This post is only for those above 18; hence, if you are under this age, kindly have enough courtesy to close the page right-away, this is not for you.
Please read part III first, or you won’t be able to understand this post.

There is consensus among Muslim scholars that the punishment for fornicators, if they were unmarried, is flogging. But when it comes to married persons who commit adultery, Muslim scholars were split into 2 teams, the first stated that the punishment in such case is stoning to death, and the second denied stoning and said that flogging is the punishment for all cases. Let’s indulge into their debate so that we may understand this controversial issue.

Please note that a married person is defined as: “An adult male or female who is free, sane and has had complete sexual intercourse with a lawfully wedded partner of the same mentioned qualities. This marriage is proven either by confession, or by the testimony of 2 witnesses, or through evidence: like the existence of a known born child for the couple.”

The first team said: Allah gradated the application of the punishment against fornication because in the pre-Islamic era, most Arabs were used to taking many wives and having illicit sexual intercourse without deeming it something immoral. Islam placed rules restricting polygyny, and followed a gradated method in abolishing fornication. The first stage on the path of abolishing it was the verses that say: “If any of your women commit fornication, call in four male witnesses from among yourselves against them, if they testify to their guilt, confine them to their houses until death comes to them, or until Allah prescribes a way out for them. And those two of you who commit it, punish them both. If they repent and mend their ways, leave them alone. Allah is the Most-Relenting and Most-Merciful.” [The Qur’an (4:15-16)]

In the above verses Allah orders Muslims to confine the adulteress inside her house after punishing her and her partner. The verses also make it clear that the crime cannot be proven except through 4 witnesses who would testify in the manner described earlier. As for the punishment it was called Ta’zir, it’s a punishment left for the discretion of the judge according to the case at hand, it varies from verbal tough reprehension to flogging with maximum 39 stripes. So the judge may choose the proper punishment according to the ugliness of the crime (i.e. whether the fornicator was married or not, having children or not, having one wife or more, etc…)

Later on the verses of chapter 24 were revealed specifying a punishment of 100 stripes against anyone who commit fornication as explained in the previous post. Consequently, the confinement within the house was lifted from upon women. Later on, when piety and chastity were deeply rooted in the community, the final stage was promulgated by Prophet Muhammad when he said: “Receive this injunction from me, receive from me, Allah has prescribed a way out for women, a 100 strips punishment for the unmarried man and woman, and an exile for one year, and as for those who are married a 100 stripes and stoning.” [Recorded by Muslim].

It was recorded that Prophet Muhammad gave a verdict of stoning against a companion named Ma‘ez when he confessed that he had committed adultery, and he also gave a similar verdict against the Ghamedeyyah woman when she gave the same confession. ‘Omar Ibn Al-Khattab was recorded to say: “Allah has sent Muhammad with the truth and revealed to him the Qur’an. Among what was revealed is the verse of stoning those who commit adultery, we read it and understood it perfectly well. The prophet applied stoning and we applied it after him, I’m afraid that a time may come when people will say ‘We can’t find stoning mentioned anywhere in the Qur’an’, so they will forsake it and go astray by forsaking a punishment prescribed by Allah. Stoning is the punishment for the adulterer and adulteress if the prescribed evidence was established, or if pregnancy occurred (i.e. for a married woman whose husband has been absent for over a year), or with confession.” [Recorded by Bukhari, Muslim and others].

Lady ‘Āʾishah, Obai Ibn-Ka’b, Zayd Ibn-Thabet and ‘Ali Ibn Abi-Taleb were also recorded to state that stoning was prescribed by the prophet. Based on the previous, stoning was considered the rightful punishment for adultery by the majority of scholars. They stated some logical reasons for prescribing stoning as a punishment for adultery and not flogging, they said:

1. A married person has a spouse with whom he or she can satisfy his or her sexual lusts, unlike the single person who can fall more easily into this sin.
2. The married person does not only commit the crime of fornication, but he or she also betrays the unaware trusting spouse.
3. Allah has granted a way out for men to quench their sexual lusts without ever needing to commit this abominable deed. Men can marry up to 4 wives (For more understanding, kindly read my previous posts: Polygyny In Islam Part I & Part II).
4. Allah granted every woman a way out if she didn’t love her husband, she can ask for divorce or Khol’ and marry another person whom she loves.
5. Allah considers marriage a solemn covenant, betraying it is like betraying Allah’s solemn trust.
6. The possibility of having a distorted family lineage and false ancestry is much higher with adultery than with fornicating unmarried persons.
7. Adultery is a crime that rocks the community and spreads lack of trust feelings among all spouses. This could bring down calm secured houses.

