Indexed OCR Text

145
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
deeds, and now in the end it was said: Az gius (and carry out Jihad
in His way). Though Jihad was included under 'good deeds' yet it was
to spell out the higher status of Jihad among 'good deeds' that Jihad
was mentioned separately and distinctly - as confirmed by a saying of
the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم which is :ُوَزِرُوٌَ سُنَامِهِ الْجِهَاد that is, Jihad is
the highest peak of Islam. Moreover, there is yet another element of
wisdom why Jihad has been mentioned distinctly at this place. It will
be recalled that the unlawfulness of spreading disorder on the earth,
alongwith its worldly and other-wordly punishment, was mentioned in
previous verses (32, 33). Since Jihad too, given a surface view of it (or,
as those allergic to it would love to believe), appears to be some form of
disorder on the earth (al-fasad fi al-ard), therefore, it was possible that
someone ignorant could just fail to understand the difference between
Jihad (fighting in the way of Allah) and Fasad (spreading disorder). To
offset this possibility, the spreading of disorder on the earth was for-
bidden first and it was after that that the command of Jihad was men-
tioned distinctly and the difference between the two was pointed out
by the addition of the words : d& g; (in His way). This is because the
killing and plundering of the property of people in robberies and rebel-
lions is for the sole purpose of personal aggrandizement and other ne-
farious objectives while, should it ever come to happen in a Jihad, it
will still be for the initial purpose of upraising the Word of Allah and
eliminating oppression and tyranny. There is a world of difference be-
tween the two.
Moving on to the second (36) and the third (37) verses, one notices
the manner in which the grave curse of Kufr (disbelief), Shirk (the as-
sociating of partners in the Divinity of Allah) and sin has been pointed
out. It is so poignant that even a little reflection on it could bring an
instant revolution in the lives of men and women of such persuasion
compelling them to abandon all Kufr and Shirk and sin. To explain
the curse of sinful living a little further, it can be said that sins in
which one gets involved usually is because of personal desires and
needs or for the desires and needs of family and children. Since their
fulfillment comes through an increase in wealth and property, one
goes after amassing wealth and property without making any distinc-
tion between what is Halal (lawful) and what is Haram (unlawful) in
it. In these verses, Almighty Allah has censured the acquisition mania

146
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
of such people which will prove to be futile in the ultimate analysis be-
cause its cure lies in realizing that things of comfort collected to satisfy
a short lived span of life by working hard day and night still remain
unattained. More and more stays to be the order of every other day in
life. What begins must end and this race of gold and greed will also
end when the punishment of the Doomsday will appear in sight and,
at that time, if these people were to offer all they had collected in the
mortal world, wealth and property, things and things of comfort, taste
and value, offer all of it in return for their release from the punish-
ment, then, this would not be possible anymore. Even if the wager is
increased higher, suppose everything of value were to be owned by one
person, nay, let us say twice as much, and if he were to offer all of it to
have his release from the punishment, still then, nothing would be ac-
cepted from him and he will not have his deliverance from the punish-
ment of the Hereafter. That this punishment would be everlasting for
disbelievers has been made clear through the third verse (37).
The fourth verse (38) reverts to the subject of the punishment of
crimes where the Islamic Legal Punishment of theft has been de-
scribed. The punishment for theft belongs to the category of Hudud
which is one of the three kinds of Islamic Legal Punishments dis-
cussed earlier (under the Tafsir of verses 33 and 34). Since the Holy
Qur'an has itself fixed this punishment, it has not been left at the dis-
cretion of the relevant authorities. The Holy Qur'an has determined it
as the Right of Allah (Haqqullah), therefore, it is called the Hadd of
Sariqah (The Islamic Legal Punishment of Theft). The words of the
verse are:
وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقُطَعُؤْآَ آَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَّاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ وَاللهُ
عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ
As for a man or woman who commits theft, cut off the hands
of both to recompense them for what they earned, a deterrent
from Allah. And Allah is Mighty, Wise.
Noteworthy here is the fact that the address in Qur'anic injunc-
tions is generally to men wherein women are also understood as in-
cluded consequentially. In Salah, Sawm, Hajj, Zakah and in all in-
junctions of the Shari'ah, this is the general operating principle of
----

147
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
Qur'an and Sunnah. But, in the case of the punishment for theft and
adultery, the text here does not limit itself to addressing men only, in-
stead of which it addresses its command to both sexes mentioning
them separately.
One reason for doing so is that this is a matter of Hudud in which
the least doubt could cause it to be dropped. Therefore, women were
not left as implied under the address. They were, rather, mentioned
explicitly.
Understanding the Islamic Law of Sariqah (Theft)
Something else we should find out at this stage is the very sense of
the word, 'Sariqah' and its definition as determined in the Shari'ah of
Islam. According to Al-Qamus, the Arabic Lexicon, if anyone takes
what belongs to someone else, from a secured place, without his or her
permission, clandestinely, it is called "Sariqah." And this is its Islamic
legal definition too. So, in the light of this definition, in order that Sa-
riqah be proved, a few ingredients must exist:
1. BEING PRIVATELY- OWNED : The property concerned must
have been owned privately by an individual or group. The stealer
should own nothing in it, nor should there be any doubt of such owner-
ship, nor should there be things in it in which the rights of common
people are equal, such as, institutions of public welfare and their be-
longings. This tells us that should someone take something in which
he or she has ownership rights, or there is a doubt of such ownership,
or in which the rights of common people are equal, then, the Hadd of
Sariqah, the Islamic Prescribed Punishment, will not be enforced
against the stealer. However, the relevant authority of the time could
enforce punitive punishment (Ta'zir) at his discretion.
2. BEING SECURED : It means that the stolen property must be
secured as in a locked house or under a security guard. Property not in
a secured place, if picked up by someone, would also not render that
person liable to be charged with the Hadd of Sariqah. However,
should there be even a doubt in the property concerned being secure,
even then, the Hadd of Sariqah will stand dropped. Considerations of
sin and punitive punishment (Ta'zir) are a separate matter.
3. BEING WITHOUT PERMISSION : If a person, who has been

