5:101

savage_carrot

Protection of right of Privacy is taken care. A man and woman indulging in illicit sex beyond the eyes of people are not to be alleged for criminal cognizance by the society. Anybody who lodges a complaint alleging illicit sex is made responsible to bring four eye witnesses otherwise will get 80 lashes. In many societies a mere allegation of such nature suffices to make the life of a man or woman miserable.

Even informally saying about commission of such an act, not going formally to the police/court, and passing on the gossip is prohibited in Qur'aan.

Even a husband who might have seen his wife in illict state with another man is not allowed to ask for the medical examination of his wife. Honour of women is a delicate issue and is protected.

Let's say there's a scenario where the husband/wife cheats and the spouse is an eye witness. Can the cheated spouse give evidence regarding this? Let's say their eye witness testimony is nullified by the cheater saying it's a lie. Is that the end of it or are there any other options? Can the spouse use for example, recorded evidence using technology to prove their testimony? Can a divorce in your opinion allow for these options to grant the aggrieved party a better settlement and so on? Or is the settlement always equal/following a set format regardless of any betrayals?

Mazhar

Let's say there's a scenario where the husband/wife cheats and the spouse is an eye witness. Can the cheated spouse give evidence regarding this? Let's say their eye witness testimony is nullified by the cheater saying it's a lie. Is that the end of it or are there any other options? Can the spouse use for example, recorded evidence using technology to prove their testimony? Can a divorce in your opinion allow for these options to grant the aggrieved party a better settlement and so on? Or is the settlement always equal/following a set format regardless of any betrayals?

Allegation by spouse is also mentioned

And those husbands who allege a charge of illicit sex respectively upon their wives while they had no eye witnesses to produce in court of law except respectively their own selves;
In such case the testimony of each such complainant is respectively four testimonies under oath by the name of Allah the Exalted
To the effect that indeed he is certainly of those who state nothing but truth;
And the fifth testimony is to the effect that the Curse and Condemnation of Allah the Exalted be upon him if he was of those who are the liars.

Please note the implications of the fifth testimony. He is self agreeing to be thrown in Hell-Prison in the Hereafter life. If he does this in the court of jurisdiction, the complainant succeeds in establishing the alleged charge. But the court cannot give the verdict without listening the accused

And it will repel-remove away from her the punishment prescribed for the offence that she submits four testimonies under oath by the name of Allah the Exalted
To the effect that indeed he is certainly of those who are the liars.
And the fifth testimony is to the effect that the Curse and Condemnation of Allah the Exalted be upon her if he were of those who state nothing but truth.

If it happens, the case stands closed. Charge not established. No other evidence is admissible. The question is not the availability of evidence, it must be admissible by law also.

savage_carrot

Allegation by spouse is also mentioned

And those husbands who allege a charge of illicit sex respectively upon their wives while they had no eye witnesses to produce in court of law except respectively their own selves;
In such case the testimony of each such complainant is respectively four testimonies under oath by the name of Allah the Exalted
To the effect that indeed he is certainly of those who state nothing but truth;
And the fifth testimony is to the effect that the Curse and Condemnation of Allah the Exalted be upon him if he was of those who are the liars.

Please note the implications of the fifth testimony. He is self agreeing to be thrown in Hell-Prison in the Hereafter life. If he does this in the court of jurisdiction, the complainant succeeds in establishing the alleged charge. But the court cannot give the verdict without listening the accused

And it will repel-remove away from her the punishment prescribed for the offence that she submits four testimonies under oath by the name of Allah the Exalted
To the effect that indeed he is certainly of those who are the liars.
And the fifth testimony is to the effect that the Curse and Condemnation of Allah the Exalted be upon her if he were of those who state nothing but truth.

If it happens, the case stands closed. Charge not established. No other evidence is admissible. The question is not the availability of evidence, it must be admissible by law also.

Yes, that's why I brought up the nullification. So even if we have evidence of guilt to back up our testimony, it is inadmissible because...it's not in the quran and/or husband/wives testimonies are nullified if they are divergent and can only be testimonies and nothing else. Thus, cheating in a marriage is something that can never be brought to light legally even if we have proof...except those that admit to it, of course. I take it, the answers to the divorce settlements are always equal/following a set format regardless of any betrayals then.

