₦airaland Forum

@Lagosboy,
The prophet did stone someone during his lifetime once,dont u think those Somalians where merely trying to follow in his footsteps 

Like i said i do not know the real scenario of this specific incident but from my lil knowledge, they are not trying to follow his footsteps because, there are conditions attached to the punishement. In the time of the Prophet PBUH the stoning to death was originally a jewish punishemnt in the jewish bible. It did not start with the Prophet PBUH, and the specific scenario it was the lady that walked to the prophet to confess her sins out of her guilt , the prophet PBUH was reluctant but i think she said it three times and that was the law so it had to be implemented. After the death of the woman the Prophet prayed over her dead body and his companions queried him for doing that but He said this woman is noble in the sight of Allah and her sins are already forgiven.

In islam our privacy is important and people are not suppose to spy on others, and go around saying the witnesed adultery. Like i said in the history of islam 1400 years hardly as there ever being stoning due to witness , very few cases recorded if there is any.

In somalia they dug a hole the purpose i do not know but that is not the law of islam.

The convictions of Amina in Nothern Nigeria years back was wrong as well as there were no witness but convicted out of preganancy which i never understood as she wasnt married.

Again i quote the words of Ibn Qayyum
"Shariah is based on wisdom and acheiving peoples welfare in this life and the afterlife. Shariah is all about justice, mercy, wisdom and good. Thus, any ruling that replaces justice with injustice , mercy with its opposite, comon good with mischief, or wisdom with nonsense, is a ruling that does not belong to the shariah, even if it is claimed to be so according some interpretations."

d

ifyalways:
@Lagosboy,If this qatu is to be implemented,who does it?the person whose things got stolen or an Iman?

Thanks ifya for your queries, May God illuminate your heart with his unblemished light.

Now qatu cannot be implemented by the victim neither can it be implemented by the imam. This is a whole governmental issue , the suspect is charged to court and goes through a full judicial process and if convicted of the crime then the state carries out the punishement. Like i said this will forever remain an academic debate not to be caried out unless poverty is eradicated to about 1% and the zakah system is implemented in full, which in turn establishes social justice in the islamic society. The punishment can maybe (personal opinion) be implemented on govt officials who do not need to steal and if they do deserve the punishemnt.

Islamic civilasation has a system of governance ages before any modern system. The islamic system has an execuitive arm which is the Khalifa and his ministers, has a judicial system independent of the khalifa and has a legislative arm which is the shura council.
I have just sumarised this , as we go along i will educate you on the islamic system of governance, most things you see today haven been practised by islam centuries before the decline stated after the spanish inquisition.

Hmmm , this Jarus story could make for a good novel in fact a best seller 

Seriously bro , honestly such things happen in life and your case is even better than a lot of bros here in the UK. I have some non nigerian friend mid 30s not married and parents still insisting they marry from a particular sect or caste. There are lots of sisiters, especially in this situation, one of my friend's sister is about 42 and never married because all their life their parents wanted her to marry someone from Bangladesh even if this famliy were all born and raised here.

Nigeria is case is a lot better in that , they coulples are still left alone to go search, but in some silly culutres the parent will do the search and bring the girl or guy home and expect the bro/sis to be happy and go head with the marriage. Most of this arranged marriage end up in divorce and that is the unfortunate thing amongst muslims in the west UK in particular. Thousand of divorced sisters and i even read a report of this issue in The news magazine a while ago about the divorce rate in the north of Nigeria.

Bro i would advise you to not be too choosy, i know education is important and as well is beauty, the deen is more important and even at that if you find a sisiter not too practising , she can always practise and that should not turn you off completely. You should be ready to make some sacrifices and hardwork in developing a potential life partner. There arent many ready made complete sisters out there. Also, do not let the length of the hijab decieve you into thinking a sister with it is an angel from heaven , we muslims unfortunately are our different selves (with diff character) before being muslim.