148
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
given the permission to take or pick up and use the property con-
cerned, chooses to take it away for good, the Hadd of Sariqah will not
be imposed. And should there be even a doubt about the stealer hav-
ing such permission, the Hadd will stand dropped.
4. TAKING CLANDESTINELY : This is because the looting of
someone's property openly is no theft. It is robbery, the punishment
for which has already been stated. The point is if it is not by stealth,
the Hadd of Sariqah will not be imposed on the person concerned.
After having heard the details involved in all these conditions, you
would have already realized that theft as known to us carries a gener-
al and wide sense. Every single person who indulges in it is not legal-
ly liable to the Hadd of Sariqah, that is, the punishment of cutting
hands. Instead of that, this Prescribed Punishment shall be enforced
against that particular form of theft in which all these ingredients
have been found present.
Along with it, you also know that situations in which the Hadd for
theft is dropped, it is not at all necessary that the criminal would go
scot-free. In fact, the relevant authority of the time could award puni-
tive punishment against him at his discretion, which could even be
physical, as that of lashes.
In the same way, let it not be surmised that, in situations where
the absence of some condition of Sariqah restrains the enforcement of
the Hadd Punishment, the act itself would become legally permissible
and lawful - because, as explained earlier, we are not talking about sin
and the punishment of the Hereafter here. The concern here is that of
the temporal punishment, and that too of a particular kind of punish-
ment. Otherwise, the property of a person taken without his pleasure
and permission, no matter how, shall remain Haram (unlawful), caus-
ing punishment in the Hereafter - as clarified in the verse : Kli Kus
LOLka (And do not eat up each other's property by false means -
2:188).
Also worth noting here is the fact that the words used by the
Qur'an in the matter of theft are the same as those used about the
punishment of adultery. But, the difference is that, in the matter of
theft, the mention of man appears first and that of woman follows,

149
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
while, in the case of adultery, the arrangement has been reversed
where woman has been mentioned first. Thus, in the punishment of
theft, it was said: ◌ُوَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَة (a man or a woman who commits theft -
5:38) while, in the punishment of adultery, it was said: zok lufi (the
woman and the man guilty of fornication - 24:2). Commentators have
indicated many elements of wisdom in this reversal of word order, but
the one that appeals most is that the crime of theft when committed by
man as compared to that committed by a woman is more grave be-
cause Almighty Allah has blessed him with the kind of strength to
earn his living which a woman does not have. Should a man who, de-
spite that so many doors of earning his living are open to him, stoop so
low as to commit the disgraceful crime of theft, really increases the
gravity of his sin. And when it comes to the matter of adultery, Allah
Almighty has blessed a woman with natural modesty and secured at-
mosphere which leaves no reason for her to fall into the lower levels of
immodesty which would be a grave crime indeed. Therefore, in theft,
the mention of man precedes while, in adultery, that of woman.
After stating the Hadd Punishment for theft in this verse (38), two
sentences have been added. The first sentence is: 43 GAIS : (to recom-
pense them for the evil deed they committed and the second sentence
is: Juist && (a deterrent from Allah). The later is composed of the
words, 'Nakal' (a deterrent) and 'min Allah' (from Allah). Lexically,
the Arabic word, 'Nak al' means a punishment which is exemplary,
something which teaches a lesson to others as well so that they too
abandon any intentions of committing crimes. Therefore, a translation
of this word in the idiom of any other language would have to have a
sense of lesson and dissuasion both. The hint given here is that the
stern punishment of cutting hands is based on a consideration which
is special and wise. In simple words, it amounts to punishing one and
chastening the rest so that this ugly crime is eradicated totally. Then,
by adding 'min Allah' (from Allah), a pointed reference has been made
to yet another subject of importance, that is, there are two ways of
looking at the crime of theft. Firstly, a person may take the property
belonging to someone else without any right to do so which inflicts in-
justice on the later. Secondly, this person acted counter to the com-
mand of Allah. Keeping the first aspect in sight, this punishment is
the right of the victim of injustice which requires that the punishment,

