!"
the verse says that the thief belongs to owners . it doesn?t say that the thief works to repay them . and It does not say that the thief will be returned after he repays . it says that the thief belongs to the owners . period .
The article says ?What was stolen, if found, should be restituted to their owners. Otherwise, thieves should work for them until what they have stolen is repaid.?
But according to the verses EVEN IF THE STOLEN OBJECT IS FOUND , the thief belongs to the owners .
1275, "They said, "The punishment, IF IT IS FOUND IN HIS BAG, is that the thief belongs to you??
these are some big flaws and contradictions in the article . the arguments carry no weight . the moderators should remove the article from the website .
salam.
-
salam .
can u tell me who manages the free-minds.org website ? Layth ? -
As to the thief, Male or female, cut off (faqta) their hands (aydiyahuma)
yad (singular) = the hand
yadayn (dual) = les (2) hands
aydee (plural) = the (3 or more) handsaydee-huma (dual of the plural) = the (3 or more) hands of both 2 (the male thief and the female thief)
So, since a thief (like all human beings) has only 2 hands, aydee can only be construed as figurative.
The Sunnis have well understood this, and here is how they have made the interpretation of this word literal they have invented variants of the quran, alleged to come from Ibn Masud.
This variants don't use the word yad (hand), but the word yamin (right hand), of which the plural is aymanun.
Ibn Kathir Wass?riqu wass?riqatu faqta
? aym?nahum? = And the male thief, and the female thief, cut their right hands of both Tabari Wass?riq?na wass?riq?tu faqta? aym?nahum? = And the male thieves, and the female thieves, cut their right hands of both
Qurtubi Wass?riq?na wass?riq?tu faqta`? aym?nahum = And the male thieves, and the female thieves, cut their right hands of themOnly Qurtubi's one is self-cogent, because he replaces huma (both) by hum (them).
The verb qataa (to cut) can also be construe as figurative, like in the following idioms
Qataa hu bil hujjati = he has silenced him with argument
Qataa lisana hu = he has made him to stop talking (he has cut his tongue)
qata'a al-sabeel = he has blocked his movementsPeace
-
salam JM .
i will reply to the arguement u presented . but first i want to ask u , do u agree that the story of joseph and his brothers has nothing to do with 538 . and that the following arguements in the article are in contradiction with the koranAccording to the interpretation of the article at http//www.free-minds.org/articles/quranic/theft.htm , if the thief has stolen an object worth 1000 dollars , he will work to repay the 1000 dollars to the owners.
But verse 1275 says no such thing
1274, "They said, "What is the punishment for the thief, if you are liars?"'
1275, "They said, "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. We thus punish the guilty."'Malik They replied "The punishment of he in whose pack you find the royal cup will be to make him your bondsman, that's how we punish wrongdoers."
Pickthal They said The penalty for it! He in whose bag (the cup) is found, he is the penalty for it. Thus we requite wrongdoers.
Yusuf Ali They said "The penalty should be that he in whose saddle bag it is found should be held (as bondman) to atone for the (crime). Thus it is we punish the wrongdoers!"
the verse says that the thief belongs to owners . it doesn?t say that the thief works to repay them . and It does not say that the thief will be returned after he repays . it says that the thief belongs to the owners . period .
The article says ?What was stolen, if found, should be restituted to their owners. Otherwise, thieves should work for them until what they have stolen is repaid.?
But according to the verses EVEN IF THE STOLEN OBJECT IS FOUND , the thief belongs to the owners .
1275, "They said, "The punishment, IF IT IS FOUND IN HIS BAG, is that the thief belongs to you??
-
salam JM .
i will reply to the arguement u presented . but first i want to ask u , do u agree that the story of joseph and his brothers has nothing to do with 538 . and that the following arguements in the article are in contradiction with the koranAccording to the interpretation of the article at http//www.free-minds.org/articles/quranic/theft.htm , if the thief has stolen an object worth 1000 dollars , he will work to repay the 1000 dollars to the owners.
Peace Saladin,
According to me, to make oneseld bondsman is one way to cut one's power, so, it is not in contradiction with .
Today, he should have gone to prison. -
Peace Saladin,
According to me, to make oneseld bondsman is one way to cut one's power, so, it is not in contradiction with .
peace JM .
actually , the understanding that"thieves should work for them until what they have stolen is repaid."
is in contradiction with1275, "They said, "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. ..."'
Today, he should have gone to prison.
why to prison ? he should have belonged to the owners , if the 1275 is to be applied , which is not the case .
also
The article says ?What was stolen, if found, should be restituted to their owners. Otherwise, thieves should work for them until what they have stolen is repaid.?
But according to the verses EVEN IF THE STOLEN OBJECT IS FOUND , the thief belongs to the owners .
1275, "They said, "The punishment, IF IT IS FOUND IN HIS BAG, is that the thief belongs to you??
As to the thief, Male or female, cut off (faqta) their hands (aydiyahuma)
yad (singular) = the hand
yadayn (dual) = les (2) hands
aydee (plural) = the (3 or more) handsaydee-huma (dual of the plural) = the (3 or more) hands of both 2 (the male thief and the female thief)
So, since a thief (like all human beings) has only 2 hands, aydee can only be construed as figurative.
