Chapter Fourteen
Some Ordinances
and Laws of the Qur’an and Islam
Pilgrimage Is A Pagan
Practice
All Muslims agree that the practice of
pilgrimage existed before the rise of Muhammad by hundreds of
years. The people of Quraysh (along with pagan Arabs) were
accustomed to celebrating the pilgrimage. Even Muhammad himself
did so before he claimed to be a prophet. After he installed
himself as the apostle of God, he and his followers continued to
perform the pilgrimage’s rites with the polytheistic pagans. He
did not change many things (refer to Jawami’ al-Sira
al-Nabawiyya "Prophet’s Biography" by ibn Hazm, page 14. Also
"Islam: A Creed and A Law" by the Imam Mahmud Shaltut, pp.
113-115).
Almost every major Islamic history book
documents these facts. Even after the conquest of Mecca, the
pilgrimage has become one of the pillars of Islam. Muhammad
banned the Arab polytheists from the Hajj after the year of the
conquest. They were given four months either to embrace Islam or
be killed, as we stated in chapter one. After that, Muhammad
made very slight changes in the ceremonial rituals of the
pilgrimage although he destroyed all the idols of the Ka’ba. Yet
Muhammad himself continued to practice many paganistic rituals.
He did not abolish them nor reject them. That created some
consternation among his followers who expected him to uproot
these idolatrous rudiments.
Some
Pagan Rituals
Muslims continued to practice some of the
pre-Islamic, pagan rituals such as running between the two hills
of Safa and Marwa or kissing the Black Stone. In the first case,
Arab polytheists were accustomed to running between the two
hills to glorify the idols which they erected and called them
Isaf and Na’ila. When Muhammad destroyed the idols, Muslims were
ashamed to continue this practice, and asked Muhammad about it.
Soon, he claimed that a Qur’anic verse was given to him in which
this practice was re-ordained. On page 33, of his commentary,
the Baydawi says this in the course of his interpretation of
chapter 2:158. Muslim scholars generally agree with the Baydawi
(the Jalalan, page 22, Zamakh-shari in his "Kash-shaf", part 1).
The Bukhari, for instance, remarks:
"One of the companions said to Anas
ibn Malik, ‘Did you use to hate running between the Safa and
Marwa?’ He said, ‘Yes, because it was part of the
pre-Islamic rituals until God gave Muhammad this verse and
proclaimed that it was also one of God’s ceremonial rites"’
(refer to Sahih of al-Bukhari, volume 2, page 195).
We also read in the Sahih of Muslim:
"Adherents of the prophet, (when) they
were still in the pre-Islamic period, used to come up to
visit two idols, Isaf and Na’ila, then they would go and run
between Safa and Marwa, then they would have their hair cut.
When Islam was established, they hated to run between them,
but God sent down this verse (2:158), thus they ran (between
them)" (refer to Sahih of Muslim, volume 3, page 411).
Ibn ’Abbas himself said:
"The demons in the Jahiliyya used to
circumnavigate all night around these two mountains. The
idols (were erected) between them. When Islam came, they
(Muslims) said, ‘O, apostle of God, we would never run
between the Safa and Marwa because this is an unfavorable
matter which we were accustomed to do in the Jahiliyya.’
Thus, God gave this verse" (refer to Asbab al-Nuzul by
Suyuti, page 27).
So, this "unfavorable matter" was strongly
related to idolatry, but even so, Muhammad refused to abolish it
and several Qur’anic verses were given to confirm it. Muhammad
himself performed it and Muslims are still practicing it today.
The Kissing of the Black Stone
This famous meteorite is one of the
Ka’ba’s stones. The idolatrous were accustomed to worshipping it
and kissing it. When Islam was established, Muhammad did not
abolish this practice, but rather he himself performed it and
commanded his followers to do so, in spite of their surprise and
objection. In his Sahih (part 2, page 183), al-Bukhari records a
famous statement made by ’Umar ibn al-Khattab which demonstrates
the confusion of the Muslims. The Bukhari says:
"When ’Umar ibn al-Khattab reached the
Black Stone, he kissed it and said, ‘I know that you are a
stone that does not hurt or benefit. If I had not seen the
prophet kiss you, I would have not kissed you."’
