Someone just told me that it is a punishable crime for a Muslim to convert to another religion. This person said that in some cases a Muslim man can be put to death for converting to another religion. Is this true?

I don't believe it.

I think you might find this useful, however if you just want a brief summary. The article explains that the one who rebels against the state (i.e. commits treason) is the one to be punished. This is also similar in countries such as the USA where if someone commits treason against the country faces the death penalty.


Here's the article:
http://www.islamicboard.com/refutati...-apostasy.html (Islam and Apostasy)

In order to understand this issue, we need to examine the Islamic law on apostasy. Since religion is looked on as a personal affair in western society, the notion of state intervention in one's personal choice would naturally seem excessive. However, from the Islamic perspective, a number of points must be observed with regard to apostasy:

1. Islam has never compelled anyone to accept the religion. Anyone who becomes a Muslim does so purely through objective study of the religion. As Allah has informed us in the Qur'an:

2:256 There is no compulsion in religion.
10:99 So would you (O Muhammad) then compel people to become believers?

Likewise, Islam encourages its followers to reflect and contemplate upon the universe around us and to ponder over the beauty of the Qur'anic message:

47:24 Do they not ponder over the Qur'an or are their hearts locked up?

51:20-21. And on earth are signs for those endowed with inner-certainty; and [likewise there are signs] in yourselves, do you not observe?

29:20 Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.

Thus, Islam requires that one's faith be constructed upon logical investigation and study of the universe in which we live. Through logical contemplation, one realizes the supreme authority of the Creator and the veracity of Muhammad's (saws) claim to prophethood. Thus we find that, in the history of Islam, no knowledgeable Muslim has ever left Islam. The only cases we find of former Muslims are people who were never practicing Muslims in the first place, nor did they ever have a good understanding of Islam. Yet on the other hand, the list of educated converts to Islam is immense, and it includes educated leaders such as priests, rabbis and atheists.

2. Those who have left Islam have historically fallen under three categories: those who left having never properly understood the religion often due to social circumstances, those who faked a conversion into Islam in order to undermine the Islamic community from within, and those who left to support opposing forces in battle against the Muslims. Because of the first category, Islam requires that the person who has chosen to forsake the religion be consulted with in order that his doubts may be clarified to him if there is any specific issue of confusion, or so that he may learn the proper Islamic teachings that he may otherwise have not been exposed to. As for the second and third category, this was the original reason behind the Prophet's statement on apostasy. The Qur'an records (3:72) that the Jews of Madinah decided to initiate the practice of pretending to accept Islam and then publicly declare their rejection of it, so as to destroy the confidence of the newly-converted Muslims. Thus, the Prophet Muhammad pbuh ruled that a punishment should be announced so that those who decide to accept Islam do so because of a firm conviction not in order to harm the Muslim community from within.

3. Coming to the actual law of apostasy, the Prophet Muhammad pbuh did say, in the above historical context, "Whoever replaces his religion, execute him" (Bukhari, Abu Dawud) but how exactly do we understand this statement and does it conflict with the principles of freedom? The Prophet Muhammad pbuh himself clarified this statement in another hadith narrated in Sahih Muslim where he mentioned that the one who was to be fought against was the one who "abandons his religion and the Muslim community". It should be noted that every country has maintained punishments, including execution, for treason and rebellion against the state (See Mozley and Whitley's Law Dictionary, under "Treason and Treason Felony," pp. 368-369). Islam is not just a set of beliefs, it is a complete system of life which includes a Muslim's allegiance to the Islamic state. Thus, a rejection against that would be akin to treason. Rebellion against God is more serious than rebellion against one's country. However, one who personally abandons the faith and leaves the country would not be hunted down and assassinated, nor would one who remains inside the state conforming to outward laws be tracked down and executed. The notion of establishing inquisition courts to determine peoples' faith, as done in the Spanish Inquisition, is something contrary to Islamic law. As illustrated by the historical context in which it was mandated, the death penalty is mainly for those who collaborate with enemy forces in order to aid them in their attacks against the Islamic state or for those who seek to promote civil unrest and rebellion from within the Islamic state. When someone publicly announces their rejection of Islam within an Islamic state it is basically a challenge to the Islamic government, since such an individual can keep it to themselves like the personal affair it is made out to be.

