❖ Does Hinting (تعريض) Make the Ḥadd Obligatory?
Written by: Imran Ayoob Lahori
The question is: Does ta‘rīḍ (hinting, alluding, or implying through indirect speech) make the ḥadd (prescribed punishment) obligatory or not? There is a difference of opinion on this matter:
◈ Opinions of the Schools of Thought
(Ḥanafiyyah)
Ta‘rīḍ does not make the ḥadd obligatory, even if the intention of qaḏf (slander/accusation of adultery) is present.
(Mālikiyyah)
If the circumstances and indications prove that qaḏf was intended through ta‘rīḍ, then ḥadd will become obligatory.
(Shāfi‘iyyah)
If the intention of qaḏf is present and then the person clarifies it openly, then ḥadd will be obligatory due to ta‘rīḍ.
(Ḥanābilah)
From Imām Aḥmad (رحمه الله) different narrations have been transmitted:
➊ No ḥadd is due.
➋ Ḥadd is due.
References:
المبسوط: 120/9 ، فتح القدير: 191/4 ، بدائع الصنائع: 42/7 ، تبين الحقائق: 200/3 ، بداية المجتهد: 432/2 ، حاشية الدسوقى: 327/4 ، القوانين الفقهية: ص / 357 ، المهذب: 273/2 ، المغني: 222/8
◈ The Preferred Opinion (الراجح)
If from the circumstances and conditions it becomes clear that by ta‘rīḍ or through ambiguous words the intention is to accuse of zinā, or if the person himself admits it in unambiguous words, then ḥadd will be obligatory. Otherwise, it will not be.
This is because the accusation mentioned in the Book of Allah refers to the accuser using words that, from a linguistic, Shar‘ī, or customary perspective, truly apply to the accusation of zinā.
References:
فقه السنة: 537/2 ، الروضة الندية: 608/2