Following this scenario, say the cheater has a child with another woman, and the wife says he's cheated, the guy says he didn't... we can verify this by testing the child but we can't do this. Only testimonies are admissible...? Somehow I see why you thought the politician was being protected. In this mad world sometimes it so happens that the guy would divorce the wife blithely, marry the other woman and adopt his child legally, while the ex-wife watches the evidence of the cheating bastard every night on her phone before going to sleep with his voodoo doll. Surreal.

Mazhar

Following this scenario, say the cheater has a child with another woman, and the wife says he's cheated, the guy says he didn't... we can verify this by testing the child but we can't do this. Only testimonies are admissible...?

This could lead to what is termed "fasad" in Arabic. The other child is recognized by a father who is the husband of that woman with whom the husband of another woman had allegedly illicit relation and that child was the result of that illicit relationship. Too many people will get involved. Had there been not the four witnesses condition as the only admissible evidence, such "fasad" could be everyday phenomenon in many muslim societies. Too many complications then.

savage_carrot

This could lead to what is termed "fasad" in Arabic. The other child is recognized by a father who is the husband of that woman with whom the husband of another woman had allegedly illicit relation and that child was the result of that illicit relationship. Too many people will get involved. Had there been not the four witnesses condition as the only admissible evidence, such "fasad" could be everyday phenomenon in many muslim societies. Too many complications then.

Because too many people can get involved we sweep it under the rug? Okay. What if the woman has no husband? Any opinion on single mothers in the light of the quran?

Mazhar

Because too many people can get involved we sweep it under the rug? Okay. What if the woman has no husband? Any opinion on single mothers in the light of the quran?

A woman can come to know that she is pregnant without ever have consiously indulged in sex with a man. Sperms can be injected into her womb when she is unconsious or put to deep sleep without there any ------. How would one prove that it is not the case if the lady insists she did not have sex with a man?

You people are hereby directed to call them-adopted youngsters by their respective Fathers.
This is most appropriate and balanced conduct in the judgment of Allah the Exalted.
However, if you know not the Fathers of them, thereby, they are your brothers in the Prescribed Code and Physical Procedure ;
And they are your Beneficiaries.

savage_carrot

A woman can come to know that she is pregnant without ever have consiously indulged in sex with a man. Sperms can be injected into her womb when she is unconsious or put to deep sleep without there any ------. How would one prove that it is not the case if the lady insists she did not have sex with a man?
I'm not asking about exceptional scenarios like you bring up, the scenario was that the single woman was lucid and willing when she had sex with a married man then got pregnant, and the wife saw it. In your opinion, what light does the quran shed on this scenario...? Does the man get away with it even if the other woman is silent? Does the baby not have any rights other than what the parents decide? Should the courts look out for the rights of the child and the rights of the betrayed? Your explanation suggests that if the man is a liar even under oath, that's it...end of.

Bender

5101 O you who believe, do not ask about things which, if revealed to you, would harm you; and if you ask about them after the Qur'an has been sent down, then they will become clear to you. God pardons for them, and God is Forgiving, Compassionate.
5102 A people before you had asked the same, then they became rejecters in it.

There was another thread dealing with the same a while back but I didn't find an explanation that satisfies. It's commonly used to shut down questioning in regards to religious matters. Wondering if anyone has analysed the verses before and what they think it's talking about or a link to where it's been discussed well. Will the questions become clear or the reasoning behind why we aren't supposed to ask them? Also, what is meant by "became rejecters in it"?

Any insights/help appreciated. Thanks.

Salaam,

RED The reason is given in 5102 "A people before you had asked the same, then they became rejecters in it."

GREEN They disobeyed the command of their Lord.

Salaam,
Bender

Bender

Salam alaikum.

Verse 5101 is referring to a time when the Quran was being sent down. But now the complete Quran is with us, and so we can question all we want.

Salaam,

I do not agree with this.

Salaam,
Bender

savage_carrot

Salaam,

RED The reason is given in 5102 "A people before you had asked the same, then they became rejecters in it."

GREEN They disobeyed the command of their Lord.

