هناك مجموعة من المسائل العقدية والفقهية التي تحتاج الى وقفة تأمل أحببتُ أن أسجلها هنا ثم عسى مع مرور الوقت أن أتوسع فيها وفي اشكالاتها، وكثير منها لا جواب لها عندي، وليس لي دور فيها سوى جمع المتفرقات من مثل قول ابن حجر في فتح الباري ج6-ص367 تعليقاً على طول آدم عليه السلام وكون ذلك في تناقص، ما يلي: ويشكل على هذا ما يوجد الآن من آثار الأمم السالفة كديار ثمود فإن مساكنهم تدل على أن قاماتهم لم تكن مفرطة الطول على حسب ما يقتضيه الترتيب السابق، ولا شك أن عهدهم قديم، وأن الزمان الذي بينهم وبين آدم دون الزمان الذي بينهم وبين أول هذه الأمة، ولم يظهر لي إلى الآن ما يزيل هذا الإشكال. اهـ
-من هم يأجوج ومأجوج وأين هم؟ -
إنشقاق القمر في زمن النبوة
-من هم يأجوج ومأجوج وأين هم؟ -
إنشقاق القمر في زمن النبوة
- جمع القرآن -
عمر نوح عليه السلام
عمر نوح عليه السلام
الرجم -
وغيرها
__________________________________
July 11, 2008
الرجم -1
كتب الشيخ يوسف القرضاوي حفظه الله: كنتُ مع شيخنا العلامة الزرقا في ندوة التشريع الاسلامي بمدينة البيضاء في ليبيا، واستمعتُ معه إلى العلامة أبي زهرة في رأيه في الرجم الذي كتمه عشرين سنة، ثم باح به، وردود المشاركين في الندوة عليه، وقد ناقشتُ شيخنا أبا زهرة هناك، وذكرتُ له توجيه الحكم على أنه تعزير، كما يقوله الحنفية في عقوبة التغريب. ولكن أبا زهرة رفض ذلك، وقال: إن هذه عقوبة ٌ يهودية في الأصل، وقد نـُسخت بظهور دين الرحمة، وذكرتُ هذا التوجيه لشيخنا الزرقا، واستحسنه، وقال لي: إنه جدير بالنظر، ويبدو أنه – حفظه الله – نسي هذه المحادثة بيننا. والمهم أني والشيخ متفقان تماماً في هذه الوجهة. فالرجم مع الجلد، كالتغريب مع الجلد. وإن لم يقل بذلك أحد من الفقهاء، ولكنه في رأيي اجتهاد وجيه، وقد كنتُ كتبت في هذا شيئاً ولكني لم أجرؤ على نشره، كما أن شيخنا أبا زهرة لم يكتب رأيه هذا فيما أعلم، واكتفى بنسبته إلى الخوارج في كتابه (( العقوبة)). اهـ كلام الشيخ القرضاوي.
الرجم-2
كتب الشيخ الزرقا
أولاً: إني لا أتفق والاستاذ الجليل أبا زهرة في رأيه و مسلكه هذا، لأني لا أجد مجالاً للشك فيما شك فيه من ثبوت الآثار الواردة في الرجم.
ثانياً:" ولكني أرى مجالاً كبيراً لاحتمال أن يكون النبي (ص) قد أمر بالرجم في تلك الحوادث الثابتة على سبيل التعزير لا على سبيل الحد
وقال" وهذا أمر يعود تقديره شرعاً إلى وليّ الامر كما في سائر الحالات التي تستوجب الزجر بالتعزير المفوض إلى ولي الامر. وعندئذ يمكن أن يقال في أمر الرجم ما يقال في كل تعزير من أنه مفوض إلى ولي الامر بحسب ما يرى من المصلحة: فإن شاء طبقه، وإن شاء اكتفى بالجلد الذي هو وحده الحد، وإن شاء جمعهما حداً وتعزيراً لأن زناه (أي المحصـَـن) أشد وأفظع من زنى البكر، كل ذلك بحسب ما يرى من وجه المصلحة
وقال:" وهذا الرأي (أعني حمل ما ورد من السنة في الرجم على قاعدة التعزير) وإن كان لم يره أحد من الأئمة الأربعة : تشهد له بعض الدلائل في الحديث النبوي الذي قرر حكم الرجم
المصدر: فتاوى الشيخ مصطفى الزرقا، حاشية بقلم المحقق الشيخ المتقن مجد مكي وهو تلميذ الشيخ القرضاوي
المصدر: فتاوى الشيخ مصطفى الزرقا، حاشية بقلم المحقق الشيخ المتقن مجد مكي وهو تلميذ الشيخ القرضاوي
_____________________________________
Disclaimer from ZAK: As compiler of this material, I don't necessarily agree or disagree with the topics noted. My primarily interest and goal is to open an educated discussion on important issues.