N.B Wetin do our Lagos sisters nah, i go fight you o remember i be proper Lagos boy omo eko to the core.

_{[/sub]Na hausa/fulani sister i dey look for now  [sub]}

But what is wrong with lagos sisters, I am a lagos boy as well anyway

Where you dey sef mukina2

isuomo:
Poster, u picked the story from PM news website and if u had bothered to look closely, u would have realised that the November 11 issue of their paper is what is sitting on their website today. Mehinks it is an error on the part of the guys that run their website but please be more circumspect before you post next time.

I was just about to say this as well.

I beg i am kidding o before mukina2 comes to break my head.

I meant she is married to Arsenal FC , i am just using the words she used sometime ago to describe herself.

She is married to Ar. . . . . FC you can confrim with her

zayhal:
N.B Some hanafi scholars even permit wiping of wig during wudhu of the wig is fixed and not easily removed.

This is very new to me. I'll try to read more, insha Allah.
Jazakallah khayran.

I did study Hanafi fiqh and Nigeria is mainly Maliki which prevents many muslim scholars to know little or nothing of Hanafi fiqh which make some verdicts strange when you first come across it. It is same to these Hanafi scholars as well , most of them never studied other schools thought. Comparative fiqh knowledge is essential but real hardwork and committment.

The permisibility if i remember well is in a book called Takmila Fath ul Mulhim -  A book on Hanafi fiqh , also in fatawa al ahindiyya you will find it there. The books are all in arabic of course though.

I understand where you are comming from and I have been of a similar opinion before i advanced in knowledge on some issues alihamdulilah.

Now this is the hadith i guess you are refferring to

Sayyida A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) narrates that an Ansari girl was married and became sick hence all her hair fell out. They (her family and friends) intended to join her hair with false hair, so they asked the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) who said: “Allah has cursed the woman who joins her or[b] someone else’s hair [/b] (with the hair of another man or woman) and the woman who asks for her hair to be joined with the hair of another.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no 5590)

The opinion in the Hanafi school and Shafi school explains that the hadith specifically refers to someone elses hair and not an animal hair which was also available in their time. According to the Hanafi school the use of wool whether fitted or extended or looks longer is permissible. Fashion for a woman is not haraam rather it is encouraged to make her always attractive to her husband but fashion has to be within the limits set by islam.

If you read this book umad al qari sharh bukhari (its in arabic though, no english translation) under the hadith above it explains all these and highlights the permissibity of non human hair as long as it is not pig and a pure animal.

Remember the rule everything is halal until proven haram. The burden of proof is on one who says if it extends beyond the normal hair then it is haram. As far as i know there is no hadith stating this but the interpretation of the above hadith to mean is not correct in my humble opinion. Wool heavy or light is clear to the beholder it is not natural hair and as such no deception in this. Also remember the hair is for the husband and will be covered by hijab anyway.

The opnions above like i stated is of the Hanafi school and shafis as well. Some Malikis accept wool on the condition of not extending beyond the normal hair and i guess this is the opinion you stated.?

N.B Some hanafi scholars even permit wiping of wig during wudhu of the wig is fixed and not easily removed.

And God knows best.

I am wondering as well, i was just about to post a thread asking after him as well.

Please bro if you read this , you dont have to leave NL.

Please come back

ifyalways:
Hmmn. . .
Lagos boy,I wud have to relax at a later time and go through your replies again before i would be able to ask any more questions.
Thanks for all your replies.May Allah Reward you accordingly.
Bilms,welcome.
Usisky,do u happen by any chance to belong to a particular sect in Islam cos u seem to be the lone wolf  I appreciate your imputs though but like i said,No fights 

No worries at all ifya, read them and try to digest them. Ask anything you dont understand as usual before we move on inshallah.

I am sorry for the long boring posts but i had to so you could get a clearer picture thats why I took my time to write it out. 

ayinba1:
Thank you sister Zayhal.
Mukina, I am so NOT kidding.

"Ojo nlo o!"

