Monday, December 2, 2013

Refuting arguments about Women in Islam

Tabari I:280 “Allah said, ‘It is My obligation to make Eve bleed once every month as she made this tree bleed. I must also make Eve stupid, although I created her intelligent.’ Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of this world menstruate and are stupid.” 

Response: This comes from a weak source. So it's unreliable. 

Qur’an 4:3 “If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with orphans, marry women of your choice who seem good to you, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to do justice (to so many), then only one, or (a slave) that you possess, that will be more suitable. And give the women their dower as a free gift; but if they, of their own good pleasure, remit any part of it to you, eat it with enjoyment, take it with right good cheer and absorb it (in your wealth).”


Already refuted here: http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2008/06/does-islam-allow-wife-beating.html

Does Islam allow wife beating?

Some non-Muslims especially the Christians criticize and speak against Islam saying that Islam allows men to beat their wives. They refer to Quran 4:34 and pour out their inner filth.

Lets have careful look into the issue;
Firstly, you cant just take a word of the Quran and comment the way you like. You ought to consider the whole Islamic moral and social make up, make a study in the very same context and then form your opinion;
Now consider the following points;

The context:

1-Islam asks both male and female to restrict themselves only to their spouses.
2-Islam, in the strongest manner possible, condemns every extra-marital relation.
3-The permission to (lightly) beat women is not unconditional, nor it is in every situation. Lets see the context of the that; Quran says:

"....therefore the righteous women are devotedly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence What ALLAH would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, Admonish them (first), Next, refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); But if they turn to obedience, Seek not against them, means (of annoyance): For ALLAH is Most High, Great (above you all)." (Quran 4:34)

This makes it absolutely clear that this permission is only when women become disloyal--And again reading from start makes it clear that disloyalty here means something below dignity of a modest and chaste woman.

4-When a woman indulges into such an act then of a surety she would not be to her husband as she ought to be. This can even possibly make her husband slip away form the right path and he may get involved somewhere else. If such a stage arrives then this would be havoc not only for the couple and their relations but for the society as a whole. And this permission is deterrence and a necessity against evil.

It's allowed in extreme cases only:

1-Even in that case, to beat is the last option. First is to admonish, if this does not work then next step is to part from their beds, and if this also fails then is light beating.

2-And even if such a stage arrives then also their are restraints, "But if they turn to obedience, Seek not against them, Means of annoyance"

3-If at all a woman feels that she cannot live with her husband anymore, for any reason, she must get divorce and part, but as long as she is inside the marriage she must remain loyal to her husband even in his absence. For the mutual relation of the couple is the very basis of the society.

An Important Instruction:

When interpreting a verse we have to take in consideration the Hadith of Holy Prophet (peace be upon him). He said;

"Fear Allah concerning women! Verily you have taken them on the security of Allah, and intercourse with them has been made lawful unto you by words of Allah. You too have right over them, and that they should not allow anyone to sit on your bed whom you do not like. But if they do that, (in that case) chastise them in a way that leaves no mark (i.e. not severe). Their rights upon you are that you should provide them with food and clothing in a fitting manner."
(Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2137)

This shows it is more of a psychological thing then a physical one and the purpose is only to maintain the chastity and mutual love and affection of the spouses. If a wrong conduct of the woman is not checked then surely the relation will be adversely effected.

Why there is no legislation for wife doing the same to her husband:

Remember man can have legitimate second wife but woman can't have two legitimate husbands at a time for obvious reasons. Considering this and the more obvious psychological, physical differences and considering real life facts there is no legislation regarding wife admonishing her husband this way. She may take up the issue with the elders of both families to correct her husband.

An unauthentic narration:

Some people try to mislead by quoting a narration which goes as:

Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab: The Prophet (pbuh) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.(Sunan Abu Dawud Hadith 2147. Albani classified it as Da’if i.e. unauthentic).

Besides Albani, Ahmad Shakir and Shu’aib ‘Arna’ut also graded it Da’if in their respective classification of Musnad Ahmad. Ibn Kathir also criticized its chain in Musnad Al-Farooq 1/182.

Qur’an 4:11 “Allah directs you in regard of your Children’s (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females…. These are settled portions ordained by Allah.”


Does Hadith say women are deficient in intelligence?

Many anti-Islamic polemic writers specially the Christian Missionaries often quote a Hadith and yell obscenities about Islam and Holy Prophet (PBUH). The Hadith they quote is;

عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ قَالَ خَرَجَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي أَضْحَى أَوْ فِطْرٍ إِلَى الْمُصَلَّى فَمَرَّ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ فَقَالَ يَا مَعْشَرَ النِّسَاءِ تَصَدَّقْنَ فَإِنِّي أُرِيتُكُنَّ أَكْثَرَ أَهْلِ النَّارِ فَقُلْنَ وَبِمَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ تُكْثِرْنَ اللَّعْنَ وَتَكْفُرْنَ الْعَشِيرَ مَا رَأَيْتُ مِنْ نَاقِصَاتِ عَقْلٍ وَدِينٍ أَذْهَبَ لِلُبِّ الرَّجُلِ الْحَازِمِ مِنْ إِحْدَاكُنَّ قُلْنَ وَمَا نُقْصَانُ دِينِنَا وَعَقْلِنَا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ أَلَيْسَ شَهَادَةُ الْمَرْأَةِ مِثْلَ نِصْفِ شَهَادَةِ الرَّجُلِ قُلْنَ بَلَى قَالَ فَذَلِكِ مِنْ نُقْصَانِ عَقْلِهَا أَلَيْسَ إِذَا حَاضَتْ لَمْ تُصَلِّ وَلَمْ تَصُمْ قُلْنَ بَلَى قَالَ فَذَلِكِ مِنْ نُقْصَانِ دِينِهَا

----Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah's Messenger went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Messenger?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Messenger! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 293)------

Two questions are raised about this Hadith. Firstly why does the Hadith say that women will majority in the hell and does it not condemn women this way? And secondly why did the Prophet say that women are deficient in intelligence and religion. As to first question, why the Hadith says women form the majority in the hell? You can find the answer Here.
Here we address the second question.

Context of the Hadith:

Firstly we need to see that this was said in a proper context, Holy Prophet (PBUH) was asking people to raise funds for Jihad at the eve of Eid (one of the two yearly Islamic festivals) so he asked women using a figure of speech called synecdoche (majaz mursal) i.e. using the whole for the part: intelligence to refer to the legal testimony and religion to refer to prayers and fasting in specific monthly days. Later part of the Hadith testifies this. The Prophet (PBUH) was actually inviting women to generously donate in the way of Allah as they were to miss the reward of practically waging Jihad. This can be well understood and its astounding affect can be observed if we refer to other Ahadith.

عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ قَالَ شَهِدْتُ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الصَّلَاةَ يَوْمَ الْعِيدِ فَبَدَأَ بِالصَّلَاةِ قَبْلَ الْخُطْبَةِ بِغَيْرِ أَذَانٍ وَلَا إِقَامَةٍ ثُمَّ قَامَ مُتَوَكِّئًا عَلَى بِلَالٍ فَأَمَرَ بِتَقْوَى اللَّهِ وَحَثَّ عَلَى طَاعَتِهِ وَوَعَظَ النَّاسَ وَذَكَّرَهُمْ ثُمَّ مَضَى حَتَّى أَتَى النِّسَاءَ فَوَعَظَهُنَّ وَذَكَّرَهُنَّ فَقَالَ تَصَدَّقْنَ فَإِنَّ أَكْثَرَكُنَّ حَطَبُ جَهَنَّمَ فَقَامَتْ امْرَأَةٌ مِنْ سِطَةِ النِّسَاءِ سَفْعَاءُ الْخَدَّيْنِ فَقَالَتْ لِمَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ لِأَنَّكُنَّ تُكْثِرْنَ الشَّكَاةَ وَتَكْفُرْنَ الْعَشِيرَ قَالَ فَجَعَلْنَ يَتَصَدَّقْنَ مِنْ حُلِيِّهِنَّ يُلْقِينَ فِي ثَوْبِ بِلَالٍ مِنْ أَقْرِطَتِهِنَّ وَخَوَاتِمِهِنَّ

Jabir b. 'Abdullah reported: I observed prayer with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) on the 'Id day. He commenced with prayer before the sermon without Adhan and Iqama. He then stood up leaning on Bilal, and he commanded (them) to be on guard (against evil for the sake of) Allah, and he exhorted (them) on obedience to Him, and he preached to the people and admonished them. He then walked on till he came to the women and preached to them and admonished them, and asked them to give alms, for most of them are the fuel for Hell. A woman having a dark spot on the cheek stood up and said: Why is it so, Messenger of Allah? He said: For you grumble often and show ingratitude to your spouse. And then they began to give alms out of their ornaments such as their earrings and rings which they threw on to the cloth of Bilal. (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1467)

This makes it clear that the purpose of the saying those words to women was only to make them contribute more generously for the Noble Cause of Islam which they actually did.
Having clarified the context now we come to further details.

Are women actually somewhat deficient in intelligence?

This is a reality none can deny that men and women have differences regarding intellect and feelings. By intellect I only mean theoretical intellect or more simply; men are stronger then women in analytical, philosophical, hypothetical and socio-political aspects of intellect. This is why men are usually better then women in mathematics and pure sciences. That's why most of the research work and inventions come from men and most of the Noble Prize laureates are also men. According to a BBC Report, a research later published in British Journal of Psychology shows that on average men are five points ahead of women on I.Q. tests.

