Question on 5:38 - Theft Punishment
-
Salaam
I have taken the translation from the article
http//www.free-minds.org/articles/quranic/theft.htm
Also, i didnt follow how the cutting off and cutting off from are different. Can you please explain ?
Either way, can you use the example i have given ?
Salaam
-
Salaams Br.
I think we are in confusion here and that is because these two ayahs? I quoted are actually only talking about punishing the culprit, these ayah?s are talking about people who have a habit of this kind of thing, and if he repents then he will be forgiven. These ayah's aren't talking about the payment of what he might have stolen or damaged.
So in such a case, like josephs case, the guy is held until he repents or rather is seen to have repented but must also pay the fine.
The amount of repayment is deliberately confused and is in ayah 595 where two just men actually judge the crime and the repayment.
Salaams.
-
Salaam,
I dont think 595 is related
O you who believe, do not kill any game while you are restricted; and whosoever of you kills it deliberately, then the recompense is to expiate with the same from the livestock, to be judged by of justice from you in the form of a fine which shall reach the Kaab'a; or its cancellation shall be using it to feed the needy ones, while he is denied anything from it; that is to suffer the results of his deed; God forgives what has past. And whosoever returns, then God will seek vengeance from him. God is Noble, capable of vengeance.
It talks about punishment for killing a game during pilgrimage.
Do you agree ?
Salaam
-
Salaams Br,
No! Sorry Br. You have got a long ways to go to find out.
I would start by reading other topics and then if you ahave the ego and the time to do some research for self.
But what game and what pilgrimage?
N.B That isn't a quistion though - as you need to find out what all these things mean according to the message from Allah.
But don't stop it was very exciting to me so it may be to you aswell.
God is our Guide.
God is with you.
-
Salaam All,
I am trying to understand this article and put it in the forum as i didnt get a response from the website....
http//www.free-minds.org/articles/quranic/theft.htm
Would appreciate if someone who was in agreement in the article replied and helped.
Ahmed
-
Salam,
I am trying to understand this article and put it in the forum as i didnt get a response from the website....
http//www.free-minds.org/articles/quranic/theft.htm
Would appreciate if someone who was in agreement in the article replied and helped.
Yes, there is no
cuttingas per the Sunni/Shia practice, rather, there is a holding of the thief to make him/her work to compensate for that which was stolen.This can be clealry seen in the example of Joseph dealing with his brother in 1271-75
-
Peace "quran",
Salam,
Yes, there is no
cuttingas per the Sunni/Shia practice, rather, there is a holding of the thief to make him/her work to compensate for that which was stolen.This can be clealry seen in the example of Joseph dealing with his brother in 1271-75
JK- The compaensation law itself sounds reasobale but how can this be derived from the Arabic verse where GOD says to "aqta(cut/mark)" the hands? In the same sura Joseph the women also "cut(qata)" their hands, but this only shows that the whole hand aint to be cut like RK has promoted but not that no marks on the hand are to be done at all. GOD Bless!
-
Salaam All,
Would it be OK to take Joseph's example for dealing with thieves ?
We need to look at the other example also. Why is Joseph put in Jail ? for Adultery ? Since we know the punishment for adultery is not Prison, will it be OK to take the scenario of theft.
This thought just occured to me. Please correct me where i am wrong.
Salaam
Ahmed
-
Peace ahmed812,
The punishment applied to Joseph was not of God's laws, as you mentioned we know prison is not punishment for adultery. Infact, Joseph chose the punishment to stay away from trouble.
1232. She said ?This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced.?
1233. He said ?My Lord, prison is better to me than what they are inviting me to do. And if You do not turn their scheming away from me, I will fall for them and be of the ignorant.? -
Salaam,
I would like to understand why you say that it was not God's law ?
1235
Later, they saw to it, despite the clear proofs, that they should imprison him for awhile.From this verse, I do get the understanding that even though he tried to prove his innocence, he was jailed for adultery.
On the same lines, if you look at the punishment for theft, how does one conclude it was not king's law ?
1272
They said, "We lost the king's cup. Anyone who returns it will receive an extra camel-load; I personally guarantee this."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."1276
He then started by inspecting their containers, before getting to his brother's container, and he extracted it out of his brother's container. We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law. But that was the will of GOD. We exalt whomever we choose to higher ranks. Above every knowledgeable one, there is one who is even more knowledgeable.Also, Can you help me understand what the punishment would have been otherwise ? i.e., if it had been the king's law
Thanks for being patient !!
