Messages

1756

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: The Qibla Change

« on: November 13, 2011, 06:10:28 AM »

Salamun Alaikum,

Thank you for your email.
 
I think it is a perfectly valid observation in light of the Arabic text of the Quran. 'wa ma ba'duhum bitabi'in qiblata ba'din' which you have highlighted in purple certainly seems to suggest that between the People of the Book there were different Qiblas. Whether there were differences between Jews and Jews or Christians and Christians ('intra' differences), the text does not elucidate. However, this also cannot be ruled out. It does seem likely though that this is a reference between Jews and Christians generally.
 
With regards the differences between Christians, I am aware of comprehensive studies in the west of Christian churches that though aligned towards the East (possibly towards Jerusalem), they are better understood aligned towards the rising of the sun on the saint's day associated with the church's dedication. I also find from the studies that churches are not aligned similarly. I read a paper some time ago in the British Archaeology site which I would like to share with you.
 
http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba94/feat2.shtml
 
A comprehensive study of ancient churches around the world would possibly prove more insightful. However, to my knowledge, all churches do not necessarily face in the same direction which would support the 'intra' differences argument.
 
On the other hand, as far as I know, Jewish direction has always predominantly remained towards Jerusalem.
 
So yes, I would support your observation as a valid cogent observation based on the text. But I would also humbly allow for possible 'intra' differences in which case there could be 'many' Qiblas.
 
Your brother in faith.
Joseph.

1757

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Does Salat mean prayer?

« on: November 13, 2011, 01:21:56 AM »

Salamun Alaikum,

Thank you for your email.

Albeit I have not read the book, I am very conversant with the particular theological understanding  that you have kindly shared in your email below. Part of my discussions with a portion of my readership is with those that align themselves to such an understanding. My approach with the Quran has always humbly endeavoured to remain consistent with the Arabic, classical and modern scholarship and my ardent study of the Quran. If I were to be sincere with you and of course candid, I have to confess that I have not come across as much lax use of 'interpretative licence' as I have done with those that align themselves to school of thought that you have shared.

However, they are my brothers and sisters in faith, and I continue to engage in the best way that I can as it is only for our Lord to judge, not us. Of course there are common areas where scripture seems to keep us united. However, when it comes to rituals and where God has suspended his laws, all relevant verses are translated in a way which is unrecognisable when compared to the actual Arabic Quran. However, I attempt to give the best arguments I can from scripture. You will note that many of my prayer related articles tacitly deal with this particular theological thinking and why I cannot concur with it.

What seems to be at the heart of the problem is the fact that as prayer form is not defined by the Quran, it is then abandoned altogether and all prayer related verses are reinterpreted in a manner which seem unrecognisable against the Arabic text. What seems not to be appreciated is that aspects of prayer are actually quite detailed in the Quran. It is only pedantic form and utterance which is not stipulated and for a very good reason.

I am sure you recently noted an article of mine which asserted that the Quran was replete with prayer related aspects.

-   The details of ablution (4:43; 5:6)
-   A need for a direction - Qiblah, specific for the 'believers' (Mu'mins) (2.143-44)
-   Garments (7:31)
-   Allusion of times: (4:103; 11:114; 17:78; 24:58; 30:18; 2:238: 20:58)
-   That prayers must be observed on time (4:103)
-   Followers of the previous scripture to observe their Qiblah and the 'Believers (Mu'mins) heir own Q'iblah (2:145)
-   Prayer involves prostration (Sujood - 4:102; 48:29)
-   There is more than one prayer (Prayer in plural used - Salawat) (2:238)
-   There is a general form to prayer (2:238-39).
-   Standing position (3:39; 4:102)
-   Bowing down and prostrating (4:102; 22:26; 38:24; 48:29)
-   Form is not required during times of emergencies, fear, and unusual circumstances (2:239)
-   A mention of a call to prayer and congregation prayer (62:9)
-   A warning not to abandon prayer as was done by people before (19:58-59) but to establish prayer (Numerous references)
-   The purpose of prayer - To remember God alone (6:162; 20:14)
-   Prayer involves utterance (4:43)
-   The purpose to protect from sins (29:45)
-   What to do in danger and the shortening of prayer (4:101)
-   Garments and mention of a Masjid, or a place of prayer 7:31
-   The tone of prayer (17:110)
-   There is a leader of prayer (4:102)


Also words have a context as you will no doubt appreciate. For example, why would you need to do ablution before a salah? If one cannot find water, why the use of dry sand? Some contexts only drive one particular understanding of Salah. What is the tone of prayer in 17:110? Form is abandoned in emergencies and fear in 2:239. What else can it mean? I am aware that responses are offered, but they have to remain true to context, the Arabic and of course, to one's intellectual reasoning.

