Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Maryaam

Woman Sentenced For Apostasy And Adultery

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Do you remember, dear sister, that you picked up a few ahadith in their English translated form a while back and try to argue, with your oh-so-many qualifications, that hijab isn't wajib and that all our scholars for the past millennium were nutters following their own whims and culture? Now you tell me if that wasn't arrogant of you. That, if it was truly your stance, my dear sister, would be your Islam derived from conjecture and ra`y (your own opinion) and not true Islam, as defined, in this period of occultation, by our scholars whom you seem to love to belittle (for no apparent reason other than you don't like what they have to say) without second thought.

 

 

Are you insane? theyre your words entirely and nothing to do with me. When ever ive discussed hijab on here ive expalined any issues i have with some of the traditional or conservative approaches. It has nothing to do with arrogance, its to do with looking at the evidence and finding clear problems with how the subject is traditionally treated and I know enough about the effects that culture has on the development of religions to know that the issues i find are legitimate and reasonble concerns. My major issue on that thread was people attitudes, as most peoples was, as i remember. How petty of you to to manipulate that discussion into something it wasnt in order to personally attack me on this thread. If i was feeling paranoid i'd suspect you were leaping on the first opportunity you could find. Get a life.

 

 

 

 

I'm just using your own words dear sister. When I said, in the other thread, that to find out what Islam prescribes, one must refer to the scholars. You said 'it is their Islam'.

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235022777-sayed-modarresi-slams-the-tattoo-wearing-dudes/page-2#entry2705191

 

If you feel these words that I have repeated from you are arrogant, then you may have some work to do on yourself.

The Islam when he (aj) returns will be according to Sharia (albeit with alterations). The Sharia states that the punishment for public apostasy in an Islamic state is death, but it can only be implemented by a ma'soom. I can imagine you'd be one of the people to criticize the Imam (aj) or even go against him because you disagree with this particular aspect of the Sharia.

 

I dont think we need to pretend you consider me you 'dear sister' do we? if that was so you wouldnt go around suggesting i'd used words like 'nutter' to describe scholars. if you can get by without the passive aggression it might help the unfortunate impression you impart. You seem to think you know what i meant when i said 'their religion'. If you'd asked nicely i could have explained what i meant, but youve chosen to assume (youre really good at that i notice) and i don like your nasty methods, so i think it best we leave it at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad to see personal opinions take precedence when

Allah has perfected the religion and prophet made halal to remain halal and haram to remain haram till the end of this world.

This craving to shape and present religion which looks comfortable to us is sign of lack of knowledge.

We ponder enough on how a law looks cruel and do not consider that One who formulated it in first place is All Wise, All Knowing, Most Merciful and Just.

And yes it applies to all commandments of Allah.

With regards to application, we will all be witness that to see Islamic countries, leaders, democracies, anarchist nations and all and sundry madhabs fail at applying lot of these judgements till they realize that why Allah appointed Imams divinely and how elections and nominations failed miserably by some who thought their 'concern' for ummah and their personal opinion was better than what Allah decreed or maybe they thought it's something Allah left undecided for intelligent companions.

May Allah strengthen our faiths and help us look beyond our personal limited knowledge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bedazzle, (salam)

 

Because it is used to ridicule Islam, and "tabloid" is the primary media style.

 

And it is used to avoid really more important events like the "Shangri-La Dialogue"

Ok, so then why is it discussed in THIS Muslim forum...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sigh the apotasy rule is one massive danger.

 

How? Wahhabi's consider us kaffir. If a shia goes from wahhabism to shiism, they are apostates, they are to be killed!

 

Many shias who say there are Imams a.s or perhaps that Abu Bakr Umar and Uthman were usurpers are considered kaffirs after expressing these beliefs by a number of groups - again apostates! To be killed.

 

Can you not see many of us have different versions of Islam, some call the other apostate?

 

What if a christian became a wahabbi thinking it was right - no idea of sunni shia- then woops, they think wow, whabbism isn't right...and leave it. Death to them they are apostate! They only have how many days to repent? Is that enough a logical number of days to do fair research?

 

It makes no sense, divine law , rule or not. Therefore i conclude the only way Apotasy can be punishable in my own personal view is if you have an Imam a.s who is alive, i.e Imam Mahdi a.s who rules the world, the Ummah, and where there is nothing but truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No there is no compulsion in religion according to Qur'an. The punishment for apostasy should have nothing to do with faith but rather with treason against the Islamic state. There is a difference. Otherwise we are.just.forcing people to remain Muslim.