Salaam
Ahmed
-
Salam Jonny,
JK- The compaensation law itself sounds reasobale but how can this be derived from the Arabic verse where GOD says to "aqta(cut/mark)" the hands? In the same sura Joseph the women also "cut(qata)" their hands, but this only shows that the whole hand aint to be cut like RK has promoted but not that no marks on the hand are to be done at all. GOD Bless!
You are refering to two different words which is the source of all this confusion.
The verse 1231 (as well as 533, and 7124) all use the word Qattiu (with a shadda on the
ta) which is correctly translated ascut/severVerse 538 uses the word Iqtau (without the shadda) which is translated correctly as
stop/suspend/withhold(see 1325 for the useage of the same word).Ahmed,
Also, can you help me understand why 1272 and 1274 has "He Said" instead of "They said" in translations on the website ? All others have used THEY
It should be
they. Thanks for pointing out the error, it will be corrected. -
Thanks. All Praise belongs to God.
On the article, I had another question.
1275
They said, "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. We thus punish the guilty."Does this not mean that the thief becomes the owner's slave ?
The Bible also indicates the same thing.
Bible Genesis Chapter 44
10 And he said, Now also let it be according unto your words he with whom it is found shall be my servant; and ye shall be blameless.So my question again would be .... Can we apply this today ?
Salaam
-
Peace Ahmed
1235
Later, they saw to it, despite the clear proofs, that they should imprison him for awhile.From this verse, I do get the understanding that even though he tried to prove his innocence, he was jailed for adultery.
On the same lines, if you look at the punishment for theft, how does one conclude it was not king's law ?
1272
They said, "We lost the king's cup. Anyone who returns it will receive an extra camel-load; I personally guarantee this."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."1276
He then started by inspecting their containers, before getting to his brother's container, and he extracted it out of his brother's container. We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law. But that was the will of GOD. We exalt whomever we choose to higher ranks. Above every knowledgeable one, there is one who is even more knowledgeable.Also, Can you help me understand what the punishment would have been otherwise ? i.e., if it had been the king's law
The only reason I say that imprisonment is not God's law in this case, was because it was issued by the governor's wife first. Please note, you said yourself earlier, "Since we know the punishment for adultery is not Prison"... That's why I even brought this point up. To clarify, I'm not just saying it's not God's law, because someone else, other than the messenger issues such an order, but in this case I mention it just to make it clear.
Secondly, Joseph, being messenger of God, cannot go against God's laws or even issue unfitting punishments, just because the King said so. As noted before, he'd rather face imprisonment or even death, than go against God's laws.
Peace.
-
Peace
The only reason I say that imprisonment is not God's law in this case, was because it was issued by the governor's wife first. Please note, you said yourself earlier, "Since we know the punishment for adultery is not Prison"...
1232
She said, "This is the one you blamed me for falling in love with. I did indeed try to seduce him, and he refused. Unless he does what I command him to do, he will surely go to prison, and will be debased."1233
He said, "My Lord, the prison is better than giving in to them. Unless You divert their scheming from me, I may desire them and behave like the ignorant ones."1235
Later, they saw to it, despite the clear proofs, that they should imprison him for awhile.I dont think we can ignore just because the governor's wife said it first. She is not issuing an order. From 1235, it is clear that he is sentenced to jail.
Also on the same lines, for the punishment for theft.
1275
They said, "The punishment, if it is found in his bag, is that the thief belongs to you. We thus punish the guilty."1276
He then started by inspecting their containers, before getting to his brother's container, and he extracted it out of his brother's container. We thus perfected the scheme for Joseph; he could not have kept his brother if he applied the king's law. But that was the will of GOD. We exalt whomever we choose to higher ranks. Above every knowledgeable one, there is one who is even more knowledgeable.If you look at the verse 1275, it is said by Joseph's brothers when they are asked for what was a just punishment if they were found guilty. And from 1276,we know it is not King's law. So it was Joseph's scheme to get his brother. Joseph did not issue the command.
And the punishment per 1275 is Slavery as i mentioned in my previous post.
Please correct me if i am wrong.
MA, I am learning a lot. Thanks !
Salaam
-
Peace Ahmed, all,
The imprisonment of Joseph was not for committing adultery but for refusing to obey the command of the governor's wife to commit adultery with her
1232 She said "This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced."
This imprisonment was clearly not God's law as is clear from 1233-35. In any case, the punishment was not for adultery but for refusal to obey someone's command.
