Search This Blog

Islamophobia? Yes. What about the flip side, Christophobia: Yes? No?


Islamophobia? Yes. What about the flip side, Christophobia: Yes? No?

(N0te: I had started writing this piece much before the recent Executive orders on Immigrants)

I must start with expression of deep sympathy and pain for the innocent victims of “Islamophobia”. What follows is no attempt to minimize their humiliation and suffering. We all must do our bit to fight this evil. 

If a person is slapped because he is a Muslim, it needs to be condemned as Islamophobia. Two blocks down the road a person is kicked because he is Christian. Now what? Do they neutralize each other? No. Does one justify the other? Certainly not. But taken together the two incidents convey a sharp message. We have to change our orientation to look at this problem. Get out of this framework of “phobia”. Each side can tell the other emphatically “look who is talking”. Instead we have to plan, work and fight for Religious Tolerance and Understanding from both sides. 

We are very sensitive to possible phobia against Islam. But are we as sensitive to understand its teachings in this connection. Islam sets a very high bar for justice and equity in our problems with others and even with our enemies. Let me quote two very powerful ayahs of the Holy Text which illustrate the high standards of morality that Islam teaches to its followers:

يا أَيُّهَا الَّذينَ آمَنوا كونوا قَوّامينَ لِلَّهِ شُهَداءَ بِالقِسطِ ۖ وَلا يَجرِمَنَّكُم شَنَآنُ قَومٍ عَلىٰ أَلّا تَعدِلُوا ۚ اعدِلوا هُوَ أَقرَبُ لِلتَّقوىٰ ۖ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ خَبيرٌ بِما تَعمَلونَ
“O YOU who have attained to faith! Be ever steadfast in your devotion to God, bearing witness to the truth in all equity; and never let hatred of anyone1 lead you into the sin of deviating from justice. Be just: this is closest to being God-conscious. And remain conscious of God: verily, God is aware of all that you do.” (Surah Al Mai’dah (no. 5) Ayah 8).
Please note that we are commanded to show justice even to those who are our enemies and we hate them!

يا أَيُّهَا الَّذينَ آمَنوا كونوا قَوّامينَ بِالقِسطِ شُهَداءَ لِلَّهِ وَلَو عَلىٰ أَنفُسِكُم أَوِ الوالِدَينِ وَالأَقرَبينَ ۚ إِن يَكُن غَنِيًّا أَو فَقيرًا فَاللَّهُ أَولىٰ بِهِما ۖ فَلا تَتَّبِعُوا الهَوىٰ أَن تَعدِلوا ۚ وَإِن تَلووا أَو تُعرِضوا فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ كانَ بِما تَعمَلونَ خَبيرًا
“O YOU who have attained to faith! Be ever steadfast in upholding equity, bearing witness to the truth for the sake of God, even though it be against your own selves or your parents and kinsfolk. Whether the person concerned be rich or poor, God's claim takes precedence over [the claims of] either of them.1 Do not, then, follow your own desires, lest you swerve from justice: for if you distort [the truth], behold, God is indeed aware of all that you do!”  (Surah Al Nisa no. 4 Ayah 135).
Once again  please note the intensity of this injunction: uphold justice even if it goes against oneself, ones parents and relatives. 

If we are really concerned about the fear about and hate against our Deen, then we cannot and should not ignore these high principles of our Deen while claiming to protect it. We must attempt to see the other side of the story. On the other hand if the driving force is our antipathy and bias against “them”, then my views will sound senseless. 

While we are perfectly justified in complaining and protesting about Islamophobia, it is our Islamic duty to assess and find out how “Islam” is behaving in areas where it holds a majority. Taken together, we can achieve a sense of balance and treat the problem with justice and equity as demanded by our Deen. We must compare the extent and the manifestations of the “phobia” on both sides. How does ugly gestures, sarcastic remarks, pulling the scarf, spitting on the face and vandalizing a musjid compares with bombings and mass killing etc. 

The Growing List of Anti-Islam Incidents since ParisI quote here some statistics from both sides. 

 ThinkProgress has published an article on December 1, 2015 The Growing List Of Anti-Islam Incidents since Paris https://thinkprogress.org/the-growing-list-of-anti-islam-incidents-since-paris-ac243c55abde#.he8lruw9u  by Jack Jenkins, Celisa Calacal, and Adrienne Mahsa Varkiani. The list was last updated on October 28, 2016.

The opening statement says “The United States has seen an “unprecedented” spike in Islamophobia since the tragic terrorist attacks struck Paris, France on November 13, 2015, with Muslims all over the country falling victim to shootings, personal assaults, harassment, protests, and attacks on their houses of worship”.  Their list of hundred and eleven incidents is designed to track egregious instances of Islamophobia, focusing on violent attacks, threats, assaults, protests, firings, airport profiling cases, and instances of vandalism. They have not included the sharp rise in Islamophobic political rhetoric coming from Republican presidential candidates such as Donald Trump.

