FAQ in the category of Justice

This concept covers a wide area. Trespasses into ones body and property are concerned with the material rights; and those into ones heart and soul are concerned with spiritual rights.

The biggest trespass into ones material rights is murder; the treachery of cutting off the relations of man with this Universe, preventing one from worship, from reflecting upon the divine works and from giving thanks for the blessings God sent, and piercing and passing through the nearly seventy trillion cells that call the name of God.

The learned of fiqh say that murder is acceptable under three circumstances:

-Entering blasphemy after faith
-performing adultery though married
-killing someone unjustly

Apart from these conditions, one cannot be killed.

"Whoever kills a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the Earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind." (Al-Maidah Surah, 5:32).

As an explanation to that verse, Bediüzzaman says,

"The life and blood of an innocent cannot be taken for even all the mankind. Both of them are equal in the place of might and that of justice." (Sunuhat)

In other words; as it is the same to the power of God to create a human being and all the humanity, it is also the same according to His mercy and justice to murder a human being and all the humanity.

While man trespasses others rights, somehow s/he forgets that they are the slaves of God. S/he fails to think, "If I behave unjustly toward a slave of God, then I will be subject to his torment." For this reason, he faces divine warnings.

As an interpreter of these divine warnings, Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) warned his community many times and in many ways.

Just tree examples:

"Beware of the malediction of the wronged; because there is no veil between his supplication and God." (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim)

"The bankrupt in my community is the one who comes to the Hereafter with prayer and zekah-distribution of one fortieth of one's income as alms (one of the five pillars of the Islamic faith). But at the same time the ones he has sworn at and has beaten come, too. Thus, some of his good deeds are given to these and those. If the good deeds give out before the rights of others are still on his shoulders, then the mistakes of the creditors are loaded upon him. Then he is cast into the Hell." (Muslim, Birr,59)

"If you are slain while persevering against the enemy without running away and relying on God for your reward, this will be the compensation for all your sins except your debts. I am informed of this by Gabriel." (Muslim)

There is a very important lesson here in the last hadith, Even the martyrdom does not do away with trespasses into others rights.

A believer who sacrifices his life in the way of God is not freed of his debts to others, though he gets the great reward of it; because God has left it to His slaves whether to renounce from their own debts or not. Likewise, the sins of the one who repents sincerely are forgiven except from the trespasses of into others rights.

"For the repentant people jurisdiction of Gods rights cannot be followed; but the jurisdiction of people is followed." (Hak Dini Kuran Dili)

For example, the one who talks bad behind someone cannot escape the punishment of this sin unless he gets forgiveness from that person.

Divine warnings come like "These are the limits of God, do not trespass." after the verses that establish the basics of justice among slaves. So trespassing into the rights of others is taken as trespassing into the limits of God. So with whom will the one who performs such a sin seek refuge?

Because man is the slave of God, trespassing into His rights also results in divine punishment and at that point the rights unit.

Why cannot we cut our own fingers and plot against our own lives? Because neither the body nor the soul is our own. We have no right to destruct the building, or to drive away the guest. What if we did? We would be in an effort to shape the creature of God without His will. And this is a rebellion against the laws of God, and a trespass into others rights. So with the same deed, two rights are trespassed at the same time.

Only the wronged person may forgive the one who wronged him/her. Therefore, one must find a way to make himself forgiven by the one who he wronged. Otherwise, the problem will be solved in the hereafter, which will turn into a grave issue. If the person that we wronged has passed away, we must find his heirs and pay our debt. 
If one does not please the person he wronged here in this world, he will be interrogated in the other world and the wronged one will get his right from him.

However, if the wrong-doer regrets later on, repents sincerely, lives like a person that pleases Allah, but cannot find the person he wronged, it is expected from the mercy of Allah to ask the wronged one to forgive the other, in the other world, on condition that Allah bestows blessings on the wronged one. In return, the wronged one will forgive him as long as the repenter is sincere in his repentance.
However, if the wrongdoer wants to pay for his wrong doings to those he hurt, but cannot find them, then he is recommended to do good things on their behalf, give alms and pray for them.
If we wronged someone who is hard to please, we must find a way to pay his share directly or via a deputy. If that person does not know that we wronged him and if  it is not possible to express it openly, then we need to leave the money onto his desk or home or through another means, and then tell him about the situation with a note. There is no need to mention the name directly.

Man is an honorable being. Wronging his moral values like his freedom, honor, chastity and dignity is a grave sin, just like an encroachment done to his life and assets. They are all grave responsibilities.

One may have wronged another person willingly or unwillingly, knowingly or unknowingly. Or he may encroach his rights to the extent that causes the loss some of his rights. We cannot avoid being fully away from faults and sins, even if we strive to control ourselves or have strong self-determination to remain righteous.

What must we do in this case, which may be considered natural? Does it merely suffice to say “It happened once inevitably, it will not happen again, I wish I had not done it” with an inner soul-searching? Or, should we try to compensate for our faults through correcting our wrongs and asking for forgiveness from the one we wronged by expressing our regrets ?

Essentially, in Islam, there are two kinds of rights: the right of Allah and the right of the people. The right of Allah means the duties that every man should fulfill towards his Lord. Any failure or sin or shortcoming in this sense, requires sincere invocation, repentance and asking frogiveness from Allah. However, the right of people is different. There is only one compensation for it. That is, meeting the wronged one personally, asking for pardon and forgiveness and paying for the losses.

Our Prophet (PBUH) states the following in a hadith : “If one has wronged his brother’s dignity or assaulted his assets unrightfully, he must have himself forgiven before the Doomsday where there is no gold or silver to pay. Otherwise, some of his good deeds (equal to the rights of that person) will be taken away from him and given to that person. If he has no good deeds, then the sins of the wronged one will be given to him. “

Yes, also according to our Prophet’s (PBUH) advice, there is no solution in this case, other than pleasing the wronged one. In so much that, even if a person has become a martyr but has wronged someone, all of his sins are forgiven except the wrongs done to that person. Thus, the only remedy is applying to the wronged person to please him through confessing the mistake and asking for forgiveness. If there is a financial loss, you should pay for it as much as you can to please him.

So, you will have done your best. If he responds positively, shows tolerance and understanding, then you will have gotten rid of the responsibility and thus of the torment and account in the hereafter through settling the problem in this world.
However, if you still feel remorse, you can repent additionally. You will have relieved before Allah as it is stated in this hadith : “Regret is the repentance itself”, “ A repenter from sins is just like one who has not committed  any sins at all. “
How can a person understand and discern that his repentance has been accepted, he has been freed from the sin ?

Let us get the answer from the Prophet (PBUH)  :

“One who repents and does a good deed following a committed sin, is like a person who wears a very tight armor on himself. Following the sin, if he does a good deed, one of the rings of the armor will be released; following another good deed, another ring will be released. After the good deeds, the armor will fall off the body”

We deduce from the hadith that  a person who committed sin against Allah or wronged someone, can be freed from those sins, and the buttons  of the armor of the sin will be unbuttoned quickly through regretting following the sin and doing good deeds and increasing his services of the Quran and faith. So, it will not be necessary to feel remorse and feel uneasy or distress any more because he is regarded to  have done his best with a pure intention and sincerity.

Meanwhile, we should not forget this verse of the Quran : “Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”

Bukhari,Mazalim ( Persecutions),10
2. at-Targhib wa't-Tarhib, 4:97.
3. ibid ., 4:106
4. Surah az-Zumar, 53.

Most often, we see that the concept equality is mistaken for justice. Equality means the state of being in equilibrium for two things in all respects. Justice, on the other hand, is described as giving every owner of right his right and punishing the unjust.

In giving man two legs and the sheep four, there is an inequality but no injustice. This suits man the best and that the sheep.

The absolute equality, in other words everything being the same in all respects, is against justice.

Let us observe human arts: A poet writes every letter in his poem by taking into account the whole word. S/he inserts every word by considering the entirety of the poem. S/he composes every line in relation with the whole poem. Here, there is no absolute equality but justice. The first line comes first, the last one goes to the end, but all serve the same purpose.

A manufacturer orders every part of his factory from the size, sections, engines, furnaces to the smallest screw with wisdom and justice. And a wonderful factory comes into being. Absolute equality destroys this orderliness.

The same thing is true for a painter, too. He draws every design in every one of his paintings in its proper place. He spreads colors, shapes not with absolute equality but with justice. Whichever color suits something, he paints it with that color. Whichever shape is best suited to something, he shapes it that way. And there comes into being a wonderful work of art.

The actions of Allah in this universe take place based not on equality but on the principles of justice. If there were absolute equality amongst people, could we, before all, talk about the notions of mother, father and child? If all the people were equal in all respects, there would be no social life anymore. According to that supposition, prophets, their followers, commanders, soldiers, fathers, children, employers, employees, teachers, students all these social concepts would cease to exist. I wonder if such a society could be imagined!

Let us have a look at other beings: If there was absolute equality, there would be neither the earth nor the sky.

If the lightning occurs, this is because the electric charges of clouds are not the same.

Let us think about our souls and bodies. If there were absolute equality, which one would dominate the other?

Could we survive if all our organs were hands or hearts?

It is evident that the sparrow and the cat are not equal. However, on both of them the Divine justice is clearly read. Whatever is necessitated by being a cat, from disposition, to the structure of teeth and nails, and to the agility of body, are all given with justice, and nothing is left incomplete. In the same way, whatever is necessitated by being a sparrow, is also given to it with all capabilities and body structure suited to it, without anything lacking.

That is the justice. Nobody has the right to ask why it was a sparrow and that a cat. If asked, the answer will be: Allah willed so. If He had willed the opposite, this question would have still been asked.

Neither this sparrow nor that cat was put to a test in another world so that they would think their status lacking as a reward for their success. Just a short time ago, they were looking forward to the blessings of Allah in the darkness of nonexistence. Although they had no right, Allah bestowed on them these present bodies of theirs and their souls. And they continue their lives, as if they consciously knew, satisfied with their conditions. In their souls, there is no one atom of objection to Allahs Ordination (Qadar-Preordination).

God says in a verse:
God enjoins justice (and right judgment in all matters), and devotion to doing good, and generosity towards relatives, and He forbids you indecency, wickedness and vile conduct (all offenses against religion, life, personal property, chastity, and health of mind and body). (An-Nahl Surah, 16:90)

So, God is not pleased with cruelty and vile conduct.

God who is the Ultimate Just One is not oblivious of what cruel people do; and whoever performs cruelty and treachery will surely account for it before the Divine justice to the finest point.

In another verse, it is explained that even being inclined to the cruel from heart and tolerating their offences are how dangerous, let alone supporting them:
And do not incline towards those who do wrong (against God by associating partners with Him and against people by violating their rights), or the Fire will touch you. (Hud Surah, 11:113)

Still in another verse:
God commands you to deliver trusts (including public and professional duties of service) to those entitled to them; and when you judge between people, to judge with justice. (An-Nisa Surah, 4:58)

Here, what attracts attention is the point that it is said people in the verse about the issue of justice, not believers, which means without discriminating between friend and foe we must approach everybody with justice.

Likewise, this verse also gives the same lesson:
And so, whoever does an atoms weight of good will see it; And whoever does an atoms weight of evil will see it. (Az-Zalzalah Surah, 99:7-8)

Another principle of justice in Islam is that for the sin of a person, others, his relatives and friends, nation and state cannot be held responsible. God Almighty states in Quran:
And no soul, as bearer of burden, bears (and is made to bear) the burden of another. (Fatir Surah, 35:18)

Everybody bears the burden of his or her own sins. Whoever committed the murder; he/she must bear the punishment; and he/she will. Only, if someone caused someone to perform a sin, then both the performer of the sin and the one who caused it will be punished.

God Almighty determined many limits in Quran in order for his slaves not to encroach upon each others rights and called them the limits of God. He gave us the lesson through warning that whoever trespasses these limits will be cruel and will be subject to Divine punishment.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) also states in one of his Hadiths: God makes those suffer who make people suffer in the world.

In many verses, God Almighty explains that the future of cruel communities who do not rule with justice will be very bad. I present two of them here as an example:
How many a township have We destroyed because it was given up to wrongdoing: so they all lie in ruins, with their roofs caved in, wells and fountains deserted, and towering, lofty castles collapsed. (Al-Hajj Surah, 22:45)

How many a community that did the greatest wrong (by associating partners with God) and thereby wronged itself have We shattered, and raised up another people after them. (Al-Anbiya Surah, 21:11)

Islam also commands complying with the rights of the people who are followers of other religions. In peace, their rights are also guaranteed and under protection just like those of Muslims. Likewise, in the sect of Hanafi, in peace, a Muslim who murders a non-Muslim unjustly is retaliated i.e. he is sentenced to death.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) warns such people in one of his Hadiths:
Whoever torments a non-Muslim, I am the enemy of him. Whomever I am the enemy of; I will grasp him from the collar in the Hereafter. (Keşfül Hafa, II, 218, hadith no: 2341)

This being the truth, the source of some Muslims resorting to terror and cruelty must be attributed to their ignorance and weakness in will power, not to the religion.

As is known, man is not exempt from mistakes; any mistake he makes sentences only him. It would not be fair to try to accuse his religion.

I want to mention a very important point about this issue:
The people who hinder Muslims from learning Islam from its essential sources and from living it, who take them away from religion by urging them into debauchery, and who lead them into poverty by exploiting their lands without fairness are directly responsible for these people falling into the disaster of anarchy. It would be more appropriate if these circles of interest made a self-questioning and questioned their consciences rather than accuse others.

There have been various considerations about punishment throughout history and the purposes of punishments have been determined in the light of those considerations. In the previous ages (approximately until 18th century) in the West, the purposes of the punishments were to intimidate, to take revenge and to expose criminals. To burn, to crucify, to amputate an organ, to break bones, to sear by means of branding metals etc, were kinds of frequently applied punishments.
Moreover, there was not a correlation between crime and punishment in those ages. Capital punishment could be applied for the simplest crimes. In the English Criminal Law, capital punishment was applied approximately for 200 crimes until 18th century. As for the French Criminal Law, capital punishment was applied for 215 different crimes. Most of those crimes were summary offences.
In the course of time, social and divine revenge began to replace individual revenge. In social revenge, frightening and intimidation; in the divine revenge, atonement of the committed crime was the main purpose. After 18th century, Western scholars struggled against the purpose of revenge in punishments and they endeavored to replace it with different purposes.
Purposes of Punishments in Islam
The purpose of the punishment in the Islamic Criminal Law is neither to tyrannize, nor to torture the criminal nor to take revenge from him/her. Hazrat Prophet (PBUH) was not sent in order to terrorize people or to tyrannize thembut He (PBUH) was sent as a mercy to all of the worlds.
As it is understood from religious decrees (from the statements of verses and hadiths) and from the explanations of the interpreters of Islamic religious law, the principal purposes of punishment in Islam are as follows:
1. To Prevent Crime in General
In Islamic Law executing punishment is based on being exemplary and preventing committing the crime. That is to say, Islamic punishments have the characteristics of preventing to commit the crime before committing it and being exemplary, which will stop the inclination of others to commit crimes.
Therefore, severe punishments are executed in the presence of the public. Executing punishments openly before the public is closely connected with human psychology.
The purpose of being exemplary and suppressing the inclinations is fulfilled in the best way by exposing the punishment and executing it openly before the public. Thus, peoples feelings of hatred and condemnation of crimes are always kept alive. Nobody would like to be in the criminals state at that moment and be in an embarrassing position in the eyes of community. Those feelings suppress the inclination of committing crimes.