As far as the punishment for theft is concerned, the way Joseph's brother was punished was also clearly not God's law, and we cannot use what happened to Joseph's brother as explanation for 538, so I agree with brother Ahmed here. As per 1275 and 1279, the punishment of Joseph's brother for theft was slavery, which was suggested by his brothers and accepted under the king's system. God's law for punishment for theft per 538 is to withhold the thief's resources as a compensation for what the thief gathered/acquired unlawfully.
The way 1276 is worded, it appears that the punishment given to Joseph's brother was the king's system
1276 So he began with their bags before his brother's bag. Then he brought it out of his brother's bag. It was such that We planned for Joseph, for he would not have been able to take his brother under the king's system, EXCEPT that God wished it so. We raise the degrees of whom We please, and over every one of knowledge is the All Knowledgeable.
"He would not have been able to take his brother under the king's system, except that God wished it so"; here the word "except" makes it clear that the punishment was according to the king's system, meaning that Joseph would not have been able to take his brother under the king's system if God had not wished it so.
As to how much resources should be withheld from the thief, please see the post at the following link for an interesting explanation
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=11317.msg75027#msg75027
-
Peace
The imprisonment of Joseph was not for committing adultery but for refusing to obey the command of the governor's wife to commit adultery with her
1232 She said "This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced."
This imprisonment was clearly not God's law as is clear from 1233-35. In any case, the punishment was not for adultery but for refusal to obey someone's command.
My understanding is different.
1235
But it appealed to them, even after they had seen the signs, to imprison him until a time.The ones who were judging did see Joseph was innocent of Adultery but they still jailed him.
Are you saying that the Governor's wife told the people that She tried to Joseph and that Joseph didn't agree and hence he was jailed.
The governor's wife accused Joseph of Adultery and he was jailed for that.
Please see 1251 also
1251
He said "What is your plea that you tried to seduce Joseph from himself?" They said "God forbid that we would do any harm to him." The wife of the Governor said "Now the truth must be known, I did seek to seduce Joseph from himself and he is of the truthful ones."Please let me know if i missed something.
-
Peace Ahmed,
The governor's wife accused Joseph of Adultery and he was jailed for that.
This is not correct and is not what the relevant verses say.
1235 But it appealed to them, even after they had seen the signs, to imprison him until a time.
Yes this shows that even when those who were trying to punish him saw the signs that he was innocent, they still imprisoned him. What were those signs ?
1226 He said "She is the one who seduced me from myself," and a witness from her family gave testimony "If his shirt was torn from the front, then she is truthful, and he is the liar."
1227 "And if his shirt is torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is truthful."
1228 So when he saw that his shirt was torn from behind, he said "This is from your female scheming, your female scheming is indeed great!"Thus he was not imprisoned for accusation of adultery, but because he refused the governor's wife's command to commit adultery, therefore she used her influence to have him imprisoned because of that reason. This is clearly told to us in this verse
1232 She said "This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced."
Please note that the governor's wife herself admitted that Joseph did not commit adultery and refused her advances
1232 She said "This is the one whom you blamed me for, and I have seduced him from himself but he refused. And if he does not do as I command him, he will be imprisoned, and he will be one of those disgraced."
In 1251, the governor's wife is reiterating her admission that Joseph did not commit adultery despite her attempts
1251 He said "What is your plea that you tried to seduce Joseph from himself?" They said "God forbid that we would do any harm to him." The wife of the Governor said "Now the truth must be known, I did seek to seduce Joseph from himself and he is of the truthful ones."
"He is of the truthful ones" refers to when Joseph denied accusation of lewdness earlier
1226 He said "She is the one who seduced me from myself," and a witness from her family gave testimony "If his shirt was torn from the front, then she is truthful, and he is the liar."
1227 "And if his shirt is torn from behind, then she is lying, and he is truthful."Thus "he is of the truthful ones" in 1251 refers to when he said "she is the one who seduced me from myself" in 1226. So how can you say that Joseph was imprisoned because he was accused of adultery, when the governor's wife herself is admitting that he refused her advances (1232), and that "he is of the truthful ones" (1251), and the signs also proved his innocence (1235) ?
He was imprisoned because he refused to obey her command to commit adultery (1232). She probably used her influence to have him imprisoned because of that reason, probably due to her ego getting hurt, even though the signs proved his innocence.
