It is often argued from liberals that the people of Lut عليه السلام were only punished because they were rapists, in this post I will be showing the Qur’an verses that speak on this story and the tafaseer that explain why they were actually punished. I will also show from the scholars what they say the punishment is for someone who commits the deed of the People of Lut عليه السلام.
Everything highlited in green from the tafaseer translations shows that their punishment was not only in regads to rape but also because the men desired men over women.
Click Here To See The Punishment For Deed Of People Of Lut عليه السلام
Click Here To See More From Ibn Al Qayyim On Their Punishment
Click Here To See Beastiality Punishment
In Surah Ash-Shu’ara: 165-166 Allah says:
لَتَأْتُونَ ٱلذُّكْرَانَ مِنَ ٱلْعَـٰلَمِينَ وَتَذَرُونَ مَا خَلَقَ لَكُمْ رَبُّكُم مِّنْ أَزْوَٰجِكُم ۚ بَلْ أَنتُمْ قَوْمٌ عَادُونَ
Why do you ˹men˺ lust after fellow men, leaving the wives that your Lord has created for you? In fact, you are a transgressing people.”
From this verse it is very clear that this is not referring to rape, but it is about men lusting after other men. To further back this even though it is crystal clear we will open the tafsir.
Translation: “The people of Lot denied the messengers” until the end
They responded to him and he replied to them just as those before them had done. Their hearts were alike in disbelief, so their words were similar too. Alongside their idolatry, they used to commit an indecent act which no one in the universe before them had ever done.
They chose to have intercourse with males, which is something repulsive and filthy, and they turned away from the women whom Allah had created for them. They did this because of their excess and transgression.
Lut did not stop calling them away from it, until they said to him, “If you do not stop, O Lut, you will surely be among those expelled” meaning from the town. Then when he saw their persistence, he said, “I truly loathe your actions” meaning that I detest your deeds, I forbid them, and I warn against them.
Taysir al-Karim al-Rahman (Tafseer as-Sa’di) Pg 698
Allah also says:
وَلُوطًا إِذْ قَالَ لِقَوْمِهِ أَتَأْتُونَ ٱلْفَـٰحِشَةَ مَا سَبَقَكُم بِهَا مِنْ أَحَدٍۢ مِّنَ ٱلْعَـٰلَمِينَ
And ˹remember˺ when Lot scolded ˹the men of˺ his people, ˹saying,˺ “Do you commit a shameful deed that no man has ever done before?
Translation: Lut in Jordan: his mission to the people of Sodom
Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, sent Lut to the people of Sodom in Jordan. He said to them, “Do you commit the indecent act?” meaning intercourse with males. “No one in the universe ever did this before you.”
Amr ibn Dinar (d. 126 AH) said, “Whenever a man mounts another man in the world, it is from the way of the people of Lot.”
“Indeed, you…” (إِنَّكُمْ): The people of Madinah and Hafs (d. 180 AH) read “Indeed you” with a kasrah under the alif, making it a declarative statement. Others read it as a new sentence. “You approach men” in their behinds, “out of desire instead of women”.
This clarified the indecent act, meaning that the behinds of men had become more desirable to them than the private parts of women. “Rather, you are a people who transgress”, meaning they had gone beyond what is lawful into what is unlawful.
Their worldly comforts and their perversion: Muhammad ibn Ishaq (d. 151 AH) said: They had fruits and villages unlike anything else on earth. People came to them because of that, and the people of Sodom harmed them.
So Iblis appeared to them in the form of an old man and said, “If you do such and such to them, you will protect yourselves.” But they refused.
Then when the people persisted in coming, they approached them and seized beautiful young boys and forced themselves upon them. Their behaviour became increasingly wicked until it took firm hold of them.
Al Hasan Al Basri (d. 110 AH) said: They would not have intercourse except with strangers.
Al Kalbi (d. 146 AH) said: Iblis was the first to do what the people of Lot did. When their land became fertile, people from other regions came to it. Iblis appeared to them in the form of a young man, invited someone to his behind, and was sodomised. Then Allah commanded the sky to pelt them with stones, and commanded the earth to swallow them.
