THEFT PUNISHMENT
-
Salam Fahad,
but these verses (like 538 ) that contain the law do not have multiple understandings . it can only have one .
hands or resources ? only one .
peace .
The law ordained in 538 remains the same one whatever the several readings
- The notion of the physical hands in FM's translation is also valid because we are told to cut from their resources what they earned with their hands.
1111 illustrates the same idea
- Condemned/perished is the hands (yada) of Abu-Lahab.
The word yada is one of the dual form of yad/hand and means the two physical hands of Abu-Lahab, but in the linght of the context, this what Abu-Lahab makes with his two physical hands which is Condemned/perished.
- What I suggested as an explanation for 538 is similar than FM's translation. If the male thief, and the female thief spent what they have stolen, it should be cut from their resources.
Salam
- The notion of the physical hands in FM's translation is also valid because we are told to cut from their resources what they earned with their hands.
-
salam marie and all .
- The male thief, and the female thief, you shall cut from their resources/seperate their hands,
Waalssariqu waalssariqatu faiqtaAAoo aydiyahuma
also why is there a "from" in your translation . if u think it is "resources" , it would translate as "cut off their resources" not "cut off FROM their resources" ?
salam.
-
salam marie and all .
- The male thief, and the female thief, you shall cut from their resources/seperate their hands,
Waalssariqu waalssariqatu faiqtaAAoo aydiyahuma
also why is there a "from" in your translation . if u think it is "resources" , it would translate as "cut off their resources" not "cut off FROM their resources" ?
salam.
Sorry, I edited my last post and maybe contains the answer to your question
- What I suggested as an explanation for 538 is similar than FM's translation. If the male thief, and the female thief spent what they have stolen, it should be cut from their resources.
to cut off FROM their resources only the equivalent of what they have stollen, the equivalent of the damage caused (jazan bimakasaba/the equivalent for what they earned).
-
peace marie.
- What I suggested as an explanation for 538 is similar than FM's translation. If the male thief, and the female thief spent what they have stolen, it should be cut from their resources.
to cut off FROM their resources only the equivalent of what they have stollen, the equivalent of the damage caused (jazan bimakasaba/the equivalent for what they earned).
but that is not what the verse states . it only says "cut off their hands(resources, according to you)"
also , do u still link joseph's story with 538 ?
peace.
fahad. -
Peace fahad,
- What I suggested as an explanation for 538 is similar than FM's translation. If the male thief, and the female thief spent what they have stolen, it should be cut from their resources.
to cut off FROM their resources only the equivalent of what they have stollen, the equivalent of the damage caused (jazan bimakasaba/the equivalent for what they earned).
but that is not what the verse states . it only says "cut off their hands(resources, according to you)"
I had given you the example of 1111 Condemned/perished is the hands (yada) of Abu-Lahab which mean Condemned/perished what Abu-Lahab did with his hands.
If you agree with this understanding, you can also agree that "faiqtaAAoo aydiyahuma jazaan bimakasaba nakalan mina Allahi" mean cut or cut off what they earn with their two hands, "jazaan bimakasaba" explains what we have to cut off.
In the same way than 1111, In 538 the physical hands are not concerned but what one did with his hands.also , do u still link joseph's story with 538 ?
The Reading is an excellent criterion, personnally I don't link joseph's story with 538 because this is not the same form of the verb qataAAa; we read iqtaAAoo....not qattiAAoo... which is specific to mean to cut both in the literal and symbolic meaning (see my previous posts).
Salam
-
also , do u still link joseph's story with 538 ?
The Reading is an excellent criterion, personnally I don't link joseph's story with 538 because this is not the same form of the verb qataAAa; we read iqtaAAoo....not qattiAAoo... which is specific to mean to cut both in the literal and symbolic meaning (see my previous posts).
i meant the story of joseph and his brothers involving theft . like the "theft punishment" article at free-minds.org links it with 538 ?
peace.fahad.
-
Peace Fahad,
also , do u still link joseph's story with 538 ?
The Reading is an excellent criterion, personnally I don't link joseph's story with 538 because this is not the same form of the verb qataAAa; we read iqtaAAoo....not qattiAAoo... which is specific to mean to cut both in the literal and symbolic meaning (see my previous posts).
i meant the story of joseph and his brothers involving theft . like the "theft punishment" article at free-minds.org links it with 538 ?
I think in the story of joseph is a lesson for us about the reward of theft. In the same chapter, the God gives us a criterion for the verb qataAAa to mean literally to cut/mark. This is not a coincidence.
Salam
-
peace, all.
the story of joseph
123 We relate to you the best stories through what We have inspire to you in this quran; and before it you were of those who were unaware.
1275 They said, "The punishment is that whomever it is found in his bags, then he shall remain as a punishment. It is such that we punish the wicked."
back to 127 It is thus that in Joseph and his brothers are signs for those who ask.
12111 In their stories is a lesson for the people of intelligence. It was not a narration that was invented, but an authentication of what is already present and a detailing of all things, and a guidance and mercy to a people who believe.
peace,
brian -
The Reading is an excellent criterion, personnally I don't link joseph's story with 538 because this is not the same form of the verb qataAAa; we read iqtaAAoo....not qattiAAoo... which is specific to mean to cut both in the literal and symbolic meaning (see my previous posts).
qaTTaa is not specefic to mean both physical and symbolic cut . qaTaa is also used to mean both physical and non-physical/symbolic .
(qaTaa is used for physical cut in 595, 538,6946 )peace.