All scholars (ancient and contemporary)
confirm that this statement is uttered by ’Umar (refer to Sahih
of Muslim, volume 3, page 406, and "Islam: A creed and a Law" by
Imam Shaltut, page 122). It is well known that Muslim pilgrims
jostle around to kiss it as Muhammad and his companions did
before them. Because of such crowding, the pilgrims suffer a
large number of serious casualties. Sheikh Sha’rawi says:
‘The kissing of the meteorite is a
firm practice in Islamic law because Muhammad did it. You
must not ask about the wisdom behind that because this rite
is (an expression) of worship in spite of the obscurity of
its wisdom" (refer to "Legal Opinions", part 3, page 167).
This was his answer to the Muslim youths
who asked, "What is the wisdom of kissing the meteorite?"
Other Rituals Of Pilgrimage
To be brief, we state that in addition to
the kissing of the meteorite and running between the Safa and
Marwa, the Muslim pilgrim has to make the trip to mount ’Arafa.
Hundreds of thousands attempt to climb this mountain, but many
suffer hardship which results in many casualties because they
hasten toward it in a disorderly manner as they do when they
jostle around the meteorite. Climbing this mountain is one of
the most important rituals of the pilgrimage. Even Muhammad used
to say, "’Arafa is the Hajj (pilgrimage)." After that,
they go to another mountain called the Muzdalifa. Then, on the
tenth day of the pilgrimage, they go to Mina and they start
casting pebbles. They also have their hair cut or shortened
(having it cut is better) provided that the barber starts from
the right side of the head, because Muhammad did so. After that,
they slay their sheep. Some prefer to offer these sacrifices
before the day of Mina because these sacrifices pile up in Mina.
Some are forced to donate money instead of sacrificing sheep
contrary to the advice of Muslim scholars who believe that such
acts abolish one of the rudiments of the pilgrimage and create a
dispute among Muslims. (Refer to "Rudiments of the Hajj" by Imam
Shaltute; Sahih of the Bukhari, part 2, Sahih of Muslim, volume
3, and any other source about the rudiments of the Hajj.)
The Hajj (Pilgrimage) by
Substitution
This may invoke the surprise of the
reader, yet it is true and confirmed by Muslim scholars who
assert that Muhammad himself allowed the Hajj by substitution.
In the Bukhari (part 2, page 163), it is recorded that a Muslim
asked Muhammad if it is possible to make the pilgrimage in lieu
of his father. He said to him, "Yes, make the pilgrimage in lieu
of your father." In "Legal Opinions" of the Sheikh al-Sha’rawi,
page 188, we read:
"A woman asked Muhammad the prophet if
she could make the pilgrimage in lieu of her mother who died
before she was able to make the pilgrimage. He said to her,
‘Yes, do so.’ He also allowed another man to make the
pilgrimage in place of his relative whose name was
Bashrama."
When Sheikh Kishk was asked plaintively
(part 3, page 113 of his "Legal Opinions"), "Is it admissible
for (a man) to make the pilgrimage in lieu of either a dead or a
living person?" He answered, "Yes, it is admissible." Therefore,
the pilgrimage is not a personal worship, but an ordinance which
a Muslim has to perform, or (in some cases) have performed for
him. It is worthwhile to note that fasting, like pilgrimage, can
be performed by substitution. Ibn ’Abbas relates that to us:
"A man came to the prophet and told
him this story: ‘O apostle of God, my mother died without
fulfilling her fasting, can I perform it in her place?’ The
apostle of God asked him, ‘In your view, if your mother had
a debt, would you pay it for her?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ The
prophet told him, ‘The debt of God is more deserving of
payment"’ (refer to ibn ’Abbas, by ’Abdul-’Aziz al-Sha
nnawi, page 133).
Fasting, then, is a mere ritual
which a Muslim has to perform even after death!
In the above-mentioned book, Muhammad said
that:
"The Black Stone was whiter than milk
when it descended (from heaven) but, the sins of children of
Adam have blackened it" (refer to page 142).
The Rewards Of Pilgrimage
In the same previous source, ibn ’Abbas
asserts that Muhammad used to say that the pilgrim who rides his
animal on his way to Mecca, gains seventy merits for every step
his animal makes. But, if he comes walking, he will gain seven
hundred merits of the Sacred Mosque for every step he makes. It
was asked of him, "What are the merits of the Sacred Mosque?" He
answered, "Every merit is equal to one hundred thousand merits."
