Understanding Zina
-
I found many threads dealing with this topic but so far none that actually reveal the true meaning. Most threads were pretty ancient so forgive me for creating this new thread.
Traditional meaning does not make any sense
The traditional understanding of zina as adultery or fornication is completely irrational. I will prove this using verse 243. This verse tells us what is allowed concerning "yankiu". Traditionally "yankiu" is understood as marry. This is debatable as well, but I would rather leave that discussion for some other thread and stick to the traditional meaning of marriage (you are free to understand this as a relationship by oath or whatever, it will not change the proof I will bring).
So what combinations are allowed
al-zn with zniyatan = allowed
al-zn with mush'rikatan = allowedSummarized "al-zn" cannot marry anything but "al-zn" or "mush'rikatan". mush'rikun is generally understood as polytheist.
Now, to begin with if you are of the "l-mu'minna" and want to marry, would you want to marry an fornicator/adulterer? That would be very odd to begin with. I can not imagine anyone wanting to marry someone that is beyond doubt an adulterer or fornicator. It's highly irrational to do so. This is the first proof adulterer/fornicator does not make any sense in this context.
Secondly, there is a huge problem with determining someone is an adulterer or fornicator if we look at how this is established in surah 24. It requires four witnesses to be established beyond doubt. Again this does not make any sense at all. It's highly improbable adultery or fornication is witnessed by 4 different people. Adultery/fornication is usually performed in secret or in private. This renders the whole verse meaningless and not applicable in reality. I know some Quranists abuse this argument. They say it's impossible to prove or highly unlikely so we don't have to flog anyone and Quran is not suggesting inhumane measures. Of course this is a false logic based on an incorrect understanding of what zina is. I know the arguments they bring, saying it refers to adultery/fornication in public but even that is totally senseless. Who on earth would want to marry someone that has an established reputation of fornicating in public? Exactly, nobody.
Thirdly,
Why would 243 only mention adultery? Why not murder? Why not theft? Why not sexual deviations of all kinds? If the traditional meaning were true this would imply someone "l-mu'minna" can marry a thief, a pedophile, a murderer or even an idol worshipper given that person only worships one idol and is not a polytheist. Polytheism and idol worship are not synonyms. One who worships only one idol is not a polytheist.
Correct understanding of zina
To understand what zina really means, let's first look at the meaning of the word fornication in English. Many people won't realize fornication does not always refer to sex outside of marriage. There is even in English a metaphorical meaning, that has root in the bible. There is a spiritual kind of adultery/fornication namely idol worship (worship of a person or thing besides God).
The hebrew word "zanah" in Old Testament has this double meaning. The greek word "porneia" also has this ambiguous meaning. Now let's apply this understanding to arabic zina and Quran. This would render the meaning of 243 as an idol worshipper cannot marry anything but an idol worshipper or a polytheist. Can we establish with quran whether someone is an idol worshipper using the mentioned 4 witnesses? Yes, idol worship is performed in public. There is no issue proving this using witnesses. This shows how complete and detailed Quran is. God does not overlook any detail. If you are of the ""l-mu'minna" you can not marry an idol worshipper, not even if that person worships only one idol (as it is allowed in the traditional understanding).
We know pre-islamic arabs used to worship idols and this was performed in public. Some of the tribes worshipped one idol, others many. God has given us clear instructions here about how this is established and what is permitted concerning "marriage".
What about flogging as punishment for zina?
Quran tells us there can be no compulsion in belief. Furthermore the flogging is only referred to as a punishment for those committing zina, not those guilty of polytheism. This reveals zina is not referring to just any kind of idol worship. It's a specific kind of idol worship. To understand this we need to look at the etymology of the word "fornication" in English. Also the occurrences in old testament are revealing. The etymology of the English word "fornication" is from the latin word fornix meaning "brothel". It's referring to a kind of prostitution. The occurrences in old testament always refer to a combination of sexual promiscuity and idol worship. We know the pre-islamic tribes worshipped idols. One of these idols was an idol of fertility and the worship of this idol included ritual group sex with prostitutes. This form of idol worship was not exclusive to the pre-islamic arab tribes, it existed in many cultures among which Sumeria, Egypt, Romans and many more. The flogging is not intended as a tool to "force" anyone into belief but rather a punishment for behaviour that is considered immoral and an abomination in Gods eyes (fahisha).
