مقدمة
In the Islamic tradition, adultery is defined as sexual intercourse without a nikah contract, which is unanimous and undisputed. However, in his contemporary reading, Dr. Muhammad Shahrour, may Allah have mercy on him, presented a different interpretation of this concept, considering that adultery is public sexual intercourse, based on two main connotations:
- اشتراط القرآن شهادة أربعة شهود لإثبات واقعة الزنا، وهو ما اعتبره أمرًا لا يمكن تحقّقه إلا إذا وقعت المعاشرة في مكان عام أو على الملأ (سورة النور: 4).
- اعتباره أنَّ الفواحش جميعها مرتبطة حصريًا بالجنس، ممّا جعله يُدرِج الزنا ضمن هذه الفئة.
However, if he looks at the concept of adultery in its full Qur’anic context, especially in Surat al-Nur, he may come up with another explanation that is consistent with what we are proposing in this research.
إشكالية المعنى التراثي للزنا
Limiting ourselves to the traditional meaning that zina is sexual intercourse without a marriage contract raises a number of questions that jurists and exegetes have not addressed with clear answers. The first of these questions, before addressing the meaning of adultery in the Arabic language, is:
- هل أقرّ النص القرآني بوضوح أنَّ الزنا لا يقع إلا بين شخصين مجتمعين؟ أم أنَّه قد يُرتكَب من طرفٍ واحد؟
If adultery is an act that can only be committed by two people, then defining it as sexual intercourse makes sense, as it requires two parties. However, if adultery can be committed by one party, this definition becomes problematic.
To understand this issue, consider the following statement in Surat al-Nur:
“The adulteress and the adulterer, flog each of them with one hundred lashes” (Al-Nur: 2).
Does this expression indicate that there is no such thing as an adulteress without an adulterer or an adulterer without an adulteress? Or does the verse speak of each of them as an independent actor, just as it says about thieves in Surat al-Ma’idah:
“And the thief and the female thief, cut off their hands” (Al-Ma’idah: 38).
It is clear that this last verse does not require a meeting of thieves for the act of theft to take place, but rather indicates that it can be committed by a single individual, male or female. Therefore, why is adultery, on the contrary, understood as only occurring between two parties?
إعادة النظر في دلالة العقوبة
A closer look at the wording of the Qur’anic text reveals an important significance. If adultery were a joint act that necessarily required two parties, the Qur’anic expression would have been closer to his statement:
“The adulteress and the adulterer, flog them both, each of them with one hundred lashes.”
However, the text uses the phrase:
“Flog each of them with one hundred lashes.”
This indicates that the punishment targets each perpetrator of adultery separately, without requiring that the adulterer and the adulteress meet in one common act.
دلالة الحديث النبوي على استقلالية الفعل
This meaning is also emphasized by the hadith, which states:
“If one of you commits adultery, let him flog her” (Sahih Bukhari, No. 2152).
The question arises here: Where is the second party, and why does the novel not mention his punishment?
This silence about the second party suggests that the act of adultery can be committed individually, which reinforces what we are arguing in this research.
التفرقة بين “إتيان الفاحشة” و”الزنا”
If adultery is sexual intercourse without a contract, why does the Qur’anic text use the term “committing fornication” when talking about illicit relationships, and not the term adultery?
“Those who commit adultery with your women” (Al-Nisa: 15).
Whereas elsewhere he said:
“And do not commit adultery” (Mutanah: 12).
This distinction is repeated in several verses, indicating that “committing fornication” is not a direct synonym for the term “adultery” and that the Qur’an makes a distinction between the two.
الزنا وإتيان الفاحشة في قصة لوط
This distinction becomes clearer when looking at the story of Lot, where the expression “committing fornication” is used in a specific context:
“And Lot, when he said to his people, “You are committing obscenity” (Al-A’raf: 80).
“Do you commit adultery while you see” (Al-Naml: 54).
“You are committing adultery” (Al-Ankabut: 28).
This reinforces the hypothesis that “committing fornication” has a broader connotation than “adultery” and relates to illicit sexual behavior in general, not necessarily the traditional sexual relationship between a man and a woman outside of marriage.
In the context of researching the concept of “adultery” in the Qur’anic text, it is necessary to distinguish between different Qur’anic terms that refer to morally and religiously prohibited acts, such as ” committing fornication” and “prostitution”**, and to study their linguistic and legislative connotations according to their uses in the Mahkam al-Tanzil.
