Disturbing questions
-
Salaam!
@LoteTree
I didn?t take it as an accusation, don?t worry. ) But you presented marking, cutting and compensation as alternatives after I?ve made a post including the word `marking?. I just wanted to make clear that my post did not speak about alternatives!Mustaf@Salim
Whipping is quranic, as we see in surah 24. Stoning is no quranic punishment at all. There is no death penalty for adultery in the quran!The whipping issue
Well, it?s surely not a painless thing and it?s not very nice to imagine it.
Although, as many have pointed out, the original quranic Arabic here implies lashes that should not cause any wounds, lashes that are relatively mild. But still it sounds not nice to us, right?
But does that mean that we can put our socially and culturally conditioned minds over the laws of the quran ??We are these days, in a globalizing world, conditioned to believe that sexuality is just a thing of privacy and that adultery should just be up to the individuals involved.
With what reasoning?
On what basis other than fear of maybe having to be punished as well?
Contrast the pain that adultery causes with the pain of 100 lashes!
If someone would place a choice in front of me to make a decision, either having a partner comitting adultery with someone else or receiving 100 lashes, I would chose the 100 lashes because they hurt less!!!
Adultery causes a lot of pains that are worse than 100 lashes!
These pains are so strong that sometimes even murders are committed because of them.
If without a right physical pains are done to a human individual we all would recommend a punishment here. And emotional pains can even be much worse than physical pains.
And we should also not forget that adultery can have many bad effects that go beyond hurted emotions. E.g. it can contribute to the spread of diseases that lead to death. A lot of people have to die these days because their partner couldn?t fully commit to them!
Unwanted children may also be a result, there are many possible negative consequences from adultery.
Adultery is not just a minor slip in controlling your desires! It is much more!And, hey, the quran is pretty mild here, much milder than most legislations on adultery in al of the history of humankind. We just need to remind ourselves of stoning to get this.
I would say that stoning (like the Taliban) and doing nothing (like modern western society) are two extremes while the quran presents to us a balanced approach.Let?s also not forget that the whole surah 24 is about the protection of privacy!
It tells us that we are not allowed to spy on other people`s privacy, that spreading rumours is wrong etc..
This is the main topic of surah 24, I would say.
It guards the privacy, also the sexual privacy!
Adultery only becomes a punishable crime in the quran when seen outside of privacy, virtually in public, by at least 4 witnesses (read 24/4).
Not respecting this privacy, spreading rumours without real witnesses will be rewarded with almost as much punishment as adultery itself.
So, in general, the quran is very balanced and mild here.
We just need to study all the implications in surah 24 and also all the negative implications that adultery may cause to see this.This talk about the punishment being `barbaric? is just rhetorics coming from our social and cultural conditioning. It has no reasonable foundation at all.
Adultery itself is barbaric, even more so when done virtually in public.Allah Hafiz,
Leyla
-
Hi,
Adultery only becomes a punishable crime in the quran when seen outside of privacy, virtually in public, by at least 4 witnesses (read 24/4).
I didnt quite understand this.
Does this mean, sex outside marriage (in privacy)is not adultery or is it also adultery but not punishable, unless the sex was in public(with 4 witnesses) ?Peace!
-
Salaam all,
Yes, but Muhammad is part of Islam. In the Quran, God says to follow His messenger and that Muhammad is an example for mankind. Therefore, for us to know his example, we have to know his story and his life. This can be achieved only through the hadiths, siras and all that. If those are all corrupted, then it's a dead end!
This is my views based on my own experience, please verify it yourself (1736). I hope I can explain this, well here goes...
It is true that Muhammad is someone that is set as an example of high standard of character for mankind. But you must not forget 604 which states that Abraham and "those with him" are also uswatun hasanah (those that we should put as examples in standard of character).
Every Muhammad word in Quran, represents Muhammad as an Anbiya/Prophet (one who receives the Revelation) or a Messenger/Rasul (one who conveys the Revelation to humankind). That's why you will only find the sentence Obey Allah and Rasul -- not once will you find Obey Allah and <insert whatever name here>. The other thing that you should note is 533-4 which talks about the nature of the Revelation -- which is devoid from self-interest on behalf of the Rasul.
The next important thing is 4150-152 which talks that every prophet and messenger stands equal to one another, and we should never differentiate any of them. If we say that Muhammad is a standard of character to be followed, what about the rest (of messengers and prophets)? Saying that they are all automatically included is just assumption, because we know that Allah says to Muhammad that there are certain Rasuls which he is not told about. If Muhammad didn't know, how can we? I have no idea because I'm no prophet. Thus, by relating to this verse, those who are with Abraham is the ones who follow the DIN which is followed by Abraham -- and the best example are the Rasuls.
