Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

According To Shia, Is Stoning Permissible?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salaam to all!

Often videos are presented online showing women being stoned for fornication/adultery. Some of these videos also claim to be from Iran.

My problem is I have always been under the impression that stoning as a punishment for such sins has no place is Shia schooling. Am i correct to assume that? I also took the understanding that the penalty for a proven case of fornication/adultery is strictly being lashed for a fixed prescribed amount of times as per the order of Quran.

If I am correct to "assume" the above, then why does Iran or other Muslim nations allow such punishments which are usually filmed on streets with masses of people either contributing or just forming an audience? If im incorrect in assuming the above, I would like for anyone to provide a detailed analysis with referenced proof, preferably from Quran and Ahlul Bayt.

Thanking you in Adv..

Edited by wazz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

It's permissible under Shia law, although I think there is some debate as to whether it's a punishment that should only be carried out in the presence of an infallible. It has been used in Iran, but I think they are considering dropping it, since in any case it is very hard to gather the required proof.

There are many other threads on this, such as this one: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

But bro im confused!!

Usually stoning is prescribed for fornication/adultery and in some cases apostasy (seemingly heard of). If the Quran explicitly dictates that the punishment for Zina is being lashed, then shouldn't we completely ignore hadith reports which contradict the divine book? After all isn't this the Shia and Sunni decisive rule, that accept any hadith which supports the Quran and throw any hadith which contradicts the Quran against the wall?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

But bro im confused!!

Usually stoning is prescribed for fornication/adultery and in some cases apostasy (seemingly heard of). If the Quran explicitly dictates that the punishment for Zina is being lashed, then shouldn't we completely ignore hadith reports which contradict the divine book? After all isn't this the Shia and Sunni decisive rule, that accept any hadith which supports the Quran and throw any hadith which contradicts the Quran against the wall?

I'm not an expert on this topic, but I think it's understood that the Quran is talking about fornicators in the verse on lashing, and not adulterers. Both Shias and Sunnis have hadith about verses on stoning adulterers that were revealed, but for various possible reasons didn't make it into the Quran we have today.

Someone with more knowledge will have to give you the details, but I think the main points are on the thread I gave a link to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not an expert on this topic, but I think it's understood that the Quran is talking about fornicators in the verse on lashing, and not adulterers. Both Shias and Sunnis have hadith about verses on stoning adulterers that were revealed, but for various possible reasons didn't make it into the Quran we have today.

Someone with more knowledge will have to give you the details, but I think the main points are on the thread I gave a link to.

Haider Husayn

You said"Both Shias and Sunnis have hadith about verses on stoning adulterers that were revealed, but for various possible reasons didn't make it into the Quran we have today."

Are you implying the Koran has changed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salaam to all!

Often videos are presented online showing women being stoned for fornication/adultery. Some of these videos also claim to be from Iran.

My problem is I have always been under the impression that stoning as a punishment for such sins has no place is Shia schooling. Am i correct to assume that? I also took the understanding that the penalty for a proven case of fornication/adultery is strictly being lashed for a fixed prescribed amount of times as per the order of Quran.

If I am correct to "assume" the above, then why does Iran or other Muslim nations allow such punishments which are usually filmed on streets with masses of people either contributing or just forming an audience? If im incorrect in assuming the above, I would like for anyone to provide a detailed analysis with referenced proof, preferably from Quran and Ahlul Bayt.

Thanking you in Adv..

Actually both Shia and Sunni schools have stoning. Such punishment are carried out in public so that others get discouraged and not carry out such sins.

WS

But bro im confused!!

Usually stoning is prescribed for fornication/adultery and in some cases apostasy (seemingly heard of). If the Quran explicitly dictates that the punishment for Zina is being lashed, then shouldn't we completely ignore hadith reports which contradict the divine book? After all isn't this the Shia and Sunni decisive rule, that accept any hadith which supports the Quran and throw any hadith which contradicts the Quran against the wall?

Laws are based not just on Quran but also Sunnah. If the Prophet (S) did something during his life its Sunnah and therefore its the law.