Tafseer Al Baghawi (3/255)
Below is At Tabari’s Tafsir of the ayah where Allah says:
وَمَا كَانَ جَوَابَ قَوْمِهِۦٓ إِلَّآ أَن قَالُوٓاْ أَخْرِجُوهُم مِّن قَرْيَتِكُمْ ۖ إِنَّهُمْ أُنَاسٌۭ يَتَطَهَّرُونَ
And the only response of his people was to say, “Expel them from your land! They are a people who wish to remain chaste!”
Translation: The only response of the people of Lut to his rebuke
Allah, Exalted is He, says: “And the only reply of the people of Lut to Lut” meaning, when he reprimanded them for their ugly deed and their committing of what Allah had forbidden from that filthy act, “was that some of them said to others: Expel Lut and his two daughters.” That is why it was said: “Expel them” using the plural form, even though only Lut had been mentioned previously on his own without others.
It is also possible that the plural refers to: “Expel Lut and those who follow his religion from your town.” So the verse began by mentioning Lut alone, omitting his followers, then ended using the plural form, just as in the verse: “O Prophet, when you (plural) divorce women” (al-Talaq: 1).
“Indeed, they are people who purify themselves”: This means: Lut and those who follow him are people who avoid what we do, namely approaching men from behind.
The scholars of explanation said similar things.
Those who said this: Ibn Wakiʿ (d. 306 AH) narrated from Hani ibn Saʿid an-Nakhaʿi, from al-Hajjaj, from al-Qasim ibn Abi Bura (d. 126 AH), from Mujahid (d. 104 AH), regarding the verse “Indeed, they are people who purify themselves”: he said, “They avoid the behinds of men AND the behinds of women.”
Al-Muthanna also said: Ishaq narrated from Abd al-Razzaq (d. 211 AH), who said: al-Hasan ibn Umara, from al-Hakam, from Mujahid (d. 104 AH), from Ibn Abbas, regarding the verse “Indeed, they are people who purify themselves”: he said, “from the behinds of men AND the behinds of women.”
Muhammad ibn al-Husayn said: Ahmad narrated from Asbat, from al-Suddi (d. 128 AH), who said about the verse “Indeed, they are people who purify themselves”: it means, “They are overly cautious.”
Bishr said: Yazid narrated from Saʿid, from Qatadah (d. 117 AH) regarding the same verse: he said, “They criticised them for something that is not blameworthy and censured them without reason.”
Tafsir At Tabari (10/306/307)
For the verse Al-A’raf verse 80:
وَلُوطًا إِذْ قَالَ لِقَوْمِهِ أَتَأْتُونَ ٱلْفَـٰحِشَةَ مَا سَبَقَكُم بِهَا مِنْ أَحَدٍۢ مِّنَ ٱلْعَـٰلَمِينَ
And ˹remember˺ when Lot scolded ˹the men of˺ his people, ˹saying,˺ “Do you commit a shameful deed that no man has ever done before?
I will post Ibn Kathir and Qurtubi’s tafsir of this ayah
Translation: Lut and his mission to the people of Sodom
Lut was the son of Haran, the son of Azar. He was the nephew of Ibrahim the Close Friend of Allah, peace be upon them both. He believed along with Ibrahim عليه السلام and migrated with him to the land of al-Sham. Allah, Exalted is He, sent him to the people of Sodom and the villages around it.
He called them to Allah, commanded them to do what is right, and forbade them from the evils, prohibitions, and indecent acts they had invented. No one from the children of Adam, or anyone else, had ever done such things before.
That act was approaching males for intercourse. This was something the children of Adam had never known or accepted, and it never even crossed their minds—until the people of Sodom, upon whom be the curses of Allah, committed it.
Amr ibn Dinar (d. 126 AH) said about the verse, “No one in the universe ever preceded you in this”: No man had ever mounted another man until the people of Lut.
Al-Walid ibn Abd al-Malik, the Umayyad caliph and builder of the Jami Masjid in Damascus, said: “If Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, had not told us the story of Lut, I would never have imagined that a man could mount another man.”