I have edited the very long list just to focus on the physical manifestations of the “Islamophobis” without trying to minimize the psychological trauma:
Al Noor was vandalized overnight with red spray paint. The culprits reportedly painted the word “TRUMP” on the outside of the mosque…………Police arrested a 20-year-old man for defacing a Muslim community center. The man reportedly covered the center in hateful messages, such as “Fuck Muslims,” “Fuck ISIS,” “Fuck Allah” and “Fuck Arabs.” He also allegedly scrawled the words “Donald Trump” on the walls……………..allegedly plotting to bomb a mosque -The men, who reportedly called themselves “the Crusaders,-”members of the group referred to Muslims as “cockroaches” and “fucking rag head bitches,” and one declared “the only good Muslim is a dead Muslim.” ………..The Islamic Center, was set on fire …………..A mosque in Rhode Island was vandalized……. A gunman opened fire on the Islamic Community of mosque early ;No one was injured, …………..The Islamic Center has been refused a security detail……posting threats online against a Mosque ………The Islamic Center outside Orlando was vandalized…… A woman in an SUV wearing a T-shirt with the word “Pride” threatened several people at the Islamic Association, telling them to get out of America and that someone was coming back to kill them……..The Islamic Association was desecrated overnight ……..The headquarters of the Islamic Society which also houses a mosque, was vandalized early Sunday morning. ……. TheIslam Center was burglarized, with security camera footage showing a white male breaking doors and windows before stealing computer equipment and causing an estimated $5,000 worth of damage………The Council on American-Islamic Relations reported a threatening Facebook comment ……………. Members of the Islamic Center repeatedly discovered alcohol bottles and other objects in the mosque’s parking lot,………….Common Council meeting to protest a proposed mosque in the region. ……residents actively protested the planned construction of a Muslim community center……………The Islamic Center was once again vandalized…………… Islamic Center defaced by red markings ……… A suspect was caught on camera vandalizing the Islamic Society ;using a machete to smash cameras, lights and windows………mosque was desecrated when someone reportedly wrapped bacon around the building’s door handles ………The Islamic Center fell victim to an apparent firebombing ;The source of the small blaze, which damaged the mosque door, appeared to be a molotov cocktail……..A fire erupted at the Mosque causing significant damage to the building while some 200 worshippers were inside. People were eventually able to escape the blaze………. The Islamic Center was vandalized over a weekend, with graffiti scrawled on the back of the building………..Two windows of the Islamic Cultural Center were shattered by vandals…….A fire broke out at the Islamic Society which officials are investigating as an arson and which mosque officials called a firebombing. No one was injured in the blaze………….— The words “hunt camp?” were spray-painted across the Islamic Center ……. A Sikh Gurdwara, or temple, was spray painted…………..A severed pig’s head was thrown at the door Al-Aqsa Islamic Society. ……….The mosque reported receiving a threatening voicemail from a man claiming to be with the “Jewish Defense League,” saying “We are checking if one Jew has been killed in California. You all will be sorry. You all will be killed.”………….notorious anti-Muslim activist Jon Ritzheimer reportedly posted a video of himself cocking a gun and threatening to go tell them to “go [expletive themselves] themselves,” while also encouraging all Americans to “carry a long rifle” everywhere they go……… A Kentucky mosque reportedly received a death threat via email…………… A group of armed protestors in military fatigues protested outside a mosque, holding Ted Cruz signs and placards that read “Stop the Islamization of America.”…………… A letter sent to a local mosque reportedly included a cartoon depiction of Muhammad — an action offensive to many Muslims — along with the instruction “Convert To Christianity Before It’s Too Late!!!” A man was charged with making a terrorist threat after posting a message with the phrase ”I’m going to shoot up a mosque” ………….Vandals reportedly spray-painted a picture ………..man left a voicemail on the answering machine of a local mosque that threatened to “come down” and “firebomb you and shoot whoever is there in the head.”A man wearing Muslim attire was inexplicably punched in the throat by a stranger while walking to the metro station………… A woman in Brooklyn was set on fire while window shopping, she first felt heat on her arm, noticed her shirt was on fire………… A woman attacked two Muslim women, tried to pull off the women’s hijabs……… A Muslim woman in Virginia claims that she was fired from her job because of her refusal to remove her hijab at work……….A Muslim man was attacked and beaten outside the Fort Pierce Islamic Center ….. A year ago on Independence Day, a Muslim woman was kicked and strip-searched by police officers during her commute home. …….A Muslim woman in D.C. was verbally and physically assaulted………….A Muslim couple was removed from a Delta Airlines flight from Paris to Cincinnati, Ohio, reportedly for saying “God” in Arabic. 

Few examples of the other side of the coin: Christophobia:

Recently I came across two short write-ups in the Economist of August 20, 2016 about Christians in the Arab world. As per the first one “Crimes and no punishment; Violence is only one of the problems faced by Christians in Egypt”. http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21705365-violence-only-one-problems-faced-christians-egypt-crimes-and-no. the Coptic Christians make up between 5% and 15% of the population in Egypt. Recently a shop-owner Ashraf, a Coptic Christian and a resident of Karam village in Minya, could not pay the dues to his Muslim suppliers resulting in an argument over money. A  rumour was started that Ashraf was having an affair with a Muslim woman. In May a group of enraged Muslim men burned down his house along with several other homes owned by Christians. Ashraf’s elderly mother was stripped naked and dragged around the village. Unbelievable, I feel. Tensions are rising between Egypt’s two largest religious communities. The head of the Coptic church, Pope Tawadros says attacks against Christians occur about once a month. At least ten incidents this year have resulted in discord, death and destruction. Three years ago protesting supporters of Muhammad Morsi were violently dispersed by the government. In response, they burned dozens of churches. Bishop Makarios, the church’s leader in Minya claims that Christians still face discrimination in the job market and are under-represented in government. He maintains that the authorities often treat them like second-class citizens. It is, for example, exceedingly hard to get the state to recognise conversions to Christianity from Islam. A teacher in Minya filmed his students mocking the jihadists of Islamic State. He was convicted in court of blasphemy and sentenced to three years in prison. Four other teenage students received sentences of up to five years in prison. An attempt to build a new church usually ends up in sectarian violence. Permits for building a new church is extremely difficult to obtain.