Women on the other hand are stronger in emotions by nature and this indeed is much important considering the fact that emotions influence all the human actions. A mother understands what her baby is up to in a way no father can ever. Briefly we can say that men have more I.Q. (Analytical and Logical intelligence) and women have more E.Q. (Emotional Intelligence). [According to a Research made by Multi-Health Systems, Inc. (MHS) women score better than men on most measures in E.Q. including Empathy, Social Responsibility and Interpersonal Relationships]

On the whole Man and Woman are equal:
Thus we see that both men and women excel in one thing and lack in another when compared among each other. So they are both in need of each other. Men need women because of their emotions and women need men by the way of their intelligence. That's why we read in Hadith;

عن عائشة ...قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم نعم إن النساء شقائق الرجال

Narrated Aisha, Holy Prophet (PBUH) said: "Assuredly, women are the twin halves of men."(Jami' Tirmidhi, Book 1, Hadith 113)

So we see that what was said by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) was true indeed and it was only emphasized in a particular context.

True Criterion of Excellence:
But one thing that needs to be remembered is that intelligence, whether Emotional or Logical, is no criteria to gauge a human being. The sole criterion is righteousness and piety. Allah Almighty says in the Holy Quran:

إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ

"Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you."(Al-Quran 49: 13)

Bukhari:V1B22N28 “The Prophet said: ‘I was shown the Hell Fire and the majority of its dwellers were women who are disbelievers or ungrateful.’ When asked what they were ungrateful for, the Prophet answered, ‘All the favors done for them by their husbands.’” 


Response: 

Do women form majority in the hell?

Christians often use a Hadith to malign Islam that women are not given equal rights and are condemn to remain in the hell fire. While they lie they try to make some issue out of the following Hadith.
عَنْ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أُرِيتُ النَّارَ فَإِذَا أَكْثَرُ أَهْلِهَا النِّسَاءُ يَكْفُرْنَ قِيلَ أَيَكْفُرْنَ بِاللَّهِ قَالَ يَكْفُرْنَ الْعَشِيرَ وَيَكْفُرْنَ الْإِحْسَانَ لَوْ أَحْسَنْتَ إِلَى إِحْدَاهُنَّ الدَّهْرَ ثُمَّ رَأَتْ مِنْكَ شَيْئًا قَالَتْ مَا رَأَيْتُ مِنْكَ خَيْرًا قَطُّ

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: The Prophet said: “I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers were women who were ungrateful.” It was asked, “Do they disbelieve in Allah?” (or are they ungrateful to Allah?) He replied, “They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the good (charitable deeds) done to them. If you have always been good (benevolent) to one of them and then she sees something in you (not of her liking), she will say, ‘I have never received any good from you.” (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 28)
Context of the Hadith:
The very first thing that is a must to be kept in mind when going through the Islamic Sources is that you cannot pick up a verse or a Hadith, take it in isolation from the rest of Islamic rubric and run to races with it. This is criminal only. Indeed one has to consider all the various Ahadith pertaining to an issue one way or the other, consider the context of each of them and then draw some conclusion. Unfortunately most of the Christian readers of Quran and Hadith fail on this account.

Now clearly we see that at the time this was said, Holy Prophet (pbuh) was not actually dwelling on the point if men or women will form the majority in the Hell and Paradise, he was only asking women to mend their ways and was pointing to a common problem in the attitude of the women. This was his duty being Al-Nazeer (the Warner).
They do not go to hell for being women:

The Hadith does not say they go to hell for being women, it actually points out to a wrong behavior on women’s part. The real misunderstanding comes with the notion that women outnumber men in hell because of their womanhood. This is indeed wrong, there is nothing like that in the Hadith, not even in the least.

Secondly, most probably either men or women will be more in the hell. It’s very difficult that they number exactly the same. Whoever will do more wrong deeds will be punished for that. It’s about deeds not gender and that’s where people take a wrong turn and are lead astray.
Women will outnumber men in Paradise:

Infact there is another Hadith which tells us that there will be more women in the Paradise then the men. It is recorded in Sahih Muslim.
عَنْ مُحَمَّدٍ قَالَ إِمَّا تَفَاخَرُوا وَإِمَّا تَذَاكَرُوا الرِّجَالُ فِي الْجَنَّةِ أَكْثَرُ أَمْ النِّسَاءُ فَقَالَ أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ أَوَ لَمْ يَقُلْ أَبُو الْقَاسِمِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ إِنَّ أَوَّلَ زُمْرَةٍ تَدْخُلُ الْجَنَّةَ عَلَى صُورَةِ الْقَمَرِ لَيْلَةَ الْبَدْرِ وَالَّتِي تَلِيهَا عَلَى أَضْوَإِ كَوْكَبٍ دُرِّيٍّ فِي السَّمَاءِ لِكُلِّ امْرِئٍ مِنْهُمْ زَوْجَتَانِ اثْنَتَانِ يُرَى مُخُّ سُوقِهِمَا مِنْ وَرَاءِ اللَّحْمِ وَمَا فِي الْجَنَّةِ أَعْزَبُ
Muhammad reported that some (persons) stated with a sense of pride and some discussed whether there would be more men in Paradise or more women. It was upon this that Abu Huraira reported that Abul Qasim (the Holy Prophet) (may peace be upon him) said: The (members) of the first group to get into Paradise would have their faces as bright as full moon during the night, and the next to this group would have their faces as bright as the shining stars in the sky, and every person would have two wives and the marrow of their shanks would glimmer beneath the flesh and there would be none without a wife in Paradise. (Muslim, Hadith 5062)

The context of Abu Huraira narrating this Hadith clearly shows that he meant to convey that according to Prophet’s sayings, women will outnumber men in the Paradise.
Ibn Kathir (d. 774 A.H.) commenting on this Hadith said:
فالمراد من هذا ان هاتين من بنات آدم ومعهما من الحور العين ما شاء الله عز وجل
“The meaning hereby is, these two are from the daughters of Adam (i.e. women of this world) and with them are wide-eyed maidens as Allah the Almighty wishes.” (Siffah al-Jannah p.132 pub. Mo’assas al-Kutab al-Thaqafiyyah, Beirut 1993)
The same is mentioned by Hafiz Zainuddin al-Iraqi (d. 806 A.H.) in his Tarah al-Tathrib fi Sharah al-Taqrib 8/270. Hafiz al-Ayni (d. 855 A.H.) has also mentioned that it refers to the women of this world. See ‘Umdatul Qari 15/155
Ibn Hajr (d. 852 A.H.) while discussing the issue says:
وَاسْتَدَلَّ أَبُو هُرَيْرَة بِهَذَا الْحَدِيث عَلَى أَنَّ النِّسَاء فِي الْجَنَّة أَكْثَر مِنْ الرِّجَال ... وَهُوَ وَاضِح
‘Abu Huraira used this Hadith as a proof to maintain that women will outnumber men in Jannah (paradise) … and this is much clear.’ (Fath Al-Bari 10/30)
Ahadith about majority in hell do not tell the present or permanent state:
Lest one would say there is some contradiction in the both the Ahadith lets clarify another thing about the Ahadith that say women were in majority in the Hell.
There are  Ahadith that contain the words ‘I was shown the Hell-fire’ and we know from other Ahadith that Holy Prophet (pbuh) was shown the Hell-Fire on his journey during the miraculous Night of Ascension. So we can easily conclude that Ahadith indicating women being in majority in the hell refer to the time when the Holy Prophet actually saw it and they do not mention if same is the case even now. (Fayd al-Bari 1/192)
An apparently contradicting narration:
There is a narration that seemingly contradicts the above. Imran bin Husain –may Allah be pleased with him- reported:
أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، قَالَ: إِنَّ أَقَلَّ سَاكِنِي الْجَنَّةِ النِّسَاءُ
Allah's Messenger –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said: Amongst the inmates of Paradise the women would form a minority. (Sahih Muslim Kitab al-Riqaq)
But this narration does not mean women will always form the majority in the hell.
Zainuddin Muhammad al-Manawi (d. 1031 A.H.) explained this Hadith saying;
أي في أول الأمر قبل خروج عصاتهن من النار فلا دلالة فيه على أن نساء الدنيا أقل من الرجال في الجنة
“means, initially before the sinful among them coming out of Hellfire. And there is no evidence in this (report) that women of the world are fewer than men in the paradise.”  (Fayd al-Qadir Sharah Jami’ al-Saghir 2/428 Hadith 2215)
Hafiz Ibn Hajr in Fath al-Bari (10/30) and Hafiz al-‘Ayni in ‘Umdatul Qari (15/155) have explained it the same way.
Some statistical facts:
Also we ought to keep in mind that women today outnumber men. Even if more males are born, their mortality rate is higher then female babies and we learn in Hadith that near the End of Times women will outnumber men greatly so if equal ratio of men and women goes to hell and the paradise even then it is quite possible that women remain in majority in both.
Women can complain against husbands for genuine reasons:
Let me make clear another point that the Hadith does not ask woman to bear with her husband even when he is wrong and refrain from complaining. No, this is not the case as we know that there is complete Surah (chapter) in the Quran i.e. Surah Mujadila (No. 58) which is about a woman who came to the Holy Prophet (pbuh) to complain against her husband and the Prophet (pbuh) did not say that she was going to hell for complaining and infact he listened to her and Allah also revealed verses addressing the issue and condemning the unacceptable behavior of the husband.
Conclusion:
Thus the conclusion is that Holy Prophet –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- stated only what he had seen during his Miraculous Journey which is not bound to remain the same for ever. And that women will be fewer in the Paradise only initially and eventually women will form the majority in the Paradise as more and more of the people are taken out of Hell and admitted into Paradise. Other traditions plainly establish that in the Paradise women will be much larger in number compared to men. And the particular tradition that Christians dwell upon only asks women not to complain and be ungrateful to their husbands without reason.

Muslim:B1N142 “‘O womenfolk, you should ask for forgiveness for I saw you in bulk amongst the dwellers of Hell.’ A wise lady said: Why is it, Allah’s Apostle, that women comprise the bulk of the inhabitants of Hell? The Prophet observed: ‘You curse too much and are ungrateful to your spouses. You lack common sense, fail in religion and rob the wisdom of the wise.’ Upon this the woman remarked: What is wrong with our common sense? The Prophet replied, ‘Your lack of common sense can be determined from the fact that the evidence of two women is equal to one man. That is a proof.’”