2. Specific Prevention
Islamic punishments aim to rehabilitate the criminal as well. Punishments are executed in order to improve the moral quality of the criminal, rehabilitate him in such a way that he will not commit crimes again.
Punishment in Islam is like how a fathers disciplining his child or doctors treatment of his patients. Otherwise, it is not for tyrannizing or torturing the criminal or taking revenge from him.
3. Atonement
Punishment in return for a crime is a required atonement of the absolute justice. Punishment carries out the absolute justice through making atonement for the crime. Thus, victims are consoled and calmed; peace and order are assured in the community. Allahs Messenger (PBUH) states the following in one of His hadiths:
An executed punishment for realizing the justice on the earth is more beneficial than the rain fall continuing thirty mornings for the people on the earth. Ibn Hanbal, Musnad, II, 402.

Retaliation with the same evil is a necessity of the justice. This issue is mentioned in the Quran as follows:
The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree): but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah: for (Allah) loves not those who do wrong. (ash-Shura, 40)

As it can be understood, punishing a criminal as much as he deserves is a necessity of justice. However, if the victim forgives the criminal, he will receive more rewards.

Equitability in punishing is imperative. That is to say, punishments must in accordance with and suitable to the committed crime. Heavier punishments in comparison to the committed crimes will become not the source of justice but the source of tyranny and discontent. That the punishment has the characteristic of expiation is a great favor and mercy for the criminal. According to the view of the most of the interpreters of Islamic law, the punishment of a committed crime in the world conceals the sin of that fault, and abolishes the punishment of that crime in the Hereafter.

In fact, Prophet (PBUH) stated the following:
ıf a person commits a crime and is punished for it, it will be his atonement. Omar Nasuhi Bilmen - Hukuki İslamiyye ve Istılahat-ı Fıkhiyye K. Vol: 1, P: 33.

Since rehabilitation is aimed through punishments, the punishment is not executed when possible if the criminal displays remorse after committing the fault. It is because the most important purpose of punishment has been realized.
The Prophet (PBUH) said to a man who came to him and confessed his theft I dont think you have committed theft. (1)
Similarly, when a man from the Companions of the Prophet (sahaba) whose name was Maiz came to Allahs Messenger (PBUH) and confessed with deep remorse that he had committed adultery, He said: Think carefully. You might have only kissed or done something similar instead of adultery. He (PBUH) wanted to make him withdraw his confession. However, Maiz insisted in his confession and consequently the punishment of adultery was applied. (2)
At this point, it is necessary to indicate that the crime did not become definite in those two occasions. There was no one knowing or witnessing the commitment of the crime. The criminal himself confessed and admitted his crime by being remorse what he had done. If his confession had not existed, it would not have been possible to attribute a crime to him legally.

Therefore, when the Prophet (PBUH) saw they were in a real contrite mood because of the crimes they committed, he did not want their crimes to be definite in terms of law through their confession. He (PBUH) found it enough for them to pledge and pray for forgiveness by themselves.

The situation in an incidence in which the crime is obvious in terms of evidence and witnesses without the need for the criminals confession is different from those examples. The remorse of the criminal is not considered in that occasion.

It is because in the punishment of defraud and similar crimes, the interest of the community is more important than that of the criminal. In order to prevent the spread of such crimes in the community and in order to prevent corruption and discontent, the punishment for the crime that is proved legally is applied whatever the situation of the criminal is. However, retaliation is an exception. In a retaliation incidence, the relatives of the victim have the right to forgive the criminal. And forgiving is encouraged in the Quran.
In the crimes called tazir the punishment is left to the judges discretion; here the situation of the criminal is considered. If the judge sees an attitude of the criminal that implies capability of being rehabilitated, he can abolish would lessen the punishment. The benefit of the community should be taken into consideration, too.

(1) Ahmad b. Hanbal, Baki Mus. Ansar, 21480
(2) Muslim, Hudud, 22; ash-Shawkani, Naylul-Ewtar, VII, 95,109; az-Zaylai, Nasbu'r-Raya, III, 314 etc.

The essentials which form the fundamentals of the Islamic Law are based on revelation (of Allah). They are outlined in the Quran. In other words, the legal essentials are established and ordained by the Creator of the Universe. Whatever the age, atmosphere and circumstances in which one lives, those essentials are the source of peace and means of comfort. This is because these decrees are the most suitable ones for mans creation. When the decrees and jurisdiction in the Quran are studied, the outstanding point is that both corporeal and spiritual existence of man is taken into consideration.

In the matter of witnessing, it is possible to observe that, too. The translation of the verse about giving testimony is as follows:

And call upon two (Muslim) men among you as witnesses. If two men are not there, then let there be one man and two women, from among those of whom you approve as witnesses, that if either of the two women errs (through forgetfulness), the other may remind her (1)

So, here, the basic matter is directly related to the creation of women. This is a requisite of their psychological aspect. The underlying disposition of woman is excitement and she lives with her excitements. Therefore, ideas get rooted in her heart rather than her mind and develop effects in this way. She cannot really remain unbiased in the face of events. She approaches phenomena with intuition as her conscience and mercy prevail.

Due to that quality of theirs, the Quran says: Women may forget, therefore they should be given helpers in testimony. It is expressed by Allah the Almighty who created the woman. So, it is an unchanging rule. Are there not among women those who do not easily forget and those who have sharper memories than men? Of course, there are, but generally, this psychological state is seen in women more often. It is just natural that they cannot retain events in their memories long.

On the other hand, the woman is more introverted. She has a world of her own. She is busy with the housework all day. She takes care of children and of their upbringing. Very few women are interested in trade, business, and politics. How will a woman who is so away from the outer world be aware of the events that take place there, how will she learn about them and retain them in her mind and to what extent will she be able to bear witness?

By accepting two womens testimonies equal to that of one man, and thus not burdening the woman with the responsibility as much as that of the man in the matter of witnessing, Islam does not harm her right, on the contrary, protects it and prevents her from sinning. This is because bearing witness is a tough duty that brings about great responsibilities.

In a verse in the Quran, the following is stated:

And do not conceal the testimony; he who conceals it, surely his heart (which is the center of faith) is contaminated with sin. God has full knowledge of what you do. (2)

In hadiths (sayings of the Prophet) it is pointed out that witnessing bears great responsibilities and that wrongful testimony is counted among the greatest sins.

Indeed, Islam protects woman from great sins and prevents her from committing such a sin as wrongful testimony, by way of deception by some weaknesses of hers through excitement or through acting emotionally. Islam has taken precautions against it by appointing a helping woman beside her. Just for this reason, in some testimonial matters, two women replace one man.

Sometimes women may act jealously in the matters they will testify and the feeling of rivalry may prevail. Therefore, they may blemish the realization of justice by concealing some aspects of the matter. However, if two women bear witness, doubts will be eradicated as one of them will clarify the point the other conceals.

On the other hand, that the testimony of two women is deemed equal to the testimony of one man does in no way mean that the woman is worth half the man. This is only a sign that great importance is given to the presence of all sorts of assurance in testimony. In what kinds of lawsuits does the woman bear witness, from which of them is she exempt, and in which is she deemed half the man?

Islamic Law exempted woman from testimony in such crimes which require the punishment called had as adultery, alcohol and robbery and in such punishments as qisas (retaliation) and does not accept her testimony in them. In these lawsuits, the punishment of adultery requires four mens testimonies and the others those of two men. In such lawsuits as related to trade, selling and purchasing, marriage and divorce, which fall into the category of relations and dealings, if there are not two men, then the testimonies of one man and two women are stipulated. However, in such matters in which men are not very competent such as the determining of virginity, the conditions that emerge during birth concerning the mother and baby, and establishing the milk brotherhood/sisterhood, one womans testimony is sufficient. Moreover, Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (May Allah be pleased with him) saw one womans testimony as sufficient even in the matter of divorce. This is because the real aim in testimony is the preservation of rights, maintenance of justice and the realization of the truth. One of the wisdoms of not applying for womans testimony in the punishments of had and in qisas (retaliation) is the sensitivity to prevent the slightest doubt in such matters. This is because in the lawsuit of qisas with an incomplete statement, a right would have been violated or a human being would have been wrongly retaliated. Such an inclination as forgetfulness and being overcome by emotions concerning women might overshadow the matter.

This kind of a question can only be asked with the purpose of learning. Otherwise, this would be a sin. Essentially, people having such a problem should ask it.

God gives horse, car, buildings, apartments to whom He wills, poverty and misery, to whom He wills. Besides these, some other reasons should not be denied coming from the family or somewhere else. For example, as it is not possible to deny the ability and capability of someone in earning property, it is not also possible to deny that he knows the methods of earning in his time, because of their being the causes of earning. However, although God bestows some people capacity, He does not give them property. Abut this issue, in a weak-in-relating hadith; God says that He gives property to whomever He wills, and knowledge to whoever wants.

Besides, property should not always be seen as beneficial. God sometimes gives the ones who want property, worldly happiness, and peace, and sometimes He does not. But it is both beneficial if He gives or not, because if you are a good person and will use the things given in good deeds, then it is beneficial for you. But if you are not a good person; and have strayed from the right path, it is not good for you whether God gives you or not.

If you are not on the right path, poverty is a cause of blasphemy for you; because it leads you to rebellion against God so that each day you riot against Him in different ways. Again, if you are not on the right path and have no spiritual life, your wealth is a trouble and disaster for you.

Many people have lost this test until now. There are so many wealthy people whose hearts show no reflection of light and peace, because of their ingratitude.

The bestowment of property by God upon these people is only to increase their arrogance; and so, a cause of their deviation. But, in the first place this is because they killed their spiritual lives and caused the decay of the innate gifts and abilities given by God.

Here, it would be good to quote the hadith of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), Among you there are the ones whose oaths God accepts when they raise their hands and take their oaths. And they do not break them. Bara Ibn-i Malik is one of them. However, the brother of Anas, Bara had neither food to eat nor place to sleep in, he was in complete poverty. Therefore, there are the ones who seem shabby and desperate and who at the same time are great people and are evaluated with the greatness of their hearts. And these are the ones, with the words of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), who God would not shame by letting them fail in their oaths, if they ever take an oath.

Thus, in isolation, neither property nor poverty must be taken as a calamity or boon. Maybe, according to the conditions, poverty is one of the greatest favors of God. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) preferred poverty with his own will. "Ama tarda an takune la humud-dunya. va lanaI-ahiratu: Wouldnt you like that the world be theirs, and the Hereafter ours. Although the treasures of the world poured into the treasury of the state, Omar (may God be pleased with him) lived on food enough to sustain his life and did not ask for any more. But there is also such kind of poverty-may God protect us-that is blasphemy and deviation. For example, if the words above were not uttered by a believer with the intention of learning; rather were uttered by an ungrateful, this person who complains about the favors of God would be in blasphemy.

Hence, poverty in some instances is favor and prosperity. The important thing is the heart must be able to thank; i.e. O my Lord, whatever is from you, I accept. It is pleasing whatever comes from you, be it even a shroud., Either fresh rose or thorn; your favor is pleasing, as well as your punishment is. In the Eastern Anatolia: From you, this is pleasing, and that, too, is.

Whether one lives in complete poverty or in wealth, if he is with God, like Abdulkadir Gaylani, his feet will touch to the shoulder of the people of closeness to God, and his blessed head to the shirttail of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). But if he has no relation with God, both his life of this world and that of the Hereafter will be in ruin. Just like that, the rich who has no relation with God, though seems happy in this world, will be in deep ruin and agony in the end.

Justice means conforming to law, giving every holder of a right their dues and punishing those who are in the wrong, and treating everybody equally before law.

The opposite of justice is injustice. Injustice means having use and disposal of something that somebody else has got without his/her permission and paying no heed to any authority or law whatsoever.

It is impossible to attribute injustice to Allah Almighty. For He (SWT) has no partner in His possession. Having stated the facts, we can examine the issue of justice in Islam now

Justice has two principal bases. The first one is establishing justice and the other one is punishing wrongdoers. Establishing justice means giving every creature, every living being all necessary things in the best manner to maintain their existence. Let us give an example from ourselves: Which organ of us do we think has been misplaced or misshaped? Which one of them does objectionable things? Do we deem their number more than necessary or less? Eyes have been attached to the face, and we have two ears whereas we have only one mouth. Our feet are below, whereas our head is at the top of our body Who can object to this divine ordering?

Doesnt every tree, every animal, every flower, every molecule, every atom, and every system in the space show establishing justice as brightly as the sun? Humankind has dwelled on this manifestation of justice for a long time and advanced considerably in understanding it. All works written ranging from astronomy to biology, from medicine to geology are to some extent the interpretation of this truth

Another aspect of justice is punishing the wrongdoers; every individuals receiving the reward or punishment that s/he deserves Thus, intellect and conscience command that as man who sees that the first aspect of justice is in effect with infinite wisdom, so too he welcomes the second aspect with faith and submission. However, unfortunately, it does not happen in practice! Many men seek this manifestation pertaining to the Hereafter in this world. Are the most debates over justice not stemming from this inappropriate search anyway?

I recently read the hadith in which the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) recited the ninety-nine most beautiful names of Allah (SWT). The names coming before and after the name of Just drew my attention. The name of al-Adl (Just) was preceded by al-Basir (The All- Seeing) and al-Hakaam (The Judge); and after the name of al-Adl (Just) came al-Latif (The Kind) and al-Khabir (The All-Knowing)

I happened to think, Allah Almighty, Who is All-Seeing and Judge, certainly absolute just. He (PBUH) knows the subtlest things and grants favors to His servants from most undetectable ways and knows the inwardness of everything.

We could contemplate on the other names just in the same way: Allah, The Merciful and The Most Compassionate, doubtlessly treats His servants equitably. Allah, The Almighty, The Subduer, and The Most Powerful, certainly is the best One to enforce the justice If Allah, The Forgiver and The Concealer, punishes His servant, that means that this servant has deserved it...