-
Salam Fahad,
Ahmad Shabir's traslation
595 Whatever softness you disregarded, or kept up by way of principle, was in accord with Allahs Command, in order that He might disgrace those who drifted away from their treaties.(Lina = Softness, gentleness = Soft young palm tree. Fasiq = One who drifts away).
6946 And would have cut off his Aorta.
When the God speak about hand and foot He doesn't use qataAAa but qattaAAa, this is only my criterion. One has to compare two similars sentences with the same form.
Let us suppose that wateen = Aorta and lina = tree, the God also uses the form qataAAa and not qattaAAa.
In the verses you quoted, the verb qataAAa should be considered in its symbolic meaning.
Salam
-
595 Whatever softness you disregarded, or kept up by way of principle, was in accord with Allah?s Command, in order that He might disgrace those who drifted away from their treaties.(?Lina? = Softness, gentleness = Soft young palm tree. ?Fasiq? = One who drifts away).
6946 And would have cut off his Aorta.
peace Marie.
both verses are easily understandable without taking help from 'erroneous traditions' . i see no problem in the understanding that lina(palm tree) and wateen(artery) are phyically cut .
peace. -
The explanation of Imam Amin Ahsan Islahi don't consider the whole Reading.
The Quran uses the word (nakal) for such a punishment.
In the light of the Reading, Nakal can mean example
266 And We made it a lesson (nakalan) to their times and for the future generations who would (learn from history and) choose to walk aright.
7925 So Allah took him to task, and made him an example (nakala) for the later generations and the ones who soon followed.
(jaza an bima kasaba nakalan minallah as a reward of their deeds and as an exemplary punishment)
Then, I translate it as an an exemplary reward from the God.
-
Peace,
Here are 3 proposed laws based on .
L1 (Saladin's law) The 2 hands of the thief shall be cut off physically.
L2 (The sunni's law) The right hand of the thief shall be cut off physically. The amount that have been stolen should be worth of more that 1 dirham, unless there is no punishment. If the thief has stolen food because he war hungry and had nothing to eat, he shall not be punished.
L3 (God's law) Hands means resources / power. Cutting the hands of the thief can mean to deprive the thief from his power, like to imprison him, or to take back resources of the thief like to make him pay compensations, or restitute what he has stolen. The effective requital shall be decided, in light of the circumstances, by a court, and shall act as a reward of his deeds and as an exemplary punishment. The victim of the steal shall be in the court, in case he would like to forgive the thief.
Let us now compare the laws L1, L2, L3 in same basic cases, C1, C2, C3, C4.
C1 The thief has stolen something worth less that 1 dirham (like a date).
Under L1, the 2 hands of the thief shall be cut off.
Under L2, nothing shall be done to the thief.
Under L3, the thief shall be requited accordingly to the circumstances (like to give back a date and to apologize)C2 The thief has stolen something worth more that 1 dirham (like a camel).
Under L1, the 2 hands of the thief shall be cut off.
Under L2, the right hand of the thief shall be cut off.
Under L3, the thief shall be requited accordingly to the circumstances. (like to give back the camel, to apologize, to be imprisoned for 3 months, to work in order to repay the camel...)C3 The thief has stolen something worth more that 1 dirham (like a slice of lamb), but he was hungry and there were famine.
Under L1, the 2 hands of the thief shall be cut off.
Under L2, nothing shall be done to the thief.
Under L3, the thief shall be requited accordingly to the circumstances. (he shall be forgiven)C4 The thief which has stolen the camel in C2 has stolen a camel again.
Under L1, nothing shall be done to the thief.
Under L2, nothing shall be done to the thief.
Under L3, the thief shall be requited accordingly to the circumstances. (like to give back the camel, to apologize, to be imprisoned for 3 years, to work in order to repay the camel...)Now, let us remind the law of equivalence
And We have decreed for them in it that a life for a life, and an eye for an eye, and a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and wounds to be similar; and whoever remits anything of it, then it will cancel sins for him. And whoever does not judge by what God has sent down, then these are the wicked.
As for those who earn evil, the recompense of evil will be evil like it, and they will be humiliated.
The recompense for a crime shall be its equivalence, but whoever forgives and makes right, then his reward is upon God. He does not like the wrongdoers.
Which of the 3 laws L1, L2 and L3 pass better the test of the law of equivalence ?
-
Peace Jm,
Nicely done. Puts everything in perspective. Thanks for the concise post!
I forgot to add, Thanks Marie for explaining the usage of the words in different verses, I learnt a lot by going through them...
-
peace all .
L3 (God's law) Hands means resources / power. Cutting the hands of the thief can .....
"Free-Mind.org's law", more appropriatly .
C3 The thief has stolen something worth more that 1 dirham (like a slice of lamb), but he was hungry and there were famine.
Under L1, the 2 hands of the thief shall be cut off.? ? ? ! !
i meant to say that laws are not to be applied under a system where poverty, hunger etc force people to commit these crimes (even though they might not like to commit these crimes) , because God holds us responsible for our innermost intentions .
God does not punish us for the crimes/sins we which were forced to commit .
peace.
-
C3 The thief has stolen something worth more that 1 dirham (like a slice of lamb), but he was hungry and there were famine.
Under L1, the 2 hands of the thief shall be cut off.? ? ? ! !
i meant to say that laws are not to be applied under a system where poverty, hunger etc force people to commit these crimes (even though they might not like to commit these crimes) , because God holds us responsible for our innermost intentions .
God does not punish us for the crimes/sins we which were forced to commit .
peace.
OK, sorry.
But are you satisfied with your law in C1, C2 and C4 cases ?Peace