Ta’zîr means
chastisement. In Islam, it is a punishment lighter than hadd. Punishment of
ta’zîr varies, ranging from the mildest chastisement called tenbîh (caution),
through the gradually hardening forms such as ihtâr (reprimanding), tekdîr
(harsher scolding), beating, and imprisonment, to the severest one, i.e.
killing. The punishment to be imposed depends on the person as well as on the
kind of the offence. The lightest kind of hadd is that which will be inflicted
on a slave, i.e. flogging with forty stripes. Therefore, ta’zîr has to be
(flogging with) thirty-nine stripes maximum. It is three stripes minimum. The
number of stripes (between these two) will be decided on by the judge. Ihtâr
will be sufficient with scholars and high ranking civil servants. With some
people, it will be sufficient to summon them to the court of law and chastise
them with tekdîr. Beating and imprisonment may be necessary for some rude
people. Ta’zîr cannot be carried out by depriving the guilty person of his
property or fining him. It is within the judge’s authority to determine the
kind and the vehemence of the ta’zîr to be applied. The stipes for ta’zîr will
be more vehement that the ones for hadd. Of the punishments of hadd, the one
inflicted for fornication will be done with the harshest flogging; next comes
the one for alcoholic beverages; and the lightest stripes will be dealt for the
hadd for qazf.
Killing, also, is
among the punishments of ta’zîr. Supposing a person sees a man committing
fornication with a woman who (he knows) is not his wife. If he sees that he
will not be able to force the man to stop it by shouting or by beating the man,
then it will be permissible to kill the man. The woman also may be killed if
(it is found out that) she has given consent to the fornication. A person who
sees his wife or his awrat committing fornication, he will kill both her and
the man. It will be needless to threaten her by any other means. A woman or a
boy may kill a man who tries to force them (to have sexual or homosexual
intercourse, respectively, with him). In all these cases, the person who has
done the killing will have to prove his rightful motives, which in turn is not
something easy to do. If a person seduces someone else’s wife and separates her
from her husband, he will be sent to prison and will have to stay there until
he returns the other man’s wife or, otherwise, until he dies.
If people notorious
for one of the grave sins involving human rights such as cruelty and brigandage
and robbery and theft and
pederasty are seen as they are committing one of these felonies,
it will be permissible, nay, it will yield thawâb for anyone who sees them in
the act to kill them, if it is impossible to prevent them by any other means.
As for judges; to do the killing will be wâjib for them (in any one of the
aforesaid cases).
Ta’zîr is applicable
also by way of deportment or by exiling the guilty person or by demolishing his
house. People who oppress the people and bachelors who have made fornication a
habit will be punished with ta’zîr. A home in which musical instruments are
being played will lose its respectability. One day Hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu
‘anh’ entered a songstress’s house and hit her with his whip, causing her head
to be exposed. When he was asked why, he explained that she had lost her
respectability and become a jâriya because she had been committing an act of
harâm habitually. Abû Bakr Hamîd-ad-dîn Balkhî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ’, a scholar
in the science of Fiqh, (d. 559 [1165 A.D.],) entered a village. They saw a
group of women with bare heads and arms. When he was asked why he had gone near
the women, he replied, “These women no longer have respectability (hurmet). It
is doubtful that they have îmân. They are like female disbelievers.”[1]
Every Muslim is
entitled to inflict ta’zîr on a person sinning. After the sin has been
committed, however, it can be inflicted only by the judge. Even if a Muslim
says that he has added salt to the wine (in a certain bottle) and that he is
going to change it into vinegar, the bottle of wine will be broken. If a dhimmî
sells wine among Muslims, his bottles also will be broken. The person who has
broken the bottles, as well as one who has broken musical instruments, will not
have to compensate. It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Let a person who sees a
person sinning prevent him with his hand, (i.e. physically). Should he fail to do so,
let him prevent the sinner with his speech!” A person who goes about (in public)
without covering his body properly, although the exposed parts of his body are
not within (the areas termed) qaba awrat, he will be admonished. (Admonition
that would arouse fitna should be avoided. That is, in that case,) Amr-i-ma’rûf
must not be performed. A person whose qaba awrat is exposed will be scolded
severely. If he persists he will be beaten. Not so is the case with punishments
of hadd, which devolve on the state exceptionally. Also, concerning the sins
where rights of creatures are involved,
---------------------------------
[1] Please see the eighth chapter.
-172-
ta’zîr can be applied only by the judge
of the court of law. And then it will be applicable only if the owner of the
right files a suit. Examples of the sins in this category are looking at
nâ-mahram women; halwat with them; selling wine; playing musical instruments;
taking and paying interest (fâiz). (Please scan the eighth and the twentieth
chapters of the fourth fascicle, and the twelfth chapter of the fifth fascicle,
of Endless
Bliss for
‘halwat’, and the forty-fourth chapter of its fifth fascicle for ‘fâiz’.
[As the ruinations
incurred by one’s speech are being dealt with in the book entitled Hadîqa, it is stated: “To
perform amr-i-ma’rûf and nahy-i-munkar manually (physically) is farz for State
officials, while it is farz for Islamic scholars to do it by speech, and for
every lay Muslim do do it with heart. It is termed ihtisâb (censorship of morals),
or hisbat, to perform it
manually (physically), wa’dh (preaching) and nasîhat (counselling) to do it by way of speech. Since it is a duty that
devolves only on the State of officials to break the bottles of alcoholic
beverages and the musical instruments by exercising ‘hisbat’, others who do so
will have to compensate for the harm. Although it is not farz for men of
religion, (i.e. for Islamic scholars,) to exercise ‘hisbat’, it is permissible
for them to dissuade from a sin being committed, provided that a man of
religion should not arouse a fitna while doing ‘hisbat’. In other words, it
will be wâjib for a man of religion to desist from exercising ‘hisbat’ if his
doing so should cause harm to his and other Muslims’ worldly life. Succumbing
to the human psychological foibles such as arrogance, self-importance,
ostentation, fame-seeking, and bad opinion about others, or to awkwardnesses
such as insulting other Muslims and looking on them as ignorant people, are
among the perils of fitna that an inadequate and tactless exerciser of ‘hisbat’
is vulnerable to. If doing something permissible would lead to committing an
act of harâm, it will be harâm also to do that permissible act. It has been
stated that it will be permissible to kill someone seen committing fornication.
