Near the end of his book, استحالة وجود النسخ بالقرآن, pages 485-490, Ihaab Abduh tells a very interesting event that took place at an Islamic law seminar held in Al-Baydhaa', Libya, in 1972. Sheikh Muhammad Abu-Zahra, the foremost jurist at the time, stood up and said to the audience, all of whom held him in the highest regard, and announced, "I kept a juristic opinion a secret for twenty years! I want to divulge it now before I meet God and He asks me: Why did you conceal the knowledge you had and did not explain it to people?"
How is that for drama?
He explained it. He has concluded that stoning of an adulterer is "a Jewish custom", which the Prophet (PBUH) approved at first, then it was
abrogated by 24:2. In other words, he opined for the reverse of the claim under discussion here.
He gave his reasons:
- Verse 4:25 states a situation where the punishment for adultery is half. Stoning cannot be halved! Thus, we must conclude that the torment spoken of in 4:25 is the torment 24:2 mentions in its epilogue, i.e., 100 floggings. That can be halved.
- The hadeeth of Abdullah ibn Awfa, reported by Al-Bukhaari where Ibn Awfa was not sure if Chapter 24 was revealed before or after the stoning ruling.
- The hadeeth that implies that there was a stoning verse but it was abrogated in recitation but not in ruling, cannot be logically accepted. Especially the narration that says a goat ate it!
As soon as he finished, most of the audience booed him and some stood up and left the hall! Some quoted him from jurists books, but he did not change his mind.
Dr. Yoosuf Al-Qaradhaawi met him after the lecture and said to him, "Your honor, I have an opinion close to yours but may be more acceptable." He asked him what it was. He replied, "The hadeeth of the way out. The Hanafi jurists have opined that flogging is the penalty, while the year exile is an extra punishment left to the discretion of the judge. Likewise may be the penalty of stoning! This way, we can reconcile the narrations which establish stoning during the life of the Prophet (PBUH), Umar's and Ali's."
Abu-Zahra replied, "Yoosuf, is it conceivable that Muhammad ibn Abdillah, the Prophet of gifted mercy, would stone people to death?"
A side point Ihaab tells in this event is the difference between scholars about the definition of المحصن. The majority defined it as a man who was married at one time in his life, even if at the time of his adultery he was divorced or windowed! Sheikh Az-Zarqa disagreed and opined like Imaam Rasheed Ridha did; namely, that المحصن is a man who is married at the time of his adultery. My comment is: How can a matter that results in capital punishment be so uncertain? Don't these people know that
their guesses may lead to the death of a human being?
Al-Qaradhaawi comments on the event asking, "How many other scholars have kept their logical conclusions a secret, for fear of what their peers may think?! How many of them died before they told us what they really thought and why?"
Ihaab comments that the religion is not what scholars make of it and that narrations are not holy. They are all single narrations whose authenticity is in question, and even if they are authentic, they have been abrogated by the Quran, not the other way around.
Ihaab concludes that none of the following is part of Islam:
- Preemptive war.
- Killing or enslaving a prisoner of war.
- Discrimination against women. They can be judges and rulers.
- Stoning of adulterers.
- Killing the thief after the fifth time he steels.
- Killing the drunkard after the fourth time he is caught drunk.
- Killing of magicians.
- Killing of one who does not pray.
- Killing of apostates.
- Harassing non-Muslims in the road, or not initiating greeting to them.
- Verses of the Quran were abrogated in recitation or ruling or both.
- That God will come on the Day of Judgment in a form that is different from His true form!
- A goat ate a page of the Quran and its verses are lost, or that people who memorized verses and were killed in battle, the verses they memorized are thus lost.
I couldn't agree more with him.