Stoning

[Umar001]

How is stoning to take place?

[Skillganon]

I think with a stone. Ask brother Ansar or check all his posts. He seem to dealt with it extensively

[Umar001]

I think with a stone. Ask brother Ansar or check all his posts. He seem to dealt with it extensively

Are they meanto be covered, i.e. over their faces and so on and put into holes so they cant get out, I saw a video edit of some stoning it was so upsetting. imsad imsad

[Skillganon]

EDIT: Until I think of something better to say. No good mentioning the video, people will go and see.

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

[Malaikah]

Are they meanto be covered, i.e. over their faces and so on and put into holes so they cant get out, I saw a video on youtube of some stoning it was so upsetting. imsad imsad

:sl:

Well of course it is upsetting, its a punishment for their sin, it isnt meant to be easy. But lok at the bright side, inshaallah that person will be forgiven of their sin because they had the punishment done on them.

From what I know, waht you described is correct, but I'm not sure about the head covering.

[Woodrow]

I have seen pictures of stoning done both ways with and without head coverings. I can not remember what countries did which.

[Umar001]

I have seen pictures of stoning done both ways with and without head coverings. I can not remember what countries did which.

Man, for real? was their head all disfigured?

Man wallahi not that i ever tought about adultery but the thing is definetly an undetterent.

Argh. they were all moving around and tryint go I dont know, but half of their body was stuck in the ground, what upset me, and also made me think that this wasnt totally done islamicly was the fact that people were like shouting and cheering which reminded me of when someone was cursing or saying something bad about someone and he was told, I THINK, not to help shaytan against the person.

[Malaikah]

:sl:

^I'm not sure of if we are talking about the same incident, but in one stoning event a person got the criminals blood on him and he cursed her, and the prophet pbuh told him not to curse her because Allah swt had forgivener her. Something like that.

Cheering? How sad can a person get. Perhaps they forget that they are not sinless themselves. ^o)

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:sl:

The punishment of stoning is the hadd punishment for the married adulterer, which essentially entails that it functions exclusively as a deterrent. Here's why. To apply this punishment you need four witnesses to the actual act of penetration who observed it from four different angles and if there is even the slightest contradiction in the most minute details of their testimony, they are punished with eighty lashes for false accusation of adultery. Thus, the implementation of the hadd punishment for zina is a practical impossibility. As the fatwâ committee under the supervision of Shaykh 'Abdul-Wahâb At-Turaryrî notes:

It is not enough for four people to show up at court and give testimony. The witnesses and their backgrounds have to be carefully scrutinized by the courts to determine their trustworthiness and honesty. They have to be able to demonstrate that they saw the crime. It is not easy to explain how one was able to witness such an act without being guilty of any wrongdoing oneself. The witnesses have to see actual sexual penetration. This is not an easy thing to explain.

If the condition of four witnesses of determined trustworthiness is not fulfilled, each of those who accused the person of adultery is given 80 lashes with a whip as the punishment for bearing false witness.

Allah says: “And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations), flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after: for such men are wicked transgressors.” [Sûrah al-Nûr: 4]

The punishments for fornication and adultery are designed more to protect society from the open practice of licentious sexual behavior than they are designed to punish people.

It is nearly impossible to get a conviction for adultery except in a case where it is carried out in public for all eyes to see. With this threat of severe punishment, people will keep their evil deeds concealed and society as a whole will be protected.

It is worth noting that in the 1400 years of Islamic history, these stringent conditions have never been met even once. And due to the deterrent effect, sexual immorality is suffocated and eradicated in an Islamic society.

In spite of all this, if the impossibility became reality and the punishment were to be carried out, then how would it be done? For the person who is convicted of such a heinous licentious act they would be placed in a pit and pelted to death while covered by a cloth so that their 'awrah is not exposed. If it is by confession and not conviction, they would have the opportunity to retract their confession at any point in time and so they would not be placed in a pit. No one is allowed to curse the person who undergoes this or express pleasure.

For the reasons outlined above, it is evident that whatever movie you have seen could by no stretch of the imagination be construed as Islamic, as this punishment is a practical impossibility and even then would never occur in the manner described.

:w:

[Woodrow]

I believe Bro. Ansar answered it all sufficiently and his last sentence is an excellent summation.

