Punishment of the Forced Adulterer in Islamic Jurisprudence

Abstract

Reluctance to commit adultery is either directed at a woman or a man. Therefore, whenever a woman is forced to commit adultery, whether she is reluctant, complete or incomplete, according to the majority of jurists, considering the verse: {وَلَا تُكْرِهُوا فَتَيَاتِكُمْ عَلَى الْبِغَاءِ إِنْ أَرَدْنَ تَحَصُّنًا لِتَبْتَغُوا عَرَضَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَمَنْ يُكْرِهْهُنَّ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ مِنْ بَعْدِ إِكْرَاهِهِنَّ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ}.  The Sharia (Hadd) does not apply to him. Because the verse of negating the sin of a woman who is forced to commit adultery, and when the sin is negated, the Sharia (Hadd) is ignored. However, if a man is forced to commit adultery, there is a different opinion among the jurists regarding the implementation of the Sharia (Hadd). According to the perspectives of Abu Hanifa's companions, Mukhtar and Mufti Imam Malik and apparently the opinion of Shafis’ ar, “a man who is forced to commit adultery”  due to the pseudo-reluctance, the Sharia (Hadd) is not necessary.Most of the Malikis and Hanbalis believe that there is an incumbent of Sharia (Hadd) on abominable (Makrooh). Because intercourse does not take place without the penis being moved consciously. So, whenever the movement of the penis is seen, the reluctance is eliminated and the Sharia (Hadd) is obligatory. From Imam Abu Hanifa's point of view, there is a difference between the reluctance of a ruler (king) and a non-ruler. So there is no Sharia (Hadd) to ruler's reluctance; because he cannot get rid of the king by appealing to someone who is stronger than him. But by referring to the king, he can overcome the reluctance of others.