We need not be surprised to see Muslims strive to perform the
pilgrimage and compete to kiss the black stone or climb the
mount of ’Arafa or to circumnavigate around the sacred sites of
Mecca in order to obtain hundreds of thousands of merits which
will wipe out their misdeeds.
Ablution and
Prayer
It is well known that every Muslim has to
pray five times a day. These are memorized prayers and must be
uttered in Arabic. Originally, according to the Islamic Hadith
and the testimony of Muhammad himself, God intended to impose on
Muhammad and his followers praying fifty times a day instead of
five, but Moses warned him and urged him to go back and
negotiate with God to reduce the number to five. God approved
that in the end. This incident took place during the time of the
Night Journey and the Ascension. Muhammad claimed that Gabriel
the angel came to him and made him ride an animal called the
Buraq (an animal between a donkey and a mule). It took him first
to Jerusalem, then to heaven where he experienced many things,
among them the reduction of the number of prayers.
Most Muslim scholars, early and late,
believe that Muhammad experienced this supernatural event in
flesh. A whole chapter was inspired in which the entire story
was recorded. It tells us how Muhammad traveled from Mecca to
Jerusalem in a few hours where he met all the prophets and led
them in prayer, then he ascended to heaven on the back of this
animal. Our main concern is to re-examine the story of the
reduction of the number of daily prayers. This incident is
recorded in all the reliable Islamic sources, among them, "The
Prophetic Biography" by ibn Hisham (part 2, page 9), Al-Sira
al-Halabiyya (volume 2, page 132), also in the Sahih of the
Bukhari (part 1, page 98). The story tells us:
"The apostle of God said, ‘Then I came
back and passed by Moses who asked me, "How many times a day
does God require you to pray?" I said fifty prayers a day.
He said, "Prayers are a heavy (task) and your people are
still weak. Go back to your Lord and ask Him to lighten for
you and for your people." I returned and asked my Lord (to
do so). This matter was repeated several times until (God)
imposed five prayers a day. Then I went back to Moses who
told me the same as before. I said to him, "I have already
returned to Him (several times) and asked that. I am
embarrassed before Him, thus I am not going to (go back to
Him)." So anyone who performs these five prayers will have
the reward of fifty prayers"’ (refer to ibn Hisham).
Ablution With Water Or Sand
The Qur’an says:
"If you find not water then go to
clean high ground and rub your faces and your hands with
some of it" (5:6).
Before every prayer, each Muslim has to
perform his ablution with water; that is, he has to wash his
hands, feet, face and ears. If he does not find water he must
use sand ... yes, the sand of the desert. Don’t think this is a
printing error! Without exception, all Muslim scholars confirm
this because of that very famous incident which happened to
A’isha, wife of Muhammad and led the angel to deliver verse 6 of
chapter 5. We spoke of this story earlier.
We do not understand this command. Is it
cleansing or dirtying? Is this the religion of purification as
they claim? Yet, this practice is acknowledged by all Muslims,
even a clear Qur’anic verse alluding to it. The Bukhari set
aside an entire chapter to discuss it (refer to part 1, page
91). The prophet, as the Bukhari, tells us, used to plunge his
hands in the sand or wipe his face and palms with it (refer to
part 1, page 93), and ordered his followers to do the same. The
same statement is found in the Sahih of Muslim (volume 1, page
663).
Indeed, ablution results in great reward,
no matter if the ablution is performed with water or sand.
Muhammad said:
"Whoever performs the ablution, his
sins will depart from his body, they even come out from
under his nails, and his former and later iniquities are
forgiven" (refer to the "Riyad of the Salihin" by Imam
al-Nawawi as quoted from Sahih of Muslim, chapter "The
Merits of Ablution," page 312).
The Ablution Spoiled and The
Prayer Made Void
This is a very important matter because it
shows that prayer in Islam is not a personal relationship and a
loving conversation between man and his God, as is manifested in
Christianity. It is a mere ritual and the fulfillment of an
order.