This is why Lut عليه السلام said to them: “Do you commit the indecent act that no one in the universe before you has ever committed? Indeed, you approach men out of desire instead of women” meaning that you turned away from the women your Lord created for you and turned instead to men. This is a form of excess and ignorance, because it is placing something where it does not belong.
That is why in another verse he said to them, “These are my daughters, if you must do something” (al-Hijr: 71). He directed them to their own women. But they replied to him by making excuses, saying that they had no desire for women. “They said: You certainly know that we have no claim upon your daughters, and you certainly know what we want” (Hud: 79), meaning: You know very well that we have no interest or desire for women, and you know that what we want is your guests.
The scholars of tafsir mentioned that the men had become satisfied with one another, and the same was true of their women—some of the women had become satisfied with other women.
Tafsir Ibn Kathir (3/444-445)
Qurtubi’s tafsir of this verse also goes into the punishment of this act, and I will finish off this post with more sources from what the ulama say on their punishment, and it is quite extensive so I will break it down before the full translation.
The meaning and ruling of the act of the people of Lut
The act refers to intercourse between males and is described in the Quran as fahishah (indecent act), like zina. Scholars agreed it is prohibited, but differed on the punishment.
Imam Malik said the one who does it should be stoned whether married or not, and the same applies to the passive partner if he is an adult. Another view from Malik is that the unmarried is imprisoned and disciplined. This was also the view of early scholars like Ata, al-Nakhaʿi, and Ibn al-Musayyib.
Imam Abu Hanifah said the punishment is taʿzir (discretionary, meaning it depends on the judge on what punishment he should get whether it is lashes oor stoning), whether married or not. This is also one of Malik’s views.
Imam Ash-Shafiʿi considered the act to fall under the same hadd punishment as zina, based on analogy. Malik used the verse “And We rained upon them stones of clay” as evidence, but some argued this was due to their disbelief. However, others responded that the act was part of their sins and others were punished for supporting it.
Hadith evidence on the punishment
Several narrations mention the Prophet ﷺ saying: “Whoever does the act of the people of Lut, kill the one who does it and the one it is done to.” This was reported by Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasai, and al-Daraqutni, all through Ikrimah from Ibn Abbas.
But there is criticism of the chain: Amr ibn Abi Amr is considered trustworthy, but his narrations from Ikrimah are seen as strange, and it is not confirmed that he heard from Ikrimah. Some said the hadith is denied.
Another narration adds: “whether he is married or not,” but this version is weak due to the presence of a rejected narrator.
There is also a report that Ibn Abbas said a man who commits this act is to be stoned, even if unmarried.
Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, burned a man who committed this act. Ali advised this, and the companions agreed. Ibn al-Zubayr and other governors later did the same. In one case, Ibn al-Zubayr found four married men guilty and ordered them stoned, and lashed the remaining three. Ibn Abbas and Ibn Umar were present and did not object. Al-Shafiʿi followed this opinion. Ibn al-Arabi said Malik’s view is strongest.
The Hanafi position
The Hanafis argued this act is not zina, so it does not carry the zina punishment. They quoted a hadith: “Whoever applies a hadd where it does not belong has committed injustice,” though it is mursal. They said this act lacks legal features of zina like valid marriage, dowry, or lineage, so no hadd applies.
Ruling on intercourse with animals
Some scholars said neither the person nor the animal should be killed. Others, like Abu Salamah, said both should be killed.
A hadith narrated by Abu Dawud and al-Daraqutni from Ibn Abbas says: “Whoever has intercourse with an animal, kill him and the animal.” Ibn Abbas explained the animal is killed to prevent its meat from being eaten.
Ibn al-Mundhir said: If the hadith is authentic, it must be followed. If not, the person should repent, and the ruler may punish him. It was also said that the animal is killed to prevent deformity in any offspring.
Ibn Abbas said there is no hadd for bestiality. This was also the view of Ata. Al-Hakam said the person should be lashed but not to the level of hadd. Al-Hasan said he is like a person who commits zina.