But of course, God is the final judge. Monotheistic prayer has always been understood in a certain way even by the people of the book. The following video may be of interest.

Jews:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aHWASyMjwg&feature=player_embedded

Christians:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRLFeldPG3Y&feature=player_embedded


I am sure you have visited the 'prayer' section on my site. There are a lot of articles there which deal with prayer from the salaat.

Please don't hesitate to ask any questions if you feel that I may be able to offer a worthwhile humble opinion, or to share your thoughts.

Your brother,
Joseph.

1758

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: A Tabarani Hadith

« on: November 13, 2011, 01:16:45 AM »

Walaikum salaam,

Thank you for your comments.

We should always keep in mind that the Ahadith is 'ilm rijaal' (knowledge of men) collated many decades, if not centuries after the demise of the Prophet. They are not accounts written at the time of the Prophet nor did any companion write them with his own hands. These were not written at the time of the Prophet. For example, Imam Bukhari's work allegedly was not completed until 846 CE. The Prophet died in 632 CE. That's over 220 years later.

If you say something today to someone else and it gets passed on, mouth by mouth for hundreds of years till it is finally compiled, what do you think will happen to the original story?

Similarly, Abu al-Qasim ibn Al-Tabarani died nearly 350 years after the death of the Prophet (970CE). The Hadith he collected are 3 and a half centuries removed from when the event occurred. Now the question can be asked, were the hadith written after the mosque had been completed many decades or centuries later and then claimed to be from an earlier period? How could al-Tabarani ever be 100% sure? To check, he would have to ask each person back 350 years to the time of the Prophet and they would have all been dead.

That is why Ahadith has caused so much confusion.

The Quran asks a very simple question:

045:006             
"These are verses of God (Arabic: ayat-ullah) that We recite to you with truth. Then, in what HADITH (Arabic word: Hadithin) after God and His verses (Arabic: Ayati) do they believe?"

007:185                
"Do they see nothing in the government of the heavens and the earth and all that God has created? (Do they not see) that it may well be that their terms are drawing to an end? In what HADITH after this will they then believe?"

So the question is not if the Hadith is true or false. Of course, no one can claim that every Hadith is fabricated or does not contain a truthful central core. However, as I'm sure you will agree this is not the point. The main point is that the Quran gives no authority to any other source except for itself.

006:114
"Say: "Shall I seek for judge other than God? - when He is the One who has sent to you the Book, explained in detail (Arabic: Mufassalan)." They know full well, to whom We have given the Book, that it has been sent down from your Lord in truth. Never be then of those who doubt"

How can a book be 'mufassalan', or 'fussilat' and then not be complete for religious guidance? I am sure you know what I mean, God willing.

However, please have a look at some of the problems the Hadith causes and let me know what you think. The sad thing is that most Muslims don't know about these and the Muslim clergy hide them from their masses. Much like the Christian priests that hide 'questionable verses' from the Bible from their masses.
                                                                                                           
http://quransmessage.com/(7)%20Updates/hadith-enter%20-%20live.htm

I hope that helps.

Kind regards,

Joseph.

1759

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Is Music Permissible in Islam?

« on: November 13, 2011, 01:07:25 AM »

Salamun Alaikum.

I trust the following article addresses your sentiments, God willing.

MUSIC AND SINGING

http://quransmessage.com/articles/music%20FM3.htm

Your brother,
Joseph.

1760

Posts on Other Forums - The Salaat Forum / Reward and Punishment

« on: November 13, 2011, 12:09:36 AM »

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?id=296

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Saturday, November 12, 2011, 08:24 (42 minutes ago)

Dear All,

It has come to my attention from my readers that a very good question was asked by someone on another forum. I will reproduce it here as I don't think it received an appropriate response (as per feedback):


AOA,

I have learned so much from you that I cant even describe it. I have another question for you if you can help me understand it please. Please take a look at what is written in 36:52 and then take a look at my question. I appreciate your time and effort. Thank you!

