Jump to content
Islamic Forum
tonnyj

Can A Man Have His Hand Chopped Off For A Snickers Bar?

Recommended Posts

I'm sorry to say that I have been moving further away from what might be termed 'mainstream' Islam.

The reason is simply that so many Muslims are encouraged to take the Quran literally and cannot see it's place in History. It is not so much a guide (in many ways) but more of a dictatorial text. No-one need think for themselves: all they need in life is to follow the Quran and they will be OK.

 

Any religion or ideology which positively encourages people to NOT think for themselves is essentially a bad one[using large font size is not allowed].

 

so you've also made the move. cool.

 

methinks your view on the quran is subjective. methinks its safer to take god's words literally rather than manipulating them like what trinitarians did. jesus is no god but trinitarians said he is. see? :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
That's understandable. I don't doubt that you believe Islam has no place in this modern world, at least on the scale of dictating people's lives, which is fine, really, but you have to know that the steadfastness of our religion in over 1400 years is what makes some of us Muslims. We believe that laws do not bend for man. Man submits himself to them. Even though affairs of the world have changed, and moral/ethical values have been reinvented, the nature of man will always be the same. If God existed and God sent laws for man, we believe that they would be universal and applicable across all ages. Otherwise, man would be god.

 

Take for example, the case of crime and punishment. What if two hundred years from now, scientists discover technology that is capable of, say, effectively erasing memories. This means that a criminal can be rehabilitated completely by erasing his memories and giving him a new identity as a law-abiding citizen. Let's say that this is a "punishment" alternative that is used for decades, until anything else seems strange and unrelatable. Of course, for us it might not be a good solution to deprive a man of his past, but we're not going to be around to argue this case.

 

Would it seem merciful then to imprison a man for his entire life because of his crimes? For people who believe that erasing memories is the best alternative, anything else will seem foreign and barbaric. It is not a matter of evolving to a better society, it is simply culture clash.

 

There is culture clash between Islam and the rest of the world. Where you would consider cutting off a man's hand barbaric, we consider promiscuity and alcohol to be vile and immoral. If there is a right and wrong involved here (and we both have opinions about that), the bigger issue is that things are ingrained into people from their birth, by the society that creates them. And it is for that reason that people who submit to God entrust Him to know what is best.

 

I will give you a personal example. I grew up in America, a society that not only encourages monogamy but forbids anything else. When I heard about polygamy as a teenager, I was disturbed by it. Of course, this was a time when my conviction was not stronger. But as I grew up, I realized that Allah knows best what is best for man. Marriage is a union sanctioned by God, not by man.

 

If God had said that serving time would be the best solution, we would have accepted it. If he said that erasing memories is better, we would quickly embrace that too. For those believers who are mentioned in this verse:

 

And they say: We hear and obey; our Lord, Your forgiveness (do we crave), and to You is the eventual course. [2:285]

 

For such people, there is no opinion involved. They entrust their Creator more than they value their desires and opinions. And in the same verse, Allah says:

 

Allah imposes not on any soul a duty beyond its scope.

 

The submission these believers have is completely within their power, without any burdens. Allah does not ask us to move mountains or to create grand empires in His name. He asks only that we worship Him to the best of our ability, and returns that love by giving us entire empires. So with that mindset that we have, with absolute dedication to Him, we could never discard the Qur'an and forge our own paths.

 

I don't expect you to agree, but I hope you will try to see through our eyes. As Muslims living in the west, we see your side of it as well.

 

Salam.