Allah Almighty announces, God enjoins justice (and right judgment in all matters), and devotion to doing good, and generosity towards relatives, and He forbids you indecency, wickedness and vile conduct (all offenses against religion, life, personal property, chastity, and health of mind and body). (An-Nahl Surah, 16:90) That is to say, that Allah Almighty is not in favor of tyranny and wickedness.
Allah, the absolutely just, is not unaware of what tyrants do and doubtlessly those who oppress and betray will definitely be brought to account before Divine justice in full detail.
Again in another verse is conveyed how perilous it is even to back up them heartily and to tolerate them, let alone be adherent to them:
And do not incline towards those who do wrong (against God by associating partners with Him and against people by violating their rights), or the Fire will touch you. For you have no guardians and true friends apart from God, (but if you should incline towards those who do wrong,) you will not be helped (by Him). (Hud Surah, 11:113)
In another verse, Allah (SWT) announces, God commands you to deliver trusts (including public and professional duties of service) to those entitled to them; and when you judge between people, to judge with justice. How excellent is what God exhorts you to do; assuredly, God is All-Hearing, All-Seeing. (An-Nisaa Surah, 4:58) Here what is striking is that the verse does not say believers but it says people. So one needs to treat everybody justly be it friend or foe.
Likewise, this verse teaches the same truth: And so, whoever does an atoms weight of good will see it; And whoever does an atoms weight of evil will see it. (Az-Zalzalah Surah, 99:7, 8)

One of the substantial principals of justice is that if somebody commits a crime, nobody else, relatives, friends, nation, state etc. are not to be held responsible for this crime. Allah Almighty announces in a verse, And no soul, as bearer of burden, bears (and is made to bear) the burden of another... (Fatır Surah, 35:18) Everybody will suffer from his own sins. Whoever commits the murder; they themselves must and will suffer from the punishment. If someone has caused another to commit crime, in this case, both will receive punishment.

Allah Almighty has determined a number of boundaries in the Holy Quran in order for His servants not to transgress each others rights and identified them as the boundaries that Allah has drawn. He instructed that those who go beyond the limit will be wrongdoers and will be inflicted with the Divine punishment.

The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), in a hadith, says, Allah (SWT) will torment those who tormented people in the world.

Allah Almighty announces in many verses that wrongdoing people who do not rule justly will have a terrible consequence. As examples, we offer here two of them:
How many a township have We destroyed because it was given up to wrongdoing: so they all lie in ruins, with their roofs caved in, wells and fountains deserted, and towering, lofty castles collapsed. (Al-Hajj Surah, 22:45)
How many a community that did the greatest wrong (by associating partners with God) and thereby wronged itself have We shattered, and raised up another people after them. (Al-Anbiya Surah, 21:11)
Islam orders that it should be showed consideration for rights of people from other religions as well. During peacetime, their rights, like those of Muslims, are preserved. In Hanafi sect, a person, even if he is Muslim, is to be killed if he kills a non-Muslim during peace time.
The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) warns such people as follows:
Whoever torments a non-Muslim will be my enemy. Whomever enemy I become, I shall seize them by the collar in the Hereafter. (Keshful Hafa, II, 218 Hadith no: 2341)
While the reality is this, one needs to seek the source of the fact that some Muslims are involved in terrorism and tyranny in their ignorance, not in Islam.
As is known, man is not free from mistake. He needs to be convicted because of the crime he has committed. To attempt to hold his religion responsible for a personal crime would not be something a sensible person would do.
In this respect, we need to mention a very important point:
Powers, which prevent Muslims from learning their own religion from the real sources and encourage them into dissipation by keeping them away from their religion and which colonize their countries unfairly and push them into poverty, are primarily responsible for these people are falling into the hands of terrorism. It would be more appropriate for these profit networks to check their conscience first instead of blaming others.

Fatrat (interregnum) means pause and interval. As a religious term, it refers to the time between two prophets.

In a hadith mentioned in Bukhari, fatrat refers to the time between Prophet Jesus and Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon them). (1)

It is understood in some verses that the Arabs before Islam knew quite a little about the prophets that were sent to peoples. In the Qur’an, it is mentioned that the Arab idolaters said: “… Had it been the will of our Lord (to send us Messengers to warn us), He would certainly have sent down angels.” (2), and thus it is expressed how little they knew about messengership and therefore about the rightful religions.

Although the Arabs knew Prophet Abraham as prophet, they accepted that his prophethood was limited to his own time. Due to the three thousand years of time span between Prophet Abraham and Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon them), there were not many who knew the decrees of the religion of Hanif conveyed by Prophet Abraham.

The scholars of Islam study the ahl-al fatrat (those who belong to the interval time) in three categories:

1. Those who contemplate and accept the existence and oneness of Allah with the help of his/her reason and intellect: Qus bin Saida and Zayd bin Amr, the father of Said bin Zayd who was given the good tidings of going to the Paradise, etc.

2. Those who tamper with and change the belief in one God and accept idolatry and those who invent religion at their own will and gather people around them: Amr bin Luhay who initiated idolatry among Arabs and other idolaters, etc.

3. Those who do not belong to either a positive or superstitious belief, neither believer nor idolater, and who passed their lives in ignorance, and who did not think about these matters. In the Age of Jahiliyya (the time of ignorance before the Prophet) there were such people, too.

Among these three categories, the second will go to Hell because they were idolaters. Those who fall into the third group will not be people of the Hell as they are truly the people of fatrat. This is because a prophet who would convey the right and the truth to them did not come to them and they did not show signs of unbelief; so they are among those saved. All the Ahl-u Sunnah (the mainstream Islamic belief) agreed on it. (3)

Qus bin Saida and Zayd bin Amr mentioned in the first category will, on the other hand, be resurrected in the Hereafter individually as separate ummah (community) by Allah, as they were believers in Allah’s existence and oneness among thousands of people, as they were not the community of any prophet because then no prophet was sent, and as they could not reach the time of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). They are the people of salvation and they saved their eternal lives because of their faith. When resurrected, they will be present in the place of gathering on the Day of Judgment as “community of only one person”. These are ‘exceptional’ people and will be bestowed with Allah’s favors and benevolence.

It is obvious that the people of fatrat are not responsible for worship and religious decrees. However, there is a disagreement between the two sects of belief of Ahl-u Sunnah, Maturidi and Ash’ari, about whether they are responsible for believing or not. According to the belief system of Maturidi, those people must make use of the reason and intellect given to them by Allah and thus understand the existence of Allah by contemplating the heavens and the earth and what is between them. According to Ash’ari, on the other hand, the people of fatrat are not obliged to believe in Allah. This is because they were not sent a prophet. Allah says in the Qur’an: “We would never punish (a person or community for the wrong they have done) until we have sent a messenger.” (4). Therefore, they do not deserve punishment because they were not sent a prophet.

Bediuzzaman, an Islamic scholar who lived and published works in the 20th century, brings the mentioned verse as evidence and says:

“The people who lived in the time between prophets are among those saved. It has been stated unanimously that they are not punished for their mistikes in secondary matters. According to Imam Shafi'i and Imam Ash'ari, even if they are deniers and do not believe in the fundamentals of faith, they still are among those saved. For responsibility before God occurs through the sending of prophets, and when prophets are sent, responsibility is established through knowledge of their mission. Since heedlesness and the passage of time obscured the religions of the former prophets, they could not provide the proof for the people of that time. If they obey the former religion, they receive reward; if they do not, they are not punished. For since it was hidden, it cannot he a proof." (5)

Imam Gazali, an important Islamic scholar, studies the people after the messengership of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in three categories:

1. Those who did not hear about the message of the Prophet and were not informed about him, too. Those who fall into this group are definitely the people of salvation and will go to Paradise.

2. Those who heard about the message of the Prophet, the miracles he worked and his high ethics, but did not believe. This group of people will definitely be exposed to torment.

3. Those who heard the Prophet’s name, but did not hear about anything except for the negative propaganda, and nobody told them the truth and thus encourage them into belief; for these reasons, they stayed indifferent. I hope that they will also be among the people of salvation and thus go to Paradise.

Badiuzzaman, who states that at the end of time, a kind of fatrat is being experienced, points out that such kinds of innocent people who die in the world wars will also be among the people of salvation. Beadiuzzaman says:

“As at the end of time (akhir zaman), there came over the religion and the religion of Muhammad (PBUH)  a veil of indifference to the degree of fatrat, and as at the end of time the real religion of Prophet Jesus will reign and will become shoulder to shoulder with Islam. For all these reasons, of course the calamities suffered by the Christians who follow Prophet Jesus are a kind of martyrdom for them.” (6)

Sources

1. Bukhari, Manaqibu'l-Ansar: 53.

2. The Qur’an, Fussilat , 14.

3. Tajrid-i Sarih trns, 4:544.

4. The Qur’an, Isra, 15.

5. Letters (Mektubat), 360-361.

6. Kastamonu Lahikası, p. 77.

While some people claim that it is impossible to judge with Islamic rules, some others accuse the ones who do not judge with Islamic rules of blasphemy, without heeding their intentions. One of these is in exaggeration, the other in oversimplification. In other words, both of them out of the limits, and go astray from the truth.

Let us begin with the first mistake. There is a well-known principle: If something is stable, it is so with all its requirements. There are fingers with the hand; you cannot think hand without fingers. And you cannot benefit from such a hand. Eyes cannot be separated from the face. A face without eyes is missing a very important part. And the white of the eye cannot be separated from the dark part of it. Fingers are the requirements of the hand; eyes of the face; and pupil of the eye. If you separate them from one another, you cannot expect any benefit from them. Islamic rules and judgments are just like that. They must be taken as a whole. And only by this way, can they bring about the progress of the individual and the community, and lead to peace and bliss.

In a community in which the basic principles of Islam are neglected, personal and domestic lives are based on wrong principles, only ordinary treatments and the application of criminal laws would not help much. Alternatively, it may not be possible to apply these rules to such a community. Even if it were, many people would fall into an opinion contrary to Islam by complying with them without believing and unwillingly. They see Muslim, but live as an enemy of Islam.

Under these circumstances, it cannot be claimed that Islamic rules fail to discipline humans. The failure is not in the rule, but in the constitution, in the structure of the community.

Let us come to the second claim, which goes beyond the borders of truth. It is unjust to immediately call someone who does not practice Islam, does not or cannot decide according to it, blasphemous; because faith is contrary to blasphemy. If someone judges and acts contrary to Islam, he must do it denying Islam so that he enters blasphemy. Otherwise, it is sin and rebellion that he is in, not blasphemy. As in faith, there is also need for intention and will in blasphemy. One can enters blasphemy only if he says, Yes, the judgment of Islam is that, but I deny it and act this way. If he doesnt have such an intention and will, and if the mistake he makes, the false judgment he arrives at stem only from his ignorance or weakness of will and if he knows that the thing he does is wrong; it is not possible to call him blasphemous according to the Ahl-i Sunnah-close followers of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). This can only be maintained by the Hariji, which says that the performer of a big sin is blasphemous; or by the Mutazila, which says that such a person will be in a place between faith and blasphemy. And all the learned of Ahl-i Sunnah agree that they have strayed from the right path.

We must be attentive; there is the danger of straying unconsciously, with the supposition that we are defending it.

The Prophet (PBUH) states the following in one of his Glorious Hadiths:

Whoever of you witnesses an evil, he should correct it by his hands if he can. If he cannot, he should correct it by his words. If he cannot do even that, the at least he should hate it in his heart. But this last resort is the manifestation of the weakest level of belief.(1)

Some scholars of Islam expressed that the government should carry out the duty of repulsing evil by using force; that scholars should fulfill it by means of conveying; that individuals should fulfill that duty by means of hating it in their hearts.

Thus, in al Fatawa al-Hindiyya, the following is stated in the section Amr bil Ma'ruf (Enforcing the Good):
Administrators realize Amr bil Ma'ruf by means of hand, scholars do it by means of tongue, as for individuals, they fulfill it by means of their hearts.

Yes, repulsing an evil by using force is the duty of the government, the authority to use force belongs to the government not to individuals. The power is in the law and the execution of laws is the duty of the government. If individuals excess their limits, it is impossible to determine a boundary. There always exists a person stronger than another stronger person. Consequently, it causes various oppressions, anarchy and disorder. For example, while punishing a person who deserves death penalty is the duty of the government, an individual cannot attempt to execute it on his own.

When an individual exceeds his limits in terms of using force, physical anarchy will take place; similarly, when an ignorant person attempts to carry out the duty of a scholar, intellectual anarchy will take place. Consequently, it will bring about physical anarchy, too.

From that point of view, some scholars explained the above-mentioned Glorious Hadith as follows:
If a person sees an evil; he should prevent it by his hands. However, even if that person is strong enough to prevent that evil, he should give up preventing it by means of his hands and he tries to stop by his words and by giving advice if he knows that such attempt will cause a bigger disturbance, If he realizes that a disorder will occur if he tries to prevent it by words, then he at last hates it in his heart and does not approve it.

We shall explain the phrase weakness of belief mentioned in the Glorious Hadith. The minimum reaction of a believer when he/she encounters an evil must be to disapprove it in his/her heart. The Hadith should not be understood as the belief of a believer who does not have enough power to repulse that evil is weak. In fact, Imam Nawawi, an Islamic scholar, interpreted the weakness of belief as shortness of reward. Similarly, many scholars interpreted the word belief as deed.

As to whether the word Whoever stated in the Hadith includes everyone:

Each believer is responsible for repulsing an evil happening in the boundaries of his area of or responsibility or at least disapproving it. In a Glorious Hadith as the following is stated:

All of you are shepherds; all of you are responsible for your flocks. (2)

Head of a family is responsible for the family; teacher is responsible for the students and finally the government is responsible for the whole nation. One of the aspects of the responsibility is to preserve the community from evil actions and to dispel the wrongdoings they commit. Regarding that issue, both individuals and governments have to fulfill their responsibilities.

(1) Tirmizi, Fitan, 11; Ibn Majah, Fitan, 20; Abu Dawud, Salat, 242
(2) Bukhari, Nikah, 90

Legitimate defense, in other words persons defending him/herself is one of the basic principalities of Islamic Law. There are three conditions for which defense would be considered a legitimate one, Self-defense, defense of possessions, and chastitys defense.

