PDA

View Full Version : Compulsion in religion



MuslimAgorist
09-03-2009, 05:51 AM
First a warning. Caveat Emptor. Buyer beware. Providing an exegesis of a Quranic verse is an ambitious task for a layman such as me, and I am unqualified. Everything right and true is from Allah, not from Al Azhar, not from Al Jazeera, not from Al Qaida, but from Allah. If there is wisdom in my words, and those words ring true for you, it is by His Will. It is my opinion that Believers should form their own opinion. So, test what I say in the laboratory of your own nervous system. If you independently agree with me, alhamdullillah, but don’t be pointing at me on The Last Day. In that context … this is the perfect verse to be discussing.

2:256 "There shall be no compulsion in religion: Truth has become distinct from error, and whoever rejects false deities and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold, which never dbreaks. And Allah is Hearing, Knowing."

The placement of this verse in the Quran remarkable. It immediately follows Ayatul Kursi, which is the most read, most widely memorized, and most prolifically displayed verse in the Quran. So, this statement regarding compulsion is imbedded within potent statements on creed. It may be the only verse of its kind, but clearly Allah intended it to be well known… and therefore well understood.The only published explanations of this verse that I can find are concerned entirely with prohibiting forced conversion. This is a reaction formation to attacks against Islam regarding how it spread historically. It is not an actionable interpretation by Muslims for Muslims. They do not discuss the implications of prohibiting coercion in other matters. So, I’ve done a little processing and I’d like to decompress the issue as I see it.

Read more
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
sur
09-03-2009, 10:31 PM
u r right... it applies to other matters too.. e.g, to "leaving islam"....

If u say penalty for leaving islam is DEATH, then u r in a way "COMPELLING" that perosn to stay in islam..... i.e. going against Quran.


Similarly compelling ppl to any other issue is going against this verse, UNLESS it's a issue that can affect society, then one can be compelled to adopt the right path .....
Reply

MSalman
09-03-2009, 10:49 PM
:sl:

It is my opinion that Believers should form their own opinion. So, test what I say in the laboratory of your own nervous system.
:hmm: this just raised my eyebrow

In order to understand this ayah one needs to understand the sabab al-nazool (the reason of revelation) of this ayah. The ayah is in reference to compelling people to become Muslim. They cannot be compelled to become Muslim, but they certainly can be compelled to comply with the laws of Islam. In fact, they are even compelled to stay Muslim if they decide to apostate.

Concerning the sabab al-nuzul of this verse, it is reported that in Jahiliyya, some of the Aws and Khazraj would entrust their children to the Jews to raise them. Therefore, some would grow up as Jews. When some of the Jewish tribes were expelled from Madina, these offspring of the Ansar who were Jews chose to go with their Jewish brethren-in-faith into exile.

Their parents were unhappy about this and wanted to compel them to accept Islam and to stay with them in al-Madina, so this verse was revealed.

There is a difference between making people accept Islam and making them submit to judicial system of an Islamic state so that the justice can be established. The ayah is talking about the former and not the latter.

and Allah knows best

@sur

this issue has been discussed so many times before and I do not want to start it again in this thread. The ahadith are clear on the subject and so is the ijmaa' of the sahaba (may Allah be pleased with them). And none of that agrees with you
Reply

cat eyes
09-03-2009, 11:12 PM
i think this thread is gona get closed also :giggling:
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
czgibson
09-04-2009, 09:43 AM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by islamiclife
In order to understand this ayah one needs to understand the sabab al-nazool (the reason of revelation) of this ayah. The ayah is in reference to compelling people to become Muslim. They cannot be compelled to become Muslim, but they certainly can be compelled to comply with the laws of Islam. In fact, they are even compelled to stay Muslim if they decide to apostate.
Which means there clearly is compulsion in religion.

Peace
Reply

Rabi Mansur
09-04-2009, 12:46 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


Which means there clearly is compulsion in religion.

Peace
Amen to that. If there were no compulsion in religion, then one should be free to leave.

:hmm:
Reply

MSalman
09-04-2009, 01:49 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


Which means there clearly is compulsion in religion.

Peace
I think it would be best that you read my post and not quote me out of context:
a) Forcing non-Muslims to accept Islam
b) Forcing people to follow the judicial system of the state
The ayah is talking about a) hence there is no compulsion in religion. As far b) then whoever is living under a state then the state has the right to force people to follow the judicial system to bring an order or what have you. The issue of apostasy follows under b) and not a); therefore, the point of compulsion in religion is mute here. No sane person will ever object to the fact that the state cannot enforce laws upon people. Whether those laws are just or unjust is an entirely different discussion.
Reply

czgibson
09-04-2009, 06:59 PM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by islamiclife
I think it would be best that you read my post and not quote me out of context:
I did read your post. I always read all of a post if I intend to reply to it.

a) Forcing non-Muslims to accept Islam
b) Forcing people to follow the judicial system of the state
The ayah is talking about a) hence there is no compulsion in religion. As far b) then whoever is living under a state then the state has the right to force people to follow the judicial system to bring an order or what have you. The issue of apostasy follows under b) and not a); therefore, the point of compulsion in religion is mute here. No sane person will ever object to the fact that the state cannot enforce laws upon people. Whether those laws are just or unjust is an entirely different discussion.
You seem to be saying that you can't force someone to become a Muslim, but you can force them to obey the laws of the state.

What if the religion forms the laws of the state, though? In that case, if there's compulsion in the state, then there's compulsion in the religion.

Peace
Reply

GuestFellow
09-04-2009, 08:02 PM
^ Ah...

There is a difference between obeying Islamic state laws and practicing as a Muslim. When a non-Muslim enters a Muslim country ruled under Shariah law it does not mean they are forced into accepting Islam by taking the shahadah.