First the verse is a little mistranslated . it does not say ? ?the thief , male or female...? . it says ??the male thief and the female thief ?? . the verse is about two thieves , both have normally two hands , and 2+2=4 i.e more than 3 . if it was about a single thief then the dual form of hand would have been used .
so the "hands" in this verse are physical .salam.
fahad. -
salam JM .
As to the thief, Male or female, cut off (faqta) their hands (aydiyahuma)
yad (singular) = the hand
yadayn (dual) = les (2) hands
aydee (plural) = the (3 or more) handsaydee-huma (dual of the plural) = the (3 or more) hands of both 2 (the male thief and the female thief)
So, since a thief (like all human beings) has only 2 hands, aydee can only be construed as figurative.
as i said before , one thief would have two hands , but two thieves combined have more than three hands . this is why "aydee" is used . "aydee" means physical hands in 538 .this is the correct interpretation . verse 1231 proves this interpretation to be true .
1231 And when she heard of their sly talk, she sent to
them and prepared for them a cushioned couch
(to lie on at the feast) and gave to every one of
them a knife and said (to Joseph) Come out
unto them! And when they saw him they exalted
him and cut their hands (aydiee) , ...1231 also uses the word "aydee" (plural , more than three),(just like 538 ) although all women had two hands . so u cannot say that 538 means "resources" . or do u and others think that "aydee" in 1231 means "resources" . did the women cut their resources ?
let us know ur opinion ,please .
all arguement for "resources" have failed . both 538 and 1231 use "physical hands" .
salam.
fahad. -
Dear Fahad,
Gramattically verse 538 cannot possibly refer to physical hands. The reason being that Aydeeahooma, is a plurality of 3 or more hands for each one of the two pple
Yadhumaa --> One hand each of the 2 people
Yadaahumaa--> Both hands of each of the 2 people
Aydeeyahumaa--> The 3 or more hands of each of the 2 people
The reason why this is confusing for many ppl is because this form "Aydeeyahumaa" apprears extremely rarely, and so ppl are not familiar with it. In conclusion, from a purely grammatical perspective, it cannot be physical hands. The word is used metaphorically to refer to wealth/resources. Please see how the exact same word is used in an obvious metaphorical sense in teh following verse
Be patient in the face of their utterances, and remember our servant David, the resourceful (Thul- Aydee); he was obedient.
This verse is referring to one person, and says he has Aydee (plural of three or more) hands. Rashad translated it as "resourceful" The only differenece between this and 538 is that 538 is referring to 2 people.
HOpe this clarifies things. Peace,
Omar
-
Gramattically verse 538 cannot possibly refer to physical hands. The reason being that Aydeeahooma, is a plurality of 3 or more hands for each one of the two pple
Yadhumaa --> One hand each of the 2 people
Yadaahumaa--> Both hands of each of the 2 people
Aydeeyahumaa--> The 3 or more hands of each of the 2 people
peace Omar .
i hardly know any arabic grammar , but the way i understand it , "humaa" is not used to mean 3 or more hands of each of the 2 people , but only because the verse is refering to the two people . just like in 1231 where "aydiya -hunna" does not mean three or more hands "of each" of the women . each women did not cut their three or more hands , right ? each women cut only one of their hands , logically .
what do u think now ? please let me know .
peace .
fahad. -
Peace,
Let us compare 242 and 538, we note that the word jazaan/reward is used in 538 and the word AAathab/punishment is used 242
-
The adulteress 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.
Alzzaniyatu waalzzanee faijlidoo kulla wahidin minhuma mi-atajaldatin wala ta/khuthkum bihima ra/fatunfee deeni Allahi in kuntum tu/minoona biAllahiwaalyawmi al-akhiri walyashhad AAathabahuma ta-ifatun mina almu/mineena -
The male thief, and the female thief, you shall cut from their resources as a reward for their doings; a deterrent/lesson from God. God is Almighty, Wise.
Waalssariqu waalssariqatu faiqtaAAoo aydiyahuma jazaan bimakasaba nakalan mina Allahi waAllahuAAazeezun hakeemun
In the light of the Reading, jazaan/reward doesn't imply systematically a physical punishment and nakalan could be translated as a lesson (266)
266 And We made it a lesson to their times and for the future generations and a reminder/exhortation to the righteous.
FajaAAalnaha nakalan lima bayna yadayha wama khalfaha wa mawAAithatan (exhortation/reminder) lilmuttaqeenaThe word "yadayha" which means literally "her two hands" is also used in 266.
-
-
Peace Saladin,
According to me, to make oneseld bondsman is one way to cut one's power, so, it is not in contradiction with .
peace JM .
actually , the understanding that"thieves should work for them until what they have stolen is repaid."
is in contradiction with1275, "They said, "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. ..."'
