What is Rajm? The Ruling of Rajm in Islam: Method, Practical Application, and Evidential Explanation

In Islamic Shariah or Fiqh, the term “Rajm” is associated with a severe punishment, primarily applied for crimes such as zina (illicit sexual relations).

Rajm means carrying out the death penalty by stoning. It is part of the Islamic system of Hudud (fixed punishments), which are prescribed to safeguard the limits set by Allah. However, the application of Rajm is subject to stringent conditions and has been very rarely implemented throughout history.

In this article, we will discuss the definition of Rajm in detail, its Islamic sources (the Qur’an and Hadith), juristic opinions, historical applications, contemporary status, related controversies, and common misconceptions. Rajm is not merely a punishment; it represents the protection of morality, justice, and mercy in society. Yet in the modern era, it has become a focal point of debate concerning human rights, gender equality, and religious interpretation. Let us explore the topic in depth.

Definition and Concept of Rajm

Rajm (Arabic: الرجم) is a punishment in which the offender is put to death by stoning. In Islam, it is primarily prescribed for the crime of zina (illicit sexual relations), particularly in the case of married individuals. For unmarried offenders, the prescribed punishment is generally flogging (100 lashes). The objective of Rajm is to eliminate immoral behavior from society and to uphold the limits ordained by Allah.

From an Islamic perspective, Rajm is not a cruel punishment; rather, it is part of Hududullah (the limits set by Allah), intended to preserve moral purity in society. However, its implementation requires extremely stringent proof: either the testimony of four witnesses who have directly and clearly observed the act, or a fourfold voluntary confession by the offender. If there is any doubt (shubha), the punishment is suspended, as stated in the Hadith: “Ward off Hudud punishments in cases of doubt.” This emphasizes mercy, as in Islam, forgiveness of sins and repentance are given priority over punishment.

In the Bangladeshi context, the concept of Rajm is often misunderstood. Many view it as an “outdated punishment” that conflicts with modern legal systems. However, Islamic scholars clarify that it is applicable only within a fully established Islamic state system, where society operates at a high moral standard.

In this article, we will discuss—using authentic sources and verbatim texts—the origins of these rulings, the circumstances under which they may be applied, and the situations in which their application would constitute injustice (zulm).

Gradual Legislation of Punishment for Adultery

The rulings of Islam were generally introduced in stages and progressive phases. Just as the prohibition of alcohol was implemented in multiple stages, the punishment for adultery (Zina) was also determined gradually. This approach ensured that society was not abruptly confronted with severe penalties, but was instead led toward moral and legal reform through a steady transition.

In the initial stage, instead of a harsh physical penalty, social control measures were adopted as the punishment for adultery. Allah (SWT) states:

““And those of your women who commit illegal sexual intercourse, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death comes to them or Allah ordains for them some other way.” (Surah An-Nisa: 15)

Commentators of the Qur’an (Mufassirun) explain that the “other way” (Sabila) mentioned in this verse refers to the final Shariah punishments that were to be determined later. Eventually, these punishments were explicitly established: one hundred lashes for an unmarried adulterer and the ruling of Rajm (stoning) for a married adulterer.

This interpretation is supported by a clear Hadith. Ubadah ibn as-Samit (RA) reported that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:—

““Take from me, take from me. Allah has now ordained a way for them. For the unmarried male and female, one hundred lashes and one year of exile; and for the married male and female, one hundred lashes and Rajm (stoning).”

(Source: Sahih Muslim, Book of Punishments (Kitab al-Hudud), Hadith No: 4320; Sunan Abi Dawud (4415), Jami` at-Tirmidhi (1434), and Sunan Ibn Majah (2550))

From this, it is evident that the punishment for adultery was not introduced suddenly. Rather, it was determined in stages to prepare society, ultimately being established as a clear and specific legal ruling in its final phase.

The Provision of Rajm (Stoning) in the Qur’an, Hadith, and Fiqh:

A detailed explanation on this subject in light of the Qur’an and Sunnah is provided below:

A. The Holy Qur’an and the Provision of Rajm

‘Naskh’ (Abrogation) is a recognized subject in Usul-al-Fiqh (Principles of Jurisprudence) and Quranic Studies. Imam Jalaluddin al-Suyuti (RA) has discussed the three types of Naskh in detail in his famous book, ‘Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Quran’:

1. First Type: Abrogation of both the Text and the Ruling (Naskh al-Tilawah wa al-Hukm).
2. Second Type: Abrogation of the Ruling while the Text remains (Naskh al-Hukm duna al-Tilawah) – for example, the initial verses regarding the prohibition of alcohol.
3. Third Type: Abrogation of the Text while the Ruling remains in force (Naskh al-Tilawah duna al-Hukm) – the verse of Rajm falls under this category.

Currently, when we recite the Quran, the word ‘Rajm’ or any verse regarding this punishment is not explicitly written. However, significant information from Islamic history and Hadith literature on this subject is as follows:

1) Mansukh al-Tilawah (Surah An-Nur and Surah Al-Ahzab) [Verses with abrogated recitation]:

It is narrated from Hazrat Umar (RA) and other Companions that the verse of Rajm was indeed revealed and was a part of the Quran. Subsequently, by the command of Allah Almighty, the ruling to ‘recite’ or read the text was abrogated, but its ‘legal ruling’ (Hukm) has been kept in force until the Day of Judgment.

i. Hazrat Aisha (RA) narrated —

Sunan Ibn Majah

Chapter 9: Marriage Section 9/36: Suckling of an Adult

2/1944. It was narrated that ‘Aishah (RA) said: “The Verse of Rajm (stoning) and the Verse of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the Messenger of Allah ﷺ passed away and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate it.”

References: Ibn Majah 1944; Sahih al-Bukhari 1452; Nasai 3307, 2062; Muwatta Malik 1293; Darimi 2253; Ta’liq Ibn Majah.

Grading by Al-Albani: Hasan (Good);

Biographical Analysis of Narrators: Regarding the narrator Muhammad bin Ishaq, Yahya bin Ma’in and Al-Ajli stated that he is Thiqah (Trustworthy). Ahmad bin Hanbal said he is Hasanul Hadith (a narrator of good Hadith). Ali ibn al-Madini stated he is Salih (Righteous). (Reference: Tahdhib al-Kamal, Narrator No. 5057, Vol. 24, Page 405).

Hadith Grade: Hasan (Good)

Hadith Commentary:

1. The Concept of Protection: Scholars explain that even though the physical paper was lost, the revelation was not lost. Allah is the protector of the Quran. The loss of the paper was the physical means by which Allah enacted the Naskh al-Tilawah (Abrogation of Recitation).
2. Hasan vs. Sahih: While some parts of this narration are in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim (establishing the ruling of Rajm), this specific wording about the goat is graded Hasan due to the narrator Muhammad bin Ishaq.
3. Preservation: The Sahaba already had the verse of Rajm memorized and practiced. Hazrat Umar (RA) confirmed its existence on the pulpit, proving that the loss of the paper did not affect the establishment of the Law.

ii) Hazrat Umar (RA) said in a sermon:

Sahih Muslim (Hadith Academy)

Chapter 30: The Prescribed Punishments (Al-Hudud) Section 4: Stoning of a Married Person for Adultery

4310-(15/1691). It was narrated from Abdullah bin Abbas (RA) that he said: “Umar bin Khattab (RA) sat on the pulpit of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and said: ‘Indeed, Allah sent Muhammad ﷺ with the truth and revealed the Book (Quran) to him. Among what Allah revealed was the Verse of Rajm (stoning for adultery). We recited it, memorized it, and understood it. Accordingly, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ implemented the punishment of stoning, and after him, we also implemented it. I fear that as time passes, someone might say: “We do not find the command of stoning in the Book of Allah.” Thus, they would go astray by abandoning an obligatory duty (Fard) revealed by Allah. Indeed, the punishment of Rajm in the Book of Allah is a established truth against married men and women who commit adultery—when it is proven by evidence, or if pregnancy occurs, or by self-confession.'”* (Note: The recitation of this verse has been abrogated (Mansukh), but its legal ruling remains in effect.)

References: Sahih al-Bukhari 2462, 3445, 3928, 4021, 6830; Sahih Muslim 1691; Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1432; Sunan Abi Dawud 4418; Sunan Ibn Majah 2553; Musnad Ahmad 151, 155; Muwatta Malik 1558; Sunan ad-Darimi 2322. A similar narration is found in Musnad Ahmad (391) narrated by Ubaidullah bin Abdullah.

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic)

Scholarly Commentary: The Foresight of Hazrat Umar (RA)

The statement of Hazrat Umar (RA) from the pulpit is considered one of the most critical legal testimonies in Islamic history. It serves as the primary evidence for the “Third Type of Naskh” (Abrogation of Text, Persistence of Ruling).

a. A Prophetic Prediction of Modern Skepticism Hazrat Umar’s fear that “someone might say: ‘We do not find the command of stoning in the Book of Allah'” has literally come true in the modern era. Today, various “Quranist” groups or modernist thinkers use the absence of the written verse to reject the punishment. Umar (RA) anticipated this 1,400 years ago, emphasizing that Sunnah is an integral part of the “Divine Way” even if the specific words were removed from the physical Mushaf.

b. Distinction Between “Recitation” and “Law” This Hadith clarifies that a ruling does not lose its status as a “Divine Obligation” (Fard) simply because its recitation was abrogated. The Sahaba (RA) were the primary guardians of the Quran; their unanimous agreement that the verse existed—and their continued practice of it after the Prophet’s ﷺ death—constitutes Ijma (Consensus), the third source of Islamic Law.

c. Three Modes of Legal Proof The Hadith explicitly outlines the three ways a Hadd (Prescribed) punishment can be established in court:

• Bayyinah (Evidence): The testimony of four upright male witnesses.
• Hamal (Pregnancy): Which, in a Shariah court, serves as circumstantial evidence for a married individual (subject to strict judicial scrutiny).
• I’tiraf (Confession): A voluntary admission of guilt.

d. Safeguarding the “Balance of Justice” By delivering this speech on the pulpit (Minbar) in front of a massive gathering of Sahaba, and with no one objecting, it became a fact that Rajm is a part of the Religion. If it were an error, the Sahaba—who were famous for correcting the Caliphs—would have spoken up immediately.

