Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

To see the complete version, go to this link :
http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/1119stoningfinal.jpg

Jeez, Mel, that's grim!

Pretty grim indeed.

As pointed out many times before, stoning is a Biblical punishment that isn't to be found in the Quran. That Iran and others carry out this form of capital punishment has more to do with their particular cultures than Islamic law.

But that said, the above appears to be from a Canadian right wing paper with a history of making up stories about Iran though - and is an anti-Muslim paper:

Criticism

On May 19, 2006, the newspaper ran two pieces alleging that the Iranian parliament had passed a law requiring religious minorities to wear special identifying badges. One piece was a front page news item titled "IRAN EYES BADGES FOR JEWS" accompanied by a 1935 picture of two Jews bearing Nazi-ordered yellow badges. Later on the same day, experts began coming forward to deny the accuracy of the Post story. The story proved to be false, but not before it had been picked up by a variety of other news media and generated comment from world leaders. Comments on the story by the Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper caused Iran to summon Canada's ambassador to Tehran for an explanation.
On May 24, 2006, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper, Doug Kelly, published an apology for the story on Page 2, admitting that it was false and the National Post had not exercised enough caution or checked enough sources.[13]

Since 1998, the Canadian Islamic Congress has been actively monitoring media coverage for anti-Muslim or anti-Islam sentiment and has issued reports highlighting its findings. It has opposed the use of phrases such as "Islamic guerrillas," "Islamic insurgency" and "Muslim militants" saying that terms like "militant" or "terrorist" should be used without a religious association "since no religion teaches or endorses terrorism, militancy or extremism."[14] The Congress has singled out the National Post, saying the paper "consistently is No. 1" as an anti-Islam media outlet.[15]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Post

Sensationalism does sell papers.

Cheers,
Shafique

Shaf,

If you want to write about the source, please start a new thread, your qoute has nothing to do with the topic.
Based on my knowledge about stoning in Islam, this description is very precise and accurate and there is nothing falsified about it.

Stoning is part of the Arab culture, not Iran's culture.

Still, as we know, muslims comprehend their Quran based on Hadith and other writings. Stoning is not in Quran, but it is one of the verified Islamic rules, you can't deny it based on its absence from Quran.

I'm struggling to understand why the paper that put together the graphic and the commentary 'has nothing to do with the topic'.

Perhaps they are accurate this time and aren't sensationalising or making things up, but their track record isn't good on 1. accuracy and 2. being balanced when it comes to Islam.

As for the fact that stoning is not in the Quran - that's a simple fact. The instances of stoning to be found in the Hadith are instances where the earlier Biblical commandments were being carried out. The Quran is clear what the punishments for adultery and fornication are - and the level of proof that is required.

I've yet to see a Hadith that says that stoning was carried out on Muslims after the verses relating to the Islamic punishments were revealed. There were indeed instances of Jews being subject to this punishment - but that was because they were being tried according to their Biblical laws, and there were instances of Muslims being stoned before these Quranic verses were revealed.

As for the graphic - I see some 'spin' in the commentary that looks like innuendo to me - so I'm suspicious. But if you 'believe' it is accurate - then so be it.

Cheers,
Shafique

The detailed steps of the stoning sentence, is quite gruesome indeed , as gruesome as execution by a firing squad, by hanging , and by the electric chair.

The reason for the existence of capital punishment as we all know is to serve to be a deterrent from repeating that kind of behavior.

Now lets imagine a society bereft of capital punishment (pause)

Interpretation of the law is restricted to those who are well versed in it, this is why we have lawyers and judges.

I'm struggling to understand why the paper that put together the graphic and the commentary 'has nothing to do with the topic'.

Perhaps they are accurate this time and aren't sensationalising or making things up, but their track record isn't good on 1. accuracy and 2. being balanced when it comes to Islam.

Do you find anything in this graph that is not based on stoning in Islam?If yes, please share it. If not, please start another thread about validity of the paper.