For the reasons outlined above, it is evident that whatever movie you have seen could by no stretch of the imagination be construed as Islamic, as this punishment is a practical impossibility and even then would never occur in the manner described.

With that in mind even though there are woman who have been stoned and there are even movies and pictures of the stoning. No matter what is said, these are not examples of Islamic Punishment by stoning. They are cases of murder of a woman.

[AvarAllahNoor]

What would a male wear for his stoning?

[glo]

Stoning ultimately leads to death through multiple injuries and internal bleeding - either through injuries to internal organs, or (if buried partially in the ground) through multiple head injuries ...

I don't know how large the stones tend to be, but the resulting injuries would be substantial.

imsad

[FBI]

Stoning ultimately leads to death through multiple injuries and internal bleeding - either through injuries to internal organs, or (if buried partially in the ground) through multiple head injuries ...

I don't know how large the stones tend to be, but the resulting injuries would be substantial.

imsad

:sl:

Suitable punishment for any cheaters out there, Break My heart I'll break their skulls :D

[Pk_#2]

ASlamuAlaykum,

i don't get it.

It's sad if people are cheering while it's being done, i mean they gonna get punished in hell anyway...right?

...

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

ASlamuAlaykum,

i don't get it.

It's sad if people are cheering while it's being done, i mean they gonna get punished in hell anyway...right?

...

Actually the person who recieves a hadd punishment for their offence in this life is completely absolved of the sin and much more, so they wouldn't get punished for it in the next life.

:w:

[Pk_#2]

AsalamuAlaykum,

oh ok, jazakhala.

Sorry i can't rep you :oS

[AvarAllahNoor]

What would a male wear for his stoning?

Anyone:?

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Anyone:?

Most said the same thing.

Regards

[IbnAbdulHakim]

^ i dont think it matters, he will be cleaned and clothed and given an appropriate burial afterwards anyway.

[Makky]

imsad

stoning is in the jewish Jurisprudence as well

in the old testament right?

[glo]

stoning is in the jewish Jurisprudence as well

in the old testament right?

Yes.
I don't know if there are any countries where it is still practiced ...

I can't help but be reminded of this story:

But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin." (John 8:1-11)

Peace

[Umar001]

Cheese it wasnt that it was someone being punished for drinking i think.

And I hope this aint going to turn into a comperative religion thread.Stoning is something all three have in their scripture lets not debate.

I was wondering, what if the person is put in the pit and they run away can they escape and be left? Beause I heard this along time ago, if they manage t o free themselves they can go free, but from what I understand this is not the case because of a hadeeth I read.

[Malaikah]

Yes.
I don't know if there are any countries where it is still practiced ...

I can't help but be reminded of this story:

Glo,

Are you then against courts and judges and jails and stuff? By the same logic we can not punish theives, murderers etc because none of us is free of sin. :rollseyes

Stoning ultimately leads to death through multiple injuries and internal bleeding - either through injuries to internal organs, or (if buried partially in the ground) through multiple head injuries ...

I don't know how large the stones tend to be, but the resulting injuries would be substantial.

imsad

Er this is something that is a part of your religion too...

Either way, its better to be punished in this life rather than in the next life, and of course let us not forget what Ansar said in his post about it being also impossible to convict someone....

EDIT- rather than taking this thread of topic i have created a new thread here: http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...thout-sin.html

[Pk_#2]

WELL SOME CHRISTIANS SAY IT IS NOT PART OF THIER FAITH AND THAT JESUS STOPPED THE STONING OF ONE WOMAN...

wah u fink?

Urm, ok May Allah protect us from Hell,

Nothing can be as bad as hell!

AsalamuAlaykum!

[Malaikah]

^That doesnt matter sis because it was part of the religion of the other prophets and christians believe that their law came from God so it doesnt make a difference...:)

Anyway sorry to take this thread off topic...

[Umar001]

Please guys, don't derail the thread.

Second time today I've had to quote myself, am sure you lot dont want me quoting myself all the time, its not good for my ego. :p

And I hope this aint going to turn into a comperative religion thread.Stoning is something all three have in their scripture lets not debate.

If you have questions about it do it in the comperative religion pwease.