The Scholarly Commentary of Imam al-Nawawi (RA)

Imam al-Nawawi (RA) explains that the text of the abrogated (Mansukh) verse was as follows: “الشيخ والشيخة إذا زنيا فارجموهما البة” “The married man and the married woman, if they commit adultery, stone them both certainly.”

He clarifies that while the Lafz (wording/text) of this verse was abrogated, its Hukm (legal ruling) was not. Instead, it remains an active and established part of the Shariah.

a. The Consensus of the Companions (Sahaba)

When the Caliph Umar (RA) publicly declared the ruling of Rajm from the pulpit, not a single Companion present objected. Their silent consensus (Ijma al-Sukuti) serves as definitive proof that the ruling of Rajm was well-established and unanimous among the Sahaba. Had they perceived any legal error in his statement, they would have undoubtedly corrected him, as was their custom in safeguarding the religion.

b. Fulfillment of Umar (RA)’s Fear

The apprehension expressed by Umar (RA) in his sermon—“I fear that in the future, someone will come and say that the ruling of Rajm is not in the Quran”—materialized exactly as he predicted. In later periods, certain deviant groups, including the Khawarij, began to deny the validity of Rajm. Imam al-Nawawi (RA) notes that Umar (RA)’s foresight was realized specifically through the emergence of these groups.

c. Proofs for Implementation

In the same sermon, Umar (RA) stated: “The punishment shall be applicable when there is clear testimony of adultery, or pregnancy occurs, or if the individuals confess to the crime.”

d. The Legal Debate on Pregnancy as Evidence

Regarding pregnancy, the position of Umar (RA) was that if a woman becomes pregnant without having a husband or a legal master, the pregnancy itself serves as sufficient evidence of adultery, thereby necessitating the ruling of Rajm. Imam Malik (RA) issued fatwas in support of this position.

However, Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) and Imam al-Shafi’i (RA) held a different view. They maintained that Rajm cannot be applied based on pregnancy alone. Their reasoning is rooted in a fundamental principle of Islamic Law: “Hadd punishments are warded off by doubts” (al-Hudud tudra’u bi al-shubuhat). Since there is a slight possibility of a non-adulterous cause for pregnancy (however rare), the “doubt” prevents the execution of the maximum penalty.

Footnote: Commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 6830

The Khawarij and certain Mu’tazila sects deny the verse of Rajm (stoning) mentioned in the context of the Quran, despite the fact that while its recitation (Tilawah) was abrogated (Mansukh), its legal ruling (Hukm) remains in effect.

The verse in question is: “الشيخ والشيخة إذا زنيا فارجموهما البتة” (The married man and the married woman, if they commit adultery, stone them both certainly as a matter of course).

There is extensive evidence confirming that this verse was part of the Quran and that its legal ruling remains binding:

Narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari (Hadith No. 6819): The historical event of the stoning of a Jewish man and woman. Also, the stoning of Ma’iz bin Malik (Hadith No. 6814, 6824).

Narrated by Abdur Razzaq and Imam al-Tabari from Ibn Abbas (RA): Umar (RA) said: “A people will soon come who will deny the truth of Rajm.”

Narrated in Sunan al-Nasai from Ubaidullah bin Abdullah bin Utbah from Umar (RA): “Some people say: ‘What is this matter of stoning? In the Book of Allah, there is only the mention of flogging.’ Beware! Indeed, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ practiced stoning.”

Narrated in Muwatta Malik from Sa’id bin al-Musayyib from Umar (RA): “Beware lest you perish by neglecting the Verse of Rajm, such that someone says, ‘I do not find two distinct punishments [flogging and stoning] in the Book of Allah.’ For indeed, stoning was practiced [by the Prophet ﷺ].”

Why was the Recitation Abrogated? (The Divine Wisdom/Hikmah)

Islamic scholars have highlighted several profound reasons behind this specific type of abrogation (Naskh)—where the wording is removed but the law remains:

• A Test for the Ummah: Allah intended to test the believers to see if they are merely followers of written words on paper, or if they place full trust and authority in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and the Consensus (Ijma) of the Sahaba. It distinguishes those who accept the entirety of Divine Guidance from those who selectively follow only what is explicitly written in the Mushaf.
• The Severity of the Punishment: Rajm (stoning) is an exceptionally severe penalty. Out of His immense Mercy, Allah Almighty did not keep these harsh words permanently as part of the recited Quranic text. However, recognizing its necessity in building a society free from the ruins of adultery, He maintained the legal ruling through the Sunnah to serve as a powerful deterrent.

2) The Current Verse of the Quran (For Unmarried Individuals)

The verse currently written in the Quran (Surah An-Nur, Verse 2) primarily addresses the punishment for unmarried individuals who commit adultery/fornication:

“The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with a hundred stripes…” (Surah An-Nur: 2)

This is the most direct and explicit ruling regarding the punishment for Zina (adultery/fornication) in the Quran. In this verse, there is no mention of Rajm (stoning); instead, the punishment is 100 lashes, applicable to both men and women.

The Scholarly Interpretation

Scholars (such as the author of Tafsir Ma’ariful Quran) explain that this specific verse applies to unmarried individuals, whereas the punishment of Rajm for married individuals is added and established through the Hadith.

In other words, according to Islamic jurists (Fuqaha), this Quranic verse governs the case of unmarried offenders, while the ruling for married offenders is determined by the Sunnah as a supplementary and specific legislation.

B. Evidence from the Sunnah (Hadith)

1. The Case of Ubadah bin Samit (RA): Explicit Ruling of Rajm

Reference: Sahih Muslim (1690); Sunan Abi Dawud (4415).

“عَنْ عُبَادَةَ بْنَ الصَّامِتِ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ خُذُوا عَنِّي خُذُوا عَنِّي قَدْ جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لَهُنَّ سَبِيلًا الْبِكْرُ بِالْبِكْرِ جَلْدُ مِائَةٍ وَنَفْىُ سَنَةٍ وَالثَّيِّبُ بِالثَّيِّبِ جَلْدُ مِائَةٍ وَرَجْمٌ”

“The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Take from me, take from me! Allah has now ordained a way for them. For the unmarried male and female (who commit zina), the punishment is one hundred lashes and one year of exile. For the married male and female, it is one hundred lashes and stoning (Rajm).’ 

– Sahih Muslim – Book: The Book of Legal Punishments (Kitāb al-Ḥudūd), Hadith No.: 1690 (Darussalam numbering); Status: Sahih; Sunan Abu Dawood – Book: Kitāb al-Ḥudūd, Hadith No.: 4415, Status: Sahih; Jamiʿ at-Tirmidhi – Book: Ḥudūd, Hadith No.: 1434, Status: Hasan Sahih; Sunan an-Nasa’i – Book: Kitāb ar-Rajm (Stoning), Hadith No.: 7145, Status: Sahih; Sunan Ibn Mājah – Book: Ḥudūd, Hadith No.: 2550, Status: Sahih (supported by Sahih Muslim); Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal – Hadith No.: 22720 (varies by edition), Status: Sahih.

Commentary: This Hadith is the most definitive proof for the classification of punishments. It specifies that Rajm is exclusively for Thayyib (married/previously married) individuals. It is the cornerstone for all four schools of Fiqh (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali).

2. The Case of Ma’iz bin Malik (RA): Implementation via Confession

Reference: Sahih Bukhari (6824); Sahih Muslim (1691).

“عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ سَمُرَةَ قَالَ جَاءَ مَاعِزُ بْنُ مَالِكٍ إِلَى النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنِّي زَنَيْتُ فَأَعْرَضَ عَنْهُ فَعَادَ فَقَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنِّي زَنَيْتُ فَأَعْرَضَ عَنْهُ فَعَادَ فَقَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنِّي زَنَيْتُ فَأَعْرَضَ عَنْهُ فَعَادَ فَقَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنِّي زَنَيْتُ فَأَمَرَ بِهِ فَرُجِمَ”

অনুবাদ: “Jabir bin Samurah (RA) narrated: Ma’iz bin Malik came to the Prophet ﷺ and said, “O Messenger of Allah! I have committed Zina.” The Prophet ﷺ turned away from him. He repeated it three more times. On the fourth time, the Prophet ﷺ asked, “Are you insane?” He said no. He asked, “Are you married?” He replied, “Yes.” Then the Prophet ﷺ ordered that he be stoned.”

Commentary: This case demonstrates that the Prophet ﷺ encouraged repentance (Tawbah) first and tried to avoid the punishment until the confession was made four times. It proves that a self-confession is a valid legal ground for Rajm, but judicial mercy is prioritized.

A similar hadith has also been narrated as follows –

Narrated from Burayda (RA):

Once, Mayzah ibn Malik (RA) came to the Prophet ﷺ and said, “O Messenger of Allah ﷺ! Purify me.” The Prophet ﷺ said, “Turn away, seek forgiveness from Allah, and repent.”

The narrator said that he went away, but shortly after, he returned and said again, “O Messenger of Allah ﷺ! Purify me.” The Prophet ﷺ again told him the same.

This happened until the fourth time when he came and said the same. Then the Messenger of Allah ﷺ asked, “Alright! From what shall I purify you?” He replied, “From zina (adultery/fornication).”

Upon hearing this, the Prophet ﷺ asked the companions, “Is this man insane?” People replied, “No, he is not insane.” Then he asked, “Has this man consumed alcohol?” One person went to smell his mouth, but no trace of alcohol was found.

Then the Prophet ﷺ asked him, “Have you really committed zina?” He said, “Yes.” After this, the Prophet ﷺ ordered that he be stoned (rajm), and he was stoned accordingly.

A few days after this incident, the Prophet ﷺ came in front of the companions and said, “Pray for forgiveness for Mayzah ibn Malik. For indeed, he has repented so sincerely that if his repentance were to be distributed among the entire Ummah, it would be sufficient for all.”

Reference: Sahih Muslim, Miskat al-Masabih, Hadith no. 3562
Grade of Hadith: Sahih (authentic)

The Ghamidiyah Woman: Pregnancy and Repentance

Reference: Sahih Muslim (1695/1696); Bulugh al-Maram (1212).