Islamic state laws cover topics such as crime, economics and so on. Obeying state laws and abiding by these regulations does not make you a Muslim. Besides some parts of the Shariah is not even applicable to non-Muslims.

EDIT: typo
Reply

czgibson
09-04-2009, 08:11 PM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
When a non-Muslim enters a Muslim country ruled under Shariah law it does not mean they are forced into accepting Islam by taking the shahadah.
Ah, I see you've inserted a 'not' there. You had me confused with the first version of your post.

You are an example of good proofreading to everyone. :statisfie

Islamic state laws cover topics such as crime, economics and so on. Obeying state laws and abiding by these regulations does not make you a Muslim. Besides some parts of the Shariah is not even applicable to non-Muslims.
That seems fair enough, but it's not really what I'm thinking about.

Originally Posted by islamiclife
In fact, they are even compelled to stay Muslim if they decide to apostate.
That's the kind of compulsion I mean, and I think it is fair to say that Islam encourages it.

Peace
Reply

GuestFellow
09-04-2009, 08:26 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,


Ah, I see you've inserted a 'not' there. You had me confused with the first version of your post.

You are an example of good proofreading to everyone. :statisfie
>_>

That's the kind of compulsion I mean, and I think it is fair to say that Islam encourages it.

Peace
Did you not read this? :P

I think it would be best that you read my post and not quote me out of context:

a) Forcing non-Muslims to accept Islam
b) Forcing people to follow the judicial system of the state
The ayah is talking about a) hence there is no compulsion in religion. As far b) then whoever is living under a state then the state has the right to force people to follow the judicial system to bring an order or what have you. The issue of apostasy follows under b) and not a); therefore, the point of compulsion in religion is mute here. No sane person will ever object to the fact that the state cannot enforce laws upon people. Whether those laws are just or unjust is an entirely different discussion.
He had already explained his point.
Reply

czgibson
09-04-2009, 08:55 PM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
Did you not read this? :P
Yes. I read it and responded to it. Why is it relevant to bring it up again now?

I claim that despite the 'no compulsion in religion' verse, there is compulsion in Islam - the compulsion to stay Muslim. Why is nobody able to address this point without equivocating?

Peace
Reply

optimist
09-10-2009, 05:04 PM
Originally Posted by Guestfellow
^ Ah...

There is a difference between obeying Islamic state laws and practicing as a Muslim. When a non-Muslim enters a Muslim country ruled under Shariah law it does not mean they are forced into accepting Islam by taking the shahadah.

Islamic state laws cover topics such as crime, economics and so on. Obeying state laws and abiding by these regulations does not make you a Muslim. Besides some parts of the Shariah is not even applicable to non-Muslims.

EDIT: typo

:thumbs_up
Reply

MSalman
09-10-2009, 05:30 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
What if the religion forms the laws of the state, though? In that case, if there's compulsion in the state, then there's compulsion in the religion. Peace
the same religion says that you cannot force people (non-Muslims) into Islam. Since Islamic state is based upon Islamic rulings; hence, this law will be applied. If this law is broken then that is not Islam

Originally Posted by czgibson
That's the kind of compulsion I mean, and I think it is fair to say that Islam encourages it.
Just to clarify I said those who decides to apostate and not those who have already apostatized. Do you know how they are compelled? Compulsion does not always have to be negative! You are compelled to not to kill otherwise severe punishment. You are compelled to not drive fast. Is that a negative compulsion!? They are compelled by giving da'wah and asking to repent; thus, coming back to Islam. If they do not repent then they are put to death as long as they are within an Islamic state but if they flee to a kafir land then Muslims are not to pursue them because Islamic laws cannot be applied in a kafir land on people in that land.

gibson, at the end of the day, Islam has laws just like your secular country has laws. We can argue about it all day and say that this law is not fair and that law is not fair without reaching any beneficial conclusion. Your source of law is your limited intellect, knowledge and corrupt understanding of truth whereas our source is the Creator who knows what is best for His creation. And no one is asking you to like Islam. Your choice, if you choose Islam good for you and if you do not then you are among the losers.

PS: I will double check the part of what methods are allowed in Shari'ah to compel apostates to remain Muslims
Reply

czgibson
09-10-2009, 10:39 PM
Greetings,

Thank you for continuing to help me with this subject. I am genuinely trying to understand the Islamic attitude to apostasy here, and as with other areas of the religion, I am encountering great difficulty.

Originally Posted by islamiclife
the same religion says that you cannot force people (non-Muslims) into Islam. Since Islamic state is based upon Islamic rulings; hence, this law will be applied. If this law is broken then that is not Islam
I can see that this is true, but it's not really related to what I'm saying.

Just to clarify I said those who decides to apostate and not those who have already apostatized.
This is interesting. Could you explain what the difference is and how a sharia system would view these cases differently?

Do you know how they are compelled? Compulsion does not always have to be negative! You are compelled to not to kill otherwise severe punishment. You are compelled to not drive fast. Is that a negative compulsion!?
No, but it is still compulsion.

Nobody is arguing that there is no compulsion in law - of course there is.

Islam claims to be a coherent and complete philosophical system, but when Allah says that there is to be "no compulsion in religion" (2:256), that logically excludes the possibility of having any binding laws within the religion at all, since laws involve compulsion.

Another thing that makes your analogy puzzling is the fact that killing and driving fast are both activities that endanger or destroy life. Relinquishing a religion doesn't.