There is difference between simple Zina and adultery. Lashing is for those who are not married. Stoning is punishment for adultery, so such hadith would not contradict Quran.

WS

Haider Husayn

You said"Both Shias and Sunnis have hadith about verses on stoning adulterers that were revealed, but for various possible reasons didn't make it into the Quran we have today."

Are you implying the Koran has changed?

Quran is not changed.

There are some hadith is Sunni books from Umar that stoning verses were present that are not part of quran.

Shia reject all such hadith.

Edited by Orion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

Quran is not changed.

There are some hadith is Sunni books from Umar that stoning verses were present that are not part of quran.

Shia reject all such hadith.

Brother, I would suggest you pick up a Shee`ah hadeeth book for once and look at the MANY hadeeth we have, some of them being SaHeeH, that say the verse of rajm (stoning) was in the Qur'aan. Those same hadeeth is in Shee`ah books as well.

(salam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

Brother, I would suggest you pick up a Shee`ah hadeeth book for once and look at the MANY hadeeth we have, some of them being SaHeeH, that say the verse of rajm (stoning) was in the Qur'aan. Those same hadeeth is in Shee`ah books as well.

(salam)

(salam)

Any explanation as to why this verse what removed?

Is this an example of naskh ul-tilawat?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

Brother, I would suggest you pick up a Shee`ah hadeeth book for once and look at the MANY hadeeth we have, some of them being SaHeeH, that say the verse of rajm (stoning) was in the Qur'aan. Those same hadeeth is in Shee`ah books as well.

Shia books are collections of hadith of all kinds therefore having something in Shia books does not mean its correct. That is why we dont call al-Kafi, Sahih al-Kafi. Our scholars classify hadith and determine which are exceptable and which are not. Same is the case with Sunni books, thay claim that they are Sahih, but in fact they also have false hadith.

Also having many hadith does not mean its correct. Even one hadith could be correct.

Corruption in Quran (Tahreef) is a Akhbari belief that majority of Shia reject.

WS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

Yes, this is an example of that.

(salam)

??

http://www.al-islam.org/protection/

It needs no great intelligence to see that this theory of abrogation of recital cannot be of any use in such cases. If a surah or verse was recited in the life of the Prophet and then it was lost either because the reciters were killed in a battle, or because a goat devoured it or for any other reason, then the question arises: Who had the right to abrogate a Qur'anic verse after the Prophet's death? Had any other prophet come after Muhammad (peace be on him and his progeny)? That is why Sayyid al-Khu'i has said, "It is clear that the theory of abrogation of recital (naskhu 't-tilawah) is exactly the same as belief in alteration in and omission from the Qur'an."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Shia books are collections of hadith of all kinds therefore having something in Shia books does not mean its correct. That is why we dont call al-Kafi, Sahih al-Kafi. Our scholars classify hadith and determine which are exceptable and which are not. Same is the case with Sunni books, thay claim that they are Sahih, but in fact they also have false hadith.

Too bad Bahboodee disagreed with your philosophy, and titled his book, SaHeeH Al-Kaafee. Also, I suggest you to read the preface of Al-Kaafi, the scholars have suggested that Al-Kulayni thought that everything in his book was saheeh. Heck, read the preface of all of our kutub al-arba`, it seems like all of the scholars who have compiled those books thought that their books were SaHeeH.

Also having many hadith does not mean its correct. Even one hadith could be correct.

I don't think you can read properly. I also emphasized that many are SaHeeH.

Corruption in Quran (Tahreef) is a Akhbari belief that majority of Shia reject.

Once again with the baseless claims. Hoor Al-`Aamilee, an akhbaree, was one of the biggest proponents of the Qur'aan being 100% intact with verses in proper order and no taHreef. (his book Tawaatur al-Qur'aan). While Al-Tabarasee, considered an Usoolee, has a big book saying the Qur'aan has taHreef (his book FaSl Al-Kitaab).