In the second article Under the Gun http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21705366-archbishop-laments-his-flocks-flight-under-gun  an archbishop laments his flock’s flight. Nicodemus Daoud Sharaf, archbishop of Mosul’s Syriac Orthodox church,  has been chased out of one
of Christianity’s oldest dioceses. Most of his congregation fled when the city was conquered by the
jihadists of Islamic State (IS) in July 2014; now he ministers to what is left of it in Erbil, the capital of Iraq’s Kurdish region Since then, he says, 32 churches in Mosul and in the surrounding plain of Nineveh have been burnt or put to other uses. His cathedral is now a mosque dedicated to jihad. “For the first time in the history of Christianity, there are no Christians praying in Mosul,” he adds, weeping. “Even under the Mongol hordes and Hulagu Khan [in the 13th century] it wasn’t so bad.  He adds that When Iraq became independent in 1932, Christians made up 12% of its people. By the time Saddam Hussein was ousted in 2003, they had fallen to 6%. Since America’s invasion, two-thirds of Iraq’s remaining 1.5m Christians have left. The full article discusses some more problems of Christians in Iraq. 

Another article in Economist of November 19, 2016 Tolerance on Trial http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21710290-accusation-blasphemy-upends-election-campaign-tolerance-trial describes religious bias in Indonesian politics when an accusation of blasphemy may destroy an entire election campaign. The campaign is set for election of Jakarta’s next governor on February 15th as “a showcase of Indonesia’s vibrant democracy”. The incumbent and front-runner is Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, known as Ahok, a Christian. In a speech to fishermen in late September “Ahok appeared to suggest that any attempt to dissuade Muslims from voting for him by citing a verse in the Koran that warns Muslims against taking Christians and Jews as allies was deceitful. He has apologised for his comments, insisting—not unreasonably—that he was criticising not the verse itself, but the use to which it was being put”. Muslim protest groups, however, accused him of denigrating the word of God. They stirred up outrage through social media and filed complaints with the police. The Islamic Defenders Front, or FPI, a Muslim vigilante outfit, organised an unusually large protest—of more than 100,000 people—in Jakarta on November 4th. Many carried placards calling for the governor to be jailed, or worse. On November 16th police investigating complaints of blasphemy said they were formally declaring him a suspect. The most recent opinion polls suggest that his lead in the race for governor may be slipping. Admittedly the fuss  is not all, or even mostly, about religion. Dirty politics has crept in. However Indonesia’s blasphemy law, as in Pakistan  is vague and confusing allowing courts to punish words or actions deemed “hostile” to religion by up to five years in prison. Andreas Harsono of Human Rights Watch reckons it is “very likely” that Ahok would be found guilty, based on precedent. In the dozens of blasphemy cases to go to trial since 2004 the defendant has always been convicted.

An additional news in the Economist of December 17th 2016 A massacre of Coptic Christians;
Egypt is hit by terror attacks is also relevant. http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21711734-terrorism-egypt-compounds-presidents-problems-egypt-hit-terror   The article mainly discusses the increasingly volatile situation in Egypt despite the draconian laws and a crackdown on dissent by Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi, Egypt’s president and self proclaimed protector. The violence against the government is extended to Christians also. A bomb tore through Cairo’s Coptic cathedral during Sunday mass, killing at least 25 worshippers, mostly women and children. The interior ministry say exiled Brotherhood leaders directed it, sending the bomber to train with jihadists linked to IS in the northern part of the Sinai peninsula. Whereas, after claiming the Coptic bombing, IS vowed to continue its “war against apostates”. Egypt’s Christian Copts, who make up about 10% of the country’s population, are a common target. They have long faced persecution by the Muslim majority asserts the article.

Judge for yourself. Should we just protest about “Islamophobia” or recognise the other side of the coin and call for religious tolerance on both sides?











Homicide and the Guide and Ruling for the Mandatory Capital Punishment in the Islamic Shari'ah