They are compelled by giving da'wah and asking to repent; thus, coming back to Islam. If they do not repent then they are put to death as long as they are within an Islamic state but if they flee to a kafir land then Muslims are not to pursue them because Islamic laws cannot be applied in a kafir land on people in that land.
That sounds like a fair amount of compulsion to me.

gibson, at the end of the day, Islam has laws just like your secular country has laws. We can argue about it all day and say that this law is not fair and that law is not fair without reaching any beneficial conclusion.
It may or may not be fair, but what I'm drawing your attention to is what looks like an obvious contradiction.

Your source of law is your limited intellect, knowledge and corrupt understanding of truth whereas our source is the Creator who knows what is best for His creation. And no one is asking you to like Islam. Your choice, if you choose Islam good for you and if you do not then you are among the losers.
Well, thank you. What a charming thing to say to a fellow human being.

PS: I will double check the part of what methods are allowed in Shari'ah to compel apostates to remain Muslims
That would be interesting.

Thanks again. :)

Peace
Reply

Rabi Mansur
09-11-2009, 01:59 AM
I guess I never saw where he addressed the contradiction.

Did I read that right? You can be put to death in as Islamic state if you leave the religion and refuse to "repent" and come back?

That gives me the shudders.
Reply

Sampharo
09-11-2009, 01:55 PM
MuslimAgorist,

I saw your link and read the article which I assume is something you wrote. I found this paragraph that I would like to quote here:

"It is my contention that if we carry this verse to its logical conclusion it means much more than a religion without coercion. A deen without coercion means politics without coercion. It means personal relationships without coercion. It means a comprehensive way of life without coercion. So, just as Islamic theology should be characterized by open debate and a free market of ideas, an Islamic order should be characterized by political liberty, and the Islamic family should be characterized freedom of association."

If this is indeed something you wrote, then Excuse me, what on Earth are you talking about? Are you stripping down God's religion to some string of sub-certainty conclusions to suggest a "philosophical" understanding that over-rides the set limits and laws that God has placed to us?

Such matters weigh practically nothing to actual Islamic knowledge and would like to alert you that such contemplative approach is the heart and soul of "taking God's verses in mockery" and is forbidden misguidance. Of course you are "free" to practice what you will, you're not free to change fundamentals of Islam by pure desire and bending words out of its context.

Quran interpretation has basis that people study years just to understand the process. It is also attached many times to historical events. Abrogation of rules is an established system and was not set by philosophers based on desires and thoughts, it was set by Shariah and revealed knowledge to the prophet. "No Compulsion In Religion" refers to land under Islamic rule and to leave christians and jews to maintain their religion. That's it.

As for "the reasoning" that you keep saying God has asked us to use, it wasn't to reanalyze and reject and accept rulings without evidence and actualy AGAINST established evidence and documented orders and actions, it was regarding contemplating in creation and God's words to realize his existence and the impossibility of the Quran being anything other than inspired by God. What you are venturing into seems to be using reasoning, philosophy, theory and logic to manipulate the verses after the laws and practice was set in the example of the prophet and companions, ultimately to come around and re-establish your own desirable way of life and force people to accept it in the name of freedom, while still branding it Islam.

May God grant you real guidance
Reply

MSalman
09-11-2009, 02:55 PM
Originally Posted by czgibson
Greetings,

Thank you for continuing to help me with this subject. I am genuinely trying to understand the Islamic attitude to apostasy here, and as with other areas of the religion, I am encountering great difficulty.
ok, I will have husn al-dhan (benefit of doubt) for you

Originally Posted by czgibson
This is interesting. Could you explain what the difference is and how a sharia system would view these cases differently?
to be honest, I do not know - I will have to check with knowledgeable brothers.

Originally Posted by czgibson
No, but it is still compulsion.
And I did not deny it. I was only clarifying the part that some may think it is physically forcing them

Originally Posted by czgibson
Nobody is arguing that there is no compulsion in law - of course there is.
then what is point of this discussion

Originally Posted by czgibson
Islam claims to be a coherent and complete philosophical system,
explain the underlined part to me please and what do you mean by this and what are you referring to? thanks

Originally Posted by czgibson
but when Allah says that there is to be "no compulsion in religion" (2:256), that logically excludes the possibility of having any binding laws within the religion at all, since laws involve compulsion.
you are doing exactly what these Muslims are doing - taking it out of context. And you keep repeating it despite the fact I have explained this to you. You see these kinds of points does not show me that you are really trying to understand things here.

Last time, the ayah is not general - it talks about specific case. Hence, NO CONTRADICTION!

Originally Posted by czgibson
Another thing that makes your analogy puzzling is the fact that killing and driving fast are both activities that endanger or destroy life. Relinquishing a religion doesn't.
analogies are NOT meant to be taken in absolute or equal sense. They are presented just to explain things. I only brought them to show that compulsion exists in every judicial system as you agreed. Thus, if we are argue that Islamic law is not fair (for sake of arguing) then we can argue about other laws as well. So my point was from fairness point of view.

Secondly, note that your explanation is Islamic logic: clarifying some wisdom or reasoning behind some ruling. I do not know where you get that relinquishing a religion does not endanger people's lives!? It does endanger as some extremists may kill them or attack relatives or the apostate may incite wars or spread other type of fitnah which would lead to physical fights. This type of violation of Islamic law is more dangerous than the two examples I presented.

Originally Posted by czgibson
That sounds like a fair amount of compulsion to me.
straw man; never denied it; see above

Originally Posted by czgibson
It may or may not be fair, but what I'm drawing your attention to is what looks like an obvious contradiction.
see above

Originally Posted by czgibson
Well, thank you. What a charming thing to say to a fellow human being.
every kafir is a loser in the sight of Allah, the Lord; the Creator. So your complaint has little value whether we put that that fact on the table or not. Secondly, do you expect me to be nice to you and act 'goody goody' and not tell you the truth? Would that not be deception!? Thirdly, we do not hesitate to speak the truth whether people like it or not as Allah says in the Qur'an. Maybe someone can quote those ayaat for you.