150
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
if pardoned by the holder of the right, will stand forgiven - and this is
the customary practice in all cases of Qisas (Even Retaliation). Now
looking at it from the second aspect, this punishment is for having act-
ed contrary to the command of Allah. It requires that this punishment
will not be forgiven even if it were to be forgiven by the person who
has been the victim of the theft - unless, of course, forgiven by Al-
mighty Allah Himself. This is called Hadd or Hudud in the terminolo-
gy of the Shari'ah of Islam. So, by determining the second aspect
through the addition of 'min Allah' (from Allah), the hint given is that
this punishment is Hadd - not Qisas, that is, in a manner of saying,
the punishment has been awarded for what constitutes a Crime
against the State! Therefore, even if the person who is the victim of
the theft were to forgive, the punishment would still not be dropped.
Finally, towards the end of the verse (38), by saying: "2$= "34'll, (And
Allah is Mighty, Wise), answer has been given to the doubt so widely
entertained these days, that is, this punishment is very harsh. Not
resting at that, there are the loudmouthed and the uninformed among
them who would not even fight shy of saying that this punishment is
savage. Refuge with Allah! These words are there to point out that
the introduction of this severe punishment is not only that it is an out-
come of Allah's being Mighty and Powerful, but that it also based on
His being Wise as well. The Islamic Legal Punishments which the
modern highbrows of the West label as harsh and savage shall be tak-
en up in details with comments on the wisdom behind them, their
need and benefits, soon after we have completed the explanation of the
present set of verses.
The next verse (39) says:
فَمَنُ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ * إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ
And whoever repents after his transgression and corrects
himself, then Allah shall relent towards him. Surely, Allah is
Most-Forgiving, Very-Merciful.
It will be recalled that forgiveness was also mentioned in connection
with the Prescribed Punishment for robbery appearing a few verses
earlier (34) - and forgiveness has been mentioned after the punishment

151
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
for theft as well. But, the statement of forgiveness at both places has
a particular difference and it is on the basis of this difference that the
sense of forgiveness in both punishments has been taken differently by
Muslim jurists. While ordaining the punishment for robbery, giving
an exception, Almighty Allah has said : ◌ْإِلاَّ الَّذِينَ تَابُوا مِنْ قَبْلِ أَنْ تَقْدِرُوا عَلَيْهِم (except
those who repent before you overpower them - 5:34) the outcome of
which is that the Hadd Punishment for robbery mentioned in the verse
provides an exemption whereby the one who repents - before robbers
are overpowered and arrested by the government - shall have his Hadd
Punishment forgiven. As for the forgiveness mentioned after the pun-
ishment for theft, it does not have the exemption from this temporal
punishment. It is rather in terms of the Hereafter that this repen-
tance shall be accepted towards which a clear indication exists in the
words : ◌ِفَإِنَّ اللّهَ يَهُوُبُ عَلَيْه (then Allah shall relent towards him). In other
words, the relevant ruler of the time will not abandon the Hadd Pun-
ishment because of this repentance, instead of that, Almighty Allah
will, by forgiving their crime, grant deliverance to them from the pun-
ishment of the Hereafter. Therefore, Muslim jurists almost unani-
mously agree that the Hadd Punishment for robbery shall not be en-
forced on robbers who repent before they are arrested. But, should a
thief were to forsake and repent from stealing after having committed
a theft - whether before or after arrest - then, the Hadd of Sariqah, the
Islamic Legal Punishment, which is a temporal punishment, will not
be forgiven. That the sin is forgiven and deliverance from the punish-
ment of the Hereafter has been achieved is not contrary to this.
The later verse (40) says:
اَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ لَهُ مُلُكُ السَّمُوتِ وَالْأَرْضِ يُعَذِّبُ مَن يَشَاءُ وَيَغْفِرْ لِمَنُ
يَشَأْمُ وَاللّهُ عَلَى كُلِّ شَئٌ قَدِیُ
Do you know that to Allah alone belongs the kingdom of the
heavens and the earth? He punishes whomsoever He wills
and He forgives whomsoever He wills. And Allah is powerful
over everything.
This verse is linked with and homogeneous to previous verses which
feature stringent injunctions of the Islamic Legal Punishments for rob-
bery and theft. A shallow look at these injunctions could give the false

152
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
impression of their being contradictory to human dignity. It is to re-
move this doubt that Almighty Allah has, in this verse, initially stated
that He alone is the real Master of all the universe. Then, He says that
He alone is the Absolute Power. In between, comes the statement that
it is not only that He punishes. He forgives as well, and that forgive-
ness and punishment depend on His Wisdom, for the way He is the
Absolute Master and the Absolute Power, so is He Absolutely Wise too.
There is no human power which can guage the extents of His mastery
and domain so shall there be no human reason which can fully fathom
the countless manifestations of His Wisdom - and that which it would
pass on to human beings by virtue of pondering through principles is
sufficient enough to put their hearts at peace.
What is Benign and What is Savage?
People in the West and those influenced by their education and cul-
ture commonly object that Islamic punishments are harsh. And as
pointed out a little earlier, there are some heedless people who do not
even hesitate to say that these punishments are savage and undigni-
fied.
Before we deal with this matter, it would be useful to keep what
has been stated earlier in sight. We know that the Holy Qur'an has it-
self determined and fixed the punishments for only four crimes which
are called Hadd, in the terminology of the Islamic Shari'ah. The pun-
ishment of robbery is the cutting of the right hand and the left foot;
the punishment of theft is the cutting of the right hand from the wrist;
the punishment of adultery is one hundred lashes in some situations,
and stoning to death in some others; the punishment of making a false
accusation of adultery is eighty lashes. The fifth Islamic Prescribed
Punishment (Hadd) is that of drinking which is eighty lashes as fixed
under the consensus of the Sahabah of the Holy Prophet . With the
sole exception of these five crimes, the punishment of all other crimes
has been left to the discretion of the ruler of the time so that the rele-
vant judge may award the kind and amount of punishment with due
consideration of the crime, the criminal and the circumstances. This is
a matter in which it is also possible that some particular system de-
signed to delimit and apportion punishments is established in consul-
tation with those fit to guide and advise, and Qadis or judges are