Punishment of those born into Islam for leaving it makes no sense. They did not make a choice.

 

I never got why I, for example, should be punished for leaving a religion I never chose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

_76493025_apo.jpg

 

Congratulations to Muslims of Sudan for making a monkey of themselves. Now this nobody woman managed to get international fame, Islam got another reason for bad press, and Muslims gave the world more reasons to laugh at them, and this woman just like countless others who are hunted down in their own petty countries has now sought and found refuge in the glorious West for no_good_reason.

 

A Sudanese woman who fled to Italy after being spared a death sentence for renouncing Islam has met the Pope.

 

Meriam Yahia Ibrahim Ishag flew to Rome with her family after more than a month in the US embassy in Khartoum.

 

There was global condemnation when she was sentenced to hang for apostasy by a Sudanese court.

 

Mrs Ibrahim's father is Muslim so according to Sudan's version of Islamic law she is also Muslim and cannot convert.

 

She was raised by her Christian mother and says she has never been Muslim.

 

Welcoming her at the airport, Italy's Prime Minister Matteo Renzi said: "Today is a day of celebration."

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28460383

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May God protect her and her family and curse the tyrants and oppressors.

 

I am glad she is safe now, and I don't care who brought it about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly sure where people are getting "Only imam Mahdi has the right to execute this and that law" from. 

 

So bascially what you guys are saying is that Allah made a set of laws for mankind, then decided that some of them should and could be executed by a Jurist, but some can't because they can only be executed by Imam Mahdi?

 

If I'm understanding this right, those laws that you claim are to be executed by Imam Mahdi only, are just tossed aside for God knows how many years until he comes back, and in the mean while we just make up our own laws? Or are you saying that there is a hadith out there that says: "Dudes, if your imam isnt there, do this instead?"

And if we aren't supposed to execute these laws without Imam Mahdi present, the other option is Jail right? So basically someone rapes someone, kills her, decides to maybe kill her children too while he is at it. Blows up a church and a couple of mosques and since Imam Mahdi isn't here, we put him to jail. In jail, we must feed him right, keep him warm, give him medicine when he gets sick. Who is going to pay for this? 

 

I'm just curious, can someone please give some proper references on where you are getting this stuff from? I'm not interested in your opinions. I want a proper academic approach to this since people seem so certain about what they are saying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly sure where people are getting "Only imam Mahdi has the right to execute this and that law" from. 

 

So bascially what you guys are saying is that Allah made a set of laws for mankind, then decided that some of them should and could be executed by a Jurist, but some can't because they can only be executed by Imam Mahdi?

 

If I'm understanding this right, those laws that you claim are to be executed by Imam Mahdi only, are just tossed aside for God knows how many years until he comes back, and in the mean while we just make up our own laws? Or are you saying that there is a hadith out there that says: "Dudes, if your imam isnt there, do this instead?"

And if we aren't supposed to execute these laws without Imam Mahdi present, the other option is Jail right? So basically someone rapes someone, kills her, decides to maybe kill her children too while he is at it. Blows up a church and a couple of mosques and since Imam Mahdi isn't here, we put him to jail. In jail, we must feed him right, keep him warm, give him medicine when he gets sick. Who is going to pay for this? 

 

I'm just curious, can someone please give some proper references on where you are getting this stuff from? I'm not interested in your opinions. I want a proper academic approach to this since people seem so certain about what they are saying. 

"Only imam Mahdi has the right to execute this and that law"

 

Many say this only because they don't like the shariah penalty. 

Unfortunately there are shia  who argue that we can't even establish an Islamic state today without the imam. 

 

So , t  if the Shia are the majority (as in Iran, etc.), we should  rather prefer secular laws (!!),  than Shariah .

 

In other words: We should just cry and pray , and of course do taqlid to the secularist( the hudhud is suspended, so then we should follow the western countries)  .Under no circumstances should  we implement God's rules.

 

:no:

Edited by Nima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with stoning and other punishments, but I have doubts that the proper conditions are always followed. When you think about how hard it is to get the proper evidence to be able to stone someone for adultery, I don't understand how it is that some countries apparently stone people for adultery on a relatively frequent basis. I am also 100% against any attempts to 'modernise' the methods of proof, by for example using DNA or camera footage. The conditions were meant to be difficult to apply, and in the Prophet (pbuh) discouraged people from confessing to adultery, so we shouldn't be trying to make things any easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because many scholars believe that only Imaam al-Mahdi (a.j.f) has the right to establish Sharee'ah on Earth.