“عَنْ عِمْرَانَ بْنِ حُصَيْنٍ أَنَّ امْرَأَةً مِنْ جُهَيْنَةَ أَتَتْ نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَهِيَ حُبْلَى مِنَ الزِّنَا فَقَالَتْ يَا نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ أَصَبْتُ حَدًّا فَأَقِمْهُ عَلَيَّ فَدَعَا نَبِيُّ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَلِيَّهَا فَقَالَ أَحْسِنْ إِلَيْهَا فَإِذَا وَضَعَتْ فَأْتِنِي بِهَا فَفَعَلَ فَأَمَرَ بِهَا نَبِيُّ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَشُدَّتْ عَلَيْهَا ثِيَابُهَا ثُمَّ أَمَرَ بِهَا فَرُجِمَتْ”

অনুবাদ: “A woman from the Juhaynah (or Ghamid) tribe came to the Prophet ﷺ while pregnant from Zina and said, “O Prophet of Allah! I have committed a crime deserving of a legal penalty (Hadd), so execute it upon me.” The Prophet ﷺ called her guardian and said, “Treat her kindly. When she gives birth, bring her to me.” After the child was born and later weaned, the punishment was carried out. Khalid bin Walid (RA) cursed her during the process, but the Prophet ﷺ rebuked him saying: “Stop, O Khalid! By Him in Whose Hand is my soul, she has offered such a repentance that if it were distributed among seventy of the people of Medina, it would be sufficient for all of them.”

Commentary: This Hadith highlights two critical points:

1. Protection of the Innocent: The punishment was delayed twice—once for the child’s birth and again for weaning—to ensure the infant’s life was not harmed.
2. Spiritual Status: The Prophet ﷺ leading her funeral prayer (Janazah) proves that the punishment serves as a complete purification from the sin in the eyes of Allah.

Explanation: This hadith shows that pregnancy can also be considered as evidence of zina (adultery/fornication) if there is a confession or if the husband denies it. The Prophet ﷺ waited until the child was born and then performed the punishment followed by the funeral prayer, which demonstrates that rajm serves to expiate the sin. This forms the basis of the Maliki school of thought for using pregnancy as evidence.

A similar narration is reported as well –

Buraida (RA) reported:

A woman from the Gamidi tribe came to the Prophet ﷺ and said:

“O Messenger of Allah ﷺ! Purify me.”

He said: “Regret be upon you! Go, seek forgiveness from Allah, and repent.”

The woman replied: “Do you intend to turn me away as you did Mayyiz ibn Malik? Look, I am pregnant due to zina!”

The Prophet ﷺ asked: “Are you really pregnant?” She said: “Yes.”

He then said: “Go, wait until your child is born.”

The narrator said: An Ansari man took responsibility for her care until the child was delivered. After the delivery, the man came to the Prophet ﷺ and said:

“O Messenger of Allah! The Gamidi woman has delivered her child.”

He ﷺ said: “We cannot punish her while the child is left without someone to nurse it.”

Then, another Ansari stood up and said: “O Prophet of Allah! I will take care of breastfeeding the child.”

The narrator said: Then she was stoned (rajm).

In another narration, the Prophet ﷺ said to the woman: “Go and wait until the child is born.” After delivery, he ﷺ said again: “Go and arrange for breastfeeding and wait until the child is weaned.”

After the child was weaned, the woman came with a piece of bread for the child in her hand and presented herself to the Prophet ﷺ. She said: “O Prophet of Allah! The child has been weaned and can even eat from its own hand.”

The Prophet ﷺ handed the child to a Muslim guardian, then ordered a pit to be dug for her. The pit was dug up to her chest, and those present stoned her. Khalid ibn Walid (RA) advanced and struck a stone at her head, which caused blood to splash onto her face. He then rebuked and scolded her.

The Prophet ﷺ said: “O Khalid, stop! By Him in Whose Hand is my life! She has performed such sincere repentance that if any great sinner were to do the same, he would also be forgiven.”

Then he ﷺ ordered her funeral prayer, and she was buried.

Grade of Hadith: Sahih

Source: Sahih Muslim, Mishkat al-Masabih, Hadith no. 3562

There are more –

Buloogul Maram – Chapter 08: Delaying the Rajm (Stoning) of a Pregnant Woman until She Gives Birth

Hadith 1212 – Narrated from Imran ibn Husain (RA):

A woman from the Juhainah tribe, who had become pregnant due to zina, came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and said:

“O Messenger of Allah! I am liable for the hadd punishment. Implement the hadd of zina upon me.”

The Prophet ﷺ called her guardian (wali) and said:

“Treat her well. When she gives birth, bring her to me.”

The guardian did as instructed. After she gave birth, he brought her to the Prophet ﷺ. The Prophet ﷺ ordered her outer garment to be properly fastened to preserve her modesty, and then, following his instruction, she was stoned (rajm). Afterward, he ﷺ led her funeral prayer (Salat al-Janazah).

Umar (RA) said:

“O Messenger of Allah! She committed zina, yet you led her funeral prayer?”

The Prophet ﷺ replied:

“She has performed such sincere repentance that if it were distributed among seventy people of Madinah, it would suffice for them. O Umar! Have you seen anyone better than this, who has given her soul entirely for Allah?”

More References: Sahih Muslim 1319 (Muslim 1696), Jami’ at-Tirmidhi 1435, Sunan an-Nasa’i 1997, Sunan Abu Dawud 4440, Sunan Ibn Majah 2555, Musnad Ahmad 19360, 19402, Al-Darimi 2325

Grade of Hadith: Sahih

4. Narration of Abu Hurairah (RA): The Rule of Lineage and Punishment

Reference: Sahih Bukhari (6817, 6818); Sahih Muslim (1457).

“عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الْوَلَدُ لِلْفِرَاشِ وَلِلْعَاهِرِ الْحَجَرُ”

The Prophet ﷺ said: “The child belongs to the bed (the legal husband), and for the adulterer is the stone.”

Explanation: This hadith forms a fundamental basis of Islamic family law and penal code. It has two main aspects:

• Punishment of the Adulterer: The phrase “stoning for the adulterer” (Al-Hajar) is understood by the scholars (ulama) to refer to Rajm, i.e., execution by stoning. This is both metaphorically and literally applicable, supporting the ruling of Rajm. Imam Bukhari (RA) compiled this hadith under the chapter of Rajm, demonstrating that the punishment for a married adulterer is indeed stoning.
• Legitimacy of the Child: If a married woman commits zina and gives birth, the child is legally considered her husband’s offspring (unless the husband explicitly denies it through the prescribed method). In other words, zina does not nullify the child’s lineage.

Further Examples of the Prophet ﷺ Implementing Adultery Rulings

The Case of the Laborer and the Compensation

Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 2724, 2725.

Narrated by Abu Hurairah and Zaid bin Khalid al-Juhani (RA): A desert Arab came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and said, “O Messenger of Allah! I beseech you by Allah to judge my case according to the Book of Allah.” His opponent, who was more learned than him, said, “Yes, judge between us according to the Book of Allah, and allow me to speak.” The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, “Speak.”

He said, “My son was a laborer working for this man and he committed illegal sexual intercourse (Zina) with his wife. I was informed that the legal punishment for my son was Rajm (stoning). So, I ransomed my son from him with one hundred sheep and a slave girl. Later, I asked the people of knowledge, and they informed me that the legal punishment for my son is one hundred lashes and exile for one year, while the punishment of Rajm is for the wife of this man.”

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “By Him in Whose Hand is my soul, I will definitely judge between you according to the Book of Allah. The slave girl and the sheep must be returned to you. Your son is to be punished with one hundred lashes and exile for one year. O Unays! Go tomorrow morning to the wife of this man, and if she confesses, stone her.” The narrator added: Unays went to her the next morning, she confessed, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ ordered her to be stoned.

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic) 

And The Case of the Man from the Aslam Tribe –

Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 5271 (also 6815, 6825; Sahih Muslim 1691).

Narrated by Abu Hurairah (RA): A man from the tribe of Aslam came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ while he was in the mosque and called out, “O Messenger of Allah! This unfortunate man has committed Zina.” He was referring to himself. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ turned his face away from him. The man moved to the side the Prophet ﷺ had turned to and repeated, “O Messenger of Allah! This unfortunate man has committed Zina.” The Prophet ﷺ turned his face away again. The man moved once more to the side the Prophet ﷺ was facing and repeated his statement.

When he had witnessed against himself four times, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ called him and asked: “Are you insane?” He replied, “No.” The Prophet ﷺ then said: “Take him away and stone him.” The man was a Muhsan (married/previously married).

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic)

Scholarly Commentary:

1. “According to the Book of Allah”: Note that the Prophet ﷺ used the phrase “Judge according to the Book of Allah,” yet he ordered Rajm. This proves that “The Book of Allah” includes both the recited Quran and the rulings inspired by Allah (Sunnah).
2. Private Settlements vs. Shariah Law: The first Hadith shows that Hudud punishments (fixed penalties) cannot be settled privately with money or livestock. The law must be upheld by the state.
3. Encouraging Repentance: In the second Hadith, the Prophet ﷺ turned away four times. This indicates that the judge should not be eager to punish, but rather give the person a chance to withdraw their confession and repent privately to Allah.

5. Umar (RA): The Verse of Rajm and the Continuity of its Ruling

Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari (6829, 6830); Sahih Muslim (1691).

“عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ قَالَ قَالَ عُمَرُ لَقَدْ خَشِيتُ أَنْ يَطُولَ بِالنَّاسِ زَمَانٌ حَتَّى يَقُولَ قَائِلٌ لاَ نَجِدُ الرَّجْمَ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ فَيَضِلُّوا بِتَرْكِ فَرِيضَةٍ أَنْزَلَهَا اللَّهُ أَلاَ وَإِنَّ الرَّجْمَ حَقٌّ عَلَى مَنْ زَنَى وَقَدْ أَحْصَنَ إِذَا قَامَتِ الْبَيِّنَةُ أَوْ كَانَ الْحَمْلُ أَوْ الاِعْتِرَافُ”

“Ibn Abbas (RA) narrated that Umar (RA) said: “I am afraid that with the lapse of time, people will say, ‘We do not find the Verse of Rajm (stoning) in the Book of Allah,’ and thus they will go astray by abandoning an obligation (Faridah) revealed by Allah. Lo! Stoning is a duty (Haqq) upon those who commit adultery provided they are married (Muhsan), if the proof is established, or if there is pregnancy, or a confession.”