Conclusion
The al-zn mentioned in surah 24 are parttakers of a cult that involved idol worship involving group sex and sexual rituals. Verse 243 is not marriage advice for the "l-mu'minna" but rather a restriction of rights for partakers of that kind of idol worship. The punishment is not a tool to force someone into a correct belief but rather a punishment for immoral behaviour. All of this is intended to keep Islam pure and free of pagan influences. Surah 24 does not tell us to punish polytheists by flogging, only those who take part in idol worship involving sexual rituals.
PS This does not mean Quran condones other forms of adultery or sexual promiscuity. There are verses in Quran dealing with that matter, just not in surah 24.
Peace
-
Can you be more precise? There are a lot of them, are you refuting my thesis here or are you pointing me to an earlier thread that already stated what I am stating? You are too vague for me to understand what you are insinuating. I would appreciate solid argumentation/refutation of my thesis. I can't possibly start reading all the threads posted on this topic in the past. It would take me days to do so and honestly the majority of them are sunnah/hadith based nonsense (and thus a complete waste of my time). If you have an argument to make, let's hear it.
-
One thing I forgot to add to my post is the following "practice what you preach". Those who differ in opinion and think zina refers to adultery/fornication/illicit public sex, will you apply the whip in reality when your encounter zina that fits your interpretation? I doubt this very much.
-
Evidence from the Tanakh
Chronicles 2111
11Moreover, he made high places in the mountains of Judah, and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit zanah and led Judah astray.
Isaiah 2317
17And it shall come to pass after the end of seventy years, that the LORD will visit Tyre, and she shall turn to her hire, and shall commit zanah with all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth.
Ezekiel 1626
26Thou hast also committed zanah with the Egyptians thy neighbours, great of flesh; and hast increased thy zanah, to provoke me to anger.
You can read more about the evidence in Old Testament and Bible right here http//www.godward.org/bible%20study%20notes/what%20is%20fornication.htm
We can not just be blind for the hebrew roots of the word zina. There just is no other meaning of zina that withstands scrutiny outside "sexual cult/idol worship". The greatest abomination in Gods eyes. A greater immorality than adultery, murder, polytheism or any other sin. If this weren't true, why would only zina be punished with flogging?
-
Peace,
What is your understanding of that verb?
-
In my opinion the wrongly translated word here is flogging...it is not anywhere else in the Q used in that way..so focus on that word instead.
Peace,
I cannot figure it out...so I decided to rest from that topic for now...I came across one group on FB where they said it means to protect, but I didn't look deeper into it.Feel free to start a topic about that word. This thread is dealing with the understanding of the word zina. Personally I find no evidence for any interpretation of that verb that excludes referring to "skin".
-
I agree but so far I haven't found any evidence contradicting the flogging translation.
-
The Sahih International Translation produces this as the English translation of Sura 243 - " The fornicator does not marry except a fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers."
This in itself doesn't give any reference to 'zina' by name, only that those who have been deemed 'fornicators' (by one means or another) are not to marry any but other who have been deemed to be fornicators or polytheists; the sura specifies that these individuals are unlawful for 'the believers' (obviously Muslims, but one may make the argument that in this case 'the believers' extends to Jews and Christians as well for purposes of maintaining the social order).
As for the requirement for witnesses, we find in 244 that an accusation of adultery carries a requirement of four witnesses- regardless of the practical difficulty of this, that is what the Qur'an specifies and we have no recourse but to include this standard of evidence. Note that an accusation not backed up by the witnesses is disregarded and the accuser is awarded eighty lashes for his trouble. In other words- don't accuse someone unless you have proper proof.