1.Self-Defense: The act of defending ones person when physically attacked, as by countering blows on overcoming an assailant. The decree over this issue, If one kills a person who draws a gun on him/her, it cannot be imposed any penalties, such as retaliation, blood money, or reprimand upon him/her. In legal contemplation, it does not make any difference whether the incident takes place in daytime or nighttime and in town or outside the town. If the assailant cannot be overcome instead of killing, and if the assaulted knows that he is going to be killed if he does not react, in that case killing is legitimate. However, if there is a possibility of overcoming the assailant by chasing him after, wounding him, or any other way killing is not religiously permissible. (1)

2.Defense of Possessions: The second condition of legitimate defense is defending or protecting ones own possessions and properties while under an assault. For example, if a person chases after and catches a thief who sneaks his house at nighttime and steals his possessions; he can kill the thief if he does not give his possessions back. And he cannot be regarded as a murderer; he is innocent according to Islamic law. However, if there is a possibility of rescuing his possessions by wailing and gathering neighbors and security forces around, he cannot kill the thief; if he does, it is a felony or it is even needed retaliation according to Islamic law. (2)

3.Chastitys Defense: Third condition of legitimate defense is ones protecting his/her chastity under an attack. A person, who kills a rapist, cannot be considered a murderer. Islamic Law does not perform a legal act under these circumstances. The base regarding the matter is mentioned as, If a person kills an assailant who forces him/her to adulteration, when there are no other options to do, he/she cannot be regarded as a murderer. (3) And a persons defending his/her close relatives (by blood and by marriage) privacy by killing their assailant does not accrue any decree against him/her. For who cannot kill the assailant, under the condition of the victims death, there is an ethereal reward for him/her. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) decrees for this matter as, One who is killed in the cause of his/her religion and life is a martyr. (4) When a person is killed unjustly in the cause of protecting his/her possessions, he/she will be admitted to heaven. (5)

It should be mentioned carefully that according to Islamic Law, legitimate defense resulting with killing an assailant could only be accrued when there is no other possibility. Otherwise as he could not escape from responsibility in this world, he/she will be punished severely in the hereafter as this Quranic verse states,Whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense (in the Hereafter) is Hell (An-Nisa Surah, 4:93)

Sources:
1. İbni Abidin, Reddü'l-muhtar, 5:351.
2. Feteva-yı Hindiyye, 6:7.
3. Istılahalat-ı Fıkhiyye Kamusu, 3:125.
4. Tirmizi, Diyat:21.
5. Müsned, 2:221

Theft is a great treachery, which hurts one’s heart by stealing his/her property which s/he gained by working hard; and it is an unscrupulous act. This act has always been seen in every era and every place. For this reason, Islam ordered that the hand of the person who committed this unscrupulous act be cut off, which is a severe sanction, so that the punishment will be appropriate for the crime. If this sanction was applied, the cases of theft would be minimized.

Theft has been forbidden with evidence of the Quran, sunnah and the consensus of Islamic scholars. The following is stated in the Quran: “As to the thief, male or female, cut off his or her hands” (al-Maidah, 38). The Prophet stated: “The people before you were destroyed because they set an honorable person free when he committed theft.” (ash-Shawkani, Naylu’l-Awtar, VII, 131,136). When the crime of theft is proved, the punishment of cutting one hand off is applied. As for cases in which this punishment is not necessary, the thief compensates for the loss.

Islamic jurists have discussed lawfulness in crime and punishment, under what conditions the crime of theft will be considered to have been committed in order to provide justice and lawfulness, the conditions under which the punishment can be applied, the effect of situations such as repetition, enforcement and forgiving on punishment, one by one and they have established a rich law doctrine. In short, they have decided that, in order for the crime of theft to be valid, it is necessary that there must not be excuses such as obligation, enforcement and starvation, which extenuate the commitment of the theft crime partly or totally. It is necessary that the crime be committed willingly and deliberately, the subject must have criminal liability, the stolen property must be under protection and it must be more than a specific amount.

Penalties in Islamic law are characterized as final and obligatory interventions which can be applied after the necessary precautions are taken in order to prevent crime. In this sense, it must be kept in mind that the main purpose of Islam is not punishing people but, diversely, taking precautions which will hinder committing the crime of theft, educating and directing people. It is of great importance that, in order for all those endeavors in society to be successful, religious education, society’s general moral values and additionally lawful regulations and official politics be in harmony with each other.

Allah, the Supreme, ordered that theft be punished. Under these general conditions, it is necessary to cut the hand of the person off who dared to commit theft like a gangrenous organ of the Islamic social institution.

“O you who believe! Cut off the hands of thief men and women, whose crime has been revealed and is without any doubts and excuses, as a punishment for what they have done, as a severe anguish by Allah, as an appropriate hindrance, as handcuffs so that they will not dare to do it again. Indeed, Allah is both supreme and wise.” His orders cannot be argued. He judges wisely. Justice is safe with His supreme protection and His punishment is totally full of wisdom. Allah does not approve oppression, torment and mischief. He bestowed upon us hands and strength to work for goodness and justice. Allah orders that we fear Him, make efforts for the good of religion, protect the poor, take care of the needy and help the weak, as He stated in many Quranic verses. He also made it fard (obligatory) for the rich to give freely from their property to the poor and to the weak with His judgments about helping, alms-giving and charity. A true Muslim must not disobey those orders of Allah and must apply them into their lives. If one does not fear Allah, does not seek nice reasons to approach Allah, cannot resist his lower-self’s desires and attempts to take a property of somebody else’s surreptitiously, for which he has got no right doubtlessly, as if Allah does not see him doing so, it is of course attacking Allah’s honor, and it is a secret war waged against Him. And, the hand of such a man deserves to be cut off as a punishment.

In this sense, it must not be thought that there is not equality between the crime and the punishment. As a matter of fact; that punishment is not only for the compensation of the stolen property, but also for the surreptitious perfidiousness and attack against Allah’s honor. It is as if that person has put his hand in fire or hit it on a sword. That punishment is, both for him and the ones who will follow his way and go astray, like an irremovable handcuff. With it, both the thief and the others are purified from mischief. Moreover, Allah deems the ones who attack His honor in this way worthy of such punishment not only because of His anger but also because there is wisdom in it. In a society in which this punishment is applied, theft is exterminated. There will not be a hand which is worthy of cutting off anymore. This punishment must be applied fairly and without any doubt so that it will not give rise to any unfairness. Otherwise, Allah’s honor and wisdom would look adverse. If the punishment for a hand which stole something is cutting off, consider what the punishment for someone who stole a hand unfairly (who cuts one’s hand off unfairly) would be!

So, if a thief whether a woman or a man who caused their hands to be cut off because they stole something, repents after the commitment of the crime and improves their behavior, Allah will accept their repentance because He is merciful and forgiving. And He does not punish them in the Hereafter, takes mercy on them and forgives them. In this sense, those who had their hands cut off and repented later should not be deemed malicious because they committed theft before; they should be helped.

It is not permissible for a Muslim woman to marry an atheist. The nikah is not valid.

In the religion of Islam, just like human life, the belief, integrity, independence, property, and honor of human beings are also under protection. This is because the peace and bliss of the human being in this world and the Hereafter are based on them.

It is a great sin in the presence of Allah not to comply with the material or spiritual rights of humans and it is left outside of Divine forgiving. In other words, those who infringe on a persons rights can only be forgiven by that person. As long as the person does not get his/her right or as long as he does not renounce his/her right, Allah does not forgive that sin. In Islam, everybody is responsible for respecting one others rights.

The human being is a creature who leads a social life. Therefore, among people there are innumerable social relations. They must be founded on rights and justice. Otherwise, there emerge violations of human rights and oppression.

The Quran protects the spiritual rights of the human being to such an extent that it forbids Believers from su-i zan (interpreting the behaviors of Believers as bad), from tajassus (inquiring about others mistakes) and from backbiting.

O you who believe! Avoid much suspicion, for some suspicion is a grave sin, and do not spy (on one another), nor backbite (against one another). Would any of you love to eat the flesh of his dead brother? (The Quran, Hujurat Surah, 12)

One must avoid doing others injustice and must try to prevent others from doing injustice. This is a duty. Of course, there are Islamic criteria in eliminating the injustice done to us or to someone else. They must observe.

For instance, it is a command of our Prophet to prevent an evil or an injustice one sees with hand (actively preventing), if not, with tongue (verbally), and if it is also not appropriate/possible, then to answer it with the objection of heart. This hadith of the Prophet is explained by authorities as follows: To prevent the munkar (evil) with hand is the duty of the state and other authorities. And to prevent it with tongue is the duty of the learned and the people knowledgeable in that matter. Those who do not possess any authority, and who lack the knowledge to prevent the evil with tongue should hate it in their heart, in other words, they must object to that evil in their inner world.

Accordingly, when one is faced with an injustice, one must apply to the authorities for its removal, and if there are people capable of preventing the evil, one must let them intervene. And in cases when all these fail to prove successful, it means that the wronged person will get her/his right on the great Day of Judgment in the Hereafter.

The justice of Allah (SWT) is valid for all people whether they are Muslims or Non-Muslims. Allah forbids cruel attitude and injustice for all regardless of their religion. Does Allah, who Himself consider the cruelty haram, oppress anyone?

Whoever works righteousness benefits his own soul; whoever works evil, it is against his own soul: nor is thy Lord ever unjust (in the least) to His servants. (Fussilat, 41/46)

The expression of the verse which means “nor is thy Lord ever unjust” emphasizes that there will be a just approach to all and there will be no oppression to anyone regardless of his/her religion.

There are lots of verses on this subject. Most particularly, the interpretation of a verse that addresses directly unbelievers is as follows:

(Disdainfully) bending his side, in order to (lead men) astray from the Path of Allah; for him there is disgrace in this life, and on the Day of Judgment we shall make him taste the Penalty of burning (Fire).

(It will be said): "This is because of the deeds which thy hands sent forth, for verily Allah is not unjust to His servants.” (Al-Hajj, 9-10).

Then shall anyone who has done an atom's weight of good, see it! And anyone who has done an atom's weight of evil, shall see it. (Al-Zalzala, 99/7-8)

The verse informs us that no deed, minor or major either good or bad will be wasted but recompensed definitely.

“An Atom” is a particle as small as an ant, which can only be distinguished in the sunlight. The purpose of this expression is to inform about the smallest thing that interest humans and the lowest limit of the responsibility for man. The main aim is to explain that not even the tiniest good or bad deed will be lost in the presence of Allah 

No, the person who is in that situation is never punished, on the contrary, the state pays the owner what he stole and takes care of all the needs of his family.

Conditions such as knowingly and willfully committing the crime, having criminal capacity, the stolen property being under legal protection and being more than a certain amount are necessary for the crime of theft to occur fully.

However, if there is an excuse such as hunger, necessity and coercion that partially or completely excuses committing the crime of theft, no penalty is given.

Accordingly, if a person has to steal bread to save his family from starvation, no punishment is given. In addition, all the needs of the hungry people are met by the state and the money for the stolen property is paid to the owner by the state.

As a matter of fact, during his caliphate, Umar (ra) did not impose hadd punishment on those who stole when famine and starvation prevailed. (1)

We think that Hz. Umar made this ijtihad by basing the cause of the decree on a hadith. We know that the Prophet (pbuh) did not apply had penalty in an event that took place when the Companion named Abbad b. Shurahbil committed theft due to hunger and that the needs of that Companion were met. (2)

It is possible to explain it with the principle of necessity (darurah). That is, Hz. Umar decreed that stealing someone else’s property in case of famine and hunger did not require a hadd penalty acting upon the fact, by analogy, that eating the meat of a dead animal in case of necessity did not bring about any responsibility. In this ijtihad, he observed the principle of protecting one’s life.

We would like to remind you that Islamic jurists laid very strict conditions for the formation of the crime and the implementation of the penalty; they adopted the principle of canceling the hadd penalty in case one of these conditions was absent or doubtful; moreover, they mentioned a series of measures in order to minimize the reasons that push people to commit theft.

Therefore, it is seen in the first Islamic society that the incidents of theft decreased considerably compared to the past and that the practice of cutting off the hand took place only in a few incidents in the periods of the Prophet (pbuh) and the Four Caliphs.

According to the shared statements of the fiqh scholars, the punishment prescribed for theft is equivalent to the severity of the crime committed; it has an exemplary aspect, and deters and improves anyone who attempts and intends to steal, as well as warns the society in this direction and forces them to take the necessary measures.

On the other hand, punishing the crime of theft is not the goal; on the contrary, it is the last resort. What matters is to eliminate the social instability, economic and moral distress, ambition, lack of education and moral degradation that pave the way for or encourage theft, and to reduce luxury and waste to a reasonable degree.

After the conditions are improved and the necessary measures are taken, the punishment of the crime of theft is a requirement of justice and is a part of Islam’s determination to ensure social order and the protection of rights.

Footnotes:

1) Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, Ilamul-Muwaqqi’in, Egypt, 1955, 3/10-12; Muhammad Rawwas Qalaji, Mevsuatu Fiqhi Umar Ibn al-Khattab, Beirut, 1981, p. 382.
2) Abu Dawud, Jihad, 85; Ibn Majah, Tijarat, 67.

For more information, please click on he link given below;

Is the penalty of cutting off the hand of the thief very severe?

Islam introduced the belief of tawhid (oneness) and had an attitude against polytheism; it rejected anything that was contrary to the religion and abolished all bad habits that were the products of that faith and that did not fit human honor.

Islam struggled against the spirit of Jahiliyya with its legal and ethical aspects; Islam established a new system of life in which deeds based on moderation and knowledge dominate by ending Jahiliyya’s debauched, immoral and cruel acts and eliminating all of the manifestations of the Era of Jahiliyya.

In that case, if there is a practice that Allah continues, this decree is Allah’s order even if it belongs to the Era of Jahiliyya. This practice continued not because it originated from Jahiliyya but because Allah’s decree and consent necessitated it.

Thus, even if the penalty of cutting off a hand of the thief is a practice of the Era of Jahiliyya, when Allah gives that decree, it is no longer a practice of Jahiliyya; it becomes Allah’s order and decree.

Theft and Penalty for Theft in the Era of Jahiliyya

In the community of Hejaz-Arabs before Islam, theft was a sin and crime but it cannot be said that this crime was interrogated and punished regularly since there was no central, political authority.

For instance, nomadic Arabs regarded stealing something belonging to the members of their own tribe, friendly tribes, temples and the public as a crime but they regarded stealing things – they were generally camels and food – from other tribes as booty and they regarded such deeds as acts representing courage and skill.  

On the other hand, the social position of the thief and the power of his tribe caused important differences in punishments.

The resources mention that theft was so common among Arabs of Jahiliyya that it formed one of the themes of Arab literature, which was the mirror of social life. A genre of literature that consisted of various poems, proverbs and stories about famous thieves and incidents of theft emerged.

It is known that they started to prevent theft through various sanctions like imprisonment, cutting off a hand, excluding a person from the protection of the tribe and beating and that a hand of the thief was cut off in very few incidents of theft but there are narrations that this practice did not have a long history and the the first person to impose the penalty of cutting of a hand for theft was Abdulmuttalib or Walid b. Mughira. (see  TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, Hırsızlık item)

* * *

Note: The article written by Hayrettin Karaman regarding the issue is as follows:

Theft for Punishment

Although theft is defined in various forms, it is condemned, prohibited and punished in almost all religions, legal and ethical systems

The instruction "Thou shalt not steal" is included among the famous "ten commandments" of the Old Testament. 