Qur’an 4:43 “Believers, approach not prayers with a mind befogged or intoxicated until you understand what you utter. Nor when you are polluted, until after you have bathed. If you are ill, or on a journey, or come from answering the call of nature, or you have touched a woman, and you find no water, then take for yourselves clean dirt, and rub your faces and hands. Lo! Allah is Benign, Forgiving.” [The Qur’an claims women are unclean and polluted—worse than dirt.]




Bukhari:V4B55N547  “The Prophet said, ‘But for the Israelis, meat would not decay, and if it were not for Eve, wives would never betray their husbands.’” 


Hadith about food of Israelites and Eve’s betrayal

Many people have trouble understanding the following Hadith:
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Were it not for Bani Israel, meat would not decay; and were it not for Eve, no woman would ever betray her husband." (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 3083)
Infact the same Hadith is found in Sahih Muslim (Hadith, 2674) too. In his commentary to Sahih Muslim, Shaykh Muhammad Taqi Usmani explains this.
“Were it not for Bani Israel, meat would not decay”:
Explaining this phrase he writes;
“It means that People of Israel were the first to keep food and meat until it would go bad and get rotten and if it was not for the People of Israel who started this habit, people would not have kept food for so long till it goes bad. This is how al-Abi[1] and al-Hafiz[2] explained it in al-Fath[3]. However; it does not mean that for the people before the People of Israel food and meat never rotted even if they saved it. But the meaning in fact is that the habit of saving the food was not common before them. For the people used to eat and feed others and nothing decayed till the People of Israel came, and they kept saving it till it would get rotten.”
So the meaning actually is that these were the people of Israel who started the general practice of hoarding surplus food with them which used to rot and get wasted. Before them generally the people used to collect food only for their own selves. And when they had surplus they would share it with other people (either through charity or trade). So they were actually the people who started the general practice that lead to wasting of food.
And he then quotes the report telling us when it so happened;
“al-Aini[4] narrated from Qatadah: "the Mann and Salwa used to fall upon the People of Israel, from dawn to the sunrise, like the ice falls. So they would take from it just enough for the day except Friday, when they had to gather for it and the next day (Saturday). But if they exceeded (their need), it used to get spoiled. So their saving used to cause a food waste for them and others." (Takmilah Fath al-Mulhim, Darul Ahya al-Turath al-‘Arabi Beirut 2006 vol.1 p.140)
“Were it not for Eve, no woman would ever betray her husband”:
Shaykh Taqi Usmani writes:
“al-Hafiz (Ibn Hajr) said: It has a reference to what Eve did when she tried to seduce Adam to eat from the tree until he actually did. And since she was the mother of the daughters of Adam (all females), they in turn resembled her by birth and genes, that you can hardly find a woman that had not betrayed her husband in one shape or form. And here betrayal does not mean infidelity. Far be it! It rather refers here to the incident where Eve inclined to the desire of eating from the tree and she beautified that to Adam, it was counted as a kind of betrayal for him. But for all women who came after her, their kinds of betrayals varied in levels and forms. And what is similar to that Hadith is the Hadith that says "And Adam denied, so his descendants denied.[5]"
And in this Hadith a consolation for those men - who have been afflicted by some actions of their women - through the mention of what had happened from their great grandmother, affirming that this is one of their natural traits. So the man shouldn't excessively blame the woman who unintentionally or occasionally errs or wrongs him. And for the woman not to dwell in such a manner but to discipline herself and fight her desires. It is so in Fath al-Bari.” (Takmilah Fath al-Mulhim, vol.1 pp.139-140)
Here I must elucidate on certain points to avoid confusion.
Does this Hadith imply the blame rests on Eve alone?
Not really, because the sin was committed by both and Islam holds that both of them were basically seduced by the Devil. In fact, Islamic sources explicitly state that Devil seduced them both. In Qur’an 20: 120 it is mentioned that the Devil seduced Adam –may Allah bless him. This Hadith suggests Devil first spoke to Eve –may Allah bless her- and Qur’an (7:20) plainly says that Devil seduced them both. So, clearly the Islamic standpoint is that both of them made the mistake. The betrayal referred to in this particular Hadith is about Eve speaking to Adam –may Allah bless them both- about the forbidden tree. Eve having been deceived spoke to Adam but Devil himself also seduced Adam as clear from Qur’an 20: 120.
Why specifically mention of Eve here?
As clear from Qur’anic references cited above Devil seduced both Adam and Eve and as Qur’an says they both prayed to Allah for forgiveness after the whole thing took place. See Qur’an 7: 22-23.
However the stress about Eve here is to instruct the man not to over react when a woman makes a mistake for the same was done by his own great grandmother. This is just natural for her. See the explanation of Hafiz Ibn Hajr quoted above.
Is it about Original Sin?
Next question is if the Hadith supports the Christian doctrine of original sin?
It does not because in Islam the issue of falling from heavens was a specific incident related to two individuals and their progeny is not to bear the brunt for it. The idea is simply that capacity to err and sin is in the genes of humankind. Man and woman have the innate weakness and characteristics as such which were made evident in the lives of the first humans. Qur’an refers to this fact often;
“And man is created weak.” (4: 28)
“Surely man is created of a hasty temperament.” (70: 19)
“Truly man is, to his Lord, ungrateful; And to that (fact) he bears witness (by his deeds);” (100: 6-7)
And a Hadith substantiates it and kills the notion of Original Sin and deliverance from it through vicarious atonement;
The Prophet –may Allah bless him- said, “Every son of Adam commits sin but the best of those who sin are those who repent.” (Jami’ Tirmidhi, Hadith 2499. Classified as Hasan by Albani)
Certainly the idea of mankind as being sinful in nature, and that of a person being held responsible for the sins of his ancestors, are not even remotely related. Also the fact that it is mentioned along with the issue about the People of Israel, leads us to maintain that it is not a concept related to Christian dogma of original sin.
LET ME TURN THE TABLES
Usually some missionary haters of Islam use this narration to attack Islam, so let’s show them the mirror.
Bible asserts that only Eve was deceived and she herself gave the forbidden fruit to Adam.
“And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.” (Genesis 3: 5-7)
This is certainly different from Qur’an which says that both of them were deceived and Qur’an makes a special reference to Devil seducing Adam. Even the Hadith is not saying what the Bible says because taking it along the Qur’anic references to the story it becomes apparent that while she did speak to Adam about eating the forbidden fruit after being deceived, Adam was seduced by Devil himself.
According to Qur’an they both erred and then together sought Allah’s forgiveness whereas Bible is too dogmatic to assert to the contrary when it says;
“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” (1-Timothy 2: 14)
As to the specific reference to Eve’s fault in the Hadith under consideration, let me reiterate that it was for a special reason to instruct men in their behavior towards women and we find that another Hadith specifically mentioning Adam to have erred.
And Bible even says that pain during child birth and man ruling over her was a punishment for Eve for what she did. (See Genesis 3:16)
All this highlights the difference between Islamic and Christian approach.
To summarize: In Islam both Adam and Eve erred and were equally responsible (Qur’an 7: 20) Adam was personally seduced by the Devil (Qur’an 20:120) whereas Bible maintains only Eve was deceived by the Devil and she made Adam to eat the forbidden fruit (Genesis 3:6) While Qur’an hold both of them responsible Bible categorically vindicates Adam and puts the blame on Eve (1-Timothy 2:14) Islam highlights their mistakes to show that it is only natural for humans to err Bible goes on to hold the subsequent generations responsible for the sin actually committed by their great grandparents (1-Corinthians 15:22)
Note: Translation of Hadith’s commentary  from Takmilah Fath al-Mulhim by sister Rabbaniya from Cairo, Egypt

Qur’an 33:59 “Prophet! Tell your wives and daughters and all Muslim women to draw cloaks and veils all over their bodies (screening themselves completely except for one or two eyes to see the way). That will be better.”


Qur’an 4:15 “If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death [by starvation] claims them.”


Bukhari:V4B52N143/V5B59N523 “When we reached Khaybar, Muhammad said that Allah had enabled him to conquer them. It was then that the beauty of Safiyah was described to him. Her husband had been killed, so Allah’s Apostle selected her for himself. He took her along with him till we reached a place called Sad where her menses were over and he took her for his wife, consummating his marriage to her, and forcing her to wear the veil.’” 


SEE HERE: http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2009/11/slanders-regarding-holy-prophets-pbuh.html

Slanders about Prophet's (PBUH) marriage with Safiya (RA)

Holy Prophet’s (PBUH) marriage with Sayyidah Safiya (RA) is another topic that critics of Islam often take up. They say:

1-Holy Prophet (PBUH) married a woman after killing her husband and father, so how could she be happy or even willing for it?
2-The rules of Iddah were violated in this marriage.


MY RESPONSE


In the following lines we explain the whole issue in detail. Ahadith in Sahih Bukhari explain as to what actually happened.

