Husband dating another woman adultery
In other cases of abrogations we can clearly see why the Qur`anic laws changed.
Thus in some cases, abrogation results because full legislation is postponed till it becomes really necessary, as in case of prohibition of drinking.
The fallacy of [their] argument becomes obvious, if one uses common sense in the application of the appropriate meaning of .
In the case of the guilty slave girl, it has been used in the sense married woman, enjoying the protection of the husband, as is plain from the subsequent clause, after they have been fortified in wedlock ().
This is all that Mawdudi says about the words of God: and ] has been used in two different senses, that is (1) wedded wives, enjoying the protection of their husbands and (2) free Muslim women, enjoying the protection of their families, even though they might not have been married.
Then he comments: The Kharijis and those other people who do not believe in the stoning of an adulterous woman have misused this verse 25 to prove their own point of view.
But there are other ahadith in which the married persons who commit zina` are not flogged before being stoned to death.
The question is considered only in passing while discussing the views of ) will be averted only if she also takes the oaths.
If she does not take the oaths, she is necessarily subject to punishment.
In other cases, it results from first setting high ideals and then making allowance for human weaknesses, as in case of reduction in the number of fighting persons on the enemys side from ten times () the believers strength to twice that strength (); in such cases the purpose is to give realistic laws while keeping high ideals before us.
But what is the purpose of first adding 100 lashes to death by stoning and then removing them?