It is known that theft was regarded as a crime in Arabia before Islam, that the hands of those who committed that crime were cut off as a penalty and that the first decree of cutting off the hand was given by Walid b. Mughira.

When Islam emerged, it did not abolish all of the systems, customs and practices of the Era of Jahiliyya; it continued some of them without changing them; it changed some of them and abolished the rest since they were contrary to Islam’s principles of tawhid (oneness) and ethics. Theft regarded as a crime and the penalty applied for that crime are among the practices that Islam took from Jahiliyya and continued.

The following is stated in the verse about the crime of theft and its penalty:

"As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power. But if the thief repents after his crime, and amends his conduct, Allah turneth to him in forgiveness; for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."(al-Maida, 5/38-39)

There is no doubt that the penalty of cutting off a hand is a very severe penalty. The crime for which this severe penalty is applied needs to be as severe; there has to be a balance between crime and punishment. That it is mentioned that Allah is "hakim (wise)" at the end of the verse supports this thought of balance. For, wisdom includes the meaning of "doing everything in a proper, regular and balanced way".

Socio-economic structure and state are among the factors that determine the severity and lightness of a crime.

Acting upon this, some modernistic tafsir scholars state that the vital relationship between things and their owners was more important, that stealing was a severe crime and that the penalty given then was in balance with the crime; they state that the relationship between a person’s possessions and his life is not so important today and they put forward that extenuating the penalty will not be contrary to divine purpose. 

This brave interpretation definitely has some aspects that need to be discussed and searched.

The decree adopted unanimously by the classical fiqh scholars is that the penalty of cutting off a hand will be applied today – when the conditions are present.

It is not necessary to enter into details of the conditions of cutting off a hand here but there is one condition that needs to be mentioned; otherwise, the issue will not be understood well: this condition is related to the cause that leads a person to theft. 

There is an incident and practice that exist in all relevant resources and that happened during the caliphate of Hz. Umar. The slaves who were left hungry by their master were caught stealing food and were taken to the caliph; when the caliph found out that they stole food due to hunger, he did not punish the slaves. He summoned their owner and told him that if he left the slaves hungry again, he would punish him.

During a year of famine, people had to steal to due to hunger; therefore, Hz. Umar suspended this penalty until famine ended.

These practices, which happened in the presence of the Companions and which were not opposed by anybody, lead us to a general rule:

One of the conditions of applying the penalty for theft is nobody being hungry and lacking basic needs, and forming a high level of social welfare that is possible for everybody.

However, if some people steal the possessions of others that they earned legitimately with the intention of obtaining wealth without working and sweating though the "legitimate cause" that leads man to theft has been eliminated, they will definitely be punished. 

How will "repenting after his crime, amending one’s conduct and improving oneself" mentioned in the verse affect penalty?

The answer given to that question by the classical fiqh is as follows:

Allah's accepting the repentance means not punishing that person in the hereafter; repentance will not abolish the penalty to be given in the world.

According to Ata, one of the mujtahids of the first period, if a person repents before he is caught, regrets and surrenders, returns what he has stolen and pays for the damages, the penalty of cutting off a hand is annulled.

Fiqh scholars insist on this interpretation based on the anxiety that the principle of protecting wealth, legal stability, and security of wealth and life cannot be protected if repentance is misused.

In our opinion, the clear expression of the verse, by doing necessary research and trials, shows that this penalty should not be applied on people who are sincere in their repentance and who are understood to have improved themselves – whether before or after they are caught. That Allah forgives a thief based on those conditions is an evidence that His slaves also need to forgive.

We live in a world of wisdom. In this world, a person who acts in accordance with the laws of the world will succed whether he is an unbeliever or a Muslim. If a person fulfills the pre-requisites of something and acts in accordance with its causes and means, he will succeed whether he is a Muslim or an unbeliever. It is certain how to obtain crops from which plant, under which conditions, with which techniques and planning. A person who acts accordingly will succeed.

However, those who do not fulfill their duties and do not obey those orders will definitely suffer the consequences.

The reason why Allah does not prevent bad deeds directly in this world is the fact that we are in a world of testing. This world is a place of testing and those who give wrong answers and correct answers are allowed. If those who gave wrong answers were intervened, the testing would be meaningless.

If roses were thrown on the heads of those who did thawabs and thorns on those who committed sins, the world would not be a place of testing, but a place of reward and punishment.

- Where are oppressors punished?

Believers usually suffer in this world for the sins they commit so that their sins will be cleaned in this world and so that they will not be punished in the hereafter. However, the sins committed by unbelievers and oppressors are big; therefore, the misfortunes in this world are not enough for their penalty and their penalty is left to the hereafter. Even in this world, the penalty for minor crimes is given in small courts but the penalty for major crimes is given in big courts.

The penalty of a person who wrongs millions of people in this world will definitely not be given in this world. Only Hell can be fair penalty for their crimes.

Allah has never allowed oppression to continue. When we look at the history of humanity, we see that the oppressing people and states were punished severely for what they had done sooner or later.

We definitely hope that this oppression would end soon and the Muslims would get rid of this oppression. 

Besides, the Muslims that die due to oppression die as martyrs. This oppression enables them to gain a happy, eternal life in the hereafter in return for this short, troublesome world life.  

Islamic scholars have different views about what people to curse and damn. Some scholars hold the view that it is not permissible to curse and damn Muslims. Others hold the view that it is permissible to curse sinners even if they are Muslims. They also have different ideas about cursing and damning unbelievers.

Some scholars say it is permissible to curse and damn unbelievers unconditionally while others say it is not wajib to curse them hence it is better not to curse and damn them unconditionally. (Fakhruddin ar-Razi, Tefsi al-Kabir Trnsl. III/188; Ibn Majah, Translation and Expalantion, X/148)

Animals have partial free will. For, when you treat an animal well, it approaches you without fearing; when you treat it badly and hit it, the animal runs away from you when it sees you. We understand from it that animals have partial free will. However, it is not enough for being held responsible. That is, their partial free will is not like man's free will, which can be expressed as follows: “Regarding worshipping and obeying Allah, he will do it if he wishes and not do it if he does not wish it.”

It is possible to divide laws of Shari'ah into two. One of them is the religious laws. People are held responsible for them.

The other is the laws of nature like the law of gravity and the burning property of fire. A person who jumps into space falls down and is punished by the pain caused by that fall.

The legitimate sustenance of wild animals is carrion. They cannot violate one another's rights. This natural law was informed to them through inspiration and an instinct from their creation. A bird learns the necessities of life through inspiration. Similarly, what it needs to do in its life is informed to him naturally through inspiration.

Therefore, they cannot harm living animals and cannot oppress weak animals thinking that they are strong. An animal that acts like that will be punished in this world or in the Gathering Place in the hereafter. They will not go to Hell since they do not have intellect.

How do animals receive inspiration?

There is a different realm that directs and controls every living being, from the sparrows that hide behind the branches of a tree when it gets dark to the ants that return to their nests, from the fish that hide in the hollows of a rock to a gazelle that seeks safety in a distant corner of the jungle. All of them find the places to spend the night in the best way through inspiration, instinct and divine control. The next day, an awesome day with various activities starts when the first rays of the sun appear in the horizon. All of them set off with a feeling, turn, fly, run, walk, swim... However, none of them knows where they go, what the time is, when they will return to their nests. However, all of their affairs are settled through inspiration.

Animals know their Lord, who gives them inspiration, through inspiration. An animal might not know what it is, how many feet it has, its stomach, liver, etc but it knows that it exists. It wants to protect this existence. If you try to take it from it, it will run away from you. Every animal that knows its being through inspiration and that is pleased with it has a feeling of thanking to this grant in their hearts in a form that we cannot know. Yes a being that knows itself needs to know its Lord too. This meaning is valid for all animals. However, their knowing their Lord is small like knowing themselves but it is true.   

Any animal that we see and meet cannot know our inner world; similarly, we cannot know its inner realm.  What we know is only its brain and organs. Even if we know what swims in their blood, we cannot know what passes through it. Then, how can we claim that these beings, whose inner realms we are ignorant about, do not know their Lord?

What will the situation of animals be like in the Gathering Place?

If we divide living beings into three as having life, having spirit and having intellect and consciousness, plants have only life. Animals have both life and spirit. People, angels and jinn have life, spirit and consciousness. Among these beings, only people and jinn are held responsible. They are bound to obey Allah's orders and prohibitions; they are subject to a test throughout their lives. When they die, they will go to Paradise or Hell. 

Since animals are deprived of feelings like intellect and consciousness that will encumber responsibility on them, concepts like sin-thawab, good-bad, Paradise-Hell are not in question for them.

All animals, from unicellular ameba to whales, have spirit. Essentially, spirit itself is eternal; it does not die or disappear. The body in which the spirit lives temporarily dies and decays. 

As it is clearly stated in the Quran, spirit is under the order, power and control of Allah Almighty. Nobody but Allah can control spirit. It is Allah who creates it and who maintains it.

As for the issue of the situation in the Gathering Place, two species will be resurrected there; their eternal place will be determined after they are called to account: They are human beings and jinn. 

The situation of animals is completely different. Two verses regarding the issue are as follows:

“When the wild beasts are herded together (in human habitations)” (1)

“The Day when man will see (the Deeds) which his hands have sent forth, and the Unbeliever will say "Woe unto me! Would that I were (mere) dust.” (2)

In the interpretation of these verses, according to the narrations of Abdullah bin Umar, Abu Hurayra and Imam Mujahid, Allah Almighty will resurrect animals on the Day of Gathering; He will give their rights by taking them from one another and will give them the order, “Be Dust!” Then, all of them will be transformed into dust. Unbelievers will watch the animals and will envy them; they will ask Allah to transform them into dust. (3) However, human beings will be punished for what they did; therefore, they will not be treated like animals.

Animals are not responsible beings but they will be given and taken their rights to a certain extent. As a matter of fact, the Prophet (pbuh) stated the following in a hadith:

“You will give the rights of every being to them. Even the right of the hornless sheep will be taken from the horned sheep through retaliation.”

Thus, he states that no injustice will be left unreciprocated. According to the statement of hadith scholars, an ant will take its right from another ant. (4)

Badiuzzaman Said Nursi explains this issue as follows:  

“Although the bodies of animals with immortal spirits perish, they will receive reward and punishment in a manner appropriate for them in an eternal realm.”(5)

Yes, the spirits of animals will remain eternal; Allah Almighty will keep their spirits. However, only Allah knows how He will keep spirits since spirit is under His control.

Footnotes:

1. at-Takwir, 5.
2. an-Naba, 40.
3. see Tabari, the interpretation of an-Naba, 40.)
4. Tirmidhi, Qiyamah, 2; Elmalılı Hamdi Yazır. Hak Dini Kur'an Dili, 8:5599.
5. Lem'alar, (Osm.) p. 887.)

- Firstly, the crimes whose penalties were determined in the Sari'ah of Islam like fornication and theft cannot be punished in a different way. That is, a thief cannot be killed. However, some crimes whose penalties were not determined can be punished by “tazir”. This penalty is determined by the judge based on his own thought.

Tazir penalties from flogging 30-40 times to capital punishment can be given for the world/state/country order. However, such a determination needs to be made by an assembly of consultation. Otherwise, personal thoughts can cause a lot of oppression especially today, when taqwa lacks. 

- Nobody can be executed only for the sake of the world order according to pure justice. For, according to pure/real justice, “right” is right whether small or big. No right can be violated for the sake of a big right unless the owner of the right gives consent.

However, when pure justice cannot be applied, relative justice is applied. Relative justice is not real justice but it can be applied to prevent other evil deeds when there is no solution.

For instance, if there are 99 murderers and one innocent person on a ship, that ship cannot be scuttled according to pure justice. The rights of that one innocent person need to be taken into consideration.

Similarly, a believer who is used as a shield by the enemy in a castle cannot be killed. That castle cannot be bombed. However, if hundreds of believers are likely to die if the castle is not bombed, relative justice is applied and the castle is bombed even if that believer's life is risked. Thus, a big mischief is prevented. That believer becomes a martyr if he dies. 

- It will be useful to see what Badiuzzaman Said Nursi writes regarding the issue:

“Pure justice and relative justice may be explained like this: according to the allusive meaning of the verse, "If anyone slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would he as if he slew the whole people", the rights of an innocent man cannot be cancelled for the sake of all the people. A single individual may not be sacrificed for the good of all. In the view of Almighty God’s compassion, right is right, there is no difference between great and small. The small may not be annulled for the great. Without his consent, the life and rights of an individual may not be sacrificed for the good of the community. If he consents to sacrifice them in the name of patriotism, that is a different matter.” (Mektubat (Letters), 53 - 54)

The Prophet (pbuh) said these hadiths to the people living in Hejaz region at that time. Besides, most of those who were there lived there.

The expression here is for any person who performs prayers there and there is no injustice here. It also encourages people to visit those places. The virtue of the prayers performed in these holy places are more but the sins committed there are relatively heavier.

Those who visit these places coming from distant places and perform prayers there will receive a lot of extra rewards due to the difficulty of travelling. Those who live there will not get such rewards.

Besides, Allah gives rewards to a person based on his intention. A person who always wants to be in those holy places and to perform prayers there but cannot go there may expect rewards from Allah as if he has performed prayers there. This is closer to Allah’s mercy and justice.

There are various narrations regarding the issue. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) states the following in a hadith:

"Do not set out on a journey except for three mosques: Masjid al-Haram, my mosque and Masjid Al-Aqsa" (Bukhari, Fadailus-Salat, 1, 6)

A prayer performed in Masjid an-Nabawi is much more virtuous than a prayer performed in other mosques. Sa'd Ibn Abi Waqqas narrates that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said,

"A prayer performed in my mosque is better than one thousand rak’ahs performed in other mosques except Masjid al-Haram." (Ahmad b. Hanbal, I/184)

In another narration, the phrase "more virtuous" is used. (Hanbal, I/16; Nasai, Masjid, 4)

“Allah doth command you to render back your Trusts to those to whom they are due; And when ye judge between man and man, that ye judge with justice: Verily how excellent is the teaching which He giveth you! For Allah is He Who heareth and seeth all things.” (an-Nisa, 4/58)

The addressees of the people here for the fulfillment of the trusts, giving trust to people who are due and judging among people with justice are generally all people, specifically believers, and more specifically the people and institutions responsible for trust and justice on behalf of the public.

Throughout history, the peace and happiness of human societies have been gained or lost for two reasons: trust and justice.

Peace and happiness existed in the society as long as the trusts were given to those who were due and justice was secured; and treachery and injustice were among the main reasons for discontent, quarrels, wars and destruction of wealth and generations.

Trustis the material and spiritual value required to be protected. Something that a person borrows in order to use and return to its owner is a trust; similarly, the positions given to people in the state so that they will serve the public are also trusts; knowledge, religion, treaties, contracts and rights of neighbors, etc. are all trusts.