Would the reader imagine that if a Muslim
has performed the rites of ablution and bathing and is almost
through with his prayer that this prayer will be nullified and
his remuneration will be taken away, if a donkey, or a dog or a
woman passes in front of him? He has to bathe or to perform the
ablution anew and to repeat the prayers. We wonder and ask,
"What does it mean to have the prayer invalidated? Has his
conversation with God been erased? Are not prayers a
conversation with God, being in His holy presence in full
submission of the heart and mind? What does it mean that he has
to repeat his prayer? Are prayers just uttering memorized words,
or are they heartfelt fellowship? What effect does a dog or a
donkey or a woman have if any of them passes in front of the
worshipper?"
Muhammad says that the prayer will be
defiled and invalidated. We have already alluded in chapter two
of this book to the references related to this subject in the
context of our discussion of the status of women in Islam. We
also stated A’isha’s answer to the prophet’s companions when
they pointed to this issue after they vowed that they heard
those words from the lips of Muhammad. She told them, "You have
equated us with a dog and a donkey." Yet, what is significant
for us here, is that prayers in Islam are external practice
and not internal worship. They are outward bearing,
not essence.
Muhammad assures us that there is another
reason for nullifying the ablution, that is breaking wind. Can
the reader imagine that? In his Sahih, the Bukhari assures us
that Muhammad made these statements while he was talking about
ablution (refer to part 1, page 46). He said:
"The Apostle of God said, ‘God does
not accept the prayer of one who breaks wind until he
performs the ablution anew."’
We don’t see why some gases nullify
ablution and prayer!
We have already mentioned that anyone who
touches a woman’s hand after ablution, has to perform it again
even if he spent five minutes in carrying out this ritual.
Certain Times In Which Prayer
Is Forbidden
Muhammad forbade Muslims from praying to
God at sunrise or sunset, that is, from dawn until sunrise or
afternoon until sunset. If you ask for the reason, the prophet
of the Muslims tells you, "Satan at this time brings his head
closer to the sun so those prostrate to it become infidels." All
these strange things are confirmed by Muhammad’s followers
(refer to Sahih of Muslim, volume 2, pp. 476-486 under the
title, "The Times in which Praying is Forbidden").
We do not understand these things because
Christ taught us in the Gospel that we ought to pray all the
time. Also we read, "Pray without ceasing." It is permissible
for the believer to pray anytime he wishes. He can enter his own
room and close the door to pray to his Heavenly Father as Christ
commanded us. Yet, Muhammad forbade the Muslims to pray at
particular times such as sunrise or sunset because Satan brings
his head close to the sun during these times!
Reward And Punishment
Regarding Friday Praying
One Friday, Muhammad was addressing the
Muslims. A caravan of camels arrived from Syria and most of the
audience left him except for twelve men. Thus, a Qur’anic verse
was given which says, "Whenever they had (an opportunity) for
trade or entertainment, they hastened to it and left you
standing alone" (refer to Sahih of Muslim, volume 2, page 514).
Thus, Muhammad promised many great rewards for those who pray
the Friday prayer. Ibn ’Abbas quotes Muhammad as saying:
"Bathing on Friday atones for sins,
and walking to the mosque (on Friday) is like working twenty
years. If the Muslim completes the Friday prayer, he will
receive a reward equal to one hundred years of work" (refer
to ibn ’Abbas by ’Abdul-’Aziz al-Shannawi, page 121).
What a strange claim !
It is also recorded in Sahih of Muslim,
volume 2, page 510:
"Whoever performed the ablution, then
attended the Friday prayers and listened (to the sermon),
all his sins he would commit between that Friday and the
following Friday would be forgiven including three more
days."
What an easy way to obtain forgiveness!
But the one who neglects prayers is
regarded as an apostate, and must be killed if he does not
repent as we mentioned in chapter one. This is related to us by
Muslim scholars such as ibn Hazm, ibn Timiyya, Imam al-Shafi’i
and Malik, on the authority of Muhammad who said so. But Imam
Abu Hanifa, who was more merciful than the rest, said, "He must
not be killed, but should be beaten and thrown in jail until he
prays, otherwise, he must be continuously beaten until he prays
even if his beating results in his unintentional death." In
regard to this subject, the Azhar scholars have published many
important statements ascribed to Muhammad in the Egyptian
Magazine, "The Liwa’ al-Islami", issue of 12/31/1987. They claim
that Muhammad said:
"The one who neglects to pray will die
thirsty, hungry, humiliated and his grave will become so
narrow that it will press his ribs tight until they break. A
snake called the ‘Bald Brave’ will be set on him to beat him
in the grave until he plunges into the ground seventy
cubits. Then, (the snake) will pull him by his face to the
fire of hell."