Homicide and the Guide and Ruling for the Mandatory Capital Punishment
 in the Islamic Shari'ah
ABSTRACT
“Nor take life - which God has made sacred - except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand Qisas or to forgive): but let him nor exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law). The ayah is giving the eight injunction in the set of ayahs termed sometimes as the “Ten Commandments of the Quran” (not to be taken literally) which we have been  discussing in the last few sessions. To start with, the ayah clearly prohibits taking of any human life because Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo has made human life sacred. Maudoodi points out that taking one’s own life is also covered by this ayah. The ayah adds “illaa bil haque” — except for a just cause. Basically there are only two circumstances in which taking a human life is justified in our Shari’ah:
  • Unjust murder of another human being; murder in genuine self-defense is exempted.
  • The second is mentioned in ayah 33 of Surah Al Ma’idah: “Verily the recompense of those who wage war against God and His Messenger, and endeavor to work corruption upon the earth is that they be killed….”
  • Some traditional scholars have added two other  categories. These are controversial because conflicting and inadequate rivaayaat have been given precedence over the clear and plain text of the Quran: 
Adultery; sexual indiscretion by married couple
A renegade from Islam 
Next the ayah declares that, in the event of  “qutelaa mazlooman” (slain wrongfully/unjustly) “verily we have made for his wali an authority” (“faqad ja-alnaa le walayyehi sultana”). Wali is usually taken to mean the heir of the victim who alone is the legal plaintiff and not the government.  The heir is authorized to demand qisaas, to pardon or receive blood-money. The head of the State has no role to play. This is in sharp contrast to the practice found in almost the whole of non-Muslim world. Further, there is an ongoing movement in the world to ban capital punishment. This is a non-starter for Muslims because our Quran declares categorically and for good reasons:3
“for, in [the law of] just retribution, O you who are endowed with insight, there is life for you, so that you might remain conscious of God!”
As per this ayah, this Wali has been given a “sultana” i.e. an authority which is described in another ayah:
“ O YOU who have attained to faith! Just retribution is ordained for you in cases of killing: the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the woman for the woman. And if something [of his guilt] is remitted to a guilty person by his brother, this [remission] shall be adhered to with fairness, and restitution to his fellow-man shall be made in a goodly manner. This is an alleviation from your Sustainer, and an act of His grace. And for him who, none the less, wilfully transgresses the bounds of what is right, there is grievous suffering in store”
The ayah is discussing “fi’l-qatla” which literally means "in the matter of the killed”. This is the ayah of Qisaas which Mohsin Khan labels as “the law of Equality in Punishment”. The jurists have carefully laid down that the law of qisaas refers to first degree murder only. After inspiring pardon and mercy, the ayah exhorts to follow the procedure in a “maa’roof” way i.e. in a suitable and universally recognised and appreciated manner and to settle the compensation with “ahsaan” i.e. with utter kindness and generosity. The ayah then calls this whole episode as a “takhfeef” i.e. concession from Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo and HIS “rehmah” i.e. mercy. At the end of the ayah Bari Ta’aala warns of “azaabun aleem” — painful punishment — to those who “mane’ ta’daa” i.e. transgress the limits. Coming back to the index ayah. Next it warns “fa-laa yusrif fil qatle” i.e. do not transgress in enforcing the retribution. Thus the Waliyye or the Court of Justice should impose the sentence only on the actual culprits; the pagan practice 0f punishing others as well is forbidden. It is also recommended to avoid the capital punishment in the presence of possible mitigating circumstances.The last segment again is open to two interpretations.

January 22, 2017

 Read ONLY,  IF AND WHEN you have time and mood for: 
 “An Ayah of the Quran for 30 Days” -- January 2017

Choose the section you have time, in the next 30 days to read this ayah:-

Prelude:                       Recurrent Primary Message          1st.         Page
Starting Dua, a note & The Ayah                                       2nd.      Page
A Short Summary:       For the Busy Bee                            Two       Pages
The Main Story:           Recommended                                Three    Pages
Footnotes:                   For the Perfectionist                         Two       Pages


PRELUDE
From the Pen and Perspective of a self-styled PPK Muslim (Proud, Practicing, Knowledgeable) with a humble submission that Islam totally rejects Blind Following BUT vigorously focusses on the Limitations of Pure Human Reasoning..............and clearly and comprehensively AlLAH knows best.

In the beginning of the seventh century C.E., the folks of Mecca and Medina had a fascinatingly unique window: they had direct access to the Heavens through one of their own. They were blessed with a regular stream of Divine counseling and guidelines. Question and answer sessions were part of the program. Even individual questioner was graced by an answer. In the short Introduction to this scheme they were assured that at the end of this twenty-two year project, Divine Directions and Admonitions will continue through the agency of the PEN. The whole discourse has been preserved and archived till eternity under the guarantee of our Lord and Creator. This record in known as the Quran. 

It should sound unbelievable but factually appears to be true: Many of our prevalent, widespread and important concepts and opinions about religious matters do not have a basis in the Quran and sometimes even appear to be in obvious conflict with the teachings of the Quran. It would be very educative and helpful to discuss an Ayah once a month to see if it supports or rejects our views and actions in our daily life. I wish and hope this email generates a fruitful interactive discussion. 

DUAA’
بِسمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحمٰنِ الرَّحيمِ


In the name of Allah, we praise HIM, seek HIS help and ask for HIS forgiveness. Whosoever Allah guideth none can misguide; whosoever HE allows to fall astray, none can guide him right. We bear witness that there is none worthy of worship but Allah alone and we bear witness that Mohammed, SAW is HIS slave-servant and the Seal of HIS Messengers. 
Further, we recall that Allah Ta’aala has declared in HIS Book1

 “He granteth wisdom to whom He pleaseth; and he to whom wisdom is granted receiveth indeed a benefit overflowing; but none will grasp the Message (or remember or receive admonition) but men of understanding (or intellect)”

 and we also recollect that he has warned us about the day of judgement2 

“Then on that day you shall most certainly be questioned about the boons (joy, pleasure).” 

We realise, that there cannot be a greater boon or blessing or benefit than wisdom and we wonder if this should be a timely reminder to very many of us sincere and practicing Muslims who use our critical thinking to enhance the mundane for ourselves and our families but resort to compulsory following -- taqleed, doctrine of classical Sunni Islamic Fiqh  -- in matters religion. 

