ﱺ ﱻ ﱼ ﱽ ﱾ ﱿ ﲀ ﲁ ﲂ
And do not approach unlawful sexual intercourse. Indeed, it is ever an immorality and is evil as a way.
ﱺ ﱻ ﱼ ﱽ ﱾ ﱿ ﲀ ﲁ ﲂ
And do not approach unlawful sexual intercourse. Indeed, it is ever an immorality and is evil as a way.
Tafsir
Verse range: 17:32
Know that when the Almighty commanded the five matters previously mentioned—which essentially return to two things: reverence for God's command and compassion for God's creation—He followed them by mentioning prohibitions against certain acts.
The first of these is His prohibition against adultery, where He said: {And do not approach} (ولا تقربوا).
Al-Qaffal said: When a person is told, "Do not approach this," it is a stronger prohibition than if he were told, "Do not do it." Furthermore, the Almighty explained this prohibition by stating that it {was an abomination and an evil way} (كان فاحشة وساء سبيلا).
Know that people have differed regarding whether, when the Almighty commands or prohibits something, it can be said that He commanded or prohibited it for a reason pertaining to that thing itself, or not.
Those who affirm the intellect's capacity to judge good and evil (i.e., that things are inherently good or bad) argue that this is the case. Those who deny the intellect's capacity to judge good and evil argue otherwise.
The proponents of the intellect's capacity to judge good and evil used this verse as proof for their position. They said: The Almighty prohibited adultery and based that prohibition on it being an fahishah (abomination). Therefore, it is impossible that its being an fahishah is merely a synonym for it being prohibited. If that were the case, it would lead to defining a thing by itself, which is impossible. Thus, it must be that its being an fahishah is a quality inherent to it by virtue of it being adultery. This indicates that things possess inherent goodness or badness due to reasons pertaining to themselves, and it also indicates that God's prohibition of them is based on their inherent nature. This line of reasoning is plausible.
However, it is better to say that a thing's inherent quality of being a benefit (maslaha) or a harm (mafsada) is established by its own nature, not by Divine Law. For instance, consuming suitable food is a benefit, and painful striking is a harm; the determination of this is established by reason, not by the Law.
If this is established, we say: The injunctions of God Almighty align with the benefits of the world in both worldly life (ma'ash) and the Hereafter (ma'ad). This is the apparent discourse, yet it contains tremendous complexities and deep discussions, for which we ask God for success in reaching the ultimate goal.
Having understood this, we say: Adultery encompasses several types of harms:
If this is established, we say: Since intercourse involves humiliation, seeking to reduce it aligns with reason. Restricting one woman to one man seeks to reduce this act. Furthermore, the humiliation inherent in marriage is compensated for by the benefits derived from it. Adultery, however, opens the door to that reprehensible act without being compensated by any benefits. Therefore, it must remain under the original ruling of prohibition and restraint. Thus, sound intellects judge adultery to be reprehensible based on what we have mentioned.
If this is established, we say: The Almighty described adultery with three attributes: being an fahishah (abomination), being an object of maqt (loathing) in another verse, and {and an evil way} (wa sa'a sabila).
We mentioned six aspects regarding the reprehensibility of adultery, while God Almighty mentioned three terms. We have assigned each of these three terms to two aspects from those six. And God knows best His intent.