Mukina2 no fit understand "ojo nlo o" dem no dey speak dat one for Freetown or Kerr segnie o.

But why u won marry mukina2 to another man nah , dont you know she is married

The problem with Nigeria is we have never had an elected president who actually wanted to be president and had a clear vision and programme before assuming office. The only exception is the first republic of course.

2nd republicShagari - was drafted into the race by pressure , he was a simple minded teacher. Awolowo who had a "vision or programme" never won

3rd republic - None of the candidates succedeed and MKO was robbed. Shonekan emerged from no where and just woke up and found himself head of state.

4th republic - Falae,Ekwueme, Bola Ige and others who actually wanted to be president with their own "programmes" did not emerge but OBJ was drafted in and rigged into power.

2007 - Atiku and Buhari who wanted to be president never emerged but our Yaradua was drafted in from mere obscurity in Katsina to be our president.

2009 - It seems our dear univeristy don 9 years ago is about to be president out of good luck, without any plan, programme or vision.

I also do not think Nigeria has ever had a duly elected president since the first republic.

A man with no vision or programme but found himself as president in my opinion can never make a good leader. He will spend all his time trying to formulte policy and will never have the time to implement it.

Sky Blue:
What on earth has what you think about democracy got to do with the issue? Gosh

This is a british MP, who was the for chairman of intenational development committee (which oversees international affairs) of which Nigeria is international. He has many interests in west african business affairs and he is about to use his office to influence the CPS to drop a case. This is a single man about to influence that deals with millions of Nigerias wealth in a democracy due to his position as an MP.

Several of these MP are stooges of business interests and different lobbies and only dance to the tune of their sponsors. If he his successfull then Ibori would be said to have been successful in getting his lawyers to influence the CPS to drop a case.

Now my saying democracy is not a perfect system doesnt mean I do not acknowledge its benefit neither did i say it is a useless form of govt. It is just demo - Crazy (in felas words again)

mbulela:
you have only added to the talk shop.
lead the way, since you know the way.
others are waiting or you.
Pls do not disappoint.

I do accept this , and i hope we can have a courageous leader to lead this struggle sooner rather than later or the latter generation will suffer for ever. I do not have the resources neither have I acquired the necessary intellectual skills to lead a movement, when i have maybe yes!!

This is the rot that exists in the so called "democratic state". Democracy i will always insist is not a perfect system neither is it how we are made to believe it is. Imagine if this guy is successful in stopping this trial , then 3 million Nigerians will have lost and he would have gained.

On the other hand , i do not blame him or the British govt if they stop the trial but i do blame the 150 million Nigerians living in Nigeria and have Ibori amongst them. He his a free man , has being acquited by the courts, his assets in Nigeria have not been frozen. Why should the Briish govt do Nigeria's dirty job for them.

This is the same arguement the French authorities give when accused of habouring IBB's wealth , they say " why should we seize the assets of a free man in your country whose assets have not been seized by you".

The only solution to Nigerias problem is a targeted revolution at Nigerias ruling class , otherwise we would forever be holding conferences , talks and shows like the recent one by Chinua Achebe in the US. This conferences will forever be a talking shop. Nigeria's problem has gone beyond talking , it has gone beyond the Nigerian courts, it only needs on solution - force.

In the words of Obama when he recieved the Nobel peace and a commander in chief in war he explained that force is sometimes neccesary to repel the evil that talking will not solve. Lets be real here 49 years and our ruling elite are more or less the same people who have spoiled Nigeria (In Fela's words).

I do honestly admire his use of language and prose. He his imaginative and creates a pictoral reflection of his intent , which adds humour to his writings,

He his cool

zayhal:
If she can't make a direct proposal due to bashfulness or fear of being turned down, she may go through someone who knows the brother well and has the wisdom to carry out the job well.

A case happened around me recently. The sister liked the brother and was too shy to go to him so she went to the brother's friend and started asking questions about the brother. The brother understood what she wanted and asked her if she didn't mind the brother. She affirmed and the brother got to work.

