[kiosokkn]

Conditions for it to be valid:

1) The rule and authority is Islamic.
2) There are 4 male and realiable, sane honest witnesses that witness that the actual act of sexual intercourse (not just them sleeping together but actual penetration) is taking place.
3) The adulterer is married to someone else.
4) Or the adulterer confesses to someone in authority and hands themselves in.

It is almost impossible for all these conditions to be met, so actual punishments would be very rare, the law is so tough because it acts as a deterrant when people are brought up in a society where such laws exist...they know in their hearts and minds that it is really bad so they are unlikely to even go towards such acts.

Can this law be applied in a land that has newely been brought under Islamic rule? Or is it better to wait until people are brought up to speed and educated gradually? What if the Islamic authority and rule is lax in applying other parts of the shariah, for example they allow Capitalism to function unhidered with its riba and fraudulant transactions and allow the rich to steal using the pen and other sophisticated means while they punish the poor and adulterers in this way...is rajm still valid in a situation like this? How can sinners who continue to sin big, punish others?

[Karensmith]

Conditions for it to be valid:

1) The rule and authority is Islamic.
2) There are 4 male and realiable, sane honest witnesses that witness that the actual act of sexual intercourse (not just them sleeping together but actual penetration) is taking place.
3) The adulterer is married to someone else.
4) Or the adulterer confesses to someone in authority and hands themselves in.

It is almost impossible for all these conditions to be met, so actual punishments would be very rare, the law is so tough because it acts as a deterrant when people are brought up in a society where such laws exist...they know in their hearts and minds that it is really bad so they are unlikely to even go towards such acts.

Can this law be applied in a land that has newely been brought under Islamic rule? Or is it better to wait until people are brought up to speed and educated gradually? What if the Islamic authority and rule is lax in applying other parts of the shariah, for example they allow Capitalism to function unhidered with its riba and fraudulant transactions and allow the rich to steal using the pen and other sophisticated means while they punish the poor and adulterers in this way...is rajm still valid in a situation like this? How can sinners who continue to sin big, punish others?

you should mail one of the ifta sites and ask for a detailed answer. this would be better than asking here when there are too many people to confuse you.

[kiosokkn]

you should mail one of the ifta sites and ask for a detailed answer. this would be better than asking here when there are too many people to confuse you.

I just thought I would put it here as well because this has been discussed in other threads and it has been presented as one of the fundamental beliefs of Islam, denial of which takes one out of Islam. However the conditions for its application were not discussed.

Would you agree that people who want to apply this rule without the strict conditions on others have something wrong with them psychologically? Or it creates a totalitarian culture where some people want to be lords over others?

I remember on haj, at Mina some people I know (including women and children) became trapped in the crowd under the bridges. There was much pushing and shoving the children were very close to being crushed to death and there were two big young healthy looking males who were finding it funny pushing and shoving and laughing. What type of character would find this situation funny? There was obviously something wrong with them mentally.

[kiosokkn]

I recently learnt that some women are attacked in the Muslim world because they are not covered up, someone thinks they are then justified to pour acid on the womans face, disfiguring her for life and virtually destroying a persons life. Who gave permission to these crazy people to do such a thing? Islam does not teach us to do this?

[gambleingsites]

I recently learnt that some women are attacked in the Muslim world because they are not covered up, someone thinks they are then justified to pour acid on the womans face, disfiguring her for life and virtually destroying a persons life. Who gave permission to these crazy people to do such a thing? Islam does not teach us to do this?

its ignorance,just like forced marriages

[Karensmith]

I just thought I would put it here as well because this has been discussed in other threads and it has been presented as one of the fundamental beliefs of Islam, denial of which takes one out of Islam. However the conditions for its application were not discussed.

Would you agree that people who want to apply this rule without the strict conditions on others have something wrong with them psychologically? Or it creates a totalitarian culture where some people want to be lords over others?

I remember on haj, at Mina some people I know (including women and children) became trapped in the crowd under the bridges. There was much pushing and shoving the children were very close to being crushed to death and there were two big young healthy looking males who were finding it funny pushing and shoving and laughing. What type of character would find this situation funny? There was obviously something wrong with them mentally.

there are many things who's denial or utterance causes a person to go out of the fold of Islam. one has to be firm on this.
regarding application the details are in books of fiqh and also books of contemporary scholars. that is why i said ask a good dar ul ifta u trust.

i do not think your haj example has any relevance here.
also don't mind but i think your issue with rajm's application is more emotional than academic. no offence meant.

duas requested.