July 13th, 2008
Scholars' Difference of Opinions on Parts of Controversial Islamic Penal Code
Sh. Mohammad Abou Zahra
Sh. Mustafa Al Zarqa
Sh. Yousof Al Qaradawi
In a conference in Libya, Sheikh Mohammad Abou Zahra spoke on this matter and declared that he questions and doubts all the narrations that the Prophet pbuh had ordered, or stoned anyone. He justified his opionion that stoning is the most severe death punishment, and it is difficult to imagine the soft-hearted Prophet implementing such a punishment. Sheikh Abou Zahra then proceeded to list the evidences that such a punishment is in conflict with the quran. In it, the punishment for adultery is specifically 100 flogging, without any differentiation between married or not. Another evidence was the fact that the quran imposed on slave men, for the crime of adultery, half punishment of the free man. Needless to say; capital punishment is indivisible. Sheikh Abou Zahra was challenged and his opinion was rejected.
Sheikh Mustafa Al Zarqa said:
First: I don’t agree with Sheikh Abou Zahra in his direction as I do not find a reason to doubt the authentic narrations. Imam Al Shafii said that stoning is a punishment specific for free men, and hence not applicable on slave men, and hence being indivisible is not an argument.
Second: I find it very possible that the Prophet pbuh had ordered the stoning in the narrated incidents as an additional reprimand (ta3zeer), not as a part of a penal code. The possible reason was to differentiate the punishment of a married adulterer than that of a non married in an attempt to eradicate any possible remaining traces of Sifa7 al Jahiliyyah (pre-islamic common form of adultery). This additional punishment is an arbitrary matter that is at the discretion of the ruler. He could implement it, waive it, or ascribe another one. All of this is dependent on the ruler’s assessment to benefits, consequences, similar to current legal systems where the judge is given the discretion to apply minimum punishment, or maximum, or any other in between.
This opinion, ie judging stoning to be arbitrary, even though none of the 4 imams adopted it, but the stoning narration itself contains in it indications to this possibility. The quran had already dictated the original punishment of adultery by the verse:
“confine them (i.e. women) to houses until death comes to them or Allah ordains for them some (other) way.” Nisaa v.15
Later on the flogging punishment in surat Al Noor, and the Prophet pbuh declared it to his companions: Take from me, take from me; Allah has made a way for them. A virgin with a virgin the punishment is 100 flogging and one year in exile. Married with Married, is flogging 100 and stonning.
So as is clear, the Prophet pbuh has added the exile and stonning to the punishment declared in the quran. Most scholars considered the combination to be the complete indivisible punishment.
Hanafi school on the other hand considered the exile is not a part of the obligatory punishment, but an additional item that is at the ruler’s discretion. Similarily; stonning should also be considered an additional item.
Sheikh Zarqa also said that this opinion is also the opinion of Sheikh Mahmoud Shaltoot, the Sheikh of Azhar.
Even if we considered the above analysis not acceptable, there also should be a consideration to our times. If stoning is adopted today, it will open the doors of criticism that such a punishment is cruel and severe. We should not forget that the Prophet pbuh had adopted graduality in implementing rules. We today are in the era of scientific jahiliyyah and arrogance, along with proliferating atheism and islam-phobia that necessitates we transition wisely while implementing penal codes. It could be more advantageous today to limit the code to the flogging until another time when stoning could be re-instated whether as an integral part of the code, or a discretionary add-on.