The wisdom he applied that I really liked was that he didn't go to tell the brother in question that hey sister so and so likes you. he just told his friend that he's been watching that particular sister and thought they could be compatible. the friend said, really? and watched the sister for a couple of days too and found that he liked what he was seeing. At the long run, it was the brother who went to propose to the sister. And did she accept!

So different ways can be used that won't put the sister in a difficult situation because the truth is, though Islam permits it, it's not so easy for a woman to walk up to a man and propose.

Love the story !!!

Mmmm interesting topic. How do i start, mmmmm

Firstly there is a unanimous agreement of sholars on the impermissiblity of the use of human hair to beautify the womans hair. This is from the hadith of the Prophet PBUH in Bukhari that says and (i am not quoting verbatim) Allah has cursed the Al - wasilah (The hairdresser that adds the hair) and mutawasilah (The lady who asks for it).

The scholars based on this hadith have prophibited the use of another persons human hair of whatever source.

Now to the issue of non human hair like wool , silk and cloth.

We have difference of opinion amongst the schools of thought.

Hanafi and shafi schools have allowed the use of wool and its kind because it is not human hair and not considered cheating. They have allowed it as it could beutify the woman for her husband.
The Shafi school based their on the condition that the source animal for the wool has to be pure as in halal to eat and also that the woman who does it is married with the permission of her husband.

The maliki school prohibits the use of wool and other things that seem like hair and not apparently clear it is not the womans hair. They have only permitted the use of things like silk to tie the hair as it doesnt add to the hair but only used as an extention and fully apparent it is not her hair.

The Hambali have toed a similar line of the malikis prohibiting anything that seems like human hair even if it is not human hair.

From the explanation above we should not condemn anyone using wool to beautify herself as long as it is for her husband. The use of rubber will take the similar ruling of wool but the reason rubber will be sometimes impermissible is water will not penetrate rubber for the purpose of wudhu which makes the wudhu non valid. Wool could be penetrated by water so no issue with this.

And God knows best.

Very good innovation !!! Jazakallah bro

v

@Mukina2

Haba wot of if your husband wants 10 children u no go give am?? As i dey see you plenty lil mukinatu dey ur belle o. The more the merrier in da house. Lets pray for mukina2 to have 10 children all hale and hearty. Imagine you have 10 Bil gates as children i am sure u will be ralxing at Gambian beach everyday thanking Allah

ayinba1:
Well the aim of my post was to get the Islamic perspective on this issue. What I propose is immaterial, Brother Lagosboy. What is important is (at least to me)/are

Is this the pulse of a greater majority of our muslim sisters? (and brothers? )

The issue at stake is what is Islamically sound not what ayinba1 thinks is acceptable.
Thank you

Hmm true talk i was just trying to get the whole jist of the arguement   

In islam , from my humble knowledge I know there is really no rule limiting the number of kids, also there is no express rule prohibiting someone that wants few kids. However there is a hadith of the prophet PBUH recommending we should have as much kids so as to grow the ummah.

Some sahabas practised a form of family planning as they went to the Prophet to seek a ruling regarding coitus interruptus (withdrawal before expulsion) and the Prophet PBUH said they could practise it but whatever is decreed by Allah will always stand.

In such issues where there is no fixed or binary view one has to be look at issues in the context of the real world to see what will be most beneficial to the ummah and then make a reccommendation. This issue is not a black or white rissue neither is it  haraam vs halaal issue , it is an issue experts in the fiqh of family affairs vis avis social strucutre of a society have to deliberate on. Walahi me personally cannot give you this kind of islamic view as i dont have the qualifications or the knowledge, maybe someone in the house could take the issue further.