36:52 They will say, "Oh, woe to us! Who has awakened us from our beds of sleep? This is what the Beneficent promised, and the Messengers spoke the truth." [Marqad = Bed of sleep = Resting place. These two verses strongly dismiss the clergy-peddled false concept of punishment in the grave. And how would God punish people after death before the Day of Judgment. Moreover, many kinds of suffering (‘Azaab) are named in the Qur'an, but not once is mentioned 'Azaabil Qabr. In fact, God never punishes people. We only face His Law of Just Recompense, "As you sow, so shall you reap."]

I agree that God never punishes. My question is: what is the purpose of a resurrection and Day of Judgement if we only 'face His law of just recompense' and 'As you sow, so shall you reap'? It sounds like the results of doing bad deeds will be your punishment and the results of your good deeds will be your rewards. You are paying/rewarded in this life based on Gods laws of just recompense. what is the purpose of an additional day of judgement?

Amjad

http://www.ourbeacon.com/cgi-bin/bbs60x/webbbs_config.pl/page/1/md/read/id/314123119171588


The response was given by Shabbir Ahmed which in my view does not address the important question asked:

W'A dear brother,

While the human body dies, our 'self' or NAFS remains immortal. Benefiting people causes our 'self' to grow to the eternal Jannah and harming people, violating human rights stunts our 'self' to suffer (Hell).

A lifelong student

http://www.ourbeacon.com/cgi-bin/bbs60x/webbbs_config.pl/page/1/md/read/id/314123119171590


The question remains, what is the purpose of an additional day of judgment if the claim is that "You are paying/rewarded in this life based on Gods laws of just recompense"

How did someone like Pharaoh, a tyrant get rewarded for his heinous crimes in this life or any other tyrant throughout history who does not attract recompense in this world?

I agree there is NO punishment in the grave. That is not my academic contention.

http://quransmessage.com/articles/grave%20punishment%20FM3.htm


Please brother Jawaid and others, please feel free to answer but please without long quotes but dealing with the core of the question.

I look forward to any suitable responses.

Let us facilitate a meaningful discussion.

Kind regards,
Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

1761

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Trust to the Heavens, Earth and Mountains

« on: November 12, 2011, 11:03:02 PM »

As-salamu alaykum

With regards 33:72, a trust 'amana' carries a huge amount of responsibility as it has inherent power to exercise authority. This trust is also linked in my opinion to man's vicegerancy on Earth (2:30). Man was given 'responsibilities' on Earth and volition to exercise analogous to a caretaker. He has also been expected to recognise his Creator and to worship Him. This is possibly what prompted the question posed by the angels "Will you place in it one that will spread corruption and will shed blood while we glorify You with Your praises and we sanctify You?" (2:30)

However, other creations of God have also been mentioned with no such power of volition or vicegerancy such as other celestial objects, sun, moon, other stars etc (i.e. Heavens) along with the earth and the mountains which simply run their course. The hypothetical is used 'but they refused' to signify that God may have offered His other creation such power of authority but their response in the negation clearly implies that such creation were not ready to accept such a responsibility. This hypothetical is also picked up in verse 59:21 "Had We sent down this Quran on a mountain, verily, you would have seen it humble itself and cleave asunder for fear of God"

This clearly implies man accepted such a responsibility based on volition. This also goes back to the heart of the primordial contract in verse 7:172, where we were asked at the point when we were brought forth from our parents, '"Am I not your Lord (who cherishes and sustains you)?"- They said: "Yes! We do testify!" (This), less you should say on the Day of Judgment: "Of this we were never mindful"

Man being foolish / ignorant (jahil) or unjust (zalim) signifies that to take on such authoritative responsibilities demands a huge undertaking and answerability which man may not have fully considered and in that sense may have also remained unjust to himself. However God's mercy would see continuous guidance in the form of Prophets and messengers to be sent to mankind to keep them in obeisance to God's laws (7:35)

[man = mankind / humans]

I hope this helps.

Your brother,
Joseph.