It needs no great intelligence to see that this theory of abrogation of recital cannot be of any use in such cases. If a surah or verse was recited in the life of the Prophet and then it was lost either because the reciters were killed in a battle, or because a goat devoured it or for any other reason, then the question arises: Who had the right to abrogate a Qur'anic verse after the Prophet's death? Had any other prophet come after Muhammad (peace be on him and his progeny)? That is why Sayyid al-Khu'i has said, "It is clear that the theory of abrogation of recital (naskhu 't-tilawah) is exactly the same as belief in alteration in and omission from the Qur'an."

Unfortunately, our scholars are very "dishonest" sometimes. They make it seem as if these verses of rajm is NO WHERE found in the books of the Shee`ahs. When this is not the case at all. So what do you make of so much hadeeth regarding "stoning" in the our books, and MANY of them being SaHeeH?

P.S. - `Umar wasn't part of the chain of narrators, the narrators were our best of the best narrators.

(salam)

Edited by Nader Zaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

According to our hadeeth though, the stoning punishment is "suspended" until Imaam Mahdee (as) comes out of occultation. Here is the evidence for this narration (Taken from Kamaal Al-Deen).

و بهذا الإسناد عن أبان بن تغلب قال قال أبو عبد الله ع دمان في الإسلام حلال من الله عز و جل لا يقضي فيهما أحد بحكم الله حتى يبعث الله عز و جل القائم من أهل البيت ع فيحكم فيهما بحكم الله عز و جل لا يريد على ذلك بينة الزاني المحصن يرجمه و مانع الزكاة يضرب رقبته

The two bloods which in Islam are lawful from Allaah that no one shall give judgement in by the ruling of Allah until Allaah sends the Qaa'im from the Ahl Al-Bayt, so he shall rule in regards to them by the ruling Allaah without wanting evidence upon that: the "muHsin" fornicator he will stone and the preventer of zakat he will strike his neck.

  • Source:
  • Al-Sadooq, Kamaal Al-Deen, vol. 2, ch. 58, pg. 671, hadeeth # 21
  • Al-Barqee, Al-MaHaasin, vol. 1, ch. 11, pg. 87, hadeeth # 28
  • Al-Sadooq, Thawaab Al-A`maal, pg. 235

It says "bi-haadha al-isnaad", so that means the complete isnaad has already been mentioned previously. Here is the complete isnaad.

حدثنا محمد بن الحسن بن أحمد بن الوليد رضي الله عنه قال حدثنا محمد بن الحسن الصفار عن يعقوب بن يزيد عن محمد بن أبي عمير عن أبان بن عثمان عن أبان بن تغلب قال قال أبو عبد الله ع

^^ This isnaad is VERY SaHeeH. ^^

So basing it off of that. The answer to the OP question is...

"Yes, Stoning according to Shee`ah Islaam is 100% permissible, BUT the punishment has been "suspended" until Imaam Mahdee (as) comes out of occultation. Wallaahu `Alim"

(salam)

Edited by Nader Zaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

Too bad Bahboodee disagreed with your philosophy, and titled his book, SaHeeH Al-Kaafee. Also, I suggest you to read the preface of Al-Kaafi, the scholars have suggested that Al-Kulayni thought that everything in his book was saheeh. Heck, read the preface of all of our kutub al-arba`, it seems like all of the scholars who have compiled those books thought that their books were SaHeeH.

That was their opinion. We respect them, learn from them, and so on.......but we dont believe in everything they believed in. Their opinions and beliefs were for them and their followers. We follow the scholars of our era.

Once again with the baseless claims. Hoor Al-`Aamilee, an akhbaree, was one of the biggest proponents of the Qur'aan being 100% intact with verses in proper order and no taHreef. (his book Tawaatur al-Qur'aan). While Al-Tabarasee, considered an Usoolee, has a big book saying the Qur'aan has taHreef (his book FaSl Al-Kitaab).

I never said ALL Akhbari believe in tahreef. There are no Akhbaris on this board, what we lean about them is from some websites. But at least you will agree that some of those who claim to be Akhbaris believe in Tahreef.

