Please login for Bookmark , Comment or Highlight ...
Your Questions Answered
Queries
A Misconception about Islamic Punishments
Question: Living here in Saudi Arabia are many American soldiers who are here officially. The other day, I had a chance to meet one of them through a friend of mine. The topic of Islamic punishments which are in force here came up. My non-Muslim acquaintance was very apprehensive and critical of Islamic punishments. One of the points he raised bothered me a lot. Therefore, I am posing this question to you. What are the criteria on which these punishments are administered? After all, if a person steals out of compulsion, then why should his hands be cut? similarly, if he kills someone in self defence or in the defence of some other person, why should he be executed in return?
Answer: This question has actually arisen from a misconception about Islamic punishments. People generally think that as soon as it is proven through a court trial that a person has stolen something, one of his hands shall be amputated, or the moment a judge is certain that a person has murdered someone, he shall be executed in return; similarly, as soon as it is proven that he is guilty of adultery, he shall be whipped a hundred times. In other words, people contend that these punishments are to be administered necessarily in all circumstances. The only thing required is the court’s satisfaction that the charges brought against the criminal are correct to the best of its knowledge.
Now the actual picture which emerges if one reflects on the style and linguistic constructions in which these punishments are mentioned in the Qur’an is that these punishments are extreme forms of reproof. They are to be given only and only if the extent of the crime and the state of the person who has committed the crime deserve no leniency. In other words, it is not just the fact that whether a person has committed a particular crime or not is to be found out and ascertained by the court; equally important is the information concerning the factors which led to the crime and the state of the person who committed the crime. If this information induces a judge to decide that the crime has not been committed in its ultimate form, he has all the authority to punish the criminal with lesser punishments like fining him or having him beaten up.
Consequently, if someone steals out of compulsion, or if a child steals a few rupees from his father’s pocket, or a wife pinches some money from her husband, or if a person steals something very ordinary, then, no doubt all these cannot be classified as acts of theft which deserve punishment of amputation of hands. Precisely, on such grounds, in a particular case, the Caliph ‘Umar (rta) refused to amputate the hand of a person who was forced to steal because of hunger simply because he thought the circumstances were such that the person deserved leniency. We know that there was a severe drought during his rule and it was in this drought that the incident had taken place. People think that ‘Umar (rta) had abrogated the punishment, whereas, as I said, ‘Umar (rta) thought that the criminal deserved leniency.
Similarly, if we take the case of the punishment of fornication, we have two very clear precedents from the Qur’an itself as to how extenuating circumstances affect the extent of punishments. We know that during the Prophet’s times there were people who forced their slave girls to prostitution. They would compel them into this heinous crime and thereby earn money. If we look at the conditions of slavery which prevailed in the Prophets times, it becomes clear that it was so very rampant in that society and there were dozens of slaves owned by a single person. All these slaves, whether men or women, were totally dependent on their masters for their livelihood, and the way things were in Arabia at that time it was very difficult for them to think of any other economic activity independently. So the Qur’an never demanded from these slave girls forced to prostitution to run away from their masters. Instead it comforted them by saying that if in spite of wanting to refrain from this abomination and having a severe dislike and aversion for it, they were driven into it by their masters, the Almighty shall forgive them:
But if anyone compels them, Allah will be forgiving and merciful to them. (24:33)
The second example is again of these slave women who of their own accord and without any coercion from their masters committed fornication. The Qur’an says that they also cannot be administered this punishment because of improper upbringing and education and because of lack of family protection. So much so that if their husbands and masters had done all they could to keep them chaste and in spite of this they committed the crime, they shall be given only half this punishment ie, fifty lashes.
Then if they are kept chaste and then commit fornication, then they shall be given only half the punishment of chaste women. (4:25)
Similar is the case with executing a person who has murdered someone in self defence or in the defence of another individual.
Summing up, I would reiterate that all the punishments in the Qur’an are extreme forms of chastisement and should only be administered if the criminal deserves no leniency, and if he does, lesser punishments should be given.
In other words, it can also be said that in this particular aspect the Islamic penal code is no different from other penal codes.
Ruling on Cloning
Question: Here in the US, there is much debate about the issue of cloning and its implications. At the moment, federal funds have been banned by the president from being used for this purpose. Muslim scholars also seem to be divided on this issue. I want to know the status of cloning in Islam.
