DRINKING
The punishment of drinking
had been fixed at eighty stripes by ‘Umar (raa) during his period
after he had consulted the members of his shura. In the time of the Prophet
(sws), this offence was punished by punching and kicking the offender and
by beating him by twisted sheets of cloth and by the twisted pieces of
trunk of date-palms. The Caliph Abu Bakr (raa) had decreed that
this crime be punishable by forty stripes and ‘Umar (raa) in his
own times increased it to eighty stripes when he saw that people were not
desisting from it. In the words of Ibn Rushd:
The general opinion in this regard is based on
the consultation of ‘Umar (raa) with his members of the shura. This
session of this shura took place during his period when people started
indulging in this habit more and more. ‘Ali (raa) opined that, by analogy
with the punishment of qadhaf, its punishment should also be fixed at eighty
stripes. It is said that while presenting his arguments on this he had
remarked: when he (a person) drinks, he will get intoxicated and once he
gets intoxicated, he will utter nonsense; and once he starts uttering nonsense,
he shall falsely accuse other people. (Bidayat-al-Mujtahid, Vol 2, Pg 332)
It is evident from this that
this punishment has not be fixed by the Shari‘ah. It is only the
prerogative of the Prophet (sws) to regard anything as Shari‘ah and
if he has done so in a particular case, Abu Bakr (raa) or ‘Umar (raa) can
in no way alter it. It is clear that if the Prophet (sws) punished such
criminals by beating them, he did so not in the capacity of a law-giver
but in the capacity of a Muslim ruler. His successors punished such criminals
by whipping them with forty and eighty stripes respectively in the capacity
of rulers. Consequently, it can be safely said that the punishment of drinking
is not a hadd1 ; it
is a ta‘zir2 , which
the parliament of an Islamic State can adopt and if needed legislate afresh
in this regard.
APOSTASY
The prevailing concept
about apostasy has arisen by not understanding a hadith. This hadith
has been narrated by Ibn ‘Abbas (raa) in the following way:
Execute the person who changes his faith. (Bukhari:
Kitab Istatabat-al-Murtaddin)
Our jurists regard this verdict
to have a general application for all times upon every Muslim who renounces
his faith. In their opinion, this hadith warrants the death penalty for
every Muslim who becomes a disbeliever. In this matter, the only point
in which there is a disagreement among the jurists is whether an apostate
should be granted time for repentance, and if so what should be the extent
of this period. The Hanafite jurists though, exempt women from this punishment.
Apart from them, there is a general consensus among the jurists that every
apostate, man or woman, should be punished by death.
In our consideration, this
opinion of our jurists is not correct. The verdict pronounced in this tradition
does not have a general application but is only confined to the people
towards whom the Prophet (sws) had been directly assigned. The Qur’an
uses the words mushrikin and ummiyyin for these people.
We now elaborate upon our view.
In this world, we are well
aware of the fact that life has been endowed to us not because it is our
right but because it is a trial and a test for us. Death puts an end to
it whenever the period of this test is over, as deemed by the Almighty.
In ordinary circumstances, He fixes the length of this period on the basis
of His knowledge and wisdom. In special circumstances, when a prophet is
assigned towards a nation, the span is governed by another Divine law which
has been explained in the Qur‘an in detail. It is based upon certain
premises which must be understood beforehand: A prophet is the final authority
on this earth about matters which pertain to faith. No other person can
illustrate and explicate the essentials of faith in a better manner. He
uses his extraordinary powers of intellect and reasoning to deliver and
disseminate the truth revealed to him. He exposes the truth in its ultimate
form after which a person can have no excuse but stubbornness and enmity
to deny it. We have indicated before that God's purpose in endowing life
to people is to test whether they accept and uphold the truth when it comes
to them. In these special circumstances, the truth is unveiled to them
in its purest form by no other a personality than a prophet. If they then
deny it, there is no possibility whatsoever that a further extension in
life can induce them to accept it. It is at this juncture that the Divine
law sanctions the death sentence for them.
The sentence is enforced
upon them in one of the two ways depending upon the situation which arises.
In the first case, after performing Itimam-al-Hujjat3
upon his nation, a prophet and his companions not being able to achieve
political ascendancy in some other territory migrate from their people.