 

Can you name the scholars? 

Edited by Nima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly sure where people are getting "Only imam Mahdi has the right to execute this and that law" from. 

 

So bascially what you guys are saying is that Allah made a set of laws for mankind, then decided that some of them should and could be executed by a Jurist, but some can't because they can only be executed by Imam Mahdi?

 

If I'm understanding this right, those laws that you claim are to be executed by Imam Mahdi only, are just tossed aside for God knows how many years until he comes back, and in the mean while we just make up our own laws? Or are you saying that there is a hadith out there that says: "Dudes, if your imam isnt there, do this instead?"

 

This is invalid reasoning because the waging of an offensive Jihad is one example of a Fiqhi issue that must only be executed by a M'asum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The non-WF scholars

Puff..

 

Like Sayyid al khoei( who is against islamic government based on WF)

 

From his risalah:

Punishment Prescribed For Certain Sins

2795. If a free man commits adultery he should be whipped one hundred times, and if he commits adultery thrice and is whipped one hundred times on each occasion, he should be killed, if he commits adultery for the fourth time. If a person has a permanent wife or a slave girl, and has had sexual intercourse with her in the state of being adult, sane and free, and on have sexual intercourse with her any time he likes, and in spite of that he commits adultery with a woman, who is adult and sane, he should be stoned to death.

 

2747. If an adult and sane person commits sodomy with another adult and sane person, both of them should be killed. And the religious Head can kill the person guilty of sodomy with a sword, or bum him alive, or tie his hands and feet and hurl him down from a high place, and under the conditions mentioned in Article 2795 can lapidate him.

 

2799. If a child kills his father or mother intentionally, he should be killed, and if a father kills his child intentionally he should pay diyah (blood-money) in accordance with the orders which will be related later and should be beaten as much as the Religious Head may deem fit.

 

http://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/punishment-prescribed-certain-sins

 

Not the  imam, but a just "religious head" 

Edited by Nima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2799. If a child kills his father or mother intentionally, he should be killed, and if a father kills his child intentionally he should pay diyah (blood-money) in accordance with the orders which will be related later and should be beaten as much as the Religious Head may deem fit.

This is insanity. Is the child's context not even taken into account? Is the age factored into the judgment? What if his or her father is abusive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Puff..

 

Like Sayyid al khoei( who is against islamic government based on WF)

 

From his risalah:

Punishment Prescribed For Certain Sins

2795. If a free man commits adultery he should be whipped one hundred times, and if he commits adultery thrice and is whipped one hundred times on each occasion, he should be killed, if he commits adultery for the fourth time. If a person has a permanent wife or a slave girl, and has had sexual intercourse with her in the state of being adult, sane and free, and on have sexual intercourse with her any time he likes, and in spite of that he commits adultery with a woman, who is adult and sane, he should be stoned to death.

 

2747. If an adult and sane person commits sodomy with another adult and sane person, both of them should be killed. And the religious Head can kill the person guilty of sodomy with a sword, or bum him alive, or tie his hands and feet and hurl him down from a high place, and under the conditions mentioned in Article 2795 can lapidate him.

 

2799. If a child kills his father or mother intentionally, he should be killed, and if a father kills his child intentionally he should pay diyah (blood-money) in accordance with the orders which will be related later and should be beaten as much as the Religious Head may deem fit.

 

http://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/punishment-prescribed-certain-sins

 

Not the  imam, but a just "religious head"

What does his emminence say about apostasy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is invalid reasoning because the waging of an offensive Jihad is one example of a Fiqhi issue that must only be executed by a M'asum.

 

Invalid based on what? You just said nothing but your opinion. If it's not your opinion but based on facts, i would like to see them. 

What does his emminence say about apostasy?

Does it matter? Your "Anti-WF scholar" theory went flying out the window.

 

Point still stands, how are we choosing which sharia law is only for Imam Mahdi to execute and which isn't? Based on what article of faith have some people or some scholars come to this conclusion? The whole concept of some laws which were given to mankind as a whole is suddenly only valid if Imam Mahdi is here seems odd to me. 

 

That being said, let us assume Imam Mahdi is here. Is he going to be busy in court all day holding trials for criminals? There are over 6 billion people in the world now, that is a whole lot of criminal cases. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not exactly sure where people are getting "Only imam Mahdi has the right to execute this and that law" from. 

 

Invalid based on what? You just said nothing but your opinion. If it's not your opinion but based on facts, i would like to see them. 

