Important questions about stoning for adultery!

[ILuvAllah]

I could not find any verse in the Quran about stoning for adultery. I found these verses from surah nisa about the punishment of adultery.

15. And those of your women who commit illegal sexual intercourse, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them (i.e. women) to houses until death comes to them or Allah ordains for them some (other) way.

16. And the two persons (man and woman) among you who commit illegal sexual intercourse, punish them both. And if they repent (promise Allah that they will never repeat, i.e. commit illegal sexual intercourse and other similar sins) and do righteous good deeds, leave them alone. Surely, Allah is Ever the One Who accepts repentance, (and He is) Most Merciful.

I did a small research on it afterwards where I found the verse was revealed to the prophet (pbuh) but he did not include it in the text of the Quran Why would the Prophet (pbuh) miss this verse intentionally without an order from Allah to do so. I find it hard to believe, he would never do such a thing. The hadith says that the Prophet (pbuh) and his companions carried out the penalty of stoning. So, if this law was revealed then why would the Prophet (pbuh) not include this law in the Quran which he himself practiced.

One more question, if this punishment of stoning was revealed or if still valid then why would Allah mention the above verses as punishment of adultery? I remember reading a hadith where the Prophet (pbuh) was informed about a woman who has committed adultery and he was asked how should she be punished. Then the Prophet (pbuh) said she should be punished according to the law of the Torah (old testament) which was stoning. this is prior to the time the verses about the punishment of adultery was revealed.

[Perseveranze]

السلام عليكم

بسم الله الرحمن الرحم الهر

Till this day, the words of Umar(رضي الله عنه) ring loud, when he said;

---

"Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: 'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him." - [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 816]

---

I could not find any verse in the Quran about stoning for adultery. I found these verses from surah nisa about the punishment of adultery.

15. And those of your women who commit illegal sexual intercourse, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them (i.e. women) to houses until death comes to them or Allah ordains for them some (other) way.

16. And the two persons (man and woman) among you who commit illegal sexual intercourse, punish them both. And if they repent (promise Allah that they will never repeat, i.e. commit illegal sexual intercourse and other similar sins) and do righteous good deeds, leave them alone. Surely, Allah is Ever the One Who accepts repentance, (and He is) Most Merciful.

These verses were abrogated with a Qur'anic verse (fornication) AND a Sunnah (adultery). The verse which abrogated it was;

---

The [unmarried] woman or [unmarried] man found guilty of sexual intercourse - lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah , if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment. [Qur'an 24:2]

---

Ibn Kathir(رحيم الله) in his tafsir mentions;

---

Ibn `Abbas said, "The early ruling was confinement, until Allah sent down Surat An-Nur (chapter 24) which abrogated that ruling with the ruling of flogging (for fornication) or stoning to death (for adultery).''

---

Note: Fornication ruling was established in that verse (above), but Adulterer ruling was established in the Sunnah (of which there's amples of hadiths which I'm sure you're aware off).

---

"Such stoning is confirmed in the Sunnah, while flogging is established clearly in the Qur'an. Since the Qur'anic statement is phrased in general terms, and the Prophet inflicted stoning on a married man and a married woman who committed adultery, it is clear that the punishment of flogging applies only to adulterers who are unmarried." (Sayyid Qutb - In The Shade Of The Qur'an - The Islamic Foundation - Volume 12 - Page 206).


"'...the punishment prescribed in the Qur'an relates to unmarried persons and the punishment of stoning is prescribed by the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) for married persons." (Commentary Of: Sahih Muslim, Book 17, Number 4218 - Abdul Hamid Siddiqi's Commentary - Dar Al Arabia - Volume 3 - Chapter DCLXXXIII - Footnote 2177 - Page 920).

"Hafiz ibn Hajar has even recorded a consensus of all reputable scholars on the fact that the verse of 100 lashes refers only to non-muhsans, i.e. fornicators." (Fath Al-Bari - Volume 12 - Page 157 - cited in: Maulana Abdullah Nana - Stoning To Death In Islam - Islamic Da'wah Academy - Page 56 - Source).