All of them need to be protected, handed over to the relevant people or authorities and used in accordance with the purpose they were entrusted.

The Prophet (pbuh) stated the following:

“There are three characteristics of a hypocrite: when he speaks, he lies, when he makes a promise, he acts treacherously, and when he something is entrusted to him, he betrays.” (Muslim, Iman, 107-109)

Thus, he described the people who betrayed the things entrusted to them as people with characteristics of munafiqs.

The judgment among people is usually given when there is a dispute and a legal case by distinguishing between the right and the wrong or by explaining to whom the right belongs.

Justice means "ensuring equality and balance".

What is meant by equality here is not giving everyone the same thing with the same quality and quantity; it is everyone being equal in obtaining their rights, what they deserve and what they are worthy of; being treated equally by the law when a person who is right but weak has a problem or disagreement with a person who is wrong but strong.

Those who violate people's rights often do so by regarding themselves superior and powerful to others.

When the public power supports the person who is right but weak, equality in practice, that is, justice, is ensured.

The realization of justice depends on having the right, equitable and balanced knowledge and criteria about who deserves what, and who is worthy of what– along with just people who apply justice. The rules of law and binding legislation are imposed in order to provide the knowledge and criteria.

If the rules of the law are imposed by people independent of divine guidance the criteria of equity and the balance of rights can be distorted since it is not possible for people not to go beyond themselves, not to be influenced by human conditions and the culture and values of the society ​.

If the knowledge is incomplete and the criteria are wrong, justice is not secured – even if system, law and courts exist.

Allah, who created man and the universe, has imposed mizan (the criteria).

Mizan means "the criteria of balance, equity and justice in material and spiritual fields". The indispensable resource related to finding the criteria for law is nass (Quranic verses and hadiths).

Related to the issues that verses and hadiths do not explain directly, it is necessary to refer to public interest, interpretation, ijtihads of qiyas (juristic expositions of analogy) and urf (custom or usage); the decrees and criteria to secure justice are obtained this way. When decrees and criteria are found and known, they are put into practice.

In practice, there are two guarantees for justice not to be corrupted:

A) Ethics based on belief.

B) Supervision by the society with the sense of trust and responsibility.

There is no reason for justice not to be secured in a place where sound rules of law, ethics and public supervision exist.

It is man who needs to obey and show respect to justice and trust; despite the perfect guide of Islam, the failures of trust and justice seen in Muslim societies originate from the lack of Islamic people, and failures of so-called Muslims in belief, ethics and deeds.

If the top administrators do not give the trusts to the people who are due as much as they can and if they do not supervise carefully, the greatest responsibility will belong to them.

Author:

Hayrettin Karaman (Prof. Dr.)

Every Muslim is responsible to fulfill their duties. The position a person has in a community lays certain burdens on him. A Muslim becomes responsible based on his position. We can view the issue through a hadith:

“He who amongst you sees something abominable should modify it with the help of his hand; and if he has not strength enough to do it, then he should do it with his tongue, and if he has not strength enough to do it, (even) then he should (abhor it) from his heart.” (Muslim, Iman 78)

We cannot interpret this hadith on our own on every occasion. If we see a bad deed on the way and try to correct it with our hands and punish a person and if that person sues us, we will be punished.Then, how should we understand the meaning of this hadith?

To correct with the hand is the duty of the state and security forces; to correct with the tongue is the duty of scholars; to abhor from the heart is the duty of others.

In addition, it is important what the advice or explanation given to a person will bring about in that person. For, it is possible to make things worse and to harm people while trying to be helpful. From this point of view, it is necessary to give advice if it is not likely to cause any harm.

The first way to follow while conveying the message of Islam to people for each person is to struggle against his own soul. After that, he should serve as a model by practicing Islam. He should love his addressee even if he is mistaken; he should not nurture a grudge against him. After that, he can give that person advice with compassion, mercy and good deeds like a doctor who treats his patient. However, he should give him advice if he knows that the advice will not harm him; otherwise, it is better for him to keep silent.

On the other hand, if he has to tell a lie when he speaks, he must not speak at all. He should tell the truth or he should keep silent if the truth will harm his addressee.

As for what should our attitude be toward the wrong deeds committed against us:

Should a person struggle against the injustices he faces in this world and to what extent should he struggle? Or, should one not waive his rights by complaining against the wrongdoers in the Hereafter?

One must avoid doing wrong to others and try to prevent others from doing wrong. This is a duty. However, there are Islamic criteria in eliminating the wrong done to us or to someone else. It is necessary to act in accordance with them.

For instance, it is a command of our Prophet ‘to prevent an evil or an injustice one sees with the hand, if not, with the tongue (verbally), and if this is also not possible, to answer it with the objection of the heart.’ This hadith of the Prophet is explained by authorized scholars as follows:

To prevent the ‘munkar’ (evil) with hand is the duty of the state and other authorities. And to prevent it with tongue is the duty of the scholars and the people knowledgeable in that matter. Those who do not possess any authority, and who lack the knowledge to prevent the evil with tongue should hate it in their heart, in other words, they must object to that evil in their inner world.

Accordingly, when one experiences an injustice, he must apply to the authorities for its removal, and if there are people capable of preventing the evil, one must let them intervene. And in cases when all these fail to prove successful, it means that the wronged person will get her/his right on the great Day of Judgment in the Hereafter.

As for waiving one’s right, this is a virtue; one may forgive the infringements on his rights if s/he wills. Those who prefer the way of forgiving when faced with an evil done by his believing friend rather than retaliating with the same amount or more will, by all means, receive the great reward of this in the Hereafter. However, their right to demand their rights is also guaranteed. It is up to the person to decide.

The penalty of cutting off the hand of the thief in Islam is aimed at preventing theft not cutting off hands.

The property of a person that he has earned legitimately cannot be touched in any way. Whoever steals is severely punished and his hand is cut off. The Quran states it as follows:

“As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power.” (al-Maida, 5/38)

Someone who found the punishment given to the thief very severe in the Islamic legal system was asked, “What would you do if someone broke into your house and stole your thirty years of savings and then you caught him?”

The man said: “I would kill him!”

Thereupon, he was addressed as follows: “You went further than the judgment you found severe; while Shari’a cuts off only one of his hands, you want to kill the man, let alone cutting off a hand.”

Hamdi Yazır states the following regarding the issue:

“A hand that dares to steal will inevitably be cut off like a gangrenous limb in the social life of Islam.” (Yazır, Hak Dini Kuran Dili, 3/1673)

On the other hand, the following point should not be overlooked in any case:

Punishments should be deterrent, not affectionate. Affectionate punishments do not prevent crime; on the contrary, they encourage crime. Many people who say “Oh, if only I were rich” can dream of reaching it by stealing. Since he sees that nothing happens to his hand even if he is caught and that he stays in prison for three or five months and then comes out, he can easily take that risk and steal.

If he is caught, he will have an experience of “overcoming fear” during the three or five months he stays in prison; and instead of coming to his senses and giving up, he decides to “continue theft”. Especially, if he stays with similar people in prison, he learns from them and gains experience; when they go out, they may even become organized and continue their way as a “gang”.

Badiuzzaman Said Nursi deals with the issue of punishment for theft in the religion in a detailed way as follows:

One time in the desert, a man was the guest of a nomad who was one of the people of reality. He saw that the desert-dwellers did not concern themselves with guarding their belongings. His host had even left some money openly in the corner of the room. The guest asked him, “Aren’t you frightened of thieves, just throwing your belongings in the corner like that?”

His host answered, “We do not have any thieves here.”

The guest said, “We put our money in safes and lock them, but it is still frequently stolen.”

His host told him, “We cut off the hands of thieves as a Divine command and on account of the justice of the Shari’a.”

Whereupon the guest exclaimed, “Then most of you must be lacking a hand!”

His host told him: “I am fifty years old, and yet in my whole life I have only seen one person.”

The guest was ashamed and said: “Although every day in my country we put fifty people in prison for theft, it does not have one hundredth of the effectiveness of your justice here.”

The host said: “You have been unmindful of an important truth and have ignored a strange and powerful fact, as a result of which true justice has escaped you. In place of general good, under an apparent justice, hatred and vicious and partisan currents intervene, destroying the effect of the judgements. The truth is as follows:

With us, the moment a thief stretches out his hand to seize another’s property, he recalls the punishment of the Shari’a. The command revealed from the Divine Throne comes to his mind. Through the sense of belief and ear of the heart, he as though hears the verse: وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا اَيْدِيَهُمَا which calls for “the execution of the thief’s hand,” and his belief and elevated emotions are stirred into action. From around his spirit and the depths of his conscience a state of mind is given rise to which as though attacks the inclination to steal. The inclination, which arises from the instinctual soul and lust, is stifled and recedes; by degrees it is completely extinguished. For not only the mind and imagination, but also the inner faculties, the intellect, heart, and conscience, together attack that desire and emotion. By recalling the punishment of the Shari’a the thief’s conscience restrains and prohibits him, confronting that desire and silencing it.

Yes, belief places in the heart and mind a permanent ‘prohibitor;’ when sinful desires emerge from the soul, it repulses them, declaring: “it is forbidden!”

Man’s actions result from the inclinations of his heart and emotions. They come from the sensibilities of the spirit and its needs. The spirit is stirred into action through the light of belief. If an act is good, he does it; if it is evil, he tries to restrain himself. Blinder emotions will not drive him down the wrong road and defeat him.

In short: When the punishments are carried out in the name of the Divine commands and dominical justice, both the spirit, and the intellect, and the conscience, and man’s innate subtle faculties are affected and influenced.

It is for this reason that the execution of a punishment once in fifty years is more effective than your imprisoning numerous people every day. Your penalties affect only your imaginations, for when one of you decides to steal something, suffering a penalty on account the country and nation and its benefits seems imaginary; or he thinks others will condemn him if they know about it; or it occurs to him that if it turns out unfavorably the government will send him to prison. So only his power of imagination feels minor discomfort. And the powerful desire issuing from his instinctual soul and emotions -particularly if he is needy as well- will overpower him. Then the penalty will be ineffective in making him refrain from committing the bad deed. Anyway, because they are not a Divine command, the penalties are not justice. They are vain and futile like performing the prayers without taking ablutions and not facing the qibla. That is to say, true justice and effective penalties are those which are in accordance with the Divine command and executed in its name. Others can have only a minimal effect.

Other universal and all-embracing Divine injunctions may be compared with this small question of theft, so that it may be understood that man’s happiness and well-being in this world are possible only through justice. As for justice, it can be achieved only through direct application of the way shown by the Qur’an…” (see Hutbe-i Şamiye, p. 75)

It seems that the punishment given to the thief in Islam is not to cut off the hands, but to prevent theft.

In the periods when this punishment was applied, theft was largely prevented and a balanced and peaceful society model was seen.

Yes, a soldier who rapes a captive woman can be sentenced to flogging or death penalty.

Today, there is no slavery and concubinage; captive men and women are only captives and are treated as captives.

When the decrees and practices about slaves and concubines, which were the property of believers during the periods of concubinage, are examined in terms of their purposes and the measures taken, it is understood that all of the slaves were aimed to be freed over time. Until that result was achieved, the Muslims were asked to treat them as people entrusted to them (to give them the same food as they eat, the same clothes as they wear and not to torture, oppress, insult or beat them…).

In some periods in the history of Muslims, the Islamic rules of war were violated, though a little, and the red lines in the treatment of captives (slaves and concubines) were not respected. The goal of freeing the slaves over time was also neglected; therefore, enslavement and slavery continued for a long time. There is no obstacle for the Islamic state to accept the rules related to prisoners of war in terms of human rights in international conventions and practices. For this reason, slavery and concubinage ended in Islamic countries as well.

The decrees given about the issue mentioned in the question during the periods of concubinage are as follows:

According to Hanafi and Shafi’i madhhabs, hadd (penalty) of fornication is not applied to a person who has sexual intercourse with a captive woman, but the penalty of tazir is given because it is not clear to whom the concubine in question belongs since the distribution of the booty has not been made yet. However, in general, the mujahid in question also has a right related to that concubine. In accordance with the order of the hadith, “If there is doubt, do not apply the penalties” (Munawi, Faydul-Qadir 1,227); the hadd penalty should not be applied.

However, since what he has committed is a sin, a tazir penalty that the judge deems appropriate is given.

Tazir penalty is the penalty that the judge deems appropriate, such as harsh words, imprisonment, flogging and death, depending on the state of the offender and the nature of the crime.

Accordingly, a person who rapes a captive woman can also be given death penalty under the penalty of tazir.

According to Imam Malik and Abu Thawr, the punishment of HADD is applied to a person who rapes a captive woman because the crime of rape is committed though he knows that it is haram. (see Ibn Qudama, al-Mughni, 9/324)

Note:

The Islamic state may enact a law that the soldier who rapes a captive woman will be punished with hadd penalty or directly with death penalty, and it may punish the perpetrator of this crime with hadd penalty or execute him.

Qisas (retaliation/equality) means to punish a person who kills or wounds another person deliberately with a penalty equal to what he has done. The penalty of qisas exists in the Islamic law. The penalty of qisas is based on the evidences of the Book and the Sunnah. The following is stated in the Quran:

"O ye who believe! The law of equality is prescribed to you in cases of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the woman for the woman. But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude, this is a concession and a Mercy from your Lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in grave penalty. In the Law of Equality there is (saving of) Life to you, o ye men of understanding…" (al-Baqara, 2/178-179)

"…And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand qisas or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law)." (al-Isra, 17/33)

"We ordained therein for them: "Life for life, eye for eye, nose or nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal." But if any one remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (No better than) wrong-doers." (al-Maida, 5/45)

The Prophet (pbuh) states the following:

"If a person kills another person deliberately, the penalty is qisas (retaliation)." (Abu Davud, Diyat, 5).

One of the basic rights and freedom of humanity is the right to live. Allah did not give anyone the right to take the life of anybody unjustly. No other penalty except capital punishment given to a murderer is equal to the right to live. Since he has killed an innocent person, the penalty equal to it is his life.

It is among the common issues of the divine religions that it is a major crime and sin to kill a person unjustly. The following is stated in the Torah: 

"Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death." (Exodus: 21/12)

"But if anyone schemes and kills someone deliberately, that person is to be taken from my altar and put to death." (Exodus: 21/14)

"Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death." (Leviticus: 24/17)

Yes, if someone slanders you publicly, causing you material or moral harm, it is permissible to seek justice through legal means and demand compensation.

Is slander and unjust harm haram?

“And those who malign believing men and believing women undeservedly, they bear the guilt of slander and manifest sin.” (al-Ahzab 33/58); “O you who believe! Avoid most of suspicion… and do not spy on one another…” (al-Hujurat 49/12) The verses above show that damaging a person’s honor and reputation is haram.