I see your side. This all hinges on whether or not that the word of God is actually in your holy book. I'm not picking on Muslims here. There are other religions that claim the truth. Each person will listen to their own heart. The Muslim heart is no more righteous than any Christian, Hindhu or Jewish heart. I still feel Islamic countries need to evolve. Islam is stuck in the past. There are many progressive and moderate muslims in the west who are intimidated by radical Muslims. They will eventually prevail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Shirt - are you a Muslim? Why do you go under the alias as one? You sound like an atheist or a christian maybe. Anyways, I just wanted to add; even though I'm not very familiar with this whole 'chopping off the hand' ideology, something came to mind. Why should people say that Islam is so barbaric and a backward civilization only? I mean what about Christians? What do they believe? They believe if it wasn't for Abraham, we wouldn't be here today. They look at Abraham with high esteem yes? Don't they believe Abraham was going to slaughter his son for the grace of God? If its okay to accept this idea, Christianity allows fathers to slaughter their own sons as a sacrifice. How should you have any more say about a persecutor chopping off a man's hand for stealing? Is it more wrong to kill your own son in the name of religion or to cut a theft's hand off? Furthermore, in Christianity, they believe the Father killed the Son (Jesus). So this whole theme of father killing his own son is prevalent in Christianity, except Christians don't perceive it. They only see the problems of others.

 

Christians don't believe in violence. Jesus preached non violence. He said(I paraphrase)"If a man strikes you on the cheek, turn the other cheek" That's pretty hard to live up to. What he may have been saying is that an eye for an eye is barbaric. BTW, Christians don't believe in sacrificing their own sons. Jesus came to free mankind from religion, not start one.That, I believe, to be the truth. The person who believes they know the truth is a complete fool and has stopped searching for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surah 8.12 "Remember thy lord has inspired the angels with the message. Give firmness to the believers and instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. Smite them above their necks and smite the fingertips of them."

 

Surah 9.5 "When the sacred months have passed, kill the idolaters whereever you find them."

 

Surah 47.4 "When you encounter the unbelievers, Strike off their heads. Untill you have made a wide slaughter among them tie up the remaining captives."

 

These are verses from the Qur'an. I guess 6 billion people will have to be killed by those who take the Qur'an literally. It is the word oF Allah, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These are verses from the Qur'an. I guess 6 billion people will have to be killed by those who take the Qur'an literally. It is the word oF Allah, right?

 

No, 6-billion don't have to be killed by those who take the Qur'an literally. Yes, it is the Word of God. Hint, everything has a context and you can't take things out of context. Another hint, historically the Companions (ra) were in a position of power to start a nation-wide slaughter slaughter like the Mongols, but they didn't and they were the foremost when it came to believing in the Qur'an.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, 6-billion don't have to be killed by those who take the Qur'an literally. Yes, it is the Word of God. Hint, everything has a context and you can't take things out of context. Another hint, historically the Companions (ra) were in a position of power to start a nation-wide slaughter slaughter like the Mongols, but they didn't and they were the foremost when it came to believing in the Qur'an.

What is the context of those statements?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is the context of those statements?

 

It means kill those disbelievers who are at war with you. If it was an all out killing spree, it would be quite pointless to say to take captives like one of the verses you quoted says:

 

"Surah 47.4 "When you encounter the unbelievers, Strike off their heads. Untill you have made a wide slaughter among them tie up the remaining captives."

 

The verses were never understood by the Prophet (pbuh) nor his Companions (ra) to mean an all-out killing spree where you kill everybody. It was understood in a specific context which is the battle field. The Prophet (pbuh) and the Companions (ra) were in a position of power to kill everybody Mongol-style but they didn't due to obvious reasons. They understood in a specific context and didn't think it meant what you proposed/asked about earlier - and they were the foremost in applying the Qur'an.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Islam is stuck in the past. There are many progressive and moderate muslims in the west who are intimidated by radical Muslims. They will eventually prevail.

 

Islam has perservered against the ever-changing whims and desires of man. And it will always perservere, untainted, regardless of however many human beings wish otherwise.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Islam has perservered against the ever-changing whims and desires of man. And it will always perservere, untainted, regardless of however many human beings wish otherwise.

Salam.

Change can be good for the soul. Islam has to change in some ways to have peace with the rest of the world. I don't wish any negativity on moderate Islam, but I will not bend to the radicals, when it affects my country. You live in the States. You know full well the west's issues with Islam. Salaam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It means kill those disbelievers who are at war with you. If it was an all out killing spree, it would be quite pointless to say to take captives like one of the verses you quoted says:

 

"Surah 47.4 "When you encounter the unbelievers, Strike off their heads. Untill you have made a wide slaughter among them tie up the remaining captives."