---

I did a small research on it afterwards where I found the verse was revealed to the prophet (pbuh) but he did not include it in the text of the Quran Why would the Prophet (pbuh) miss this verse intentionally without an order from Allah to do so. I find it hard to believe, he would never do such a thing. The hadith says that the Prophet (pbuh) and his companions carried out the penalty of stoning. So, if this law was revealed then why would the Prophet (pbuh) not include this law in the Quran which he himself practiced.

There's two opinions on this (the first one is stronger, and it's better to just accept that to avoid being confused);

1. The recitation was abrogated, but the ruling was not. (There's three types of abrogations you need to learn about to fully understand)
2. It wasn't ever meant to be apart of the Qur'an, and was a Non-Qur'anic revalation (ie. It was from the Torah of Moses), and thus its instruction (ruling) was upheld through revelation.

Eitherway, both lead to the fact that the ruling on the stoning verse is still and always will be active (until Judgement day).

Read the following links (where you can see the two opinions), if there's something you still don't understand/unsure of, please ask;

http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/20...t-stoning.html

One more question, if this punishment of stoning was revealed or if still valid then why would Allah mention the above verses as punishment of adultery? I remember reading a hadith where the Prophet (pbuh) was informed about a woman who has committed adultery and he was asked how should she be punished. Then the Prophet (pbuh) said she should be punished according to the law of the Torah (old testament) which was stoning. this is prior to the time the verses about the punishment of adultery was revealed.

As already shown above, the verse was not for adultery, it was for fornication. Adultery punishment was revealed in the Sunnah.

As for the hadith, could you show me this?

It should be noted;

---

"We can say with certainty that all the incidents of stoning or the majority of them occurred after the verse of 100 lashes was revealed. Surah Nur was revealed in response to the accusation which was leveled against Aishah which took place immediately after the Battle of Banu Mustaliq. The scholars have differed with regard to the date in which this battle took place. Some say it was 3 A.H., others say that it was 5 A.H., and yet others hold the view that it took place in 6 A.H. Musa ibn Uqbah - one of the most knowledgeable scholars regarding wars and battles - says that this battle took place in 5 A.H., shortly before the Battle of Ahzab (confederates). Hafiz ibn Hajar has also given preference to this view and supported it with many proofs."

(Fathul Bari - Vol. 7, Pg. 430 - cited in: Maulana Abdullah Nana - Stoning To Death In Islam - Islamic Da'wah Academy - Page 59 - Source).

---

Also, if you have question on the requirements for adultery and the details of it etc. Let me know, as I remember writing a detailed explanation of it in the past.

[ILuvAllah]

Thanks for the clarification but there has to be four eye witnesses before carrying out the punishment. I just asked this question because this is the issue the non muslims bring very often to mock islam. It is also mentioned in the torah but people dont talk about that. they just pick on Islam.

[Logikon]

It is also mentioned in the torah but people dont talk about that. they just pick on Islam.

Yes you are correct. Jesus noticed a stoning about to take place and famously said "Those without sin, cast the first stone". This is evidence that the Jews used stoning as a punishment


However, since then, the Jews have changed their ways and do not carry out the punishment. This can be compared to some Muslims who continue to carry out the punishment to this day. This is the background to your comment "They just pick on Islam".

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Logikon]

it is clear that the punishment of flogging applies only to adulterers who are unmarried." (Sayyid Qutb - In The Shade Of The Qur'an - The Islamic Foundation - Volume 12 - Page 206).

Could somebody please clarify this point. If a person is unmarried then they cannot commit adultry.

[Perseveranze]

Yes you are correct. Jesus noticed a stoning about to take place and famously said "Those without sin, cast the first stone". This is evidence that the Jews used stoning as a punishment


However, since then, the Jews have changed their ways and do not carry out the punishment. This can be compared to some Muslims who continue to carry out the punishment to this day. This is the background to your comment "They just pick on Islam".