4. From Islamic history, we can gain a better understanding of how this law has been implemented. Although the Prophet Muhammad pbuh threatened the death penalty in response to the attempts against the Muslim community, no such executions took place in his time (Imam Shawkani, Nayl Al-Awtar, vol. 7, p. 192) even though there is a report that a Bedouin renounced Islam and left Madinah unharmed in his time (Fath Al-Bari vol. 4, p.77 and vol. 13 p. 170; Sahih Muslim biSharh An-Nawawi, vol. 9, p. 391). Thus, we find that context plays an important role in determining how to deal with apostates. The case of one who enlists nations to fight against the Islamic state is more serious, for example. That is why the scholars of the Hanafi school of thought felt that the punishment only applies to the male apostate and not the female apostate because the latter is unable to wage war against the Islamic state. If someone simply has some doubts concerning Islam, then those doubts can be clarified.

So an Islamic state is certainly justified in punishing those who betray the state, committing treason and support enemy forces. As for anyone else, if they do not publicly declare their rejection of Islam, the state has no interest in pursuing them; if their case does become public, however, then they should be reasoned with and educated concerning the religion so that they have the opportunity to learn the concepts they may not have understood properly and they can be encouraged to repent.

From another of my posts:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl Quote: Originally Posted by blunderbus If a predominantly Christian country were going to execute a former Christian who converted to another religion (in this hypothetical case, Islam) would you be ok with that? As a side note, this has already happened, examples include the spanish inquisition. But on to your question... First of all, the law on apostasy has been explained here (My view on muslims) and here (Islam and Apostasy). It is commonly taken out of context, but the point to note is that the Prophet Muhammad (saws) clarified that the one to be punished was the one who rebelled against the community. This is quite similar to state laws on treason. A state is justified in taking action against those who pose a significant threat. But the idea of setting up an inquisition to examine the beliefs of the people is against Islamic teachings, so someone who personally changes their religious convictions will be insignificant in the eyes of the state. It is the one who publically announces his rebellion, stirring civil unrest, who must be opposed. While the Christian inquisitions were bent on examining (through the use of torture) the beliefs of those Muslims and Jews who outwardly professed conversion to Christianity, in an Islamic state, someone who even outwardly professes acceptane of Islam is left alone because they cause no harm to society, and the Islamic state is only interested in the security of its society. If someone poses a threat to a state's security, then they are justified in taking action against them. But if someone changes their personal religious views, then it is quite extreme for the state to attempt to pry into the hearts of its citizens to determine their faith and punish them.

_______

Material from this post has been added to this article:
http://www.load-islam.com/artical_de...conceptions#28

Thank you!

Yes, it is a crime to leave Islam. Those who leave Islam sometimes are misguided by others or raised without proper Islamic education.

This punishment is also prescribed in the BIBLE and TORAH for Christians and Jews.
Not only Muslims.

"And he should go and worship other gods and bow down to them or to the sun or the moon or all the army of the heavens, and you must stone such one with stones and such one must die. (Deuteronomy 17:3-5)"

Those who leave Islam must be put to death, because there is no reason to leave Islam.

I wonder whether the replies given are rather cagey ... and very quickly pointing towards Bible verses in the OT which also call for the death penalty.
The death penalty for apostates is a topic which doesn't sit well with most people in the 21st century ...

I do not know of any instances when Christians or Jews who left their religion were killed (although that, of course, doesn't mean it doesn't happen)

However, there seem to be many accounts of Muslim apostates being killed around (unless those are all fabricated lies).

Can I perhaps add to Caroline's question by asking, on what grounds Muslim apostates are still killed today?
Does this just happen in Muslim countries?
If Britain became a Muslim country, would it happen here too?

And how do you (the reader of this sentence) personally feel about the death penalty for apostates? Do you think it is right? Justified?
If it happened to your brother/mother/best friend, would you support it?

I hope you don't mind. Those who know me better, know how I love to ask questions!

Peace

When I turned to Islam, I read that a Muslim could turn to another religion and be allowed back to Islam once... But if he/she was to turn his/her back again, That Allah (SWT) would not accept them.