As for the fact that stoning is not in the Quran - that's a simple fact. The instances of stoning to be found in the Hadith are instances where the earlier Biblical commandments were being carried out.

Again, Islamic laws are made based upon Quran and Hadith. Lots of Islamic laws are just smilar to Jews, but I dont see you deny them. Stoning had been done in the time of prophet and after that, it is valid among almost all scholars, and more important, there are some rivaya from Aisha, Abu musa Ashari and Ibn bani Ka'b that says it was a verse about it in Quran which is not in the final version of it!

Well personally I don't see a problem with the graphic, it always state Iranian Law and does not confuse it or claims it to be Islamic law, I didn't read the article so can't comment what it says. Iran although wishes it was an Islamic state it is not and none of its so called Islamic laws even.

Now Iran carries these out is indeed horrific and grim and needs to stop imediately, including those horrible hangings which on the face don't look very gruesome but are indeed. Slowly being lifted by a tightening noose around your neck and then suffocating to death, which can sometime take up to 20 min for a heart to stop beating also there are videos of bungled hangings where the condemened clearly suffers extreme pain and is not a very pleasant way to die.

Even in the US the moral of beacon of democracy, well atleast according to most Americans atleast more people were exnorated after being sentenced to death in the southern death belt states than executed. Showing a huge flaw in the system, one can only imagine how many innocent or people not deserving were executed there aswell.

Iran really needs to stop this instantly and overhaul its justice system.

Well personally I don't see a problem with the graphic, it always state Iranian Law and does not confuse it or claims it to be Islamic law, I didn't read the article so can't comment what it says. Iran although wishes it was an Islamic state it is not and none of its so called Islamic laws even.

So you are implying that stoning in Islam has some different steps from stoning in Iran? can you please carify how?

melika969 wrote:

Well personally I don't see a problem with the graphic, it always state Iranian Law and does not confuse it or claims it to be Islamic law, I didn't read the article so can't comment what it says. Iran although wishes it was an Islamic state it is not and none of its so called Islamic laws even.

So you are implying that stoning in Islam has some different steps from stoning in Iran? can you please carify how?

Well first of all if you can squeeze it into being called a current Islamic form of capital punishment. First of all there have to be four credible witnesses who have clearly witnessed this, now that itself is almost impossible. Unless the accused were doing the do in a public street market. Second condition, confession. One has to be insane to put himself in this position, according to modern aswell Islamic law anyone not in control of his senses and and cannot be held accountable for his actions. Thats your catch 22 there and shows it to be more of a deterrent than anything lese. That only leaves us with someone who is very deeply religious and truly wants to repent for his sins. In that case I think but am not sure, but then it does not imply to him, but since I'm not sure I'll leave it out.

Then according to the graphics , it mentions article 104, 16 etc etc, what are these articles. There is not book of criminal codes with numbered articles in Islam ? Never heard or read in any validated Hadith that a man has to be so high and woman has to be so low, also that if you can wiggle out then your free to go, this is the first time I've heard it. Could be wrong but right now I am thinking its more of an Iranian thing than anything else.

Also never read or heard anything so detailed anywhere, about judges, witnesses, doctors etc etc, I'm surprised the graphic does not give the exact dimesions of the holes and stones to be hurled down to the last cm.

Plus Iranian so called islamic law is mostly based on the Shia sect of Islam, which disreagrd most of the authenticated hadith and only consider the ones told by the ahle bait i.e related by the family of the prophet only. And this stoning can be attributed to the one of Ali ( who the shia hold in great importance, some will even say equal if not more than the prophet himself ). Where he flogs a woman and then stones her the next day. Which has proved to be misjudged. Where Ali is later says that he does not hold any additional knowledge than what is in the Quran and the "paper" and the paper hold only the law of Qisas and blood money. And we all know the Quran does not scribe stoning. But ofcourse either the Shia judges of Iran disregard the later or just ignore it.