It's alright, Fox News doesn't report everything.

---

A 28-year-old Philadelphia says he stoned a 70-year-old friend to death “because the Bible refers to stoning homosexuals.” John Thomas said he killed Murray Seidman with stones inside a sock after the older man made “unwanted sexual advances.” From the AP report:

According to the complaint, “John Thomas stated that he read in the Old Testament that homosexuals should be stoned in certain situations. The answer John Thomas received from his prayers was to put an end to the victim’s life. John Thomas stated that he struck the victim approximately 10 times in the head. After the final blow, John Thomas made sure the victim was dead.”

But the full story reveals that Thomas’ “the Bible made me do it” excuse may just be that. Thomas had another, far older, motive for the killing: money. He was the sole heir to Seidman’s estate.


Yet Thomas’ excuse that the Bible supposedly sanctioned his horrific act should not be taken as a reason to dismiss the Bible wholesale. Gay blogger John Aravosis — like Thomas, not a theologian – agrees with the confessed killer that the Bible orders death for gay people and wonders: “How Christians get away with selling the Bible with those quotes still inside is beyond me.”


Both Thomas and Aravosis are right that the Bible (Leviticus 20:13, to be precise) prescribes death for homosexual acts between two men (never between two women because women, being property, were pretty much ignored). However, Thomas is incorrect about the method of death. The Bible never mentions stoning gay men.
Both arguments, though, miss the point. Bibles don’t kill people, ignorant Bible readers kill people.


Aravosis may find some solace from theologian Stanley Hauerwas who wrote a few years ago in his book Unleashing the Scripture, “The Bible is not and should not be accessible to merely anyone, but rather it should only be made available to those who have undergone the hard discipline of existing as part of God’s people.”


Which is to say that many people, like Thomas, who justify their conduct with a single quote from the Bible frequently don’t know what they are talking about. When one reads the Bible and takes the English version at face (and literal) value, they do terrible violence to the text. The Bible is not meant to be a book of answers where you can just open it up and find out exactly what to do next. It is not a Ouija board or a divining rod. Instead, it is a collection of writings from wildly different times, cultures, and points of view. In fact, it contradicts itself from book to book, and sometimes from chapter to chapter. To say, “the Bible says …” as if it settles an argument once and for all is a terribly naïve way to read a very complicated text. Instead, one must be trained to actually read the Bible in a responsible manner – preferably, as Hauerwas states, within a community dedicated to taking the Bible seriously.


As Jennifer Wright Knust writes in her latest book, Unprotected Texts, “The only way the Bible can be regarded as straightforward and simple is if no one bothers to read it. The Bible was not a collection of policy statements that had to be obeyed or a weapon designed to enforce particular views about morality, but an invitation to think about who God might be and what it means to be human.”

http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/03/sho...y-were-muslim/

---

Also, she said "Pick on Islam" (compared to ignoring Judaism/Christianity), instead of "Pick on Muslim".

[Logikon]

But the full story reveals that Thomas’ “the Bible made me do it” excuse may just be that. Thomas had another, far older, motive for the killing: money. He was the sole heir to Seidman’s estate.

The punishment of stoning appears in all 3 holy books. We are in agreement here.

The Jews and Christians ignore their holy books in that they don't use stoning as punishment.

Would an Islamic state with sharia law use stoning as a punishment?

[Perseveranze]

Could somebody please clarify this point. If a person is unmarried then they cannot commit adultry.

By Islamic terms; Fornication is sexual intercourse where the person has never been married, they are known as a “Zani”. Adultery on the other hand, is sexual intercourse where they have been/are married, and thus are referred to as a “Thayyib Zani”.

It's differentiated like this due to experience, where the Zani is still exploring and due to a more likelyhood of a weak moment, may commit the sin, but the Thayyib Zani has done it/been through it all so has less of an excuse; thus is considered equivalent to the adulterer.

