Like OK Beheader, Mainstream Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America Condones Stoning Adulterers, and Sharia Supremacism

h/t www.thereligionofpeace.com

 

Like OK Beheader, Mainstream Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America Condones Stoning Adulterers, and Sharia Supremacism

http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2014/09/27/like-ok-beheader-mainstream-assembly-of-muslim-jurists-of-america-condones-stoning-adulterers-and-sharia-supremacism/

September 27th, 2014 (9 minutes ago) · No Comments · Essays

Oklahoma beheading suspect, and Muslim convert Alton Nolen, aka “Jah’Keem Yisrael,” per a local newspaper account in the McCurtain Gazette (reproduced by Caleb Howe of Truth Revolt),
…was telling coworkers Thursday (9/25/14) of an Islamic teaching that said women should be stoned for an offense, and that an argument followed the remark. Nolen was later fired and returned later Thursday, when he beheaded Colleen Hufford.

The Islamic law, i.e., Sharia-based “offense,” and its requisite punishment by stoning to death, which Jah’Keem Yisrael alluded to Thursday, was certainly adultery.

Reuters reported today, Saturday 9/27/14, from Somalia, a graphic, real time illustration of this living, sacralized Islamic barbarity. The stoning to death yesterday (Friday 9/26/14), of a 33 year-old Somali, as described by Reuters, comported with the Sharia-complaint worldview of the Oklahoma beheading suspect Nolen/ Jah’Keem Yisrael:

Hundreds gathered to watch the killing of Safia Ahmed Jimale in an open field. The 33-year old mother was buried up to her shoulders and pelted with stones by masked al Shabaab fighters and local men…The killing was witnessed by the al Shabaab governor for the region. Her body was then dug out of the ground and carried away for funeral prayers, said resident Ahmed Abdullahi, who was in the crowd. A man who presented himself as an al Shabaab judge said Jimale had confessed to having three husbands. He said the three men were not aware they were married to the same woman and had testified against her.

The Hedayah (translated by Charles Hamilton) of classical jurist Sheikh Burhanuddin Ali (1135-1183), is one of the most important Sunni texts of Islamic Law used throughout the Indian subcontinent to this day. An extract from pp. 178-79 of this authoritative text demonstrates the traditionalist Sharia rationale for the draconian punishment of stoning adulterers:

A married person convicted of whoredom is to be stoned—When a person is fully convicted of whoredom; if he be married, let him undergo the punishment of Rajim, that is, lapidation, or stoning to death, because the Prophet condemned Maaz to be thus stoned to death, who was married; and he has also declared, It is unlawful to spill the blood of a Muslim, excepting only for three causes, namely apostasy, whoredom after marriage, and murder”—and in this all the companions likewise unite….Mode of executing lapidation.—“It is necessary, when a whoremonger is to be stoned to death, that he should be carried to some barren place, void of houses or cultivation; and it is requisite that the stoning be executed—first by witnesses, and after them by the Imam or Qadi, and after those the rest of the by-standers, because it is so recorded from Ali…An unmarried free person is to be scourged with one hundred stripes—If the person convicted of whoredom be free, but unmarried, the punishment with respect to him is one hundred stripes, according to what is said in the Koran [Koran 24:2], “The whore and the whoremonger shall ye scourge with one hundred stripes;”—for although this text is cancelled with respect to all other than those who are married (NOTE: i.e., married persons are stoned to death] the law must be executed in conformity to it.…The punishment of whoredom is the same with respect to both sexes, as all the texts which occur in the sacred writings upon this subject extend equally to both…”

Contemporary validation of the ongoing Sharia mandate to stone adulterers to death was provided March 31, 2005, via “question and answer” format at Islam Online (now On Islam), didactic website of the esteemed cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi, whose regular Al-Jazeera program on Sharia is wildly popular, and in whose name the government of Qatar recently created the Al-Qaradawi Centre for Islamic Moderation.

Under the heading, “Stoning: Does It Have Any Basis in Shari`ah?,” the following exchange was posted:

Question: “Dear scholars, as-Salamu `alaykum. I have heard that the punishment specified for the person who commits adultery is 80 lashes. I would like to ask, from where did you get the punishment of stoning to death. Moreover, if you say that it is based on the Sunnah, I can say that how to depend on Sunnah in this regard. Isn’t it a fact that the Qur’an is the source of legislation for all Muslims? Jazakum Allah khayran.”

Answer: “Coming to the issue of stoning to death as a punishment for married adulterer and adulteress, the statement that there is no verse stipulating that punishment is not correct. It is to be made crystal clear that the punishment is explicitly sanctioned by both the Qur’an and the Prophetic Tradition.” “…we would like to note that there are many incidents in the Sunnah and the life of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in which the Prophet stoned the married adulterer and adulteress to death. This happened in the case of Ma`iz and the Ghamidi woman. All this makes it clear that the punishment is proven and authentic and is not debatable.” 