In the case of a husband accusing his wife of adultery, we have an entirely different standard of evidence as laid out in 246-9.
Taken as a whole, the argument does indeed refer specifically to 'unlawful intercourse' whether it be between persons married to another, two unmarried people, or a married person and an unmarried one. The key is that marriage is the only condition that provides for lawful intercourse.
However, given the relative mountain of eyewitness evidence that is required to prosecute such an accusation, it would seem the primary reason for the specification of 100 lashes would, in fact, be for 'disturbing the peace' by such a public display so flagrant as to be seen by four other individuals (and at this point I would ask for clarification if these four witnesses must observe the act together, or may they witness it apart from each other at differing times and still be considered valid witnesses?).
The question I would have, though, is if indeed a man and woman (or m/m or f/f as the case may be) are caught in flagrante dilicto and are successfully prosecuted in a proper court AND the punishment of 100 lashes is applied to each, does that absolve them of any subsequent punishment from Allah upon his rendering of judgement?
As a follow-on question in the absence of a proper Qur'an-guided court, the application of the lashes is for all practical purposes nullified as a punishment. In this case, if the couple in question sees the error of their ways and repents and each returns to- or begins- an observant life, what then? Are they absolved of the sin through their sincere repentance?
OR.... am I looking at all of this through the lens of my former hadithista life and putting too much emphasis on having a special 'court' involved at all? Could not a person familiar with the relevant suras of the Qur'an sit as 'judge' and consider the evidence laid out by the defendants and the accuser(s)? Is a finding of a person or persons as being guilty of the crime of adultery or otherwise 'unlawful sexual intercourse' really as simple as having four unimpeachable witnesses attest to their personally witnessing the couple in the commission of the act? Can I, armed with the Qur'an, listen to witnesses and sit in judgement of another in this fashion- if not I, then who?
-
From the whole exposition of the Qur'an regarding this and the subsequent ayas, my conlcusion after many years es that this punishment 100 lashes or whatever is trnslated sets the quality of the misdeed. That is, transgression of the moral law in this matter is very grave, it is not at all a light matter.
But at the same time the requisite to prosecute is practically undoable and the reason is to stop gossip and slander and defamation, again I insist that those ayas after the ayas on fornication must be read together. From that reading it is clear that defaming very specially of women is heinous and that the setting of the punishment for fornication is meant to set an end to that slandering and defamation (eating the believers flesh). If you force the slanderers to bring four witnesses or shut up, they have no excuse to slander nor to gossip.
As to the question whether they must all testify to the same event, and not separate events, For sure, it must be so, the same event. If it were othetwise it would defy the very meaning of giving testimony, because one only witness is not questionable against the other witnesses that might check his or her testimony, that is a must and a need in any justice administration. So really, four witnesses pending on them the possibility of themselves being punished for false testimony is almost a perfect insurance against anybody bringing a charge of zina.
So while the (low) moral standard of the deed is clearly set forth, its punishment by human means is made too problematic and unlikely.
As to whether Gods forgives after the 100 lashes, that is like everything else between the sinner and God., We cannot know. ?We may suspect and we may be right or not but we cannot know. Thank God that task is taken off our shoulders.
This whole first part of sura An-Nur are indeed very enlightening, I mean those ap to aya 30. They devolve the responsibility for doing good on the very people and not on any authority figure.
We must remember al ghayb, that belongs to God, and in includes the sexual acts. We are supposed to do good and enjoin good but not to pry on peoples lives, on peoples' sins. God gives all of us space to think over our wrongs and to repent and to reflect. Nobody should trespass that save for enjoining good and give the most sincere and honest advice PRIVATELY.
Salaam
-
So really, four witnesses pending on them the possibility of themselves being punished for false testimony is almost a perfect insurance against anybody bringing a charge of zina.