Explanation: This Hadith serves as a historical and legal bridge. It confirms that the Verse of Rajm was originally part of the Quranic revelation, but while its written text was abrogated (Naskh al-Tilawah), its legal authority remained intact. Hazrat Umar (RA) reinforced this through the Sunnah to ensure the Ummah remains guided. Furthermore, this narration outlines the three distinct methods of legal proof required for implementing the punishment: clear testimony (witnesses), pregnancy, or self-confession.

In Sunan al-Tirmidhi, similar hadith narrated by Umar (RA) –

Sunan al-Tirmidhi

Chapter 17: Prescribed Punishments (Al-Hudud) Section: Evidence of ‘Rajm’ (Stoning)

1437. It was narrated from Umar bin al-Khattab (RA) that he said: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ implemented the ruling of Rajm, Abu Bakr (RA) implemented the ruling of Rajm, and I too have implemented the ruling of Rajm. Had I not considered it a forbidden innovation to add to the Book of Allah, I would have certainly written this ruling into the Book of Allah. This is because I fear that a group of people will emerge in the future who, upon not finding the ruling of Rajm in the Book of Allah, will deny it.”

References: Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1431 (International), 1437 (IF); Sahih al-Bukhari 6362, 6841; Sahih Muslim 1699; Sunan Abi Dawud 4449; Musnad Ahmad 4498; Mishkat al-Masabih 3559.

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic) Imam at-Tirmidhi noted: “The Hadith of Umar (RA) is Hasan-Sahih. It has been narrated through multiple chains of narration from Umar (RA).” Narrations on this subject are also reported from Ali (RA).

Scholarly Commentary: The Legal Consistency of the Caliphs

This narration is vital as it establishes a “Legal Chain of Custody” for the ruling of Rajm through the first three leaders of Islam:

1. Continuity of Practice: Hazrat Umar (RA) highlights that this was not a new or isolated law. It was practiced by the Prophet ﷺ, maintained by the first Caliph Abu Bakr (RA), and continued during his own caliphate. This establishes Ijma (Consensus).
2. Respect for the Quranic Text: Umar’s (RA) statement—“Had I not considered it forbidden to add to the Book”—is a profound testament to the Sahaba’s integrity. They were so committed to preserving the exact wording of the Quran that they refused to re-insert a verse that Allah had chosen to abrogate in recitation (Tilawah), even though the law remained valid.
3. The Predictability of Deviance: This Hadith serves as a “spiritual warning.” It identifies the denial of Rajm as a sign of a group that prioritizes their own limited reading of the text over the established Sunnah and the historical practice of the Prophet’s closest companions.

6. Confirmation of Rajm (Stoning) from the Torah

Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari (6819, 3635); Sahih Muslim (1699).

“عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ أَنَّ يَهُودِيًّا وَيَهُودِيَّةً أُتِيَا بِهِمَا إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَقَدْ زَنَيَا فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مَا تَجِدُونَ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ لِمَنْ زَنَى قَالُوا نُسَوِّدُ وُجُوهَهُمَا وَنُحَمِّلُهُمْ قَالَ ائْتُوا بِالتَّوْرَاةِ فَاقْرَءُوهَا إِنْ كُنْتُمْ صَادِقِينَ فَجَاءُوا بِهَا فَقَرَءُوهَا حَتَّى إِذَا مَرُّوا بِآيَةِ الرَّجْمِ وَضَعَ الْيَهُودِيُّ يَدَهُ عَلَيْهَا فَقَالَ ابْنُ صُورِيَّا ارْفَعْ يَدَكَ فَإِذَا آيَةُ الرَّجْمِ تَحْتَ يَدِهِ فَأَمَرَ بِهِمَا فَرُجِمَا”

It was narrated from Ibn Umar (RA) that a Jewish man and a Jewish woman were brought to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, having committed adultery. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ asked them, “What do you find in the Torah regarding the punishment for adultery?” They replied, “We blacken their faces and publicly shame them.” The Prophet ﷺ said, “Bring the Torah and read it, if you are truthful.” They brought it and began to read until they reached the Verse of Rajm, at which point the Jewish man placed his hand over it (to hide it). Ibn Suriya (a Jewish scholar who had converted) said, “Lift your hand!” When he lifted his hand, the Verse of Rajm was revealed beneath it. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ then ordered that they both be stoned.”

The similar narration is in Muwatta Malik –

Muwatta Malik

Book 41: Fixed Punishments (Al-Hudud) Section 1: Stoning (Al-Rajm)

Narration 1. Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) narrated: A group of Jews came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and mentioned that a man and a woman from among them had committed adultery. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ asked them, “What is the command in the Torah regarding stoning (Rajm)?” They replied, “We shame them and flog them.” Abdullah ibn Salam (RA) said, “You are lying. Indeed, the punishment of stoning is in the Torah. Bring the Torah and read it.”

They opened the Torah, and one of them placed his hand over the Verse of Stoning and read only the verses before and after it. Abdullah ibn Salam said to him, “Lift your hand!” When he lifted his hand, the Verse of Stoning was revealed underneath it. All the Jews then admitted, “Abdullah ibn Salam has spoken the truth; the Verse of Stoning is indeed in the Torah.”

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ then ordered that both of them be stoned, and they were subsequently stoned. Abdullah ibn Umar (RA) said: “I saw the man leaning over the woman to protect her from the stones.”

Imam Malik (RA) commented: The phrase “leaning over her” means the man was hunching over the woman to shield her from the impact of the stones, bearing the pain of the stoning himself to protect her.

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic)

Muttafaq ‘Alayhi: This same incident has been detailed by Imam Bukhari (Hadith no. 3635) and Imam Muslim (Hadith no. 1699) in their respective books.

Scholarly Commentary:

• The Witness of Abdullah ibn Salam (RA): Abdullah ibn Salam was a high-ranking Jewish Rabbi before converting to Islam. His presence in this narration is critical because it proves that the Prophet ﷺ did not just “claim” what was in the Torah; he was supported by an expert of that scripture who knew where the truth was hidden.
• Mercy within Judgment: The observation by Ibn Umar (RA) regarding the man leaning over the woman is a profound detail. It shows the human element and the weight of the moment. Even in a situation of legal punishment, the Sahaba recorded the psychological and emotional realities of those involved.
• Judicial Consistency: This narration confirms that the Prophet ﷺ viewed Rajm as a universal Divine Decree for married individuals, applicable across different religious communities when they sought his judgment.

Another similar narration –

Sahih al-Bukhari (Islamic Foundation)

Chapter 52: Tafsir (Interpretation of the Quran) Section 2313: “Say: Bring the Torah and read it, if you are truthful” (Surah Al-Imran 3:93)

4200. Narrated by Abdullah bin Umar (RA): The Jews came to the Prophet ﷺ with a man and a woman from among them who had committed adultery. The Prophet ﷺ asked them, “How do you punish your adulterers?” They replied, “We blacken their faces and beat them.” The Messenger of Allah ﷺ asked, “Do you not find the legal ruling of stoning (Rajm) in the Torah?” They said, “We do not find anything related to it therein.”

Then, Abdullah bin Salam (RA) said, “You are lying! Bring the Torah and read it if you are truthful.” When the Torah was brought for recitation, their religious scholar (the reciter) placed his hand over the verse of stoning and began reading only what was before and after it, skipping the verse of Rajm. Abdullah bin Salam (RA) moved the man’s hand away and asked, “What is this?” When they saw the situation was undeniable, they confessed, “This is the verse of Rajm.”

Subsequently, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ ordered them to be stoned, and both were stoned near the place of funeral prayers (Janazagah) beside the Mosque. Ibn Umar (RA) added: “I saw the man leaning over the woman, trying to protect her from the stones.”

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic) Narrator: Abdullah bin Umar (RA)

Explanation: This shows that the Prophet ﷺ affirmed the punishment of Rajm in the Torah and accepted it for the Muslims as well. This forms the basis for the Ijma (consensus) on Rajm.

7. The Testimony of Abdullah ibn Abi Awfa (RA)

Source: Al-Lu’lu’ wal-Marjan

Chapter: Al-Hudud (Prescribed Punishments)

Hadith No: 1105

Narrated by Al-Shaybani (RA): He said: “I asked Abdullah ibn Abi Awfa (RA), ‘Did the Messenger of Allah ﷺ implement the punishment of stoning (Rajm)?’ He replied, ‘Yes.’ I then asked, ‘Was it before or after the revelation of Surah an-Nur?’ He answered, ‘I do not know.'”

References: Sahih al-Bukhari, Book 86, Chapter 21, Hadith No. 6813; Sahih Muslim, Book 29, Hadith No. 1702.

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic)

Explanation: This hadith primarily provides indisputable evidence for the ruling of Rajm and highlights the integrity and trustworthiness of the Sahabah (may Allah be pleased with them).

8. Cases Where the Life of a Muslim is Legally Forfeited

Source: Sahih Muslim (Hadith Academy)

Chapter 29: Al-Qasamah (Oaths), Al-Muharibin (Combating Rebels), Qisas (Retaliation), and Diyat (Blood Money)

Section 6: When the Killing of a Muslim is Lawful

Hadith No: 4267 (25/1676)

Narrated by Abdullah (RA): The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “The blood of a Muslim who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah, cannot be lawfully shed except in one of three cases:

1. A married person who commits adultery (Zina);
2. A life for a life (retaliation for murder);
3. One who reverts from his religion (Apostasy) and leaves the community.”

References: Sahih Muslim 4267; Islamic Foundation 4228; Islamic Center 4228.

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic)

9. Testimony of Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari (RA)

Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 5272 (also 5270, 5271; Sahih Muslim 1691).

Narrated by Az-Zuhri (RH): Az-Zuhri said: A person who heard it from Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari (RA) told me: “I was among those who took part in stoning him (Ma’iz ibn Malik). We stoned him at the Musalla (the place for Eid prayers) in Medina. When the stones troubled him, he ran away, but we caught up with him at Al-Harrah (a volcanic rocky area) and stoned him until he died.”

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic) (Cross-references: Sahih Muslim 1691; Musnad Ahmad 14469; Islamic Foundation 4780)

10. The Importance of Rajm (Address by Hazrat Umar RA)

Source: Musnad Ahmad

Chapter: Narrations of Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA)

Hadith No: 352 (See also Hadith No. 391)

Narrated by Abdur Rahman ibn Awf (RA): Abdur Rahman ibn Awf (RA) narrated that Umar (RA) performed Hajj. At that time, he wished to deliver a public address. Abdur Rahman ibn Awf said to him, “The crowd here consists of diverse and unruly people; it would be better to postpone your address until you reach Medina.”