Are these not meaningless words uttered by
Muhammad?
The irony is that these great scholars
have believed and accepted these claims. Yet, what makes it
worse is that the one who abandons his prayers is subject to
death, or in the best case, he will be beaten and jailed. Some
scholars quoted Muhammad, saying:
"Whoever neglects part of the prayer
will complete them after his death on a mountain of fire."
Some Statutes And
Penalties Of Islamic Law
The Penalty Of The Thief
Islamic law is very clear about this
crime. It says that a thief’s hand must be cut off. This
sentence is based on an explicit Qur’anic text which says:
"As for the thief, both male and
female, cut off their hands. It is the reward of their own
deeds, an exemplary punishment from Allah." (Refer to
chapter "The Table": 38.)
All legists confirm that Muhammad has
endorsed this penalty. They all quote his statement:
"A hand is cut off if he steals
(anything) that costs one-fourth of a dinar and over. May
God curse the thief. If he steals an egg, his hand must be
cut off, or if he steals a rope, his hand must be cut off"
(refer to Sahih of the Bukhari, part 8, pp. 199-201).
On these same pages, the Bukhari assures
us that A’isha, Muhammad’s wife, and the rest of his companions
have said that Muhammad used to cut off a thief’s hand if he
stole a shield which cost three dirhams (refer to Sahih of
Muslim, volume 4, page 258 and on; ibn Timiyya, volume 8, page
331, ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya in Zad of al-Ma’ad, part 5, page 49;
The Baydawi, page 149; The Jalalan, page 93, and the
Zamakh-shari in the Kash-shaf, part 1, page 612).
The Azhar scholars have been very explicit
about this. In "The Statute of Legal Penalties", we turn to page
5 to read:
"A person found guilty of theft shall
be punishable as follows: 1 - amputation of the right hand
for the first offense, 2 - amputation of the left foot for
the second offense, 3 -imprisonment till the time of evident
repentance for subsequent offenses."
On the same page, the Azhar scholars
remark that there are cases in which the penalty is not to be
carried out. These cases are:
"When theft occurs in a public place
during its hours of activity or in a place to which the
culprit had free access unless stolen property is found in
his possession."
In his book, "Zad of the Ma’ad" (part S,
page 50), ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya says that the embezzler and the
thief who steals fruit are not subject to the penalty of the
Islamic law. He adds that Muhammad had commanded that they drop
the penalty against them.
There are two illogical elements in
this Islamic law concerning the penalty of the thief.
Muhammad’s claim that the embezzler or the
thief who robs public property, are not subject to the penalty,
is meaningless. There is no law in any country of the world
which endorses such an unjust, irrational, and illogical
statement. Why should an embezzler not be punished? We do not
find any answer for that.
Why should a father not be punished if he
robs his son? It is possible that the son is a diligent person
who is responsible for his wife and children while his father is
a reckless and extravagant man who wastes his money on his own
pleasures. Why then should he and other relatives who rob their
own kin, not be punished? When Muhammad said to someone, "You
and your property belong to your father," he was stating a
meaningless verdict because each person lives an independent
life and has his own distinctive entity.
What about the larceny of the public
property? It is evident that the thief must be punished. This is
the opinion of the Imam Malik, but all other scholars disagree
with him on the basis of Muhammad’s deeds and sayings. Ibn
Qayyim al-Jawziyya tells us that Muhammad issued an order in
which he dropped the penalty against the plunderer, the
embezzler, and the traitor of the trust (refer to part 5, page
50).
Obviously, the relentlessness of Islamic
law and Muhammad’s attitude are evident. Is it reasonable that a
man’s hand is not worth more than a quarter of a dinar, or three
dirhams, or an egg? Would it not be more fair that the
punishment be in proportion to the crime? Should Muhammad cut
off the hand of a man whether he steals an egg or a shield? What
logic or sensible person would accept that? Is it fair that a
person be disabled to work or to be productive and inflicted
with a permanent handicap because of such a simple matter? Also,
does he have the right to replace it with an artificial hand or
not? Contemporary scholars disagree on this problem.