فَأَصَبْنَاهَا عَنْوَةً فَجُمِعَ السَّبْيُ فَجَاءَ دِحْيَةُ الْكَلْبِيُّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ فَقَالَ يَا نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ أَعْطِنِي جَارِيَةً مِنْ السَّبْيِ قَالَ اذْهَبْ فَخُذْ جَارِيَةً فَأَخَذَ صَفِيَّةَ بِنْتَ حُيَيٍّ فَجَاءَ رَجُلٌ إِلَى النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَ يَا نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ أَعْطَيْتَ دِحْيَةَ صَفِيَّةَ بِنْتَ حُيَيٍّ سَيِّدَةَ قُرَيْظَةَ وَالنَّضِيرِ لَا تَصْلُحُ إِلَّا لَكَ قَالَ ادْعُوهُ بِهَا فَجَاءَ بِهَا فَلَمَّا نَظَرَ إِلَيْهَا النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ خُذْ جَارِيَةً مِنْ السَّبْيِ غَيْرَهَا قَالَ فَأَعْتَقَهَا النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَتَزَوَّجَهَا فَقَالَ لَهُ ثَابِتٌ يَا أَبَا حَمْزَةَ مَا أَصْدَقَهَا قَالَ نَفْسَهَا أَعْتَقَهَا وَتَزَوَّجَهَا حَتَّى إِذَا كَانَ بِالطَّرِيقِ جَهَّزَتْهَا لَهُ أُمُّ سُلَيْمٍ فَأَهْدَتْهَا لَهُ مِنْ اللَّيْلِ فَأَصْبَحَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَرُوسًا فَقَالَ مَنْ كَانَ عِنْدَهُ شَيْءٌ فَلْيَجِئْ بِهِ وَبَسَطَ نِطَعًا فَجَعَلَ الرَّجُلُ يَجِيءُ بِالتَّمْرِ وَجَعَلَ الرَّجُلُ يَجِيءُ بِالسَّمْنِ قَالَ وَأَحْسِبُهُ قَدْ ذَكَرَ السَّوِيقَ قَالَ فَحَاسُوا حَيْسًا فَكَانَتْ وَلِيمَةَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

"We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, 'O Allah's Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.' The Prophet said, 'Go and take any slave girl.' He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, 'O Allah's Messenger! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.' So the Prophet said, 'Bring him along with her.' So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, 'Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.' Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her." Thabit asked Anas, "O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?" He said, "Her self (i.e. freedom) was her Mahr (dower) for he manumitted her and then married her." Anas added, "While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet. So the Prophet was a bridegroom and he said, 'Whoever has anything (food) should bring it.' He spread out a leather sheet (for the food) and some brought dates and others cooking butter. (I think he (Anas) mentioned As-Sawiq). So they prepared a dish of Hais (a kind of meal). And that was Walima (the marriage banquet) of Allah's Messenger (pbuh)." (Bukhari, Hadith 358)

Were the rules of Iddah violated?

Following Hadith needs a careful reading;

عن أبي سعيد الخدري ورفعه أنه قال في سبايا أوطاس لا توطأ حامل حتى تضع ولا غير ذات حمل حتى تحيض حيضة

Abu Sa’id Khudri narrated the following statement from Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) regarding the captives of Awtas:“There must be no intercourse with a pregnant woman till she gives birth, or with one who is not pregnant till she has had one menstrual period.” (Abu Dawud, Hadith 2157. Albani classified it as Sahih)

This Hadith lays down a rule that a man is not allowed to have intimate relations with a captive woman till she is clean from menses. This is to avoid any confusion in the lineage.

Now considering the fact that Sayyidah Safiya (RA) was actually a captive woman who was then freed and married to by the Holy Prophet (pbuh), in the light of the above Hadith the Prophet (PBUH) was to wait for her being clean from a menstrual course before consummating the marriage and this is exactly what he did. We read in Sahih Bukhari:

عَنْ أَنَسِ ...فَاصْطَفَاهَا النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لِنَفْسِهِ فَخَرَجَ بِهَا حَتَّى بَلَغْنَا سَدَّ الصَّهْبَاءِ حَلَّتْ فَبَنَى بِهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

Narrated Anas bin Malik: …The Prophet (pbuh) selected her for himself, and set out with her, and when we reached a place called Sadd-as-Sahba’, Safiya became clean from her menses then Allah's Messenger married her. (Bukhari, Hadith 3889)

Was Sayyidah Safiya willing for the marriage?

As to the question whether Sayyidah Safiya (RA) was willing for the marriage or not, no body’s conjecture but her own words can make things clear. The following narration explains in detail:

لما دخلت صفية على النبي، صلى الله عليه وسلم، وسلم قال لها: لم يزل أبوك من أشد يهود لي عداوة حتى قتله الله. فقالت: يا رسول الله إن الله يقول في كتابه ولا تزر وازرة وزر أخرى. فقال: لها رسول الله: اختاري، فإن اخترت الإسلام أمسكتك لنفسي وإن اخترت اليهودية فعسى أن أعتقك فتلحقي بقومك. فقالت: يا رسول الله لقد هويت الإسلام وصدقت بك قبل أن تدعوني حيث صرت إلى رحلك وما لي في اليهودية أرب وما لي فيها والد ولا أخ، وخيرتني الكفر والإسلام فالله ورسوله أحب إلي من العتق وأن أرجع إلى قومي

When Safiya came to the Holy Prophet (pbuh), he said to her; ‘Among the Jews your father did not stop in his enmity towards me until Allah destroyed him.’ She said: ‘O Allah’s Messenger! Indeed Allah says in His book, ‘No one will take anyone else’s burden’. So the Holy Prophet (PBUH) said to her: ‘Make your choice, if you will chose Islam I’ll select you for myself and if you chose Judaism, I’ll set you free and send you to your people.’ She said; ‘O Allah’s Messenger indeed I longed for Islam and testified for you even before you gave me this invitation when I came to you. I have no guardian among the Jews, neither father nor brother and I prefer Islam over disbelief. Allah and His Messenger are dear to me then freedom and to return to my people.” (Ibn Saad 8/123)

Lest one should doubt this narration as to how did Sayyidah Safiya (RA) know before embracing Islam that Allah says in His book ‘No one will take anyone else’s burden’, it needs to be clarified that even in the Jewish scriptures the same is mentioned e.g. in Ezekial 18: 20 and it is comprehendible that she coming from a Jewish background knew it.

About a Companion standing armed outside their camp and Sayyidah Safiya’s feelings:

Unaware of such an affectionate talk between Holy Prophet (PBUH) and Sayyidah Safiya(RA) , one of the pious Companions, Sayyidina Abu Ayub (RA), stood armed outside their camp for the fear that Sayyidah Safiya, whose father and brother were killed in the battle, may try to harm the Prophet (pbuh) (Ibn Saad 8/126). Some Missionaries refer to this happening giving an impression as if Sayyidah Safiya (RA) was forced into marriage and was really unhappy. While the very conversation quoted above belies such a notion, it must also be known that Abu Ayub (RA) was standing there voluntarily and Holy Prophet (PBUH) had not made him to stand there as he knew the actual position of Sayyidah Safiya. The pious companion in his innocence didn’t know and the cunning polemicists in their evil designs run away from the fact that much before Holy Prophet (PBUH) reached Khyber the All-Wise, the Almighty had sown the seeds of the love of the Prophet in the heart of Sayyidah Safiya (RA).

نَزَلَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ خَيْبَرَ وَصَفِيَّةُ عَرُوسٌ فِي مَجَاسِدِهَا، فَرَأَتْ فِي الْمَنَامِ كَأَنَّ الشَّمْسَ نَزَلَتْ حَتَّى وَقَعَتْ عَلَى صَدْرِهَا، فَقَصَّتْ ذَلِكَ عَلَى زَوْجِهَا، فَقَالَ: وَاللَّهِ مَا تَمَنَّيْنَ إِلا هَذَا الْمَلِكَ الَّذِي نَزَلَ بنا، فَفَتَحَهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَضَرَبَ عُنُقَ زَوْجِهَا صَبْرًا، وَتَعَرِّضَ مِنْ هُنَاكَ مِنْ فِتْيَةِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لِيَتَزَوَّجَهَا

When Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) reached Khyber while Safiya was a bride at her place. She saw in her dream that a sun came into her lap. She mentioned it before her husband. He said; ‘By Allah you do not wish for anyone except the King who has come upon us.’ Allah’s Messenger conquered Khyber and her husband was killed. From that time (of dream) she loved that the Prophet (pbuh) may marry her.(Tabarani Kabeer, Hadith 19667)

عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، قَالَ: كَانَ بِعَيْنَيْ صَفِيَّةَ خُضْرَةٌ، فَقَالَ لَهَا النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ:مَا هَذِهِ الْخُضْرَةُ بِعَيْنَيْكِ؟فَقَالَتْ: قُلْتُ لِزَوْجِي: إِنِّي رَأَيْتُ فِيمَا يَرَى النَّائِمِ قَمَرًا وَقَعَ فِي حِجْرِي فَلَطَمَنِي، وَقَالَ: أَتُرِيدِينَ مَلِكَ يَثْرِبَ؟ قَالَتْ: وَمَا كَانَ أَبْغَضُ إِلَيَّ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ، قَتَلَ أَبِي وَزَوْجِي، فَمَا زَالَ يَعْتَذِرُ إِلَيَّ، فَقَالَ:يَا صَفِيَّةُ إِنَّ أَبَاكِ أَلَّبَ عَلَى الْعَرَبَ، وَفَعَلَ وَفَعَلَحَتَّى ذَهَبَ ذَاكَ مِنْ نَفْسِي

Ibn Umar narrates: In the eye of Sayyidah Safiya was a scar. Holy Prophet (pbuh) said to her, ‘What is this scar in your eye?’ She said, ‘I mentioned before my husband that I saw a moon falling into my lap in a dream so he slapped me and said; ‘Do you long for the King of Yathrib [i.e. Holy Prophet pbuh]’ She said: ‘There was none more hateful to me then Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) as he killed my father and husband. [But] the Prophet (pbuh) explained, ‘O Safiya your father instigated the Arabs against me and did so and so…’ He kept on explaining until that feeling (of hatred) vanished from me.’
(Tabarani Kabeer, Hadith 19668. Albani classified it as Sahih in his Silsala Sahiha H. 2793)

Taking together all the narrations above we come to know that Sayyidah Safiya (RA) had a feeling of affection for the Prophet (pbuh) before they met (Tabarani 19667). When her father and husband were killed in the battle she developed some feeling of hatred for the Prophet (PBUH) for natural reasons but when the Prophet (PBUH) explained to her what all her father did to him (Tabarani 19668) she realized that her father met such an end because of his own deeds (Ibn Saad 8/123) and so her ill feelings for the Prophet (PBUH) completely vanished and she was left with the feelings of love for the Prophet (pbuh) that the All-Wise and Almighty had put in her heart through a dream (Tabarani 19667 & 19668).
Truly unique and inscrutable are the ways of My Lord!