[Logikon]

Also, she said "Pick on Islam" (

Yes I did too. Again we are in agreement

[Perseveranze]

The punishment of stoning appears in all 3 holy books. We are in agreement here.

The Jews and Christians ignore their holy books in that they don't use stoning as punishment.

Would an Islamic state with sharia law use stoning as a punishment?

Yes it would, because we don't pick and choose stuff and play around with our beliefs.

Despite the rajm punishment, you need to understand what factors are required for it to be implemented. Throughout early Islamic history, the punishment was so rare that you could count the number on your fingers - all known cases that I'm aware of, were self confession based (the four witness rule has never been achieved till date).

To give you a brief overview, these are the requirements, either;

• - Self confession (which has to under no compulsion, it has to be done 4 times, it has to be done under sanity and without any influences such as alcohol or drugs).
• - 4 upright witnesses

Regarding witnesses, the great classical Hanafi jurist (faqih), Imam al-Mawsili (Allah have mercy on him) states:

---

“It (legal punishment) is established by evidence and confession. Evidence is that four people give testimony against a man and woman that they committed fornication. When they testify (in the courts), the judge (qadhi) will inquire from the witnesses the particulars and details of what took place, the place of incident, the time of incident, and the identity of the woman involved. When they give details of all of this and they state that the woman was unlawful upon the man in every way (to ensure it wasn’t rape), and that they testify the observing of sexual intercourse taking place like they see a Kohl needle entering the Kohl bottle, and the four witnesses are considered upright both privately and publicly, then the judge will give the order for the legal punishment to be enforced upon (both) perpetrators.”

-(See: al-Ikhtiyar li ta’lil al-Mukhtar, 2/312-313)

---

Furthermore, there’s another factor that makes the “witness” requirement almost impossible to achieve. When it comes to accusing other people of adultery/fornication, there's strong protection, as we find in the Qur’an;

---

“And those who accuse chaste women [of adultery/fornication] and then do not produce four witnesses — lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient. ” [Qur’an 24:2]

---

In a hadith we find more significantly;

---

Narrated Sahl ibn Sa’d: A man came to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and confessed before him that he had committed fornication with a woman whom he named. The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) sent for the woman and asked her about it. But she denied that she had committed fornication. So he inflicted the prescribed punishment of flogging on him, and let her go.

- [Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 442]

---

Regarding self-confessions, Islam completely discourages people publicly confessing their sins, especially if it’s adultery/fornication. The following hadith reflects this strongly;

---

‘Abdullah b. Buraida reported on the authority of his father that Ma’iz b. Malik al-Aslami came to Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said : Allah’s Messenger, I have wronged myself ; I have committed adultery and I earnestly desire that you should purify me. He turned him away. On the following day, he (Ma’iz) again came to him and said : Allah’s Messenger, I have committed adultery. Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) turned him away for the second time, and sent him to his people saying: Do you know if there is anything wrong with his mind. They denied of any such thing in him and said: We do not know him but as a wise good man among us, so far as we can judge. He (Ma’iz) came for the third time, and he (the Holy Prophet) sent him as he had done before. He asked about him and they informed him that there was nothing wrong with him or with his mind (ie. He wasn’t a mad man, wasn’t drunk, wasn’t under compulsion). When it was the fourth time, a ditch was dug for him and he (the Holy Prophet) pronounced judgement to carry out the rajm punishment.

- [Sahih Muslim, Book 17, Number 4206]

---

You can see from the above the Prophet(pbuh) tried to avert the punishment by giving the man amples of opportunities to go away and never come back. But the man remained persistent and kept coming back. In fact, in another hadith version (Muslim, Book 17, Number 4198), the Prophet(pbuh) says; “maybe you only kissed or hugged?” It was only after the person came back again and again (a total of four times, so it’s four confessions) was the rajm punishment pronounced.