More than that, it was Muhammad’s habit to
cut off the thief’s hand and to hang it around his neck to make
an example of him, to humiliate him, and as a warning to other
people (refer to ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya in Zad of al-Ma’ad, part
5, pp. 52, 56). Ibn al-Jawziyya also mentioned that Muhammad
ordered the death of a thief after he stole for the fifth time
(part 5, page 56).
Moving
Stories
The following famous moving stories are
recorded by most Muslim scholars. One is a story of a woman who
was accustomed to borrowing things and failing to return them.
So, Muhammad cut off her hand in spite of the intercession of
his companions (refer to the Bukhari, part 8, page 199). Another
story related by the majority of the scholars who said:
"A man stole the gown of Safwan while
he was in the mosque. Safwan, who was one of Muhammad’s
famous companions, arrested him and brought him to Muhammad.
Muhammad ordered his hand to be cut off. Safwan shouted with
surprise, ‘Because of my gown you cut off his hand? I give
it to him free.’ Muhammad said to him, ‘That would only have
been possible before you brought him to me.’ Muhammad
ordered his hand to be cut off immediately" (refer to ibn
Timiyya, volume 28, page 311; ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, part
5, page 51 of Zad of the Ma’ad).
Is it fair, then, after Safwan has given
up his gown and presented it to the thief as a gift, that
Muhammad still cut off the thief’s hand instead of reducing his
punishment? What does it matter if Safwan did that before he
brought the thief to Muhammad or afterward? He waived his right,
what more is needed? If someone claims that this is God’s right
and the cutting off of the hand is a must, then the question is,
why did Muhammad tell Safwan that waiving of punishment would
have been possible before he brought him before Muhammad? What
eccentric behavior!
If somebody steals a gown or an egg, they
cut off his hand, but the one who loots public property and
embezzles the state’s treasury is not subjected to the
punishment. This is iniquitous law devoid of rationale and
fairness!
Other Strange Things
Islam allows the beating of the accused,
if he acts suspiciously. Muhammad himself whipped and jailed a
defendant before the charge was proven true against him (refer
to ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, part 5, page 56). Such a practice is
left in the hands of the plaintiff who decides whether to
request the whipping of the suspect or not. But if the plaintiff
demanded the beating of the suspect and it was proven that he
was innocent, then the plaintiff (the owner of the stolen
property) would be beaten. Muhammad himself did so and told the
accusers, "If you wish me to beat them (the suspects), I will do
so, and if your property is found with them, then let it be.
Otherwise, I will flog your backs as I flogged their backs."
They asked him, "Is this your verdict?" He said, "(It is) God’s
verdict and His apostle’s" (refer to ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya,
part 5, pp. 52, 53, under the title, "Testing the Suspect by
Beating Him’).
We do not believe that this is God’s
decree as Muhammad claims because God does not punish a man
before he is proven guilty. Neither God nor a free, just society
would accept this. Such abuse is the reason behind the torture
inflicted on the defendants in the Arabic and Islamic countries
in order to force them to confess to crimes they never
committed. What an intolerant law, an unforgiving religion ...
and an unmerciful prophet!
The Drunkard
The punishment of the drunkard is to be
flogged forty times, and to be killed if he is arrested drunk
for the fourth time. This is according to Islamic law and to
actions and sayings of Muhammad. In the book of "A Proposal For
The Law Of Legal Penalties" which was published by the Azhar
(page 27), we read:
"Whipping is approved by a saying of
the prophet, peace be on him, narrated by Abu Daud and
others, ‘Whip those who drink wine."’
This same book describes (page 8) the
flogging procedure as follows:
"The punishment of whipping shall be
inflicted by means of a knotless whip of medium length and a
single tip after stripping the convict of such clothing as
may prevent pain to the body. Strokes must be divided all
over the body; regarding women, the strokes may only be on
her back and shoulders."