My personal opinionhowever (subject to scholarly ratification) is the more the kids the better especially in the west where things are easier compared to africa where poverty is fast becoming a culture (Naudhubilah)

and you are proposing a maximum of . . . . . or simply no limits

Quite an an interesting issue you are have highlighted here. Maybe we should start by what is considered "more children" and what is considered "less children".

I think this issue is one for women to discuss

deols:
Salam alykum,
My question concerns the use of nail polish. I have not heard of any hadith or verse of the Qur'an against it but from logical reasoning, many muslims believe it is wrong to use it as it would prevent water from touching the nails during ablution.

What if an ablution is performed before applying it and What is the rule of its use when a woman is off salaat. Pls i want delil on this.

Jazakallah for your question.

You have partially answered the question, the only issue with this is water touching the skin is obligatory for the wudhu to be valid. However according to scholars applying the nail polish after wudhu and praying with it is permissible but one has to note you will need to remove it if your wudhu breaks and you need to renew it.

If you are off salah then there is no harm in using it as you will not need to take wudhu anyway,

Regarding delil for the use of nail polish , the burden of proof is on the one who says it is not allowed and not the one permiting it. The reason being that in islam apart from issues/rituals relating to direct ibadah everything is deemed permissible until proven to be forbidden.

And God knows best

I couldnt step out today in berkshire , My sista couldnt get a bus to go home and all taxis were down and I couldnt drive to go pick her. Damn she walked for about 3 hrs in the snow to get home.

The snow is quite heave in kent, Berkshire, Hertfodshire

`

ifyalways:
Wait oooo
U said the the idea of stonning an adulterer to death was added by some Islamic scholars afetr the death of the Prophet PBUH,added to
the Quoran or its an unwritten law?
Your quotations,are they from the Bible or Quoran?am kind of confused cos u were using the name GOD as opposed to Allah
So then,like the Bible,most parts/versions of the Quoran have undergone slight changes from the original text during translation?
Please,u can always add to the thread,its open for everyone as long as there wont be NO fight or insults.
U said nothing about Sharia?

@Ifya

Please i strongly disagree with usisky, stoning to death was never added to the quran after the death of the prophet PBUH. It is not anywhere in the quran so how can what is not there be added. Nothing has ever been added to the quran and nothing will ever be able to be added or taken out. That is its unique miracle and remember what i said about the intellectual miracle of the qur'an.

The quran is unlike the bible and has never been revised or changed due to translations. Almost every translation (apart from Pickthall) has its arabic text beside the translation so as never to lose its mening. People are encouraged to study arabic so as to grasp the deep meaning of the quran. You will see sometimes i quote the text in arabic and then translate.

The quran poses a challenge :

Say: "If the mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another." [Qur'an 17:88]

And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him ), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful. [Qur'an 2:23]

And this Qur'an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah (Lord of the heavens and the earth), but it is a confirmation of (the revelation) which was before it [i.e. the Taurat (Torah), and the Injeel (Gospel), etc.], and a full explanation of the Book (i.e. laws and orders, etc, decreed for mankind) - wherein there is no doubt from the the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns,and all that exists).

Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it?" Say: "Bring then a surah (chapter) like unto it, and call upon whomsoever you can, besides Allah, if you are truthful!" [Qur'an 10:37-38]

Or they say, "He (Prophet Muhammad(P)) forged it (the Qur'an)." Say: "Bring you then ten forged surah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!" [Qur'an 11:13]

Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it (this Qur'an)?" Nay! They believe not! Let them then produce a recital like unto it (the Qur'an) if they are truthful. [Qur'an 52:33-34]

The quran is the most recited book in the world and it is the only book that millions of people memorise it entire 114 chapters and 6,666 verses. No one can come now and revise it or change it. 1.7 Billion muslims recite it everyday in the world so how can someone now change it or revise it.

There is no point being apologetic about ones faith and shy to disclose its punishments. There are harsher punishments in the bible and other cultures and traditional beliefs have svere punishments for various crimes. Usisky talked about the cutting of a thiefs hands as not correct.
See his transaltion:

[5:38]  The thief, male or female, you shall mark their hands as a punishment for their crime, and to serve as an example from GOD. GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.