Unfortunately, our scholars are very "dishonest" sometimes. They make it seem as if these verses of rajm is NO WHERE found in the books of the Shee`ahs. When this is not the case at all. So what do you make of so much hadeeth regarding "stoning" in the our books, and MANY of them being SaHeeH?

Again, by calling them "dishonest" you are being disrespectful of our scholars, which is against the rules of this board.

WS

Edited by Orion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

But i thought ZINA is the same for fornication and Adultery. I'm sure i read somewhere that there are 2 forms of Zina, one being fabrication and the other Adultery. I also read somewhere above that Stoning is only permissable with a Masoomeen present, since no Masomeen is present physically would't that make Stoning Void?

I spoke with someone regarding Stoning a few days ago and this person said Stoning was the old way to to stone sinners till death. It was still common amongst some of the hardliner ummayads and other tribal warlords. So it is possible the old traditions remained active after the Prophet (saw) and became traditionally acceptable?

Finally and most importanly did the Ahlul Bayt allow stoning adulterers? And if anyone knows what does Ayatollah Sistani have to say about this?

The problem is guys I work in Dubai with a british Christian and he raised this topic and showed me a video clip of how people were stoning a young girl. Eventually someone picked up a huge rock and smashed it against her head and killed her instantly. Just seeing that it didn't seem right. I know our personally opinions are void but sometimes things dont make sense and hence we force ourselves to ask Question. All in Good FAITH!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

I don't have a problem with stoning, as long as the only proof used to carry out the punishments is either 4 righteous witnesses, or an unretracted, uncoerced confession(with some other safeguards). Nothing else, not DNA, or any other modern methods. It should be obvious to anyone that under such strict conditions, only the most brazen people would be stoned for adultery. No one who isn't insane will confess either. And if they are insane, they can't be stoned.

In other words, it is a punishments that should hardly ever be carried out, but it's severity should make people stop and think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(salam)

(bismillah)

According to our hadeeth though, the stoning punishment is "suspended" until Imaam Mahdee (as) comes out of occultation. Here is the evidence for this narration (Taken from Kamaal Al-Deen).

æ ÈåÐÇ ÇáÅÓäÇÏ Úä ÃÈÇä Èä ÊÛáÈ ÞÇá ÞÇá ÃÈæ ÚÈÏ Çááå Ú ÏãÇä Ýí ÇáÅÓáÇã ÍáÇá ãä Çááå ÚÒ æ Ìá áÇ íÞÖí ÝíåãÇ ÃÍÏ ÈÍßã Çááå ÍÊì íÈÚË Çááå ÚÒ æ Ìá ÇáÞÇÆã ãä Ãåá ÇáÈíÊ Ú ÝíÍßã ÝíåãÇ ÈÍßã Çááå ÚÒ æ Ìá áÇ íÑíÏ Úáì Ðáß ÈíäÉ ÇáÒÇäí ÇáãÍÕä íÑÌãå æ ãÇäÚ ÇáÒßÇÉ íÖÑÈ ÑÞÈÊå

The two bloods which in Islam are lawful from Allaah that no one shall give judgement in by the ruling of Allah until Allaah sends the Qaa'im from the Ahl Al-Bayt, so he shall rule in regards to them by the ruling Allaah without wanting evidence upon that: the "muHsin" fornicator he will stone and the preventer of zakat he will strike his neck.

Source:Al-Sadooq, Kamaal Al-Deen, vol. 2, ch. 58, pg. 671, hadeeth # 21
Al-Barqee, Al-MaHaasin, vol. 1, ch. 11, pg. 87, hadeeth # 28
Al-Sadooq, Thawaab Al-A`maal, pg. 235

It says "bi-haadha al-isnaad", so that means the complete isnaad has already been mentioned previously. Here is the complete isnaad.

ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÃÍãÏ Èä ÇáæáíÏ ÑÖí Çááå Úäå ÞÇá ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÍÓä ÇáÕÝÇÑ Úä íÚÞæÈ Èä íÒíÏ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä ÃÈí ÚãíÑ Úä ÃÈÇä Èä ÚËãÇä Úä ÃÈÇä Èä ÊÛáÈ ÞÇá ÞÇá ÃÈæ ÚÈÏ Çááå Ú

^^ This isnaad is VERY SaHeeH. ^^

So basing it off of that. The answer to the OP question is...