Eesa

[Muslim Woman]

With the name of ALLAH ( God Almighty ) -The Bestower Of Unlimited Mercy, The Continuously Merciful

Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh (May the peace, mercy and blessings of Allah be upon you)

Listen to the holy Quran

http://www.islamicity.com/MOSQUE/ARA...AYAT/1/1_1.htm


&&&


----Did not read the whole thread .....is this ok to ask one question ?:hiding:


I did not find any verse on stoning in holy Quran....instead there is lashing punishment mentioned in Sura .... most probably Nur.
So, because of 1 or 2 hadith why should we think , stoning to death is a must ? Why we don't give them a chance to repent & come back to Islam ?

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

I was wondering, what if the person is put in the pit and they run away can they escape and be left? Beause I heard this along time ago, if they manage t o free themselves they can go free

No because that would be discrimination against obese adulterers.

Honestly bro, I've never heard of that but I highly doubt it. I know that for the person who confesses they are not put in a pit and are allowed to retract their confession at any time and escape the punishment. But not someone who is actually convicted by four witnesses in public, and we have never had such a case in all of islamic history.

And Allah knows best.
:w:

[Malaikah]

:sl:

^I've heard of it too actually... but I do not remember from where...:?

[snakelegs]

No because that would be discrimination against obese adulterers.

:giggling: :giggling: ;D :giggling:

[Skillganon]

No because that would be discrimination against obese adulterers.
.....
:w:

Assalamu alaikum bro
Did you Joke? :uuh:

That is rare

[Woodrow]

Ansar took me my surprise with that reply. But, that is a very serious answer.

We know that Allah(swt) is all just and that he would not establish any ruling that would not equaly apply to all people. That ruling of escaping punishment would not be available to obese people who would be unable to out run the law enforcers. Therefore it would be an unjust rule. If it is unjust to even one person, it does not sound like a ruling that Allah(swt) would have sent down.

[Malaikah]

It shouldn't. No matter how much you try and consider other views and different cultural perspectives, stoning is a Dark Age barbarism that has no place in any modern civilized society.

Not at all. It is a punishment in line with the crime. Also refer back to Ansar Al-'Adl's posts for an explanation of why it this is more of a scare tactic to keep the people from sinning, it is very hard to convict a person.

[Makky]

Yes.
I don't know if there are any countries where it is still practiced ...

I can't help but be reminded of this story:
Quote:
But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin." (John 8:1-11)

Peace

according to the christian belief jesus 'GOD' said : If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."
.. Was he the same person who had send moses with the Law ? Who said in mathew :5/ 17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished



another question : was there a person after moses without a sin ... if there wasn't, then to whom was the law of stoning ?

peace

[Umar001]

Assalamu Aleykum guys,

according to the christian belief jesus 'GOD' said : If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."
.. Was he the same person who had send moses with the Law ? Who said in mathew :5/ 17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished



another question : was there a person after moses without a sin ... if there wasn't, then to whom was the law of stoning ?

peace

Bro, as I said, please if you want to bring topics up do so in the comperative section.

I did not find any verse on stoning in holy Quran....instead there is lashing punishment mentioned in Sura .... most probably Nur.
So, because of 1 or 2 hadith why should we think , stoning to death is a must ? Why we don't give them a chance to repent & come back to Islam ?

Wa Aleykum Salam Wa Rhametulahi Wa Berekatu,

If you want to know whether the legal status of hadeeth is the same as Qu'ran please make a thred in an appropiate section.

And thanks guys,

I think that I should get a rep point because I did create a thred in which Ansar actually made something which was or might have been a joke!:happy:

[snakelegs]

I think that I should get a rep point because I did create a thred in which Ansar actually made something which was or might have been a joke!:happy:[/B]

i agree!

[جوري]

actually the whomever is without sin shbeal is a nice addendum that wasn't said by Jesus..

anyhow, in light of the Iranian woman to be stoned much to Sarkozy's naked wife's protest (funny they are so concerned about one woman but don't seem to care for millions others, whether Muslims/Gypsies or whatever but I digress) and an intervention from the Vatican, I thought I'd re-bump this thread!

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam / Peace

If anyone missed the news , here it is.

Vatican: stoning in Iran adultery case 'brutal'

By FRANCES D'EMILIO (AP) – 6 hours ago

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican raised the possibility Sunday of using behind-the-scenes diplomacy to try to save the life of an Iranian widow sentenced to be stoned for adultery.
In its first public statement on the case, which has attracted worldwide attention, the Vatican decried stoning as a particularly brutal form of capital punishment.


Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi said the Catholic church opposes the death penalty in general.
It is unclear what chances any Vatican bid would have to persuade the Muslim nation to spare the woman's life. Brazil, which has friendly relations with Iran, was rebuffed when it offered her asylum.
Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani was convicted in 2006 of adultery. In July, Iranian authorities said they would not carry out the stoning sentence for the time being, but the mother of two could still face execution by hanging for adultery and other offenses.
Her son, Sajad, told the Italian news agency Adnkronos that he was appealing to Pope Benedict XVI and to Italy to work to stop the execution.
Lombardi told The Associated Press that no formal appeal had reached the Vatican. But he hinted that Vatican diplomacy might be employed to try to save Ashtiani.
Lombardi said in a statement that the Holy See "is following the case with attention and interest."
"When the Holy See is asked, in an appropriate way, to intervene in humanitarian issues with the authorities of other countries, as it has happened many times in the past, it does so not in a public way, but through its own diplomatic channels," Lombardi said in the statement.
In one of the late Pope John Paul II's encyclicals in 1995, the pontiff laid out the Catholic Church's stance against capital punishment.
John Paul went to bat in several high-profile cases of death-row inmates in the United States. One of the first was the case of Paula Cooper, who was convicted of murdering her elderly Bible teacher when she was 15 but spared the electric chair by Indiana in 1989.

But that same year, a papal appeal for clemency to Cuba to spare a war hero and three other Cuban officers convicted of drug trafficking from the firing squad went unheeded.
Meanwhile, Italy's foreign minister, Franco Frattini, told the ANSA news agency that while Italy respects Iranian sovereignty and isn't in any way interfering, "a gesture of clemency from Iran is the only thing that can save her."


Italy has strong economic ties, primarily energy interests, in Iran.
Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...SLVSwD9I1SR682

[Al-Yasa]

stoning is wrong

i mean the punishment was there for its time

there are better and more humane methods out there

[جوري]

stoning is wrong

i mean the punishment was there for its time

there are better and more humane methods out there

Stoning is not wrong, so long as people commit primitive ancient crimes, the punishment remains the same, that being said, I'd recommend you read the thread in totality and see if the conditions are actually met for such a punishment to take place.. in fact in accordance to Islamic jurisprudence it is almost impossible to prove such a crime unless those committing it choose to fornicate in public in plain eye view to multiple witnesses!

:w:

['Abd Al-Maajid]

A person who is married and committed adultery is subjected to this punishment, right? Will he/she will be subjected to the eternal punishment as well even if the person is punished here according to the Sharia law?

And, can a community practice these laws in a democratic or secular country...:?

[Rhubarb Tart]

A person who is married and committed adultery is subjected to this punishment, right? Will he/she will be subjected to the eternal punishment as well even if the person is punished here according to the Sharia law?

And, can a community practice these laws in a democratic or secular country...:?

No he or she will not be subjected to punishment for that sin in hereafter. And if she or he ask forgiveness the Allah (swt) can also forgive.

Does Sharia law exist in democratic or secular country? (You will find the answer to be NO then the community can't practice this.)

Also punishments are only carried and issued out by the state not the community (or family members or tribes). Muslims are prohibited to take the law into their own hands. Like idiots (honour killings which is a vile crimes that cannot be justified) that has already taken the law into their own hands as a result costing innocent people lives.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...r-killing.html

http://www.channel4.com/news/article...llings/3738477

This is common sense, why ask this question? Thinking of stoning anyone?

Plus four witnesses are needed from four different angles actually seeing penetration.

[abdussattar]

To apply this punishment you need four witnesses to the actual act of penetration who observed it from four different angles and if there is even the slightest contradiction in the most minute details of their testimony, they are punished with eighty lashes for false accusation of adultery. Thus, the implementation of the hadd punishment for zina is a practical impossibility.

What more do I say? How would 4 people see such a crime? How would anyone do such a crime in the open??

[Rhubarb Tart]

What more do I say? How would 4 people see such a crime? How would anyone do such a crime in the open??

To add penetration and four angles? Pssh

I think more people are questioning it because punishment is being carried out unjustly.

http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/12871

^^^I dont know if that was done unjustly. I read the couple ran away and they were caught but didn’t admit to adultery and I also read another version. Nevertheless, this did occur and the Taliban confirmed it. And disgustingly the local celebrated it.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/af...216476354.html
^^^This is true. This was 13 years old who was raped by these men (who order and stoned her). She then went to police station to report the crime. Some of the police happen to be the men that raped her. Hence: why they accuse her of adultery. Btw her family confirmed she was never married! So how can she be stoned when she was never married?

See why people are now questioning it. It is because people are applying the law wrongly. The woman in Iran is innocent according to Shariah. She did not confess nor was even one witness let alone four.

The majority of Muslim scholars insist that such an interpretation misses the point of the basic nature of shariah, which is intended to be related to context and carefully applied.

['Abd Al-Maajid]

Like idiots (honour killings which is a vile crimes that cannot be justified)

I thought honor killings can be justified, earlier. Personally, I would not tolerate if my sister elopes with a kaffir. What am I supposed to do then, eh?

[abdussattar]

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/af...216476354.html
^^^This is true. This was 13 years old who was raped by these men (who order and stoned her). She then went to police station to report the crime. Some of the police happen to be the men that raped her. Hence: why they accuse her of adultery. Btw her family confirmed she was never married! So how can she be stoned when she was never married?

This is completely non-islamic. A raped woman cannot be stoned anyway, and if she was not married, there is no question of this!

[Rhubarb Tart]

This is completely non-islamic. A raped woman cannot be stoned anyway, and if she was not married, there is no question of this!

I know it is non islamic. They obviously did it to cover their own backs. It makes me sad:cry:

[Rhubarb Tart]

I thought honor killings can be justified, earlier. Personally, I would not tolerate if my sister elopes with a kaffir. What am I supposed to do then, eh?

Please tell me you are joking? I wonder would you behave in similar manner if it was your brother. Let just say he get together with Sikh or Christian women who is not chaste?


(PS. Honour killings is NEVER justified. It is a disgusting practice period.)

[Asiyah3]

I thought honor killings can be justified, earlier.

I'll leave this to your common sense.

Personally, I would not tolerate if my sister elopes with a kaffir. What am I supposed to do then, eh?

Advise her and advice her and advice her.

[kashmirshazad]

Regarding the case in somalia;

Did we expect anything good to ever come out of there apart from Pirates lol

['Abd Al-Maajid]

You guys need further perspicuous explanation.

I thought honor killings can be justified, earlier.

Please tell me you are joking? I wonder would you behave in similar manner if it was your brother. Let just say he get together with Sikh or Christian women who is not chaste?


(PS. Honour killings is NEVER justified. It is a disgusting practice period.)

I never said that I support honor killings or these acts can be justified. Those were my thoughts when I was not mature enough. 'Honor killing are jahalat and people practicing it are Jaahil'. These are my current thoughts on Honor Killings. :)

Advise her and advice her and advice her

LOL. I don't have any sister to give any advice...:p

P.S. I repeat that I do not think honor killings can be ever justified. Do not neg. rep. me. ;D

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Whichever way you look at it, you have to conclude that stoning is a troubling issue.

For a start, there are authorities using this punishment and believing that they are acting within Islam, when they are clearly not using the criteria explained by Islamic scholars. How can these people be told that they have got it wrong? How can their cruel actions be prevented?

Secondly, there is the deterrent issue. If four witnesses are needed for a prosecution, then the only thing the law seems to deter is adultery and fornication in public. The scholar quoted by Ansar Al-Adl said:

It is nearly impossible to get a conviction for adultery except in a case where it is carried out in public for all eyes to see. With this threat of severe punishment, people will keep their evil deeds concealed and society as a whole will be protected.

So adultery will still be going on, just in private.

It is worth noting that in the 1400 years of Islamic history, these stringent conditions have never been met even once. And due to the deterrent effect, sexual immorality is suffocated and eradicated in an Islamic society.

How can one say that sexual immorality has been "eradicated" when it is still perfectly possible for people to sin in private without fear of prosecution?

Peace

[kashmirshazad]

In hindsight, it is much less evil to do a sin undercover, than to do it out in the open and to declare it.
Correct me if I am wrong but isnt there a hadith saying that a prisoner should not disclose or talk about his crimes to anyone.

[Rhubarb Tart]

So adultery will still be going on, just in private.

lol I think that was the whole point?:hmm:

How can these people be told that they have got it wrong? How can their cruel actions be prevented?