The method prescribed by jurists for stoning stipulate that: While applying the punishment, if the convict ran away out of fear while stoning, and he or she was receiving the punishment after confessing, then he or she should not be followed and is left to get away and repent. But if this person runs away from stoning after being found guilty by the testimony of witnesses, then he or she is followed and stoned to death. If the adulteress was pregnant, she is released until she delivers her baby and suckles him or her for 2 years. If the baby had no one to look after him or her, the woman is left until the baby grows up, needs her no more and can manage to take care of him or her self, then the punishment is applied without further delay.

The second team said: It’s true that Prophet Muhammad ordered the application of stoning 2 times following the laws of the Torah (Leviticus, Chapter 20), but this was before he received the verses of chapter 24 in the Qur’an, which abrogated the old laws. Prophet Muhammad always applied the laws of Moses until he receives new laws abrogating them. There is no stoning in Islam at all. All of the traditions upon which the first team built its opinion were either weak, or narrations of individuals that could not stand as evidence above the Qur’an, or a proof for such a punishment. The following are a few logical points raised against stoning:

1. The tradition recorded by Muslim relating Prophet Muhammad’s words promulgating stoning has “Hushaim Ibn Bashir” in its chain of narrators, and Hushaim was accused of forging traditions, therefore, this is a weak deceitful tradition.
2. The wording of the tradition in Muslim implies that the prophet was speaking to a lot of companions, then how come that the number of those who were recorded to confirm stoning from among the companions did not exceed 8 companions and all of these traditions were weak and unreliable?!
3. The wording of the tradition contradicts the prophet’s application, for Prophet Muhammad never flogged before stoning and he never banished any fornicator.
4. How could ‘stoning’ be ‘a way out’ for women when they commit adultery?! The wording doesn’t make any sense, which degrades the classification of this tradition from ‘Authentic’ to ‘Fabricated’.
5. As for the very long tradition attributed to ‘Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, and recorded by Bukhari, this tradition is a dilemma itself; if ‘Omar was speaking to the companions who lived with the prophet, and knew very well his teachings, then how come the wording implies that ‘Omar was speaking to a bunch of people who were unaware of stoning or were denying it?!
6. If there is a verse that prescribes stoning, then how come that it was not written down inside the Qur’an?! Those who say that it was abrogated in wording but its ruling remained applicable are worsening the situation, there is absolutely no meaning nor logic in cancelling a verse prescribing a divine law while its ruling is still applicable, it’s as if Allah wants us to go astray.
7. Allah promised to keep His final testament intact, complete and safe, so how come that any verse from amidst its context is lost and there isn’t even one recurrent tradition mentioning it?!
8. The tradition recorded by Ibn Mājah reporting the words of Lady ‘Āʾishah, in which she states the wording of the clamed stoning verse, is classified as weak. Even if it was raised to the state of ‘Good by others’, it will remain to be a speculative narration of an individual.
9. The tradition recorded by Ahmad on the authority of ‘Ali Ibn Abi-Taleb is classified ‘Very Weak,’ which makes it even worse than the previous tradition recorded by Ibn Mājah.
10. The few narrations recorded on the authority of the companions regarding stoning were speculative weak traditions except ‘Omar’s tradition, which remains a narration of individual even if authenticated by Bukhari. There aren’t even 10 different weak traditions recorded on the authority of the companions that confirm stoning.
11. The juristic rule says: “Punishments are cancelled by suspicion.” Prophet Muhammad himself said: “Forsake what fills you with doubt to what makes you rest assured.” Lady ‘Āʾishah said: “Ward off punishments from upon the people as much as you can. It is better for a judge to be mistaken in pardoning than to be mistaken in punishment.” So how can we apply such a brutal punishment when all of the evidence supporting it is speculative and contradicts the Qur’an?!

Then the second team then submitted their rebuttal evidences, they said:

• Bukhari recorded a tradition reported by a follower named Ibn Al-Shaibany who said: “I asked ‘Abdullah Ibn Abi-Awfa: ‘Did the prophet P.B.U.H. ever apply stoning?’ He answered: ‘Yes.’ So I asked: ‘Before or after Chapter ‘An-Nur’?’ He answered: ‘I don’t know.’ ” [Recorded by Bukhari]

1. Chapter 24 was revealed after the “Slander incident” (Arabic: حادثة الإفك) by one month, approximately in Ramadan of the 6^th year A.H.
2. ‘Abdullah Ibn Abi-Awfa was one of the companions. His regular companionship to the prophet started in 6 A.H.
3. He witnessed “Al-Hudaibeyah treaty” with the prophet in Dhul-Qe’dah of the 6^th year A.H., this was 1 month after chapter 24 was revealed.
4. ‘Abdullah witnessed the last 5 years of the prophet’s life, but still he didn’t have any knowledge whether stoning was applied before or after the verses of chapter 24.