"Yes, Stoning according to Shee`ah Islaam is 100% permissible, BUT the punishment has been "suspended" until Imaam Mahdee (as) comes out of occultation. Wallaahu `Alim"

(salam)

But why is it carried out in Iran,then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The problem is guys I work in Dubai with a british Christian and he raised this topic and showed me a video clip of how people were stoning a young girl. Eventually someone picked up a huge rock and smashed it against her head and killed her instantly. Just seeing that it didn't seem right. I know our personally opinions are void but sometimes things dont make sense and hence we force ourselves to ask Question. All in Good FAITH!!!!

(bismillah)

Show him the following verses from the Bible:

If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father's house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father's house. You must purge the evil from among you. (Bible, Deuteronomy 22:20-21)

And If a Sunni asks you here is stoning from Sunni book Sahih Bukhari:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

A man came to Allah's Apostle while he was in the mosque, and he called him, saying, "O Allah's Apostle! I have committed illegal sexual intercourse.'" The Prophet turned his face to the other side, but that man repeated his statement four times, and after he bore witness against himself four times, the Prophet called him, saying, "Are you mad?" The man said, "No." The Prophet said, "Are you married?" The man said, "Yes." Then the Prophet said, 'Take him away and stone him to death." Jabir bin `Abdullah said: I was among the ones who participated in stoning him and we stoned him at the Musalla. When the stones troubled him, he fled, but we over took him at Al-Harra and stoned him to death. (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, 8.806)

WS

But why is it carried out in Iran,then?

(bismillah)

Because there must be other evidence regarding stoning. Ayatullah Dastaghaib Shirazi writes:

If the person is sane, major, and legally married, and has a wife with whom he could establish sexual relation whenever he wants, and in spite of this he commits fornication with another sane, mature woman, he has to be stoned to death according to the Islamic law. And according to some Mujtahids, he must first be given a hundred lashes. (Book Greater Sins by Ayatullah Abdul Husayn Dastaghaib Shirazi, Chapter 12-Fornication)

http://www.al-islam....complete/15.htm

WS

Edited by Orion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Too bad Bahboodee disagreed with your philosophy, and titled his book, SaHeeH Al-Kaafee.

He just meant that these were the hadeeths that were saheeh in al kafi according to him. Although this is off topic, his work was terrible. Half the time I think he was grading the hadeeths as saheeh or not based on his own personal views, with out even looking at the isnad, he would also grade hadeeths with the same isnad saheeh some times and weak other times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

He just meant that these were the hadeeths that were saheeh in al kafi according to him. Although this is off topic, his work was terrible. Half the time I think he was grading the hadeeths as saheeh or not based on his own personal views, with out even looking at the isnad, he would also grade hadeeths with the same isnad saheeh some times and weak other times.

Yes, no doubt. I personally don't rely on Bahboodee's work because there are many contradictions. I just wanted to show that we have scholars who call their books "SaHeeH" as well.

But why is it carried out in Iran,then?

Because Iran doesn't follow Islaam 100%.

(salam)

Edited by Nader Zaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Brother Orion, that was a fantastic reply. Surely a good ticker to relieve the often suggested barbarity of Islam by the non-believers (usually Christians). I can't believe i didn't think of checking the bible sources online hehe

So stoning seems to a Christian remedy too lol....My Christian colleague is certainly gonna be GOBSMACKED!!!!!

Greatly appreciated!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Because Iran doesn't follow Islaam 100%.

(bismillah)

Nader Zaveri, you claim Quran is corrupted and think you follow Islam 100%???????

Iran tries its best to implement Islamic laws. The punishments are as per fatwa of Shia scholars.

WS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

Nader Zaveri, you claim Quran is corrupted and think you follow Islam 100%???????