153
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
bound with it. This is what happens these days when penal laws are
generally enacted through legislative assemblies, and Qadis or judges
award punishments within limits already identified. Although, in the
five crimes the punishment for which has been fixed by the Qur'an, or
through a consensus (Ijma'), and in which no individual or party or as-
sembly has any right of alteration or substitution, but, in them too, if
the proof of the crime is not available through the Law of Evidence
prescribed by the Shari'ah, or there be the proof of the crime but condi-
tions under which this punishment is enforced may not be complete,
and the fact of the crime stands proved in the sight of the Qadi or
judge, still then, in that situation too, the Hadd Punishment (_>)
will not be enforced, instead of which, the punishment given will be
punitive (Ta'ziri). Along with it, there is the standing rule of Islamic
Law that the benefit of doubt goes to the person accused of a crime. A
doubt about anything in the proof of the crime or the conditions of the
crime causes the Hadd Pubnishment to be dropped. But, in the event
that there be the necessary proof of crime available, the punishment
given will be punitive (Ta'zīrī).
This tells us that there will be many more situations in which the
Hadd Punishment will not be enforced and, in their place, punitive
punishments will be awarded subject to the discretion of the ruler of
the time. Since punitive punishments have not been predetermined by
the Shari'ah, they can be changed or tailored to suit the needs of every
time and every circumstance just like the general laws of the land.
Therefore, at least, in this field, nobody has room for any objection.
Now the 'debate' is reduced to the punishments of five crimes only, and
that too, in their particular situations. For example, let us take theft
and see that the punishment of cutting the hand has not been imposed
by the Shari'ah on every theft, in an absolute sense - that is, theft as
we know it in our common usage. This is no Sariqah. Sariqah, the
crime which is punished by cutting the hand, has a peculiar definition
of its own, details about which have appeared earlier (under the sub-
heading: 'Understanding the Islamic Legal Punishment of Sariqah')
and which can be briefly defined here as the taking out of someone's
property from a secured place, by breaking the security arrangements,
unlawfully and secretly. According to this definition, many forms rec-
ognized as common thefts stand eliminated from the standard defini-

154
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
tion of the Hadd of Sariqah. For instance, the condition of a secured
place tells us that property stolen from commonly used public places
such as Masjid, masalla of 'Id (area earmarked for the large congrega-
tional prayers on the occasion of 'Idul-Fitr and 'Idul-Adha), Park, Club,
Railroad Station, Waiting Room, Train, Airplane etc., or stealing fruits
hanging on trees, or stealing honey will not cause the Hadd of Sariqah
to be imposed against the thief, instead of that, punitive punishment
will be given to the culprit as generally done in most countries. Simi-
larly, take the example of a person you have allowed to enter your
house - whether he is your servant or maid or a worker on wages or a
builder on contract or a friend or relative - now should he take some-
thing away from your house, then, though he is included under the
definition of common theft and is deserving of the punitive punish-
ment for it, yet, the Islamic Legal Punishment of cutting the hand will
not be enforced on him - because he entered the house with your per-
mission and the arrangement of legal security is not complete as far as
he is concerned.
Similarly, incidents like someone picked someone else's pocket, or
snatched away cash or jewellery from someone's hand, or extracted
something by fraud, or went back on his word when asked to return
what he had agreed to keep in trust are all unlawful and impermissi-
ble, and definitely included under customary thefts, but, the punish-
ment for all these is punitive which depends upon the discretion of the
ruler. Since these are not included under the definition of legally cul-
pable 'Sariqah,' no amputation of hand will take place.
Likewise, the hand of a stealer of coffin clothes will not be cut be-
cause, first of all, it is in no secure place, then the shroud itself is not
in the 'ownership' of the deceased, though this act of the stealer is
gravely unlawful. For this, he will have his punitive punishment at
the discretion of the ruler. In the same manner, if someone commits a
theft in what was jointly owned property in which the stealer too had
some share - whether it was a joint property from inheritance or from
commercial partnership - it is a situation in which, since some part of
the ownership of the stealer is also included therein, the doubt about
such ownership will cause the Islamic Legal Punishment (Hadd) to be
dropped and punitive punishment will be given.