In my opinion, first they need to sort out the widespread poverty and overall state of their country. Then educate the local people and the government.

But we have Iran which happens to be in a better state then a lot of other countries including Somalia and Afghanistan. So I don’t know, we have to somehow figure it out I guess.

[czgibson]

Greetings,

lol I think that was the whole point?:hmm:

Maybe so. I have no doubt that the threat of stoning effectively deters people from committing adultery in public view, but does driving the action into private quarters do anything to prevent the sin from occurring?

Peace

[Rhubarb Tart]

You guys need further perspicuous explanation.




I never said that I support honor killings or these acts can be justified. Those were my thoughts when I was not mature enough. 'Honor killing are jahalat and people practicing it are Jaahil'. These are my current thoughts on Honor Killings. :)



LOL. I don't have any sister to give any advice...:p

P.S. I repeat that I do not think honor killings can be ever justified. Do not neg. rep. me. ;D

:phew

Sorry
:embarrass

[Rhubarb Tart]

Greetings,



Maybe so. I have no doubt that the threat of stoning effectively deters people from committing adultery in public view, but does driving the action into private quarters do anything to prevent the sin from occurring?

Peace

no it doesnt.

[czgibson]

Greetings,

no it doesnt.

So on the one hand we have a punishment that seems almost impossible to apply correctly, given the slim chance of having four witnesses, and which acts as a deterrent for an action that is unlikely to happen anyway (i.e. public adultery), but which on the other hand makes it possible for corrupt authorities to carry out brutal executions under the pretense that they are doing the will of Allah. How could an omniscient being come up with such a damaging and impractical idea?

Peace

[Alpha Dude]

czgibson,

How can one say that sexual immorality has been "eradicated" when it is still perfectly possible for people to sin in private without fear of prosecution?

It may be that people commit sin in the privacy of their homes but the fact remains that there would be a deterrent on a societal level. For example, consider the following acts that occur nowadays which people are very desensitized to and wouldn't usually bat an eyelid about:

- pornography
- kissing/cuddling in public
- use of (usually female) human body as an advertising tool (basically selling oneself)
- nudism

These things are immoral in Islam and even according to other religions/cultures. They involve fornication or draw near to it. These kinds of things would never happen in a state where stoning is a punishment for such a crime.

Can you imagine a muslim film-maker putting an ad out in the local paper wanting to cast people for a porno?

Likewise for the other three examples (cuddling, advert/modelling, nudism). Nobody would dare do these things in public due to the implications.

Even if people go underground and do their sins, at least the innocence of society is maintained. So from that perspective, I can agree with Ansar when he says immorality gets eradicated.

I have no doubt that the threat of stoning effectively deters people from committing adultery in public view, but does driving the action into private quarters do anything to prevent the sin from occurring?

Probably not. I would argue more for deterrence against changes in the collective public opinion on sexual morality.

[Alpha Dude]

but which on the other hand makes it possible for corrupt authorities to carry out brutal executions under the pretense that they are doing the will of Allah. How could an omniscient being come up with such a damaging and impractical idea?

He has also given man the know-how to create nuclear bombs (obviously not in revelation but via inspiration, as nothing happens without the will of Allah). A device that has the potential to destroy much of the planet and humanity. One could argue the same as you did for this example too. I.e Why would an Omniscient being allow something so damaging to come into existence that people could use in the wrong way.

A fundamental premise in Islam is that people are here to be tested.

If people choose to abuse and thereby end up failing the test, there will be punishment.

[czgibson]

Greetings,

He has also given man the know-how to create nuclear bombs (obviously not in revelation but via inspiration, as nothing happens without the will of Allah). A device that has the potential to destroy much of the planet and humanity. One could argue the same as you did for this example too. I.e Why would an Omniscient being allow something so damaging to come into existence that people could use in the wrong way.

I actually would make such an argument, yes, although I think it makes a difference if there is a passage in scripture that explicitly instructs such a thing. As far as I know, there is no instruction in the Qur'an or ahadith on making nuclear weapons, so while an analogy could be made I don't think they are directly comparable.

I understand your point about the test - I've heard it mentioned before. Those of us who don't believe in an afterlife would feel safer if something could be done here and now to prevent corrupt organisations from carrying out brutal executions, rather than waiting for punishment later. However, I also understand that Islam wasn't exactly designed with non-believers' views in mind.