The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said:

“La darara wala dirar.” That is, there should be neither causing harm nor reciprocating harm. (Ibn Majah, Ahkam 17; Muwatta, Aqdiya 31)

Accordingly, causing harm is not permissible, nor is causing more harm than the damage already inflicted; only compensation equal to the damage that has been caused can be demanded.

This hadith is considered a fundamental general principle in Islamic law.

In Islamic law, according to the principle that “Damage is removed” (Majalla, article 30), the person who causes wrongful damage is liable, and the injured party has the right to claim compensation.

For example, if the slander takes the form of an accusation of adultery, it is the crime of “qadhf”; and its punishment is specified in the Quran.

“And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations),- flog them with eighty stripes…” (an-Nur 24/4)

This verse shows that slander is not only a sin, but also a crime with legal consequences.

Seeking justice through the courts

“But indeed if any do help and defend themselves after a wrong (done) to them, against such there is no cause of blame.” (ash-Shura, 42/41) The verse clearly states that it is legitimate for the oppressed to seek their rights.

The issue of moral damages.

In general, material damages are explicitly arranged in fiqh. However, discretionary (tazir) punishments are left to the judge’s discretion.

Damaging someone’s honor and reputation is a violation of his rights. Moral harm is also included within the scope of compensation. (See Zuhayli, al-Fiqhul-Islami, Damascus, 6/4215–4217)

Thus, seeking one’s rights is permissible; demanding compensation is legitimate, but forgiveness is more virtuous. In other words, in Islamic law, the right to justice is protected, but morally, kindness and forgiveness are encouraged.

Conclusion

- Slandering is haram and a major sin.

- The person who causes a damage is held responsible.

- The injured party can apply to the court.

- Material and, if deemed appropriate, non-material damages can be compensated.

- It is not religious revenge, but the legitimate pursuit of rights.

- Seeking justice is fairness, but forgiving is a virtue.

We should try to maintain the natural balances of the universe and animals, which form one of those balances.

It is not permissible to kill harmless animals unless there is a risk of their spreading a disease or there is a legitimate excuse. It stated that it is forbidden to kill unnecessarily and arbitrarily the animals living on land and in the sea except the ones that attack people or their belongings and that killing them makes the one that kills them responsible. 

However, to kill an ownerless animal by mistake decreases the sin but it is still necessary to repent, give sadaqah and ask forgiveness from Allah. If the animal has an owner, it is necessary to pay him the price of the animal and to ask forgiveness from him. 

Besides, if it is necessary to kill an animal, it needs to be killed suddenly and without giving much pain to the animal and without scaring it.

If an animal kills a human being, it shows that it is an animal. Since animals have no intellect, they will not be held responsible. Its owner will be held responsible in the eye of Allah and he is regarded to have committed a crime in terms of human rights. 

Therefore, if the owner of the animal is guilty, one will apply to the court; the owner will be punished or will be imposed a fine. However, the animal that has caused a loss cannot be killed or harmed.

First of all, a person who believes in Allah and what He has revealed, even if concisely, who confirms it with his heart and expresses it with his tongue is a believer. As long as he continues in this state, he will continue to be a believer, and according to the belief of Ahl as-Sunnah, sins do not make a person an unbeliever. The fact that there is a door to unbelief in every sin is a separate issue. First of all, it is necessary to understand this issue well.

Secondly, only learning a branch of science does not make a person an unbeliever. Probably the most dangerous science in this regard is magic; its leading people to unbelief is not just because it is learned.

It is permissible with the uninterpreted decree of fiqh to study at schools such as faculties of law, leaving aside their benefits and harms related to the future. It depends on the purpose. It is a duty and a deed of worship to study it with the aim of fully or partially applying absolute justice, reducing oppression as much as possible, defending, protecting and guarding those who have been wronged. Depending on the two opposite possibilities, it may also be fisq or unbelief.

When you study at these schools, you will graduate and work in this direction. In case of being a judge, the situation is still the same. Accordingly,

“If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.” (al-Maida, 5/44)

The decree of the verse above is not unconditionally valid for them. So, there are some conditions and considerations:

1. First of all, it is metaphorical to call these people “hakim (judge)”. They are not truly judges. They are in a position to apply a decree determined by the real judges. If the decree in question is contrary to “absolute justice” and the judge has no discretion, he will apply it unwillingly and, where he has the opportunity to apply real justice, he will reduce the cruelty, that is, the decrees that are contrary to real justice, as much as possible. It is not regarded as unbelief; it means alleviating the oppression and as they put it, “preferring the lesser evil”.

2. Even the biggest disobedience other than unbelief committed by a person who believes in the way we have mentioned above and maintains this belief is not regarded as unbelief; it can be a major sin at most. Therefore, it is not regarded as unbelief for a person to apply the decrees of Saddam, Hitler, Lenin, and Hajjaj by believing in the trueness of Allah’s decree. He may be regarded as a cruel person. This can be said at most for those who choose this profession without any good intentions.

3. If we declare those who do not judge based on what Allah has revealed as unbelievers without any reservation or limitation, even Muslim judges in an Islamic country will not be able to escape from this decree because they will not be able to find Allah’s clear decree in every issue; they will have to use their own judgment and ijtihad in most of the cases, and might not judge correctly in their decisions. In such cases, how can we say that they are unbelievers since we cannot say that they ruled based on the decree of Allah? Never. Moreover, what is meant by those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed are unbelievers is those who deny Allah’s decrees.

4. In that case, one should aim to study in faculties of law in particular, to isolate oppression step by step, to establish absolute justice, and to prevent victimization while doing it. We believe that even this education will be regarded as worship with this intention. Yes, it is impossible to get into the swamp and not to get muddy. However, there is nothing else to do if there is no choice but to enter the swamp in order to move to a mud-free environment.

The state of prosecutors and notaries public is no more dangerous than that of judges as long as the intention is good and maximum effort is made not to get involved in persecution. Being a lawyer should also be evaluated according to the same criteria.

The people who work as lawyers, judges, prosecutors, etc. work mentally in the law cases that they undertake by using their reasoning, knowledge and experience; they also exert (partially) physical and material efforts for the follow-up of the case. The wages that lawyers receive are the price of the time and effort they spend. Therefore, as long as they do not defend religiously illegitimate issues in the cases they undertake, and they abide by the principles of rights, justice and conscience, the fees received by lawyers are halal.

However, if they defend issues that are religiously illegitimate or that are incompatible with the principles of rights, justice and conscience, they become partners in the sin that is committed, and the wages they receive in return for it become doubtful in terms of religion.

In this respect, it is not appropriate and it is a sin to help people who deal with religiously and morally wrong things in return for a fee and to defend them within the framework of law and with the opportunities provided by law.

The people who work as lawyers, judges, prosecutors, etc. work mentally in the law cases that they undertake by using their reasoning, knowledge and experience; they also exert (partially) physical and material efforts for the follow-up of the case. The wages that lawyers receive are the price of the time and effort they spend. Therefore, as long as they do not defend religiously illegitimate issues in the cases they undertake, and they abide by the principles of rights, justice and conscience, the fees received by lawyers are halal.

However, if they defend issues that are religiously illegitimate or that incompatible with the principles of rights, justice and conscience, they become partners in the sin that is committed, and the wages they receive in return for it become doubtful in terms of religion.

In this respect, it is not appropriate and it is a sin to help people who deal with religiously and morally wrong things in return for a fee and to defend them within the framework of law and with the opportunities provided by law.

"O ye who believe! Eat not up your property among yourselves in vanities: But let there be amongst you Traffic and trade by mutual good-will: Nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: for verily Allah hath been to you Most Merciful! If any do that in rancor and injustice,- soon shall We cast them into the Fire." (an-Nisa: 29, 30)

We explained the verses above as follows in the tafsir called Kur'an Yolu:

In the previous verses, legitimate ways like inheritance, donation and mahr that were used in the transfer of wealth and material interests were mentioned. In the verses above, trade is mentioned in its widest sense, that is, in the sense of “legal transaction that is based on mutual consent and that is about material values"; the verses forbid taking people’s things and benefitting from them through the ways that are contrary to those mentioned above and hence that are called wrong ways.

Theft, seizure, bribery, corruption, usury, pawn-broking, price gouging, deceiving are the most important and common forms of those wrong ways. Trade is generally done by adding some profit to the goods that are bought. The price is determined when it is bought. Since it is not transferred with the same price while selling, this profit – which consists of the extra money, resembles “wrong ways of earning” and reminds them.

Probably due to this reason, when unjust profit is forbidden, trade is rendered free as an exception. Profit, which consists of the price of difference between the purchasing price and the selling price, is legitimate. For, the merchant who buys and sells goods does something useful for the public and risks his capital, along with working. After prohibiting black marketing, Hz. Umar said, “... however, anybody who brings goods to the market by taking pains in summer or winter is Umar’s guest; he can sell them as he wishes." Thus, he indicated that reason. (al-Muwatta', “Buyu' ", 56) Those elements and qualities do not exist in wrong ways; the strong oppress the weak and benefit from their weaknesses and needs; they take their goods without the real consent of the weak.

The phrase “do not kill yourselves" includes important and subtle points aiming to maintain both life and public order. It is especially remarkable that the phrase “do not kill yourselves" is used after goods are prohibited to be eaten up and used through unjust ways. Injustice and legal and social unfairness bring about or increase anarchy; once the public order is broken, and law and order disappear, safety of life falls into danger. Not only those who are wronged but also those who eat up others’ goods unjustly and those who kill others unjustly are affected by this insecurity; they can be killed; the lives and goods of their relatives can be harmed. Although the real purpose of the verse is to forbid killing others, the phrase “do not kill yourselves" is used meaning others; it is a great emphasis in terms of protecting right to live. For, there is no difference between a person’s own life and the life of another person; all lives deserve to be protected equally; they have the right to be protected. A person who kills another person needs to think that he kills himself; he needs to have this consciousness.

The verse contains two of the “five necessary/important values and purposes (maqasid ash-shari’ah) that need to be protected", which are the purpose of all muamalat decrees of Islam: Protection of life and protection of wealth. The previous verses contain the principle of protecting the generation by encouraging marriage and prohibiting fornication; verse 43 of the chapter contains the principle of protecting the mind by prohibiting becoming drunk; and the orders of obedience to Allah and worshipping Him, obedience to His Messenger and following him, belief in the religion conveyed by all prophets and following it, which are often repeated in various places, contain the purpose of protecting the religion.

Along with the verses stating that Allah has absolute will and knowledge, there are many verses stating that man has will in the Quran. It is stated in those verses that man will be held responsible for what he does and that he will be rewarded when he does good things and punished when he does bad things.

The verses mentioning Allah's will emphasize that His will is absolute, unique and pre-eternal and that everything that exists is surrounded by Allah's will.

The verses mentioning Allah's will indicate man’s limited and partial will. That is, man wants something and Allah creates it.

Thus, in personal acts, the deed is done with man’s will and free choice. Allah creates that deed based on man’s choice and holds man responsible for it.

If Allah had not given man the possibility to have will, it would not be possible to mention human will. Man’s having will within Allah's absolute will enables him to do his deeds freely.

The beings to which Allah did not give freedom have no mind and responsibility. However, man has mind and will as well as responsibility.

There are many verses in the Quran indicating that man has free will and that he will be held responsible for what he does.

Some of the verses regarding the issue are as follows:

“The truth is from your Lord: Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it): for the wrong-doers We have prepared a Fire…” (al-Kahf 18/29)

“Do what ye will: verily He seeth (clearly) all that ye do.” (Fussilat 41/40)

"Say: O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine." (al-Kafirun 109/1-6)

"We showed him the Way: whether he be grateful or ungrateful (rests on his will)." (al-Insan 76/3)

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things." (al-Baqara, 2/256)

"Therefore do thou give admonition, for thou art one to admonish. Thou art not one to manage (men´s) affairs. But if any turn away and reject Allah,- Allah will punish him with a mighty Punishment, For to Us will be their return; Then it will be for Us to call them to account." (al-Ghashiya 88/21-26)

"Say: ‘O ye men! Now Truth hath reached you from your Lord! Those who receive guidance, do so for the good of their own souls; those who stray, do so to their own loss: and I am not (set) over you to arrange your affairs.’" (Yunus, 10/108)

“Verily We have revealed the Book to thee in Truth, for (instructing) mankind. He, then, that receives guidance benefits his own soul: but he that strays injures his own soul. Nor art thou set over them to dispose of their affairs." (az-Zumar 39/41)

“It gets every good that it earns, and it suffers every ill that it earns." (al-Baqara, 2/ 286)

"Whoever works righteousness benefits his own soul; whoever works evil, it is against his own soul: nor is thy Lord ever unjust (in the least) to His Servants" (Fussilat, 41/46)

"Mischief has appeared on land and sea because of (the meed) that the hands of men have earned, that (Allah) may give them a taste of some of their deeds: in order that they may turn back (from Evil).”  (ar-Rum, 30/41)

“Allah does not change a people´s lot unless they change what is in their hearts... " (ar-Ra'd, 13/11)

"This is because of the (unrighteous deeds) which your hands sent on before ye: For Allah never harms those who serve Him." (Aal-i Imran, 3/182)

Thus, man uses will as well as many things presented to him by Allah. Therefore, man is responsible for the good and bad deeds he does and will be rewarded and punished for them.

Answer 1:

Drinking alcohol is strictly prohibited by verse 90 of the chapter of al-Maida. However, its punishment is based on the Sunnah and practice of the Prophet (pbuh), not the verse. The Prophet (pbuh) and Abu Bakr (ra) gave 40 lashes to the drinker. When the number of drinkers increased during the caliphate of Umar (ra), he consulted with his friends. They decided to give 80 lashes, which is the minimum amount of hadd. (see Darimi, Hudud, 10; A. b. Hanbal, IV, 389; see also W. Zuhayli, al-Fiqhul-Islami; 7/5489)

Although there are some scholars who say that there was consensus on this practice of Umar (ra), it is not true because this issue was controversial among the Companions before and after Umar (ra) too. (see Naylul-Awtar, 7/142)

Answer 2:

The principle that tazir punishments cannot exceed the amount of hadd punishment is based on the following hadith:

“If a person gives a tazir punishment that reaches hadd punishment in an issue that does not necessitate hadd punishment, he will have committed oppression.” (Zaylai, Nasbur- Raya, III, 354; al-Haythami, Majmauz-Zawaid, VI, 281)

However, Zaylai states that this hadith narrated by Bayhaqi and others is mursal. (see Zaylai, 3/354)

There is a disagreement among scholars about whether to act upon mursal hadiths. Therefore, acting upon this hadith, some scholars say that tazir punishment should not reach the amount of hadd punishment while others state that it is permissible.