155
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
As for all these conditions, they relate to the actual completion of
the crime, a brief outline of which you have seen above. Now what
comes next is the completion of the proof. In this matter of enforcing
Hudud, the Shari'ah has also made its Law of Evidence unmistakeable
by keeping it very distinct and cautious as compared to what concerns
other common matters. In the punishment of adultery, imposed there
is the condition of four witnesses in place of two - and that too, while
they give such eye witness as would not leave any word doubtful there-
in. Though, in the case of theft, only two witnesses are sufficient, yet,
even for these two, some additional conditions, other than those com-
monly required in witnessing, have been imposed. For example, there
are other matters in which, if needed, the Qadi or judge has the option
to accept the witness of a sinning person if he is satisfied that the per-
son, despite his being a sinner practically, does not lie. But, in the
case of Hudud, the Qadi or judge does not have the right to accept his
witness. Common matters can be judicated based on the evidence giv-
en by one man and two women. But, in Hudud, the evidence of two
men is necessary. In common cases, the Shari'ah does not consider Ta-
madi (being time-barred) as valid excuse - a witness given by someone
can be accepted irrespective of the time lag since the event occured.
But, in Hudud, if a testimony is not given immediately, instead of that,
was given after one month or was delayed more than that, then, it will
not be acceptable.
This brief outline of the conditions of the enforcement of the Hadd
of Sariqah appearing above has been taken from the highly authorita-
tive book of the Hanafi Fiqh, Bada'i' al-Şana'i'.
The outcome of all these conditions is that the Hadd of Shari'ah,
the Islamic Prescribed Punishment, will be enforced only in a situation
when it is strictly in accordance with the rules of procedure deter-
mined by the inviolable Shari'ah of Islam that the crime, as well as, its
proof are found conclusively complete - and so complete too as would
leave no aspect of it doubtful. This tells us that the Shari'ah has done
two things simultaneouly - it has, on the one hand, fixed the punish-
ment of these crimes, as required in its wisdom, being strict as they
are; but, on the other hand, it has also taken extreme precaution in
the enforcement of the Hudud of Islamic Law. The Law of Evidence as

156
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
applicable to Hudud is also different from the Law of Evidence as ap-
plicable to common matters, and is certainly based on extreme precau-
tion. The slightest shortfall in it renders the Hadd of the Shari'ah to
be changed into punitive punishment. Similarly, in the event of any
shortcoming being found in determining the completion of the crime,
the Hadd of the Shari'ah is dropped and punitive punishment gets ac-
tivated in its place. The practical outcome of this is that the far-out
occasion of enforcing the Hudud of the Shari'ah would present itself
only very rarely ( or, as they would say in charged English, only once
in a blue moon!) Under normal conditions, even in crimes which fall
under Hudud, the punishments given are punitive. But, in a case,
where the completion of the crime and the completion of the proof con-
join, even though in one per cent cases, the punishment given is very
stringent, something which would inspire awe, something mind-
boggling and heart-rending, something which would cause the next as-
pirant cold feet before even touching a crime like that. This kind of
punishment, notwithstanding objections, becomes the source of eradi-
cation of crimes and the blessing of public peace for ever. This stands
in stark contrast against societies built around penal laws with which
hardened criminals keep playing as some sort of sport they enjoy.
They sit in jails making programs to do what they have been doing all
along much better next time they are out there. There are countries
where the Hudud of the Shari'ah are imposed even now. A look at con-
ditions which prevail there would bring the reality in the open. You do
not see there a lot of people with amputated hands, nor is there an
event of stoning to death (Rajm) for years and years together. But,
such is the standing awe and dread and fear of these punishments in
hearts that theft, robbery and immodesty do not seem to exist there.
Muslims have the first-hand and direct knowledge about conditions in
Saudi Arabia because Muslims of all classes and countries have the
good fortune of being there in connection with Hajj or 'Umrah. Five
times everyday, everyone sees that shops and stores are open. Mer-
chandise worth millions is lying there and their owner leaves for the
Sacred Mosque at prayer time without closing them - and comes back
from there only after having made his prayers in perfect peace. He

157
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 35 - 40
never has any scruples about anything having disappeared from where
he had left it. Then, this is not a matter of one day. This is a matter of
whole life and how it goes on. Do this in any 'civilized' country of the
world, you will end up with hundreds of thefts and robberies in a sin-
gle day. Strange are the ways of those who claim to be the standard
bearers of civilization and human rights. They are compassionate to
professional criminals but they have no mercy for the whole humanity
harassed by them. In cold reality, showering mercy on one criminal
amounts to being tyrannical to the whole humanity. This attitude is
the greatest cause of disturbing public peace and tranquility. This is
the reason why He, who is the Lord of all universes and worlds, and
who provides sustenance to the virtuous and the vicious, the pious and
the polytheists, the saints and the sinners, and who gives to snakes,
scorpions, lions and wolves their livelihood, and whose mercy extends
to all, it was He who, when He revealed the religious laws of Hudud in
the Qur'an, also said along with it :ِوَلاَ تَأْخُذُكُمْ بِهِمَا رَأْفَةٌ فِيُ دِيْنِ اللَّه that is, 'do not
show mercy to these criminals in enforcing the Hudud of Allah.' On the
other hand, He declared Qisas (the Law of Even Retaliation) to be the
life of humanity : ◌ِوَلَكُمْ فِى الْقِصَاصِ حَيْوَةٌ يَّ أُولِى اُلَاَ لُبَاب that is, "for you in Qisas
there is life, O people of understanding.' It appears that those who op-
pose and obstruct the institution of Islamic Hudud, just do not wish
that crimes be eradicated. Otherwise, as far as mercy is concerned,
who else, if not Islam, can be the teacher? It is Islam which has recog-
nized the right of even enemies and killers in the heat of the battle-
field where it demands: Hold your hands before women, hold your
hands before children, hold your hands before the aged, and do not kill
the religiously observing not fighting against you on the battlefield but
are busy with worship in their way.
What is most astonishing is the cold fact that objections against Is-
lamic punishments are raised by, of all the people, those have their
hands red with the blood of hundreds and thousands of innocent and
blame-free human beings of Hiroshima even to this day, human beings
who may have never dreamed of fighting and killing in a battlefield
and included among them are women and children and old people, a