The Quran’s use of the term “committing for nication “ refers to a broad concept encompassing multiple acts, not just what is traditionally known as adultery:
“And do not commit immoral acts, what is apparent and what is hidden” (Al-An’am: 151).
The plural form of the word emphasizes the plurality of fornication, which means that adultery is not the only fornication. This is also evident in the saying:
“And do not marry what your fathers married among women, except for what has already been preceded, for it was an abomination and an abomination and a bad way.” (Al-Nisa: 22).
Here, we find that the fornication referred to in the text has nothing to do with adultery, but rather with illicit marriage, which confirms that the concept of fornication is broader than mere illicit sexual relations.
التمييز بين الزنا والبغاء
An important question arises in this context: Are adultery and prostitution synonymous?
Exegetes have interpreted the word “prostitute” in Almighty God:
“She said, “How can I have a son when no man has touched me and I have not been a prostitute?” (Maryam: 20).
as a reference to adultery. They also took the same meaning in the saying of Maryam’s people to her:
“O sister of Aaron, your father was not a bad man and your mother was not a prostitute” (Maryam: 28).
However, if “prostitute” means “adulteress,” why does the Qur’anic text not use this term explicitly? “And your mother was not an adulteress”?
This raises a legitimate question about the accuracy of this interpretation. If they meant to accuse Mary of promiscuity, they should have reminded her that her mother was not accused of adultery, thus weakening the traditional interpreters’ interpretation of “prostitution” as synonymous with adultery.
دلالة “البغاء” في اللسان العربي
It may be argued that prostitution refers to the practice of illicit cohabitation, meaning that all prostitution is adultery, but not all adultery is prostitution. This is recognized by linguistic dictionaries, but the research here goes beyond the traditional Arabic language to the Arabic language in which the Book of Revelation was revealed.
When we return to the origin of the root “bgha” in the Arabic language, we find that its basic meaning is to seek and seek something with passion and strength. This is confirmed by Ibn Faris in his “Lexicon of Language Measures”, where he says:
“(Bogha) The B, G, and Y are two origins: One is seeking something, and the other is a kind of corruption.”
It is clear from tracing the uses of the root “bogha” in the Qur’an that it is used exclusively in the context of demanding bad and corrupt things, not good things, as in the words of Almighty God:
“O People of the Scripture, why do you turn away from the way of Allah from those who believe, seeking to make it crooked, while you are witnesses” (Al-Imran: 99).
And his saying:
He said, “Who else should I seek for a god other than Allah?” (Al-A’raf: 140).
Accordingly, “prostitution” in the Qur’an is associated with the pursuit of corruption and not necessarily with sex or illicit cohabitation. This casts doubt on the traditional interpretation that associates the concept of prostitution with prostitution only.
إعادة تأويل “البغاء” في سورة مريم
If we go back to Mary’s statement:
“I was not a prostitute” (Maryam: 20).
It can be read according to the linguistic meaning of the root:
“I wasn’t seeking or wanting a child.”
This is consistent with the context, as Maryam had vowed to worship without being preoccupied with worldly affairs, as her mother said:
“When the woman of Umaran said, ‘Lord, I have vowed to You what is in my womb freely, so accept from me, for You are the All-Hearing and All-Knowing ‘” (Al-Imran: 35).
This means that Mary was not looking to have a child in the first place, which makes her surprise when Gabriel told her about the baby boy all the more appropriate.
The same is true for her people:
“Your mother was not a prostitute” (Maryam: 28).
If it means that she was not seeking to have a son, this is consistent with her vow to God, as her goal was not to have offspring, but rather to devote herself to worship.
خاتمة
A careful reading of the Qur’anic and Hadith texts highlights the need to reconsider the traditional concepts of adultery, especially with regard to the requirement of bilateralism in its occurrence. Analyzing the linguistic structure of the verses and comparing the terms “fornication” and “adultery”** raises serious questions about the accuracy of the traditional understanding. Hence, research on this topic requires an in-depth study of Qur’anic terms in their linguistic and legislative context, away from the inherited jurisprudential projections.
By analyzing the Quranic terms in their linguistic and legislative context, it also becomes clear that “prostitution ” in the Quran is not necessarily synonymous with “adultery,” and that the root “ prostitution ” refers to seeking corrupt things in general, not just illicit relationships. This reconsiders traditional concepts and highlights the need to revise traditional interpretations according to a rigorous linguistic approach that takes into account the specificities of the Arabic language in the Qur’anic text.
