Skip to main content
Refutations

Why Did Omar Ibn Al Khattab Not Carry Out the Punishment on the Man Who Was Accused of the Ugly Act

7 min read 1570 words

Responding to the Suspicion: Why Did Omar ibn al-Khattab Not Carry Out the Punishment on the Man Who Was Accused of the Ugly Act?

ContextResponding to the suspicion: Why did Omar ibn al-Khattab not carry out the punishment on the man who was accused of the ugly act - i.e. the act of the people of Lot?

Table of Contents

Content of the Doubt

The DoubtThe Shiites claim that the Companions committed the abomination of the people of Lot and that Omar ibn al-Khattab did not punish them. They cite this narration as evidence:
Narration Cited by Them[ Abd al-Razzaq informed us, on the authority of Ma’mar, on the authority of al-Zuhri, on the authority of Urwah, on the authority of Aishah, who said: “The first person to be accused of an ugly act - meaning the actions of the people of Lot - was during the time of Umar. Umar ordered some of the young men of Quraysh not to sit with him.”]

Response to This Ridiculous Suspicion

First: The Narration Only Mentions an Accusation

FirstThis narration was mentioned by Al-Bayhaqi in his book ( Shu’ab Al-Iman) as follows:
Al-Bayhaqi’s WordingAbu al-Husayn ibn Bishran informed us, Ismail ibn Muhammad al-Saffar informed us, Ahmad ibn Mansur informed us, Abd al-Razzaq informed us, Muammar informed us, on the authority of al-Zuhri, on the authority of Urwah, on the authority of Aisha, who said: The first person to be accused of the ugly matter - meaning the actions of the people of Lot - was accused of it during the time of Umar , so Umar ordered some of the young men of Quraysh not to sit with him.
Key PointBut this narration does not mention that the man committed the obscene act. Rather, the narration says that he was accused of it, and thus we cannot be certain whether the man did it or not… the accusation is not evidence that he committed the obscene act.
ExplanationThroughout history, we find many righteous people who were falsely accused even though they were innocent.
ExampleEven the Prophet Joseph was falsely accused of fornication… There is no power or strength except with God.
ConclusionSo, the mere accusation does not mean that the man committed the obscene act, because there are many innocent people who are envied by others and so they fabricate false accusations against them.

The Statement of Muhammad Rashid Rida

Tafsir Al-Manar 8/462Therefore, Muhammad Rashid Rida says - in (Tafsir Al-Manar) 8/462 the following:

Al-Bayhaqi narrated on the authority of Aisha that the first person to be accused of an ugly act—meaning the actions of the people of Lot—was a man during the time of Umar. Umar ordered some of the young men of Quraysh not to sit with him, i.e. , simply because of the accusation.

Why Omar Did Not Carry Out the Hadd

ExplanationThis explains why Omar ibn al-Khattab did not carry out the prescribed punishment on the accused. Caliph Omar did not have sufficient evidence and clues, and he did not know the unseen.
Legal PrincipleSince the judge does not know the unseen, he must inquire about the evidence, indications, and testimonies that support the accusation. If such indications, evidence, and testimonies are not available, the judge cannot impose the hadd punishment on the accused. Instead, he has two options: either issue a verdict of acquittal or issue a ta’zir (discretionary) punishment, where the judge decides on a specific punishment appropriate to the accused.

The Quranic Principle of Verification

Quranic PrincipleTherefore, you will find the Holy Qur’an commanding us to wait until we are certain of the witnesses and evidence:
Al-Hujurat 6God Almighty says:

O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful. [Al-Hujurat 6]

Second: The Narration Does Not Say He Was a Companion

SecondlyThe narration did not mention that the accused was a companion of the Prophet, nor did it mention that he committed the fornication with another companion. Rather, the narration’s apparent meaning suggests that the accused was an unknown man.
Historical ContextThen, during the era of Omar ibn al-Khattab, there were many people other than the Companions. After the death of the Prophet, the era of the Followers began, with their varying degrees of righteousness.
Additional PointThere were also young boys who were not companions.

Third: Why Did Omar Forbid Young Men From Sitting With Him?

QuestionRegarding the question: Why did Omar forbid young men from sitting with this man?!
AnswerAnswer: Omar bin Al-Khattab did this as a precaution to prevent any contact between this accused and others.
ExplanationAlso, Omar did this so that the doors of gossip would not be opened, because if people saw someone entering the house of this accused person, they might think that he entered to commit an immoral act with him, and thus rumors and accusations would spread, and the reputation of this person who entered the house of the accused person or sat with him might be tarnished.

The Statement of Najm al-Din al-Ghazi

The Good Attention to What Was Said About Imitation 5/509Therefore, Najm al-Din al-Ghazi says in his book (The Good Attention to What Was Said About Imitation) 5/509 - the following:

Al-Bayhaqi narrated on the authority of Aisha, may God be pleased with her: “The first person to be accused of the ugly thing - meaning: the actions of the people of Lot - was accused of it during the time of Umar, so Umar ordered some of the young men of Quraysh not to sit with him.”

This hadith indicates caution against sitting with a beardless boy, especially one who is accused.

Fourth: Why the Young Men of Quraysh Specifically?

QuestionRegarding the question: Why did Omar forbid the young men of Quraysh in particular from sitting with this man?!
AnswerAnswer: It seems that this story happened in the Quraysh tribe, and that is why Omar directed the matter specifically to them, as he was the emir of Medina, Mecca, and other cities.

Fifth: Why Did Omar Not Exile Him as He Exiled Nasr ibn Hajjaj?

QuestionOne of the pagan Shiites asks: Why did Omar not exile this man as he exiled Nasr ibn Hajjaj?
AnswerAnswer: Assuming the story of Nasr ibn Hajjaj is true and reliable, it says that a woman was infatuated with Jamal Nasr, so Caliph Omar tried in every way to prevent Jamal Nasr from seeing her so that she wouldn’t be tempted by him. When Omar’s attempts failed, he banished this man from Medina so that the woman wouldn’t be tempted by him.
Difference Between the Two CasesAs for the story of the man accused of committing the same act as Lot’s people, if Omar had denied it, the fundamental problem would have remained; because the accused would have gone to another country and mingled with its people there. Therefore, Omar realized that the ideal solution was to prevent the Quraysh youth from sitting with him.

Finally: Why Did Some Imams Dislike Looking at a Handsome Boy?

QuestionFinally:

A disabled Shiite asks in astonishment: Why did some of the Imams of Islam hate it when someone looks at a handsome boy? That is, they hate it when someone looks sharply at a handsome boy?!

AnswerThe answer is simply that Islamic scholars wanted to prevent the weak-hearted from slipping into the abyss of sexual perversion, as there are some people whose desires are aroused when they look at a beautiful child, so they kidnap him and commit an immoral act with him.
Personal ObservationI personally have seen some sinners who commit this abomination, and that is why Islamic scholars have forbidden the weak-hearted from looking at any handsome young man for too long, lest they be tempted by him.
Contrast With AtheismAs for atheism, the atheist allows watching pornographic and homosexual films and he has no problem with that.