It has not been stated that it will be wâjib to do so. It will be permissible
only if shouting will not do to prevent the foul act, and should the killing be
exercised it will have to be proved that the person killed had been
perpetrating fornication, which in turn will entail producing two witnesses. A
more commendable policy to be followed, after all, would be to keep the crime
as a secret, rather than going ahead and killing both the fornicators. Being
permissible is something quite different from being wâjib. One should not
attempt to do something that is not wâjib by
-173-
interpreting the hadîth-i-sherîfs on one’s own. One should be
carelul about one’s behaviour lest one should arouse fitna. It will not be
permissible for a person who is quite sure that he will be killed to perform
jihâd. It is permissible for a person to perform ‘hisbat’ in keeping with its
conditions even if he knows that he will be killed (while doing so); and if he
is killed he will become a martyr. However, if he knows that a fitna will arise
it will not be permissible for him to perform it. An example of this case is to
perform amr-i-ma’rûf for the grace of Allah by admonishing cruel State
authorities.”]
The blessed author
‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih’ of the book entitled Behjet-ul-fatâwâ states: A person who
ensnares and enslaves free children and thereafter sells them as slaves will be
punished with a severe beating and sent to prison. If he has made it a habit,
the judge will sentence him to death.
If a person beats
another person and then the latter in his turn beats the former, both of them
will be punished with ta’zîr by the judge. The ta’zîr will be started with the
former. It is permissible to respond in kind to wrongs that do not incur a
punishment of hadd. Forgiving the wrong, however, will yield plenty of thawâb.
The judge is
accredited to inflict imprisonment and tying and beating altogether at the same
time.
A person who unjustly
hurts Muslims with his speech or hands will be punished with ta’zîr. A person
who swears at his own son or at a disbeliever, or who commits (the offence
termed) qazf against them, will be punished with ta’zîr. A burglar who is
caught before leaving the house with things he has stolen and gathered together
will be punished with ta’zîr. A person who neglects his daily prayers of nemâz
because of laziness will be punished with ta’zîr, which in this case consists
of beating until the limbs flogged bleed. If a person becomes a murtadd, (i.e.
abandons Islam,) he will be forced to return to Islam by way of flogging with
thirty-nine stripes (maximum) or imprisonment. A person will not be punished
with ta’zîr for calling a person ‘fâsiq’, if the latter is notorious with
‘fisq’, or if his fisq is known by the judge of the court of law. Nor will a
person who says, “fâsiq,” about another person be punished with ta’zîr if he
proves the latter’s fisq by giving (known) examples. For instance, he will have
to prove by producing two witnesses that the latter has kissed a woman
nâ-mahram to him, in which case the latter will be punished with ta’zîr.
-174-
[NOTE: A person who sees
someone committing a sin involving the right of Allâhu should apply ta’zîr in
the presence of a witness. Application of ta’zîr on a person who calls a Muslim
‘fâsiq’ is intended for protection of that Muslim’s right. To protect himself
from being punished with ta’zîr, which is the wronged Muslim’s right, the
person accused of name-calling will have to produce two witnesses (beyyina); in
which case he will be absolved.
If a person says to
another, “Yâ zânî (O, you, fornicator)!” or insults him with other words in
English and to the same effect, his acquittal from the punishment of hadd for
qazf will be possible only if he produces two witnesses and proves without
providing examples that he is telling the truth.
It is an act of ‘fisq’
not to learn the teachings of Fiqh that are farz or wâjib (for every Muslim) to
learn. Since fâsiq people are not acceptable as witnesses, the judge will
question the witnesses on matters of Fiqh when an objection is raised
concerning the witnesses. If they fail to answer the questions, they will not
only be rejected, but also punished with ta’zîr. Ibni ’Âbidîn states in his
introduction: “It is farz to memorize as many âyat-i-kerîmas of the Qur’ân al-kerîm as you need to
perform namâz. After having memorized that much of the Qur’ân al-kerîm, learning the
teachings of Fiqh that are farz-i-’ayn for every individual Muslim to learn
takes priority over memorizing an extra amount of the Qur’ân al-kerîm. For, whereas it is
farz-i-kifâya to memorize the Qur’ân al-kerîm, i.e. to become a hâfiz, it is farz-i-’ayn to learn as much
knowledge of Fiqh as you need to perform your acts of worship and to carry on
with your business and social transactions called ‘mu’âmalât’. (Please see the
second page of the fifth chapter of the second fascicle of Endless Bliss, and also the
footnote on the second page of the forty-second chapter of its fifth fascicle,
for terms such as ‘farz-i-’ayn’ and ‘farz-i-kifâya’.) Two hundred thousand
matters pertaining to halâls and harâms should be memorized. Some of them are
farz-i-’ayn, while others are farz-i-kifâya. The ones that are farz-i-’ayn are
incumbent upon every individual Muslim, some of them varying from one person to
another, depending on situations, conditions, circumstances, and occupations.