The four witnesses and the self confessions are true. They must be done then the sotning wil happen. and It is all considered in Iran's law as well.

As this graph has come from Iran's law, which is based on Islamic laws, the articles and their numbers are related to them, so no need to relate it to any Hadith.

relating it to Shia, was a very weak argument, as it is very well known act in Sunni and shia, both of them. Just look at SA, it is a sunni country and and they are doing it as well.

melika969 wrote:The four witnesses and the self confessions are true. They must be done then the sotning wil happen. and It is all considered in Iran's law as well

As this graph has come from Iran's law, which is based on Islamic laws, the articles and their numbers are related to them, so no need to relate it to any Hadith.

relating it to Shia, was a very weak argument, as it is very well known act in Sunni and shia, both of them. Just look at SA, it is a sunni country and and they are doing it as well.

Thats the thing its not, like I said Iran likes to consider itself and all its laws Islamic but they are not infact many are contrary. Like the law of mutah or temp marriage which is legal in Iran and shia Islan but not elsewhere. At best Iranian laws are loosely based on Shia Islam. No where in Islam say that women shall be forced to cover up or an implementation of a religious police to implement such laws. No where is Islam does it say people will be executed by slow hanging from cranes.

Shia is not a weak argument as most of the hadiths are diregarded by the Shia and even the most fundemental practices are different like declaration of Islam, the shia add the part of ali to it, the call to prayer even the way prayers are performed are different and if you tried that call to prayer publicly in SA you'd probably be done in for blasphemy ! Not to mentioned did a Mutah or temp marriage. So your comparison to SA and Iran are not correct.

Having said that SA is also in the same shoes as Iran, it too likes to think its an Islamic country with Islamic laws. So two wrongs don't make a right either.

Plus like I said the graphics detailed steps are also not to be found anywhere either so the steps mentioned are also not Islamic but Iranian. Hence I don't disagree with the graphic when it says its Iranian and not Islamic. Although I am taking it at face value without cross checking the steps illustrated are part of the official procedure.

There is no doubt that Shia and Sunni is different, I m not gonna debate on which is better, becasue both are BS to me. As the topic of this thread is stoning, it is valid in both Shia And Sunni. It is a law in Indonesia, Iraq, Sudan,Nigeria, Sumalia, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, based on Islamic laws. and again it is valid for both sectors.

Plus like I said the graphics detailed steps are also not to be found anywhere either so the steps mentioned are also not Islamic but Iranian. Hence I don't disagree with the graphic when it says its Iranian and not Islamic. Although I am taking it at face value without cross checking the steps illustrated are part of the official procedure.

If you can't find the Islamic steps for stoning in your googling, I dont blame you! The steps are devised by early time scholars who interpret it from Hadith and Quran ( FYI, there is a debate that there was a verse in Quran, named "Rajam" dedictaed to stoning, which was removed later) So if you want to read and know more about steps in different procedures you need to read other resources, maybe you need to learn Arabic.

melika969 wrote:There is no doubt that Shia and Sunni is different, I m not gonna debate on which is better, becasue both are BS to me. As the topic of this thread is stoning, it is valid in both Shia And Sunni. It is a law in Indonesia, Iraq, Sudan,Nigeria, Sumalia, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, based on Islamic laws. and again it is valid for both sectors.

Plus like I said the graphics detailed steps are also not to be found anywhere either so the steps mentioned are also not Islamic but Iranian. Hence I don't disagree with the graphic when it says its Iranian and not Islamic. Although I am taking it at face value without cross checking the steps illustrated are part of the official procedure.

If you can't find the Islamic steps for stoning in your googling, I dont blame you! The steps are devised by early time scholars who interpret it from Hadith and Quran ( FYI, there is a debate that there was a verse in Quran, named "Rajam" dedictaed to stoning, which was removed later) So if you want to read and know more about steps in different procedures you need to read other resources, maybe you need to learn Arabic.