In the Kuwaiti Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence, we read the following: 

Ibn Qudamah wrote: “Muslim jurists are unanimous on the fact stoning to death is a specified punishment for married adulterer and adulteress. The punishment is recorded in number of traditions and the practice of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) stands as an authentic source supporting it. This is the view held by all Companions, Successors and other Muslim scholars with the exception of Kharijites.” 

Al-Bahuty said: “The authentic practice of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) supports stoning to death as a punishment specified for adultery. In addition, the verse commanding this punishment was revealed in the Qur’an. Later, it was verbally abrogated but its ruling is still binding. `Umar ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “Almighty Allah sent Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) with the truth and revealed unto Him the Qur’an. Among the revelation (brought by him) was the verse stipulating that married adulterer and adulteress should be stoned to death. We read, comprehended and understood it. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) acted in accordance with that and so did all of us. I fear, by the passage of time, that some people will say: ‘We do not find this verse in the Qur’an’, and thus they go astray abandoning an obligation given to them by Allah. Stoning to death is a Divine obligation and punishment specified for any married adulterer or adulteress once there is four witnesses or the confession of the accused.” 

In another narration, `Umar added: “By the One in Whose hands is my soul, had it not been that people would say: ‘`Umar added to the Book of Allah, I would have reinserted it. It (the verse) read: “A married man and woman, if they commit adultery, stone them to death. This is a punishment from Allah. Allah is Almighty and Wise.”

Finally, we would like to note that there are many incidents in the Sunnah and the life of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in which the Prophet stoned the married adulterer and adulteress to death. This happened in the case of Ma`iz and the Ghamidi woman. All this makes it clear that the punishment is proven and authentic and is not debatable.

A concluding—and very chilling—example validating the application of stoning to death for adultery, perhaps most relevant to Nolen/ Jah’Keem Yisrael’s Islamic views, has an active American source: the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA). The mission statement  of AMJA maintains the organization was,

…founded to provide guidance for Muslims living in North America…AMJA is a religious organization that does not exploit religion to achieve any political ends, but instead provides practical solutions within the guidelines of Islam and the nation’s laws to the various challenges experienced by Muslim communities… 

With regard to the Sharia, specifically, AMJA’s stated purpose is to “clarify the rulings of the sharia which are relevant for those who live in America.” AMJA is well-accepted by the mainstream American Muslim community.  The Islamic scholars affiliated with this group maintain influential positions in universities, Islamic centers, and mosques throughout the United States. Notwithstanding this mainstream acceptance, including uncritical endorsement of its annual American conferences to train American imams, AMJA openly sanctions the stoning to death of adulterers, albeit with the “caveat” that the adultery involves intercourse.

AMJA has also issued rulings which sanction the killing of apostates (here), “blasphemers” (including non-Muslims guilty of this “crime”; here), and condone marital rape. Even more ominously, another Arabic-language fatwa from AMJA’s Dr. Salah Al-Sawy leaves open the possibility for offensive jihad against America and the West, as soon as Muslims are strong enough to do so. When asked whether “the Islamic missionary effort in the West … [was] to the point where it could take advantage of offensive jihad,” Al-Sawy ruled:

The Islamic community does not possess the strength to engage in offensive jihad at this time. With our current capabilities, we are aspiring toward defensive jihad, and to improve our position with regards to jurisprudence at this stage. But there is a different discussion for each situation. Allah Almighty knows best.

It is also of grave concern that AMJA, as an American organization, offers only grudging and conditional support to the fundamental notions of acquiring citizenship in, and swearing allegiance to, the U.S. and our Sharia-antithetical governing legal system. Responding to the query: “Is acquiring an American citizenship lawful or prohibited?” AMJA issued fatwa #77223:

As for optionally obtaining citizenship of a non-Muslim country it is definitely prohibited without a doubt, moreover it could be a form of apostasy or main means leading to apostasy because willingly accepting the laws of disbelievers and obeying it without any valid excuse or enforcement, or ignorance is considered a nullifier to Tawheed and Islam, as long as the proof has been established upon this person and the matter and its consequences are as I clarified. As for obtaining citizenships in light of circumstances of Muslims today who are residing outside the lands of Islam — on the condition that they do not accept indefinitely the law and legislation of that country and being indefinite belonging to the nation of the non-Muslim country so that they become loyal to all their allies and an enemy to all their enemies — and obtaining the citizenship is considered a required means in order to organize the affairs of Muslims who already live there while ensuring fulfilling vows and agreements between them and host countries, and exists due to urgent necessities and needs and this Muslim kept his loyalty to Allaah and His Messenger, then it would not be farfetched to say that it would be permissible.

Moreover, what one might wish to deem as circumscribed, “purely Islamic” rulings, fit within a larger disturbing—and entirely unacceptable—seditious context. AMJA’s own words make plain the organization’s long term commitment to superseding the US legal code with its antithesis, a Sharia-based system.

Nolen/ Jah’Keem Yisrael’s Facebook page stated this shared Islamic “vision” more bluntly:

Sharia Law is Coming!