However, learning all of them is better than memorizing the entire Qur’ân al-kerîm. It is not something
right to spend one’s time reading books of Tafsîr, (i.e. those explaining the
meanings of the âyat-i-kerîmas of the Qur’ân al-kerîm.) For, what is learned by reading books of Tafsîr consists in
preaches and tales,
-175-
true as they are. One should learn halâls and harâms by reading
books of Fiqh. Allâhu ta’âlâ praises ‘hikmat’. And “Hikmat,” in its turn, “is Fiqh,”
according to the majority of Islamic scholars in the science of ‘Tafsîr’. One
scholar in the science of ‘Fiqh’ is more valuable than a thousand ‘zâhid’s.[1] Teachings of Fiqh are
learned from Islamic scholars in the four Madhhabs. Any teaching of Fiqh that
does not exist in any one of the four Madhhabs is not permissible. Rules have
not been established in the science of Tafsîr; it has not been divided into
branches; and conclusions have not been reached. Every âyat has a number of
explanations. No one but Allâhu ta’âlâ knows all of them. It is stated in Hadîqa, from the tree
hundred and twenty-fourth page on: “It is farz to learn the creed of Ahl
as-sunnat and the acts of farz and harâm. It is farz-i-kifâya to teach these things,
to learn teachings of Fiqh more than necessary for you, and to learn tafsîr of
the Qur’ân
al-kerîm
and the science of Hadîth. Teachings of Fiqh are teachings that are farz to
acquire from the Qur’ân al-kerîm and from hadîth-i-sherîfs. Muqallids, (i.e. lay Muslims,) who
read books of Fiqh, save themselves from the need to extract rules from the Qur’ân al-kerîm and/or from
hadîth-i-sherîfs. As there are people who know and perform the ones that are
farz-i-kifâya, it would be mustahab for you also to learn them. And it would be
nâfila (supererogatory) worship to perform them. Only, the namâz of janâza is
exempt from this general rule. When the walî of the dead person performs the
namâz of janâza for him or her, it will not be permissible for others to reperform
it. If a person has memorized as much of the Qur’ân al-kerîm as he needs to perform namâz, his
spending his leisure time memorizing more will yield more thawâb than
performing nâfila (supererogatory) namâz. What would yield even more thawâb,
however, is his learning the teachings of Fiqh that he needs in his acts of
worship and daily chores. Learning Fiqh teachings more than necessary, on the
other hand, brings more thawâb than do acts of nâfila worship. As the knowledge
of Fiqh more than necessary is being acquired, it is mustahab, also for judges,
to learn knowledge of Tasawwuf, i.e. the statements and biographies of (great
spiritual guides called Awliyâ, i.e.) people who have attained (spiritual
knowledge called) Ma’rîfatullah. Reading done in this subject will enhance the
heart’s ikhlâs. Teachings of Fiqh have been derived from the Qur’ân al-kerîm
---------------------------------
[1] ‘Zâhid’ means a Muslim with ‘zuhd’, which in
turn means ‘abstinence from most of the mubâhs for fear of slipping into the
doubtful area’.
-176-
and from hadîth-i-sherîfs by profound
Islamic scholars. These teachings can be acquired only from books of Fiqh and
scholars of Fiqh ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în.”
As is seen, it is an
act of farz-i-kifâya to do reading on Tafsîr. Yet it would be an act of nâfila
worship to attempt to learn teachings of Fiqh from books of Tafsîr while there
are the books of Fiqh. And it would not be permissible to do something nâfila
by reading books of Tafsîr, instead of reading books of Fiqh, which is an act
of farz-i-’ayn, (i.e. an open commandment Allâhu ta’âlâ performance of which is incumbent upon every individual Muslim.)
Besides, it would be impossible for us muqallîds to acquire knowledge of Fiqh
from books of Tafsîr. Scholars of the seventy-two (heretical) groups who it had
been stated would go to Hell, deviated from the right path as a result of their
misinterpretations from books of Tafsîr. We should cogitate on what ignorant
people like us could understand from something which has caused scholars to
lose their bearings! On the face of the catastrophic disaster awaiting the
ignorant people who read correctly written books of Tafsîr, what would become
of those who read books written in the name of Tafsîr by reformers of Islam
such as Mehmed Abdoh, ’Umar Ridâ, and Sayyid Qutb? In order to misguide young
people, the wahhabite book Fat-h-ul-majîd makes references to Imâd ibni Kethîr’s book of Tafsîr at a number of places. However, Ustâd
’Abd-ul-Ghanî, a Damascene scholar, states in his book entitled Fadl-udh-dhâkirîn and published in 1391
[1971 A.D.] that the book of Tafsîr written by ibni Kethîr must not be read
because it contains dalâlât-i-kethîra (numerous heresies). Sayyid Qutb praises Abdoh, a freemason, in
his book entitled Fî-zilâl-il-Qur’ân, which he wrote towards the end of his life. He says, “My
master,” about that heretic and adds that he is one of his followers and that
he has borrowed Abdoh’s articles and ideas in his own Tafsîr. The latest books
written by this man, formerly a socialist philosopher and later a reformer
trying to defile the Islamic religion and writing his own fancies and aberrant
ideas in the name of religious knowledge, cry out the fact that he is a zindiq
who does not have a certain Madhhab. On the other hand, a person named Muhammad
’Alî Sâbûnî published a book entitled Rawâi’ul-beyan in Mekka-i-mukarrama in 1391 [1971 A.D.]; he filled that book
with statements made by Islamic scholars of Ahl as-sunnat, inserting among them
ideas that belong to heretics such as Muhammad Siddîq Hasan Khân Buhupâlî,
Mahmûd Âlûsî, Sayyid Qutb, and ibni Kethîr, and which propagate Wahhâbîism.
-177-
We should not read these venomous books or let our children read
them. We should not believe the sequinned advertisements run by people who
market them!]