(NOTE:  I have filtered out the proofs and details into the Footnotes for those who have the time and interest for them. The main email will then be reasonable length, hopefully for the busy majority. What follows is not a sermon; I do not feel qualified to give one, anyhow. I wish, it may provide a food for thought. A caveat seems in order: If the ayah selected pertains to issues we face in our daily life with our family, friends, neighbours or peers it may affect us personally and lead to some self analysis and soul searching which in turn could be divisive and distressing. If taken in the right spirit, it can be a humble attempt towards finding the “straight path”.) 

THE AYAH
Surah Al Isra’ (no. 17), Ayah 33
وَلا تَقتُلُوا النَّفسَ الَّتي حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ إِلّا بِالحَقِّ ۗ وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظلومًا فَقَد جَعَلنا لِوَلِيِّهِ سُلطانًا فَلا يُسرِف فِي القَتلِ ۖ إِنَّهُ كانَ مَنصورًا
“Nor take life - which God has made sacred - except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand Qisas or to forgive): but let him nor exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law). (Yousuf Ali)


A SHORT VERSION

“I am convinced about the veracity of my opinions, but I do consider it likely that they may turn out to be incorrect. Likewise, I am convinced about the incorrectness of the views different from mine, but I do concede the possibility that they may turn out to be correct.” Imam Shafa’i

Generally speaking the language of the Quran is lucid and clear; it is fun reading and studying it. However there are situations where the text sounds difficult and open to different interpretations. The present ayah is an example, as we will see shortly. It is giving the eight injunction in the set of ayahs termed sometimes as the “Ten Commandments of the Quran” (not to be taken literally) which we have been  discussing in the last few sessions. 

To start with, the ayah clearly prohibits taking of any human life because Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo has made human life sacred; they are innocent souls. Islam considers the killing of any human being to be a crime of the highest order, ranking next to associating partners with God………………(See the Main Story) Maudoodi points out that taking one’s own life is also covered by this ayah; hence suicide also should be haraam. As ours is a Divine religion, it is natural and realistic; it recognizes that sometimes taking one life may be required to save many others. Hence the ayah adds “illaa bil haque” — except for a just cause — after mentioning the prohibition of killing. These causes of justified killing are discussed elsewhere in the Text. Basically there are only two circumstances in which taking a human life is justified in our Shari’ah:
  • Unjust murder of another human being; murder in genuine self-defense is exempted.
  • The second is mentioned in ayah 33 of Surah Al Ma’idah: “Verily the recompense of those who wage war against God and His Messenger, and endeavor to work corruption upon the earth is that they be killed….” …………………(See the main story)
  • Some traditional scholars have added two other  categories for capital punishment. These are controversial because conflicting and inadequate rivaayaat have been given precedence over the clear and plain text of the Quran: 
Adultery; sexual indiscretion by married couple
A renegade from Islam 

Next the ayah declares that, in the event of  “qutelaa mazlooman” (slain wrongfully/unjustly) “verily we have made for his wali an authority” (“faqad ja-alnaa le walayyehi sultana”). That’s it. Now we have to figure out who the wali is and what is this authority. Before I proceed further let me point out that slain wrongfully refers to a first degree murder and not to ………………..(See the Main Story)

Wali is usually taken to mean the heir or next of kin of the victim in the present context. Technically the term also means “protector”……………….. As pointed out by Maudoodi, in a case of murder, the legal plaintiff is not the government but the guardian or the guardians of the victim; they are authorized to demand qisaas, to pardon or receive blood-money. The head of the State has no role to play. This is in sharp contrast to the practice found in almost the whole of non-Muslim world. Further, there is an ongoing movement in the world to ban capital punishment. This is a non-starter for Muslims. Our Quran mandates categorically and for good reasons:3

“for, in [the law of] just retribution, O you who are endowed with insight, there is life for you, so that you might remain conscious of God!”
As per this ayah, this Wali has been given a “sultana” i.e. an authority. Which authority? What authority? The ayah is quiet on this according to the general style of the Holy Text. But the reader in the early seventh century knew where to look in the Text for this authority:4

O YOU who have attained to faith! Just retribution is ordained for you in cases of killing: the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the woman for the woman. And if something [of his guilt] is remitted to a guilty person by his brother, this [remission] shall be adhered to with fairness, and restitution to his fellow-man shall be made in a goodly manner. This is an alleviation from your Sustainer, and an act of His grace. And for him who, none the less, wilfully transgresses the bounds of what is right, there is grievous suffering in store”

Basically religion is for the individual; but this individual is part of a society; each has to react with the other. Unless there are laws to regulate this interaction there will be chaos. To put it beautifully and effectively “This is the innermost reason why legislation plays so great a role within the ideology of Islam, and why the Qur'an consistently intertwines its moral and spiritual exhortation with ordinances relating to practical aspects of social life.” (Dr. Mohammed Asad)
The ayah is discussing “fi’l-qatla” which literally means "in the matter of the killed”. This will include all types of  homicide like  premeditated murder, murder under extreme provocation, culpable homicide, accidental manslaughter etc. However this ayah covers the first kind only. The legal retribution for unintentional homicide is discussed in Ayah 92 of Surah Al Nisa.