Originally Posted by czgibson
That would be interesting.
you might have to wait for sometime since we are busy with ramadhan and other projects

and Allah knows best
Reply

czgibson
09-11-2009, 07:17 PM
Greetings,
Originally Posted by islamiclife
ok, I will have husn al-dhan (benefit of doubt) for you

to be honest, I do not know - I will have to check with knowledgeable brothers.
Thank you. :)

then what is point of this discussion
I'd like to see how you explain the apparent contradiction that I've pointed out.

explain the underlined part to me please and what do you mean by this and what are you referring to? thanks
Islam claims to be a coherent and complete philosophical system, which essentially means:

It is a way of life that makes complete sense in every part, and every part fits in perfectly with all the other parts. Also, it is complete - no other system is needed.

Is that a fair description of the claims Islam makes for itself?

you are doing exactly what these Muslims are doing - taking it out of context. And you keep repeating it despite the fact I have explained this to you. You see these kinds of points does not show me that you are really trying to understand things here.
You may think you've explained it, but I'm still none the wiser.

Last time, the ayah is not general - it talks about specific case. Hence, NO CONTRADICTION!
What is this specific case that you speak of?

Here is the ayah in question, together with the ones before and after it, in the translation of Mohsin Khan:

255 Allah! La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), Al-Hayyul-Qayyum (the Ever Living, the One Who sustains and protects all that exists). Neither slumber nor sleep overtakes Him. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is he that can intercede with Him except with His Permission? He knows what happens to them (His creatures) in this world, and what will happen to them in the Hereafter. And they will never compass anything of His Knowledge except that which He wills. His Kursi extends over the heavens and the earth, and He feels no fatigue in guarding and preserving them. And He is the Most High, the Most Great.
256 There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.
257 Allah is the Wali (Protector or Guardian) of those who believe. He brings them out from darkness into light. But as for those who disbelieve, their Auliya (supporters and helpers) are Taghut [false deities and false leaders], they bring them out from light into darkness. Those are the dwellers of the Fire, and they will abide therein forever.
The bolded section of Ayah 256 looks very much like two general statements. Can you show why you think differently?

Also, how does including the context of the ayah affect its meaning?

I do not know where you get that relinquishing a religion does not endanger people's lives!? It does endanger as some extremists may kill them or attack relatives or the apostate may incite wars or spread other type of fitnah which would lead to physical fights. This type of violation of Islamic law is more dangerous than the two examples I presented.
I suppose I underestimated humanity's capacity for idiocy.

It's pretty alarming that you think apostasy is worse than murder, by the way.

straw man; never denied it; see above
You didn't deny it, but Allah did. That is the point.

Secondly, do you expect me to be nice to you
Yes.

I am a human being, as deserving of respect as anyone else.

The Qur'an commands you to "argue with them in a way that is better" (16:125) and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said "The Muslim does not slander, curse, speak obscenely or speak rudely." (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, who said, this is a ghareeb hasan hadeeth; it was classed as saheeh by al-Albaani.)

If your own scriptures can't convince you to behave in a civilised way, then what chance do I have of doing the same?

Peace
Reply

Uthman
09-11-2009, 07:37 PM
Greetings czgibson,
Originally Posted by czgibson
Also, how does including the context of the ayah affect its meaning?
This is related to a sub-topic of Islamic Sciences known as asbaab-an-nuzool (causes of revelation), the knowledge of which is essential in order to properly interpret the Qur'an. Verses of the Qur'an were often revealed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in response to a specific event. Perhaps Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, the great classical scholar, explains it best when he says:
The knowledge of asbaab an-nuzool aids in understanding the verse, for knowledge of it's cause of revelation produces knowledge of it's application.
Reply

Rasema
09-11-2009, 08:02 PM
"I am a human being, as deserving of respect as anyone else.

The Qur'an commands you to "argue with them in a way that is better" (16:125) and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said "The Muslim does not slander, curse, speak obscenely or speak rudely." (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, who said, this is a ghareeb hasan hadeeth; it was classed as saheeh by al-Albaani.)

If your own scriptures can't convince you to behave in a civilised way, then what chance do I have of doing the same?"

Peace

May peace be upon those who follow the truth.

Basiclly, imagine a person who murders people, should we respect them?
The answer is a reasoning no. Murder comes below Shirk. Should I respect you? There are different kinds of respects, friendships....

But If you ask questions in a rude way we will be rude in return. Muslims don't believe in debating. If that is your purpose here you should leave because I will make sure that I insult you in every single of your post.The hadeeth might be talking between interactions of Muslims and Muslims. We have teachings, commands, in fact, to what are our relations to Non - Muslims and I can be 100% sure that we are not permitted to have love and affection in our hearts toward you.
Reply

Rasema
09-11-2009, 08:14 PM
Oh and about this verse to "argue with them in a way that is better" (16:125)

"I definately agree - if you want present Islam to a non-Muslim, then obviously you are going to have come in contact with them. And as the Qur'an says, you have to preach to them in a good manner(Younes Ibn abd al aziz)."
Reply

Al-Yasa
09-13-2009, 09:53 PM
what bout those ppl who threaten to kill their children if they leave islam ?
Reply

rpwelton
09-13-2009, 10:07 PM
Originally Posted by Al-Yasa
what bout those ppl who threaten to kill their children if they leave islam ?
The punishment of apostates can only be carried out by the state. There is no such thing as vigilante-ism in Islam.
Reply

Rasema
09-13-2009, 10:12 PM
Originally Posted by Al-Yasa
what bout those ppl who threaten to kill their children if they leave islam ?
Well, a child who hasn't reached its mature age can leave Islam without being punished. SOMEONE KNOWLEDGEABLE CORRECT ME.