I dont know if he knows a word of arabic because this is the verse in arabic

"wa sariku wa sarikat qatu fa'aqtau aydihuma jaz'a bimaa . . . . . . . ." meaning " The male or female thief cut off (from the wrist joint) their hands as a recompense
for that they committed . . . . . ."

The word qatu means nothing but cut off and doesnt mean mark like he says. That is the general prinicple the implementation is a different issue entirely.

The other mathematical coincidence he has stated is nothing but jargon and the issue of 19 is mere nonsense. (Apologies to Usisky and all for the harsh words but these are the words scholars have used for this issues and i am simply echoing them)

Cutting off a thief's hand cannot be implemented in a society that has not eradicated poverty and established social justice.  There is really no society that can implement it in the world today because unfortunately there is no islamic state and there is no state that has fully integrated Zakah into the economy and as a social seciruty to feed and cater for the unemployed. You cannot cut a thiefs hand for stealing food as he was hungry and it is the responsibility of the state to feed him.

This punishment is a dettrent again in an islamic society and prevents anyone from stealing. Imagine if our politicians hand were cutt off for stealing, this kind of punishment could be implemented on this class of the society(my personal thought) as they are stealing public funds. Public corruption would be reduced by 90% i guarrantee you. But on the general populace without solving unemployment in a society or utilised the zakah cutting of hands of thiefs will be a crime.

There is more to shariah than this two punishment like i have highlighted. It is unfortunate that non muslims and muslims havent helped to understand the shariah and not just the criminal penal code which has stages to its implementation and it is normally the last stage before several of its ruling are applied.

Again i quote the words of Ibn Qayyum

"[size=8pt]Shariah is based on wisdom and acheiving peoples welfare in this life and the afterlife. Shariah is all about justice, mercy, wisdom and good. Thus, any ruling that replaces justice with injustice , mercy with its opposite, comon good with mischief, or wisdom with nonsense, is a ruling that does not belong to the shariah, even if it is claimed to be so according some interpretations." [/size]

And God knows best

Usisky like i suggested we move away from that thread. Lets have a real time debate here inshallah. Give me a time morn , afternoon or evening tommorow  or even tonite and inshallah i will be your guest. With the help of Allah we could arrive at some truth on this matter of sunnah.

Could you please state your sect or ideological name. As for me I am Sunni and orthodox.

usisky:
@lagosboy
@ifyalways

hi lagosby. the only thing i got to say to is this, "The truth that set men free is for the most part the truth men prefer not to hear"


hi ify. As u can see from lagboys comment, he will never agree with my view. u knw why? cos i chose to go by GOD's words(Qur'an) alone, rather than some man made innovations(hadith, sunna, tafsirs e.t.c). u can even testify yourself, the verses i Qouted are from the Qur'an and not some other source. i'll b waiting for lagboy's response anywaz. cheers!!!!

Honestly, i do not know you and have never engaged in any discussion with you so u saying "he will never agree with my view" is wronng and pre emptive and has the undertone of someone lacking in convicition in his own arguement or beliefs.

I really do not know where to start with you but i will suggest we move out of this thread as i dont want to derail it. I will open a thread to debate with you inshallah and i will prefer a time when we are both live so we could have a real time debate. I will open a theread now inshallah and then give me a time morning or evening.

PLEASE and PLEASE dont let us derail this thread and lets move elswhere.

I watched a video of a somalian muslim stoned to death by fellow belivers cos they alleged he committed adultrey or whatever,what say u abt that?Is their acts justified?what shld they have done instead?Methinks killing another man for any reason is wrong

Now, to be honest i dont know the full details about the incident to make a full specific stance on the issue and i have deliberately avoided posting on the threads as whatever i say will be mere speculation. It is a crime in islam to say or make inputs unto issues you know nothing about. However, what i can do here is explain the islamic position in prinicple and not specific to the inicident.