[Karensmith]

I recently learnt that some women are attacked in the Muslim world because they are not covered up, someone thinks they are then justified to pour acid on the womans face, disfiguring her for life and virtually destroying a persons life. Who gave permission to these crazy people to do such a thing? Islam does not teach us to do this?

if you are talking about pakistan then my simple question is: how do you know why the woman had acid poured on her face?
secondly how do you know they took permission from a scholar to do this?
people do a lot of evil things to women in pakistan. why does Islam have to be blamed for everything? recently two women were driven from their homes after a jirga ruled them as 'kaari'. people think jirga is synonymous with islam.

[kiosokkn]

[QUOTE=mh16388;790503]

also don't mind but i think your issue with rajm's application is more emotional than academic. no offence meant.

duas requested.
Yes I am emotional because I think people in our age who apply the rule do not follow the conditions.

[kiosokkn]

[QUOTE=mh16388;790507]

if you are talking about pakistan then my simple question is: how do you know why the woman had acid poured on her face?
secondly how do you know they took permission from a scholar to do this?
people do a lot of evil things to women in pakistan. why does Islam have to be blamed for everything? recently two women were driven from their homes after a jirga ruled them as 'kaari'. people think jirga is synonymous with islam. I heard it happens in Egypt, Algeria and Pakistan. You think a scholar can give permission for this?

[Andrew1978]

Yes I am emotional because I think people in our age who apply the rule do not follow the conditions.

On what basis? Have you ever been present at the court hearings which do happen in places like Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan?

[kiosokkn]

On what basis? Have you ever been present at the court hearings which do happen in places like Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan?

No. Have four witnesses been present in all these cases? In addition to this Saudi openly practices riba with its central bank a crime that is similar to fornicating with ones own mother in the haram accroding to a hadith. So this is a case of a openly sinful government applying the laws of Allah unevenly. Weak people have the law apply on them and powerful people do not. This is not Islam.

[Andrew1978]

No. Have four witnesses been present in all these cases?

Can you show that this hasn't been the case?

In addition to this Saudi openly practices riba with its central bank a crime that is similar to fornicating with ones own mother in the haram accroding to a hadith. So this is a case of a openly sinful government applying the laws of Allah unevenly. Weak people have the law apply on them and powerful people do not. This is not Islam. This is not applicable to this. The government has every right to allow the carrying out of hudood punishments, even if the government is corrupt. The verdict is decided by judges (qadhis) anyway. If anything, the Saudi government has gotten people OUT of their sentences by bowing down to Western pressure.

A government that is perfect and free of sin is not a prerequisite for any hukum of shari'ah. The king could be swimming in pools of wine and still there would be no issue with having the hudood punishments in place.

[kiosokkn]

Can you show that this hasn't been the case? No, but when have four men been present witnessing penetration taking place?

This is not applicable to this. The government has every right to allow the carrying out of hudood punishments, even if the government is corrupt. The verdict is decided by judges (qadhis) anyway. If anything, the Saudi government has gotten people OUT of their sentences by bowing down to Western pressure.

A government that is perfect and free of sin is not a prerequisite for any hukum of shari'ah. The king could be swimming in pools of wine and still there would be no issue with having the hudood punishments in place.
There is a hadith in which a companion tried to get some yahudi adulters off the punishment of stoning. The Prophet became very angry and told the companion if I remember correctly that only punishing the weak and letting the powerful go is a massive corruption. (a cause of much wrong doing and punishment from Allah ) I would say it is a major corruption of the deen and it definetly is a huge disaster when inviting others to Islam because they see this blatant hypocrasy and double standards. I pray that the Saudi regime is protected and empowered to do the good. Ameen.

[WeestDype]

Rajm can also inflicted when the requisite four witnesses are not present i.e. when a person confesses himself and sticks by his/her confession. There have been wonderful souls who have given themselves completely and submitted to the punishment.

Rajm is the last resort option in Islam for adultery. The whole ethos of Islam, in its divinely ordained system of Hijaab, is to prevent as much as possible from such incidents occurring.