This is the ayah of Qisaas which is describing the “authority” referred to in our index ayah. Many of our traditional and well known mufassirs have translated Qisaas as the “law of retaliation”. Linguistically this is absolutely baseless………..(See the main story). Mohsin Khan labels it as “the law of Equality in Punishment”. The jurists have carefully laid down that the law of qisaas refers to first degree murder only — deliberate and premeditated. …………….(See the Main Story)
Nasr in his “Study Quran” refers to an interesting historical use of this ayah: ……….(See the main story)

The Quranic language is par excellence in its style and literary beauty which is the main basis for its Ejaaz. …………….To most of us this ayah seems to suggest apparently that if a slave is killed another slave should be killed for the ayah says “and the slave for the slave”………………The Quran here has adopted the elliptical mode of expression……. It orders that whoever kills — free, slave, free woman or slave woman — he or she will be punished; no other person can be replaced or added………………(See the main story) 

Dr. Asad brings in an important divergence in interpretation……………….. (See the Main Story)          
The Islamic Law of Qisaas, in one aspect differs fundamentally from the prevalent law and practice in most societies……………….(See the main story)

It cannot be over emphasised that ours is a very Natural and Practical religion. It recognizes the need for capital punishment and legislates for it. At same time, as if in the same breath it strongly recommends forgiveness on the basis of common brotherhood and offers practical steps for it. After inspiring pardon and mercy, it exhorts to follow the procedure in a “maa’roof” way i.e. in a suitable and universally recognised and appreciated manner and to make the compensation with “ahsaan” i.e. with utter kindness and generosity. The ayah then calls this whole episode as a “takhfeef” i.e. concession from Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo and HIS “rehmah” i.e. mercy.

 At the end of the ayah Bari Ta’aala warns of “azaabun aleem” — painful punishment — to those who “mane’ ta’daa” i.e. transgress the limits. The transgression is a pointer to and warning against………….

Coming back to the index ayah. Next it warns “fa-laa yusrif fil qatle” i.e. do not transgress in enforcing the retribution. Thus the Waliyye or the Court of Justice should impose the sentence only on
the actual culprits; the pagan practice 0f punishing others as well is forbidden. It is also recommended to avoid the capital punishment in the presence of possible mitigating circumstances.

The last segment again is open to two interpretations. It reads “for he is helped”. Who is helped? How he is helped?………………….(See the Main Story)


........and Allah knows best. 
May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding--“fahm”--of our Deen, Aameen
THE MAIN STORY

“I am convinced about the veracity of my opinions, but I do consider it likely that they may turn out to be incorrect. Likewise, I am convinced about the incorrectness of the views different from mine, but I do concede the possibility that they may turn out to be correct.” Imam Shafa’i
Generally speaking the language of the Quran is lucid and clear; it is fun reading and studying it. However there are situations where the text sounds difficult and open to different interpretations. The present ayah is an example, as we will see shortly. It is giving the eight injunction in the set of ayahs termed sometimes as the “Ten Commandments of the Quran” (not to be taken literally) which we have been  discussing in the last few sessions. 

To start with, the ayah clearly prohibits taking of any human life because Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo has made human life sacred; they are innocent souls. Islam considers the killing of any human being to be a crime of the highest order, ranking next to associating partners with God. The Quran has declared that unjust killing of one soul is tantamount to killing the whole of humanity. It’s punishment says the Quran is eternal Hell. The warning against slaying souls that God has made inviolable is also found in ayah 151 of Surah Al An’am and ayah 68 of Surah Al Furqan. Maudoodi points out that taking one’s own life is also covered by this ayah; hence suicide also should be haraam. As ours is a Divine religion, it is natural and realistic; it recognizes that sometimes taking one life may be required to save many others. Hence the ayah adds “illaa bil haque” — except for a just cause — after mentioning the prohibition of killing. These causes of justified killing are discussed elsewhere in the Text. Basically there are only two circumstances in which taking a human life is justified in our Shari’ah:
  • Unjust murder of another human being; murder in genuine self-defense is exempted.
  • The second is mentioned in ayah 33 of Surah Al Ma’idah: “Verily the recompense of those who wage war against God and His Messenger, and endeavor to work corruption upon the earth is that they be killed….” That is, ignoring the collective will of Muslims in any acton against the life, property and honor of other Muslims will be dealt with an iron hand. In other words to curb fitna in the society, fighting a war, rebellion against a government or any upheaval or turmoil in the society.
  • Some traditional scholars have added two other  categories for capital punishment. These are controversial because conflicting and inadequate rivaayaat have been given precedence over the clear and plain text of the Quran: 
Adultery; sexual indiscretion by married couple
A renegade from Islam 

Next the ayah declares that, in the event of  “qutelaa mazlooman” (slain wrongfully/unjustly) “verily we have made for his wali an authority” (“faqad ja-alnaa le walayyehi sultana”). That’s it. Now we have to figure out who the wali is and what is the authority. Before I proceed further let me point out that slain wrongfully refers to a first degree murder and not to manslaughter as the concept of “zulm” in Islam necessarily refers only to intentional misconduct.