At what point did I claim that the Qur'aan has undergone some sort of "taHreef"? I have never done such a thing. I just bring out hadeeth to show our shee`ahs so when an salafee / sunnee comes up and brings these aHaadeeth from our books, it wouldn't hit them like a "ton of bricks". they would've seen these narrations before. And not be ignorant of them.

(salam)

Edited by Nader Zaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

At what point did I claim that the Qur'aan has undergone some sort of "taHreef"? I have never done such a thing. I just bring out hadeeth to show our shee`ahs so when an salafee / sunnee comes up and brings these aHaadeeth from our books, it wouldn't hit them like a "ton of bricks". they would've seen these narrations before. And not be ignorant of them.

I am happy to know that.

But how do you explain things that you have said, like:

Brother, I would suggest you pick up a Shee`ah hadeeth book for once and look at the MANY hadeeth we have, some of them being SaHeeH, that say the verse of rajm (stoning) was in the Qur'aan. Those same hadeeth is in Shee`ah books as well.

How could these hadith be Sahih?

and when you were asked about naskh ul-tilawat, you said:

Yes, this is an example of that.

Please explain.

WS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Orion

You said:

"Actually both Shia and Sunni schools have stoning. Such punishment are carried out in public so that others get discouraged and not carry out such sins"

The punishment hasn't been very effective has it? You can't change morality with criminal law, never have and never will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

But why is it carried out in Iran,then?

I believe they have taken the Wilayat ul-Faqih concept a little too far and now they are implying the Wilayat-ul-Faqih has the "equivalent" right to implement such rulings as our 12 Imam.

Complete and utter non-sense.

The people are turning him into an infallible almost and people treat him as such.

I know ghuluw (exaggerators) existed at the time of the Imams because they did some amazing stuff. No doubt. But nonetheless the ghuluw (exaggerators) were cursed by the Imams themselves.

But how can people today be ghuluw towards fallible people. Very illogical!

In my local masjid here in Houston, Texas they act like you have exited the fold of Islam and are a Kafir if you don't agree with the concept of Wilayat-ul-Faqih.

My masjid kicked out an excellent guess A'lim speaker for the reason that he wouldn't testify to the belief in Welayat-ul-Faqih. (Like as if he needed to testify like its the shahada) This A'lim had Supreme Akhlaaq, Knowledge and Speaking Power and he brought out the youth and got them interested in loving in Islaam again. He established a furvor for the religion in the youth that no other A'lim has ever been able to do.

This Welayat-ul-Faqih has been a great Fitnah in my community and has divided the community greatly!

Enought with my rant. Good Post Nader Zaveri on the sources from our Shee'ah books.

Man if our Shee'ahs today understood the value of Unity they wouldn't startup Fitnah like this.

Always remember this before you try to start division with our own Shee'ah or with our Sunni Brothers and Sisters. "My Imam (Ali (as)) had his divinely appointed right usurped from him, but he still mained Unity for the safety of our religion. If Imam Ali (as) maintained Unity who the hell am I compared to the Imam to do something different." - Zeshan Zaveri.

I think I should put this quote in my signature if I had the option of adding a signature.

Edited by zzaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe they have taken the Wilayat ul-Faqih concept a little too far and now they are implying the Wilayat-ul-Faqih has the "equivalent" right to implement such rulings as our 12 Imam.

Complete and utter non-sense.

The people are turning him into an infallible almost and people treat him as such.

I know ghuluw (exaggerators) existed at the time of the Imams because they did some amazing stuff. No doubt. But nonetheless the ghuluw (exaggerators) were cursed by the Imams themselves.

But how can people today be ghuluw towards fallible people. Very illogical!

In my local masjid here in Houston, Texas they act like you have exited the fold of Islam and are a Kafir if you don't agree with the concept of Wilayat-ul-Faqih.

My masjid kicked out an excellent guess A'lim speaker for the reason that he wouldn't testify to the belief in Welayat-ul-Faqih. (Like as if he needed to testify like its the shahada) This A'lim had Supreme Akhlaaq, Knowledge and Speaking Power and he brought out the youth and got them interested in loving in Islaam again. He established a furvor for the religion in the youth that no other A'lim has ever been able to do.