For the sake of argument I'll agree it is a valid punnishment and as I said certain almost impossible creteria have to fulliled and if countries like your totaly choose to ignore those there is nothing I can do about it. And your question was to show you how those depicted in the graphic were different from said Islamic laws.

I put my opinions forward regarding this to the best of my current knowledge and now its you who have to show wheter I am wrong or right. Not me.

desertdudeshj wrote:For the sake of argument I'll agree it is a valid punnishment and as I said certain almost impossible creteria have to fulliled and if countries like your totaly choose to ignore those there is nothing I can do about it.

Read my previous post:

melika969 wrote:The four witnesses and the self confessions are true. They must be done then the sotning wil happen. and It is all considered in Iran's law as well.

desertdudeshj wrote:And your question was to show you how those depicted in the graphic were different from said Islamic laws.

The graph is about the steps of conducting the stoning, not about the process of judgment and making the decision.

Thats what I am talking about, you have to show that the steps illustrated are part of Islamic law. I told you why they are not so ( read my earlier posts ), now its your turn.

desertdudeshj wrote:Thats what I am talking about, you have to show that the steps illustrated are part of Islamic law. I told you why they are not so ( read my earlier posts ), now its your turn.

What?!! which reasons? when did you say any reasons???

Again, I have to repeat, these steps shown in this graph are about the stoning day, do you see any difference from steps in conducting the stoning between the Iranian way and Islamic way?

The person need to confess themselves, then the judge can go trough all this, but we are not debating that here. This is the third time I am stating it, yes it is needed to be self confessed, in Islam and in Iran law.

melika969 wrote:

desertdudeshj wrote:Thats what I am talking about, you have to show that the steps illustrated are part of Islamic law. I told you why they are not so ( read my earlier posts ), now its your turn.

What?!! which reasons? when did you say any reasons???

Again, I have to repeat, these steps shown in this graph are about the stoning day, do you see any difference from steps in conducting the stoning between the Iranian way and Islamic way?

The person need to confess themselves, then the judge can go trough all this, but we are not debating that here. This is the third time I am stating it, yes it is needed to be self confessed, in Islam and in Iran law.

My last post wasn't even about the conditions, I've already stated that I have never come across such steps. I've read the entire Quran and the Sahih Bukhari hadith all nine volumes, its been a while though.

Its you who claim these are "steps" gathered from Islamic scripture, I don't so you have to prove that they are. Even your illustrations don't mention anything of the sort and alway refer to them part of Iranian law .It is you who are making the claim that this paticular procedure in such detail is based on Islamic teachings hence the burden of proof is on you.

An alien from outer space visted me last night and I played chess with him all night long. Now prove this didn't happen. This is the logic you are using. I made a claim now I have to prove if indeed I had extra terrestrial visitors, not you. Get what I'm saying ?

An alien from outer space visted me last night and I played chess with him all night long. Now prove this didn't happen. This is the logic you are using. I made a claim now I have to prove if indeed I had extra terrestrial visitors, not you. Get what I'm saying ?

You are making no sense. It seems like the alien told you that "this is not Islamic"! You made a claim based on nothing! Do you have any reason or evidence for "this is not Islamic"?

bring it on! Bring on your arguments about the Islamic way, but I know, you have nothing!

As for the fact that stoning is not in the Quran - that's a simple fact. The instances of stoning to be found in the Hadith are instances where the earlier Biblical commandments were being carried out. The Quran is clear what the punishments for adultery and fornication are - and the level of proof that is required.

You would be wrong.

There's a hadith of Caliph Umar mentioning that a man would have been stoned if all four witnesses had testified against him.

Mel - for something to be 'Islamic' the usual criterion is that it has a basis in the religion of Islam.

The commandments of Islam (the rules and regulations if you will) are primarily to be found in the Quran.

