Race and Tribe in Islam: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
[checked revision][checked revision]
No edit summary
Line 89: Line 89:


====Imam Malik====
====Imam Malik====
{{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.''''}}
{{Quote|{{citation|author=Imam Malik|author2=Sahnun|author3=Ibn al-Qasim|title=al-Mudawwana|publisher=al-Maktaba al-Shamila|chapter=The book of the hudud with regards to adultery and slander|volume=4|pages=497-502|url=https://app.turath.io/book/587}}|‎'''Chapter: Regarding he who ascribed to an Arab or non-Arab the kinship of other than ‎his own people''' […]‎
 
I [Sahnun] said: What if he said to an Arab man, ‘Oh Ethiopian!’ or ‘Oh Persian!’ or ‘Oh ‎Roman!’ or ‘Oh Berber!’? Will the hadd [referring to the hadd punishment known as ‎‎''hadd al-firyah'' – that is, the punishment of 80 lashes for slander] be implemented ‎according to Malik?‎
 
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 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.‎
 
I said: What if he said to a Persian or Berber, ‘Oh Arab!’‎
He said: There is no hadd upon him in this case.‎
 
I said: What if he said to an Arab, ‘Oh Qurayshi!’, or to a man of Mudar [the tribe], ‘Oh ‎Yemeni!’, or said to a man from Yemen, ‘Oh Mudari’‎
He said: I see all of this as the cutting-off of lineage, and I think that it warrants the hadd ‎just as Malik says regarding the cutting-off of lineage [a different hadd punishment than ‎the 80-lashes hadd punishment for slander – i.e. lying about lineage (“cutting off lineage”, ‎or ''qatt al-nasab'') is not necessarily slander (''qadhf''), while saying someone is the “son ‎of a black person” or describing an Arab as a non-Arab is], because the Arab’s lineage is ‎traced through his forefathers, so whoever attributes him [the Arab] to other than his ‎forefathers has done away with his [the Arab’s] lineage, [and] thus the hadd is upon him. ‎‎[…]‎
 
I said: And if he said to an Arab, ‘You are not from the Arabs’, will he not suffer the hadd ‎according to Malik?‎
He said: Yes [the criminal will suffer the hadd]. […]‎
 
‎'''Chapter: He said to a man, ‘Oh son of a disabled person!’ or ‘Oh son of a black person!’''' ‎‎[…]‎
 
I said: What if he [the criminal] said to him [the victim], ‘Oh son of a cupper!’ [one who ‎conducts cupping therapy] or, ‘Oh son of a tailor!’‎
He said: Malik said: If he [the victim] is an Arab, then the hadd is implemented unless ‎there is among his [the victim’s] forefathers someone who did that type of work.‎
Malik said: And if he [the victim] is a non-Arab, I hold that he [the criminal] should swear ‎by Allah that he did not intend thereby the cutting-off of lineage, and there is no hadd ‎upon him, and upon him is the ''tazeer'' [i.e. some other discretionary punishment ‎decided by the judge – these punishments are not allowed to exceed 40 lashes].‎
I said: why is it [the ruling] differentiated in this [case] between the Arab and the non-‎Arab? ‎
He said: Because they [i.e. cupping and tailoring] are the work of the non-Arabs.‎
 
I said: And if he [the criminal] said to him [the victim], ‘Oh son of a black person!’‎
He said: The hadd will be implemented upon him according to Malik if he [the victim] ‎was an Arab or a non-Arab unless there is a black person among his forefathers. […]‎
 
‎'''Chapter: Regarding he who said to a white man, ‘Oh son of a black person’ or ‘Oh one ‎blind in an eye!’''' […]‎
 
I said: What about the man who says to an Arab, ‘Oh non-Arab!’ Is he punished with the ‎hadd or not according to Malik?‎
He said: Yes [the criminal is punished with the hadd].‎
I said: What about the man who says to an Arab, ‘Oh slave!’ Is he punished with the hadd ‎or not according to Malik?‎
He said: Yes [the criminal is punished with the hadd].‎
 
I said: What if he said to a non-Arab, ‘Oh slave!’ - will he be lashed according to the hadd ‎or not according to Malik?‎
He said: I do not remember it [i.e. the ruling] from Malik, but I hold that there is no hadd ‎upon him. […]‎
 
‎'''Chapter: Regarding the one who was slandered and then left Islam'''‎
 
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, 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] ‎fornication but was not taken thus for the hadd [i.e. not punished or prosecuted] until he ‎‎[the victim] [actually] fornicated, 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==


Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers
6,633

edits

Navigation menu