Answer: Islam does not in any way condemn man’s freedom in scientific inquiry unless it has ethical or moral implications. Cloning is a step forward in this direction. Human cloning, generally defined as the production of two genetically identical individuals, apparently cannot be objected to. However, human cloning is in a very very rudimentary stage at the moment. Currently, it is even very difficult to say whether science will ever succeed in this objective or not. It is also quite impossible to say what exactly will be the result. Cloning an adult sheep was extremely difficult to do; over 270 attempts were needed before Dolly was born. Many foetal lambs did not survive the early stages of development. Those lambs that were carried to term were born with health problems, including malformed kidneys, and all but Dolly subsequently died. See for example, The Washington Times, ‘Before there was Dolly, there were Disasters’(March 11, 1997).
Furthermore, there are several unanswered questions at the moment: Will genetically identical people be physically and behaviourally identical, too? Will they have identical personalities? What if a clone is cloned again, and again? What would be the result and status of these subsequent ‘beings’? Will it be possible to clone the human soul, along with the body and if it is possible to clone the soul, what would this mean? In contrast, if the body is cloned, but not the soul, what would this mean? Until scientists are able to say something definite regarding these questions, a final verdict on human cloning would just be a wild guess.
For the moment, the only thing which can be said with certainty is that research and investigation in the area of human cloning cannot be objected to. Scientists say that human embryo research and embryo cloning can be used to conduct research into the development of contraceptives, in studies aimed at understanding the causes of human infertility and its solutions, in research involving genetic testing, genetic engineering, disease diagnosis, prevention and treatment, and tests on various medicines and medical procedures.
All this of course, cannot be disapproved in any way, unless, of course, something unethical comes up.
Waging War against Jews and Christians
Question: There is a Qur’anic verse (9:29) that states that we should fight the Ahli-Kitab (the People of the Book) until they pay the Jizyah tax. Does this mean that we should keep fighting them or only when they refuse to pay Jizyah to the Islamic state?
Answer: Neither of your inferences are correct. Since this verse and other verses of similar meaning have a specific context and background, I’ll try to explain this context, which, hopefully, will bring out the true purport of this verse:
It is evident from the Qur’an (2:62) that the basic truths for which man shall be held accountable on the Day of Judgement are:
1. Belief in the One and Only God.
2. Belief that a person shall be held accountable on the day of judgement.
3. Belief that this accountability shall be based on the deeds a person does in this world.
The Almighty selects and sends certain personalities called Prophets (Rusul) to elucidate and explain these basic truths to their respective people. With His special help and assistance, they remove misconceptions which may surround these concepts and vehemently say that if people do not accept these truths they shall be doomed in this world and in the Hereafter too. People who knowingly deny these truths are punished in various degrees so that this whole episode can become an argument for the reward and punishment that is going to take place on similar grounds in the Hereafter.
The Prophet Muhammad (sws) too, like the previous Prophets (sws), explained these truths in their ultimate form through the special help of the Almighty. When it became evident that his addressees were deliberately denying him, they were punished in varying degrees to prove to mankind for the last time that a similar court of justice shall be set up on the Day of Judgement, and that the reward and punishment given by the Almighty through His Prophets (sws) to their addressees in their collective capacity in this world would be given to all the people who deny such basic truths. The idolaters were given the options of accepting faith or death and the People of the Book were given the options of accepting faith or remaining subservient and paying Jizyah, a tax imposed on them. This difference seems to stem from the fact that the idolaters subscribed to polytheism even after being convinced about its baselessness, while the People of the Book were basically monotheistic though were involved in certain polytheistic practices.
It is evident from this thesis that 9:29 specifically relates to the Prophet’ addressees. It is not directly related to us. After the departure of the Prophets of Allah, no Muslim preacher can deliver the truth in its ultimate form and neither has he any means to know if his addressees are knowingly denying him. Therefore, today Muslims cannot wage war on the non-Muslims of the world to forcibly make them accept faith. They must keep on presenting Islam to them in a polite and humble manner. Only the Prophet (sws) and his companions had this authority since it was actually the Almighty who had delivered the truth in its ultimate form through him and his addressees knowingly denied the truth.
Today the Muslims fail to realize this difference and insist on doing something which is the prerogative of only the Prophets of Allah and their companions.
Some Misleading Translations of Qur’anic Verses
Questions: The following verse points out that Islam was gradually perfected. Until that time, are we to suppose that Islam was not a perfected religion?