Wali is usually taken to mean the heir or next of kin of the victim in the present context. Technically the term also means "protector" or "defender of [one's] rights”. Zamakhshari, therefore, observes that it may also apply to the government (or sultan) as he is  the "protector" or "defender of the rights" of all its citizens. Mufti Mohammed Shafi regards lineal heir as the real  heir; in his absence the head of the govt. is the legal heir. As pointed out by Maudoodi, in a case of murder, the legal plaintiff is not the government but the guardian or the guardians of the victim; they are authorized to demand qisaas, to pardon or receive blood-money. The head of the State has no role to play. This is in sharp contrast to the practice found in almost the whole of non-Muslim world. Further, there is an ongoing movement in the world to ban capital punishment. This is a non-starter for Muslims. Our Quran mandates categorically and for good reasons:3

“for, in [the law of] just retribution, O you who are endowed with insight, there is life for you, so that you might remain conscious of God!”
As per this ayah, this Wali has been given a “sultana” i.e. an authority. Which authority? What authority? The ayah is quiet on this according to the general style of the Holy Text. The reader in the early seventh century knew where to look in the Text for this authority:4

O YOU who have attained to faith! Just retribution is ordained for you in cases of killing: the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the woman for the woman. And if something [of his guilt] is remitted to a guilty person by his brother, this [remission] shall be adhered to with fairness, and restitution to his fellow-man shall be made in a goodly manner. This is an alleviation from your Sustainer, and an act of His grace. And for him who, none the less, wilfully transgresses the bounds of what is right, there is grievous suffering in store”

Basically religion is for the individual; but this individual is part of a society; each has to react with the other. Unless there are laws to regulate this interaction there will be chaos. To put it beautifully and effectively “This is the innermost reason why legislation plays so great a role within the ideology of Islam, and why the Qur'an consistently intertwines its moral and spiritual exhortation with ordinances relating to practical aspects of social life.” (Dr. Mohammed Asad)

The ayah is discussing “fi’l-qatla” which literally means "in the matter of the killed”. This will include all types of  homicide like  premeditated murder, murder under extreme provocation, culpable homicide, accidental manslaughter etc. However this ayah covers the first kind only. The legal retribution for unintentional homicide is discussed in Ayah 92 of Surah Al Nisa.

This is the ayah of Qisaas which is describing the “authority” referred to in our index ayah. Many of our traditional and well known mufassirs have translated Qisaas as the “law of retaliation”. Linguistically this is absolutely baseless. According to all the classical commentators the word Qisaas is almost synonymous with musaawah, i.e., "making a thing equal (to another thing)”; in this instance, making the punishment equal (or appropriate) to the crime. Hence Qisaas can be best rendered as "just retribution" and not (as has been often, and erroneously, done) as "retaliation". Yousuf Ali calls it “law of equality” which has much mitigated the horrors of the pre-Islamic custom of retaliation and meets the strict claims of justice. Mohsin Khan labels it as “the law of Equality in Punishment”. The jurists have carefully laid down that the law of qisaas refers to first degree murder only — deliberate and premeditated. Qisaas is not applicable to manslaughter, due to a mistake or an accident. In all these cases there is no capital punishment. Obviously, there should be no subterfuges, no bribes, no unseemly byplay etc. in tackling such cases.

Nasr in his “Study Quran” refers to an interesting historical use of this ayah: “This verse was invoked by ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ (d. 43/ 664) at the arbitration (37/ 658) that took place after the Battle of Ṣiffīn (37/ 657) as part of his argument that Muʿāwiyah ibn Abī Sufyān (then the governor of Syria) had the right to assume the caliphate. ʿAmr’s argument was that Muʿāwiyah, as the walī (in the sense of a near male relative) of his “unjustly slain” cousin, the third Caliph, ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān, should be granted sulṭān, meaning political authority”. I am probably missing here something for I see very devious logic here. Caliphate was not a private property to be transferred to the heirs of the deceased.

The Quranic language is par excellence in its style and literary beauty which is the main basis for its Ejaaz. Most of the present day Arabs also are probably ignorant of this. We, the Ajmi cannot even visualize it. Yet, this does not really matter most of the time. It does become an issue though, as in this ayah when we fail to appreciate the meaning of what Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo is talking about because of this  style. To most of us this ayah seems to suggest apparently that if a slave is killed another slave should be killed for the ayah says “and the slave for the slave”; it also speaks of “free for the free” and “woman for the woman”. It almost sounds as if who the killer is does not matter. This would be a great travesty of justice which is one 0f the essence of Islam. The Quran here has adopted the elliptical mode of expression. The meaning was very clear to the Bedouins of those days when for example if a “free” kills a person, he will not be touched and instead few of his slaves would be killed. The ayah puts a halt to this wrongful practice. It orders that whoever kills — free, slave, free woman or slave woman — he or she will be punished; no other person can be replaced or added.  A woman is mentioned separately because her position as a mother or an economic worker is different. She does not form a different class, but a division in the other two classes. 

Dr. Asad brings in an important divergence in interpretation. When it comes to remittance, the ayah uses the term “his brother”. Most exegesis refer to this as the victims brother. However Dr. Asad is of the opinion that “his” here pertains to the guilty party and “brother” denotes his brother in Faith that could extend to the whole community and its legal organs. This gives an entirely new outlook to approach the problem.5 Yousuf Ali also maintains that the term “The brother” is perfectly general; all men are brothers in Islam. In this, and in all questions of inheritance, females have similar rights to males, and therefore the masculine gender imports both sexes.