A person who says, “O,
you, unbeliever,” to a Muslim [or calls a Muslim ‘freemason’ or ‘communist’]
will be punished with ta’zîr. If (the person who does so) believes that the
latter, (i.e. the Muslim he stigmatizes,) is an unbeliever, he himself will
become an unbeliever. If a Muslim gives a positive answer to a person who calls
him ‘unbeliever’ e.g. if he says, “Yes, sir,” he will become an unbeliever,
too.
If a person says, “O,
you, khabîth,” or, “O, you, heretic,” or “O, you, fâjir,” (to another person),
he will be punished with ta’zîr. ‘Fâjir’ means ‘fractious and irascible
person’. A person who says, “O, you, effeminate person,” will be punished with
ta’zîr. An effeminate person is a (boy or) man who behaves, looks, or sounds
like a woman. A person who says, “You, traitor,” will be punished with ta’zîr.
A traitor is a person who commits a breach of trust, a wicked person. The
following words with which a Muslim is insulted will incur a punishment of
ta’zîr: sefîh; pelîd; ahmaq; mubâhî; awânî; lutî; zindiq; khirsiz; deyyûs;
qaltaban; wine drinker; usurer. ‘Sefîh’ means a person ‘who wastes his money by
spending it at harâm places. ‘Pelîd’ means ‘evil, wicked’. ‘Ahmaq’ means
‘idiotic and bad tempered’. ‘Mubâhî’ means (a person) ‘who calls harâms halâl’.
’Awânî’ means (a person) ‘who slanders innocent people and causes them to be
brought to the court of law’. ‘Zindiq’ means ‘unbeliever without a heavenly
book and in disguise of a Muslim’. ‘Deyyûs’ means (a man) ‘who condones his
wife’s indecencies’. ‘Qaltaban’ and ‘pezevenk’ are synonyms for ‘deyyûs’.
‘Lûtî’ means ‘pederast’ or ‘sodomite’.
Other words that will
incur ta’zîr are “You, munâfiq (or yezîdî or mubtedi’ or yahûdî or nasrânî or
son of a qahba)!” ‘Munâfiq’ means ‘unbeliever who pretends to be a Muslim’.
‘Yezîdî’ means ‘devil-worshipper who is inimical to Hadrat ’Alî’. ‘Mubtedi’
means ‘holder of a bid’at’. ‘Bid’at’ means ‘any belief disagreeing with the
creed of Ahl as-sunnat’. ‘Qahba’ means ‘whore who fornicates for money;
prostitute who works at a brothel’. According to the Two Imâms, (i.e. Imâm Abû
Yûsuf and Imâm Muhammad, ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ‘alaihimâ’,) ‘Son of a qahba’
means ‘son of an adulteress’. So is the case with saying, “Son of a bitch!”
Other insults that
will incur ta’zîr are: “Son of an unchaste person”; “Son of a fâjira”; “Son of
an unbeliever”; “Son of a fâsiq
-178-
person”; “Accomplice of thieves”; “Chief of adulterers”;
“Harâmzâda”; “catamite-pursuer”. A person who insults by saying, “You bastard,”
will be punished with hadd.
A person who calls
himself ‘deyyûs’ and who is notorious with that self-insult will not be killed
unless he deems that misdemeanour an act that is halâl. He will be punished
vehemently with ta’zîr. If a fâsiq person makes a tawba and says, “May
so-and-so become a Râfidî (or a disbeliever) if I
sin
again,” the latter will not be a Râfidî (or a disbeliever) when the former sins
again. However, the former person will have to pay kaffârat for a breach of
oath.[1] If he does not know
that that person will not become a disbeliever, he himself will become a
disbeliever. For, a person who gives consent to someone else’s disbelief will
become a disbeliever.
Ta’zîr will not be
incurred by calling a person ‘ass’ or ‘swine’ or ‘dog’ or ‘monkey’ or ‘ox’ or
‘bear’ or ‘snake’. Not only will calling a person these names be an open lie,
but also a person who does so will have insulted himself. And ta’zîr is not
applicable for an insult that recoils on its utterer. For, ta’zîr is a
chastisement that will be inflicted on a person who commits a harâm or who
unjustly hurts a Muslim with his speech or behaviour or gestures.
A person who calls
another person a ‘thief’ and yet fails to prove it will not be punished with
ta’zîr. A person calls a woman a ‘prostitute’ or a ‘whore’ and yet cannot prove
it will be punished with hadd for qazf.
Most cases of ta’zîr
involve rights of Allâhu ta’âlâ and those of His born slaves, (i.e. people,) at the same time.
Yet rights of the slaves involved in a case of ta’zîr hold a majority. A case
of qazf involves a mixture of both kinds of rights. Yet rights of the slaves
are in the minority. It is for that reason that punishments of hadd are not
pardonable. A punishment of ta’zîr will fall when the person wronged pardons the
guilty person. However, the judge cannot forgive a guilt that involves a human
right. If a person swears at a person by uttering several words of invective or
swears at several people by uttering one word of invective, he will be punished
with ta’zîr separately for each word of invective he has uttered or for each
person hurt, respectively. For, human rights will not stand for one another.
But punishments of hadd are
---------------------------------
[1] Please see the sixth chapter of the fifth
fascicle of Endless Bliss for ‘kaffârat for a breach of oath’.
-179-
interpenetrative. In ta’zîr, if the
person guilty of swearing at another denies his guilt, the oath he takes will
be accepted and he will be pardoned.
In some guilts that
incur ta’zîr, such as kissing a nâ-mahram woman and being present at places
where sins are being committed, the ta’zîr to be inflicted will not be pardoned
and the oath taken (by the guilty person) will not be accepted, since guilts of
that sort involve only rights of Allah. The guilty person can be pardoned only
by the president of the State.
If a person steady
with his (daily prayers of) namâz is hurting other people with his speech and
with his hands, it is permissible to inform the State about him so that he
should be chastised. In cases of ta’zîr that involve only rights of Allah, the
judge will inflict ta’zîr if at least one ’âdil person informs. For, the
judge’s own information will suffice for him to decide about the punishment.