In this case, Divine punishment descends upon them in the form of raging
storms, cyclones and other calamities which completely destroy them. Historically
speaking, the tribes of ‘Ad and Thamud and the people of
Noah and Lot besides many other nations met with this dreadful fate, as
has been mentioned in the Qur’an. In the second case, a prophet
and his companions are able to acquire political ascendancy in a land where
after performing Itimam-al-Hujjat upon their people they migrate.
In this case, a prophet subdues his nation by force, and executes them
if they do not accept faith. It was this situation which had arisen in
the case of the Prophet (sws). On account of this, the Almighty bade him
to declare that the people among the ummiyyin who will not accept
faith until the day of Haj-i-Akbar (9th AH.) will be given a final
extension by a proclamation made in the field of ‘Arafat on that day. According
to the proclamation, this final extension would end with the last day of
the month of Muharram, during which they must accept faith, or face
execution at the end of this period. The Qur’an says:
When the forbidden months are over, slay the
idolaters wherever you find them. Seize them, surround them and every
where lie in ambush for them. But if they repent and establish regular
prayers and pay Zakah, then spare their lives. God is oft-forgiving
and ever merciful. [9:5]
A hadith illustrates
this law in the following manner:
I have been ordained to fight against these people
until they testify to the oneness of God and assent to my prophethood,
establish regular prayers and pay Zakah. If they accept these terms,
their lives will be spared except if they commit some other violation that
demands their execution by Islamic law. (Bukhari: Kitab-al-Iman)
This law, as we have stated
before, is specifically meant for the ummiyyin or the people towards whom
the Prophet (sws) had been directly assigned. Apart from them, it has no
bearing upon any other person or nation. So much so, that even the people
of the Book who were present in the Prophet's times were exempted from
this law by the Qur’an. Consequently, where the death penalty for
the ummiyyin has been mentioned in the Qur’an, adjacent to
it has also been stated in unequivocal terms that the people of the Book
shall be spared and granted citizenship if they pay Jizyha. The Qur’an
says:
Fight against those among the people of the Book
who believe not in God nor in the Last Day, and who do not forbid what
God and His Prophet have forbidden and do not accept the religion of truth
as their own religion, until they pay Jizyha out of subjugation and lead
a life of submission. [9:29]
There is a natural corollary
to this Divine law as obvious as the law itself. As stated above, the death
penalty had been imposed upon the ummiyyin if they did not accept faith
after a certain period. Hence, it follows that if a person among the ummiyyin
after accepting faith reverts to his original state of disbelief, he must
face the same penalty. Indeed, it is this reversion about which the Prophet
(sws) has said ‘Execute the person who changes his faith.’
The relative pronoun ‘who’
in this hadith qualifies the ummiyyin just as the words ‘the people’
(Al-Nas) in the hadith quoted earlier are specifically meant
for the ummiyyin. When the basis of this law as narrated in these
Ahadith exists in the Qur’an with a certain specification,
then quite naturally this specification should also be sustained in the
corollary of the law. Our jurists have committed the cardinal mistake of
not relating the relative pronoun ‘who’ with its basis in the Qur’an
as has been done in the case of ‘the people’ (Al-Nas). Instead
of interpreting the tradition in the light of the relationship between
the Qur’an and Sunnah, they have interpreted it in the absolute
sense, totally against the context of the Qur’an. Consequently,
in their opinion the verdict pronounced in the tradition has a general
and an unconditional application. They have thereby incorporated in the
Islamic Penal Code a punishment that has no basis in the Shari‘ah.
There is no doubt whatsoever
that this death penalty was prescribed only for the ummiyyin who lived
during the Prophethood of Mohammad (sws), be they the idolaters or others
like Waraqah Ibn Nawfal, a cousin of the Prophet's wife, Khadijah (raa),
who was originally among the ummiyyin and had later accepted Judaism or
Christianity. It is absolutely evident that now if a Muslim becomes an
apostate and is also not a source of nuisance for an Islamic State, he
cannot be administered any punishment merely on the basis of apostasy.
(Translated from Ghamidi's "Mizan" by
Shehzad Saleem)
|