No 1 - The criminal code in islam can only be carried out in an islamic stae
No 2 - The criminal code in islam can only be carried out when the shariah is being implemented as a whole in that state.
No 3= The criminal code in islam is only applied when the social justice branch of the shariah has been established.

I do not think somalia falls into any of this condition above, arguable maybe on the path to No 1 but not yet.

Now on the issue of adultery and fornication in islam.
Firstly, the stoning to death punishemnt is no where in the quran which is true and you will remember when you asked me earlier on about justified killings in the quran I made no mention of it.
Secondly, we have two primary sources of knowledge in islam the quran and prophetic tradition which was the implementation of the shariah. The stoning of the adulterer was a prophetic tradition carrried out only once by him in his lifetime.

Generally , all the four major jurispudential schools of thought accept the punishement of stoning to death of an adultrer, however there are near impossible or strict conditions attached to it by the qur'an.

1. Four withnesses who witnessed the bannana going inside the hole. Not witnessing kissing or smooching but actual seeing the thing penetrating.

Let me briefly explain that the criminal punishemnt regarding to morals and vices are simply largeley deterrent punishement to prevent public committing of sin which leads to societal decadance. The punishment is not simply to punish the culprit as the best punisher is Allah himself, thats why sins committed under ones roof away from the public is not the business of the islamic state neither can any punishement be meted out to such a person.

Now, it is difficult/impossible for four people altogether to withness the actual infiltration unless it is the the set of a hardcore indecency movie as as we are told indecency on pay tv even is censored and the real infiltration is not shown on screen. If three people report to the state of seeing the actual infiltration and the fourth one waivers all four of them would be lashed 80 lashes for slander and defamation. Such is the gravity of claiming to be a witness.

Also, some scholars have said the only way to prove infiltration is for the couples to stop the ding dong and then the winess pass a string or rope through to confirm if the banana is actually penetrating. Now you see this is laughable and ridiculous as it is impossible to happen so the stoning to death is impossible to implement based on withnesses.

All the conviction in recent years in Nigeria or somalia have never been based on witness but "confession or preganancy"

2. Personal willingful confession and not coersion of the culprit. And also in this case the culprit has to ask for the punishement to be inflicted on him. From the reports we read we were told this guy confessed to the act when he was accosted as his girlfriend was pregnant. He did not just go voluntarily to confess. The punishement of stoning that happened in the time of the prophet as far as i know was never based on witness but the culprit went to confess voluntarily due to the guilt and they asked for the punishement to be carried out on them.

Under this scenerio as well, if the culprit waivers for as little as 5 sec then the punishement will be stopped and not carried out, if he runs away , he his not to be chased but left to Allahs mercy according to the hadith of the prophet PBUH.

Now in this case i saw a hole which has no basis in islam, if it is to prevent the culprit from running away then the punishment is null and void and not from the shariah.

3. The other basis which we have seen convictions on relates to women and pregnancy. some judges have convicted the woman on the basis of pregnancy and i will like to state that according to the 3 major schools of thought this is wrong and also has no foundation in the shariah. The only school which has a branch of it supporting conviction by pregnancy is the Maliki school but all other scholars have proven it to be wrong as it is inustice especially if the man is not convicted and she doesnt confess to the crime and so many other juridical reasons which i cannot start to explain here.

From all of the above , yes stoning to death exists in principle in the shariah for a married couple and not unmarried couples as theris is just 100 lashes with the same conditions. However the implementation of stoning to death is near impossible and largely serves as a deterrent to prevent public immorality like sex on the beach, in the bus stop and all sorts. Adultery in your home with no one seeing you is your personal business between you and your lord and not the business of the state.

I do not think(to the best of my knowledge) the stoning in somalia satisfies all these conditions so i leave their reasons to their conscience and they will explain to Allah on the day of judgement. As for the victim may God forgive him his sins and admit him to paradise