Salaam,
Bender

Al Bender, I'll try to put it in a clearer way...I was asking if the questions that were being asked ( = if revealed to you would harm you) were going to be answered after/during? (not sure what the consensus is on what the right word is here) the quran has been sent down or the reasoning behind why we shouldn't be asking such questions (= if revealed to you would harm you) be clear after/during the quran has been sent down. If we knew the questions would harm us, why would we still seek answers unless we were self destructive...? But if we were more aware of the reasons for asking said questions and the possible ramifications we'd understand? Thus, can it be referring to something other than the fact that it's not the questions/questioning but the mindset behind the questions...? So were these questions going to be answered let's just say by the quran, or the reasoning behind why the questions are being left open ended or whatever also by the quran. The fact that we are pardoned for asking them, but then a people before us had asked the same and became rejecters, begs the question whether it was the answers or the line of reasoning behind the inquiries that did them in. If it was the answers, I find it hard to accept that the truth can make one a rejecter, hence must be the line of reasoning/mindset behind the questions. A little knowledge being a dangerous thing also comes to mind.

Mazhar

I'm not asking about exceptional scenarios like you bring up, the scenario was that the single woman was lucid and willing when she had sex with a married man then got pregnant, and the wife saw it. In your opinion, what light does the quran shed on this scenario...? Does the man get away with it even if the other woman is silent? Does the baby not have any rights other than what the parents decide? Should the courts look out for the rights of the child and the rights of the betrayed? Your explanation suggests that if the man is a liar even under oath, that's it...end of.

In husband and wife scenario the complainant is the husband and the accused is his wife. It is not otherway round.

In the quoted scenario, oaths are not involved. Ground reality 1. Husband and wife, socially known as legally wed; 2. Another woman about whom the legally wed wife believes that she is engaged in illicit sex with her husband; 3. A child is with the other woman about whom legally wed wife believes to be the child born of her husband.

Legally wed wife is not sure whether or not the other woman is her husband's "keep" or a second wife. She cannot allege charge of Zina nominating as accused her husband and other lady since she does not have four eye witnessess. She can take recourse to other penal-social laws of the society; as in Pakistan she can complaint that her husband is keeping another woman without having taken her consent. The state will take cognizance and investigate the matter and decide the matter.

savage_carrot

In husband and wife scenario the complainant is the husband and the accused is his wife. It is not otherway round.

In the quoted scenario, oaths are not involved. Ground reality 1. Husband and wife, socially known as legally wed; 2. Another woman about whom the legally wed wife believes that she is engaged in illicit sex with her husband; 3. A child is with the other woman about whom legally wed wife believes to be the child born of her husband.

Legally wed wife is not sure whether or not the other woman is her husband's "keep" or a second wife. She cannot allege charge of Zina nominating as accused her husband and other lady since she does not have four eye witnessess. She can take recourse to other penal-social laws of the society; as in Pakistan she can complaint that her husband is keeping another woman without having taken her consent. The state will take cognizance and investigate the matter and decide the matter.

So oaths would not be needed in this case or you think that the scenario didn't mention oaths thus they aren't involved? 2 as you put it is not in the scenario, 2 would be legally wed wife sees her husband and the other woman having sex. Thus legally wed wife is relatively sure that her husband can be the father of the other woman's child. The other woman could have had sex with other men as well, yes, but the chances of her husband being the father of the other woman's child cannot be nullified unless there is proof that the child isn't his. Of course, this isn't zina. I was asking what options in the light of the quran does the wife have besides testimonies that may be divergent. This is a betrayal unless it was previously agreed that the husband can have sex with other people. In Pakistan, the husband will probably get away with it, it's when the woman is accused is when it becomes more of an issue. But wait, you're saying ONLY a man can be a complainant and not the wife in a husband/wife scenario?
Allegation by spouse is also mentioned

And those husbands who allege a charge of illicit sex respectively upon their wives while they had no eye witnesses to produce in court of law except respectively their own selves;

This would come under what heading in your view? Zina? Adultery? A combination of the two put under one term zina? Or totally not any of the preceding? And to reconfirm, only husbands can bring allegations of illicit sex upon their wives if they have no eye witnesses? Wives need not apply?

I asked you why a 'loving consented affectionate relationship between a man and woman' is what you term as zina? It's obvious that affairs of the sort do not have 4 eye witnesses, it is obvious that it is dealing with a public menace because if one or both of them are seen having sex 4 times by different individuals, it cannot be a 'loving consented affectionate relationship between a man and a woman'. It's as if it is irrelevant to put that detailed procedure in there when it's never going to be used in cases of 'loving consented affectionate relationships between men and women' as those are pretty commonplace in private even in cultures where the norms are that sex is not a shameful act (even when not married). Unless of course you opine that there was a time when such loving affectionate consented affairs between a man and a woman were commonplace in public because privacy as a concept did not exist. Hopefully, that is something that you or anyone else won't bring up.