158
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 41 - 43
whole lot of human beings indeed! And these are the people whose
fury has still not subsided even after the tragedy of Hiroshima and
who are still going ahead with all sorts of goals and projects and exper-
iments to build and stock nuclear weapons of mass destruction.
Other than this, there is not much we can say, except raise our
hands in prayer - May Allah remove the curtains of selfishness from
their eyes and may He guide them towards the true Islamic methods
of establishing peace in the world.1
Verses 41 - 43
يَاَيُّهَا الرَّسُولُ لَا يَحْزُنُكَ الَّذِيْنَ يُسَارِعُونَ فِى الْكُفْرِ مِنَ
الَّذِينَ قَالُؤَّا امَنَّا بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَلَمْ تُؤْمِنْ قُلُؤُبُهُمْ ، وَمِنَ الَّذِيْنَ
هَادُوا ◌ْ سَتُعُوْنَ لِلْكَذِبِ سَتْعُُونَ لِقَوْعِ الخَرِيْنَ ا لَمْ يَأْتُوُنَ﴾
يُحَِّّفُونَ الْكَلِمَ مِنُّ بَعْدِ مَوَاضِعِهٍ " يَقُؤُلُونَ إِنْ أُوْ تِيْتُمْ لهذَا
فَخُذُؤُهُ وَإِنُ لَّمْ تُؤْتَوُهُ فَاحْذَرُوْا * وَمَنْ تُرِدِ اللَّهُ فِتْنَتَهُ فَلَنْ
تُلِكَ لَهُ مِنَ اللَّهِ شَيًّاءُ أُولَئِكَ الَّذِينَ لَمْ يُرِدِ اللَّهُ أَنْ يُطَهِّرْ
1. This is the basis of the nuclear conflict among nations. The haves want to
keep what they have and stop others from having it. If others have it, that
will be 'proliferation'. The power to destroy must stay with the powerful.
Because, powerful is responsible. But, was it? So, being powerful, or
mutually cooperating powerfuls, is no guarantee that nuclear weapons will
not be used. Human beings of one country sitting on their nukes and
talking about world peace is hardly believable.
Let's say Amen to the prayer.
A word about the use of the word, 'deterrent' with nuclear weapons. They
are there, just in case ... They are supposed not to be used first. They are
for retaliation. The having of nuclear weapons means that everybody
should behave, or else! So, they are 'deterrents', telling people to be
careful and not mess around. So human beings can have deterrents to
check the irresponsible behaviour of others, the behaviour of 'rogue' states,
for example. Now, if God were to enforce His own deterrent against
criminals, robbers and thieves and fornicators, in His wisdom, how could
that become 'savage' overnight? Or, is it that what a set of human beings
can do in their 'self-interest', cannot be done by God, in His Wisdom? ...
Mercy! (Tr.)

159
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 41 - 43
قُلُوبَهُمْ ﴿ لَهُمْ فِى الدُّنْيَا خِزُبِىٌٌّ وَلَهُمْ فِى الْأَخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ
عَظِيمٌ ﴿٤١﴾ سَمْعُوْنَ لِلْكَذِبِ الْلُوُنَ لِلسُّحْتِ، فَإِنُ جَاءُوُكَ
فَاحُكُمُ بَيْنَهُمْ أَوْ اَعُرِضُ عَنْهُمُ ، وَإِنْ تُعْرِضُ عَنْهُمُ فَلَنْ
يَضُكَ شَيْئًا، وَإِنْ حَكَمْتَ فَاحُكُمْ بَيْنَهُمُ بِالْقِسْطِ، إِنَّ اللَّهَ
يُحِبُّ الْمُفْسِطِيْنَ ﴿٤٢﴾ وَكَيْفَ يُحَكِّمُوْنَكَ وَعِنْدَهُمُ التَّوْرِبَةُ
فِيْهَا حُكُمُ اللَّهِ ثُمَّ يَتَوَّلَّوُنَ مِنْ بَعُدٍ ذَلِكَ، وَمَّا أُولَئِكَ
بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ ﴿٤٣﴾
O Messenger, those who race towards disbelief should
not be a cause of grief for you - those who say with
their mouths, "We believe," while their hearts do not
believe, as well as those who happen to be Jews. They
are listeners of the lie, listeners for other people who
did not come to you. They displace the words after
their having been properly placed. They say, "If you
are given this, take it, and if you are not given this,
then avoid." And the one whom Allah wills to put to
trial, for him you shall never be able to do anything
against Allah. They are the ones whose hearts Allah did
not intend to purify. For them there is humiliation in
this world. And for them there is a great punishment
in the Hereafter. [41]
Listeners of the lie! Eaters of the unlawful! So, if they
come to you, judge between them or turn away from
them. And if you turn away from them, they can do you
no harm. And if you judge, judge between them with
justice. Surely, Allah loves those who do justice. [42]
And how do they ask you to judge while the Torah is
there with them having the judgement of Allah? Still,
they turn away, after all that. They are no believers.
[43]
Sequence of the Verses
Continued from the third Section of Surah al-Ma'idah was the sub-
ject around the People of the Book. In between, some other subjects,
though very few, appeared where particularly appropriate. Now, the