And finally, in a very famous hadith, the Prophet(pbuh) said;

---

The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Keep the Muslims away from punishments as much as possible. If there is any way out for an offender to escape punishment, acquit him. It is better for a judge to make an error in acquittal than in conviction.”

- (Sunan Tirmidhi, no: 1424)

---

There's also so many other factors, such as the fact that the witnesses have to carry out the punishment, and if any of them back out at any point, then the case is dropped (same thing if any of the witnesses retracts their statement and so on).

Overall, you should get the point. It's near impossible to get stoned for adultery. You're not suppose to do it in the first place, as a Good Muslim, if not that, then think of the punishment at the back of your mind - overall acting as a good deterrent. As a scholar puts it;

---

Allah Most High says:

“In the law of retaliation there is (saving of) life to you, O you men of understanding.” (Surah al-Baqarah, V: 179)

An example of this which comes to mind is that we see speed cameras being placed on many roads and streets (especially here in the UK!) in order to deter people from speeding in their vehicles. The idea behind these speed cameras is not to catch people speeding, rather to prevent people from speeding and causing accidents. If the aim was to catch people speeding, there would be no warning signs indicating that a camera is present. However, we see that whenever a speed camera is placed, many warnings are given that “beware this road has a speed camera”. Many of the times, the camera is not even in operation, hence, the idea is to stop people speeding rather than catch and punish them.

The same is with the various legal punishments prescribed by Shariah, in that they are prescribed to prevent people from committing unlawful actions and corrupting the society, yet the rules and conditions for a legal punishment to be enforced are so stringent that very rarely would an individual be punished. The legal punishment is considered a deterrent, but if an individual did involve him/herself in some unlawful activity, the objective now is not to get the individual punished rather to save him/her from the punishment.

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=4208&CATE=42

---

If you do that act, then you're suppose to keep your sins to yourself and repent sincerely to God alone and never do it again.

There's many benefits to deterring fornication/adultery. Check this out;

Pre-marital sex is forbidden in Islam and is considered fornication/zina. So, how does this benefit society/individuals? In many ways, such as less unplanned pregnancies, leading to less abortions/child neglect, less family breakdowns, and potentially less likely to gain STD’s (you’d be surprised to know that in the US they are thinking of testing teens (some just 10-12 year old) for STD/Drugs) etc. So who would’ve thought that another benefit is that you’d less likely be someone to cheat on your partner?

A recent study came out which show that; Muslims are amongst the least likely people to have pre-marital relations, and thus are amongst the least likely to cheat on their marital partners.

Abstract

Social scientists have long been interested in how cultural and structural characteristics shape individuals’ actions. We investigate this relationship by examining how macro- and micro-level religious effects shape individuals’ reports of premarital and extramarital sex. We look at how identifying with one of the major world religions—Islam, Hinduism, Christianity, Buddhism, or Judaism—and living in a nation with a Muslim culture shape the likelihood of sex outside of marriage. Using hierarchical modeling techniques and cross-national data from the Demographic and Health Surveys, we find that ever married Hindus and Muslims are less likely to report having had premarital sex than are ever married Jews and Christians, and an earlier age at marriage does not appear to explain the relationship. Married Muslims are also less likely than affiliates of all other religions, except Buddhists, to report extramarital sex. The percentage Muslim within a nation decreases the odds of reports of premarital sex and this relationship is not explained by restrictions on women’s mobility. These findings contribute to research on religion, culture, policy, and health, as well as our understanding of the macro-micro relationship.

Religion and Sexual Behaviors

[facethetruth]

It is said in the hadeeth and Allah ordered us in the quran to follow our prophet prayers and peace be upon him.

Now pls note that applying stonning is almost impossible I remember a scholar counted 20 or such cases through 1400 years and most of them were people who wanted that because of the shame that they had and just want to purify their sins. The condition is there should be 4 witnesses are trustwrothy who say the actual intercourse which means if they saw them under the blanket that does not count so who would put themselves in these situation I would say this would prevent porn movies these days which is destroying our Ummah.