It is very evident that the Islamic
Tradition has a significant role in the implementation of
Islamic Law since it records all the sayings and the deeds of
Muhammad. It explained, interpreted and demonstrated some
essential elements of worship which the Qur’an either did not
deal with, or was brief. Because of its role, the Hadith’s books
(Sahih of Bukhari, Sahih of Muslim and other books which
collected or recorded the Islamic Tradition) occupy a very
important place in Islam. Most of these traditions are handed
down to us by Muhammad’s companions, his wives—A’isha in
particular—as well as others who lived around Muhammad.
Without the information we obtain from the
Traditions, it would be impossible to construct a detailed
system of worship, procedure of pilgrimage, list of unlawful
food, or laws of inheritance. Many of the religious penalties,
such as the punishment of the drunkard, the punishment of the
married adulterer, are not mentioned in the Qur’an but uttered
by Muhammad (refer to the "History of the Islamic Law" by Dr.
Ahmad Shalabi, pp. 142-153). Dr. Shalabi asserts that the
Islamic Tradition is a basic source of Islamic law, not because
it explains new ordinances which are not mentioned in the Qur’an
only, but also because in it Muhammad expounded the Qur’anic
verses and the reasons for their revelation. All contemporary
scholars agree with Dr. Shalabi.
Let us now examine the implementation of
the penal code on the drunkard as it is recorded in the Sahih of
the Bukhari which is regarded by all scholars as the most
important book about Islamic Tradition.
Beating with Brutality and
Savagery
In his book, part 8, pp. 196, 197, the
Bukhari says:
"The prophet’s custom was to beat the
drunkard with palm branches and sandals. When a drunkard was
brought to him, he ordered his companions to beat him with
their hands, sandals and robes. One of Muhammad’s companions
by the name of al-Sa’ib ibn Yazid says, ‘We used to bring
the drunkard before the apostle of God and during the
caliphate of Abu Bakr and in the first stage of the
caliphate of ’Umar, and we would beat him with our hands,
sandals and robes. During the last part of ’Umar’s
caliphate, he ordered us to flog him eighty times"’ (refer
to ibn Timiyya, volume 28, page 336; and the book of the
Sunna and its Significance, by Dr. M. Yusuf, page 29).
What brutality to see Muhammad and his
followers rise against the drunkard to beat him altogether at
the same time with their sandals and hands with the poor man
agonizing in the middle. Later, during the last days of ’Umar,
the penalty of the drunkard was eighty lashes and not forty.
Likewise, ’Ali ibn Abi Talib sometimes used to lash the drunkard
either forty times or eighty. It is no secret that Muhammad
really did whip anyone who drank even a drop of any intoxicating
drink. Yes, even one drop! This was confirmed by all the
scholars when Muhammad was asked about wine as a medicine. He
said, "No, it is its own malady and can never be a remedy"
(refer to ibn Timiyya, volume 28, page 339, and Sahih of Muslim,
volume 4, page 666).
More Than Flogging
This is true, because Muhammad said, "If
someone drinks wine, lash him, if he drinks again, lash him, if
he drinks for the third time, lash him, but if he drinks for the
fourth time, kill him" (refer to ibn Timiyya, volume 28, page
336).
On page 347, ibn Timiyya tells us that:
"Some people came to Muhammad and told
him, ‘We use a drink made of wheat to protect us against the
cold of our country.’ Muhammad said, ‘If it intoxicates
(you), shun it.’ He was told that the people would not
relinquish it. Muhammad said, ‘If they do not relinquish it,
then kill them."’
So, the penalty was (and still is) to lash
and even kill anyone who drinks any intoxicating drink, even if
it is used moderately or in a small amount as a protection
against cold.
What a law! If somebody steals an egg or
anything which costs a quarter of a dinar, they cut off his
hand. If that is repeated for five times, they kill him. If
someone drinks even one drop of wine, they brutally beat him
with sandals, palm branches, and hands. If he repeats that four
times, they kill him.
Despite that they tell us this is the justice and the
wisdom of Islamic law. They also tell us that Islam is the
religion of forgiveness, and Muhammad is the prophet of mercy.
Can we believe that the one who hangs the amputated hand of the
thief around his neck, then orders his followers to parade him
around, is the prophet of mercy? Such an act makes our
bodies quiver, our souls feel disgusted and our free consciences
rebel, especially if the defendant was punished before he was
proven guilty as Muhammad said and did.
|