If someone who has been raised a Muslim and hasn't testified the shehada can leave Islam as well, without being punished.

And I'm most likely correct. What you just said doesn't have to do with Islamic teachings rather human behaviour.

SOMEONE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG!
SHUKRAN
Reply

Salahudeen
09-13-2009, 10:22 PM
I remember reading somewhere that apostacy is only punishable when it leads to treason against the Islamic state. there's been other threads on this where a brother explained that what's being referred to, as being punishable by death is treason.
Reply

Rasema
09-13-2009, 10:25 PM
Originally Posted by Rasema
Well, a child who hasn't reached its mature age can leave Islam without being punished. SOMEONE KNOWLEDGEABLE CORRECT ME.

If someone who has been raised a Muslim and hasn't testified the shehada can leave Islam as well, without being punished.

And I'm most likely correct. What you just said doesn't have to do with Islamic teachings rather human behaviour.

SOMEONE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG!
SHUKRAN
Here is where I got the information from:

A person is liable for punishment when he or she reaches puberty or the age of 15, whichever comes first. So, as you said, a six-year-old wouldn't be punished for apostasy, but a 16-year-old and 26-year-old would.

No, there is no such opportunity such as the confirmation cereronomies in some Christian churches. Technically a Muslim born person can decide to apostasise from Islam if he or she hasn't uttered the testification of faith, "There is no deity but God, and Muhammad is His Messenger, in front of witnesses, and hasn't been seen by witnesses practicing Islam (for example going to pray) after he has attained puberty, but in practice it is extremely unlikely.

This post has been edited by Younes Ibn Abd' al-Aziz: Apr 23 2009, 04:10
Reply

Uthman
09-14-2009, 09:37 AM
Originally Posted by squiggle
I remember reading somewhere that apostacy is only punishable when it leads to treason against the Islamic state. there's been other threads on this where a brother explained that what's being referred to, as being punishable by death is treason.
It's probably this one. :)
Reply

alcurad
09-14-2009, 09:46 AM
Originally Posted by Rasema

A person is liable for punishment when he or she reaches puberty or the age of 15, whichever comes first.
note that 15 is not the only age the scholars have given for liability for all punishments.
Reply

Al-Yasa
09-14-2009, 04:43 PM
but isnt killing still wrong ?

example lets say a muslim girl at the age 22 leaves our religion

are we supposed to kill ? I thought only God decides who lives and dies
Reply

Al-Yasa
09-14-2009, 04:44 PM
but isnt killing still wrong ?

example lets say a muslim girl at the age 22 leaves our religion

are we supposed to kill ? I thought only God decides who lives and dies
Reply

Rasema
09-14-2009, 04:52 PM
Originally Posted by Al-Yasa
but isnt killing still wrong ?

example lets say a muslim girl at the age 22 leaves our religion

are we supposed to kill ? I thought only God decides who lives and dies
:sl:
Look, you're a Muslim,someone who submits one's self to the will of God.
"The question we should ask ourselves is not "Do people deserve to be punished if they leave Islam?" but "Is leaving Islam a serious offense against Allah?"

When a person understands the latter, then the former does not need questioning. To be honest, just a while ago I was fixated on the first question but when I realized that there is more to it, I've come to understand and accept the law.

Salam.

If you were a non-Muslim, I would respond to you in a different manner. But since you are a Muslim, I will simply advice you not to make judgements based on your own concepts of right and wrong, or based on your own logic. If you believe that the law itself originates from Allah, then it is, without a doubt, the right thing. We have to be careful about questioning Allah's decisions, because we might be implying that He is fallible and we as human beings have better solutions.

Allah is not worried about offending people or pleasing them. Allah guides whom He wills. It's really that simple.
" By Redeem from gawaher
Reply

Al-Yasa
09-14-2009, 05:01 PM
Originally Posted by Rasema
:sl:
Look, you're a Muslim,someone who submits one's self to the will of God.
"The question we should ask ourselves is not "Do people deserve to be punished if they leave Islam?" but "Is leaving Islam a serious offense against Allah?"

When a person understands the latter, then the former does not need questioning. To be honest, just a while ago I was fixated on the first question but when I realized that there is more to it, I've come to understand and accept the law.

Salam.

If you were a non-Muslim, I would respond to you in a different manner. But since you are a Muslim, I will simply advice you not to make judgements based on your own concepts of right and wrong, or based on your own logic. If you believe that the law itself originates from Allah, then it is, without a doubt, the right thing. We have to be careful about questioning Allah's decisions, because we might be implying that He is fallible and we as human beings have better solutions.

Allah is not worried about offending people or pleasing them. Allah guides whom He wills. It's really that simple.
" By Redeem from gawaher
you are right that it is a serious offense against Allah. however i do not believe ppl should be killed because faith is a personal thing. Only god is able to punish those who apostate. However if there was a true islamic state and a person commits treason, then the punishment is understandable.

Say: Oh you that reject the faith!
I do not worship that which you worship,
Nor will you worship that which I worship.
And I will not worship that which you have been accustomed to worship.
Nor will you worship that which I worship.
You have your way and I have mine." –[109:1-6]
Reply

Al Ansari
09-14-2009, 05:03 PM
assalaamu 'alaikum,

Leaving Islaam is treason. They should be killed; and they will be dealt with by Allaah ta a'la in al akhirah, WAllaahu a'lam.\\
Reply

Rasema
09-14-2009, 07:48 PM
Originally Posted by Al-Yasa
you are right that it is a serious offense against Allah. however i do not believe ppl should be killed because faith is a personal thing. Only god is able to punish those who apostate. However if there was a true islamic state and a person commits treason, then the punishment is understandable.