When he reached Medina, I attended his gathering and sat near the pulpit (Minbar). I heard him saying:

“Many people say, ‘What is this stoning (Rajm)? In the Book of Allah, only flogging is mentioned as the punishment for adultery.’ However, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ practiced stoning, and after him, we too have practiced stoning. Had I not feared that people would accuse Umar of adding something to the Book of Allah which is not in it, I would have recorded the verse of Rajm in the Quran exactly as it was revealed.”

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic)

11. The Era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs (Khulafa al-Rashidun)

There are numerous narrations and historical reports (Athar) recorded in the books of Hadith confirming that the punishment of stoning (Rajm) was carried out during the caliphates of Hazrat Abu Bakr (RA), Hazrat Umar (RA), and Hazrat Ali (RA).

Specifically, when Hazrat Ali (RA) implemented the punishment for a woman named Sharaha al-Hamdaniya (or Sharaha Nammi), he declared:

“I have flogged her according to the Book of Allah, and I have stoned her according to the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.”

Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 6812.

C. Consensus of the Four Schools of Jurisprudence

The Imams of the four primary Sunni schools of law (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali) are in unanimous agreement (Ijma) that Rajm (stoning) is established by the Sunnah and is mandatory (Wajib) for a Muhsan (married) adulterer. However, the conditions for its application are exceptionally stringent, requiring either four eye-witnesses or a four-fold voluntary confession. Historically, only a small faction of the Khawarij and Mu’tazila denied this ruling.

Below are the positions of each Imam, supported by references from authentic books of Fiqh, Arabic texts, and explanations. These rulings prioritize societal morality, though their actual legal implementation is intentionally rare due to strict evidentiary standards.

1. Imam Abu Hanifa (Hanafi School, d. 150 AH / 767 CE)

Imam Abu Hanifa considers Rajm to be mandatory for Muhsan adulterers. He views this as a specific legislative addition via the Sunnah to the general Quranic verse of flogging (Surah An-Nur: 2). To establish proof, there must be four male witnesses or a confession, and the testimonies of the witnesses must be identical in detail.

Core Principles in Hanafi Fiqh:

• Pregnancy: He does not consider pregnancy alone as independent proof of adultery, as there may be possibilities of coercion (Ikrah) or legal doubt (Shubha).
• Proof: Requires four witnesses or a confession.
• Banishment: Unlike some other schools, he does not include exile/banishment as a standard part of the Hadd punishment.

“فَإِنْ كَانَ الزَّانِي مُحْصَنًا فَحَدُّهُ الرَّجْمُ لِحَدِيثِ عُبَادَةَ بْنِ الصَّامِتِ عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ خُذُوا عَنِّي خُذُوا عَنِّي قَدْ جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لَهُنَّ سَبِيلًا الْبِكْرُ بِالْبِكْرِ جَلْدُ مِائَةٍ وَنَفْىُ سَنَةٍ وَالثَّيِّبُ بِالثَّيِّبِ جَلْدُ مِائَةٍ وَرَجْمٌ”

English Translation: “If the person committing adultery (Zina) is a Muhsan (married), then their prescribed punishment (Hadd) is Rajm (stoning), based on the Hadith of Ubadah bin Samit: ‘…and for the married with the married, one hundred lashes and stoning.'”

Source: Badai’ al-Sanai’ fi Tartib al-Sharai’ Author: Imam al-Kasani (Hanafi Jurist, d. 587 AH)

Reference: Volume 7, Page 33.

Explanation: The Hanafi Logic

Imam Abu Hanifa views Rajm as a legislative specification (Takhsis) or partial abrogation (Naskh) of the general Quranic ruling via the Sunnah. While the Quran mentions flogging for all fornicators, the Sunnah specifies stoning for those who are Muhsan (married).

A core pillar of his jurisprudence is the prioritization of Shubuhat (legal doubts). He emphasized that Hudud punishments must be avoided if there is even the slightest ambiguity, ensuring that such severe penalties remain extremely rare. For example, if there is any inconsistency or contradiction in the testimonies of the four witnesses, the entire case for Rajm is dismissed.

2. Imam Malik (Maliki School, d. 179 AH / 795 CE)

Imam Malik considers Rajm to be an essential and undeniable punishment for Muhsan adulterers. His school is unique in its approach to evidence and the combination of punishments.

Core Principles in Maliki Fiqh:

• Banishment (Taghrib): For unmarried fornicators, he includes one year of exile for men, but he does not apply this to women to protect them from the dangers of traveling alone.
• Pregnancy as Evidence: Unlike the Hanafi school, the Maliki school considers pregnancy in an unmarried woman (or a married woman whose husband denies paternity through Li’an) as a standalone legal proof of Zina, unless she can prove coercion or rape.
• Single Punishment: Imam Malik does not combine flogging and stoning. He views Rajm as the complete and sole punishment for the Muhsan.

“قَالَ مَالِكٌ: الرَّجْمُ لِلْمُحْصَنِ الزَّانِي وَالزَّانِيَةِ إِذَا قَامَتِ الْبَيِّنَةُ أَوْ كَانَ الْحَمْلُ أَوِ الْإِقْرَارُ وَلَا يُجْلَدُ مَعَ الرَّجْمِ وَيُنْفَى الرَّجُلُ وَلَا تُنْفَى الْمَرْأَةُ”

Imam Malik said: “Stoning (Rajm) is for the Muhsan (married) adulterer and adulteress if the evidence is established, or if there is pregnancy, or a confession. Flogging is not combined with stoning. The man is to be exiled (for unmarried fornication), but the woman is not.”

Source: Al-Mudawwanah al-Kubra (The compilation of Imam Malik’s rulings by Sahnun, d. 240 AH)

Reference: Volume 15, Page 301.

Explanation: The Maliki school relies heavily on the “Amal of Madinah” (the practice of the people of Medina). Since Rajm was practiced openly in Medina by the Prophet ﷺ and the Rightly Guided Caliphs, Imam Malik recorded it as an indisputable consensus.

3. Imam al-Shafi’i (Shafi’i School, d. 204 AH / 820 CE)

Imam al-Shafi’i views Rajm as a Specification (Takhsis) of the Quranic ruling through the Sunnah. While the Quran establishes a general rule for fornicators, the Sunnah specifies a distinct punishment for those who are Muhsan (married). Unique to his school’s primary view, he supports combining punishments (first flogging, then stoning) based on the literal text of certain Hadiths. Additionally, he categorizes homosexual acts (Liwat) under the same legal framework as Zina, applying the punishment of Rajm if the conditions are met.

Core Principles in Shafi’i Fiqh:

• Homosexuality (Liwat): In the Shafi’i school, if a Muhsan commits this act, the punishment is Rajm, treating it with the same legal severity as adultery.
• Combination of Penalties: Based on the Hadith of Ubadah bin Samit, he initially held that a married adulterer should receive 100 lashes first and then be stoned (though later scholars within the school noted the Prophet ﷺ often practiced stoning alone).
• Definition of Proof: To implement the Hadd, there must be four male witnesses who testify to seeing the actual act of penetration clearly.

“قَالَ الشَّافِعِيُّ: فَالسُّنَّةُ دَلَّتْ عَلَى أَنَّ الرَّجْمَ عَلَى الثَّيِّبِ دُونَ الْبِكْرِ، وَأَنَّ الْجَلْدَ عَلَى الْبِكْرِ دُونَ الثَّيِّبِ”

Imam al-Shafi’i said: “The Sunnah demonstrates that stoning (Rajm) is for the Thayyib (married/previously married) and not for the virgin (Bikr), while flogging is for the virgin and not for the Thayyib.”

Source: Al-Umm (The foundational work of Imam al-Shafi’i)

Reference: Volume 6, Page 146.

“الرَّجْمُ وَاجِبٌ عَلَى الْمُحْصَنِ الزَّانِي وَلَا يُجْلَدُ إِلَّا مَعَ الرَّجْمِ وَالْحُدُودُ تُقَامُ بِأَرْبَعَةِ شُهُودٍ عُدُولٍ يَشْهَدُونَ عَلَى الْفِعْلِ الْمُبَاشِرِ”

Stoning (Rajm) is mandatory (Wajib) upon the Muhsan (married) adulterer, and flogging is not administered except in conjunction with stoning. The Hudud (fixed punishments) are established by four upright (Adul) witnesses who testify to the direct act.

Source: Al-Umm (Imam al-Shafi’i’s primary work)

Reference: Volume 6, Page 148.

Explanation: Imam Shafi‘i views the Sunnah as an interpreter of the Qur’an, which limits lashing to unmarried individuals. He includes homosexuality under zina (fornication/adultery) for the application of Rajm (stoning), but instructs that hudud punishments should be avoided in cases of doubt.

4. Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (Hanbali School, d. 241 AH / 855 CE)

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal strongly supports the ruling of Rajm and, in his primary view, advocates for the combination of both flogging and stoning for a married adulterer. He views this as the most literal and complete application of the Sunnah. Furthermore, he considers Zina to be even more severe if it is accompanied by Hirabah (armed robbery or public terrorism).

Core Principles in Hanbali Fiqh:

• Rigorous Adherence: As the “Imam of Ahl al-Hadith,” his position is strictly tied to the recorded actions of the Sahaba, viewing Rajm as a clear, non-negotiable part of the Divine law.
• Combination of Penalties: Following the practice of Hazrat Ali (RA) and the literal text of early Hadiths, the Hanbali school holds that a Muhsan should first be flogged 100 times and then stoned.
• Pregnancy as Proof: Similar to the Maliki school, Imam Ahmad considers pregnancy in an unmarried woman to be legal evidence of Zina, provided there is no evidence of rape or valid legal doubt.

Source: Al-Mughni (By Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi, d. 620 AH)

Reference: Volume 9, Page 37.