 

The verses were never understood by the Prophet (pbuh) nor his Companions (ra) to mean an all-out killing spree where you kill everybody. It was understood in a specific context which is the battle field. The Prophet (pbuh) and the Companions (ra) were in a position of power to kill everybody Mongol-style but they didn't due to obvious reasons. They understood in a specific context and didn't think it meant what you proposed/asked about earlier - and they were the foremost in applying the Qur'an.

Jesus said: "Jesus said: "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you". "turn the other cheek". He was never violent and preached only love. I'm not religious, but I prefer Him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Change can be good for the soul. Islam has to change in some ways to have peace with the rest of the world. I don't wish any negativity on moderate Islam, but I will not bend to the radicals, when it affects my country. You live in the States. You know full well the west's issues with Islam. Salaam.

 

Sure, change is good for the soul - if it helps a human being establish a connection with his Creator. Also, Islam doesn't have to change, especially not through coercion ("We'll give you peace if you conform to our ways"). That'll only make martyrs of us.

 

What can my enemies do to me? I have in my breast both my heaven and my garden. If I travel they are with me, never leaving me. Imprisonment for me is a chance to be alone with my Lord. To be killed is martyrdom and to be exiled from my land is a spiritual journey. -Ibn Taymiyyah

 

Jesus said: "Jesus said: "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you". "turn the other cheek". He was never violent and preached only love. I'm not religious, but I prefer Him.

 

This seems like a contradiction to what you said to me. You're not willing to turn the other cheek for "radicals" when it affects your country.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure, change is good for the soul - if it helps a human being establish a connection with his Creator. Also, Islam doesn't have to change, especially not through coercion ("We'll give you peace if you conform to our ways"). That'll only make martyrs of us.

 

What can my enemies do to me? I have in my breast both my heaven and my garden. If I travel they are with me, never leaving me. Imprisonment for me is a chance to be alone with my Lord. To be killed is martyrdom and to be exiled from my land is a spiritual journey. -Ibn Taymiyyah

This seems like a contradiction to what you said to me. You're not willing to turn the other cheek for "radicals" when it affects your country.Salam.

I'm not Jesus. It's still admirable to believe in those words, even if it's extremely difficult to adhere to them. It's a lot harder to live up to those words, than something about slaying your enemy. Everything is created from thought. If you follow good words of advice, it will eventually lead somewhere good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not Jesus. It's still admirable to believe in those words, even if it's extremely difficult to adhere to them. It's a lot harder to live up to those words, than something about slaying your enemy. Everything is created from thought. If you follow good words of advice, it will eventually lead somewhere good.

 

So at the core, you believe that it is better to lay down arms and not protect yourself or the oppressed against a transgressing enemy? Is forgiving the enemy more important than protecting the lives of innocents? Pardon the wording, I know this sounds like a leading question, but I'm honestly puzzled.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So at the core, you believe that it is better to lay down arms and not protect yourself or the oppressed against a transgressing enemy? Is forgiving the enemy more important than protecting the lives of innocents? Pardon the wording, I know this sounds like a leading question, but I'm honestly puzzled.

 

Salam.

I believe that Jesus' words are something to aspire to in one's life. Of course, the way the planet is structured with dense energy and a struggle between the dark and the light, we have to protect ourselves. What Jesus was saying, in my mind, is that the light will always overcome the dark, eventually. If we continue to give an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, then we will remain in the dark. If enough people on the planet live in love for each other, regardless of race, gender or religion, we will reach a critical mass that will change the conciousness of the planet. At that point we will begin to live as one, the way the creator meant us to. This is why Jesus said "Love thyne enemy". Salaam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is it that when the discussion gets interesting it gets shuffled away?

 

I think you concluded things pretty well in your above post, so there might not be much left to debate.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you concluded things pretty well in your above post, so there might not be much left to debate.

 

Salam.

Fair enough. thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you concluded things pretty well in your above post, so there might not be much left to debate.

 

Salam.

 

it may be a debate for you and others but not for me. i've questions but they dont seem to get no response. :sl:

 

greatly appreciate it if mr ALA'ADIN or others can elaborate.

 

1. such as?

2. whats the minimum limit?