In a more simple way, to obey Muhammad the Rasul means to obey ALL Rasuls. This is exactly what Muhammad did -- obey the Rasul or The Message revealed to him by the "instrument" called Jibril.
In an even more simple way, obey the Rasul means obey whatever revealed directly from Allah -- which is Quran. In other words, follow Allah's Words Alone. In Quran, we can find the complete DIN which governs the entire system of our lives (and the universe if I may add). And this is what all Rasuls do -- to make this DIN a reality. That's why all Rasuls experienced hardships, being mocked, attacked, etc -- that is what you get for telling and living up to the truth of DIN brought from Allah, but the Rasuls are those who are steadfast. We should strive/jihad to be like them in character and commitment.
Learning about how the Quran uses the word Rasul did me a truly great favor in understanding how to obey the Rasul. I just hope that I'm doing okay so far. )
Well hope that helps. I'm really sorry if what I write is confusing D
Wasalaam,
=adley= -
Peace peacefulmuslim!
Adultery is still wrong when done in privacy but it is not an issue of the legislation of a certain community.
The quran guards the true comitment between partners (nikah) and tells us that to break it is bad for us and all others involved. 24/4 tells us that to punish adultery we need 4 witnesses. And surah 24 also tells us that spying on the privacy of other?s is wrong.
That?s the order in which we should see things here.bye,
Leyla
-
SaLaM Leyla
Adultery only becomes a punishable crime in the quran when seen outside of privacy, virtually in public, by at least 4 witnesses (read 24/4).
Again, if the Quran had come down in this age, its rules would be different. For example, now we can catch any such activity on cameras. In this case, we dont need the 4 witness as the Quran sujjests.
Also, this makes a good point to those who support religious legislation. For them, only evidence submitable in court would be the testimony of 4 people who have witniessed the act. Where as in democracy, it will be agreed up by MAJORITY that a recording will be admisable in the court. D
-
Peace Jaxal!
Cameras can be manipulated. In many modern countries cameras are not allowed as a tool for evidence in the legislation for good reasons!
Camera proof if crap proof when not supported by other evidence, that?s the reasoning in these countries.
Furthermore, let?s again not forget the consistency of the whole surah 24 which stresses privacy. When 4 witnesses see the crime this is a crime outside privacy. A camera would not fulfill this idea!!
Rather it would in many cases probably be against the quranic command to respect other people?s privacy.
Your reasoning does not apply here.Jaxal, I respect your personal believes but I can not share them. They are not consistent with my own experiences.
Democracy has some benefits, yes.
But the ruling of a majority only causes compromises in the end. And compromises are rarely the best solution.
I would rather trust in revelation of the Most Knowledegable than in compromises caused through a plebiscite.
By the way, majority attitudes are just too fluid.
Someone has once written it in this forum and I will repeat it
Hitler was elected through a democratical process!
Bush was not truly elected but still became president!
What?s so great about democracy, again ????????You have no proof for your idea that the quran is historically and culturally conditioned.
Rather, our minds are historically and culturally conditioned!Bye,
Leyla
-
SaLaM Leyla
Cameras can be manipulated. In many modern countries cameras are not allowed as a tool for evidence in the legislation for good reasons!
And the people giving testimoney cant?
Camera proof if crap proof when not supported by other evidence, that?s the reasoning in these countries.
WEll, camera is suposed to be the eyes and the ears. What other evidence are you looking for?
Furthermore, let?s again not forget the consistency of the whole surah 24 which stresses privacy. When 4 witnesses see the crime this is a crime outside privacy. A camera would not fulfill this idea!!
Just becoz a wife is have sex with her garderner in her bedroom dont make it right. Privacy has nothing to do with this.
Rather it would in many cases probably be against the quranic command to respect other people?s privacy.
the privacy of people to kill, murder, rape and molest in their own house? You think God cares where these crimes are commited?
Your reasoning does not apply here.
Neither does yours.
Jaxal, I respect your personal believes but I can not share them. They are not consistent with my own experiences.
I respect yours too.
Hitler was elected through a democratical process!
Bush was not truly elected but still became president!People make mistakes. It is in our nature.
What?s so great about democracy, again ????????
Quran advocates democracy.
-
Peace Jaxal!
