6,633
edits
Race and Tribe in Islam: Difference between revisions
→Imam Malik
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
| Line 95: | Line 95: | ||
He [Ibn al-Qasim, Imam Malik’s companion for twenty years] said: Yes [the hadd will be implemented]. | He [Ibn al-Qasim, Imam Malik’s companion for twenty years] said: Yes [the hadd will be implemented]. | ||
I said: What if he said to a non-Arab, ‘Oh Persian!’, while he is a Roman? Or he | I said: What if he said to a non-Arab [''mawla''], ‘Oh Persian!’, while he is a Roman? Or he said to a Berber, ‘Oh Ethiopian!’ or ‘Oh Persian!’? Or he said to a Persian, ‘Oh Roman!’ or ‘Oh Nabatean!’? Will the hadd be implemented in this case according to Imam Malik or not? | ||
He said: Malik said: When it is said to a Persian, ‘Oh Roman!’, ‘Oh Ethiopian!’, or something similar, then there is no hadd with regard to this. And it was differed upon about Malik regarding whether or not the one who says to the Roman or Berber, ‘Oh Ethiopian!’ would have the hadd upon him. And I think that there is no hadd upon him [the criminal] except if he says to him [the victim], ‘Oh son of a black person!’ while he [the victim] is white. If there are among his [the victim’s] forefathers none who are black, then the hadd is implemented. And if he [the criminal] described him [the victim] as an Ethiopian, saying, ‘Oh son of an Ethiopian!’, and he [the victim] was a Berber, then the Ethiopian and the Roman [descriptions] in this case are the same [that is,] if he [the victim] was a Berber – and it [i.e. this ruling] is the best of what I have heard from the speech of Malik. And it [i.e. this ruling] was confirmed with me unless it were said to him [the victim], ‘Oh son of a black person!’, for that would be clear slander if there were no black person among his forefathers. | He said: Malik said: When it is said to a Persian, ‘Oh Roman!’, ‘Oh Ethiopian!’, or something similar, then there is no hadd with regard to this. And it was differed upon about Malik regarding whether or not the one who says to the Roman or Berber, ‘Oh Ethiopian!’ would have the hadd upon him. And I think that there is no hadd upon him [the criminal] except if he says to him [the victim], ‘Oh son of a black person!’ while he [the victim] is white. If there are among his [the victim’s] forefathers none who are black, then the hadd is implemented. And if he [the criminal] described him [the victim] as an Ethiopian, saying, ‘Oh son of an Ethiopian!’, and he [the victim] was a Berber, then the Ethiopian and the Roman [descriptions] in this case are the same [that is,] if he [the victim] was a Berber – and it [i.e. this ruling] is the best of what I have heard from the speech of Malik. And it [i.e. this ruling] was confirmed with me unless it were said to him [the victim], ‘Oh son of a black person!’, for that would be clear slander if there were no black person among his forefathers. | ||
| Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
I said: What if I [Sahnun, being a criminal] slandered a man and then that man [the victim] left Islam, thereafter returned to Islam, and then demanded of [i.e. against] me the hadd [that it should be imparted against Sahnun] - Would you smite [i.e. lash] me for him or not? | I said: What if I [Sahnun, being a criminal] slandered a man and then that man [the victim] left Islam, thereafter returned to Islam, and then demanded of [i.e. against] me the hadd [that it should be imparted against Sahnun] - Would you smite [i.e. lash] me for him or not? | ||
He said: There is no hadd upon his [the revert’s] slanderer [i.e. the criminal]. | He said: There is no hadd upon his [the revert’s] slanderer [i.e. the criminal]. | ||
He, Ibn al-Qasim, said: If he [the criminal] slandered him, and then he [the criminal] left Islam, or if he [the criminal] slandered him while he [the criminal] was an apostate [''murtad''], then the hadd would be implemented against him [the criminal] while he [the criminal] was an apostate – and if he [the criminal] repented [i.e. returned to Islam], then the hadd would be implemented against him [the criminal] just as well. And if someone [being a criminal] slandered him [the victim] while he [the victim] was an apostate, and then he [the victim] repented, then there would be no hadd upon him [the criminal]. And if someone [being a criminal] slandered him [the victim] before he [the victim] apostatized, and then he [the victim] apostatized, then there is no hadd upon the slanderer [i.e. the criminal] if he [the victim] repents [i.e. returns to Islam] – and indeed this is similar to the case of a man who was slandered with [the accusation of] | He, Ibn al-Qasim, said: If he [the criminal] slandered him, and then he [the criminal] left Islam, or if he [the criminal] slandered him while he [the criminal] was an apostate [''murtad''], then the hadd would be implemented against him [the criminal] while he [the criminal] was an apostate – and if he [the criminal] repented [i.e. returned to Islam], then the hadd would be implemented against him [the criminal] just as well. And if someone [being a criminal] slandered him [the victim] while he [the victim] was an apostate, and then he [the victim] repented, then there would be no hadd upon him [the criminal]. And if someone [being a criminal] slandered him [the victim] before he [the victim] apostatized, and then he [the victim] apostatized, then there is no hadd upon the slanderer [i.e. the criminal] if he [the victim] repents [i.e. returns to Islam] – and indeed this is similar to the case of a man who was slandered with [the accusation of] ''zina'' [fornication/adultery] but was not taken thus for the hadd [i.e. not punished or prosecuted] until he [the victim] [actually] committed ''zina'' [fornication/adultery], for then [also] there is no hadd upon whoever slandered him.}}{{Quote|{{citation|title=al-Shifa bi-ta'rif huquq al-Mustafa|author=Qadi Iyad|publisher=al-Maktaba al-Shamila|url=https://app.turath.io/book/1753|volume=2|page=217, 234}}; translated in {{citation|editor=Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley|Publisher=Madinah Press Inverness|location=Scotland|year=2004|title=Ash-Shifa of Qadi 'Iyad|pages=375, 387|url=https://archive.org/details/MuhammadMessengerOfAllahAshShifaOfQadiIyad}}|[Qadi Iyad repeats this twice:] Ahmad b. Abi Sulayman, '''the companion of Sahnun, said, 'Anyone who says that the Prophet was black (''aswad'') should be killed.''''}} | ||
==Race and Tribe in Islamic doctrine== | ==Race and Tribe in Islamic doctrine== | ||