Thanks for your interesting thoughts.

Peace

[Rhubarb Tart]

Greetings,



So on the one hand we have a punishment that seems almost impossible to apply correctly, given the slim chance of having four witnesses, and which acts as a deterrent for an action that is unlikely to happen anyway (i.e. public adultery), but which on the other hand makes it possible for corrupt authorities to carry out brutal executions under the pretense that they are doing the will of Allah. How could an omniscient being come up with such a damaging and impractical idea?

Peace

Places like Iran, Somalia etc will always have these executions, they just happen to have an excuse(complex ruling in Islam).

Even if Islam was not to have this ruling, they would have brutal executions based on culture rather than religion. Islam clearly state killing innocent people is wrong. But yet some Muslims still kill innocent people.


Some people in Somalia kill each other because of their tribes. Where in Islam does it say it okay to do that?

But yet this is still practice? So culture is far more important to them than religion.

There are places in this world were brutal practices still takes place based on culture. This is not exclusive to Muslim countries.

[Alpha Dude]

I understand your point about the test - I've heard it mentioned before. Those of us who don't believe in an afterlife would feel safer if something could be done here and now to prevent corrupt organisations from carrying out brutal executions, rather than waiting for punishment later. However, I also understand that Islam wasn't exactly designed with non-believers' views in mind.

You seem to be suggesting that corruption unique to muslims and that the system of stoning itself will attract evil people.

I see that as flawed. An evil person would be evil regardless.

A corrupt teacher in a catholic school could beat up a kid just as easily as a mosque teacher could beat on in a madrassah.

[جوري]

Greetings,

How can one say that sexual immorality has been "eradicated" when it is still perfectly possible for people to sin in private without fear of prosecution?

Peace

seems a little dishonest to address Ansar in a post, when you know he isn't here to reply to you?
Also I doubt you have read his post in totality and exercised an abstract thought? or is it that you were banking that you'd get away with dishonesty? He wrote

It is worth noting that in the 1400 years of Islamic history, these stringent conditions have never been met even once

in other words to accuse someone of adultery the punishment would be stringent and not worth taking a risk for unless met with other witnesses who can corroborate that account, and to be the subject of stoning one would have to sin publicly in open view of bystanders.

really easy and I know English is your forte as you so like to point out in every post related or unrelated to education issues!

all the best

[أحمد]

:sl:

So adultery will still be going on, just in private.

I hope this answer's your query:

(24:19) Indeed, those who like that immorality should be spread [or publicized] among those who have believed will have a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And Allah knows and you do not know.

:wa:

[czgibson]

Greetings,

seems a little dishonest to address Ansar in a post, when you know he isn't here to reply to you?

I know he's not here any longer - a real loss to the forum. Still, at least it's possible to have an intelligent conversation with some of the members here. Ansar's post seemed like the most definitive explanation in the thread, so I thought others wouldn't mind a discussion in relation to it.

Also I doubt you have read his post in totality and exercised an abstract thought? or is it that you were banking that you'd get away with dishonesty? He wrote

in other words to accuse someone of adultery the punishment would be stringent and not worth taking a risk for unless met with other witnesses who can corroborate that account, and to be the subject of stoning one would have to sin publicly in open view of bystanders.

really easy and I know English is your forte as you so like to point out in every post related or unrelated to education issues!

Yes, I did read all of it, and yes, I was aware of all that you've said. Thanks anyway.

Peace

[czgibson]

Greetings,

:sl:



I hope this answer's your query:

(24:19) Indeed, those who like that immorality should be spread [or publicized] among those who have believed will have a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And Allah knows and you do not know.

:wa:

That's interesting. So do you believe that even if there is no obvious and public punishment for those who commit adultery in private, that Allah will find some other way to punish them in this life and in the next? Or is this verse only about people who spread knowledge of private sin?

Peace

[Muhammad]

Greetings czgibson,

The quote from Ansar Al-'Adl also mentions, (emphasis his own):

The punishments for fornication and adultery are designed more to protect society from the open practice of licentious sexual behavior than they are designed to punish people.

I think this answers your previous query about the punishment. And Allaah (swt) knows best.

[جوري]

Greetings,



I know he's not here any longer - a real loss to the forum. Still, at least it's possible to have an intelligent conversation with some of the members here. Ansar's post seemed like the most definitive explanation in the thread, so I thought others wouldn't mind a discussion in relation to it.