Bukhari:V5B59N524 “The Muslims said among themselves, ‘Will Safiyah be one of the Prophet’s wives or just a lady captive and one of his possessions?’”


Response: See Above. 

Ishaq:593 “From the captives of Hunayn, Allah’s Messenger gave [his son-in-law] Ali a slave girl called Baytab and he gave [future Caliph] Uthman a slave girl called Zaynab and [future Caliph] Umar another.”


Ibn Ishaq is a Weak source for information. 

Bukhari:V3B48N826 “The Prophet said, ‘Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.’” 


Does Hadith say women are deficient in intelligence?

Many anti-Islamic polemic writers specially the Christian Missionaries often quote a Hadith and yell obscenities about Islam and Holy Prophet (PBUH). The Hadith they quote is;

عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ قَالَ خَرَجَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي أَضْحَى أَوْ فِطْرٍ إِلَى الْمُصَلَّى فَمَرَّ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ فَقَالَ يَا مَعْشَرَ النِّسَاءِ تَصَدَّقْنَ فَإِنِّي أُرِيتُكُنَّ أَكْثَرَ أَهْلِ النَّارِ فَقُلْنَ وَبِمَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ تُكْثِرْنَ اللَّعْنَ وَتَكْفُرْنَ الْعَشِيرَ مَا رَأَيْتُ مِنْ نَاقِصَاتِ عَقْلٍ وَدِينٍ أَذْهَبَ لِلُبِّ الرَّجُلِ الْحَازِمِ مِنْ إِحْدَاكُنَّ قُلْنَ وَمَا نُقْصَانُ دِينِنَا وَعَقْلِنَا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ أَلَيْسَ شَهَادَةُ الْمَرْأَةِ مِثْلَ نِصْفِ شَهَادَةِ الرَّجُلِ قُلْنَ بَلَى قَالَ فَذَلِكِ مِنْ نُقْصَانِ عَقْلِهَا أَلَيْسَ إِذَا حَاضَتْ لَمْ تُصَلِّ وَلَمْ تَصُمْ قُلْنَ بَلَى قَالَ فَذَلِكِ مِنْ نُقْصَانِ دِينِهَا

----Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Once Allah's Messenger went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Messenger?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Messenger! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 293)------

Two questions are raised about this Hadith. Firstly why does the Hadith say that women will majority in the hell and does it not condemn women this way? And secondly why did the Prophet say that women are deficient in intelligence and religion. As to first question, why the Hadith says women form the majority in the hell? You can find the answer Here.
Here we address the second question.

Context of the Hadith:

Firstly we need to see that this was said in a proper context, Holy Prophet (PBUH) was asking people to raise funds for Jihad at the eve of Eid (one of the two yearly Islamic festivals) so he asked women using a figure of speech called synecdoche (majaz mursal) i.e. using the whole for the part: intelligence to refer to the legal testimony and religion to refer to prayers and fasting in specific monthly days. Later part of the Hadith testifies this. The Prophet (PBUH) was actually inviting women to generously donate in the way of Allah as they were to miss the reward of practically waging Jihad. This can be well understood and its astounding affect can be observed if we refer to other Ahadith.

عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ قَالَ شَهِدْتُ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الصَّلَاةَ يَوْمَ الْعِيدِ فَبَدَأَ بِالصَّلَاةِ قَبْلَ الْخُطْبَةِ بِغَيْرِ أَذَانٍ وَلَا إِقَامَةٍ ثُمَّ قَامَ مُتَوَكِّئًا عَلَى بِلَالٍ فَأَمَرَ بِتَقْوَى اللَّهِ وَحَثَّ عَلَى طَاعَتِهِ وَوَعَظَ النَّاسَ وَذَكَّرَهُمْ ثُمَّ مَضَى حَتَّى أَتَى النِّسَاءَ فَوَعَظَهُنَّ وَذَكَّرَهُنَّ فَقَالَ تَصَدَّقْنَ فَإِنَّ أَكْثَرَكُنَّ حَطَبُ جَهَنَّمَ فَقَامَتْ امْرَأَةٌ مِنْ سِطَةِ النِّسَاءِ سَفْعَاءُ الْخَدَّيْنِ فَقَالَتْ لِمَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ لِأَنَّكُنَّ تُكْثِرْنَ الشَّكَاةَ وَتَكْفُرْنَ الْعَشِيرَ قَالَ فَجَعَلْنَ يَتَصَدَّقْنَ مِنْ حُلِيِّهِنَّ يُلْقِينَ فِي ثَوْبِ بِلَالٍ مِنْ أَقْرِطَتِهِنَّ وَخَوَاتِمِهِنَّ

Jabir b. 'Abdullah reported: I observed prayer with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) on the 'Id day. He commenced with prayer before the sermon without Adhan and Iqama. He then stood up leaning on Bilal, and he commanded (them) to be on guard (against evil for the sake of) Allah, and he exhorted (them) on obedience to Him, and he preached to the people and admonished them. He then walked on till he came to the women and preached to them and admonished them, and asked them to give alms, for most of them are the fuel for Hell. A woman having a dark spot on the cheek stood up and said: Why is it so, Messenger of Allah? He said: For you grumble often and show ingratitude to your spouse. And then they began to give alms out of their ornaments such as their earrings and rings which they threw on to the cloth of Bilal. (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1467)

This makes it clear that the purpose of the saying those words to women was only to make them contribute more generously for the Noble Cause of Islam which they actually did.
Having clarified the context now we come to further details.

Are women actually somewhat deficient in intelligence?

This is a reality none can deny that men and women have differences regarding intellect and feelings. By intellect I only mean theoretical intellect or more simply; men are stronger then women in analytical, philosophical, hypothetical and socio-political aspects of intellect. This is why men are usually better then women in mathematics and pure sciences. That's why most of the research work and inventions come from men and most of the Noble Prize laureates are also men. According to a BBC Report, a research later published in British Journal of Psychology shows that on average men are five points ahead of women on I.Q. tests.

Women on the other hand are stronger in emotions by nature and this indeed is much important considering the fact that emotions influence all the human actions. A mother understands what her baby is up to in a way no father can ever. Briefly we can say that men have more I.Q. (Analytical and Logical intelligence) and women have more E.Q. (Emotional Intelligence). [According to a Research made by Multi-Health Systems, Inc. (MHS) women score better than men on most measures in E.Q. including Empathy, Social Responsibility and Interpersonal Relationships]

On the whole Man and Woman are equal:
Thus we see that both men and women excel in one thing and lack in another when compared among each other. So they are both in need of each other. Men need women because of their emotions and women need men by the way of their intelligence. That's why we read in Hadith;

عن عائشة ...قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم نعم إن النساء شقائق الرجال

Narrated Aisha, Holy Prophet (PBUH) said: "Assuredly, women are the twin halves of men."(Jami' Tirmidhi, Book 1, Hadith 113)

So we see that what was said by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) was true indeed and it was only emphasized in a particular context.

True Criterion of Excellence:
But one thing that needs to be remembered is that intelligence, whether Emotional or Logical, is no criteria to gauge a human being. The sole criterion is righteousness and piety. Allah Almighty says in the Holy Quran:

إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ

"Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you."(Al-Quran 49: 13)

INDEED ALLAH KNOWS THE BEST!

Ishaq:584 “Tell the men with you who have wives: never trust a woman.”


Comes from a weak source. 

Ishaq:185 “In hell I saw women hanging by their breasts. They had fathered bastards.”


Comes from a weak source. 

Qur’an 24:31 “Say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty except what (must) appear; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display them except to their husbands...”


This is just a modesty command. 

Qur’an 24:34 “Force not your slave-girls to whoredom (prostitution) if they desire chastity, that you may seek enjoyment of this life.  But if anyone forces them, then after such compulsion, Allah is oft-forgiving.”


See Tafsir Ibn Kathir on this verse, and the Hadith the Prophet Muhammad said not to force slave girls into prositution. 

Ishaq:469 “The Apostle said, ‘Every wailing woman lies except those who wept for Sa’d.’”


Ibn Ishaq is a weak source. 

Tabari VIII:62/Ishaq:496 “Ali [Muhammad’s adopted son, son-in-law, and future Caliph] said, ‘Prophet, women are plentiful. You can get a replacement, easily changing one for another.’”


Al Tabari and Ibn Ishaq is a weak source. 

Ishaq:496 “Ask the slave girl; she will tell you the truth.’ So the Apostle called Burayra to ask her. Ali got up and gave her a violent beating first, saying, ‘Tell the Apostle the truth.’”


Ibn Ishaq is a weak source. 

Qur’an 24:1 “(This is) a surah which We have revealed and made obligatory and in which We have revealed clear communications that you may be mindful. For the woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah. And let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.”


 Qur’an 24:6“And for those who launch a charge against their wives, accusing them, but have no witnesses or evidence, except themselves; let the testimony of one of them be four testimonies, (swearing four times) by Allah that he is the one speaking the truth.”  

Opposition to Rajm (Stoning to death): Analysis & Refutation

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم الحمد لله وحده و الصلاة و السلام على من لا نبي بعده و على آله و أصحابه أجمعين
by Gabriel Keresztes and Waqar Akbar
in-sha’Allah the most concise and comprehensive analysis and refutation of those who deny the established punishment of rajm (stoning to death) prescribed for adulterers in the House of Islam.
Contents

1. Introduction

One of the most interesting phenomena that the Muslim nation is faced with today is that of external pressure to change. Scholars and intellectuals are faced with community issues that threaten the identity of their children, the integrity of their families and most important, the Muslim faith that they hold so dearly to and claim it as the ultimate truth.  Since the dislocation of the Muslim empire, the partitioning of Muslim lands under the rule of non Muslims, and the mass emigration by Muslims to non Muslim lands, the Ummah has been questioned and intellectually attacked with regards to the Quran and even more with regards to the Sunnah and Hadith.  New groups and so called intellectuals rose and began denying certain aspects of our faith due to: external pressure by non Muslim masses and a dire need to fit in societies that have values very different from those of Muslims.  Muslims were faced with the option of enduring accusations of barbarism, inhumane behavior and non tolerance or changing certain articles of their faith that would apparently appease and gain acceptance of non Muslims. One of such examples is the issue of Rajm or stoning to death as a punishment for adultery.  In this article we will discuss the implication of denying this hadd, refutation of various arguments against it and last but not least the growing phenomena of Muslims changing aspects of their faith in the face of external pressure.