Az-Zuhri said: one hundred lashes, married or not. Malik, al-Thawri, Ahmad, and the Hanafis said the punishment is taʿzir. Reports from al-Shafiʿi differ on this. Jabir ibn Zayd said: hadd applies unless the animal belongs to the person.
Translation: The verse “And Lut when he said to his people…”
Al-Farra’ said: The name Lut is derived from the saying “I have stuck to the pond (luttul hawd)” meaning I smoothed it over with clay. (This statement is attributed to al-Zajjaj, who said that the grammarians, meaning al-Farra’, claimed that the name Lut could be derived from the verb lutta, as in coating with clay. See al-Maʿani by al-Farra’, 2/351–352, and Iʿrab al-Quran by al-Nahhas, 2/137.)
But this is a mistake, because foreign (non-Arabic) names are not derived, such as Ishaq. One cannot say that Ishaq comes from saḥq, which means “distance.” The reason the name Lut is declined (takes case endings) is because it is light and consists of three letters with a silent middle. (See al-Sihah under “Lut” and Tafsir al-Razi, 14/168.)
Al-Naqqash said: Lut is a non-Arabic name and not from the Arabic language. As for the verb luttu al-hawd or the expression hadha yalittu bi qalbi (this sticks to my heart), these are valid in Arabic, but the name itself is foreign.
Sibawayh (d. 180 AH) said: Nuh and Lut are foreign names, but they are light, so they are declined. (See al-Kitab, 3/235.)
Allah sent him to a nation called Sodom. He was the nephew of Ibrahim. The accusative form of Lut in the verse may relate back to the previously mentioned verb “We sent”, so it is a conjunction. Or it may be in the accusative due to an implied verb like “and mention Lut.” (See the explanation at the verse “Indeed We sent Nuh to his people…” (al-Aʿraf: 59), Tafsir al-Muḥarrar al-Wajiz, 2/424, and Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 3/444.)
The verse “Do you approach the indecent act?” means intercourse with males. Allah described it as fahishah (indecent act) to show that it is a form of zina, just as He said: “Do not go near zina, for it is an indecent act” (al-Isra: 32).
Punishment For Deed Of The People Of Lut عليه السلام
The scholars agreed on its prohibition but differed on the punishment for someone who does it. Malik (d. 179 AH) said: He is to be stoned, whether he is previously married or not. The same applies to the passive partner if he has reached puberty. It is also narrated from Malik that the one who is married is stoned, and if he is not, he is imprisoned and disciplined. This is also the view of Ata (d. 114 AH), al-Nakhaʿi (d. 96 AH), Ibn al-Musayyib (d. 94 AH), and others. (See al-Muḥarrar al-Wajiz, 2/425, and Ahkam al-Quran by Ibn al-Arabi, 2/776.)
Abu Hanifah (d. 150 AH) said: Both the active and passive partners, whether married or not, are punished with discretionary punishment (taʿzir). This is also one of the views attributed to Malik.
Al-Shafiʿi (d. 204 AH) said: He is given the same hadd punishment as zina, by analogy. (This is also found in al-Ishraf, 2/36; al-Istidhkar, 24/78; and Ahkam al-Quran by Ibn al-Arabi, 2/776.)
Malik used as evidence the verse: “And We rained upon them stones of clay” (Hud: 82), which was a punishment and consequence for their action.
It may be said that this is not a valid proof for two reasons:
First, the people of Lut were punished for disbelief and denial, like other nations.
Second, both young and old were included in the punishment, which shows that it was not a legal hadd punishment.
In response: As for the first, it is incorrect, because Allah clearly informed us that they were guilty of sins for which He punished them, and this act was among them.
As for the second, there were some among them who committed the act, and others who were pleased with it, so all were punished.