This Welayat-ul-Faqih has been a great Fitnah in my community and has divided the community greatly!

Enought with my rant. Good Post Nader Zaveri on the sources from our Shee'ah books.

Man if our Shee'ahs today understood the value of Unity they wouldn't startup Fitnah like this.

Always remember this before you try to start division with our own Shee'ah or with our Sunni Brothers and Sisters. "My Imam (Ali (as)) had his divinely appointed right usurped from him, but he still mained Unity for the safety of our religion. If Imam Ali (as) maintained Unity who the hell am I compared to the Imam to do something different." - Zeshan Zaveri.

I think I should put this quote in my signature if I had the option of adding a signature.

Thanks for the clarifying answer.Indeed i suspected it was because Iran follows the doctrine of Wilayat ul-Faqih.But as it is a controversial issue,how is it possible that people like in your mosque,actually have to believe in it otherwise they are kicked out?Afaik many scholars are against Wilayat ul-Faqih....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Thanks for the clarifying answer.Indeed i suspected it was because Iran follows the doctrine of Wilayat ul-Faqih.But as it is a controversial issue,how is it possible that people like in your mosque,actually have to believe in it otherwise they are kicked out?Afaik many scholars are against Wilayat ul-Faqih....

Its strictly politics bro! What they don't understand is that no practicing Shia will ever hate the Islamic Republic of Iran but they are trying to force this belief on people even thought a lot of the Major Scholars have a difference of opinion on this subject as well. I am only speculating but I believe they think that if you don't believe in Walayat-ul-Faqih you are against the Islamic Republic or have disdain for it to some degree.

Just because I don't agree with the concept of Walayat-ul-Faqih doesn't mean I want the Islamic Republic of Iran to topple and majority of the others share the same view who have this similar belief as myself.

Edited by zzaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Orion

You said:

"Actually both Shia and Sunni schools have stoning. Such punishment are carried out in public so that others get discouraged and not carry out such sins"

The punishment hasn't been very effective has it? You can't change morality with criminal law, never have and never will.

It hasn't been practiced long enough. Therefore, you cant say it is not effective.

Its strictly politics bro! What they don't understand is that no practicing Shia will ever hate the Islamic Republic of Iran but they are trying to force this belief on people even thought a lot of the Major Scholars have a difference of opinion on this subject as well. I am only speculating but I believe they think that if you don't believe in Walayat-ul-Faqih you are against the Islamic Republic or have disdain for it to some degree.

Just because I don't agree with the concept of Walayat-ul-Faqih doesn't mean I want the Islamic Republic of Iran to topple and majority of the others share the same view who have this similar belief as myself.

(bismillah)

Br. zzaveri,

My understanding is that all eminent Marjas today believe in Walayat-ul-Faqih. The difference is in the finer details like how much authority WF has, weather there should be one WF or a council of scholars, etc. If you have any fatwa against Walayat-ul-Faqih please share it with me.

And therefore, if someone rejects the concept altogether, it means he is misguided. How can you except a misguided person to guide others.

WS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

According to our hadeeth though, the stoning punishment is "suspended" until Imaam Mahdee (as) comes out of occultation. Here is the evidence for this narration (Taken from Kamaal Al-Deen).

و بهذا الإسناد عن أبان بن تغلب قال قال أبو عبد الله ع دمان في الإسلام حلال من الله عز و جل لا يقضي فيهما أحد بحكم الله حتى يبعث الله عز و جل القائم من أهل البيت ع فيحكم فيهما بحكم الله عز و جل لا يريد على ذلك بينة الزاني المحصن يرجمه و مانع الزكاة يضرب رقبته

The two bloods which in Islam are lawful from Allaah that no one shall give judgement in by the ruling of Allah until Allaah sends the Qaa'im from the Ahl Al-Bayt, so he shall rule in regards to them by the ruling Allaah without wanting evidence upon that: the "muHsin" fornicator he will stone and the preventer of zakat he will strike his neck.