'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from Al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire. When the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: 'Do not drink alcoholic drinks.' people would have said, 'We will never leave alcoholic drinks,' and if there had been revealed, 'Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 'they would have said, 'We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse. Bukhari
Sheikh Al Qaradawi said: I was alongside Sheikh Al Zarqa during the said conference, and together we listened to Sheikh Abou Zahra’s lecture and opinion on stoning that he kept secret for 20 years. I have debated the topic with Sheikh Abou Zahra and suggested to him the possibility of being an additional punishment, as the Hanafis said, but he refused this argument and said that stoning is in its origin a jewish punishment that got abrogated by the religion of mercy. I mentioned this response to Sheikh Zarqa, and he kind of liked it, and said was worthy of further consideration. I had written my opinion suggesting exiling and stoning being additional discretionary punishments, but I did not have the courage to publish it.
Sheikh Mustafa Al Zarqa said:
First: I don’t agree with Sheikh Abou Zahra in his direction as I do not find a reason to doubt the authentic narrations. Imam Al Shafii said that stoning is a punishment specific for free men, and hence not applicable on slave men, and hence being indivisible is not an argument.
Second: I find it very possible that the Prophet pbuh had ordered the stoning in the narrated incidents as an additional reprimand (ta3zeer), not as a part of a penal code. The possible reason was to differentiate the punishment of a married adulterer than that of a non married in an attempt to eradicate any possible remaining traces of Sifa7 al Jahiliyyah (pre-islamic common form of adultery). This additional punishment is an arbitrary matter that is at the discretion of the ruler. He could implement it, waive it, or ascribe another one. All of this is dependent on the ruler’s assessment to benefits, consequences, similar to current legal systems where the judge is given the discretion to apply minimum punishment, or maximum, or any other in between.
This opinion, ie judging stoning to be arbitrary, even though none of the 4 imams adopted it, but the stoning narration itself contains in it indications to this possibility. The quran had already dictated the original punishment of adultery by the verse:
“confine them (i.e. women) to houses until death comes to them or Allah ordains for them some (other) way.” Nisaa v.15
Later on the flogging punishment in surat Al Noor, and the Prophet pbuh declared it to his companions: Take from me, take from me; Allah has made a way for them. A virgin with a virgin the punishment is 100 flogging and one year in exile. Married with Married, is flogging 100 and stonning.
So as is clear, the Prophet pbuh has added the exile and stonning to the punishment declared in the quran. Most scholars considered the combination to be the complete indivisible punishment.
Hanafi school on the other hand considered the exile is not a part of the obligatory punishment, but an additional item that is at the ruler’s discretion. Similarily; stonning should also be considered an additional item.
Sheikh Zarqa also said that this opinion is also the opinion of Sheikh Mahmoud Shaltoot, the Sheikh of Azhar.
Even if we considered the above analysis not acceptable, there also should be a consideration to our times. If stoning is adopted today, it will open the doors of criticism that such a punishment is cruel and severe. We should not forget that the Prophet pbuh had adopted graduality in implementing rules. We today are in the era of scientific jahiliyyah and arrogance, along with proliferating atheism and islam-phobia that necessitates we transition wisely while implementing penal codes. It could be more advantageous today to limit the code to the flogging until another time when stoning could be re-instated whether as an integral part of the code, or a discretionary add-on.
'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura from Al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire. When the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: 'Do not drink alcoholic drinks.' people would have said, 'We will never leave alcoholic drinks,' and if there had been revealed, 'Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, 'they would have said, 'We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse. Bukhari
Sheikh Al Qaradawi said: I was alongside Sheikh Al Zarqa during the said conference, and together we listened to Sheikh Abou Zahra’s lecture and opinion on stoning that he kept secret for 20 years. I have debated the topic with Sheikh Abou Zahra and suggested to him the possibility of being an additional punishment, as the Hanafis said, but he refused this argument and said that stoning is in its origin a jewish punishment that got abrogated by the religion of mercy. I mentioned this response to Sheikh Zarqa, and he kind of liked it, and said was worthy of further consideration. I had written my opinion suggesting exiling and stoning being additional discretionary punishments, but I did not have the courage to publish it.
Ref: Fatawi Sh Mustafa Al Zarqah/compiled by Sh. Majd Makki/Frwd by Sh Y. Qaradawi
Disclaimer from ZAK: As compiler of this material, I don't necessarily agree or disagree with the topics noted. My primarily interest and goal is to open an educated discussion on important issues.
Last update July 13th, 2008
____________________________________________________________