Say: Oh you that reject the faith!
I do not worship that which you worship,
Nor will you worship that which I worship.
And I will not worship that which you have been accustomed to worship.
Nor will you worship that which I worship.
You have your way and I have mine." –[109:1-6]

:sl:


First of, It is our respnsablity to watch after one another,our neighboors, and admonish them if they go astray.
Personal thing?
Islam is not just faith. Islam has a belif system and an action system. The same law is found in the Bible. In the law of Moses(pbuh).God punishs them through us. And I'm not saying that this should be done by a civilian especially in a Non-Muslim country. I think that this surah was revealed because the idolaters requested from the Prophet(pbuh) to share worship, or something like that.

You have your religion, idolatry, and I have a religion’, Islam: this was [revealed] before he was commanded to wage war [against the idolaters] (all seven Qur’ānic readers omit the yā’ of the genitive possessive construction [in wa-liya dīni] whether with a pause or without; Ya‘qūb, however, retains it in both cases).

As Muslims we don't care what we think or what others think of Islam or its laws. We just obey. The scholars are the inheritors of the Propher,saws, you must obey them and accept their fatwas in order to be a complete Muslim. Rejecting things from the Qur'an and hadeeths leads to kufr.

Some of the rulings on apostasy and apostates

Question:

I am happy to have found this website of yours. I was born a Muslim and I learned a lot of Islamic teachings after I reached adolescence. I am trying to understand my religion.
I have read in some of your answers on the issue of apostasy that the punishment for the apostate is to be put to death. But I have read on another website that the apostate who is to be put to death is the one who wages war on Islam (muhaarib).
I am more inclined towards the second opinion.
The reason for that is that I have friends who were born in Muslim families and who have Muslim names, but some of them do not know how to do wudoo’ or how to pray, but they acknowledge the Shahaadatayn.
Can we regard these people as apostates and thus put them to death?.

Answer:

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

The Muslim should not incline more towards one scholarly opinion rather than another just because it is in accordance with his whims and desires or his reasoning. Rather he has to accept the ruling based on evidence from the Qur’aan and Sunnah. It is essential to put the texts and rulings of sharee’ah before all else.

Secondly:

Apostasy (riddah) and going out of Islam are things that may be done in the heart, on the tongue or in one's actions.

Apostasy may take place in the heart, such as disbelieving in Allaah, or believing that there is another creator alongside Allaah, or hating Allaah or His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Apostasy may take the form of words spoken on the tongue, such as defaming Allaah or the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Or apostasy may take the form of outward physical actions, such as prostrating to an idol, mistreating the Mus-haf, or not praying.

The apostate (murtadd) is worse than one who is a kaafir in the first place.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, refuting the pantheistic belief of the Baatinis:

It is well known that the kaafir Tatars are better than these (Baatinis), because the latter are apostates from Islam, of the worst type of apostates. The apostate is worse than one who is a kaafir in the first place in many aspects.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 1/193

Secondly:

Not every Muslim who falls into kufr is a kaafir and apostate. There are reasons why a Muslim may be excused and not judged to be a kaafir, for example: ignorance, misunderstanding, being forced, and making mistakes.

With regard to the first, a man may be ignorant of the ruling of Allaah, because he lives far from the Muslim lands, such as one who grows up in the desert or in a kaafir land, or has only recently come to Islam. This may include many of those Muslims who live in societies where ignorance prevails and knowledge is scarce. These are the ones concerning whom the questioner is confused as to whether they are to be judged as kaafirs and executed.

The second reason is if a person interprets the ruling of Allaah in a manner not intended by the Lawgiver, such as those who blindly follow the people of bid’ah (innovation) in their misinterpretations, such as the Murji’ah, Mu’tazilah, Khawaarij and the like.

The third reason is if an oppressor overwhelms a Muslim and will not let him go until he makes a blatant statement of kufr out loud in order to ward off the torture, when his heart is at ease with faith.

The fourth is when words of kufr come to one's lips without meaning it.

Not everyone who is ignorant about wudoo’ and prayer can be excused, when he seed the Muslims establishing prayer and praying regularly, and he can read and hear the verses on prayer. What is preventing him from praying or from asking about how it is done and what its essential conditions are?

Fourthly:

The apostate is not to be put to death immediately after he falls into apostasy, especially if his apostasy happens because of some doubt that arose. Rather he should be asked to repent and he should be offered the opportunity to return to Islam and resolve his doubts, if he has any doubts. Then if he persists in his apostasy after that, he is to be put to death.

Ibn Qudaamah said in al-Mughni, 9/18:

The apostate should not be put to death until he has been asked to repent three times. This is the view of the majority of scholars, including ‘Umar, ‘Ali, ‘Ata’, al-Nakhaii, Maalik, al-Thawri, al-Awzaa’i, Ishaaq and others. Because apostasy comes about because of doubt, and cannot be dispelled in an instant. Time should be allowed for the person to rethink the matter, and the best length of time is three days.

End quote.

The saheeh Sunnah indicates that it is essential to put the apostate to death.

Al-Bukhaari (6922) narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever changes his religion, put him to death.”

Al-Bukhaari (6484) and Muslim (1676) narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allaah and that I am the Messenger of Allaah, except in one of three cases: a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a previously-married person who commits zina; and one who leaves his religion and separates from the main body of the Muslims.”

The general meaning of these ahaadeeth indicates that it is essential to put the apostate to death whether he is waging war on Islam (muhaarib) or not.