Is there any truth to this?

I'll be honest. I am doing as much research as possible on both Christianity and Islam because I've been feeling very strongly about converting to Islam. I'm looking at both religions as honestly as possible and to tell the truth there have been several times when I've thought, "Why would I want to join a group that I could be executed for leaving?"

Yeah it bothers me. There are things about Christianity that have REALLY been bothering me. And there are so many things about Islam that I really love and that make so much SENSE.

The death for leaving Islam is one of the really big stumbling blocks for me. I'll be real. I know the Old Testament has the same demand and look at the Inquisition and all.

It's all so confusing.

This is not applied in any muslim country! This point is a big subject of debate and details in Islamic Constitution.

im not sure if i like the hidden message behind that
yes,yes i would!

peace

I don't recall hearing about any apostates being prosecuted since the case of the man in afghanistan who was pardoned or something?

The issue of apostasy is just not as simplistic as some people make out. For a certainty there were apostates at the time of the Prophet and he did not order their execution. And the qur'an speaks of punishments of apostates in terms of the next life only. It is not simply a question of choosing a different way of life other than Islam, it is when people who were practising Muslims become enemies of Islam. That would certainly call for punishment, and Allah knows best.

Also, in order for anyone to apostate from Islam they have to have been true believing and practising Muslims in the first place. So many Muslims are just brought up culturally Muslim, even if they have the outward signs of Islam like hijab and praying 5 times, it doesn't touch their hearts at all. so if they become Christians can they really be said to be apostates? After all, what Muslim parent takes their child to one side at an appropriate time and gives them the choice as to whether they want to be Muslims or not? and if they do, warn them that they might face execution if they change their minds in the future?

People change religion all the time. A Christian may decide to take the shahada, and then later on change his/her mind and go back to Christianity. does that deserve the death penalty? I don't believe so. If that was the case, then it should be made clear at the point of taking the shahada. and I for one think I might well have turned round and run if I had been told that.

We all know that faith has its ups and downs. And the words and actions of other people can have a big effect on our own faith. As a new Muslim I remember being absolutely devastated at times by the things I read, saw and heard from Muslims. As a matter of fact, the first 2 years as a Muslim were terribly hard for me because of that. It took time before I was able to ignore Muslims and concentrate on the qur'an and the sunnah.

sorry for the rambling, I have no idea if I answered even one of your questions!

peace

yes^ this only applies in muslim countries

i dont know nothing about that but all i know is i am muslim and i will stay muslim until i die

Hi Glo,

I'm no expert, but I can tell you that not anyone call kill an apostate- it can only be done by the relevant authority (like, it can be ordered by a judge or something, not some bloke who lives across the street).

Before the person is sentenced to death they are debated by people who have knowledge and if they return to Islam than that is accepted of them and they are not harmed. In other word, if an apostate is caught and does not want to die, all they have to do is pretend to return to Islam, even if they don't mean it and they will not be harmed. Not that I am promoting lying, of course.

If it is correct and from Allah then of course I feel it is right and justified. However at the moment I do not know enough about the difference of opinion regarding whether it is simply the apostate who is sentenced to death or the apostate who rebels against the state (i.e. commits treason).

I have no right to stand in the way of justice just because my family member is the one to suffer. I ask Allah to protect my family from such an evil fate (apostacy, not death).

What do you mean by cagey? Also, do you deny that the in the OT God did command that apostates be put to death? And, knowing that it was ordained by God at one stage, can you please answer your question too:

And how do you (the reader of this sentence) personally feel about the death penalty for apostates? Do you think it is right? Justified?

Thanks!

Thank you all for your comments.

I am not going to reply to each poster individually, because I find that snowballs over time and gets too time consuming ...

There seem to be contradictory messages here:
Also:
I understand that this is a much debated issue. I am trying to understand rather than be inflammatory ...

Are people here saying that apostates are not killed today at all (either according to the court, or because people take justice into their own hands), and that any accounts of such incidents are false?
Or are people saying that such incidents do happen, but shouldn't because it is unislamic?

I found this on the religious tolerance site:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_apos3.htm

The Council of ex-Muslims of Britain says this: