Re: The concept of being Stoned to Death
Granted you have a valid point but it did not answer what I asked, isn’t the Quran supposed to supercede the ahadith and all historical accounts.
Thats my dilemma now, its given in crystal clear terms in the Quran yet we are not practicing it. Even the Surah is Madani, which means it was when the muslims had their own state, so its more of a law. What I would want to see is whether the verse was revealed after the incidents of stoning mentioned in the ahadith. None of the scholars has presented any such evidence. There is no time relation between the Quranic verse and the hadith, which mandates stoning.
I am not denying the ahadith but something is not right then. We all know ahadith do not supercede the Quran. If the historical accounts say that the Sahaba practiced Rajm then where is the explanation why, were the Sahaba blind to the Quran I don’t think so.
The Arabic word used in the Quranic ayat i.e. Zani is used for both married and unmarried people, so there is no exception either as many of us claimed before or are claiming now that the ayat only applies to unmarried people. Even the translations mention both adultery and fornication, which covers both cases of married and unmarried people. In some translations it mentions only adultery, which would make it specific to married people only and that still runs counter to the explanation that it applies to unmarried people only.