Waging offensive Jihad, which falls under one of our laws,  is only executed by a Ma'sum, and hence, to argue against the position that Imam Mahdi has the only right to execute certain laws is invalid. This is agreed by almost every Marja'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Invalid based on what? You just said nothing but your opinion. If it's not your opinion but based on facts, i would like to see them. 

Does it matter? Your "Anti-WF scholar" theory went flying out the window.

 

Point still stands, how are we choosing which sharia law is only for Imam Mahdi to execute and which isn't? Based on what article of faith have some people or some scholars come to this conclusion? The whole concept of some laws which were given to mankind as a whole is suddenly only valid if Imam Mahdi is here seems odd to me. 

 

That being said, let us assume Imam Mahdi is here. Is he going to be busy in court all day holding trials for criminals? There are over 6 billion people in the world now, that is a whole lot of criminal cases.

Because Sayyed al-Khu`i (r.a) was the only non-WF scholar to exist right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Sayyed al-Khu`i (r.a) was the only non-WF scholar to exist right?

 

So you meant to say "some scholars", i see. How about admitting you were wrong.....for once? 

 

 

Waging offensive Jihad, which falls under one of our laws,  is only executed by a Ma'sum, and hence, to argue against the position that Imam Mahdi has the only right to execute certain laws is invalid. This is agreed by almost every Marja'.

 

Again, you are just saying things without providing any evidence. And what on earth is an offensive jihad? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not wrong though. I said "scholars" and didn't specifically name one.

 

Of course......what was i expecting.......

 

"The non-WF scholars" -What you said

 

vs

 

"Some non-WF scholars"

 

or even better

 

"Some scholars"

 

But you definitely didn't mean all non-WF scholars right? And of course you didn't intend on saying only WF scholars are for this rule while other scholars aren't?  I'm just being silly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, you are just saying things without providing any evidence. And what on earth is an offensive jihad? 

 

السؤال: هل الجهاد في سبيل الله واجب ؟

 

الجواب: الجهاد مع المعصوم (عليه السلام) أو نائبه الخاص واجب وهو حكم شرعي

 

Question: Is Jihad on the path of Allah obligatory(Wajib)?

 

Answer: Jihad under the Ma'sum or his special representative(Naib) is obligatory and is a Shar'i ruling.

 

http://www.sistani.org/arabic/qa/0429/

 

This means that only a Ma'sum or his appointed representative are reserved to declare the Jihad that is obligatory upon every Muslim and no one else is. Also, the Jihad Al-Kifai(which is not obligatory upon every Mumin) like the one that the Sayed recently declared does not apply to this case.

 

Also discussed here: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234937434-is-offensive-jihad-permitted-in-islam/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly sure where people are getting "Only imam Mahdi has the right to execute this and that law" from. 

 

So bascially what you guys are saying is that Allah made a set of laws for mankind, then decided that some of them should and could be executed by a Jurist, but some can't because they can only be executed by Imam Mahdi?

 

If I'm understanding this right, those laws that you claim are to be executed by Imam Mahdi only, are just tossed aside for God knows how many years until he comes back, and in the mean while we just make up our own laws? Or are you saying that there is a hadith out there that says: "Dudes, if your imam isnt there, do this instead?"

And if we aren't supposed to execute these laws without Imam Mahdi present, the other option is Jail right? So basically someone rapes someone, kills her, decides to maybe kill her children too while he is at it. Blows up a church and a couple of mosques and since Imam Mahdi isn't here, we put him to jail. In jail, we must feed him right, keep him warm, give him medicine when he gets sick. Who is going to pay for this? 

 

I'm just curious, can someone please give some proper references on where you are getting this stuff from? I'm not interested in your opinions. I want a proper academic approach to this since people seem so certain about what they are saying. 

 

First we have to look at the institution of infallibly-led Imamate itself; the issue of jurisprudential laws comes much later.

 

Imamate is the fundamental of tenets on which Shia faith rests: an Imam needed for all times, the world can't exist without an Imam and like sentences we hear very often in our religious sermons. However, come to think of it, hasn't God just tossed aide the whole concept of Imamate only after allowing the believers to practice it for circa 250 years (a tiny, miniscule, inconsequential period of time in the light of thousands more years to come) and let the billions upon billions of masses that came after the disappearance of the last Imam to be without an active Imam, to grope in darkness, to remain dependent on whatever sources that have reached down them? In brief, considering it logically, the very concept an Imam's obligatory existence among the believers has been made redundant by the as yet 1200 years or so of paused Imamate.