Informing may be done by writing.
A person who buys
alcoholic drinks and drinks them or who does not perform his daily prayers of
namâz will be imprisoned, beaten, and then released. A person who is accused of
homicide, theft, or battery will be kept in prison until signs of tawba are
observed in his behaviour. For, people of this sort are harmful to others,
whereas people in the former example give harm only to themselves. A Muslim who
swears at a dhimmî will be punished with ta’zîr. It is a sinful act to swear at
a dhimmî. It sinful to accost a Jew or a Christian by addressing them as
‘disbelievers’. They do not deem themselves as disbelievers. So they become
hurt when they are called so.
It is necessary, and
profuse in yielding thawâb, for a woman to to wear all the ornamental
attirements and articles she has and to apply odorous perfumes to beautify
herself for her husband, provided the articles and perfumes being used be
lawful. Hadîth-i-sherîfs stating this are quoted in the four hundred and
sixty-fifth (465) page of the commentary to Shir’at-ul-islâm. If she does not
bedeck herself properly or neglects her (ablutions termed) ghusl or goes out
without her husband’s permission and without any rightful reason or refuses to
go to bed with her husband or beats her baby when it cries, her husband will
admonish her. If she ignores his admonitions or swears at her husband or shows
her face to men nâ-mahram to her or gives to others without her husband’s
permission things that are not customarily given (to others without husband’s
permission), or if she commits another
-180-
sin without the scope of punishments of
hadd, then it will be permissible for the husband to chastise her with ta’zîr,
i.e. to hit her slightly with an open hand or with a handkerchief. He cannot
hit her for any other reason whatsoever, not even slightly. [Although a woman’s
face is not one of her awrat parts, she will have to cover her face, too, if
otherwise a fitna may arise.] He will not inflict ta’zîr for not performing
(her daily prayers of) namâz. For, (her performing) namâz is not something
intended for the husband’s good. A father may inflict ta’zîr on his son below
the age of puberty for not performing namâz or for not fasting (in the blessed
month of Ramadân). The mother and the wasî of the child are equivalents for its
father. A person’s grown-up son, (in this respect,) is no different from people
unrelated to him.
Supposing a person’s
parents are committing sins; he will admonish them once. If they will not
admit, he should keep silent. He should invoke blessings on them. Supposing a
person’s young and widowed mother goes out to wedding parties or to other
places that may cause a fitna; the son will not prevent her; instead, he will
inform the judge, who in turn will prohibit her.
A child’s father is
accredited to use force (ikrâh) on it in matters pertaining to learning how to
read the Qur’ân
al-kerîm,
acts of âdâb[1] and farz and harâm and the creed of Ahl as-sunnat. In matters where he is accredited to beat his own child, he may beat an orphan as well. A
stick cannot be used to beat one’s child or wife. The beating may be done only with the hand or with a handkerchief. It cannot be done by kicking with one’s
foot or by hitting with one’s fist. A child may be punished with ta’zîr for guilts involving human rights. A child cannot be punished with ta’zîr for guilts
involving only rights of Allâhu ta’âlâ, such as alcoholic beverages, fornication, and theft.
No one will be held
responsible if a culprit sentenced to hadd or ta’zîr by the judge dies during
the infliction of punishment. If a woman dies during the ta’zîr being inflicted
on her by her husband, or if a pupil dies during the teacher’s ta’zîr,
compensation by the person who has caused the death will be compulsory in
either case. For, it is not wâjib for a person to punish his wife with ta’zîr;
it is something mubâh (permitted). In other words, Islam has never commanded a
man to beat his wife. And the gentle beating is only a permission. A husband or
an instructor who exceeds this limit
---------------------------------
[1] Please see the sixth chapter for ‘âdâb’.
-181-
will be punished with ta’zîr. And an
unfairly done gentle beating will also incur ta’zîr (on the husband or the
instructor, respectively). A person who transfers to another Madhhab, (i.e. to
one of the other three Madhhabs,) for a worldly purpose, e.g. in order to marry
a certain girl [or to eat an animal that is harâm to eat (according to their
own Madhhab), such as mussels, or an animal that has become a lesh because it
has been killed (in a manner outruled by Islam such as) by electrocution], will
be punished with ta’zîr. For, it is sinful for a non-mujtahid to change his
Madhhab for any worldly advantage. That act would mean to abhor one’s own
Madhhab. Please scan the fourth chapter of the fourth fascicle of Endless Bliss!
Ibni ’Âbidîn states as
follows in the fifty-first page of Radd-ul-muhtâr: “Something being done, e.g. an act of worship, has to accord
with the principles and rules of one of the four Madhhabs so that it can be
sahîh (valid). In other words, it should be done in such a way as will be
agreeable with all the principles established by one (of the four) Madhhab(s).