Putting the previous together, you should be able to deduce that:

1. ‘Abdullah never witnessed the prophet applying or ordering the punishment of stoning.
2. The prophet didn’t apply stoning during the last 5 years of his life.
3. The probability that chapter 24 nullified the stoning laws of the Torah are now sky high.

• The previous translation of the Qur’anic verses (4:15-16) is wrong, the correct translation is as follows: “If any of your women is involved in an unlawful sexual relation, call in four male witnesses from among yourselves against them, if they testify to their guilt, confine them to their houses until death comes to them, or until Allah grants them a way out. And if two men from among you commit it, punish them both. If they repent and mend their ways, leave them alone. Allah is the Most-Relenting and Most-Merciful.” [The Qur’an (4:15-16)]

These two verses are not speaking about fornication or adultery, they are speaking about sapphism and sodomy. This was one of the recorded opinions for Mujahed Ibn-Jabr the student of Ibn-’Abbās, and the famous Mu’tazily scholar Abu-Muslim Al-Asfahany (Died 934 AD). The verses were revealed prescribing the punishment for such unlawful relationships. A female who commits sapphism should be confined to her house until a man proposes to take her as a lawful wife, and this is her way out. As for sodomites, they should be punished by flogging each one of them 100 stripes if intromission occurs. But if there was no intromission, then the judge may prescribe the punishment he deems appropriate with the condition that he doesn’t exceed 39 stripes.

• Chapter 24 speaks about fornicators, whether married or unmarried. This is obvious in the verses that say: “One who accuses his wife and has no witnesses except himself shall swear four times by Allah that his charge is true, and the fifth time, that Allah’s curse may be upon him if he is telling a lie. The wife shall receive no punishment, if she bears witness four times in the name of Allah that her husband has lied, and a fifth time that Allah’s wrath will be upon her if he is telling the truth.” [The Qur’an (24:6-9)]

The punishment mentioned in these verses is the one prescribed 3 verses earlier. This is an ultimate proof that the flogging punishment includes both married and unmarried persons.

• Allah says in the Qur’an: “If any of you cannot afford to marry a free believing woman let him marry one of his believing maids whom he possesses. Allah best knows your faith. You are one of another. So marry them with their owner’s permission, and give them their dowry according to what is fair, neither committing fornication nor taking secret paramours. And if, after they are married, they commit adultery they shall have half the punishment prescribed for a free woman.” [The Qur’an (4:25)].

This verse prescribed the adultery punishment for a wife who was originally a female slave. She should receive half the punishment of the wife from free origins. If the punishment for adultery was stoning, how can this be split into two halves?! Of course the punishment meant here is flogging her with 50 stripes. This further proves that flogging is the lawful punishment for adultery and not stoning.

• If the method of applying the death penalty on “killers” was chosen to be the least painful and most quick, and so was the case with the enemies who fight against Muslims, then how come that the method chosen to punish a Muslim who commits adultery would be stoning?! Is a Muslim adulterer worse than the enemy who is killing and persecuting Muslims?! Didn’t Prophet Muhammad say: “If you kill, then make it a quick death”, how could stoning be a quick death?!

The previous was a simplified record of the debate that has been occurring since the 1^st century A.H. Which of the two teams is more correct is something that you have to figure out on your own after a complete fair study. At the end, whether you choose to follow this opinion or that, put 2 things in mind, First: harsh punishments are meant to be deterring against grave sins, and disciplining for sinners, they are not meant to torture people, they are prescribed for the common good of the community, not the opposite. Hence, if applying any punishment will result in any different result, you should seriously doubt its correctness. Second: Only immoral cheating adulterers fear and refuse all punishments, so don’t take their side.
All I wanted to do by tackling this issue in such a manner was to draw your attention towards the critical thinking of the early generations, which unfortunately, Muslims don’t have today. Today, Muslims follow blindly like other nations did during their dark ages.

May Allah guide us all to the truth, Amen.

For more understanding of the penal code in Islam, read my previous posts:
Islamic Penal Code Part I       Islamic Penal Code Part II
Islamic Penal Code Part III

IMME, ISBN:9789779027395
Written By: Ehab Shawky