The choice delegated to the accountable person is divided into two parts: 1- Choice of desire 2- Choice of benefit
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : So the choice delegated to the accountable person is divided into two parts: choice of desire, meaning that the matter is left to what the person desires.
And choice of benefit, meaning that it is obligatory for the person to follow what is in the benefit in his choice. So what is the criterion for choice of desire and choice of benefit?
If the person is acting on behalf of another, then his choice is a choice of benefit; and if he is acting for himself, then his choice is a choice of desire. This is the criterion.
So if we say to the buyer: You have the option, either to execute the sale or to annul the sale, as long as you are in the assembly, then the option here is of desire, because he is acting for himself.
And if we say to the guardian of the orphan: You have the option between selling his wealth for cash or on credit, then the option is for benefit.
Now, the Imam: if we say that in the verse is for giving a choice, is the choice here a choice of desire or a choice of benefit?
It is a choice of benefit, because he is acting on behalf of others, acting for the benefit of the Muslims.
So if the Imam is just, trustworthy, discerning, and knowledgeable, then he will impose these punishments on the crimes according to the nature of the crimes. The punishment for the major crime is killing, and if it is greater, then killing with crucifixion, because crucifixion does not stand alone; otherwise, we would say that there is crucifixion alone. But crucifixion does not occur except after killing. And on this basis, either he restricts it to killing alone, in which case the criminal is killed and buried, or he kills and crucifies according to the strength and magnitude of the crime.
Or their hands and feet are cut off crosswise. The right hand and the left foot are cut, but where is the hand cut?
It is cut from the palm, the joint between the forearm and the palm, not between the forearm and the upper arm, because the well-known meaning in the Arabic language is that the hand, when used in a general sense, refers only to the palm.
Now, the foot? The foot is cut from the joint of the heel, between the heel and the foot, and the heel remains. The heel is not cut, because there is a joint here between the heel and the foot, is there not? Do you feel it?
Now, so it is cut from here and the heel remains, because cutting the heel, this is from here.
Now, the heel remains because if the heel were cut, it would harm him when walking; one leg would be shorter than the other.
[Al-Ma'idah 5:33] Meaning the right hand and the left foot.
[Al-Ma'idah 5:33] Is the "al" here for the definite or for the generic?
It appears to be for the definite, meaning from their land in which the corruption occurred. And if we said it is for the generic, then the intended meaning of the negation is that they are imprisoned, that they be imprisoned, because the imprisoned person is as if he were not on the earth. For this reason, the scholars differed on whether the intended meaning of the negation is...
And choice of benefit, meaning that it is obligatory for the person to follow what is in the benefit in his choice. So what is the criterion for choice of desire and choice of benefit?
If the person is acting on behalf of another, then his choice is a choice of benefit; and if he is acting for himself, then his choice is a choice of desire. This is the criterion.
So if we say to the buyer: You have the option, either to execute the sale or to annul the sale, as long as you are in the assembly, then the option here is of desire, because he is acting for himself.
And if we say to the guardian of the orphan: You have the option between selling his wealth for cash or on credit, then the option is for benefit.
Now, the Imam: if we say that
Or
أوIt is a choice of benefit, because he is acting on behalf of others, acting for the benefit of the Muslims.
So if the Imam is just, trustworthy, discerning, and knowledgeable, then he will impose these punishments on the crimes according to the nature of the crimes. The punishment for the major crime is killing, and if it is greater, then killing with crucifixion, because crucifixion does not stand alone; otherwise, we would say that there is crucifixion alone. But crucifixion does not occur except after killing. And on this basis, either he restricts it to killing alone, in which case the criminal is killed and buried, or he kills and crucifies according to the strength and magnitude of the crime.
Or their hands and feet are cut off crosswise. The right hand and the left foot are cut, but where is the hand cut?
It is cut from the palm, the joint between the forearm and the palm, not between the forearm and the upper arm, because the well-known meaning in the Arabic language is that the hand, when used in a general sense, refers only to the palm.
Now, the foot? The foot is cut from the joint of the heel, between the heel and the foot, and the heel remains. The heel is not cut, because there is a joint here between the heel and the foot, is there not? Do you feel it?
Now, so it is cut from here and the heel remains, because cutting the heel, this is from here.
Now, the heel remains because if the heel were cut, it would harm him when walking; one leg would be shorter than the other.
or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides
أو تقطع أيديهم وأرجلهم من خلافor that they be exiled from the land
أو ينفوا من الأرضIt appears to be for the definite, meaning from their land in which the corruption occurred. And if we said it is for the generic, then the intended meaning of the negation is that they are imprisoned, that they be imprisoned, because the imprisoned person is as if he were not on the earth. For this reason, the scholars differed on whether the intended meaning of the negation is...