(salam)

(wasalam)

If you read the bolded, the hadith can be interpreted that none will be able to rule like Imam (as) as only he has the power to judge without evidence and this it being a true rule of Allah ie flawless. Besides, we have Imam Ali (as) having stoned people, so the punishment isn't only applicable in our Imams time. So the fact that he hadith mentions no one shall give judgement until Qaim's government is true in the sense that he is the only one that will not need evidence to decree punishments. And God knows best.

Edited by Ya Baqiyatullah (aj)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

And therefore, if someone rejects the concept altogether, it means he is misguided. How can you except a misguided person to guide others.

WS

Is there any fatwa out there from the scholars that if you outright reject concept of Walayat-ul-Faqih you are outright misguided?

It almosts sounds like they are making this concept into a part of aqaaid (principle beliefs)

Last time I checked our Aqaaid is the Usool-ad-Deen unless you are claiming that the Walayat-ul-Faqih is an extention of Imamat (Where is the Quranic reference / Hadith that this concept is a part of belief)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Is there any fatwa out there from the scholars that if you outright reject concept of Walayat-ul-Faqih you are outright misguided?

It almosts sounds like they are making this concept into a part of aqaaid (principle beliefs)

Last time I checked our Aqaaid is the Usool-ad-Deen unless you are claiming that the Walayat-ul-Faqih is an extention of Imamat (Where is the Quranic reference / Hadith that this concept is a part of belief)?

(bismillah)

Walayat-ul-Fhaqi is not an extension of Imamat but it is a continuation of Wilayat.

Wilayat menas guardianship and Faqih means a qualified jurist. So WF in its basic form means guardianship of qualified jurists. In other words being the general representatives of our Imam (ATF), Fuqha of our time are our guardians. This is a basic Shia belief. We follow Maraja and consider their verdicts to be followable because of this belief.

When a qualified faqih issues a fatwa, fulfilling all required conditions, it becomes obligatory upon the concerned people to follow it. This is Wilayat of the Fuqha. Fuqha are hujjat upon us, Imam (ATF) is hujjat upon the scholars and Allah is hujjat upon the Imam (ATF). This is the chain of Wilayat.

If we expand this we will see that the scope of this concept is not just related to personal matters like prayers, fasting and hajj. It also covers political issues like running an Islamic government, general affairs of the Muslims, etc.

Anyone who denies the authority of a qualified scholars therefore would be misguided.

Here is the answer from Ayatullah Sistani which makes it even more clearer:

Question: What is Grand Ayatollah Sistani's opinion about Wilayat-e Faqih (governance of jurist)?

Answer: Every jurisprudent (Faqih) has wilayah (guardianship) over non-litigious affairs. Non-litigious affairs are called "al-omour al-hesbiah". As for general affairs to which social order is linked, wilayah of a Faqih and enforcement of wilayah depend on certain conditions one of which is popularity of Faqih among majority of momeneen.

http://www.sistani.org/local.php?modules=nav&nid=5&cid=485&hl=Faqih

------------------

WS

Edited by Orion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Orion:

"It hasn't been practiced long enough. Therefore, you cant say it is not effective."

Say what? What do you want to give it another 1,000 years or so? I think 1400 years is plenty of time.

I asked this before and got no answers perhaps you can help me. What kind of crimes carried sentences in prison under Sharia Law? What kind of prison system did they have when Sharia was the law of the land say 1,000 years ago or were all punishments barbaric?

Edited by blister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

Orion:

"It hasn't been practiced long enough. Therefore, you cant say it is not effective."

Say what? What do you want to give it another 1,000 years or so? I think 1400 years is plenty of time.

But Islamic punishments have not been implemented for all 1400 years. Let the system work for a few years and you will feel the difference.

I asked this before and got no answers perhaps you can help me. What kind of crimes carried sentences in prison under Sharia Law? What kind of prison system did they have when Sharia was the law of the land say 1,000 years ago or were all punishments barbaric?

Sorry, I don't know.

WS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...