This day have those who reject faith given up all hope of your religion: Yet fear them not but fear Me. This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. But if any is forced by hunger, with no inclination to transgression, Allah is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (5:3)
My second question pertains to the following verse of the Qur’an:
O ye who believe! Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach unto Him, and strive with might... (5:38)
Some people claim mediation from this verse. They use this verse to justify their invocation of certain pious personalities and even criticize those who ask Allah for help directly. Is this true?
Answer: In 5:3, the word akmaltu (perfected) actually means ‘completed’. It is used in this shade in the English language, though this usage seems to have been overshadowed by other ones, in particular by the one which means ‘ultimate’ or ‘supreme’. For your own understanding, you can read the verse thus:
This day have I completed your religion for you (5:3)
In other words, verse is implying that the religion whose revelation started 22 years ago has today been completed.
In 5:38, the correct translation of the word Wasilah is ‘nearness’. It does not mean ‘the means of approach’, which is actually its Urdu meaning. In other words, the verse is directing the Muslims to seek the nearness of Allah. There is no question of any mediation in this regard. He listens directly.
Is this Gender Discrimination?
Question: What does this Hadith mean?
Narrated Abu Musa Ash‘ari: Allah’s Messenger (sws) said: ‘Many amongst men attained perfection but amongst women none attained perfection except Maryam (rta), the daughter of 'Imran, and A%siyah (rta), the wife of Pharaoh. And the superiority of A%’ishah(rta) to other women is like the superiority of Tharid (an Arab dish) to other meals.’ (Bukhari: Kitab Ahadithu’l-Ambiya’)
Being a woman, I am concerned about the words ‘many amongst men...but amongst women none …’ Why? Doesn’t the Qur’an say men and women are equal as human beings?
Answer: The Hadith does not compare men and women in their capacity as human beings. It does not say that men are superior to women in this regard. Men and women are equal as far as being human beings are concerned.
A l\ittle deliberation on the Hadith shows that the Prophet (sws) is just mentioning a fact regarding the prominence achieved in piety by men and women until his times. He is not commenting on men and women of subsequent times. In other words, he is not stating any general principle about men and women. What he is actually commenting upon is the historical fact that up to his times more men have achieved excellence in piety than women. This of course does not mean that in later times this proportion will continue, nor does it mean that men are generally more pious than women.
Showing Respect to theQur’an
Question: Here, in the US, each year, our Muslim Students Association debates whether to put a Qur’anic verse (in English) on our Muslim students Association T- Shirt. Primarily, we see this as a means of doingDa‘wah and spreading the message of Islam while also having a cool shirt to wear. However, some people have taken exception to printing the Qur’an on a shirt because it will be thrown around and washed. Could you comment.
Answer: Displaying respect for Qur’anic verses belong to the class of directives which pertain to showing one’s regard for the various symbols of Islam and cannot be outright classed as right or wrong. Such directives depend upon one’s perception of showing regard as well as on the traditions of the society he lives in. In my opinion, the manner in which a person expresses this has been left to the circumstances and situations he may face. It is he who must decide keeping in view the general framework of religion and the customs of the society he lives in. Also, others must not ridicule him if he adopts a course of action which is wrong in their opinion -- for in such affairs it is the intention which actually counts.
Can Perfumes Containing Alcohol be used?
Question: Is using of perfume, deodorant, anti-prespirant etc which have alcohol, permitted. If yes, then can you pray while wearing them? If not, what alternatives do we have?
Answer: It should remain clear that the prohibition of alcohol pertains to its oral use as an intoxicant. Consequently, perfumes and deodorants which contain alcohol can be used.
Queries of a Nursing Mother
Questions: I regularly feed my newborn baby. I wanted to know if stains of breast milk make ablution necessary or not? If a nursing woman wants to abide by her prayers, how much cleanliness of the clothes is necessary? If the mothers clothes are soaked with milk or with the baby’s urine, does this make a bath necessary; or changing of clothes will suffice?
Answer: Strains of breast milk do not make ablution necessary. The cleanliness required for nursing women depends upon the state of her clothes. If the mother’s clothes are soaked with breast milk or with the baby’s urine and if the area affected is not much, then washing them without taking them off or changing them is enough. Having a bath is no requirement.
In other words, the Shari‘ah does not impose any restriction on a nursing mother as far as doing wudu or having a bath is concerned. It leaves it to her comfort and satisfaction.