The Islamic Law of Qisaas, in one aspect differs fundamentally from the prevalent law and practice in most societies. In a case of murder the Plaintiff in Islamic jurisprudence is the heir of the deceased and not the State. The latter is required to control and felicitate the smooth enactment of the law. Only the heir has the right to demand execution or blood money or grant pardon. The head of the State does not have this power in our Shari’ah. If there is no heir or is not interested then the State takes this responsibility.

It cannot be over emphasised that ours is a very Natural and  Practical religion. It recognizes the need for capital punishment and legislates for it. At the same time, as if in the same breath it strongly recommends forgiveness on the basis of common brotherhood and offers practical steps for it. After inspiring pardon and mercy, it exhorts to follow the procedure in a “maa’roof” way i.e. in a suitable and universally recognised and appreciated manner and to make the compensation with “ahsaan” i.e. with utter kindness and generosity. The ayah then calls this whole episode as a “takhfeef” i.e. concession from Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo and HIS “rehmah” i.e. mercy.

 At the end of the ayah Bari Ta’aala warns of “azaabun aleem” — painful punishment — to those who “mane’ ta’daa” i.e. transgress the limits. The transgression is a pointer to and warning against the extended blood feuds that were often generated by such crimes in pre-Islamic Arabia. Only the actual murderer is subject to punishment. Additionally the murderer should not be tortured, maimed, or mutilated before execution. Warning of  painful punishment is is a common style of God Almighty after an injunction. The only sanction these commandments of Allah have is our Taqwaa; God consciousness; our firm and practical belief in HIM and the day of judgement. HE does not employ any moral police force to enforce HIS instructions. In the absence of taqwaa, all the words of our Lord and Creator will fall on deaf ears.  

Coming back to the index ayah. Next it warns “fa-laa yusrif fil qatle” i.e. do not transgress in enforcing the retribution. Thus the Waliyye or the Court of Justice should impose the sentence only on the actual culprits; the pagan practice 0f punishing others as well  is forbidden. It is also recommended to avoid the capital punishment in the presence of possible mitigating circumstances.

The last segment again is open to two interpretations. It reads “for he is helped”. Who is helped? How he is helped? According to Razi, a Persian Hadith scholar “he” i.e. the victim is avenged in this world by the retribution exacted from his murderer, and in the life to come, blessed by the special grace which God bestows on all who have been slain without any legal or moral justification. According to some scholars “he” refers to the guilty. It is assured that he will be helped adequately by the Divine law of Qisaas and should be content on that. Maulana Maudoodi has a dissenting note to add: “It has not been defined how succor will be given because at the time of its revelation the Islamic State had not yet been established. After its establishment it was made clear that a guardian was not authorised to enforce retribution by murdering the criminal. The Islamic Government alone is legally authorized to take retribution; therefore, succor for justice should be demanded only from it”. 

........and Allah knows best. 
May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding--“fahm”--of our Deen, Aameen.


FOOTNOTES

(1) Surah 2/269
يُؤتِي الحِكمَةَ مَن يَشاءُ ۚ وَمَن يُؤتَ الحِكمَةَ فَقَد أوتِيَ خَيرًا كَثيرًا ۗ وَما يَذَّكَّرُ إِلّا أُولُو الأَلبابِ


(2) Surah 102/8
ثُمَّ لَتُسأَلُنَّ يَومَئِذٍ عَنِ النَّعيمِ
(3) Surah 2/179
وَلَكُم فِي القِصاصِ حَياةٌ يا أُولِي الأَلبابِ لَعَلَّكُم تَتَّقونَ

(4) Surah 2/178
ا أَيُّهَا الَّذينَ آمَنوا كُتِبَ عَلَيكُمُ القِصاصُ فِي القَتلَى ۖ الحُرُّ بِالحُرِّ وَالعَبدُ بِالعَبدِ وَالأُنثىٰ بِالأُنثىٰ ۚ فَمَن عُفِيَ لَهُ مِن أَخيهِ شَيءٌ فَاتِّباعٌ بِالمَعروفِ وَأَداءٌ إِلَيهِ بِإِحسانٍ ۗ ذٰلِكَ تَخفيفٌ مِن رَبِّكُم وَرَحمَةٌ ۗ فَمَنِ اعتَدىٰ بَعدَ ذٰلِكَ فَلَهُ عَذابٌ أَليمٌ
(5) Dr. Asad: “The segment  فَمَن عُفِيَ لَهُ مِن أَخيهِ شَيءٌ literally means ‘and he to whom [something] is remitted by his brother’. There is no linguistic justification whatever for attributing - as some of the commentators have done - the pronoun "his" to the victim and, thus, for assuming that the expression "brother" stands for the victim's "family" or "blood relations". The pronoun "his" refers, unquestionably, to the guilty person; and since there is no reason for assuming that by "his brother" a real brother is meant, we cannot escape the conclusion that it denotes here "his brother in faith" of "his fellow-man" - in either of which terms the whole community is included. Thus, the expression "if something is remitted to a guilty person by his brother" (i.e., by the community or its legal organs) may refer either to the establishment of mitigating circumstances in a case of murder, or to the finding that the case under trial falls within the categories of culpable homicide or manslaughter - in which cases no capital punishment is to be exacted and restitution is to be made by the payment of an indemnity called diyyah (see 4:92) to the relatives of the victim. In consonance with the oft-recurring Qur'anic exhortation to forgiveness and forbearance, the "remission" mentioned above may also (and especially in cases of accidental manslaughter) relate to a partial or even total waiving of any claim to indemnification.”