160
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 41 - 43
text resumes that subject again which goes on further ahead. The
People of the Book already had two groups among them. Joining them
was a third group. They were really Jews who had become Muslims
hypocritically. They would show their Muslim face before Muslims but
when they sat with their co-religionist Jews, they mocked Islam and
Muslims. The three verses appearing above concern the doings of
these three groups which show that they prefer their desires and opin-
ions over the injunctions and instructions of Almighty Allah and keep
trying to interpret and mould them to their own choices. These verses
tell us about the disgrace and evil end of such people in this world as
well as in the Hereafter. As a corollary, there appear some guiding
principles and injunctions for Muslims.
The Background of the Revelation
Two events which are the cause of the revelation of the cited verses
relate to Jewish tribes who lived in the vicinity of Madinah during the
blessed period of the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. One of these events
was that of Qatl and Qisas (killing and retaliation) and the other, that
of Zina (fornication) and its punishment.
It is not hidden from anyone who knows history (as it is) that tyr-
anny prevailed all over before the advent of Islam. Mastery was for
the powerful and slavery, for the weak. The powerful and the influen-
tial had their laws different from the weak and the meek. Not too far
is an extension of that approach in our own time where some of our so-
called civilized countries had separate laws for the black and the
white. But, across this bridge of history, came the blessed benefactor
of humanity, the Arab Prophet, may the blessings of Allah be upon
him, and peace, who alone erased these distinctions. It was he who
first declared equality of rights for the progeny of Adam and taught
human beings their essential lesson in humanity.
Before the coming of the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم to Madinah,
there lived on the outskirts of Madinah two tribes of Jews, Banu Qu-
rayzah and Banu Nadir. Out of the two, Banu Nadir were more power-
ful and wealthy than Banu Qurayzah who constantly suffered at their
hands and could do nothing about it. Matters reached to the point
when Banu Nadir forced Banu Qurayzah to agree to a disgraceful pact
whereby if a man from Banu Nadir were to kill a man from Banu

161
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 41 - 43
Qurayzah, they would not have the right to take his life in Qişaş
(retaliation). Instead, stipulated the pact, they will receive only seven-
ty Wasaq of dates as his blood money (Wasaq, Arab measure of weight
approximately equivalent to 195.30 kg). As for the case being the re-
verse of it, if a man from Banu Qurayzah were to kill a man from Banu
Nadir, the law will be that the killer will be killed and, on top of it,
blood money will be taken, and that too, twice as much as compared to
what Banu Nadir were entitled to, that is, one hundred and forty Wa-
saq of dates. Attached along with these were more conditions such as,
if a woman from Banu Nadir were to be killed, a man from Banu Qu-
rayzah will be killed in retaliation; and if the person killed were to be a
man, two men from Banu Qurayzah will be killed in retaliation; and if
a slave from Banu Nadir has been killed, a free man from Banu Quray-
zah will be killed in retaliation; and if one hand of a man from Banu
Nadir has been cut by someone, two hands of a man from Banu Quray-
zah will be cut; if one ear has been cut, two ears of their man will be
cut. This was 'law' before Islam as it prevailed between these two
tribes and Banu Qurayzah being weak had no choice but to go along
with it.
When the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم migrated to Madinah, it be-
came Dar al-Islam, a homeland of Muslims. These two tribes had not
embraced Islam upto that time nor were they bound to follow Islamic
law under any treaty obligation. But, they were observing the justice
and common good brought in by Islamic law from a distance. During
this period, it so happened that a man from Banu Qurayzah killed a
certain man from Banu Nadir. According to the pact mentioned above,
Banu Nadir demanded the doubled blood money (Diyat) from Banu Qu-
rayzah. As said earlier, Banu Qurayzah were neither a part of the
Muslim community nor did they have any existing pact with the Holy
Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم . But, they were Jews who had among them
many learned people as well. They knew on the strength of the proph-
ecies of the Torah that the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is the promised
Last Prophet the glad tiding of which was given by the Torah. But,
they had not declared their faith in him because of religious prejudice
or temporal greed. Since they were watching that the Last Prophet's
religion is a standard bearer of human equality and justice, they used
it as a crutch to get rid of the tyranny of Banu Nadir. They refused to