Arabic: “الْمُحْصَنُ إِذَا زَنَى يُرْجَمُ وَيُجْلَدُ مَعَ الرَّجْمِ وَالْبَيِّنَةُ أَرْبَعَةُ شُهُودٍ أَوْ إِقْرَارٌ أَرْبَعَ مَرَّاتٍ وَالْحَمْلُ بَيِّنَةٌ إِنْ أَنْكَرَ الزَّوْجُ”

English Translation: “When a Muhsan (married person) commits adultery, they are to be stoned (Rajm), and flogging is administered along with the stoning. The proof is established by four witnesses, or a four-fold confession, and pregnancy is considered evidence if the husband denies [paternity].”

Source: Al-Mughni (The most comprehensive Hanbali encyclopedia by Ibn Qudamah)

Reference: Volume 12, Page 309.

English Translation: “The people of knowledge among the Companions, the Successors (Tabi’un), and the jurists of all regions have reached a consensus (Ajma’) that stoning is mandatory (Wajib) upon the Muhsan. No one disagreed with this except for the Khawarij.”

Arabic: “أجمع أهل العلم من الصحابة والتابعين وفقاء الأمصار على أن الرجم واجب على المحصن، ولم يخالف في ذلك إلا الخوارج”

Explanation: Imam Ahmad emphasizes a literal interpretation of the hadith, which makes Rajm strict. He instructs that Hudud be suspended in cases of doubt and views Rajm as a means to prevent societal corruption (fasad).

Summary:

The four Imams unanimously agree that Rajm applies to married (muhsan) offenders, but they make it rare by setting strict conditions (rigorous evidence, avoidance of doubt). It is Sunnah-based and confirmed through Ijma (consensus). Modern scholars (e.g., Yusuf al-Qaradawi) argue that it should currently remain suspended.

Consequences of Denying the Ruling of Rajm:

In Islam, adultery is strictly prohibited and considered a punishable offense. The primary reason is that adultery undermines family stability and damages the moral integrity of society. Children born from such relationships may face various social complications and disadvantages, ultimately creating distressing and problematic situations within families and society.

Regarding the application of Rajm, the Prophet ﷺ explicitly stated in a hadith that those who deny its ruling are considered disbelievers (kafir), unjust, misguided, and sinful.

Sunan Abi Dawud (Tahqiq-script)

Chapter 33: Crimes and Their Punishments (Kitab al-Hudud) Section 26: The Incident of Stoning Two Jews

4448. Narrated by Al-Bara’ ibn Azib (RA): A Jew, whose face had been blackened and who had been flogged, was passed by the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. He ﷺ called them (the Jews) and asked, “Is this the punishment for adultery you find in your Book?” They replied, “Yes.”

He ﷺ then called one of their scholars and said, “I adjure you by Allah, Who sent down the Torah to Musa (AS)! Do you find this punishment for adultery in your Book?” The scholar replied, “No, by Allah! Had you not adjured me by this oath, I would not have told you.

We find the punishment of Rajm (stoning) in our Book. However, when adultery became widespread among our elite, we would let the high-ranking person go if we caught them, but we would implement the punishment on the weak. Later, we said: ‘Let us come together on a punishment that we can apply to everyone, regardless of status.’ So, we agreed upon blackening the face and flogging as a substitute for stoning.”

Upon hearing this, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ declared: “O Allah! I am the first to revive Your command after they had brought death to it.” He ﷺ then ordered that the offender be stoned.

Consequently, Allah revealed the following verses regarding the Jews: “O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who rush into disbelief… They say, ‘If you are given this [the modified ruling], take it, but if you are not given it, then beware’ … And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed—then it is those who are the disbelievers … then it is those who are the wrongdoers … then it is those who are the defiantly disobedient.” (Surah Al-Ma’idah: 41-47). He (the narrator) said these verses were revealed concerning the disbelieving transgressors.

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic)

Narrator: Al-Bara’ ibn Azib (RA)

Another similar one –

Sunan Abi Dawud (Tahqiq-script)

Chapter 33: Crimes and Their Punishments (Kitab al-Hudud) Publisher: Allama Albani Academy Section 23: Regarding Stoning (Al-Rajm)

4418. Narrated by Abdullah ibn Abbas (RA): Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA) said in his public address:

“Indeed, Allah sent Muhammad ﷺ with the Truth and revealed the Book to him. Included in what was revealed to him was the Verse of Stoning (Ayat al-Rajm). We recited it, understood it, and memorized it. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ implemented stoning, and we too implemented stoning after him. However, I fear that as time passes, someone might say, ‘We do not find the Verse of Stoning in the Book of Allah.’

Consequently, they would go astray by abandoning an Obligation (Faridah) revealed by Allah. Behold! Stoning is an established duty upon married men and women who commit adultery, provided the proof is established, or pregnancy occurs, or a confession is made. By Allah! Had people not been likely to say that ‘Umar has added to the Book of Allah,’ I would have certainly written this verse [into the Mushaf].”

References: Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim.

Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic) Narrator: Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA)

Strict Conditions for Implementing Rajm

In Islam, the punishment of Rajm is subject to strict and clear conditions. First and foremost, the case must be presented to a qualified Shariah judge who possesses the legal authority to enforce Hudood under an Islamic governance system. This is because, during the time of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and the subsequent rule of the rightly guided Caliphs (Khulafa-e-Rashideen), all Hudood punishments were implemented solely through the authority of the state.

Additionally, before imposing such a severe punishment, it is considered preferable for the offender to repent and seek forgiveness from Allah, keeping their sin private. The purpose of Shariah is not merely to enforce punishment but to protect society from sin and give the offender a chance for reform.

Another important condition is that the person subject to Rajm must be muhsin—that is, an adult, sane, independent individual who has previously entered into a lawful marital relationship.

Specific Evidence of the Crime:

Hudood punishments, including Rajm, can only be carried out when the crime is clearly proven. The evidence can be:

• The confession of the accused
• Testimony of reliable witnesses

According to Caliph Umar (RA), if someone is unmarried and becomes pregnant, the pregnancy alone can be considered proof of the offense. The Maliki school of thought agrees with this view. However, according to Shafi‘i, Hanafi, and the majority of scholars, pregnancy alone is not sufficient, as there may still be room for doubt.

Testimony

If the accused does not confess to the crime, the testimony of four upright and just male witnesses is mandatory. Each witness must clearly state who committed the act, when, where, and how it occurred. The judge will examine their moral integrity and carefully scrutinize their testimony before accepting it.

If there are fewer than four witnesses, the witnesses themselves will be liable to the punishment of Qadhf (false accusation). This reflects an Islamic principle that requires the highest level of caution in the application of the punishment of Rajm. For example, the Prophet ﷺ advised regarding the Companion Maʿiz: “If only you had covered him with your cloak!”

Confession (Ikrar)

Ikrar is when a person voluntarily admits their crime, making them liable for a Hudud punishment. For the confession to be valid, it must be made clearly before a Shariah judge. The accused must state who, where, and how the offense was committed.

According to the Shafi‘i school, an adult, sane person’s single confession is sufficient for Hudud. Hadith mentions that the Prophet ﷺ would question the confessor multiple times to ensure they did not retract their admission. Some narrations also mention confessing multiple times.

A narration in Sahih Bukhari states that the Companions Abu Huraira and Zayd ibn Khalid reported: a Bedouin came to the Prophet ﷺ and said:
“O Messenger of Allah, judge between us according to Allah’s Book.”

The opposing party agreed. Later, it was found that Rajm (stoning) was prescribed for his son. The Prophet ﷺ instructed that if the accused confesses, he should be stoned. According to Shafi‘i scholars, a single confession suffices.

However, according to Hanafi school, confession must be obtained four times in four separate sessions. Each time, the judge gives the accused a chance to retract. If the confession remains firm, the Hudud is carried out; if not, the person is released.

Indirect Questioning by the Judge

If someone confesses, the judge often gives them a chance to retract due to doubt. For example, the judge might ask:
“Perhaps you only kissed, or maybe only touched?”

According to the incident of Companion Mu‘adh, the Prophet ﷺ questioned him repeatedly and only applied Rajm after receiving a clear and unequivocal confession.

Confession and Repentance

The Hadith mentions that while confession is necessary, repenting privately is considered better. If someone publicly admits their crime, the judge will implement the Hudud punishment.

For example, Companion Mu‘adh and the Ghamidiya woman themselves wished to carry out Rajm. These incidents show that Hudud serves both as a penalty for the crime and as a means for the offender’s reform. [35–39]

Condition of ‘Ihsan’ in the Punishment of Rajm

In implementing the punishment of Rajm, Ihsan (Arabic: الإحصان) is a fundamental and essential condition. According to Shariah, Rajm is only applicable to those adulterers who are in a state of Muhsin. The term ‘Muhsin’ derives from the Arabic ‘Ihsan’, which literally means to practice restraint, protection, and adherence to what is forbidden. In Islamic terminology, Ihsan refers to a married status in which a person preserves their private parts lawfully.

The term Ihsan is especially used regarding women who, through Islam, modesty, independence, and lawful marriage, maintain their protection. Such women are called ‘Muhsina’. Similarly, a married man with a legitimate wife is also considered a Muhsin.

Al-Farra notes that in Arabic, the word Ihsan signifies piety and restraint for both men and women. Some scholars argue that accepting Islam is a condition for the application of Ihsan mentioned in the Qur’an. However, Imam Nabawi (rah.) clarifies that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ applied Rajm to both Jewish women and men, so it is not unanimously required that being Muslim is a prerequisite for being considered Muhsin.

Preconditions of Being a Muhsin in the Implementation of Rajm

Like other punishments in Islam, the execution of Rajm has strict and essential preconditions. The key requirements include:

• Confession: Alternatively, if the accused voluntarily admits the crime without coercion or prompting, their confession is considered valid evidence for applying Rajm.
• Being Married: The accused must be married and have engaged in sexual relations within a lawful marriage.
• Being Sane: The individual must be of sound mind, fully conscious, and possess the capacity for moral discernment.
• Four Witnesses: The act of adultery must be witnessed by four trustworthy male witnesses who have seen the incident clearly with their own eyes.

The Importance of Valid Evidence in the Application of Rajm

According to Islamic law, the implementation of this punishment is extremely stringent. Rajm cannot be lawfully applied without proper and valid evidence. In this regard, there are well-known hadiths that emphasize this principle—

Sahih al-Bukhari

Chapter 68: Divorce (At-Talaq) Section 31: The Statement of the Prophet ﷺ: “Had I been one to stone anyone without clear evidence…”

5310. Narrated by Ibn ‘Abbas (RA): The matter of Li’an (mutual oath of imprecation) was mentioned in the presence of the Prophet ﷺ. ‘Asim bin ‘Adi (RA) asked a question regarding this and left. Later, a man from his tribe came to him complaining that he had found another man with his wife. ‘Asim said, “I have been afflicted with this trouble only because of my unnecessary questioning.”