1762

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Exalted Assemblies

« on: November 12, 2011, 10:59:25 PM »

Salamun Alaikum,

Please allow me to provide you with a closer rendering of the Arabic in my humble opinion:

038.067-69
"Say: It is a message / news of great importance, from it which you turn away; I had no knowledge of the exalted chiefs when they were disputing"

Here a condition is captured of certain contemporaries of the Prophet who have inclined to turn away from the powerful message which has been revealed to the Prophet. It is also clear that some kind of theological questions must have arisen which prompted such an inspired response. The Quran clearly recognises a 'heavenly exalted assembly' ('mala-i-l-ala' (37:08)) who are also possibly entasked with decrees (97:4).

In verse 38:70, the Prophet clearly expresses that he has no knowledge of what may have transpired at these Divine exalted assemblies other than what he was told by way of revelation. (verse 38:70).

With reference to what the 'exalted assemblies' disputed or contended, I feel this is clearly linked to the following verses which reference some of the contentions with regards the creation of man. (This can be read in the following verses 38:71-85). This dispute can also be read in (2:30-34, 7:11-18, 15:28-43, 17:61-65 and 18:50). However, God enforces His will repeatedly and without fail as supreme authority which was picked up by the preceding verse (38:66).

I hope this helps.

Joseph

1763

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Praying at Mosques which Idolise the Prophet

« on: November 12, 2011, 10:53:23 PM »

Salamun Alaikum,


It is not the mosque which is inherently the point of contention. It is the worshippers within them. We can never know what is in someone's heart so we can never make such a judgment. Of course, if the place of worship is a dedicated place of idol worship such as a Hindu or Buddhist temple, then yes it would not be appropriate to pray there.

With regards your quote:

'Regarding the place of prayer, I can't remember the ayah but remember reading in the Quran that Allah asks us to flee from the place of idol worship'

The verse you are probably referring to is the 'masjid dirar'. (Mosque causing harm 9:107) which was founded on dissension and disunity as opposed to idol worship. However as this mosque was build on 'dissension' and not piety, God specifically asks the new believers not to be part of it (as the founding intention of the mosque was flawed).

We have no way of knowing what motives lay behind the construction of certain mosques. We can only assume them to be noble. One would take a more nuanced approach and accept them to be dedicated to the worship of one God albeit some / many worshippers have introduced alien doctrines into their beliefs and practices. However, that is not to say that true monotheists have not walked through their doors and exist in their congregations.

Keeping verse 9:107 in context, I personally would not have a problem with being in part of a congregation with one's heart devoted to God. There are many I am sure that worship and believe as true monotheists but are part of the same congregation. We simply cannot know how God manifests His wisdom on others.

We pray in these places of worship with the best of intentions.

I hope this helps.

Your brother,
Joseph.

1764

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Intercession of the Prophet, Help and Wasilah

« on: November 12, 2011, 10:41:55 PM »

Salamun Alaikum,


God informs us to ask of him directly. "wa iyyaka nasta'in' (1:5 You alone we ask for help).

Such a concept of intercession as the one prompted by your question is negated by the Quran.

INTERCESSION AND THE PROPHET'S HELP
http://quransmessage.com/articles/intercession%20FM3.htm

Also human wasilah's as the one intimated by your question is also negated by the Quran. Please see the following article:

WHAT IS 'WASILAH' FROM A QURAN'S PERSPECTIVE
http://quransmessage.com/articles/wasilah%20FM3.htm

We ask of him directly and Him alone.

I hope this helps.

Regards,
Joseph.

1765

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Stoning to Death for Adultery

« on: November 12, 2011, 10:35:40 PM »

Salamun Alaikum.


No it isn't.


Please see the following article:

STONING FOR ADULTERY
http://quransmessage.com/articles/stoning%20FM3.htm


Kind regards,
Joseph.

1766

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Did the Prophet Marry Hazrat Ayesha at Age 6?

« on: November 12, 2011, 10:30:21 PM »

Salamun Alaikum

There is no mention of Hazrat Ayesha in the Quran or the Prophet's marriage to a young girl at the age of 6. In fact, no names of either the companions nor the wives of the Prophet are mentioned in the Quran. The exception is the name of Zayd (33:37 - adopted son) in the matter of marriage and to underscore the point that elective / adoptive relations cannot replace blood relationships and should not be viewed as such and the possible mention of Abu Lahab (111.1).
 