An act of worship performed by following the principles of one Madhhab in one
respect and those of another Madhhab in another respect will not be sahîh
(according to either Madhhab). For instance, if blood exudes from a person’s
skin, his or her ablution will be broken according to the Hanafî Madhhab. Yet
it will not be broken according to the Shâfi’î Madhhab. If a man touches the
skin of a woman nâ-mahram to him, both of them will lose their ablutions
according to the Shâfi’î Madhhab. According to the Hanafî Madhhab none of them
will lose their ablution. If both blood exudes from a man’s skin and he touches
a woman nâ-mahram to him, his ablution will be broken according to both
Madhhabs. Namâz that he performs with that ablution will not be sahîh. It
cannot be argued that “his ablution will be sahîh according to one Madhhab
although it is not sahîh according to the other Madhhab. So his namâz will be
sahîh.” That person would have mixed the two Madhhabs with each other, which is
called telfîq. A person who does so
is called a muleffiq. It has been stated unanimously (by Islamic scholars) that
namâz performed by a muleffiq will not be sahîh. An act of worship that is
sahîh in one Madhhab with respect to one of its precepts and so in another
Madhhab with respect to another one of its precepts will not be sahîh (in
either Madhhab). If a person who made an ablution by applying masah on
one-fourth of his head performs namâz after having touched a dog, this namâz
his will not be sahîh. For, the ablution he made was not sahîh according to the
Mâlikî
-182-
Madhhab. And when he touched the dog he was smeared with
something najs according to the Shâfi’î Madhhab. Likewise, a talâq (divorce)[1] accomplished by using
intimidation and force will be sahîh according to the Hanafî Madhhab. Therefore
a person (in the Hanafî Madhhab) may marry the sister of the woman whom he has
divorced (by using force). However, it will not be sahîh in the Shâfi’î
Madhhab. For that matter, it will not be sahîh for him to carry on a life of
double marriage with both sisters at the same time by achieving a manoeuvre
through the conveniences presented by both Madhhabs. (It might be pertinent at
this point to refer the dear reader to the initial eight chapters of the fourth
fascicle, and also the twelfth chapter of the fifth fascicle, of Endless Bliss!) The aforesaid
practices are examples of telfîq (or talfîq). Supposing, however, a person has accomplished doing
something, e.g. an act of worship, by observing all the principles and rules of
a certain Madhhab; it will be sahîh, according to a majority of Islamic
scholars, for that person to perform that same act once again, or to perform
something else, e.g. another act of worship, by following the guidelines
presented in another Madhhab. In fact, it will be sahîh according to a
consensus of all Islamic scholars to do so in case of a compelling situation.
Moreover, supposing a person performed a certain act of worship by observing
the principles of a certain Madhhab and thereafter found out that his worship
had not been sahîh in that Madhhab though it would have been sahîh according to
another Madhhab; he will have imitated that second Madhhab if he (considers)
that it will be sahîh in that second Madhhab, and the act of worship that he
performed will be sahîh now. [For, a necessity has arisen for him to imitate
the second Madhhab so that he may save that act of worship, (which he has
already performed.) It will be telfîq to follow an eclectic policy by
performing different acts in accordance with different Madhhabs, if it is done
with arbitrary worldly considerations or for pleasure. As is explained in the
subject of ghusl, (i.e. in the fourth chapter of the fourth fascicle of Endless Bliss,) when an ’udhr,
(i.e. an excuse, a hindrance, an inevitable situation,) arises, so that a
person cannot perform a certain act of worship within the rules and principles
of his own Madhhab, he will have to perform that worship by imitating another
Madhhab, (i.e. one of the other three Madhhabs.) If, as he imitates the other
Madhhab, there arises such another ’udhr
as will hinder him from imitating the
other
---------------------------------
[1] Please see the fifteenth chapter.
-183-
Madhhab although it is not a hindrance
against following his own Madhhab (in the face of that new problem), his
following both Madhhabs will not be telfîq, although it would not be sahîh
according to either Madhhab were it not for the (compelling situation called)
’udhr.] As another Madhhab is being imitated, it is necessary to obey the other
Madhhab in performing the acts of farz and avoiding the acts of mufsid in the
system of the other Madhhab, even though the rules pertaining to those acts may
be quite the other way round, e.g. harâm, in your own Madhhab. Your Madhhab’s
saying, “harâm,” about them will not apply to your case (so long as your
imitation continues).” A person who practises telfîq of Madhhabs will be
punished with ta’zîr. Please see the book entitled Seyf-ul-ebrâr, (by Muhammad
’Abd-ur-Rahmân Silhetî, an India scholar!)
[In the Mâlikî
Madhhab, red, yellowish or turbid blood that issues from the front of a girl
that has reached the age of nine is called the blood of haid (menorrhoea). It is
haid as soon as the bleeding starts. As the bleeding continues, it is menstrual
until immediately before the fifteenth day, and its continuation thereafter,
(as it may be the case,) is judged to be istihâda (menorrhagia). If her ’âdat
changes the next month, her new ’âdat is the longer period of menstruation she
has so far had plus three days. Bleeding that continues thereafter, as well as
bleeding that continues after the fifteenth day in any case, becomes istihâda.
When the kursuf (pad, tampon, sanitary towel) is found to be dry, or colourless
although it may be wet, this case must be taken as the end of the menstrual
period. Bleeding that a woman past the age of seventy undergoes is not haid; it
is istihâda. In case a woman’s bleeding continues intermittenly, the days spent
without bleeding are to be taken as days of purity. The number of running days
of purity is fifteen minimum. Bleeding that recurs before these fifteen days is
istihâda. Such days of purity are infinite, (i.e. there is not a maximum
limit.) If a bleeding stops and recurs fifteen days later, it is haid. Bleeding
undergone before a childbirth is haid. If the baby is lifted out of the woman’s
womb through an opening cut in her abdomen, the bleeding that occurs in the
immediate aftermath is not nifâs (puerperal discharge). Puerperal period is
sixty days maximum. If the puerperal bleeding stops and does not recur within
the following fifteen days, (the puerperal period has ended and) the woman undergoing
nifâs has become tâhir (clean, purified). Bleeding that occurs thereafter is
haid.]
A person who commits
qazf by way of allusion and/or
-184-
innuendo will be punished with ta’zîr. A
person who swears (at another) by allusion will not be punished with ta’zîr. A
person who seduces someone else’s wife and then marries her by making nikâh
will be imprisoned, being kept in confinement until he divorces her or,
otherwise, until he dies. Ta’zîr will be inflicted on a person who makes a show
of wara’ and taqwâ.
Guilts of ta’zîr
wherein human rights are involved are, like guilts of hadd, unpardonable.
It is stated in the
nineteenth article of Majalla: “It is not permissible to harm someone or to
give others harm in return for the harm they have given you.” Acts that are
mubâh will not be permissible if they should be harmful to others. A person
whose property has been stolen will not gain the right of stealing the thief’s
or other people’s property. It is the judge’s duty to get damages compensated
for in a manner compatible with Islamic rules. A damage canot be compensated
for by inflicting an equal or greater damage.
It is stated in Bahr-ul-fatâwâ: “A Muslim who sells
alcoholic beverages will be punished severely with ta’zîr. A person who hugs a
woman walking on the street and kisses her will be punished with ta’zîr. A
punishment of hadd will be executed after the culprit is made to stand, clad in
underwears only, and by inflicting flogging. If a woman whose husband is dead
marries another man before the end of the period called iddat,[1] the man who marries
her knowingly of it will be punished severely with ta’zîr. If a person marries
a woman whose husband is somewhere far away, he will be punished with ta’zîr,
and they will be separated. A woman who goes around in a man’s guise and a man
who goes around in a woman’s guise will be punished with ta’zîr, and they will
be sent to prison, to stay there until they make tawba. The same rule applies
to singers and to people who play musical instruments. A person who takes
someone else’s wife to his own home by using force will be punished vehemently
with ta’zîr, and the woman will be delivered back to her husband. A prostitute
cannot be evicted from her house or ousted from the street where she lives by
her neighbours. The judge will have her chastised with ta’zîr, which will be
inflicted either by beating her or imprisonment.
A person who practises
sorcery or incantation will be punished with ta’zîr. Ibni ’Âbidîn ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih’ states as
---------------------------------
[1] Please see the final part of the fifteenth
chapter for ’iddat.
-185-
follows in the introduction: “Two of the teachings that are
harâm (forbidden) to learn are sihr and kehânat. Sihr (sorcery, incantation) is
a branch of teachings that is exploited to achieve weird feats by unscientific
means. It is harâm to learn or teach sihr. It is harâm to learn it even for the
purpose of protecting people from harm or doing useful services. [Hence, it is
a grave sin to practise sihr, regardless of the altruism of the motive, such as
breaking a magic spell, inciting love and admiration between married couples,
and effecting defeat of the enemy forces. That altruistic motives will not make
this grave sin permissible is written in the book Hadîqa, in its section
dealing with ruinations that will be incurred by one’s entire body in the
aggregate.] There is a hadîth-i-sherîf interdicting the kind of sihr called
‘tivala’ and which is intended to incite a man to love his wife. That this
practice is harâm is written also in Fatâwâ-i-Hâniyya. In sihr, the written statements comprise also things other
than âyat-i-kerîmas and effective prayers. Tawba made by a person who practises
sihr or by a zindiq will not be accepted. Even if a person who practises sihr
does not hold the belief that he is capable of doing anything he likes, which
would cause him to (go out of Islam and) become an unbeliever, the judge will
have to punish him or her with ta’zîr since he or she engages in mischief,
(i.e. fitna and fesâd.) The ta’zîr will be inflicted by killing the culprit. If
the person practising sihr does something ruinous to îmân, that person will
become an unbeliever. ‘Kehânat’ means ‘telling about future events, (i.e.
divination, fortune-telling, soothsaying,)’. ’Arrâf means diviner, soothsayer.
Such people inform about the places of stolen things, about people who stole
them, and about sorcerers. Their information is based on guesswork and
suppositions, rather than on experimentation and calculation. Or, they say that
they learn it from genies.”
If something that
causes unbelief comes to person’s heart, it will not cause harm to his heart so
long as he does not utter it and feels sorry about it. It will show that he has
firm îmân. A person who swears at the Shaikhayn, (i.e. Hadrat Abû Bakr and
Hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’,) will become a murtadd (renegade,
apostate). He will be killed. A person who says that it is halâl for men to
wear silk clothes will not become an unbeliever. For, it is a controversial issue.
A person who says to another person, “Let us refer to Islam, too,” and the
latter replies, “I have no business with Islam,” the latter will become an
unbeliever. He will have to renew (tejdîd) both his îmân and his nikâh
(marriage). A Muslim should
-186-
obey both Islam and the laws in force in his country. If a
Muslim becomes a murtadd and goes to the Dâr-ul-harb, his property will pass on
to his inheritors’ possession. It will not become property of the Beyt-ul-mâl.
A dhimmî who says that he has become a Muslim will be admitted as a Muslim. A
disbeliever will not become a Muslim only by having himself circumcised. A
dhimmî who buys a Muslim jâriya will be punished vehemently with ta’zîr. He
will be ordered to sell the jâriya to a Muslim. A dhimmî who has bought a house
within the Muslims’ quarter will be ordered to sell it to a Muslim. A Muslim
who has rented out his house in the vicinity of a mosque to a dhimmî will be
ordered to evacuate the house and rent it out to Muslims who perform (their daily
prayers of) namâz. It is permissible for a dhimmî to buy a slave who also is a
disbeliever. If the slave becomes a Muslim, then the dhimmî will have to sell
the slave to a Muslim. If a dhimmî fornicates with a Muslim woman, he will be
flogged with a hundred stripes and sent to prison, being kept in confinement
for a long time. If the woman is muhsan (married) she will be punished with
rajm (stoning to that). If not, she will be flogged. A person who fornicates
with his daughter-in-law will be punished with rajm.”
A person who utters
fuhsh (indecent or obscene words) will be punished with ta’zîr. For, it is an
act of makrûh tahrîmî to utter fuhsh. It is stated in the eleventh of the
ruinations incurred by way of speech: ‘Fuhsh’ means ‘indecent or obscene speech’.