Today, he should have gone to prison.
why to prison ? he should have belonged to the owners , if the 1275 is to be applied , which is not the case .
also
As Marie wrote above,
This action "to cut their hand" can have several meanings prevent the thieves to steal, to spend what they have stolen and restitute what they have stolen....The article says What was stolen, if found, should be restituted to their owners. Otherwise, thieves should work for them until what they have stolen is repaid.
But according to the verses EVEN IF THE STOLEN OBJECT IS FOUND , the thief belongs to the owners .
1275, "They said, "The punishment, IF IT IS FOUND IN HIS BAG, is that the thief belongs to you
As to the thief, Male or female, cut off (faqta) their hands (aydiyahuma)
yad (singular) = the hand
yadayn (dual) = les (2) hands
aydee (plural) = the (3 or more) handsaydee-huma (dual of the plural) = the (3 or more) hands of both 2 (the male thief and the female thief)
So, since a thief (like all human beings) has only 2 hands, aydee can only be construed as figurative.
First the verse is a little mistranslated . it does not say the thief , male or female... . it says the male thief and the female thief . the verse is about two thieves , both have normally two hands , and 2+2=4 i.e more than 3 . if it was about a single thief then the dual form of hand would have been used .
so the "hands" in this verse are physical .salam.
fahad.I do not have enough knowledge in arabic grammar to answer you.
So what is to be cut off ?
The 2 hands of the thief ? Or only one (his right one) ?Assuming could be construed either literal or figurative, why do you prefer the literal meaning ?
salam JM .
As to the thief, Male or female, cut off (faqta) their hands (aydiyahuma)
yad (singular) = the hand
yadayn (dual) = les (2) hands
aydee (plural) = the (3 or more) handsaydee-huma (dual of the plural) = the (3 or more) hands of both 2 (the male thief and the female thief)
So, since a thief (like all human beings) has only 2 hands, aydee can only be construed as figurative.
as i said before , one thief would have two hands , but two thieves combined have more than three hands . this is why "aydee" is used . "aydee" means physical hands in 538 .this is the correct interpretation . verse 1231 proves this interpretation to be true .
1231 And when she heard of their sly talk, she sent to
them and prepared for them a cushioned couch
(to lie on at the feast) and gave to every one of
them a knife and said (to Joseph) Come out
unto them! And when they saw him they exalted
him and cut their hands (aydiee) , ...1231 also uses the word "aydee" (plural , more than three),(just like 538 ) although all women had two hands . so u cannot say that 538 means "resources" . or do u and others think that "aydee" in 1231 means "resources" . did the women cut their resources ?
let us know ur opinion ,please .
all arguement for "resources" have failed . both 538 and 1231 use "physical hands" .
salam.
fahad.In , there are more than 2 women, so aydee can be literal or figurative.
According to you, what have these women really done with their hands ? Have they cut off it ?
Peace
-
Peace Saladin,
Do you really agree with this ?
http//www.apostatesofislam.com/media/video/handcutting_video_islam_200kbps.wmv
Or would you prefer that the 2 hands shall be cut off ?
-
Salam Fahad
the verse is about two thieves , both have normally two hands , and 2+2=4 i.e more than 3 . if it was about a single thief then the dual form of hand would have been used .
so the "hands" in this verse are physical .You are right "aydiyahuma/their hands" are physical hands, from 538 we shall cut the hands of the robbers, as stated in the same verse we shall reward them for their doings; only for what they sent forth with their own hands.
In the hereafter, the punishment doesn't concern only the physical hands (850-51). The punishment of the transgressors, the rejecters is the result of their deeds that they sent forth with their own hands.
Rampant corruption and disorder have appeared in the land and in the sea because of what people keep doing.. (3041)
Thahara alfasadu feealbarri waalbahri bima kasabat aydee alnnasi...This is valid for the robbers, the reward/jazaan concerns what they earns with their hand; they have to make reparations (539).
Waalssariqu waalssariqatu faiqtaAAoo aydiyahuma jazaan bimakasaba...538
The chapter 111 is similar than 538
1111 Perished is the hands/yada of Abi Lahab (the father of the flame), and perished is he!
Yada/two hands is the dual form of yad/hand, that implies the two physical hands of Abi Lahab.
But "Perished/Condemned the hands of Abi Lahab" means perished what Abi Lahab sent forth with his own two hands (1112).Salam
-
I don't get you Marie, the dual form of hand (yad) is yadeyn (yaa', daal, yaa', noun) and not yada(an).
Yada/two hands is the dual form of yad/hand, that implies the two physical hands of Abi Lahab.
But "Perished/Condemned the hands of Abi Lahab" means perished what Abi Lahab sent forth with his own two hands (1112). -
I don't get you Marie, the dual form of hand (yad) is yadeyn (yaa', daal, yaa', noun) and not yada(an).
Yada/two hands is the dual form of yad/hand, that implies the two physical hands of Abi Lahab.
But "Perished/Condemned the hands of Abi Lahab" means perished what Abi Lahab sent forth with his own two hands (1112).According the grammar, one can use Yadaahu (his two hands) or yadayhi (his two hands), both are the dual form of yad.
One can say yadayni or yadaani or yaday or yadaa.
salam