[ValintinoV]

Even if there are no witnesses, and the person does not confess, then although rajm wont be done but the judge can hand out a discretionary punishment based on forensic or other types of evidence. Allah know best

[Ilaubuas]

A clear example of how Mercy overwhelms Justice within the Shar'ia, nonetheless the punishment shows how severe fornication as a sin is.
Alas...what a beautiful deen we have and how ignorant we are in its application.

[JohnTruels]

Even if there are no witnesses, and the person does not confess, then although rajm wont be done but the judge can hand out a discretionary punishment based on forensic or other types of evidence. Allah know best

This is the kind of problem that happens. Through such unestablished or weakly established extension of rules and through false analogys, a complete new set of rules emerges and the punishment adultery becomes altogether something else.

In today's time anyone trying to Islamise the state should start by establishing those aspects of Islam upon which the four schools of thought agree. And new issues should be similarily based on widespread agreement of Muslims all over the world. Aspects which are obtained through Ijthihad (past or present) over which agreement does not exist nor immediately evident should be left out when it causes unnecessary burden among Muslims.

Whats is also worse is when punishment is used as an attempt to show off their Islamic character. An outward hypocritical show which even a layman can recognize and would despise. Or when pubishment is done to make a statement to the "kuffar west" or conduct witch hunt against rivals.

[Karensmith]

This is the kind of problem that happens. Through such unestablished or weakly established extension of rules and through false analogys, a complete new set of rules emerges and the punishment adultery becomes altogether something else.

this is not the case when qualified muftis sit to do it.

In today's time anyone trying to Islamise the state should start by establishing those aspects of Islam upon which the four schools of thought agree. And new issues should be similarily based on widespread agreement of Muslims all over the world. Aspects which are obtained through Ijthihad (past or present) over which agreement does not exist nor immediately evident should be left out when it causes unnecessary burden among Muslims.

you are incorrect. the country's majority madhab is chosen as the state madhab. other madhahib and other sects can run their affairs by their own laws.

you should read relevant portions of Al Ahkam As Sultaniyyah where ijithad for the Qadhis has been thoroughly discussed. i am afraid i cant copy paste from the book. i have it in images.

Whats is also worse is when punishment is used as an attempt to show off their Islamic character. An outward hypocritical show which even a layman can recognize and would despise. Or when pubishment is done to make a statement to the "kuffar west" or conduct witch hunt against rivals.

an example is the recent 'taliban' video of 'stoning' via a single gun shot.
i have very strong reason to believe it is utterly fake and a propaganda by the

[JohnTruels]

this is not the case when qualified muftis sit to do it.

A panel of 40 muftis as the qualification of today is weak compared to the qualification of the past.

you are incorrect. the country's majority madhab is chosen as the state madhab. other madhahib and other sects can run their affairs by their own laws. Is this some rule that is well established and unchangable? Ofcourse not. It was evolved based on convenience. My reading also tells me that courts had judges from four madhabs.

you should read relevant portions of Al Ahkam As Sultaniyyah where ijithad for the Qadhis has been thoroughly discussed. i am afraid i cant copy paste from the book. i have it in images. I haven't read it but if there is some unambiguous proof that is not possible to be counter argued, then you can point it out here.

My point simply was based on the context of time where shariah state should start by applying what is most evident and well established and agreed; rather than applying ijthihad of every mufti here and there. The state should function in a manner that is consistent and built on strong principles and not act upon speculative ijthihad of every new mufti. Just because some past scholar allowed a certain dress color code for dhimmis don't mean a certain mufti can say "hey this scholar allowed it, so are you smarter than him? " and then apply dress color code to identify dhmmis. That is equivalent to salafis who fetch for opinions without any principles.

I'm not saying ijthihad and those aspects which are differed is to be rejected. Not at all. At scholarly level the discussions can progress and preachers can preach. But for it to be applied from a state level, there needs to be a greater level of validity.

an example is the recent 'taliban' video of 'stoning' via a single gun shot.
i have very strong reason to believe it is utterly fake and a propaganda by the That story seems more like somebody's self projection rather than a true incident. A fake drama most likely.

Yes that is an example butvthere are more real examples which are not usually addressed and blind eye turned..

[kiosokkn]

It sounds like some of us modern people want to apply the punishment, when Rasulullah had a sahabi woman confess to him he wanted to abstain from the punishment, turning his face away and asking her to come back later.