Anything that exceeds its (dictated) limit is called ‘fâhish (excessive,
exorbitant)’. In this context, it means to tell someone else about indecent
acts by using an overt language. An example of this is usage of a vulgar
language when you have to talk about conjugal relations, relieving nature, etc.
It is fuhsh, and so it is an act of makrûh tahrîmî, to express these events by
uttering their vulgar versions. For, doing so is incompatible with muruwwat and
diyânat; it will divest a person of virtues such as shame and bashfulness that
are inherent in his nature and, to the bargain, it will hurt others. Muruwwat
means ‘human virtues’, ‘manliness’. When it is necessary to talk about conjugal
relations or other bodily functions such as relieving nature, kinâya should be
preferred to frankness. Kinâya means to use indirect, euphemistic remarks instead of an open,
direct language. For instance, Allâhu ta’âlâ has said the word ‘lems’, which means ‘touch’, instead of the
word jimâ’ (coitus), in the Qur’ân al-kerîm. A hadîth-i-sherîf quoted by Ibni Abi-d-dunyâ and Abû Nu’aym
‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaihimâ’ reads: “It is harâm for people who utter fuhsh to enter
-187-
Paradise.” That is, they will not enter Paradise
unless they are tormented for it. This is the end of the passage we have
borrowed and translated from Hadîqa.
It is stated in the
book entitled Berîqa that Vekâhet is the thirty-sixth of heart diseases. ‘Vekâhet’ means ‘paucity
of hayâ (shame, bashfulness)’. ‘Hayâ’ means to be ashamed to do something
nasty, to beware of being upbraided. In English it may be explained with such
words as ‘feel shame’ and ‘bashfulness’ and ‘embarrassment’. It is stated in a
hadîth-i-sherîf: “Feel hayâ towards Allâhu ta’âlâ!” Feeling hayâ towards Allâhu ta’âlâ entails ceasing from the lustful and sensuous desires of one’s nafs. A person with hayâ will fear
Allâhu ta’âlâ. He will avoid acts and words that He does not approve of. It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Hayâ is from îmân. Talking fuhsh is from
jefâ. Îmân will guide to Paradise, whereas jefâ will lead to Hell.” Hayâ and îmân stay
together. If one of them disappears, the other one will follow suit. Hayâ that
a woman has been endowed with is a man’s hayâ nine times again. A
hadîth-i-sherîf reads: “Fuhsh is a blemish on a person, whereas hayâ is an ornament that
the human being has been gifted with.” The most valuable version of hayâ is hayâ that one has towards Allâhu ta’âlâ. Next comes hayâ towards Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’. And finally, hayâ towards other people. This is the end of our citation
from Berîqa. Unbelievers have been striving to strip Muslims of their hayâ,
whereby to destroy their îmân. They have been pioneering new-fangled fashions
of well-nigh nakedness at beaches, football games, and other sports activities.
They have been calling obscenities ‘teachings of sex’. In order to build a
younger generation without any sense of hayâ, they have been disguising the
so-called teachings of sex oriented towards nudism under cloaks such as ‘modernism’,
‘utilitarian approach’, and ‘practical and salutary ways of sports’. They have
been trying to mislead young people with casuistries such as, “We will join
civilized nations by doing as they do. We will keep in step with the time we
are living in. We will get rid of old-fashioned ways and thoughts.” Could
disbelief ever be said to be something good and useful on account of the
progress that disbelievers have made in technology or the recent inventions
they have achieved on the exploitation of matter and energy? Could their
accomplishments ever be a ground for suggesting that we should imitate their
interpolated religious rites or depraved life-styles? A Muslim simply does not
recommend that we
should imitate disbelievers’ practices
-188-
interdicted as they have been by Allâhu ta’âlâ. Nor does he say that they are useful. Harâms can by no means be good or useful. It is not a guilt to praise or imitate those practices of
disbelievers that have not been prohibited by the Islamic religion, not to mention those which Islam commands. Science and heavy industry, for instance, are
areas whereby disbelievers have attained the epithet ‘civilized’. A Muslim will praise disbelievers for such accomplishments of theirs. An enemy of Islam, on
the other hand, will praise their disbelief, their religious rites, their immoralities and other harmful and evil activities forbidden by Islam, by affixing
them to their so-called accomplishments. Allâhu ta’âlâ bestows comfort and peace on those who work in the way shown by
Islam and on those who teach Islamic knowledge, Islamic ma’rifats, Islamic
kerâmats and wonders, as He gives whatsoever they pursue to those who strive to
make progress in worldly knowledge and in science. Nations of disbelievers
focus all their attention and efforts on science. They do not study the Islamic
religion with a neutral and unbiased conscience. Consequently, as they make
progress in science and build up heavy industries, they cannot get out of the
filths of disbelief or protect themselves against the harms of harâms and their
wicked acts; they cannot attain comfort, peace, or happiness. The progress they
make in science cannot provide them a comfortable life. For, disbelief and
committing harâms will always and only produce harms, losses, and evils. They
always end in ruination. In stark contrast, îmân, acts of worship, and
beautiful morals will always and only produce goodness and peace. It is
ignorance and stupidity to praise the disbelievers’ acts counter to Islamic
belief and practices by putting forward the progress they have been making in
science. Muslims should emulate disbelievers in doing scientific research and
building up heavy industries. For, Islam commands to do so. Islam commands both
scientific research and moral beauty and doing good to others. Muslims should
avoid being ensnared into the error of looking on the disbelievers’ and
munâfiqs’ going about naked and engaging in pornografic talks in the name of
teachings of sex as useful things. They should be wise to the stratagem in
(those impostors’) commending those vices, which is merely a trap set for the
purpose of robbing them of their valuable hayâ and îmân. To see whether
something is useful or harmful, the criterion to be used is not whether or not
disbelievers have been practising it, but whether our blessed faith, Islam, has
commanded it or prohibited it.
-189-