I am not good at quoting, somehow. Didn?t get the systemfor quoting here right, unfortunately. wink
So, I will try to adress your ideas without quoting them, if you don?t mind.First of all, no, the quran does not advocate rulership of a human majority. It supports rulership of the laws of God!
There is no phrase in the quran that allows us to subject quranic rulings to human majority rulings!
Or the conditions of a certain time or culture, for that matter!Of course people giving testimony can be manipulated as well. That?s why surah 24 gives to not being able to bring 4 believable witnesses almost the same punishment as to adultery itself!
I said that privacy does not make a crime right or wrong myself. Read my posts! However, the quran tells us that 4 witnesses makes adultery relevant to legislation!
That?s all I?m saying and that?s what you can read in the quran yourself!
Adultery will still be a sin when done in privacy. But not one relevant to the legislation of a community.
God will punish when the time comes, don?t worry. He will punish every crime according to His justice and His mercy! And this punishment will be eternal!
That?s not our concern here, when talking about the (wrongly) supposed `barbarity?of surah 24.My reasoning does not apply?
What reasoning?
I just collected the relevant statements of the quran and paraphrased them. Not too much reasoning involved.
Either you believe that the quran is the guidance for all mankind and tells the truth for all mankind or you don?t.
That?s up to you and within your own responsibilityExactly. People make mistakes! Majorities may err! God doesn?t!
peace again,
Leyla
-
Hi all,
Leyla, Thanks for the explanation.
I wasnt clear on that earlier.I was reading through dietary restrictions article on freeminds website, and realised what was being said is, that God's name need not be pronounced before killing the animal for food. (what is considered halal meat in the traditional muslim world)
I didnt quite understand coz, how then do u explain these verses?
6118 So eat of (meats) on which Allah's name hath been pronounced, if ye have faith in His signs.
6119 Why should ye not eat of (meats) on which Allah's name hath been pronounced, when He hath explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you - except under compulsion of necessity? But many do mislead (men) by their appetites unchecked by knowledge. Thy Lord knoweth best those who transgress.Peace!
-
Salaam!
@Jaxal
Yep, the world would be a very boring place if everyone had the same opinion. We couldn?t have fun with discussions like that. wink@Mustaf@Salim
Ok, going back to the quranic principle of freedom on financial issues of a couple within the frame of its legislation, I can now give you a good example.
Read 4/4. It tells us about the obligation of dowry, but also that the woman can decide if it has to be given and with which amount.
The woman has the right here, given by God. But of course she will have to look at many issues to make a decision here.
One of the issues might just be the fact that her husband to be is in a financially bad situation.
So, there is no pressure for a couple which wants to marry but where the husband has financial problems that his wife does not have.
This will be up to the woman. She has the right but she does not need to execute it.@peacefulmuslim
When you look at the Arabic of 6/118-119 you will see that there is no word for meat, rather it talks about consuming in general.
There is also, naturally, no word for slaughtering.
Also, ism does not only mean name, in a broader sense it more refers to attributes (of which the descriptive names of Allah may be a good example)
It also does not contain any word forpronouncing the name of Allah?. Rather the word isdhukira?, `remembering the name/attribute of Allah?.
So, this verse is not about just simply pronouncing the name when slaughtering an animal.
I would say it is about remembering the attribute of Allah when consuming, not forgetting that what we consume is a favour from Him and a gift and to consume with that attitude , which also means keeping His laws when consuming, not being excessive with it and being thankful.Bye,
Leyla
-
Hi Leyla,
@peacefulmuslim
When you look at the Arabic of 6/118-119 you will see that there is no word for meat, rather it talks about consuming in general.
There is also, naturally, no word for slaughtering.
Also, ism does not only mean name, in a broader sense it more refers to attributes (of which the descriptive names of Allah may be a good example)
It also does not contain any word forpronouncing the name of Allah?. Rather the word isdhukira?, `remembering the name/attribute of Allah?.
So, this verse is not about just simply pronouncing the name when slaughtering an animal.
I would say it is about remembering the attribute of Allah when consuming, not forgetting that what we consume is a favour from Him and a gift and to consume with that attitude , which also means keeping His laws when consuming, not being excessive with it and being thankful.Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation.
It makes so much sense, and I had no clue this was what it meant, coz I have been reading english translation and they tell u something different altogether, and ofcourse everyone practices that too.
But then, now I am seriously wondering, why has it been translated in english with such a different meaning? roll Not everyone knows arabic.Peace!