2. Denying Rajm and Arguments Against it

The Islamic Research Foundation International, INC. and other foundations that encourage critical thinking, opposing points of view and ijtihad, have been propagating articles under scholars and intellectuals that challenge and deny certain aspects of the Islamic principles laid more than 1400 years ago.  Under the guise of critical thinking and logic such people believe that they can put forth a rational argument against Rajm.  We want to emphasize the word rational as it will be very important in our article in the light of the presented proofs and arguments

2.1 Rajm Cannot be Found in the Quran?

Rajm not being in the Quran is one of the most illogical and unreasonable argument that such people can put forth.  They say that Rajm is not found in the Quran while the punishment of one hundred lashes is found in the Quran.  They also use the following logical (read illogical) statement:
“Once again, it is the Qur'an that provides an outline of the Islamic Law. Other sources of Islam must be examined within the Quranic parameters”
Firstly, it is not really true that Qur’an has nothing about stoning though it is true that Qur’an does not explicitlymention it. A reference to Rajm is however found in Surah al-Ma’idah, verse 43 wherein Allah says;
وَكَيْفَ يُحَكِّمُونَكَ وَعِنْدَهُمُ التَّوْرَاةُ فِيهَا حُكْمُ اللَّهِ ثُمَّ يَتَوَلَّوْنَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ذَلِكَ وَمَا أُولَئِكَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ
“How do they ask you to judge while the Torah is with them, having the ruling of Allah? Still, they turn away, after all that. They are no believers.” (Qur’an 5:43)
The verse was revealed when a couple from amongst the Jews committed adultery. They came to the Holy Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- asking him to judge on the matter. Actually their holy book, Torah, asked for stoning of such offenders, they came to the Blessed Prophet hoping that he would give a lesser punishment.
Consider the following narration:
Abu Hurairah said: A man and a woman of the Jews committed fornication. Some of them said to the others: Let us go to this Prophet, for he has been sent with an easy law. If he gives a judgment lighter than stoning, we shall accept it, and argue about it with Allah, saying: It is a judgment of one of your prophets. So they came to the Prophet (may peace be upon him) who was sitting in the mosque among his companions. They said: Abul Qasim, what do you think about a man and a woman who committed fornication? He did not speak to them a word till he went to their school. He stood at the gate and said: I adjure you by Allah Who revealed the Torah to Moses, what (punishment) do you find in the Torah for a person who commits fornication, if he is married? They said: He shall be blackened with charcoal, taken round a donkey among the people, and flogged. A young man among them kept silent. When the Prophet (may peace be upon him) emphatically adjured him, he said: By Allah, since you have adjured us (we inform you that) we find stoning in the Torah (as the punishment for fornication). The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: So when did you lessen the severity of Allah's command? He said: A relative of one of our kings had committed fornication, but his stoning was suspended. Then a man of a family of common people committed fornication. He was to have been stoned, but his people intervened and said: Our man shall not be stoned until you bring your man and stone him. So they made a compromise on this punishment between them. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: So I decide in accordance with what the Torah says. He then commanded regarding them and they were stoned to death.[1]
Another narration tells us that at the end of the whole episode with the Jews the Messenger of Allah said:
“The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) then said: O Allah, I am the first to give life to Thy command which they have killed.”And the narration says on the eve verses 41 to 47 of Surah al-Ma’ida were revealed.[2]
It is thus clear that “ruling of Allah” (hukm-ullah) in Surah Al-Ma’idah ayah 43 refers to rajm. For the said reasoning, the well known Tafsir al-Jalalayn, co-authored by Al-Mahalli and Al-Suyuti, puts it as;
“But how is it that they make you their judge when they have the Torah, wherein is God’s judgment”, of stoning: the interrogative here is for [provoking] amazement, in other words, they were not seeking thereby [by making you their judge] to discover the truth but a lighter punishment for them; “and then they turn away,” [and then] they reject your ruling of stoning, which accords with what is in their Scripture, “after that”request [to you] for arbitration“Such are not believers.”[3]
It is for this reason that Ibn Abbas- may Allah be pleased with him- said: "He who disbelieves in stoning (the adulterer to death) will have inadvertently disbelieved in the Qur'an, for Allah said, ‘O People of the Scripture! Now has come to you Our Messenger explaining to you much of that which you used to hide from the Scripture’ (Qur’an 5:15), and stoning was among the things that they used to hide.''[4]
Therefore it is clear that according to the blessed companions institution of stoning was proven from Qur’an itself. However they did seem to have known that it is not explicit and some people not having proper understanding may actually end up questioning it for this reason.
As to alleged verse of stoning and its abrogation, please see THIS.

2.2. The punishment for illicit relations given in Surah al-Nur is general?

Another argument is about the general import of the hundred lashes punishment given in surah al-Nur verse 2. They say rajm is, therefore, a contradiction to the Qur’anic instruction.
This argument is flawed for a number of reasons;
i) The verse with hundred lashes punishment cannot be general and Qur’an itself testifies to it. In Qur’an 4:25 the punishment of female adulterer is specified to be half of free female fornicator. With this fact known the idea of the totally generic implication of surah al-Nur ayah 2 is laid to proven wrong. Strictly considering the word “zani” used in Surah al-Nur verse 2, it does not differentiate between a slave and a free like it does not distinguish between a married one and otherwise. So to say that it is absolutely universal in application contradicts Qur’an itself.
ii) The context of the hundred lashes verse itself proves it is for fornicators (un-married people) and not adulterers (married people). While the opponents of Rajm are convinced that this verse proves their stance in the light of logic and reason they fail to look at verse number three.  How could it be that if the people refereed to in this verse included both married and unmarried the following verse said that the fornicator male does not marry except a fornicator woman or polytheist and that none marries the fornicator woman except a fornicator or a polytheist?  In the case of a man one could say that he can marry more than once, but in the case of the woman it does not make sense, as she can only marry one husband which shows that verse number two talks about unmarriedpeople.   

2.3 The punishment of adultery is rajm how can it be halved for slaves according to Qur’an 4:25

The next ‘logical’ argument that the opponents of Rajm put forth is the verse of the Quran that states the punishment of a slave being half of that of a free person, and that a slave could not logically be stoned half to death. Again it’s very interesting that reason is claimed but not exercised by such people. Any sensible person who can read and put his whims and desires on hold for a minute while applying principles of understanding and knowledge will realize the answer to this argument. Let us look at the technical details of the verse in question and show once again the lack of knowledge and understanding.
The verse reads;
وَمَن لَّمْ يَسْتَطِعْ مِنكُمْ طَوْلاً أَن يَنكِحَ الْمُحْصَنَاتِ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ فَمِن مِّا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُم مِّن فَتَيَاتِكُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَاللّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِإِيمَانِكُمْ بَعْضُكُم مِّن بَعْضٍ فَانكِحُوهُنَّ بِإِذْنِ أَهْلِهِنَّ وَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ مُحْصَنَاتٍ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحَاتٍ وَلاَ مُتَّخِذَاتِ أَخْدَانٍ فَإِذَا أُحْصِنَّ فَإِنْ أَتَيْنَ بِفَاحِشَةٍ فَعَلَيْهِنَّ نِصْفُ مَا عَلَى الْمُحْصَنَاتِ مِنَ الْعَذَابِ ذَلِكَ لِمَنْ خَشِيَ الْعَنَتَ مِنْكُمْ وَأَن تَصْبِرُواْ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ وَاللّهُ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ
“If one cannot afford to marry the believing free women (muhsanat)[a] , then (he may marry) the one you people own (i.e. slave-women) of your Muslim girls. Allah knows best about your faith. You are similar to each other. So, marry them with the permission of their masters, and give them their dues, as recognized, they being bound in marriage (muhsanat)[b], not going for lust, nor having paramours. So, once they have been bound in marriage (uhsinna)[c], then, if they commit a shameful act, they shall be liable to half of the punishment prescribed for the free women (muhsanat)[d]. That is for those of you who apprehend to indulge in sin. But that you be patient is better for you. Allah is Most-Forgiving, Very-Merciful.”
The issue is about the meaning of "muhsanat" half of whose punishment is prescribed for slave-women committing adultery after they were bond in marriage.
a) Meaning of muhsanat: The word actually meaning "one who is fortified or under protection" or inaccessible. For women it can be used in three senses
1) For the one who is married i.e. under the protection of her husband.
2) For the one who is free and under the protection of her family.
3) For the one who has protected her honor and is neither married nor a slave.
See Al-Mufradat fi Gharib al-Qur'an of Raghib Asfahani's (d.502 A.H.), root Haa-Saad-Noon (H-S-N)
It will be the context or independently known information that will decide what is meant at a particular instance.
Now for Qur'an 4:25, mark the following
There are four instances where "muhsanat" are referred to.
In the usage [b] and [c] it certainly means "married women" as it refers slave-women who have been married.
The usage [d] where the case of slave-women is shown to be opposite of the "muhsanat" it has the same meaning as in the first usage [a].
In the usage [a] "muhsanat" does not mean married women, it means free-women in the protection of their families as given in the translation above.
Explaining this Imam al-Razi (d. 606 A.H.)writes;
"Al-musanat" they are the free women and the proof for this is in the fact that in case of inability to marry the "muhsanat", Allah allowed marrying the slave-women. Therefore it is a must that "muhsanat" is opposite of "al-ima'" i.e. slave-women."[5]

Means "muhsanat" in usage [a] in the verse refers to free women.