The view that the apostate who is to be put to death is the one who is waging war on Islam (muhaarib) only is contrary to these ahaadeeth. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said that the reason why he should be put to death is his apostasy, not his waging war against Islam.

Undoubtedly some kinds of apostasy are more abhorrent than others, and the apostasy of one who wages war against Islam is more abhorrent than that of anyone else. Hence some of the scholars differentiated between them, and said that it is not essential to ask the muhaarib to repent or to accept his repentance; rather he should be put to death even if he repents, whereas the repentance of one who is not a muhaarib should be accepted and he should not be put to death. This is the view favoured by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him).

He said:

Apostasy is of two types: ordinary apostasy and extreme apostasy, for which execution is prescribed. In both cases there is evidence that it is essential to execute the apostate, but the evidence indicating that the sentence of death may be waived if the person repents does not apply to both types of apostasy. Rather the evidence indicates that that is allowed only in the first case – i.e., ordinary apostasy – as will be clear to anyone who studies the evidence that speaks about accepting the repentance of the apostate. In the second type – i.e., extreme apostasy – the obligation to put the apostate to death still stands, and there is no text or scholarly consensus to indicate that the death sentence may be waived. The two cases are quite different and there is no comparison between them. It does not say in the Qur’aan or Sunnah, or according to scholarly consensus, that everyone who apostatizes in word or deed may be spared the death sentence if he repents after he is a captured and tried. Rather the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and scholarly consensus, differentiate between the different kinds of apostates.

Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 3/696

Al-Hallaaj was one of the most well known heretics who were put to death without being asked to repent. Al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad said:

The Maaliki fuqaha’ of Baghdad at the time of al-Muqtadir were unanimously agreed that al-Hallaaj should be killed and crucified because of his claim to divinity and his belief in incarnation, and his saying “I am al-Haqq [God],” even though he outwardly appeared to adhere to sharee’ah, and they did not accept his repentance.

Al-Shifa bi Ta’reef Huqooq al-Mustafa, 2/1091.

Based on this, it is clear that what the questioner says about the apostate not being killed unless he is waging war on Islam is mistaken, and the differentiation that we have quoted from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah may dispel any confusion and make the matter clearer.

Waging war against Islam is not limited only to fighting with weapons, rather it may be done verbally such as defaming Islam or the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or attacking the Qur’aan, and so on. Waging verbal war against Islam may be worse than waging war against it with weapons in some cases.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:

Muhaarabah (waging war against Islam) is of two types: physical and verbal. Waging war verbally against Islam may be worse than waging war physically – as stated above – hence the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to kill those who waged war against Islam verbally, whilst letting off some of those who waged war against Islam physically. This ruling is to be applied more strictly after the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Mischief may be caused by physical action or by words, but the damage caused by words is many times greater than that caused by physical action; and the goodness achieved by words in reforming may be many times greater than that achieved by physical action. It is proven that waging war against Allaah and His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) verbally is worse and the efforts on earth to undermine religion by verbal means is more effective.

Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 3/735

Fifthly:

With regard to not praying, the correct view is that the one who does not pray is a kaafir and an apostate. See question no. 5208.

And Allaah knows best.


Islam Q&A

Source - http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/14231/

P.S. There is no cumpoltion in Islam,you see, I had a friend who left Islam and ISLAM DOESN'T OBLIGATE ME TO PUNISH HER. But in an Islamic state the punishment is death. There are many reasons why. Don't you think that it is important when someone includes him/her self with a particular group to keep ones self included and not excluded?

When we kill those who left Islam it's not because they left Islam in my opinion.
Reply

Rasema
09-14-2009, 08:02 PM
:sl:
I wanted to add that the fatwa given is not the view of all the scholars,but by a particular school of thaugh.
:wa:
Reply

MSalman
09-15-2009, 01:40 PM
^wa'alaykum as-salam

sister, may Allah preserve you, what you have stated is not correct. I do not know when by "scholars" who you are referring to; however, as far as we know no traditionalist scholar went against what is stated in the fatawa you posted. How can it be the view of one school of thought when ibn Taymiyyah and ibn Qadamah (rahimahumullah) are hanablis and the opinion of Maliki fuqha (jurists) is also mentioned? And let's not forget about the statement of ibn Qadamah (rahimahullah) who said it was an ijmaa' among the early generations on this issue and he brought forward names of some great scholars. By keeping in mind the definition of ijmaa', how can ijmaa' be view of one school of thought?

and Allah knows best
Reply

Rasema
09-15-2009, 04:51 PM
Originally Posted by islamiclife
^wa'alaykum as-salam

sister, may Allah preserve you, what you have stated is not correct. I do not know when by "scholars" who you are referring to; however, as far as we know no traditionalist scholar went against what is stated in the fatawa you posted. How can it be the view of one school of thought when ibn Taymiyyah and ibn Qadamah (rahimahumullah) are hanablis and the opinion of Maliki fuqha (jurists) is also mentioned? And let's not forget about the statement of ibn Qadamah (rahimahullah) who said it was an ijmaa' among the early generations on this issue and he brought forward names of some great scholars. By keeping in mind the definition of ijmaa', how can ijmaa' be view of one school of thought?

and Allah knows best
:sl:

Oh, well I got this fatwa from a forum and that is what a person said but you're correct then.Thanks
Reply

Sampharo
09-24-2009, 05:16 PM
Originally Posted by Rasema
But since you are a Muslim, I will simply advice you not to make judgements based on your own concepts of right and wrong, or based on your own logic. If you believe that the law itself originates from Allah, then it is, without a doubt, the right thing. We have to be careful about questioning Allah's decisions, because we might be implying that He is fallible and we as human beings have better solutions.
Hit the nail on the head with this statement and so many muslims unfortunately don't understand this part and neglect it so I want to highlight it. We do not pass judgement on what is right or wrong in Islam based on our judgement, that is the very foundation of the falling of the children of Israel. After being shown the turth, proof and evidence of transfer muslims are required to understand and accept God's commandments.