Hadith evidence on the punishment
Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasai, and al-Daraqutni narrated that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Whoever you find doing the deed of the people of Lut, kill the one doing it and the one it is done to.” This is the wording of Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah. (Sunan Abu Dawud, 4462; Sunan Ibn Majah, 2561; Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 1456; al-Nasai al-Kubra, 7297; al-Daraqutni, 3234. Also found in Musnad Ahmad, 2732, all through the route of Amr ibn Abi Amr from Ikrimah from Ibn Abbas. Al-Bukhari said (as in al-ʿIlal al-Kabir by al-Tirmidhi, 2/622): Amr ibn Abi Amr is truthful, but he narrated odd things from Ikrimah. Al-Tirmidhi said: It is not mentioned that he heard from Ikrimah. Ibn Maʿin said: Amr is trustworthy, but the hadith of Ikrimah from Ibn Abbas about this punishment is denied. See Mizan al-Iʿtidal, 3/282.)
In another narration in al-Tirmidhi: “Whether he is married or not.” (This wording was not found in al-Tirmidhi, but it was reported by al-Bazzar from Abu Hurayrah. It includes ʿAsim ibn Umar al-ʿUmari. Ibn Hajar said in al-Talkhis al-Habir, 4/55: It is not authentic. ʿAsim is rejected.)
Abu Dawud and al-Daraqutni narrated from Ibn Abbas that a single man found committing liwat is stoned. (Sunan Abu Dawud, 4463; Sunan al-Daraqutni, 3235. Also narrated by al-Nasai al-Kubra, 7298.)
It is also narrated that Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, burned a man named al-Fujāʾah who committed the act of the people of Lut with fire. This was also the view of Ali ibn Abi Talib, for when Khalid ibn al-Walid wrote to Abu Bakr about a case of liwat, Abu Bakr consulted the companions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, and Ali said: “No nation before has disobeyed Allah in this way except one, and you know what Allah did to them. I think he should be burned with fire.” So the companions agreed, and Abu Bakr wrote to Khalid to burn him, and he burned him. (This is mentioned by Ibn al-Mundhir in al-Ishraf, 2/36.)
Ibn al-Zubayr later burned others for this offence in his time. Hisham ibn al-Walid did the same. Then Khalid al-Qasri burned them in Iraq. (Mentioned in al-Muhalla, 11/381. Khalid al-Qasri is Khalid ibn Abd Allah al-Dimashqi, Abu al-Haytham, governor of the two Iraqs under Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik. He died in 126 AH. See Siyar Aʿlam al-Nubalaʾ, 5/425.)
It is also reported that seven men were caught during the rule of Ibn al-Zubayr for committing liwat. When he investigated their case, he found that four of them were married, so he ordered them to be taken out of the sacred precinct and stoned to death. The remaining three were punished with lashes. At the time, Ibn Abbas and Ibn Umar were present and did not object. (Reported by al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra, 8/233.)
This is the opinion that al-Shafiʿi followed. (This is also found in al-Ishraf, 2/36.)
Ibn al-Arabi said: The view of Malik is the most correct, as it has the strongest chain and most reliable basis. (Ahkam al-Quran, 2/776.)
The Hanafi view and their reasoning
The Hanafis argued that since the punishment for zina is well known, and this act is not zina, it should not share the same punishment. They also cited a hadith: “Whoever places a hadd where there is no hadd has committed injustice and oppression.” (Reported by al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra, 8/327, and he said: The preserved version is that it is mursal.)
They also said that this act involves intercourse in a place where there is no validity of marriage, no concept of consummation, no obligation of dowry, and no establishing of lineage, so the legal hadd does not apply.
If someone has intercourse with an animal, there are two opinions:
Some said neither the person nor the animal should be killed.
Others said both should be killed. This was reported by Ibn al-Mundhir from Abu Salamah ibn Abd al-Rahman.
In this regard, there is a hadith reported by Abu Dawud and al-Daraqutni from Ibn Abbas: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Whoever has intercourse with an animal, kill him and the animal.”
We asked Ibn Abbas, “Why the animal?”
He said, “I think the Prophet only said that to prevent its meat from being eaten after it had been defiled by that act.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, 4464; Sunan al-Daraqutni, 3237; also reported in al-Tirmidhi, 1455, and al-Nasai al-Kubra, 7300. The marfuʿ portion is in Musnad Ahmad, 2420.)
