islamic criminal law + honour killings

[aamirsaab]

I think 4.93 makes Lynx's situation 100% clear
"Whoso slayeth a believer of set purpose, his reward is Hell for ever. Allah is wroth against him and He hath cursed him and prepared for him an awful doom."

Lynx is/was talking about overruling. Which I have now covered.

Aamirsaab: I looked it up in Tafsir Jalalayn. It said it was about different groups of people, where if someone from group A kills someone from group B then they are in a position to demand that someone in group A is killed in retribution - or if they think it will aid peace between the two parties they can demand a sufficient payment instead.
...

I am not qualified to talk about tafsir. So cannot help you there.

I queried this because I only recall the Quran talking about "Cannot kill a believer" rather than "Cannot kill another person". I was just curious as to how a sentence would look for a Muslim who accidentally killed an atheist where the atheist's parents refused compensation money.

Any references anyone has would be appreciated.

There's a link in my sig to a sharia law book; click on it and purchase it. It will answer any and all your queries about Shariah, far more quickly than me looking it up and posting it any time you have a question.

 

[TheRationalizer]

Lynx is/was talking about overruling. Which I have now covered.

I was talking about Lynx's initial statement that Shariah law has a loophole which allows people to have their children killed by a 3rd party.

There's a link in my sig to a sharia law book; click on it and purchase it. Everything you could possibly want regarding Shariah is in there.

I don't currently have the time to read a book. I'm only mildly curious which is why I thought I'd ask here in case someone was already aware of something. Thanks for the info though.

 

[Lynx]

The Caliph Umar wrote a letter to Abu Musa al-As'hari on the eve of his appointment as a Qadi (judge) that outlined the functions and responsibilities of a muslim judge. I'll drop part of the exercpt given in the book I'm using (cus it's massive and whilst very important, you probably aren't going to read it. So let's just roll with this)

"If you have given a judgement yesterday and today you may arrive to a correct opinion upon re-thinking, you must not feel prevented ffrom retracting from your first judgement, because justice is primeval, and it is better to retract than to coninue in error''

Shariah: The Islamic Law, P.14, Abdur Rahman I. Doi (there's a link to that book in my sig; Buy it)

Hi, that quote seems to just say a judge is able to recant his initial judgment if he realizes it was in err; it does not talk about overriding a Quranic/Sunah rule (such as ignoring the option of forgiving your killer) in the case where there is an obvious 'conflict of interest' or something similar. This is important because any judgment that does not accept the forgiveness by the family would be in direct contradiction to what the Prophet said so an example where a general rule was ignored for a 'higher' purpose or something would suffice. Since you went through the trouble of finding a piece of reading I will try my best to take a look through it and see if the stuff you couldn't type out will shed more light. Thanks

 

[aamirsaab]

Hi, that quote seems to just say a judge is able to recant his initial judgment if he realizes it was in err; it does not talk about overriding a Quranic/Sunah rule (such as ignoring the option of forgiving your killer) in the case where there is an obvious 'conflict of interest' or something similar. This is important because any judgment that does not accept the forgiveness by the family would be in direct contradiction to what the Prophet said so an example where a general rule was ignored for a 'higher' purpose or something would suffice. Since you went through the trouble of finding a piece of reading I will try my best to take a look through it and see if the stuff you couldn't type out will shed more light. Thanks

Tbh that excerpt covers your query by extension of ruling. But, the rest of the letter (that I didn't post cus it was too long) is certainly worth a read and the book as a whole is definitely worth your purchase. Anytime I get stumped on a particular legal matter, I take a look in that book and I get an answer.