Isn't violating the sanctity of a Muslim body worse than taking a few dirhams? Rape is zina but by force and aggression. 100 lashes or stoning is for both parties convicted of consensual zina. What about the aggression or severe bodily harm element in rape? (Afaik, even without zina, there is qisas for bodily harm, like if two men get into a fight and one guy breaks the other's tooth) Besides, just drawing your sword and threatening an innocent Muslim, also falls under hirabah afaik. Just asking 'coz you seem to know hirabah rulings.
rape is not similar to zina, it is zina, i.e. a woman being compelled to commit the act of zina. the fact she was compelled means that the hadd is averted from her, whereas it remains for the rapist. which of our fuqaha have said this? same question is asked again regarding this claim. if it is claimed that the punishment is the same for hirabah, then it is asked: which of the punishments apply to this? since the punishments mentioned in that verse are specific to the severity of the kind of hirabah. for example, if they take the property of a muslim or dhimmi, and each of them gain 10 dirhams or more each, or the value reaches that amount, then their hands and feet are cut off from opposite sides. however, if they kill someone but do not take any property, the imam kills them as hadd. further, if they they murdered as well as taking property, then the imam has an option: 1. if he wants, he cuts off their hands and feet on opposite sides, kills them and crucifies them, 2. if he wants, he kills them, 3. if he wants, he crucifies them. so which of these punishments is applied? is rape now to be considered equal to murder such that the hadd for the one who does so is that he be killed? rape is the same as zina, the only that is different in rape is that the zina takes place without the volition of the female, this does not mean the act of zina itself does not take place. why is it incorrect to think this? can any proof be provided? which of our fuqaha have said 5:33 applies here?
Is any evidence from books of fiqh going to be provided by this brother or is he capable of ijtihad directly from the verses of the qur'an?
These are the options given against a rapist: Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and spread mischief in the land is death, crucifixion, cutting off their hands and feet on opposite sides, or exile from the land. This ˹penalty˺ is a disgrace for them in this world, and they will suffer a tremendous punishment in the Hereafter. Quran 5:33 The last part is imprisonment.
1. admission to rape and abuse: death 2. no confession but DNA and other multiple proof. Life sentence 3. no confession and scanty proof like historical abuse. Discretional punishment.
The brother replied: Its stupid because when a woman is raped and cannot prove it via 4 witnesses then she is lashed for slander if rape is similar to zina. Rape is brigandry and the rapist must be treated different to a zani. The punishment for rape is the same as hirabah. In Surah 5 verse 33. But some people think rape is the same as zina and the perpetrator only gets lashes if not married. This is incorrect
Where did he get this from? Rape is zina by force, and thus the punishment for the rapist is the same as for zina. If he is unmarried then 100 lashes, and if married then he is stoned to death. There is no separate hadd for rape which necessitates death, this is agreed upon by the 4 Madh'habs. The only difference is that other Madh'habs say he must also pay her mahr.
A brother said this: 'The lashes dont apply to rape but to consentual zina. Rape carries death. But in the case where there are no 4 witnesses then life sentence and other discretional punishments. Otherwise when do 4 witnesses see rape and even come forward as witnesses if they do? If dna and medical proof is presented and no witnesses then at least a life sentence is given.'
The lashes for zina are not supposed to disable someone, they are to be at a medium level, not severe. Also, the lashes are to be spread out over his body except for the head, face and private parts.
I don't understand why Pakistan doesn't implement the shaira ( in this case 100 lash, hudd, or exile), they do mention they will apply chemical castration for "serial or repeat rape offenders," when the sharia will most certainly prevent a "repeat offense" once convicted, so no male or female would suffer again from the same criminal. Either he will be traumatized or permanently disabled by 100 severe lashes (not those pathetic feather light whips some sellout courts do), or he'll be dead. Exiling still leaves potential for that person, whose soul is deeply corrupted, to commit the crime again. If they are really tied , by the West's hands, they could at least give a verdict of amputation (as the person stole the victim's rights and property) Amputation of one's hand or both hands, makes it easier for a future victim to escape from or defend against easily , where as castration does not prevent a offender from potentially sexually abusing or harassing the victim.
Yes. Instead of making further "man made laws" just implement the shariah rules for rape. Nothing could be better!
Of course, I agree that there should be severe punishments for this but from a fiqh perspective, is chemical castration ok?
