When Imam Can't Answer

Yesterday I attended a talk by this man :

No he did not miss his medication. Thats how he looks. He is the Imam of the Masjid Nabawi in Medina in Saudi Arabia - the third most important mosque in the world after the Mosque of the Haram in Mecca and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem.  His name is Shaykh Salah al Budayr from Saudi Arabia.  

He gave a brief talk titled "Reviving the Islamic Spirit & The Future Of Islamic Civilisation" - a rather huge topic to be discussed in a 20 minute speech.  He spoke in Arabic which was translated by a moderator (who is also a friend of mine). Not only is he the Imam (prayer leader) of the Masjid Nabawi but he is also a judge at the High Court in Saudi Arabia.  

He would be among the people who pass death sentences where people are executed in public on Friday by getting their heads chopped off - Saudi Arabian style. So I dont know how much he could add to reviving the Islamic Civilisation. Surely there has to be more to Islam.

Anyway at question time I was able to ask my usual  questions.  Since he was a Judge at the High Court in Medina, Saudi Arabia I asked three short questions which were all related to adultery or zina:

My questions were :

1. What was his view towards the admissibility of forensic evidence in adultery cases (zina) ? I drew specific reference to the Surah Yusuf in the Quran where the Prophet Yusuf was cleared of a charge of immoral behaviour  through the use of forensic evidence.

2. As a Judge in the High Court at Medina in Saudi Arabia was he personally aware of any adultery cases (zina) where four men of good character were presented as witnesses who had witnessed the adultery or zina taking place?

3. If not in his personal knowledge as a Judge at the High Court in Medina then does he have knowledge of any case precedents during the Ottoman Caliphate or any other Caliphate going back in Islamic history where four male witnesses were presented to prove any case of adultery?

He simply did not answer questions 1 and 3.  

He had no answer about the use of forensic evidence  as per Surah Yusuf  in the Quran.  Neither did he answer Question 3. I have been pursuing this question since last year. There is no case precedent in over 1400 years of Islamic courts where four male witnesses of good character had witnessed  an act of adultery. There is especially none in any of the works of the old religious scholars like Syafie, Hanafi, Maliki, Hambali and others.  

In other words there has never been a case of adultery successfully prosecuted in a religious court anywhere in Islamic history through the use of four witnesses.  

It is almost impossible to convict anyone of adultery if the standard of evidence requires four male witnesses of good character.  This is why our Brader insisted that his homosexuality and adultery cases be handled at the Syariah Courts.  He knows there were no four male witnesses - sure boleh menang kes.

What about a girl who gets raped and becomes pregnant but cannot present four male witnesses of good character to prove that she was raped? Well she will be found guilty of adultery and she will be stoned to death.  Thats how it works.

We must understand that nowhere in the Quran does it say specifically that zina (adultery, fornication) requires four witnesses - male or female. Four witnesses are required when a woman of good character is "accused".  It does not specify an accusation of zina or adultery but it does specify a woman of good character (muhsanaati).  It would appear that women are given greater protection in the Quran.

As I have stated above - the Quran (Surah 12 or Surah Yusuf) clearly provides an example where Yusuf was acquitted of a charge of seducing a woman through the use of forensic evidence.  Forensic evidence is stated clearly in the Quran. 

I think it is generally accepted that if you dont follow the Quran or you reject the Quran, then of course you cannot be a Muslim.

However the most interesting answer given by the Imam was Question No. 2. As  Judge of the High Court in Medina did he have any personal knowledge of any zina or adultery cases in Saudi Arabia where four males were presented as witnesses?

He said he had no personal knowledge. The translator added - slightly tongue in cheek - that "apparently there were no cases of zina or adultery in Saudi Arabia."  

Someone told me later that the man was just an imam - a prayer leader in the mosque. He was not a scholar, academic or intellectual hence his knowledge of legal issues would be limited and that was why he could not answer my questions. I definitely agreed.  But how then does he handle his job as a Judge at the High Court ? That is perplexing.