All other narrative details such as the one you have mentioned are sourced from Islamic Secondary Sources which have questionable authenticity and no authority from the Quran.

I strongly believe that the Prophet of God would not contravene his own teachings. A marriage to such a minor cannot be supported from the Quran.

As far as marriageable age from the Quran is concerned (the source of believer's guidance), , please see the following articles:


WAS AYESHA REALLY A CHILD BRIDE? - MARRIAGEABLE AGE FROM THE QURAN
http://quransmessage.com/articles/ayesha%20age%20FM3.htm

NIKAAH - THE CONTRACT OF MARRIAGE
http://quransmessage.com/articles/nikaah%20FM3.htm

DOES VERSE 65:4 PROVIDE CONSENT TO CONSUMMATE A MARRIAGE WITH A FEMALE MINOR?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/verse%2065-4%20FM3.htm


Kind regards,
Joseph

1767

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Is Homosexuality Punishable By Death?

« on: November 12, 2011, 09:49:52 PM »

Salamun Alaikum.

Punishment of death is only actionable in two circumstances in the Quran.
 
           (1)  As a retribution for causing 'fasaad' (gross mischief / evil, beyond all bounds) in the land (punishable by the state)
           (2)  As a retribution for murder (punishable by the state).

Unlike the Bible (Leviticus 20:13), there is no punishment for death for homosexuality in the Quran. However, the Quran deems homosexuality as a sinful transgression, a 'fahisha' and it attracts condemnation and some form of retribution if one does not repent (for an Islamic state to decide based on circumstances). Verse 4:16-17 makes this clear.

004.016
"And as for the two of you who are guilty thereof, then punish them both. But if they repent and amend, then let them be. Indeed! God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

From a Quran's perspective, homosexuality runs contrary to the nature of humans where genders of opposite sex have been created for intimate relationships and procreation through 'lawful marriage' (Nikaah) . The practice of homosexuality has also been severely rebuked in the example captured in the narratives regarding the People of Lot.

007:080-81
"And Lot when he said to his people "Do you commit lewdness (Arabic: fahishata) such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? Indeed, you approach men lustfully in preference to women. Nay, you are a people transgressing beyond bounds / committing excesses"


I hope this helps,
Joseph.

1768

Q&As with Joseph Islam - Information Only / Re: Question with regards the Permissibility of Tattoos

« on: November 12, 2011, 09:46:46 PM »

Salamun Alaikum.

Haram is a very strong word and one must be careful not to pronounce something 'haram' if it is not explicitly mentioned or strongly implied by the Quranic verses by strong analytical deduction.

Albeit the Quran does not give direct references to 'tattoos', it does give much guidance from which we can derive an answer.

I personally would not consider 'tattoos' or any decorative items on the human skin inherently taboo.

It is the 'nature' of the tattoo or 'decorative impression' (and possibly where it appears on the body) which is of more relevance. Tattoos can be graphically lewd, gross, profane, blasphemous etc which would run contrary to many of the Quranic verses and would amount to a transgression. This would clearly be taboo. Permanent tattoos can also mutilate the skin and harm it in a manner which would arguably put it at tension with verses 4:118-119

004:118-119 (Part)
"...and he said "Most certainly I will take of your servants an appointed portion: I will surely mislead them, and I will create in them false desires; I will order them to slit the ears of cattle and to deface the creation of God..."

I would find such a permanent affliction on the human body difficult to support and would personally strongly discourage it in light of the Quran.

However temporary tattoos much like Henna for women which are not permanent on the skin should not be a problem as long as they do not amount to a transgression. However, decorating the skin in sensitive areas, or private areas of the human body is arguably contrary to the Quranic teachings as more than likely a 3rd person would be involved to impression it.

As far as images and statues being haram, I find no support for this in the Quran. In fact, I find such a concept negated. Prophet Solomon had 'statues' made for the Lord's temple (34:13). The difference is he did not make them to worship them but to decorate the temple. (2 Chronicles 3:1, 3:10). In contrast, Prophet Abraham's father worshipped the 'statues' (021.051-052). So it is not the 'statue' which is inherently 'haram' but what you do with it. There is a difference. However, lewd graphical images or statues which run counter to the spirit of the Quran's guidance are obviously a transgression.

...

I hope this helps,
Joseph.

