Hudud is meant to be theoretical

[Pikacel]

The nonsense khawarij groups do where they amputate men in public for stealing is Jewish innovation. Same reason they recruit Muslims to blow up Muslims and most of them are ‘reverts’ straight from Israel with Mossad style intelligence techniques

These punishments require ‘4 eye-witnesses’ for a reason; to make them near impossible to convict. To get convicted for committing adultery you’d basically have to do in the town square. At that point blame yourself if you get stoned. Here’s an example:

Mā‘iz ibn Mālik al-Aslami (may Allah be pleased with him) went to the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) while he was in the mosque and confessed to having committed adultery. The Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) turned away from him, hoping that he would retract his statement and repent to Allah in secret. Yet, Mā‘iz was angry with himself, and he was determined to purify his soul through the prescribed punishment. Hence, he went to face the Prophet from the other side and again confessed to having committed adultery. The Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) once more turned his face to the other side, and he kept doing so until Mā‘iz confessed to having committed adultery four times. Afterwards, the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) asked him if he was suffering from any form of insanity, and he answered in the negative. The Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) then asked his family about the state of his mind, and they said that he was fine. The Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) then asked him if he was (currently or previously) married or a virgin, as the punishment of the virgin does not amount to stoning. He told him that he was married. Furthermore, the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) asked him if he had committed complete adultery, and not merely touching or kissing, but the man admitted to having committed complete adultery. After the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) had made sure of the veracity of all of those conditions which require the implementation of the legal prescribed punishment, he ordered his Companions to take the man and stone him to death.

TL;DR: A man confessed to adultery and had to literally beg for the ha’ad punishment.

So you’re clearly meant to legislate relevant and realistic laws on top of the hudud

The hyper-dogmatic rule Taliban and Al Shabaab are trying to carry out is low IQ. Every caliphate in the past drafted their own constitution and laws.

Nation-state that tolerates other religions (allows them to practice) and promotes Islamic values is enough. Going full hudud ‘chop off the hands of thieves’ and stoning in the 21st century is Jewish subversion to sabotage Muslim nations

 

[GobidMujahid]

So you’re clearly meant to legislate relevant and realistic laws on top of the hudud

عَقْل

 

[TBIcel]

A lot of terrorism yes Jewish hudud doubtful because since when do Jews want a more lawful less sexually libertine society.

 

[Loooooser]

My nigga in Christ, Tf u guys on about

 

[BrazilianTrvecel]

My nigga in Christ, Tf u guys on about

• Politics, Philosophy & Religion

 

[BrazilianTrvecel]

Cringe take.
It was narrated from Jabir that:
a woman from Banu Makhzum stole (something), and she was brought to the Prophet. She sought the protection of Umm Salamah, but the Prophet said: "If Fatimah bint Muhammad were to steal, I would cut off her hand." And he ordered that her hand be cut off.

 

[Pikacel]

Cringe take.
It was narrated from Jabir that:
a woman from Banu Makhzum stole (something), and she was brought to the Prophet. She sought the protection of Umm Salamah, but the Prophet said: "If Fatimah bint Muhammad were to steal, I would cut off her hand." And he ordered that her hand be cut off.

It was justified back then because the Sahaba on average had near perfect morals. So yes even the smallest form of theft or deceit warranted a harsh punishment

Doing this in modern times where Muslims are all corrupt jokes is nothing but an excuse for people to satisfy their sadistic urges. Stick to jail sentences or fines.

 

[BrazilianTrvecel]

It was justified back then because the Sahaba on average had near perfect morals. So yes even the smallest form of theft or deceit warranted a harsh punishment

Doing this in modern times where Muslims are all corrupt jokes is just an excuse to torture people and satisfy sadistic urges. Just stick to jail sentences or fines.

Honestly, what kind of Muslim are you?
This is the problem with you esotericists, you try your best to distort clear things to make them fit what you think is right or wrong.
You could say that these groups are Kharijites because of their methodology regarding takfir, but not because they are literalists when it comes to the laws.
The Rashidun Caliphate did not have its own constitution, nor did more recent caliphates like Sokoto.
Allah says in the Quran that "Hukm Ila Lillah,"
To legislate your own laws is a literal shirk because you are giving yourself the power that Allah has granted only to Him.

 

[Pikacel]

Honestly, what kind of Muslim are you?
This is the problem with you esotericists, you try your best to distort clear things to make them fit what you think is right or wrong.
You could say that these groups are Kharijites because of their methodology regarding takfir, but not because they are literalists when it comes to the laws.
The Rashidun Caliphate did not have its own constitution, nor did more recent caliphates like Sokoto.
Allah says in the Quran that "Hukm Ila Lillah,"
To legislate your own laws is a literal shirk because you are giving yourself the power that Allah has granted only to Him.

Bro leave this to the scholars. This isn’t our job

Muslim infighting serves kikes only

 

[BrazilianTrvecel]

Bro leave this to the scholars. This isn’t our job

Muslim infighting serves kikes only

I am simply repeating what I heard from scholars, not interpreting it myself.
Which scholar did you get the things you said above from?

 

[BrazilianTrvecel]

Bro leave this to the scholars. This isn’t our job

Muslim infighting serves kikes only

 

[Pikacel]

I am simply repeating what I heard from scholars, not interpreting it myself.
Which scholar did you get the things you said above from?

Sharia extends past Hudud bro

Many scholars agree that hudud is meant to be nearly impossible to enforce. The requirements of 4 eyewitnesses, discrete values for theft etc proves this.

Sharia is something you’re meant to rule and live by, not a collection of set in stone discrete laws. It requires an highly educated class of scholars with versed understanding of hadith and fiqh capable of making rulings on unseen circumstances and technologies.

Ofc a state that completely ignores scholarly rulings is misguided. But most Muslim states rule by sharia to an extent