No reasonable person can ask, "Why can the free-women not be the married ones?", because Allah will never ask people to marry women who are already married to someone. They are called "muhsanat" because they are free and under the protection and fortification (hisan) of their families.
Also see the Tafasir of Al-Tabari, AL-Jassas, Ibn Al-Arabi, Al-Qurtubi, Al-Nasafi, Al-Shaukani etc.
Simply put the "muhsanat" half of whose punishment is for the adulterer slave-women are free unmarried women. And their punishment, if it comes to it, is 100 lashes not stoning. And punishment of hundred lashes can easily be halved. Simple common sense issue!

2.4 Mutawatir is not a proof for rajm?

Let us turn our attention now to the issue of mutawatir and how the opponents of rajm deal with it. Mutawatir, from a technical point of view is something being narrated by so many people through so many chains of narrations that it is impossible, or at least above reasonable doubt, for what ever is narrated not to be a fact
The opponents of rajm state that the proponents of rajm hide behind this word:
“The traditionalists like to hide behind the word "Mutawatir" a lot, instead of paying attention to other people's arguments and then present their case in a logical, rational manner”.[6]
The issue in question is that so many people through so many different parallel chains narrated that prophet Muhammad –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- applied rajm and so did the followers after that it is impossible to say that such an issue is made up or false.
At least fifty-two companions of the Holy Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- have reported the narrations of rajm. They include Abu Bakr, Umar, Usman, Ali, Aisha, Abdullah bin Mas’ud, Abu Hurayra etc. may Allah be pleased with them all. For the complete list of names and references for their reports, see Shaykh Taqi Usmani’s Takmilah Fath al-Mulhim vol.2 pp. 362-372
The same mutawatir chains that report rajm have reported the Qur’an. The Quran has reached us through the same companions that have reported stoning. The opponents say that the Qur’an is guarded by Allah and there is no such guarantee for anything else, but we would like to point out a contradiction in their methodology. Their stance is actually not a logical and historical one; rather it is based on faith (to which any non Muslim intellectual would object). Logic and reason is not restricted to Muslims so their argument to present their case in a logical, rational manner falls down as a fly. 

2.5 Rajm abrogated by hundred lashes punishment?

There are some from amongst the opponents of rajm who argue that it was abrogated by punishment of hundred lashes mentioned in Surah al-Nur. In other words they try to convey that rajm was an earlier practice of the Blessed Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- and Surah al-Nur was revealed after that, therefore owing to its general import it abrogated rajm.
Although they claim the above but they have absolutely no evidence for it. At the most they can refer to the following hadith narration;
Narrated Ash-Shaibani: I asked 'Abdullah bin Abi 'Aufa about the Rajam (stoning somebody to death for committing illegal sexual intercourse). He replied, "The Prophet carried out the penalty of Rajam," I asked, "Was that before or after the revelation of Surat-an-Nur?" He replied, "I do not know."[7]
But as one can see there is no evidence that Messenger of Allah carried out rajm before Surah al-Nur was revealed. It only shows Abdullah bin Abi Aufa –may Allah be pleased with him- did not know about it.
The fact however remains that most if not all of the incidents of rajm practiced by the Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- took place after the revelation of surah al-Nur. Consider the following points;
1- Surah al-Nur was revealed after a false charge was made against Mother of the Believers, Sayyidah Aisha, which happened immediately after Battle (ghazwah) of Bani Mastaliq. [8]
2-Historians differ as to the date of this Battle. According to Ibn Ishaq it was in the year 6 A.H.[9] According to al-Waqidi[10] and Ibn Sa’d[11] it took place in the year 5 A.H. According to one report attributed to Musa bin ‘Uqbah it happened in the year 4 A.H.[12], however, more authentic reports from him also put it in the year 5 A.H.[13]Hafiz Ibn Hajr considering various narrations and facts has said that most preferable opinion is that of 5 A.H.
Therefore we can say, the latest battle took place in the year 6 A.H. though according to the most authentic view it took place in the year 5 A.H. and immediately after it the Surah al-Nur was revealed. Most accounts say it was the month of Sha’ban.
3- There is evidence of rajm carried out by the Holy Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- after year 6 A.H.
The incident of stoning to death of the Jewish adulterers is reported by the blessed companion Abdullah bin al-Harith, and he said, “I was among those who stoned the two.”[14]
And Abdullah bin al-Harith along with his father came to the Holy Prophet after the conquest of Makkah.[15] So his presence at the event means it happened in or after 8 A.H. i.e. long after the revelation of Surah al-Nur.
Regarding the same incident in a narration recorded by Al-Tabari, another companion Abu Hurayrah said, “I was sitting with the Messenger of Allah …”[16]
And it is well known fact that Abu Hurayrah accepted Islam in the year 7 A.H[17]. i.e. at least a couple of years after the revelation of Surah al-Nur.
Some people have objected to this saying how could the Jewish adulterers be punished after the conquest of Makkah while their tribes were routed from Madina well before. However this is not really a valid objection because even after the main Jewish tribes were expelled from Madina there remained many Jews in the city.
As recorded in Sahih Bukhari, Abu Hurayrah who- as stated above- embraced Islam in the year 7 A.H. said:
“While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, "Let us go to the Jews" We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras He said to them, "If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is permitted to sell it, and otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Messenger.”[18]
This proves even after 7 A.H. there were some Jews in Madina. In fact we know there was a Jew in Madina even at the time of the death of the Messenger of Allah- peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- (i.e. 11 A.H.) to whom his armor was mortgaged.[19]
4- Other incidents of rajm date later than the episode of the stoning of the Jews as we find Abu Hurayrah saying that first ones to be stoned to death by the Messenger of Allah were a couple from amongst the Jews.[20]
Narrations about rajm of Ghamdia (woman from the tribe of Ghamid) tell us that Khalid bin Walid threw stones at her.[21] And Khalid bin Walid- may Allah be pleased with him- himself said: “We reached the Messenger of Allah at Madina on the first day of Safar in the eighth year [after Hijrah].”[22]
All these days make it absolutely clear that the Noble Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- carried out stoning (rajm) after the revelation of surah al-Nur and there is no question of rajm being abrogated. 

2.6 Stoning to death was only a ta’zir not a hadd?

Some people try to catch at yet another straw and say that rajm was practiced only as ta’zir (discretionary punishment) and not as hadd (prescribed punishment).
They do not have any real evidence except that they use the following narration;
Qatada reported from Habib bin Saalim (who) said that a man was brought to Nu’man ibn Bashir for having committed adultery with his wife’s female slave. He said, “I will judge this case with the judgment of Allah’s Messenger. If she (his wife) had made her lawful for him then I will award him a hundred stripes, and if she had not then I will sentence him to be stoned to death.”[23]
They say as the punishment of stoning was dropped it shows it is not a prescribed punishment (hadd) but rather only a discretionary punishment (ta’zir).
Firstly the narration is dubious. Imam al-Tirmidhi after quoting this hadith writes;
“There is confusion in the hadith of Nu’man. Bukhari said that Qatadah and Bishr both had not heard this hadith from Habib ibn Saalim but from Khalid ibn Urfutah.”
Albani, Shu’aib Arnaut and many others have classified it as da’if (weak).
Even if accepted as authentic, it does not support the assertion of opponents of rajm, because hadd requires total and ultimate evidence and absence of any kind of genuine misconception on the part of the culprit.
In such a case when a man had sex with the slave-girl of his wife, there is doubt that he might consider it lawful for him as she belongs to his wife. The principle is to avoid imposing hadd punishment even if there is a slight doubt. That is why Imam al-Tirmidhi mentions the opinion of Ibn Mas’ud –may Allah be pleased with him- under this hadith that he “held that such a person is not subject to hadd, but to ta’zir.”
A narration about Ali –may Allah be pleased with him- helps us understand this better.
Harqus narrated: A woman came to Ali –may Allah be pleased with him- and said, ‘My husband has done adultery with my slave-girl.’ Her husband said: ‘She says the truth, what is hers is lawful for me.’ Ali said: ‘Go and do not repeat,’ as if he exempted him due to his ignorance.”[24]
The doubt on the part of the man who commits adultery with wife’s slave-girl, something very much expected in that newly Islamized society, saved such people from hadd. Hundred lashes mentioned in the report of al-Tarimidhi were only by the way of ta’zir.[25]
2.6.1 Evidence that rajm is hadd (prescribed punishment) and not ta’zir (discretionary punishment)
Contrary to the claim of opponents of rajm we have ample evidence that rajm is indeed a hadd- punishment prescribed by the Almighty Allah. The Holy Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- practiced it in the capacity of the Lawgiver and not just the ruler. Consider the following points;
1- In the verse 43 of surah al-Ma’idah rajm (stoning to death) is referred to “command of Allah” which shows it is ahadd prescribed by Allah.
2- According to the narration of Al-Bara’ bin ‘Azib-may Allah be pleased with him- after the stoning of the Jewish couple the Messenger of Allah –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said: “O Allah!, I am the first of those who revive Your command, which they had killed off.”[26]
It is clearly a command of Allah.
3- In the report from ‘Ubadah bin Samit- may Allah be pleased with him- the Messenger of Allah –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- mentioned stoning of the adulterers saying, “Allah has ordained a way for them.”[27]
Again the commandment for the punishment was attributed to Allah- simple straight forward evidence that it is indeed a prescribed punishment (haddI).
4- According to the narration of Khalid al-Juhani- may Allah be pleased with him- when a case of unmarried boy cohabiting with the a married woman was brought to the Messenger of Allah- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- he said, “By Him in Whose Hand is my life. I will decide between you according to the Book of Allah,” and ruled that the woman- if she confesses- must be stoned to death.[28]
Here again the Holy Prophet- peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- attributed the command to the Book of Allah.
5- After mentioning the incident of the stoning of the Jewish adulterers, Ibn Abbas –may Allah be pleased with him- said: “That was the punishment ordained for them by Allah because the Prophet had known their adultery.”[29]
6- Narrated 'Abdullah: Allah's Messenger- peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: In retaliation for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."[30]
This narration clearly mentions hudud i.e. prescribed punishments only and not ta’zirat i.e. discretionary punishments.
Answer to another antagonist view discussed as a separate issue below also serves as evidence for rajm being a prescribed punishment and not a discretionary one. 