For example, according to Malikis, the Islamic state can impose tazir punishment above or below this punishment equal to hadd punishment. Man b. Zaida incident is proof of it. During the caliphate of Umar (ra), this person imitated the seal of baytulmal and took goods from the treasury. When the Caliph was informed about it, he was first sentenced to one hundred lashes and imprisonment, then another hundred lashes were given; and in the third, he was sentenced to lashes and exile again. (Ibn Qudama, al-Mughni, VIII, 325)

It is seen that Man b. Zaida committed the crimes of “imitating a seal”, “taking goods from baytulmal unjustly” and “opening the door of cheating to others”. This view of Malikis is supported by the following practice reported from Ali (ra):

Ali (ra) applied the punishment of one hundred lashes as 98 lashes on a person who was in a relationship with a foreign woman without committing fornication. (Zuhayli, al-Fiqhul-Islami, 206, 207).

Again, according to Hanafis and Malikis, the Islamic state can impose the death penalty on those who commit certain crimes such as repetition of crimes, habit of committing crimes or homosexuality. It is called “political killing”. A judge’s decision is necessary for it. For example, if a Muslim curses Allah, one of the angels or one of the prophets, he is killed based on the following verse:

“Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment.” (al-Ahzab, 33/57)

To sum up, a person whose evil deeds cannot be prevented unless he is killed is politically killed, like a person who has a habit of stealing and is an atheist who tries to inculcate his corrupt beliefs in others. According to most Islamic scholars, the same thing holds true for the one who applies magic. (Ibn Abidin, Raddul-Muhtar, III, 196; az-Zuhayli, ibid, VI, 200)

According to Malikis and Hanbalis, a Muslim spy who spies on behalf of the enemy against Muslims is killed. Abu Hanifa and Imam Shafii hold the opposite view. On the other hand, a group of Shafiis and Ahmad b. Hanbal consider it permissible to kill anyone who invites people to bid’ahs that are contrary to the Book and the Sunnah. (Ibn Taymiyya, as-Siyasatush -Shar’iyya, p. 114, al-Hisba, p. 48; ash-Shirazi, al-Muhadhdhab, II, 242)

Allah created beings in the best mold.

“ … Do good; for Allah loveth those who do good.”1

With the verse above, He ordered man to do everything in the best way. To do one’s job/task in the best way in every field is expressed with the word “ihsan” in our religion. As a matter of fact, when the Prophet (pbuh) was asked, “O Messenger of Allah! What is ihsan?”, he gave the following answer:

“...Ihsan means to worship Allah as if you see Him. Even if you cannot see Him, He sees you...”2

Thus, he informed us that we should do everything with the consciousness that Allah observes us all the time and that our deeds will be presented to Him.

Our religion regards all useful deeds as worship and orders us to give importance to what we do and do it in the best and soundest way. The Prophet (pbuh) states the following:

“Allah rendered ihsan fard in everything...”3

Thus, He wants man to do everything well in accordance with its rules and technique, in a sound, beautiful, good and perfect way. The Prophet (pbuh) states the following in a hadith:

“Allah Almighty likes it when you do whatever you do soundly and well.”4

To do something, to produce a work is something peculiar to man. To do something well and soundly is a characteristic of the people who adopt their jobs and who have responsibility. Our religion advises us to do better and nicer things in every field. It does not approve of slapdash deeds and attitudes, purposeless acts and random deeds. Soundness in belief, sincerity in attitudes, honesty in business, fineness in art and quality and honesty in all kinds of deeds are among the things ordered by our religion.   

It is regarded important by our religion to have a good intention and the desire and effort to do “one’s job well” for something to be good. This desire and effort will make man successful in his job and enable him to have an innovative and constructive quality. A believer with a pure conscience cannot have the understanding of working “to fill in time” and ”slapdash” no matter what his job is. It should not be forgotten that the money earned by working with this understanding will not be halal.    

The most distinctive quality of a Muslim in business life is to do his job regularly and in the best way. A believer should work in a nice way that will make life meaningful and that will form an environment of peace for the individuals, families and the community. A scientist in his scientific study, a businessman in his business, an employee in his workplace, an official in his department, in short, everybody in their work should have “IHSAN”, which our religion regards as “doing something well and soundly” and advises everybody, as their target.

Introducing this principle in business, our religion orders us to have things done by others in the best way and to assign tasks to be done to qualified people.

“When tasks are given to unqualified people, wait for Doomsday.”5

In the hadith above, the Prophet (pbuh) states that tasks can be done efficiently and soundly only when they are assigned to qualified people and that things will go wrong otherwise.

To do things soundly and well necessitates self-sacrifice and solemnity first. It should be our target to apply the principle of doing the best and the criteria related to working life introduced by our religion in a balanced way in all of our deeds. We should not forget that if a person does his job well, he will lead a good life.

“As to those who believe and work righteousness, verily We shall not suffer to perish the reward of any who do a (single) righteous deed.”6

When assigning a task to a person, we should prefer qualified and religious people. However, being qualified comes first. If two people are equally qualified related to a task, the more religious one is preferred. For, fear of Allah will cause him to do the task more soundly. It is not permissible to assign a task to a person who does not deserve it just because he is a Muslim.

Footnotes:

1. al-Baqara, 2/195.
2. Bukhari, Iman, 37. I, 18
3. Muslim, Sayd, 57
4. Bayhaqi, Shu’abul-Iman, 4/334
5. Bukhari, Ilm, 2
6. al-Kahf, 18/30

The people who work as lawyers, judges and prosecutors work mentally by using their reasoning, information and knowledge related to the cases that they are engaged and they also work physically (though partly). The money the lawyers get is in return for that mental and physical work. Therefore, the money that lawyers get is legitimate (halal) as long as they do not defend the cases that are religiously illegitimate and as long as they act in accordance with the principles of the truth, justice and conscience.

However, if they defend the cases that are religiously illegitimate and that are not in compliance with the principles of the truth, justice and conscience, they will share the sin that is committed and the money they get will become doubtful religiously.

Therefore, it is not appropriate and it is a sin to help people who deal with wrong deeds in terms of religion and ethics in return for money and to defend their cases within the framework of law and based on the opportunities given by law.

The laws of adatullah are valid in this world. Allah gave water the lifting force; this rule is valid for both unbelievers and believers. He gave fire the property of burning. An unbeliever can benefit from it or be harmed by it; the same thing is valid for a Muslim. For instance, a prophet is affected by cold and heat; a polytheist is affected from them in the same way. Those examples show that everybody is tested under the same conditions in the world.

Prophets showed miracles from time to time but they did not eliminate the secret of testing fully.

The Kaaba is also subject to the laws imposed in this world. The Kaaba was demolished several times in the past and it was also flooded. However, during the attack of Abraha on the Kaaba, Allah sent the birds of ababil (swifts) and prevented that attack. However, if it were valid all the time, it could harm the secret of testing. Allah allowed some miracles in order to awaken people from heedlessness. However, it did not happen all the time.

Although prophets should have undergone the least trouble, they underwent the most trouble. This shows that Allah creates everything based on wisdom in the world and applies the test under the same conditions for everybody.

Our religion orders man to be honest, just, fair and sincere in his belief, heart, words, intentions, deals, business, in short, in all deeds and acts. It prohibits cheating, lying, hypocrisy and fraud. In Islam, it is haram to do forbidden things; it is also haram to shut your eyes to the forbidden things that are committed. The Prophet (pbuh) states the following:

"When you see a mischief, change it with your hands if you can; but if not, try with your tongue; if it does not work either, disapprove it with your heart. It is the weakest level of belief." (Muslim, Iman, 78; Tirmidhi, Fitan. 11; Nasai, Iman 17; Ibn Majah, Fitan, 20)

In short, it is a sin to tell lies. It is necessary for a Muslim to tell the truth in any case. As a matter of fact, a believer is ordered to tell the truth when he bears testimony even if it is against himself, his parents, or his relatives. (an-Nisa, 4/135)

It is clearly stated in verse 36 of the chapter of al-Isra that man will be held responsible for every act of hearing, seeing or feeling in the heart.

Human communities need protection, order and justice; state organization originated from those needs. Along with binding legal rules, the administrators and judges who apply those rules and witnesses who prove the rights or crimes play an important role in the realization of justice.

It is necessary for everybody, especially judges, prosecutors and witnesses, to fulfill their responsibilities truly for the realization of social justice. Otherwise, if people evade this responsibility by considering some material or spiritual gains or worries or if they neglect their duty, they will be held responsible for preventing the realization of justice and causing parties to suffer.

Therefore, it is contrary to justice for both judges and witnesses to tend to the wrong party, or to evade witnessing and making a decision in order to prevent the realization of justice, to do things that will temporize the court along with false testimony and decrees that are contrary to law; the religion of Islam forbids them and emphasizes that it is possible to hide certain things from the public but it is impossible to hide them from Allah.

Therefore, a person should inform the relevant authorities in an appropriate manner about an incident he has witnessed – without bowing to the pressures threats and blackmails. Besides, he should file a criminal complaint about the threats aiming to prevent him from this lofty duty, being aware of the fact that he lives in a state of law.

According to a hadith that is accepted as sound by hadith scholars, the property of a person’s child means the property of his father: ‘You and your property belong to your and for your father’. (see Fathul-Bari, V/211-212; Tuhfatul-Ahwazi Shamila, III/482)

Scholars have different ijtihads about the decree of the hadith above and the legal conclusion to be drawn from it. Among those ijtihads, the one that is more accurate according to other verses and sound hadiths, and ‘general principles and rules regarding property’ is as follows: The object that is the property of the child is not the property of the father at the same time. If it were so, when the child died, his property would belong only to the father; the son’s/daughter’s children, wife and mother could not be heirs.

The hadith expresses ‘ibaha (permissibility)’, not ‘property’; it means that ‘the father can take his child’s property and use it as much as he needs without asking his child’. The decree (result) is not unconditional; it is subject to some conditions:

1. The property bought by the father should not harm his child.

2. The child should not be in need of the property taken by his father.

3. The father should not take the property from a child and give it to his other children.

4. He should need the amount he receives and should not take more than he needs.

5. The need should be legitimate; for example, it is not permissible to take the child’s money to buy alcohol or cigarettes.

It is unanimously agreed by scholars that the maintenance (nafaqah) of the needy father and mother belongs to the son who is rich enough, and the maintenance of the child in need belongs to the father.

However, if the parents eat and drink their child’s property without the child’s being aware of, it is halal even if the child does not like it. The father is not regarded to have eaten haram in that case. On the other hand, the son has to take care of the father and the mother. Nevertheless, it is not appropriate for the son to eat from his father’s property without permission. (see Mughnil-Muhtaj, 5/183; Ibn Abidin, 5/696; Mawsuatul-Kuwaytiyya, 45/202)

As for the other relatives:

The verses ordering us to give the kindred their due rights (al-Isra: 17/26) and to do good to kinsfolk (an-Nisa: 4/36) and the hadiths ordering and advising us to take care of relatives from close relatives to distant ones, to take care of them (sila ar-rahm), to start helping and benevolence from relatives first are legal sources of maintenance of relatives. We see that mujtahids are divided into three groups in evaluating and applying those verses and hadiths:

a) According to Hanafis, blood relatives between whom marriage is not permissible become mutually worthy of sustenance when the conditions are appropriate; brothers, sisters, paternal uncles, maternal uncles, nephews, nieces, paternal aunts, and maternal aunts are blood relatives of that kind.

b) According to Hanbalis, those who are asaba (first degree relatives of the father) and inheritors are mutually worthy of sustenance.

c) According to some mujtahids such as Ibn Qayyim, regardless of their marriage prohibition, those who inherit each other also become mutually worthy of sustenance when necessary. This ijtihad is the ijtihad that widens the framework of sustenance and is most suitable for the verses, hadiths and the spirit of Islam.

If there is more than one relative - with the exception of some situations between husband and wife, and child and father - the maintenance liability is in proportion to the share of each person in inheritance.

The right of maintenance of one’s parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc. his children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc. and his wife is not dependent on the decree of the judge; they can receive their right for their maintenance without the consent of the debtor and without considering whether he is ready or not.

The maintenance of other relatives is obtained based on either the consent of the debtor or the decree of the judge.

The state provides the maintenance of the people who are in need and who do not have relatives. Fiqh books mention the maintenance of such individuals while listing the expenses of baytul-mal (state treasury). The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) expressed that duty of the state by saying, ‘If a person dies and leaves property, it belongs to his family; if a person dies and leaves a child to be taken care of, it belongs to me’.

It is regarded a principle to punish all of those who commit a murder all together.

Islamic fiqh scholars regarded the commit of killing a person as a whole based on the consensus of the Companions and claimed that the responsibility of the perpetrators could not be divided; they decreed that all of the perpetrators would be punished separately with the essential penalty of the crime. 

According to a narration, Hz. Umar applied the penalty of retaliation on more than one person who killed somebody all together in the city of San’a and said, “لو اشترك فيها أهل صنعاء لقتلتهم – If the whole people of San’a had taken part in the crime, I would have applied retaliation on all of them.” The view of Hz. Ali is also the same. (see Muwatta, Uqul, 19; Bukhari, Diyat, 21)

Those two concepts are not opposites; rather, they are mutually reinforcing concepts that can always come together. It can even be said that there is mercy in all justice, but there might not be justice in all mercy.

“The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment..” (an-Nur, 24/2)

It is possible to see that fact in the verse above.

As for the issue mentioned in the question:

When Allah forgives a servant for his wrongdoing, He will give such rewards to the other servant that he will not even think about the wrongdoing; in fact, he himself will consent to it and will gladly waive his right.

For example, if a person who buried his child alive became a Muslim and reached the rank of a Companion, that child would be given such blessings, such rewards, such positions and ranks that he would be pleased with what happened to him, let alone claiming rights.

It should not be forgotten that Allah is the one who punishes and rewards, and Allah is the one who knows who deserves punishment and reward. It is regarded as justice, mercy and wisdom to act accordingly.

Leaving aside the benefits and harms, it is permissible to study in schools such as Faculties of Law today with the uninterpreted decree of fiqh.

The first verse draws attention to the general application of punishments. That is, when you apply a punishment of Allah, do not let your compassion and pity prevent you from applying it because the most important characteristic of punishment is that it is a deterrent.

And if the people who carry out the punishment do not enact such a punishment by law, there is no difference between not enacting a law and not enforcing a law that is in effect.

In the other verse (verse 22), a personal - not general - method of education is presented from a specific perspective.

Verse 22 refers to a warning to Abu Bakr (ra), who swore that he would never again help a poor relative named Mistah who was involved in the gossip in the “Incident of Ifk”.

It means that we have no right to forgive someone who, according to Islamic law, needs to be punished; we cannot prevent the punishment from being carried out even if we feel compassion; that is what the first verse is about. However, what is essential related to our personal rights is to forgive. That is what the other verse is about.