The Punishment For Intercourse With Animals
Ibn al-Mundhir (d. 318 AH) said: If the hadith is authentic, then it must be acted upon. If it is not authentic, then the one who commits such an act should seek forgiveness from Allah often. And if the ruler disciplines him, that would be good. And Allah knows best. (Reported in al-Ishraf, 2/37–38.)
It has also been said: The reason the animal is to be killed is to prevent it from giving birth to a deformed offspring. So its killing would be in the interest of preventing such corruption, in addition to the hadiths from the Sunnah. And Allah knows best.
Abu Dawud narrated from Ibn Abbas (d. 68 AH) that there is no legal hadd on the one who fornicates with an animal. Abu Dawud added: This was also the view of Ata (d. 114 AH). Al-Hakam (d. 115 AH) said: I believe he should be lashed, but the punishment should not reach the level of hadd. Al-Hasan (d. 110 AH) said: He is like a person who commits zina. (Sunan Abu Dawud, 4465; also narrated in Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 1455.)
Al-Zuhri (d. 124 AH) said: He should be lashed one hundred times, whether he is married or not. Malik (d. 179 AH), al-Thawri (d. 161 AH), Ahmad (d. 241 AH), and the scholars of opinion (meaning Abu Hanifah and his companions) said: He should receive a discretionary punishment. This is also narrated from Ata, al-Nakhaʿi (d. 96 AH), and al-Hakam. The narrations from al-Shafiʿi (d. 204 AH) differ, and this difference is most consistent with his general approach in this area. (See al-Ishraf, 2/37: “And I found the position of al-Shafiʿi on this matter unclear due to the differing reports from him.”)
Jabir ibn Zayd (d. 93 AH) said: The legal hadd should be carried out on him unless the animal belongs to him. (See al-Muḥarrar al-Wajiz, 2/424.)
The verse “No one in the universe has ever preceded you in this”
The word “min” here implies a complete generalisation of all species, meaning that no nation before the people of Lut had ever committed the act of liwat. The heretics claim that it existed before them, but the truth is what is found in the Quran.
Al-Naqqash reported that Iblis was the origin of this act: he called them to himself, may Allah curse him, and they began to have intercourse with one another. Al-Hasan (d. 110 AH) said: They used to do that with strangers only, and did not do it to one another. (This is quoted from al-Nahhas.)
Ibn Majah narrated from Jabir ibn Abd Allah (d. 78 AH) that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “The thing I fear most for my nation is the act of the people of Lut.” (Sunan Ibn Majah, 2563; also reported in Musnad Ahmad, 15093, and Sunan al-Tirmidhi, 1457, who said: a hasan and rare hadith.)
Muhammad ibn Sirin (d. 110 AH) said: “There is no animal among the beasts that does the act of the people of Lut except the pig and the donkey.” (Mentioned by al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi in Nawadir al-Usul, p. 132, and earlier in his works, 7/119.)
Tafsir Al Qurtubi (9/273-278)
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: That the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “Whomever you find doing the actions of the people of Lut then kill the one doing it, and the one it is done to.” (Jami’ At Tirmidhi 1456)
Translation: Imam At Tirmidhi said: And in this topic, there are narrations also from Jabir and Abu Hurayrah.
Abu Isa (al-Tirmidhi) said: This hadith is only known from Ibn Abbas from the Prophet ﷺ through this specific chain. Muhammad ibn Ishaq narrated this hadith from Amr ibn Abi Amr and said: “Cursed is the one who does the act of the people of Lut.” He did not mention killing in the hadith but did mention: “Cursed is the one who has intercourse with an animal.”
This hadith has also been narrated from Asim ibn Umar, from Suhayl ibn Abi Salih, from his father, from Abu Hurayrah, from the Prophet ﷺ: “Kill the one who does it and the one it is done to.”
Abu Isa said: This hadith has weakness in its chain. We do not know of anyone who narrated it from Suhayl ibn Abi Salih except Asim ibn Umar al-Umari. And Asim ibn Umar is criticised in hadith due to his weak memory.
The scholars differed about the legal punishment for the one who commits liwat (anal intercourse). Some of them held that he is to be stoned, whether he is married or not. This is the opinion of Malik (d. 179 AH), al-Shafiʿi (d. 204 AH), Ahmad (d. 241 AH), and Ishaq (d. 238 AH).