Stoning is not in the Quran.

Where stoning exists in Hadith (and I'll let you explain to our young friend what Shia think of the Khalifa Umar and whether 'Hadith' include pronouncements of Khalifas) - they are accounts of the Biblical punishment being carried out - either before the Quranic verses were revealed about lashes or as punishments for those who follow the Biblical laws. In short, can you tell our friend that no Muslim - shia or sunni - would argue that a reported saying from a Khalifa can over-ride the Quran.

The graphic you posted is specifically about Iranian law, and as I said before, some of the commentary looks like spin to me (especially the bits that say 'perhaps this or that').

Cheers,
Shafique

Regardless, I think you have to look at if the punishment fits the crime! I'd say definitely not! Plus women seem to be accused and have this sentence passed far more than men.

Death penalties should be for murderers. Adultery is hardly in the same league.

It really is time these people moved into the 21st century.

^Chocs - I agree.

Cheers,
Shafique

either before the Quranic verses were revealed about lashes or as punishments for those who follow the Biblical laws.

Happy to compare your beliefs to the reality:

Book 017, Number 4191:

'Ubada b. as-Samit reported: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Receive (teaching) from me, receive (teaching) from me. Allah has ordained a way for those (women). When an unmarried male commits adultery with an unmarried female (they should receive) one hundred lashes and banishment for one year. And in case of married male committing adultery with a married female, they shall receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death.

Book 017, Number 4192:

'Ubada b. as-Samit reported that whenever Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) received revelation, he felt its rigour and the complexion of his face changed. One day revelation descended upon him, he felt the same rigour. When it was over and he felt relief, he said: Take from me. Verily Allah has ordained a way for them (the women who commit fornication),: (When) a married man (commits adultery) with a married woman, and an unmarried male with an unmarried woman, then in case of married (persons) there is (a punishment) of one hundred lashes and then stoning (to death). And in case of unmarried persons, (the punishment) is one hundred lashes and exile for one year.

Well, let's all agree on the historical fact that stoning is a Biblical punishment that the Jews of Arabia and elsewhere were carrying out (recall that even the NT recounts how Jesus intervened in a stoning of a prostitute - had he not come along the lady would have been killed).

Secondly, the fact remains that the Quran does not give stoning as a punishment for s.ex outside marriage. The only punishment in there is 100 lashes - AND only after 4 witnesses or a confession is obtained, making it practically impossible to prosecute an adulteress or adulterer (or fornicators). Ergo it is more an indication to believers of how distasteful the sin is to God rather than a practical temporal punishment.

As for the instances in Hadith of the punishment actually being carried out - I repeat, these took place either before the Quranic verses were revealed or administered to those who followed Judaic laws (i.e. Jews).

Hadith which talk of extra-Quranic laws and revelations which contradict the Quran are fabrications. The compilers of the Hadith knew that they were including fabricated/dodgy/contradictory Hadith - they all are explicit about this (and we've discussed this point ad-nauseum). The Bible is also a collection of 'Hadith' and also contains contradictory verses and many instructions that eh and other Christians do not follow (and eh wishes were not in the Bible) - such as the NT verses telling women to cover their hair, not speak in Church and obey their husbands. Contradictions are aplenty - such is the nature of 'Hadith'.

We've also noted that Biblical scholars are agreed that the Bible contains fabricated verses - such as last verses of the Gospel of Mark, and (as we've seen argued by Biblical scholars such as Hans Kung and Father O'Conner - who both have studied and written about the compilation of the Bible) the insertion of misogynistic verses by 'forgers' as they put it.

(Note - this is not a 'whataboutery argument' just an analogy that the Hadith and Biblical accounts - canonised gospels or otherwise - are similar in that they contain accounts by different authors and contain contradictory and even fabricated verses).