162
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 41 - 43
pay the doubled blood money on the plea that they belonged to the
same family, same country, and same religion, that is, Judaism, and
that they were not going to tolerate the unjust treatment meted out to
them because of their weakness against tyranny right upto that day.
This reply enraged Banu Nadir to the point of an imminent war.
But, later, on the advice of some elders, it was decided that this matter
should be taken to the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم for his decision.
Banu Qurayzah could not have it any better. They already knew that
the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was not going to allow the injustice of
Banu Nadir to continue. As for Banu Nadir, though they did agree to
mutual conciliation talks under a situation of duress, but they also
backed it up with a conspiracy when they sent a group of people to the
Holy Prophet صلى اللّه عليه وسلم before their case was to be presented in his
court. These people were really their co-religionists, that is, they were
Jews but kept in touch with the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم by hypcriti-
cally assuring him of their Islam. Their objective was to somehow find
out the view of the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم before he hears and de-
cides the case. So, the mandate and instruction given to these people
was that they should accept what he said subject to the condition that
it was in favour of their demand, and in the eventuality that his judge-
ment turned out to be contrary to this, they were told not to make any
commitments about its acceptance.
This event describing the cause of the revelation of these verses
has been reported in detail by al-Baghawi while the Musnad of Ahmad
and Abu Dawud have reported its summary from Sayyidna 'Abdullah
ibn 'Abbas رضى الله عنه - (Mazhari).
Similar to this, there is another event, that of Zina (fornication).
Reporting its details, al-Baghawi says that it took place among the
Jews of Khaybar. According to the punishment prescribed by the To-
rah, the couple involved had to be stoned to death. But, both of them
belonged to some influencial family. The Jews, acting in accordance
with their old habit, looked for a softening of the punishment for them
knowing that the religion of Islam gives leaves and concessions liberal-
ly. Based on this, they assumed that Islam would reduce this punish-
ment as well. So, the people of Khaybar sent a message to their clans-
men of Banu Qurayzah asking them to have this case settled by

163
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 41 - 43
Muhammad and along with it, they sent the two accused as well.
Their motivation behind this action was no different as they too in-
structed their clansmen to accept the verdict of the Holy Prophet ! if
the punishment awarded by him turned out to be light, but they were
to reject it if the case was otherwise. At first, Banu Qurayzah were re-
luctant about the proposal. They did not know how the case will be
decided by him and once they were there, they would have to accept
the verdict. But, after further consultations, they decided that some of
their chiefs should take the accused couple to the Holy Prophet & and
request him to decide the case.
So, a deputation of Ka'b ibn Ashraf and others accompanied by the
accused couple came to the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم . They asked: If
a married man and a married woman are involved in adultery, what
punishment do they get?' He said, 'Will you accept my verdict?' They
said that they would. At that moment, Sayyidna Jibra'il appeared with
a command from Almighty Allah which announced that their punish-
ment was stoning to death. When these people heard this verdict,
they were taken aback. They refused to accept it.
Sayyidna Jibra'il advised the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم that he
should ask these people to appoint Ibn Surya as the arbitrator before
deciding whether to accept or not to accept the verdict. Then, he told
him about Ibn Surya and his identity. He asked the members of the
deputation if they knew the youngman who is white but blind in one
eye. He lived in Fidak and His name was Ibn Surya. Everyone con-
firmed that they did. He asked, 'What do you think about him?' They
said, 'Of the learned people among Jews, there is no scholar greater
than him on this earth.' He said, 'Call him in.'
So, he came. The Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم asked him on oath,
'What is the injunction of the Torah in this case?' He said, 'By the Be-
ing in whose name you have put me on oath, if you had not put me on
oath in that manner, and I did not have the apprehension that a false
statement on my part would make the Torah burn me, then, I would
have not revealed the reality. The reality is that the Torah too, like
the injunction in Islam, does carry the command that both of them
should be killed by stoning (Rajm).'

164
Surah Al-Ma'idah : 5 : 41 - 43
The Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said, 'What has come upon you now
that you act against the injunction of the Torah?' Ibn Surya replied,
'The fact of the matter is that, religiously and legally, this is the pun-
ishment of adultery with us. But, since a prince of ours got involved in
this crime, we showed leniency to him and let him go. We did not
stone him to death. Later, the same crime was committed by an ordi-
nary man. People responsible decided to stone him to death. The sup-
porters of the criminal protested demanding that the Jewish Legal
Punishment decided for this man should be given to the prince first,
otherwise, they threatened, they would resist and block the execution
of the punishment against him. When things dragged on, they sat to-
gether and compromised on just one light punishment for all, leaving
the injunction of the Torah aside. So, we came up with a punishment
which required some beating and the taking out of a procession with
the culprits having their faces blackened with soot (a symbol of dis-
grace). This, then, became the usual custom with everyone.'
Commentary
We now know the details of the background in which the present
three verses (41-43), and others which will follow, were revealed. Their
gist is that the Jews were habitually used to issuing religious edicts as
desired by the people, either for the benefit of relatives or to satisfy
their greed for money, property, influence, and recognition. This had
become a common custom particularly in matters involving punish-
ments that they would, if the crime was committed by an influential
person, change the severe punishment of the Torah into an ordinary
one. It is this behaviour pattern of theirs which has been described in
the first verse (41) in the following words: ◌ٍيُحَرِّفُونَ الكَلِمَ مِن بَعُدٍ مَوَاضِعِه (They dis-
place the words after their having been placed properly).
When the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم took up residence in Madinah,
these people started noticing changes. The Islamic Rule of Law was
working as a unique system. It was simple, open and full of conven-
iences. Then, it had a reasonable set-up to eradicate crimes through
appropriate punishments. Now the people who were used to making
the severe punishments of the Torah easy for their clients by changing
them saw an opportunity for themselves whereby they could take such
shady matters to the Holy Prophet صلى اللّه عليه وسلم and make him their
-