Others from the jurists among the Tabiʿin, including al-Hasan al-Basri (d. 110 AH), Ibrahim al-Nakhaʿi (d. 96 AH), Ata ibn Abi Rabah (d. 114 AH), and others said: The punishment for the one who commits liwat is the same as for the one who commits zina. This is also the view of al-Thawri (d. 161 AH) and the scholars of Kufa.
Jami’ At Tirmidhi (3/124-125)
Ibn Al Qayyim On Hukm Of Those Who Commit Sodomy
Translation: It is not confirmed that the Prophet ruled on the matter of liwat (sodomy) with a specific legal judgement, because this act was not known among the Arabs and was never referred to him. However, it is authentically reported that he said: “Kill the one who does it and the one it is done to.” This was narrated by the four authors of the Sunan, and its chain is sound. Al Tirmidhi said: It is a good hadith (hasan) (This was narrated by Ahmad (2732) and (2727), al Tirmidhi (1456), Abu Dawud (4462), Ibn Majah (2561), and al Bayhaqi 8/232, from the narration of Ibn Abbas who said: The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Lut, kill the one who does it and the one it is done to.’ Its chain is sound and al Hakim authenticated it in 4/355 and al Dhahabi agreed with him. It also has a supporting narration from Abu Hurayrah in Ibn Majah (2562) and al Hakim 4/355, though its chain is weak, but acceptable as supporting evidence. See al Targhib wal Tarhib 3/199–200 by al Mundhiri).
Abu Bakr al Siddiq ruled with this punishment and wrote to Khalid about it after consulting the Companions. He was among the strictest in dealing with it.
Ibn al Qassar said, and so did our teacher, that the Companions agreed on killing the one who commits it. Their difference was only in how he should be killed. Abu Bakr al Siddiq said: He should be thrown from a high place. Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, said: A wall should be brought down upon him. Ibn Abbas said: They should be stoned to death. (This means there was agreement among them on the necessity of executing him, even if they disagreed on the method of execution.)
This ruling aligns with the ruling for someone who has sexual intercourse with a close blood relative (mahram), because intercourse in both cases is never permitted under any circumstance. That is why the two were combined in the hadith of Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him.
It is reported from him that he said: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Lut, kill him.” And he also narrated: “Whoever has intercourse with a close blood relative, kill him.” And in another narration with the same chain: “Whoever has intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill the animal along with him.” (This was narrated by Ahmad (2420), Abu Dawud (4464), al Tirmidhi (1454), al Hakim 4/355, and al Bayhaqi 8/233–234, from Ibn Abbas in the wording: ‘Whoever has intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill the animal with him.’ Its chain is sound. Ibn Majah (2564) also narrated it from Ibn Abbas with the wording: ‘Whoever has intercourse with a close blood relative, kill him. And whoever has intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill the animal.’ Though its chain is weak, the previous narration supports it. Also mentioned earlier is the hadith of al Bara ibn Azib which is authentic, that the Messenger of Allah sent Abu Burdah ibn Niyar to a man who married his father’s wife and ordered that his neck be struck).
This ruling agrees with the judgement of the Lawgiver, because the more severe the prohibition, the more severe the punishment. Intercourse with someone who is never permissible under any condition is a greater crime than intercourse with someone who is sometimes permissible, and so the legal punishment for it should be more severe.
Imam Ahmad stated in one of the two narrations from him that the ruling for the one who has intercourse with an animal is the same as the ruling for liwat: he is to be executed in all cases, or the punishment is that of the adulterer.
The early generations differed in this matter.
Al Hasan said: His punishment is the same as that of the adulterer.
Abu Salamah reported from him that he is to be executed in all cases. Al Shaabi and al Nakha‘i said: He is to be disciplined (ta‘zīr).
This was the opinion adopted by al Shafi‘i, Malik, Abu Hanifah, and Ahmad in one narration. This is also what Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, gave as a legal verdict, and he is the one who narrated the hadith.
Zad Al Ma’ad By Ibn Al Qayyim (5/36-38
