The story of the monkey who committed adultery and was stoned by the other monkeys

 

The story of the monkey that committed adultery and was stoned by the monkeys

[Question]
- [First: What is the correct explanation of the hadith narrated by the companion Amr ibn Maymun in Sahih al-Bukhari: (I saw in the pre-Islamic era a group of monkeys gathered around her who had committed adultery, so they stoned her , so I stoned her with them.) Second: Can we conclude from this hadith that some animals marry each other and commit adultery in the same way? How would the explanation be for someone who asks about the nature and form of animals marrying each other?] -

[Answer]
Praise be to God.
First:
This story was narrated by Imam Al-Bukhari (3849) on the authority of Amr bin Maymun, who said: (I saw in the pre-Islamic era a monkey that had been surrounded by other monkeys who had committed adultery, so they stoned her, and I stoned her with them).
Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar, may God have mercy on him, said:
“Al-Ismaili narrated this story from another source, at length, on the authority of ‘Isa ibn Hattan, on the authority of ‘Amr ibn Maymun, who said:
I was in Yemen with my family’s sheep, and I was on a high place. A monkey came and placed its hand on her head, then a smaller monkey came and nudged her, so she gently pulled her hand out from under the head of the first monkey and followed him, and he fell on her while I was watching. Then she returned and began to gently put her hand under the cheek of the first monkey, so he woke up frightened, and smelled her and cried out, so the monkeys gathered, and he began to cry out and beckon to her with his hand, so the monkeys went right and left, and they brought that monkey that I knew, so they dug a hole for them and stoned them, and I have seen stoning in people other than the sons of Adam.” End quote.
“Fath al-Bari” (7/160).
This narration - as is apparent - is not from the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), nor from any of his companions (may Allaah be pleased with them). Rather, it was narrated by al-Bukhari (may Allaah have mercy on him) as a narration of what ‘Amr ibn Maymun saw. He is al-Awdi, Abu ‘Abdullah al-Kufi, who died in the year 74 AH. He lived during the pre-Islamic era and the Prophethood and converted to Islam, but he did not see the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Therefore, scholars did not count him among the companions, but rather among the veterans of the great Tabi’un.
See his biography in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (8/11).
It is known that the authentic Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is what must be believed in and what is contained in it must be accepted. As for what one of the Tabi’un narrates about seeing him, it does not rise to the level of the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) under any circumstances.
If we realize that the narration is merely a statement by one of the followers about what he witnessed, we can understand the possibilities that are included in it, and we know that there is no blame on the one who doubts the truth of what happened between the monkeys, or attributes to Amr ibn Maymun the assumption that stoning was a punishment for intercourse between monkeys, for it is certain that Amr ibn Maymun did not understand the logic of monkeys, but rather it was his assumption, and that is something that can be contradicted and not accepted.
Ibn Qutaybah al-Dinawari (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“They said - meaning those who mocked the Sunnah and attacked it - ‘You narrated that monkeys stoned monkeys for adultery.’”
We say in response to this mockery: The hadith about the monkeys is not from the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, nor from his companions, but rather it is something mentioned from Amr ibn Maymun... It is possible that he saw the monkeys stone a female monkey and thought that she stoned it because she committed adultery, and no one knows this except conjecture; Because monkeys do not reveal themselves, and whoever sees them copulating does not know whether they committed adultery or not. This is a conjecture. Perhaps the Sheikh knew that she committed adultery by some evidence that we do not know. Monkeys are the most adulterous of animals, and the Arabs use them as an example, saying: “More adulterous than a monkey.” If adultery was not well-known among them, they would not have used them as an example. There is nothing more similar to humans in marriage and jealousy than them. Animals may become enemies and pounce on each other, and punish each other. Some of them bite, some scratch, some break and smash. Monkeys are stoned with the palms that Allah has given them, just as humans are stoned. If some of them stone each other for something other than adultery, and the Sheikh thought it was for adultery, then this is not far-fetched. If the Sheikh used evidence that they committed adultery and that the stoning was because of it, then this is also not far-fetched, because, as I have informed you, they are the most jealous of animals, and the closest to the sons of Adam in understanding. End quote.
Ta’wil Mukhtalif al-Hadith (255-256)
Ibn Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“This is considered reprehensible by a group of scholars: attributing adultery to someone who is not accountable, and carrying out the prescribed punishments on animals.” End quote.
“Al-Isti’ab fi Ma’rifat al-Ashab” (3/1206).
Al-Qurtubi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“If this narration is authentic, then al-Bukhari narrated it as evidence that ‘Amr ibn Maymun lived during the Jahiliyyah and did not care about his assumptions that he assumed during the Jahiliyyah.” End quote.
“Al-Jami’ li Ahkam al-Qur’an” (1/442).
Shaykh al-Albani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“This is a reprehensible report, because how can a person know that monkeys marry, and that it is part of their nature to protect their honour, so that whoever betrays them they kill him?! Then let us assume that this is something that happens among them, so how did ‘Amr ibn Maymun know that the stoning of monkeys was only because they committed adultery?!” End quote.
“Mukhtasar Sahih al-Bukhari” by al-Albani (2/535), Maktabat al-Ma’arif edition.
Then... it is not impossible that the story is true, and the assumption that Amr bin Maimon assumed is correct, for the animal world is a world full of wonders and marvels, and the Arabs of old said: “There is nothing in which marriage and jealousy come together except man and monkey.” End quote. “Uyun al-Akhbar” by Ibn Qutaybah (172).
Rather, Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“People have seen something similar in our time in other than monkeys, even birds.” End
quote. “Majmoo’ al-Fatawa” (11/545).
Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“Abu Ubaydah Muammar ibn al-Muthanna mentioned in his “Kitab al-Khayl” on the authority of al-Awza’i: A foal was mated with his mother and refused, so she was brought into a house and covered with a cloak and mated with her and mated. When he smelled the scent of his mother, he went to his penis and cut it off with his teeth from its base. If this understanding applies to horses, despite their being more intelligent than monkeys, then it is more permissible to do so in monkeys.” End quote.
“Fath al-Bari” (7/161).
Sheikh ‘Umar al-Ashqar mentioned in his book “al-‘Aqeedah fi Allah” (p. 129) about an ant that was cut up by ants because of “lying”!A man would put a "bead" on her, then she would call her people to pick it up. The man would pick it up, but they would not see anything. This happened repeatedly from him and from her, so they gathered around her and cut her down.
We have seen video clips of animals that we would not believe if they were transmitted to us theoretically, including: a tiger showing compassion to a newborn monkey that he had killed and dragging it to a tree to devour it. Then, when the fetus was born, he left it and became busy with the newborn, showing compassion to it and protecting it from hyenas, and raising it with him to the tree!
For more of these wonders, you can refer to the book of Dr. Omar Al-Ashqar “Belief in Allah” (pp. 111-168).
As for the answer to Ibn Abd Al-Barr’s objection to calling what happened between the monkeys zina, when animals are not subject to any obligation, Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) answered him by saying:
“The fact that the incident was in the form of zina and stoning does not necessarily mean that it is zina in reality or a prescribed punishment. Rather, it was called that because it resembles it, so that does not necessarily mean that the animal is subject to any obligation.” End quote.
Fath Al-Baari (7/160).
Secondly:
As for the question about animals marrying each other, this is referred to biologists who specialize in the animal world.
And Allah knows best.

[Source]
Islam Question and Answer