2.7 Was rajm only for professional and group immoral activity amounting to fasad fil ard?

Lately, another antagonist view is being propagated by the likes of Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi. He asserts thatrajm is not for every adulterer rather it is for those who make it a profession i.e. do it by the way of prostitution or as a group as such.
A member of his Al-Mawrid Institute explaining and defending his opinion writes;
Mr Ghamidi’s holds that it was an application of the Qur’ānic directive regarding the crime of muḥārabah. The Holy Qur’ān could not have been abrogated by the Prophet (sws). He stoned those people to death who had committed the crime not on any circumstantial provocation rather they were spreading open lewdness in the society or had put the honor of every citizens in danger.[31]
He actually links the whole issue of adultery punishable by rajm to Qur’an 5:33 as clear from his own writings[32]. The verse reads;
“The punishment of those who wage war (yuharibun) against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main (yus’aun) for mischief through the land is: execution (yuqattalu), or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.” (Qur’an 5:33)
But this is absolutely baseless and we have clear examples in which some adulterers that committed the crime in individual capacity and under ‘circumstantial provocation’ were stoned without their being a threat to the collective social order in the sense Mr. Ghamidi takes it.
Following examples will help us see the flimsiness of the idea that is Mr. Ghamidi’s brainchild;
In one narration of Buraida- may Allah be pleased with him- two cases of adulterers who were then stoned to death are mentioned. We put the two separately highlighting the important points.
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. When it was the fourth time, a ditch was dug for him and he (the Holy Prophet) pronounced judgment about him and he was stoned.[33]
Ma’iz was not a part of any gang violating the honor of the women that the Prophet –peace be upon him- had to take any punitive measures. In fact the Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- even wanted to have clarity about his mental status when he confessed. Yet on his repeated confession he was stoned to death. Is there any hint to what Mr. Ghamidi points? Do you find any notion of ‘open lewdness’ or ‘endangering the honor of every citizen’?
Likewise another incident given in the same report goes as;
There came to him (the Holy Prophet) a woman from Ghamid and said: Allah's Messenger, I have committed adultery, so purify me. He (the Holy Prophet) turned her away. On the following day she said: Allah's Messenger, Why do you turn me away? Perhaps, you turn me away as you turned away Ma'iz. By Allah, I have become pregnant. He said: Well, if you insist upon it, then go away until you give birth to (the child). When she was delivered she came with the child (wrapped) in a rag and said: Here is the child whom I have given birth to. He said: Go away and suckle him until you wean him. When she had weaned him, she came to him (the Holy Prophet) with the child who was holding a piece of bread in his hand. She said: Allah's Apostle, here is he as I have weaned him and he eats food. He (the Holy Prophet) entrusted the child to one of the Muslims and then pronounced punishment. And she was put in a ditch up to her chest and he commanded people and they stoned her. Khalid b Walid came forward with a stone which he flung at her head and there spurted blood on the face of Khalid and so he abused her. Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) heard his (Khalid's) curse that he had huried upon her. Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Khalid, be gentle. By Him in Whose Hand is my life, she has made such a repentance that even if a wrongful tax-collector were to repent, he would have been forgiven. Then giving command regarding her, he prayed over her and she was buried.”
According to the narration of Al-Baihaqi, the Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said: “She repented in a way that if her repentance were to be distributed to all the people of Madinah it would suffice them.”[34]
In another narration we find that when someone said some strong words about her the Holy Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said: “Have you seen better than the one who sacrificed herself for the sake of Allah, the Mighty and Sublime?”[35]
Again the lady came as a repentant, and was actually stoned some three years after she committed adultery. And she repented sincerely as clear from the words of Blessed Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- after her death.
Further these cases also show why it is not right to link the issue of stoning to Qur’an 5:33. To understand this we must read the verse along with the following verse i.e. no. 34.
The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;
Except for those who repent before they fall into your power: in that case, know that Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (Qur’an 5:33-34)
Here I want readers to carefully consider verse 34. It evidently means in case one involved in the crimes mentioned in the previous verse repents before being overpowered then his/her repentance will be accepted and he will not be executed as stated.
However in the two cases we considered above i.e. of Ma’iz and Ghamidia, we see the both repented before being overpowered, themselves confessed before the Prophet –may Allah be pleased with him- but still they were both stoned to death.
So either the verse does not relate to stoning thing or the Prophet –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- made a mistake?! May Allah forgive us for this assumption even!
If there was any possibility of according leniency and forgiveness, these two would have been spared. But this is something not possible in case of the prescribed punishments (hudud).

3. Summary and Conclusion

It is without a doubt that those who deny rajm have no reasonable, logical or rational explanation or for doing so.  Their logical arguments of the verse not being in the Quran leaves them with the embarrassment of having to deny many of the other injunctions that were revealed as part of non-Quranic revelations. In fact we have seen that stoning is rather proved from Qur’an itself though not in explicit wording. Their ‘logical’ argument that stoning cannot be halved for slaves falls in the light of the context and meaning of the words in the Quran.  The denial ofmutawatir ahadith leads them to the denial of path that has brought us the Quran, and last but not least their double standards are exposed in relation to approaching the issue form an academic and logical angle. Such people who deny the rajm do so only as an attempt to be accepted by those around them who hold rajm as a barbaric practice and who will never cease to hold any aspect of Islam as less than such.  Such people will only be pleased with the Muslims when they deny every single aspect of their faith and not sooner.  
And Indeed Allah knows the best!

[1] Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 4435. Translated by Ahmad Hasan Dani.
[2] Ibid. Hadith 4433
[3] Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Tans. Feras Hamza ONLINE SOURCE
[4] Mustadrak al-Hakim, Dar al-Kotob al-Ilmiya, Beirut 1990 vol.4 p.400 Hadith 8069. Classified as Sahih by al-Hakim. Al-Dhahabi agreed with him
[5] Mafatih al-Ghayb, Dar al-Ehia al-Tourath al-Arabi, Beirut 1420 vol.10 pp.46-47
[6] Ibrahim B. Syed, “Opposing Rajm (Stoning to Death)” Source URL:http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_151_200/opposing_rajm.htm Last Accessed on July 1, 2012 6:25 am GMT
[7] Sahih Bukhari, Book 82, Hadith 824
[8] Sahih Bukhari, Book 93, Hadith 635
[9]Ibn Hisham, Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, Mustafa al-Babi, Egypt, 1955 vol.2 p.289
[10] Al-Maghazi, Dar al-A’lami, Beirut, 1989 vol.1 p.404
[11] Tabaqat al-Kubra, Dar al-Kotob al-Ilmiyya, Beirut, 1990 vol.2 p.48
[12] Ibn Sayyid al-Nas, ‘Uyun al-Athar, Dar al-Qalam, Beirut 1993 vol.2 p.128
[13] Al-Baihaqi, Dala’il al-Nubuwwah, Dar al-Kotob al-Ilmiyya, 1405 A.H. vol.4 p.45
[14] Al-Tabarani, Mu’jam al-Awst, Dar al-Haramain, Cairo, n.d. vol.1 p.49 Hadith 137, Also see, Majma’ Al-Zawaid, Maktaba Al-Qudsi, Cairo, 1994 vol.6 p.271 Hadith 10632
[15] Fath al-Bari, Dar al-Ma’rifah, Beirut, 1379 A.H. vol.12 p.171
[16] Jami’ al-Bayan fi Tawil al-Qur’an, Mo’assas al-Resalah, Beirut 2000, vol.10 pp.305-306 Narration 11923-24
[17] Tabaqat al-Kubra vol.4 p.244
[18] Sahih Bukhari, Book 53, Hadith 392
[19] Sahih Bukhari, Book 59, Hadith 743
[20] Musannaf Abdul Razzaq, Al-Maktab al-Islami, Berut, 1403 A.H. vol.7 p.315 Hadith 13330
[21] Sahih Muslim, Book 17, Hadith 4206
[22] Tabaqat al-Kubra, vol.4 p.190
[23] Jami’ al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 1456,
[24] Musannaf Abdul Razzaq, vol.7 p.405 Hadith 13648
[25] Abu Ja’far al-Tahawi, Sharah Ma’ni al-Athar, Egypt, 1994 vol.3 p.145
[26] Sunan Ibn Majah, Translated by Nasiruddin al-Khattab, Darussalam publishers, 2007 vol.3 p.467 Hadith 2558. Classified as Sahih by Albani
[27] Sahih Muslim, Book 17, Hadith 4191
[28] Sahih Muslim, Book 17, Hadith 4209
[29] Musnad Ahmad, al-Resalah ed. Hadith 2368. Classified as Hasan by Shu’aib Arna’ut.
[30] Sahih Bukhari, Book 83, Hadith 17
[31] Tariq Mahmood Hashmi, Punishment of Rajam and the Qur'an. Source URL: http://www.al-mawrid.org/pages/questions_english_detail.php?qid=55&cid=42 Last accessed on June 30, 2012 9:50 am GMT
[32] Meezan, Al-Mawrid, Lahore, 2009 pp.610- 614
[33] Sahih Muslim, Book 17, Hadith 4206
[34] Sunan al-Kubra, Dar al-Kotob al-Ilmiya, Beirut 2003 vol.4 p.28 Hadith 6829
[35] Sunan al-Nasai, Translated by Nasiruddin al-Khattab, Darussalam publishers, 2007 vol.3 p.87 Hadith 1959

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.