Mazhar

I asked you why a 'loving consented affectionate relationship between a man and woman'

Perhaps I said this in comparison to rape issue. Zina is a loving, affectionately consented intercourse between a man and woman who are not legally husband and wife. While rape is forced intercourse by one party, the other is the victim.

Noon_waalqalami

Perhaps I said this in comparison to rape issue. Zina is a loving, affectionately consented intercourse between a man and woman who are not legally husband and wife. While rape is forced intercourse by one party, the other is the victim.

Peace Mazhar,

What about consensual prostitution (affectionate or not), any punishment?

single man - single woman
single man - married woman
married man - single woman
married man - married woman
single woman - single woman
single woman - married woman
married woman - married woman
single man - single man
single man - married man
married man - married man

Likewise married couple affectionately in a park or the beach having intercourse or "other" would that be zina?

Mazhar

Peace Mazhar,

What about consensual prostitution (affectionate or not), any punishment?

single man - single woman
single man - married woman
married man - single woman
married man - married woman
single woman - single woman
single woman - married woman
married woman - married woman
single man - single man
single man - married man
married man - married man

Likewise married couple affectionately in a park or the beach having intercourse or "other" would that be zina?

Salam,

No worldly penal clause for sex in privacies is given in Qur'aan, as I recall---all numbered propositions. Only a husband can allege about his wife sexual misconduct in her privacy and process of criminal justice in this case is prescribed.

A husband and wife indulging in intercourse before the eyes of public is Fahashi not Zina. State can prescribe deterrent punishment for such public offences pl refer 2419

Fahashi is prohibited
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/006.%20Al%20Anaam/temp%2002%206.151.gif
"And that you should not approach towards illicit sexual attractions; that which have become publicly known places about it, and also those which are secretive.

http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/007.%20Al%20Airaaf/Temp%2001%207.033.gif
You the Messenger pronounce "The fact is that my Sustainer Lord has only prohibited illicit sexual attractions; that which have become publicly known places - modes about it, and also those which are secretive;

savage_carrot

A husband and wife indulging in intercourse before the eyes of public is Fahashi not Zina.
Basically, Mazhar thinks that zina is an unmarried affectionate loving couple indulging in sex 'in privacy with 4 eye witnesses'. An unmarried couple indulging in intercourse before the eyes of the public should also be termed Fahashi otherwise, but IF they do it in 'private with 4 eye witnesses', it apparently is zina...? This doesn't cover adultery in the case of one of the two being married, however. Unless Mazhar would like to clarify if that is included in zina, fahashi or whether there is another term for it, or there is no term for it.

A husband and wife indulging in intercourse before the eyes of public is Fahashi not Zina.

6151/733 is what is apparent and what is concealed of the fawahisha. Would having sex in public thus satisfy the fahashi clause regardless of who is doing it? I would say yes. Why make it unmarried/married when no specifications are mentioned in terms of who is specifically involved in these fawahisha's. Further, if in the translations helpfully provided, there are 'publicaly known places and secretive places', what is public if not 4 witnesses...? Do the verses explicitly talk about and list public and private places regardless of the number of people...or what is apparent and what is concealed? Apparent to whom? Concealed from whom?

Public in the context would mean the presence of people (obviously not in the context of public property or anything else; if no one saw what you did, the fawahisha's are concealed) and secret would mean in the absence of people that aren't involved in the act. Your bedroom can be public with 4 witnesses if you invite them in, suddenly surprisingly dropping your pants, jumping on your willing and kinky partner in crime; going at it in front of 4 shocked and at this point, mildly terrified people musing they may be next...the sidewalk can be private if no one sees you do the same. It's not as much fun however. So, how exactly are we determining what is public and private unless it is about the people involved other than the ones doing it...? It can be just once with 4 different people, or however many times as long as there are 4 witnesses for an incident.

Hopefully, there won't be a response dealing with the strange nuances of how the particular words are magically codified to only mean pavements, restaurants etc or bedrooms and toilets etc. I've been down that road before, it wasn't pretty.