He then took the man to the Prophet ﷺ and informed him of the complainant’s situation. The husband was a thin, yellowish man with straight hair, while the man he accused of being with his wife was dark-complexioned, thick-set, and had fleshy limbs.

The Prophet ﷺ prayed, “O Allah! Clarify the matter.” Subsequently, the woman gave birth to a child who closely resembled the accused man described by the husband. Despite the resemblance, the Prophet ﷺ had the husband and wife perform the Li’an (the legal procedure of swearing oaths to dissolve the marriage).

A person in the gathering asked Ibn ‘Abbas (RA), “Is this the woman about whom the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: ‘Had I been one to stone anyone without clear evidence (Bayyinah), I would have stoned her’?” Ibn ‘Abbas replied, “No, that was another woman who used to openly display immorality/evil conduct in the Muslim society.”

References: Sahih al-Bukhari 5310 (also 5316, 6855, 6856, 7238); Sahih Muslim 1497; Musnad Ahmad 3360. Hadith Grade: Sahih (Authentic)

For your understanding, a detailed explanation and context of this hadith is presented below:

1. Context of the Hadith and Li‘an (Mutual Cursing):

The hadith mentions a specific Shariah procedure called “Li‘an.” This occurs when a husband accuses his wife of adultery but cannot produce four witnesses. According to the directives of the Holy Qur’an (Surah An-Nur: 6–9), both husband and wife must swear oaths invoking Allah. This process is known as Li‘an. After Li‘an, their marital relationship is permanently severed.

2. Explanation of “I would not have stoned without clear proof.”

The most important part of this hadith is the statement of Rasulullah ﷺ:

“I would not have stoned without clear proof…”

Its explanation is as follows:

• Importance of Evidence: In Islamic penal law (Hudood), punishments cannot be carried out based solely on suspicion or assumptions. For the punishment of adultery (Rajm) to be applied, either the offender’s clear confession is required, or the testimony of four eyewitnesses is necessary.
• Li‘an vs. Rajm: In cases where Li‘an was invoked, there might be a strong assumption that adultery occurred—for example, if the child resembled someone other than the husband. However, since there was no direct witness and the woman did not confess, Rasulullah ﷺ did not order stoning. This shows that Shariah operates based on evidence, not assumptions.
• Another woman’s case: Ibn Abbas (RA) clarified that the woman Rasulullah ﷺ referred to, whom he would have stoned if there had been clear proof, was not the one subjected to Li‘an. She was likely another woman (possibly Umm Kulthum or someone else), whose adultery had become public knowledge in society, but for whom no legal witnesses were available at the court to implement punishment.

3. Lessons and Legal Significance of the Hadith

From this hadith, we learn several important principles:

• Justice and Caution: Even if a judge is personally convinced, in Islamic law, punishment cannot be carried out without the required legal witnesses or clear evidence.
• Personal Freedom and Honor: Mere resemblance of a child or person to someone else cannot serve as conclusive proof of adultery until Shariah-compliant witnesses are available.
• Public Rumor vs. Legal Basis: Even if a matter is widely discussed or rumored among people, Hudood punishments cannot be applied without a proper legal foundation.

Punishment for Accusing Someone of Adultery (Zina)

“وَالَّذِينَ يَرْمُونَ الْمُحْصَنَاتِ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَأْتُوا بِأَرْبَعَةِ شُهَدَاءَ فَاجْلِدُوهُمْ ثَمَانِينَ جَلْدَةً وَلَا تَقْبَلُوا لَهُمْ شَهَادَةً أَبَدًا ۚ وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ”

“And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses—flog them with eighty lashes and never accept their testimony thereafter. And they are the defiantly disobedient.”
(Qur’an 24:4)

Explanation:
This verse demonstrates the strict evidentiary standard required for accusing zina (adultery)—namely, the testimony of four witnesses. This standard is directly related to the proof required for the punishment of stoning (rajm). If four witnesses are not produced, the accuser themselves is punished. This shows that the Qur’an makes the proof of zina extremely stringent, so that severe punishments like rajm are not applied lightly or without clear, definitive evidence.

Reasons for Invalidating Rajm (Stoning)

If there arises any doubt about the evidence of the accused’s crime, all Hudud punishments, including rajm, are invalidated. For this reason, judges always give priority to evidence and circumstances that might excuse the accused from punishment. In Shariah, while Hudud is important, the principle is that in the presence of doubt, the punishment should be withheld.

For proving adultery, four righteous male witnesses are required. If the number of witnesses is less, or if there is doubt about their character, the Hudud is not applied to the accused; instead, the witnesses may be liable for qazf (false accusation).

Islamic scholars state that it is also the duty of ordinary Muslims that, in the presence of doubt, the path of Hudud enforcement should be blocked, correction should be attempted through advice, and the offense should remain confidential. The Prophet ﷺ said:

“Whoever conceals the faults of a Muslim, Allah will conceal his faults in this world and the Hereafter.”

However, if someone shamelessly continues to violate Allah’s limits, and the crime risks spreading in society, then concealment is no longer permissible.

The Hadith emphasizes that Hudud should be avoided whenever possible –

The Prophetic Principle of Legal Leniency

Source: Sunan at-Tirmidhi

Publisher: Darul Kutub al-Ilmiya

Chapter: Kitab al-Hudud (The Book of Prescribed Punishments)

Section: Avoidance of Punishments (Bab ma ja’a fi dar’il Hudud)

Page: 573

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:

“Avert the prescribed punishments (Hudud) from the Muslims as much as you are able. If you find any way out for a person, then set him free. For indeed, it is better for the leader to err in pardoning than to err in punishing.”

Another narration said:

The Prophetic Instruction on Judicial Restraint

Source: Sunan Ibn Majah

Author: Muhammad ibn Yazid al-Qazwini

Publisher: Al-Maktab al-Ilmiya

Chapter: Kitab al-Hudud (The Book of Prescribed Punishments)

Section: Veiling the Faults of a Believer and Warding off Punishments through Doubts (Bab al-Satri ‘alal Mu’mini wa Daf’il Hududi bish-Shubuhat)

Hadith/Page Reference: 2545

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:

“Wherever you find an opportunity to avert a punishment, do not implement it.”

This means—if there is any doubt or room for interpretation in the application of Hudud, it is better to give priority to that doubt and refrain from carrying out the punishment. However, if the crime is undeniably proven—for example, through a clear confession or the testimony of four reliable witnesses—then it becomes the judge’s duty to implement the punishment.

Tibi, a commentator on Hadith, explains that from these descriptions it is understood that if a fault is concealed, it may never reach the court, and even if it does, the judge may suspend Hudud based on doubt.
(Tuhfatul Ahwazi Sharh Sunan at-Tirmidhi, Author: Muhammad ibn Abdur Rahman ibn Abdur Rahim al-Mubarakfuri, Publisher: Darul Kutub al-Ilmiya, Title: Kitabul Hudud An-Rasulillah ﷺ (Bab Ma Ja’a Fi Dar’ul Hudud), pp. 573–574.)

In another Hadith, it is mentioned:

The Principle of Private Repentance

Source: Al-Maqasid al-Hasanah (Regarding the Famous Reports Among the People)

Author: Imam al-Sakhawi (d. 902 AH)

Hadith No: 46

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:

“Keep the matters of fixed punishments (Hudud) hidden among yourselves; for indeed, if a case reaches me, the punishment becomes mandatory.”

Is Rajm Applicable Only in an Islamic State System?

In short, the answer is yes—the implementation of Rajm requires an Islamic state system. This is because Rajm must be carried out by the state courts.

In other words, according to Islamic Shariah, punishments like Rajm or other Hudud penalties cannot be enforced personally or by any group. Only the government or judiciary (Qadi) of a Muslim state has the authority to implement them based on proper witnesses and evidence.

Here is a detailed explanation of the matter:

The Principle of Suspending Hudud (Based on Authentic Hadith)

“ادرؤوا الحدود بالشبهات ما استطعتم”

“Avoid applying the Hudud punishments as much as possible in cases of doubt.”

Reference:

Al-Hakim, Al-Mustadrak 4/385 – Sahih (Al-Hakim: Sahih al-Isnad)

Sunan at-Tirmidhi, Hadith 1424 – Sahih (Tirmidhi: Sahih Gharib)

Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith 2545 – Sahih (classified as Sahih by Al-Albani)

Explanation: This hadith, narrated from the Prophet ﷺ (through Aisha رضي الله عنها or another companion), shows that wherever there is shubuhat (doubt or contextual factors such as poverty, coercion, or a non-Islamic society), the Hudud punishments—including Rajm—should not be applied. It limits the enforcement of Hudud to environments free of doubt, which forms the basis for not implementing them in non-Islamic societies.

Example from Sahabi Umar (رضي الله عنه): Suspension of Hudud due to state failure.

“لا قطع في عام المجاعة”

(No cutting during a year of famine”)।

During a year of famine, hand-cutting (as a Hudud punishment) is not carried out.

References:

• Muwatta Malik, Kitab al-Hudud: Sahih (compiled by Malik, classified Sahih by Albani)
• Sunan al-Bayhaqi 8/434: Sahih (compiled by al-Bayhaqi)
• Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq 10/236: Sahih (compiled by Abd al-Razzaq)

Ibn Qudamah’s explanation (verified):
“لأن الجوع شبهة تدرأ الحد”
Translation: “Because hunger is a shubuhat (doubt) that prevents the Hudud.”
Reference check: Al-Mughni 9/91: Sahih (Ibn Qudamah’s work, primary source for Hanbali fiqh)

Explanation:
Umar (رضي الله عنه) suspended the Hudud punishment of theft (cutting the hand) during famine because the state’s failure to provide food creates a shubuhat (environmental doubt), and applying Hudud in such a context would become unjust oppression (zulm). This principle also applies to Rajm: if social or environmental conditions (e.g., in a non-Islamic society where observing proper hijab is difficult) create doubt, Hudud should be suspended.