1769

Posts on Other Forums - The Salaat Forum / Re: Salaat = Follow the Quran

« on: November 12, 2011, 02:09:00 PM »

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD

http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=169#p291

Dear Brother Fadil,

Salamun Alaikum.

Thank you for your mathematical equation. It was very informative.

If you care to see the approach to my work you will note that I am highly critical of 'ancestral traditions'. My work is replete with criticisms against 'traditional thinking' and addressing misconceptions of Muslim thought.

I am not like others who reject a Quranic directive due to their personal irreconcilable difficulties they may have with the Quranic narratives. A tradition is not incorrect just because it is a tradition. It is only incorrect if it is rebuked by the Quran. I find clear support for the practice of prayer not only directly from the Arabic but also from an analysis of the 'bigger picture'.

Also, I have not made any fantastic claims. I have only expressed my ability to directly access the Arabic Quran. Furthermore, irrespective of my background, I have never claimed any 'titles' unlike others that constantly advertise them.

Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

1770

General Discussions / Re: Questions - Tattoos and Homosexuality

« on: November 12, 2011, 02:01:28 PM »

Brother Alaeddin,

Salamun Alaikum.

I see your question in two parts so I will answer accordingly.


ARE TATOOS HARAM?

Haram is a very strong word and one must be careful not to pronounce something 'haram' if it is not explicitly mentioned or strongly implied by the Quranic verses by strong analytical deduction.

Albeit the Quran does not give direct references to 'tattoos', it does give much guidance from which we can derive an answer.

I personally would not consider 'tattoos' or any decorative items on the human skin inherently taboo.

It is the 'nature' of the tattoo or 'decorative impression' (and possibly where it appears on the body) which is of more relevance. Tattoos can be graphically lewd, gross, profane, blasphemous etc which would run contrary to many of the Quranic verses and would amount to a transgression. This would clearly be taboo. Permanent tattoos can also mutilate the skin and harm it in a manner which would arguably put it at tension with verses 4:118-119

004:118-119 (Part)
"...and he said "Most certainly I will take of your servants an appointed portion: I will surely mislead them, and I will create in them false desires; I will order them to slit the ears of cattle and to deface the creation of God..."

I would find such a permanent affliction on the human body difficult to support and would personally strongly discourage it in light of the Quran.

However temporary tattoos much like Henna for women which are not permanent on the skin should not be a problem as long as they do not amount to a transgression. However, decorating the skin in sensitive areas, or private areas of the human body is arguably contrary to the Quranic teachings as more than likely a 3rd person would be involved to impression it.

As far as images and statues being haram, I find no support for this in the Quran. In fact, I find such a concept negated. Prophet Solomon had 'statues' made for the Lord's temple (34:13). The difference is he did not make them to worship them but to decorate the temple. (2 Chronicles 3:1, 3:10). In contrast, Prophet Abraham's father worshipped the 'statues' (021.051-052). So it is not the 'statue' which is inherently 'haram' but what you do with it. There is a difference. However, lewd graphical images or statues which run counter to the spirit of the Quran's guidance are obviously a transgression.


DEATH FOR HOMOSEXUALITY

Punishment of death is only actionable in two circumstances in the Quran.
 
           (1)  As a retribution for causing 'fasaad' (gross mischief / evil, beyond all bounds) in the land (punishable by the state)
           (2)  As a retribution for murder (punishable by the state).

There is no punishment for death for homosexuality in the Quran. However, the Quran deems homosexuality as a sinful transgression, a 'fahisha' and it attracts condemnation and some form of retribution if one does not repent (for an Islamic state to decide based on circumstances). Verse 4:16-17 makes this clear.

004.016
'And as for the two of you who are guilty thereof, then punish them both. But if they repent and amend, then let them be. Indeed! God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Homosexuality in the Quran runs contrary to the nature of humans where genders of opposite sex have been created for intimate relationships and procreation through 'lawful marriage' (Nikaah) . The practice of homosexuality has also been severely rebuked in the example captured in the narratives regarding the People of Lot.

007:080-81
"And Lot when he said to his people "Do you commit lewdness (Arabic: fahishata) such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? Indeed, you approach men lustfully in preference to women. Nay, you are a people transgressing beyond bounds / committing excesses"


I hope this helps,
Joseph.