3. such as?

4. who can be considered 'qualified witnesses'? is the thief gonna confess voluntarily or under duress?

5. if the owner dont wanna his stolen property back, can the thief keep it? is the theft still considered a sin despite the owner dont wanna claim it?

 

btw if the thief happen to have both hands amputated following similar crime, how he's gonna pray? what if he continues stealing despite both hands gone, whats the authority gonna do next? tq. :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Tafsir Ibn Kathir (tafsir(contact admin if its a beneficial link))

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_tafsir(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/default.asp?sid=5&tid=13821"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_tafsir(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/default.asp?sid=5&tid=13821[/url]

The Necessity of Cutting off the Hand of the Thief

 

Allah commands and decrees that the hand of the thief, male or female be cut off. During the time of Jahiliyyah, this was also the punishment for the thief, and Islam upheld this punishment. In Islam, there are several conditions that must be met before this punishment is carried out, as we will come to know, Allah willing. There are other rulings that Islam upheld after modifying these rulings, such as that of blood money for example. When Does Cutting the Hand of the Thief Become Necessary In is recorded in the Two Sahihs that Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah said, n

 

«áóÚóäó Çááåõ ÇáÓøóÇÑöÞó íóÓúÑöÞõ ÇáúÈóíúÖóÉó ÃóÊõÞúØóÚõ íóÃõåõ¡ æóíóÓúÑöÞõ ÇáúÃóÈúáó ÃóÊõÞúØóÚõ íóÃõå»

 

(May Allah curse the thief who steals an egg and as a result his hand is cut off, and who steals rope and as a result his hand is cut off.) Al-Bukhari and Muslim recorded that `A'ishah said that the Messenger of Allah said,

 

«ÊõÞúØóÚõ íóÃõ ÇáÓøóÇÑöÞö Ãöí ÑõÈúÚö ÃöíäóÇÑò ÃóÕóÇÚöÃðÇ»

 

(The hand of the thief shall be cut off if he steals a quarter of a Dinar or more.) Muslim recorded that `A'ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, said that the Messenger of Allah said,

 

«áóÇ ÊõÞúØóÚõ íóÃõ ÇáÓøóÇÑÞö ÅöáøóÇ Ãöí ÑõÈúÚö ÃöíäÇÑò ÃóÕóÇÚöÃðÇ»

 

(The hand of the thief shall only be cut off if he steals a quarter of a Dinar or more.) This Hadith is the basis of the matter since it specifies (that the least amount of theft that deserves cutting the hand) is a quarter of a Dinar. So this Hadith fixes the value. And saying that it is three Dirhams is not a contradiction. This is because the Dinar in question was equal to twelve Dirhams, so three Dirhams equalled a fourth of a Dinar. So in this way it is possible to harmonize these two views. This opinion was reported from `Umar bin Al-Khattab, `Uthman bin `Affan,

 

We will have to refer to modern jurists to see how the dinar translates in to modern day currencies

 

btw if the thief happen to have both hands amputated following similar crime, how he's gonna pray? what if he continues stealing despite both hands gone, whats the authority gonna do next? tq

People are born with out hands and they manage to pray, he can pray the same way.

 

This is a hypothetical scenario . The Judge can give him something called a ta'zeer that will prevent him from being anti-social.

 

 

The third category of punishment is known as ta'zeer (discretionary punishment) and it is "a sentence or punishment whose measure is not fixed by the Shari'ah"42 neither as to the offence nor the penalty. It helps to meet varying circumstances (e.g. if a definitional element is short in a haad offence) and the punishment that was generally inflicted in the past was whipping, though other alternatives such as a warning, fines and imprisonment could be given, but the quantum of punishment for ta'zeer is generally much below that of haad (e.g. ten lashes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

assalaam alaikum

 

yes in Islam the penalty of stealing is cutting off the hand.....BUT...there are conditions.

 

the thing stolen should fulfil the nisaab.-a least value - a bar of snickers will not.

 

the person stealing it should know it is clearly someone else's property-if a person sees a bangle of gold dropped on the road and he picks it,then his hands will not be cut,but that falls in to another case.

 

 

here are the conditions for cutting the hand off for stealing.

 

1) The one who steals is sane

 

2) He has reached puberty

 

3) He steals equivalent to the amount (nisab) or more. The Nisab is one Dinar or ten Dirhams (i.e. 4.374 grams of gold). The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said:

 

There is no cutting (of hands) for stealing that is less then ten Dirhams (Musnad Ahmad).

 

Sayyidah Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reports that The hands were not cut in the time of the Messenger of Allah for stealing worthless things (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah).

 

Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) narrates that: The hand of a thief was not cut off during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give peace) except for stealing something equal to a shield in value (Sahih al-Bukhari, 6792, & Sahih Muslim, 1685).

 

A shield was worth one Dinar at that time, as narrated by Ibn Abbas in Sunan Abu Dawud & Sunan Nasai.

 

4) He steals the article from a place that meets the requirements of security and safeguarding. This security is considered when the article is safeguarded by a guard or by it being locked in a place.

 

5) The article is in the ownership of another person

 

6) There is no confusion in it (as to whether he took it by way of theft or for some other reason).

 

7) It was stolen secretly (not by force, etc).

 

If any of the above conditions are not met, then the penalty of theft will not be established.

 

Allah Most High says:

 

As to the thief, male of female, cut off his or her hands. A punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime (Surah al-Maidah, 38).

 

 

 

there is one thing to be kept in mind sisters and brothers. when you even think of stealing anything, even one penny,remember Allah is watching you.your hand might not be cut for stealing a bar of chocolate.but Allah will surely give you what you deserve. there comes a day which there is no doubt of. those who feared Allah will be the ones who are safe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question, lets say someone stole something from a store, and later the owner of the store finds out and takes custody of the stealer. But the owner forgives the stealer for stealing. Does his hand still have to be cut off, or does forgiveness do away with the punishment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Question, lets say someone stole something from a store, and later the owner of the store finds out and takes custody of the stealer. But the owner forgives the stealer for stealing. Does his hand still have to be cut off, or does forgiveness do away with the punishment?

 

:sl:

 

The punishment is not applied if the owner does not ask for the goods to be returned.

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetIslam-qa(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/en/ref/9935/thief%20cutting%20hand"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetIslam-qa(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/en/ref/9935/thief%20cutting%20hand[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

many thanks for the input guys.

 

here's what i get from wiki and bbc. looks harsh but i must add thats the law. :sl:

 

wikipedia

Amputation

 

The punishment for stealing is the amputation of the hand and after repeated offense, the foot (Quran 5:38). This controversial practice is still in practice today in countries like Iran[4], Saudi Arabia[5], and Northern Nigeria[6]. In Iran, amputation as punishment has been described as "uncommon", but "not unheard of, and has already been carried out at least once" during 2010.[7]

 

bbc

17 October 2010

Iranian chocolate thief faces hand amputation

 

An Iranian judge has sentenced a man convicted of robbing a confectionery shop to have one of his hands cut off, Iranian media report.

 

The judge also sentenced the man to one year in prison.

 

Police arrested the man in May after finding $900 (£560), three pairs of gloves and a large amount of chocolate in his car, Fars news agency said.

 

Under Iran's Islamic law, amputations are usually reserved for habitual thieves.

 

Last week, authorities cut off the hand of a man convicted of two robberies in the north-eastern city of Mashhad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl: if the man has robbed someones' property, his hand has to be cut. because in Islam the robber has no respect for others' rights.then he has lost his right to have his hand with him.Allah has given him his hand.if he uses it to rob and disobey Allah, Allah has the right to order to cut his hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:sl: if the man has robbed someones' property, his hand has to be cut. because in Islam the robber has no respect for others' rights.then he has lost his right to have his hand with him.Allah has given him his hand.if he uses it to rob and disobey Allah, Allah has the right to order to cut his hand.

An eye for an eye is not the way to live your life. We must all strive to a greater consciousness. By the way, nobody cares too much about the hijab, except the poor Turkish ladies I was just talking to. They're fearful of the Islamist regime in Turkey. What I believe is cuel is the Niquab and burka. Me, and billions of others can't stand them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×