Man_of_Faith

Peace,

I thought you were discussing 5101 and the subsequent passages and not imaginary adultery punishment?

Be whole

savage_carrot

There were no further responses regarding the topic, when there are, I'll discuss them. The present discussion has gone towards zina because of an example used while posting about the topic, I don't see it as a problem since some people are slower to post than others, various things get talked about in the meanwhile. I personally find it of interest. Do you have anything to add to 'imaginary adultery punishment'...? If not, that's okay.

Man_of_Faith

Peace,

Okay, savage_carrot. Then I know.

I do not have anything else to add regarding the 5101 and surrounding passages.

Be whole

Mazhar

Basically, Mazhar thinks that zina is an unmarried affectionate loving couple indulging in sex 'in privacy with 4 eye witnesses'. An unmarried couple indulging in intercourse before the eyes of the public should also be termed Fahashi otherwise, but IF they do it in 'private with 4 eye witnesses', it apparently is zina...? This doesn't cover adultery in the case of one of the two being married, however. Unless Mazhar would like to clarify if that is included in zina, fahashi or whether there is another term for it, or there is no term for it.
6151/733 is what is apparent and what is concealed of the fawahisha. Would having sex in public thus satisfy the fahashi clause regardless of who is doing it? I would say yes. Why make it unmarried/married when no specifications are mentioned in terms of who is specifically involved in these fawahisha's. Further, if in the translations helpfully provided, there are 'publicaly known places and secretive places', what is public if not 4 witnesses...? Do the verses explicitly talk about and list public and private places regardless of the number of people...or what is apparent and what is concealed? Apparent to whom? Concealed from whom?

Public in the context would mean the presence of people (obviously not in the context of public property or anything else; if no one saw what you did, the fawahisha's are concealed) and secret would mean in the absence of people that aren't involved in the act. Your bedroom can be public with 4 witnesses if you invite them in, suddenly surprisingly dropping your pants, jumping on your willing and kinky partner in crime; going at it in front of 4 shocked and at this point, mildly terrified people musing they may be next...the sidewalk can be private if no one sees you do the same. It's not as much fun however. So, how exactly are we determining what is public and private unless it is about the people involved other than the ones doing it...? It can be just once with 4 different people, or however many times as long as there are 4 witnesses for an incident.

Hopefully, there won't be a response dealing with the strange nuances of how the particular words are magically codified to only mean pavements, restaurants etc or bedrooms and toilets etc. I've been down that road before, it wasn't pretty.

First step in understanding and comprehending about any issue is to understand the meanings of an individual word. Understanding a word means that one immediately perceives the propositions which are referred by that word. When we say "woman" we associate with this word that the referred object belongs to human species, adult, Not man, has chest of peculiar shape, and many other features. All those are inherent in the same word, they need not be mentioned separately.

http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/15.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Surat%2017/11.%20Az%20Zina%20Ze%20Noon%20Ya/1.gif It is a Verbal Noun which refers only an action and a state. It denotes consented extramarital intercourse of a man with a woman; whether both are virgin, or one of them is unmarried or both are married to different spouses. It is reflected by English words fornication and adultery.

Nikah, marriage grants permission to a man and woman to enjoy intercourse. Though Qur'aan puts the condition to perform this intercourse in privacy and undisturbed state; some might opt to do it in drawing room and Khabis couple might do it even on a bench in a park. But it does not mean that it will become an act denoted by Zina.

Four witnesses is the issue of Admissibility of Evidence in criminal proceedings for the charge of Zina, it is not the proposition of word Zina.

For husband and wife
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/temp%2002%20%202.187f.gif
Therefore, after this clarification henceforth-now onwards undertake mutual-consented intercourse with them in the nights of fasting and you people seek its result that which Allah the Exalted has written for you people.

The verb is of Form-III, which reflects mutuality. Arabic is the most decent language of the world. It conveys that in the most sophisticated and subtle manner which if explained and exposed in any other language the nudity will over brim.
I could have used rather decent words "enjoy matrimonial relationship" but these could reflect as if it is one sided affair. Arabic word denotes two sided affair; Perhaps West aside, Muslim men in other societies are little aware that it is also their responsibility to carry the wife to the extreme. She mostly feigns extreme perhaps of inbuilt shyness or not to hurt "manly" proud of her husband.