To say that
however i do not believe ppl should be killed because faith is a personal thing....
is direct rejection of an undeniable Islamic law that has been confirmed in order and authenticity to be a commandment from God. Your personal feelings about it is merely personal failure to comprehend the wisdom or righteousness of it, and such comprehension is not a prerequisite to its application because it has been told and over 1400 years demonstrated and shown that human comprehension and opinion is always lacking.

May God grant you guidance.
Reply

Sampharo
09-24-2009, 05:18 PM
Originally Posted by Rasema
:sl:

Oh, well I got this fatwa from a forum and that is what a person said but you're correct then.Thanks
And also brother Islamiclife is correct. The evidence is total about the matter and there is complete unanimous agreement through all schools of fiqh and jurisprudence and outside them as well.
Reply

optimist
09-24-2009, 05:29 PM
Any social system which denies men the right to exercise their free will - is anti-Quranic.
Reply

MSalman
09-24-2009, 07:28 PM
^so we should let people kill, rape, others, etc. since that is exercising their free-will?
Reply

Rasema
09-25-2009, 10:22 PM
In psychology, I've learned that humans develop their behaviour both through heradity and enviroment. That we are the products of our enviroment supports Sharia,I would say. Now, that an Islamic state forces woman who don't want to cover to cover is something that is preventing others to follow an reckless example. Same applies for someone who is worshiping a statue of Jesus(pbuh). A child would easily get into a tramp to worship thi sthing etc..
Reply

'Abd-al Latif
09-25-2009, 10:48 PM
There is no compulsion to accept Islam

Q.Some friends say that whoever does not enter Islam, that is his choice and he should not be forced to become Muslim, quoting as evidence the verses in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And had your Lord willed, those on earth would have believed, all of them together. So, will you (O Muhammad) then compel mankind, until they become believers”
[Yoonus 10:99]
“There is no compulsion in religion”
[al-Baqarah 2:256]
What is your opinion concerning that?.

A.Praise be to Allaah.

The scholars explained that these two verses, and other similar verses, have to do with those from whom the jizyah may be taken, such as Jews, Christians and Magians (Zoroastrians). They are not to be forced, rather they are to be given the choice between becoming Muslim or paying the jizyah.

Other scholars said that this applied in the beginning, but was subsequently abrogated by Allaah’s command to fight and wage jihad. So whoever refuses to enter Islam should be fought when the Muslims are able to fight, until they either enter Islam or pay the jizyah if they are among the people who may pay jizyah. The disbelievers should be compelled to enter Islam if they are not people from whom the jizyah may be taken, because that will lead to their happiness and salvation in this world and in the Hereafter. Obliging a person to adhere to the truth in which is guidance and happiness is better for him than falsehood. Just as a person may be forced to do the duty that he owes to other people even if that is by means of imprisonment or beating, so forcing the kaafirs to believe in Allaah alone and enter into the religion of Islam is more important and more essential, because this will lead to their happiness in this world and in the Hereafter. This applies unless they are People of the Book, i.e., Jews and Christians, or Magians, because Islam says that these three groups may be given the choice: they may enter Islam or they may pay the jizyah and feel themselves subdued.

Some of the scholars are of the view that others may also be given the choice between Islam and jizyah, but the most correct view is that no others should be given this choice, rather these three groups are the only ones who may be given the choice, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) fought the disbelievers in the Arabian Peninsula and he only accepted their becoming Muslim. And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“But if they repent [by rejecting Shirk (polytheism) and accept Islamic Monotheism] and perform Prayer, and give Zakaah, then leave their way free. Verily, Allaah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful”

He did not say, “if they pay the jizyah”. The Jews, Christians and Magians are to be asked to enter Islam; if they refuse then they should be asked to pay the jizyah. If they refuse to pay the jizyah then the Muslims must fight them if they are able to do so. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allaah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allaah and His Messenger (Muhammad), (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” [al-Tawbah 9:29]

And it was proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) accepted the jizyah from the Magians, but it was not proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or his companions (may Allaah be pleased with them) accepted the jizyah from anyone except the three groups mentioned above.

The basic principle concerning that is the words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning):

“And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism, i.e. worshipping others besides Allaah), and the religion (worship) will all be for Allaah Alone [in the whole of the world]” [al-Anfaal 8:39]

“Then when the Sacred Months (the 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikoon (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush. But if they repent [by rejecting Shirk (polytheism) and accept Islamic Monotheism] and perform As-Salaah (Iqaamat-as-Salaah), and give Zakaah, then leave their way free. Verily, Allaah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful” [al-Tawbah 9:5]

This verse is known as Ayat al-Sayf (the verse of the sword).

These and similar verses abrogate the verses which say that there is no compulsion to become Muslim.

And Allaah is the Source of strength.

Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat li’l-Shaykh Ibn Baaz, 6/219

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/34770






Other threads related to this topic can be found and discussed here:

http://www.islamicboard.com/clarific...n-muslims.html

http://www.islamicboard.com/clarific...-apostasy.html

http://www.islamicboard.com/clarific...-crusades.html

And there are many other oft repeated threads so please so do make an effort and use the search feature.

Without further delay

:threadclo
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-24-2008, 08:10 PM
  2. Replies: 97
    Last Post: 02-18-2008, 06:25 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-17-2005, 11:37 PM
HeartHijab.com | Hijab Sale | Pound Shop | International Institute of Entrepreneurship and Professional Development - IIEPD | Truly Halal Humour

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!