Mawḍūʻ

A hadith that is mawḍūʻ, (مَوْضُوْع), is one determined to be fabricated and cannot be attributed to its origin. Al-Dhahabi defines mawḍūʻ as a hadith the text of which contradicts established norms of the Prophet's sayings, or its reporters include a liar,

Recognizing fabricated hadith

Some of these hadith were known to be spurious by the confession of their inventors. For example, Muhammad ibn Sa`id al-Maslub used to say, "It is not wrong to fabricate an isnād for a sound statement." Another notorious inventor, `Abd al-Karim Abu 'l-Auja, who was killed and crucified by Muhammad ibn Sulaiman ibn `Ali, governor of Basra, admitted that he had fabricated four thousand hadith declaring lawful the prohibited and vice-versa.

Mawḍūʻ narrations are also recognised by external evidence related to a discrepancy found in the dates or times of a particular incident. For example, when the second caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab decided to expel the Jews from Khaybar, some Jewish dignitaries brought a document to Umar apparently proving that the Prophet had intended that they stay there by exempting them from the jizya (tax on non-Muslims under the rule of Muslims); the document carried the witness of two companions, Sa'd ibn Mua'dh and Mu'awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan. Umar rejected the document outright, knowing that it was fabricated because the conquest of Khaybar took place in 6 AH, whereas Sa'd ibn Mua'dh died in 3 AH just after the Battle of the Trench, and Mu'awiyah embraced Islam in 8 AH, after the conquest of Mecca.

Causes of fabrication

There are several factors which may motivate an individual to fabricate a narration, from them:
political differences

factions based on issues of creed
fabrications by heretics
fabrications by story-tellers
fabrications by ignorant ascetics
prejudice in favour of town, race or a particular leader
inventions for personal motives
proverbs turned into hadith

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_ter ... 5.AB.CA.BB

Cheers,
Shafique

punishment that the Jews of Arabia and elsewhere were carrying out

No, we wouldn't agree on that since Jews during this time were not carrying out stonings.

When you learn the basics of Jewish history, come back and talk to me.

(recall that even the NT recounts how Jesus intervened in a stoning of a prostitute - had he not come along the lady would have been killed).

You're only six centuries off on that one chief.

Just some advice, you should stop displaying your lack of knowledge on basic Jewish history and instead read up on the fundamentals of Jewish history from reputable sources.

Not the usual routine of consulting professor google to (try to) lecture others on theological and historical discussions.

Secondly, the fact remains that the Quran does not give stoning as a punishment for s.ex outside marriage. The only punishment in there is 100 lashes

The fact remains that I have numerous (authentic) hadith I can cite showing that lashing is the punishment for unmarried people who fornicate and stoning is the punishment for married adulterers.

You have not disputed this fact nor can you. And I don't suppose you can start backing your claims up with actual evidence - or is this another example where you would rather ignore the clear texts of Islam, as in the previous thread where you made up your own interpretation of the Koran despite the clear passages in there about the afterlife ?

As for the instances in Hadith of the punishment actually being carried out - I repeat, these took place either before the Quranic verses were revealed or administered to those who followed Judaic laws (i.e. Jews).

Once again, you would be wrong. The stories you're probably recollecting actually recount how the Jewish religious leaders *didn't* want anyone stoned. Regardless of the few stories of Jews being stoned, there are other hadith of Muslims beings stoned by Muhammad.

Whoops!

When exactly did God reveal to the Jews etc to stop stoning adulterers? Please give an exact reference.

Please re-read the bit about fabricated Hadith and then come back and argue why we should use your quotes to over-ride what God says in the Quran is the punishment for s.ex outside marriage.

I'll state this once more - so that it will be easy for you to look up evidence to contradict this fact -

the Hadith which recount stoning punishments occured either:
1. before the Quranic punishment was revealed (lashes) or
2. to Jews who followed the Torah.

I think this is as clear as I can make it - so I'll now only respond to you if you present any real evidence to counter these simple facts.

Cheers,
Shafique