No one minds a discussion, one minds your own rendition and misconstrual of what he'd written!

Yes, I did read all of it, and yes, I was aware of all that you've said. Thanks anyway.

Peace

Then why did you interpret so far astray from what has been written?

all the best

[أحمد]

:sl:

Greetings,





That's interesting. So do you believe that even if there is no obvious and public punishment for those who commit adultery in private, that Allah will find some other way to punish them in this life and in the next? Or is this verse only about people who spread knowledge of private sin?

Peace

Its about publicising private sins, further details are provided in ahadeeth.

:wa:

[MEG]

:sl:

Its about publicising private sins, further details are provided in ahadeeth.

:wa:

Hello, thank you for explaining this.

But what gives someone who has sinned many times themselves a right to condemn others? Can't they just go to jail or be allowed to atone for their sins while alive?

[Zafran]

Hello, thank you for explaining this.

But what gives someone who has sinned many times themselves a right to condemn others? Can't they just go to jail or be allowed to atone for their sins while alive?

whos going to decide if they go to jail or atone for there sins??

[MEG]

whos going to decide if they go to jail or atone for there sins??

Assuming that we are speaking of countries where adultery is illegal, then the authorities. This would be a deterrent. However, would stoning really be atonement if the adulterer didn't want it? They would need to be repentant for offending God.

[Asiyah3]

*****edit*****

[Zafran]

Assuming that we are speaking of countries where adultery is illegal, then the authorities. This would be a deterrent. However, would stoning really be atonement if the adulterer didn't want it? They would need to be repentant for offending God.

If an adulterer didnt care and thought what he did was right then God will Judge him in the hereafter.

[Woodrow]

Assuming that we are speaking of countries where adultery is illegal, then the authorities. This would be a deterrent. However, would stoning really be atonement if the adulterer didn't want it? They would need to be repentant for offending God.

In Sharia law there are different levels of crimes and punishments. For a Hadd crime there are prescribed punishments. The judge has no say about the punishment once the person meets the criteria of being found guilty or confesses to a Hadd crime. Adultery is a Hadd crime, the punishment is death by stoning and this can not be changed or rescinded. While there have been some case of people being stoned for adultery, there has never been a legal stoning for adultery. The criteria for guilt has never been met after the time of the Prophet(PBUH). Any stoning done in the past 1400 years or so was not legal and not in accordance with shariah law. .

Vigilante law and "Government" Law are not shariah and those who mete out invalid punishments in the name of Shariah, need to be stopped and face punishment for their wrong doings..

[Abz2000]

peace glo,
you said that you don't know any countries where stoning is practiced, i have come across over a few thousand,
the main one being usa, and secondly i think britain, they are usually carried out by individuals who sign up for these jobs and illegally (according to the un) travel to other countries, some of it is practised by police against their own citizens, in the majority of cases the people being stoned are innocent of any crime and are totally righteous people who often speak out against corruption and wrongdoing.

these particular stones are made of lead, they are ejected from long automatic weapons, and gunpowder is used to shoot them out at high velocity,
some of the weapons are concealable, but the user is saved from having to swing their arm.

it is amazing how use of names and wordplay can often obscure what is clear and obvious, and puts a totally different light on practically the same thing - other than the fact that this practice is usually against innocent men, women and children in illegally occupied countries and sometimes against citizen protesters in the countries which they claim to serve (the stones in these cases are sometimes made of hard rubber and leave bruises and broken ribs etc, but in the majority of cases are made of lead some of which have hollow points which cause more internal damage - often ripping out a fistful of flesh or vital organs through the other side).

it is also interesting to note how the supporters of these illegal wars and tyranny often use the term stoning as propaganda against other countries whose people they would like to shoot with lead stones from high velocity pipes.

but when these issues are compared side by side - it looks more obvious that they are trying to protect immorality and degenerate decadence (which they would most likely have their own son/daughter in laws killed for if they found their sons/daughters were being betrayed - google princess diana) among the general populace by making the offenders out to be victims of injustice.
it is also interesting that shameful immorality and unfaithfulness is something the scriptures tell us the evil satan (diabolis/iblis) wants to push on the children of adam to bring about their demoralization and destruction.

peace,
abz