Imam Abu Hanifa (رحمه الله)…

“إذا وُجدت شبهة سقط الحد”

(If there is any legal doubt (Shubha), the fixed punishment (Hadd) is canceled.)।

Reference: Badai’ al-Sanai’ fi Tartib al-Sharai’ (By Imam al-Kasani, d. 587 AH), Volume 7, Page 63.

“إنما تقام الحدود مع كمال العدالة وقيام السلطان بالواجب”

(“The fixed punishments (Hudud) are only established through the realization of absolute justice and the fulfillment of the Ruler’s (State’s) responsibilities.”)।

Source: Badai’ al-Sanai’ fi Tartib al-Sharai’ (By Imam al-Kasani, d. 587 AH)

Reference: Volume 7, Page 66.

Explanation: Imam Abu Hanifa accepts Rajm as Sunnah-based, but its implementation requires full justice and the fulfillment of the ruler’s (Islamic state’s) responsibilities. Without these conditions, Hudud cannot be applied. This demonstrates that applying it in a non-Islamic society would constitute zulm (oppression).

Imam Malik (رحمه الله)…

“تُدرأ الحدود إذا خيف الجور”

(“Fixed punishments (Hudud) must be averted if there is a fear of oppression or injustice.”)।

Source 1: Al-Istidhkar (By Ibn Abd al-Barr, d. 463 AH)

Reference: Volume 7, Page 146.

“إقامة الحد مع الفساد أعظم فساداً”

(“Implementing a fixed punishment (Hadd) within a corrupted society is a greater corruption in itself.”)।

Source 2: At-Tamhid (The extensive commentary on the Muwatta)

Reference: Volume 5, Page 331.

Explanation: Imam Malik, following the practice in Madinah, restricted the application of Rajm under the authority of the ruler. If there is fasad (disorder, unrest, or oppression) in society, implementing Hudud becomes the greatest form of zulm (injustice), and therefore it is suspended. This serves as the basis for not applying it in a non-Islamic environment.

Imam Shafi‘i (رحمه الله)…

“ولا يقيم الحدود إلا الإمام أو من فوّض إليه الإمام”

(“None may establish the fixed punishments (Hudud) except for the Leader (Imam) or one to whom the Leader has delegated authority.”)

Source: Al-Umm (The primary work of Imam al-Shafi’i, d. 204 AH)

Reference: Volume 6, Page 154.

Explanation: Imam Shafi‘i restricted the application of Rajm under the authority of the ruler (Imam) or his representative. This shows that applying it in a non-Islamic state or personally is not legitimate.

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Rah.)

“إذا خيف من إقامة الحد فتنة، ترك الحد”

(If there is fear of fitnah (civil strife) from implementing Hudud, then leave the Hudud unimplemented.)।

Reference: Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 10/322: Authentic (primary source of Hanbali Fiqh).

Explanation: Imam Ahmad follows the literal interpretation of the Hadith, but if there is fitnah (civil unrest), the Hudud is suspended. This forms the basis for not applying it in a non-Islamic society, as it could lead to societal corruption and disorder.

Ibn Taymiyyah (Rah.)

“الحدود إنما شُرعت للزجر، فإذا لم تحصل المصلحة، لم تكن مشروعة”

(Hudud punishments are legislated as a deterrent; if no benefit is achieved, then it is not Shariah.)।

Reference: As-Siyasah ash-Shar‘iyyah, p. 132: Authentic (from Ibn Taymiyyah’s work).

Explanation: Ibn Taymiyyah views Rajm (stoning) as a deterrent, but if its implementation does not serve a benefit (for example, it causes oppression in a non-Islamic society), then it cannot be considered valid Shariah. This forms the basis for suspending Hudud punishments.

Ibn Qayyim (Rah.)

“الشريعة عدل كلها، ورحمة كلها، وحكمة كلها فكل مسألة خرجت من العدل إلى الجور فليست من الشريعة”

(Shariah is entirely justice, mercy, and wisdom; any matter that departs from justice into oppression is not part of Shariah.)।

Reference: I‘lam al-Muwaqqi‘in, 3/3: Authentic (from Ibn Qayyim’s work)

Explanation: Ibn Qayyim views Shariah as fundamentally based on justice. Therefore, if the implementation of Rajm (stoning) leads to oppression (for example, in a non-Islamic society), it is not considered Shariah. In other words, he opposed any misuse or misapplication of Shariah rulings.

The Procedure and Rulings of Rajm (Stoning)

Procedure and Rules of Rajm (Stoning) in Light of Sahih Hadith and Fiqh:

• Digging (for women): If the offender is a woman, she may be placed in a pit up to the waist or navel to preserve her modesty (Sahih Muslim, 1695 – the case of the Gamidiya woman). For men, digging is not required.
• Stoning: Present people will throw medium-sized stones. The stones should not be so small that they do not harm, nor so large that a single blow kills immediately. The goal is to continue stoning until death occurs.
• Who starts?
  • If the crime is proven through witnesses, the witnesses begin stoning first.
  • If proven through confession, the Imam or judge will start (Fiqh principle).
• If the offender flees: If a person confessing their crime tries to escape during stoning due to pain, they will not be stopped. Rasulullah ﷺ, upon hearing that Ma’iz (RA) attempted to flee, expressed regret: “Why didn’t you leave him? Perhaps he would have repented, and Allah would have forgiven him” (Sunan Abu Dawud, 4419).

Important Shariah Rules and Precautions:

• Pregnancy: If the woman is pregnant, Rajm is prohibited until she delivers and weans the child. Rasulullah ﷺ allowed the Gamidiya woman to return after childbirth (Sahih Muslim, 1695).
• Funeral and Burial: Since the person has been purified through the punishment, they should be treated with respect: perform ghusl (ritual washing), pray the Janazah, and be buried in a Muslim cemetery. Rasulullah ﷺ led the Janazah prayer for the Gamidiya woman and said: “Her repentance was so great that if distributed among 70 people of Medina, it would have sufficed for them all” (Sahih Muslim, 4209).

Modern Debates and Responses

Nowadays, many people say, “If it is not in the Qur’an, it cannot be accepted.” However, they forget that just as the Qur’an has reached us reliably, the Sunnah of Rasul ﷺ and the knowledge of Nasikh (abrogation) and other rulings have also been transmitted through trustworthy sources. The ruling of Rajm was personally implemented by Rasul ﷺ and practiced by the four rightly guided Caliphs. Therefore, there is no basis for denying it.

In Islamic history, the actual implementation of Rajm was very rare. During Caliph Umar’s (RA) time, there were a few cases, such as a woman’s confession. During the Umayyad and Abbasid eras, Fiqh discussions increased, but implementation remained uncommon. In the Mughal era, such as during Akbar’s rule in Bengal, Shariah was applied more leniently, and Rajm was rarely carried out. In the modern period, due to colonial rule, European legal systems were introduced, which often invalidated Rajm.

The modern debates surrounding Rajm—human rights, gender equality, and conflicts with secular laws—are certainly important. But we must remember that Islamic rulings are not confined to a particular era; they are meant for all times. Full implementation is possible only in societies where moral standards are very high, where every member is steadfast in obeying Allah’s commands and has a natural aversion to sin.

In countries like Bangladesh, where secular law is in force and societal moral standards vary widely, the relevance of Rajm is mainly theoretical and educational. It serves as a reminder of how harmful serious sins like adultery and illicit relationships are for society, and how much caution, awareness, and moral education are necessary to avoid them.

For our generation, the ruling of Rajm carries a profound message:

• To preserve family and societal values, moral education and the cultivation of taqwa (God-consciousness) are essential.
• Developing societal hatred of sin and promoting a culture of repentance is far more effective than enforcing legal punishment.
• Allah’s mercy is boundless—He prefers forgiveness and rehabilitation over punishment.

Therefore, when discussing Rajm, we should keep two things in mind:

1. It is an inseparable part of Islam, proven through Hadith and Fiqh.
2. Its implementation is never arbitrary—it is based on extremely strict evidence and justice.

In today’s society, if we use this ruling as guidance to purify our own lives and spread moral education at the family and societal levels, the need for such severe punishment as Rajm may naturally diminish. The greatest goal of Islam is to keep people away from sin, not merely to punish them.

Common Misconceptions:

• Misconception: Rajm is not in the Qur’an, so it is un-Islamic.
  Truth: It is Hadith-based, but fully consistent with the Qur’an.
• Misconception: Rajm is easily applied.
  Truth: The evidentiary standards are extremely strict.
• Misconception: Rajm is only for women.
  Truth: It applies to both genders.

Modern Status and Country-Specific Implementation

Today, Rajm exists legally in a few countries, but its actual implementation is rare:

• Iran: Rajm exists in Shia Fiqh, but a moratorium has been in place since 2012; a few cases have been reported.
• Afghanistan: Reinstated under Taliban rule; a few cases since 2021.
• Saudi Arabia: Practiced under the Hanbali madhhab, but tazir (discretionary punishments) are more commonly applied.
• Pakistan & Nigeria: Hudood ordinances exist, but high courts have suspended implementation

Conclusion:

The ruling of Rajm is one of the most sensitive and complex chapters of Islamic Shariah. It is not merely the name of a punishment but a symbol of preserving the moral foundation of society, preventing sin, and demonstrating unwavering obedience to the limits set by Allah. When we understand this ruling in the light of the Qur’an and Hadith, we see that Islam is never in favor of cruelty or inhumanity. Rather, behind each punishment lies profound mercy, justice, and a path for humans to be freed from sin. The strict conditions for the four witnesses, the rigor of confession, and the directive to suspend punishment in case of doubt—all these demonstrate that in Islam, preventing sin and providing an opportunity for repentance are far more important than merely executing punishment.

Final Word: The discussion of Rajm reminds us not only of the law but also of Allah’s mercy, justice, and the path to liberation from sin. May Allah keep us steadfast in obeying His commands, protect us from sin, and grant us the ability to return to Him through sincere repentance. Ameen.

Appendix:

• Sheikh/Sheikha (الشيخ والشيخة): In this specific legal context, these terms do not mean “elderly,” but rather “Muhsan” (individuals who have been validly married).
• Al-Battan (البتة): This means “decisively” or “without doubt,” emphasizing the finality of the legal command.
• Hukm (Ruling) vs. Tilawah (Recitation): Explaining this distinction is the key to refuting the Khawarij and Mu’tazila arguments mentioned in your text.