Let's render the whole verse meaningless so we can ignore it. Well done, I just don't think that is shedding any light on the matter. The four witnesses are not an impossible condition. They are very practical conditions if you understand what zina really means harlotry. Zina and zanah in hebrew are always used to refer to harlotry. In some cases even cult harlotry being part of certain forms of idol worship. In fact a large majority of the occurrences of the words representing "harlotry" express cult harlotry instead of non-cult related prostitution. These kinds of idol worship are the worst in Gods eyes they are the ultimate symbol of being "promiscuous" towards God. Cheating on God with idols or attributing partners to God. A cult harlot will be witnessed by more than 4.
I don't find any evidence zina is referring to anything but cult harlotry and idol worship. The word has it's roots in Hebrew, you can't just ignore the entire Tanakh and redefine zina as just "adultery or fornication". There is no evidence for it outdise hadith and tradition.
Peace
-
I understand that this is a thread about the word zina, but sometimes a wrong translation can occur when the surrounding words are wrongly translated. That's why I think is importaint to understand the word translated as flogging. Peace.
Can't you people just flog the whores? Have to make so many excuses for her!
The Bible has even more severe punishment mentions.
In any case though this was as usual a cool idea presented in this thread, and I enjoyed it.
-
Let's render the whole verse meaningless so we can ignore it. Well done, I just don't think that is shedding any light on the matter. The four witnesses are not an impossible condition. They are very practical conditions if you understand what zina really means harlotry. Zina and zanah in hebrew are always used to refer to harlotry. In some cases even cult harlotry being part of certain forms of idol worship. In fact a large majority of the occurrences of the words representing "harlotry" express cult harlotry instead of non-cult related prostitution. These kinds of idol worship are the worst in Gods eyes they are the ultimate symbol of being "promiscuous" towards God. Cheating on God with idols or attributing partners to God. A cult harlot will be witnessed by more than 4.
I don't find any evidence zina is referring to anything but cult harlotry and idol worship. The word has it's roots in Hebrew, you can't just ignore the entire Tanakh and redefine zina as just "adultery or fornication". There is no evidence for it outdise hadith and tradition.
Peace
!How repulsive!
Let's render the whole verse meaningless so we can ignore it. Well done, I just don't think that is shedding any light on the matter. The four witnesses are not an impossible condition. They are very practical conditions if you understand what zina really means harlotry. Zina and zanah in hebrew are always used to refer to harlotry. In some cases even cult harlotry being part of certain forms of idol worship. In fact a large majority of the occurrences of the words representing "harlotry" express cult harlotry instead of non-cult related prostitution. These kinds of idol worship are the worst in Gods eyes they are the ultimate symbol of being "promiscuous" towards God. Cheating on God with idols or attributing partners to God. A cult harlot will be witnessed by more than 4.
I don't find any evidence zina is referring to anything but cult harlotry and idol worship. The word has it's roots in Hebrew, you can't just ignore the entire Tanakh and redefine zina as just "adultery or fornication". There is no evidence for it outdise hadith and tradition.
Peace
Lovely bible, men sin and women get beaten. Fantastic, only the Qur'an does not say a word on that.
You are spitting on the Qur'an, bringin all the time any foul measure from the bible to trump it.
Forget the bible and stick to the Qur'an. If you want to bring the bible, open a thread for that and boast about it as much as you want.
And also very convenient forgettiing the whole of that part of An-Nur which is very eloquent about exactly what it is speaking about, common plain women disgracing an bashing.
Salaam
-
Anything else I can do for you huruf? Do you want a hug? group
Peace
-
!How repulsive!
Lovely bible, men sin and women get beaten. Fantastic, only the Qur'an does not say a word on that.
You are spitting on the Qur'an, bringin all the time any foul measure from the bible to trump it.
Forget the bible and stick to the Qur'an. If you want to bring the bible, open a thread for that and boast about it as much as you want.
And also very convenient forgettiing the whole of that part of An-Nur which is very eloquent about exactly what it is speaking about, common plain women disgracing an bashing.
Salaam
Made me happy to see myself in action!