 

So, in the meantime, when there's no Imam, what becomes of the laws whose execution depends entirely on the presence of an Imam actively holding state power, the last example of which we saw in the six months of Imam Hassan (a.s) government? Offensive Jihad (for want of better word) is one, other matters deal with regulating God's rights on peoples (like the matter of faith and non-faith, which obviously belongs to huqooq Allah).

 

Those laws, or rather those laws that set down punishments of certain acts and deeds, which are under the radar in our discussion only make up 1-2% of total Islamic jurisprudence, even less, and their execution has little or no bearing on the practice of Islam of the masses. Why should I fret about those things and not worry about following the rest of the 98% that relates to fasting, praying, giving charity, being kind, helping others, giving zakat and khums, avoiding alcohol, out-of-wedlock sex, lying, murder, cheating, abuse of position of authority etc. In short, Imam present or not, all that makes us Muslims is there to be followed and acted upon. And therefore whether or not an inherently unjust government hangs an apostate is not something my faith depends on does it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People don't seem to realize the idea of only an infallible Imam implementing the hudud was a valid viewpoint in the past; Allama Al-Hilli mentioned it centuries ago.

 

However, it seems in the 21st century shias are taking up this viewpoint only out of disdain for the sharia as a whole, not just the hudud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

السؤال: هل الجهاد في سبيل الله واجب ؟

 

الجواب: الجهاد مع المعصوم (عليه السلام) أو نائبه الخاص واجب وهو حكم شرعي

 

Question: Is Jihad on the path of Allah obligatory(Wajib)?

 

Answer: Jihad under the Ma'sum or his special representative(Naib) is obligatory and is a Shar'i ruling.

 

http://www.sistani.org/arabic/qa/0429/

 

This means that only a Ma'sum or his appointed representative are reserved to declare the Jihad that is obligatory upon every Muslim and no one else is. Also, the Jihad Al-Kifai(which is not obligatory upon every Mumin) like the one that the Sayed recently declared does not apply to this case.

 

Also discussed here: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234937434-is-offensive-jihad-permitted-in-islam/

 

 

Yes, this is what i wanted to see. See it's much better when things get academic. The Naib part is where the difference between scholars are i believe. 

First we have to look at the institution of infallibly-led Imamate itself; the issue of jurisprudential laws comes much later.

 

Imamate is the fundamental of tenets on which Shia faith rests: an Imam needed for all times, the world can't exist without an Imam and like sentences we hear very often in our religious sermons. However, come to think of it, hasn't God just tossed aide the whole concept of Imamate only after allowing the believers to practice it for circa 250 years (a tiny, miniscule, inconsequential period of time in the light of thousands more years to come) and let the billions upon billions of masses that came after the disappearance of the last Imam to be without an active Imam, to grope in darkness, to remain dependent on whatever sources that have reached down them? In brief, considering it logically, the very concept an Imam's obligatory existence among the believers has been made redundant by the as yet 1200 years or so of paused Imamate.

 

So, in the meantime, when there's no Imam, what becomes of the laws whose execution depends entirely on the presence of an Imam actively holding state power, the last example of which we saw in the six months of Imam Hassan (a.s) government? Offensive Jihad (for want of better word) is one, other matters deal with regulating God's rights on peoples (like the matter of faith and non-faith, which obviously belongs to huqooq Allah).

 

Those laws, or rather those laws that set down punishments of certain acts and deeds, which are under the radar in our discussion only make up 1-2% of total Islamic jurisprudence, even less, and their execution has little or no bearing on the practice of Islam of the masses. Why should I fret about those things and not worry about following the rest of the 98% that relates to fasting, praying, giving charity, being kind, helping others, giving zakat and khums, avoiding alcohol, out-of-wedlock sex, lying, murder, cheating, abuse of position of authority etc. In short, Imam present or not, all that makes us Muslims is there to be followed and acted upon. And therefore whether or not an inherently unjust government hangs an apostate is not something my faith depends on does it...

 

 

I don't necessarily agree with you on all you wrote, but well written non the less. 

 

Like the part of 1-2% of total Islamic jurisprudence, well i don't believe that you can pick and choose what has bearing and what doesn't. If we look at the Quran, more than 90% of it is in regards to social issues and politics, and less than 10% of it is about fasting, wuthu, cheating and other individual fiqq issues. Things like apostasy(when declared to the public), jihad, zakat are all in regards to the society, politics and social issues which are a big part of any muslim society and must be managed by someone other than Imam Zaman(while he isnt present). 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...