Is there not, in the Almighty's saying: "And when they are fortified in wedlock, if they commit indecency, then upon them is half of what is due to chaste women of punishment," conclusive proof that stoning is not established in Islam?

The verse in Surat An-Nisa (4:25) clarifies the prescribed punishment for enslaved persons who commit adultery, which is half the punishment for free persons mentioned in Surat An-Nur (24:2). Therefore, an enslaved person is not to be stoned, even if they are muhsan (have previously been in a lawful sexual relationship), because halving cannot be applied to stoning. The ruling of stoning (rajm) is established by the Qur’an (through a verse whose wording was abrogated but its ruling remained), the Sunnah (definition) of the Prophet, and the consensus of scholars. It was narrated by Umar ibn Al-Khattab and Ubayy ibn Ka’b, may Allah be pleased with them. Stoning is obligatory for the muhsan adulterer (whether male or female) by the consensus of scholars, except for the Khawarij. As for the issue of the Sunnah abrogating the Qur’an, it is not applicable to stoning; rather, the Sunnah clarified the continuation of the ruling of the verse whose wording was abrogated. Al-Shinqiti holds the view that the Qur’an and Sunnah can abrogate each other because both are revelation. He supports this by citing the abrogation of facing Jerusalem (by the Sunnah) with facing the Kaaba (by the Qur’an), and the abrogation of the verse regarding "ten sucklings" (by the Book) with the mutawatir Sunnah. He also believes in the permissibility of abrogating mutawatir (concurrently reported) narrations by sound Ahad (single-chain) reports if their later timing is established, as there is no contradiction between them due to their different timeframes. An example of this is the prohibition of eating domesticated donkey meat by the Sunnah after the verse in Surat Al-An’am (6:145), which did not prohibit it.