The ANTI Christ

AhmadJoyia wrote: Stoning is not mentioned in the koran, not once and still we find this very severe punishment for adultery in the shariah for those who uphold the koran(muslimeen) What happened to higher criticism here? Your example is understandably good to those who wants to use basic human logic and wisdom in their matters. I don't disagree with this. However, I still call such examples as human errors and nothing wrong with the science of Hadith collection. Nevertheless, this particular hadith comes from Hz. Umar, which doesn't tell us if such a punishment by Prophet Mohammad was prescribed before or after the relevent verses on Zina were revealed in Quran. Most probably, it was before their revelation in Quran. Hence, I think, there is no sense to superceed Quranic injunctions through ahadith, especially once the verses are very clear. Hence, in this case, I think, human error of judgement can't be ruled out.

So is the difference of opinion a mercy for the community of muslimeen particulary in this instance when lives are taken?

I ask you, what holds leaders of the muslimeen back from choosing the most merciful approach in judgement? if they have faith in Arrahmaan, The Merciful and hope for His mercy then it would be logical for them to be as merciful as they can right?

Last question i would like for you to consider, the prophet was sent but as a mercy to mankind[quran], then can the shariah hold laws that are unmerciful? I do not believe the polytheists of mecca were of opinion that when he judged he was unjust or unmerciful, they just did not wish to give up their idolworship, but now people are of opinion that the shariah is unjust and unmerciful so they believe the prophet was also because people claim that is his way.

"Islamic Laws or Shariah, has a methodology to base upon and its not from whimsical ideas of one or two genius minds, but needs to involve the whole of Ummah. But again, even the Ummah, can make errors which must be rectified as soon as the mistakes are realized."

Very reasonable, howabout making it possible for judges to be replaced if they fail to be as merciful as possible? this would mean by not adopting a verdict which is not in contradiction with the words of Allah but is more merciful and just then the verdict of the judge. In my opinion a true judge should put the wellbeing of the people and the state before his position as judge. People should be able to counter a judgement made by a hakim if people believe it is unjust or unmerciful and have the book of Allah as basis for their objection. And why not make the person who objected and who had a more merciful verdict the new judge? and same for him if someone finds his verdict as unmerciful and has a better judgement, then he should be able to replace the previous judge and so on. I am of opinion that this way you guarantee the increase of justice and mercy for all.