Apostasy Islam

...sure, but would they kill you for eating bacon lol?

It's like waiting for something couple of hours...but it never comes..so you have waiting for nothing so to say.

...well enjoy your freedom while you have it.

..would be great if they enforced themselves.

predestination and an omnipotent, omnipresent god n all.

everything else seems to be written, no?


...i have sacked people that i cought stealing..

and people that turned up to work with the wrong intention.

although they still seem to turn up in the strangest places..

families in tow.

very reluctant to hire staff these days..

although someone once told me life was about risk..

iv really rather stoped chasing it.


..the dream car is worth twice as much as it was last year!

The ruling for apostasy has been mentioned in authentic hadeeth and scholars have quoted a consensus that the apostate is to be executed by the Muslim authorities, after being given time to review his decision. If you search well-known fatawa websites you will find them stating thus;

Among the crimes whose doer deserves to be killed is Riddah (leaving Islam or disbelieving in one of its tenets)...
[...]
Among the evidences, we have also the consensus of the companions after the death of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) that anyone who changes his or her religion (Islam) should be killed.
Ibn Qudama said: 'All the scholars of Islam are agreed that the apostate is to be killed.' There is no difference in this rule between the man and the woman. But Abu Hanifa believes that the apostate woman should be jailed and forced to return to Islam but not executed. But the most preponderant opinion is that she is like the man in this rule.
It should be noted here that this punishment is carried out only by the Muslim authorities. So, no individual should give himself the right to act on behalf of the authorities.
The apostate is first told to repent and given three days to decide. If he confesses in front of a Qadi, who has the necessary authority to apply the death penalty, that he does not want to repent, then he is executed. [/quote]
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/in...twaId&Id=85488


...The punishment for apostasy from the religion of Islam is execution. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And whosoever of you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever”
[al-Baqarah 2:217]
And it was proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever changes his religion, execute him.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari in his Saheeh. What this hadeeth means is that whoever leaves Islam and changes to another religion and persists in that and does not repent, is to be executed. It was also proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a person who bears witness that there is no god but Allaah and that I am the Messenger of Allaah except in three cases: a life for a life, a previously-married person who commits adultery, and one who leaves Islam and forsakes the jamaa’ah.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari and Muslim...
https://islamqa.info/en/12406


The corporal punishment that should be implemented on an apostate is death as the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi Wasallam) said: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.”
[...]

The punishment to an apostate is death, this is also according to the Ijma’ (concensus) of the Fuqaha (jurists). (Al Mabsoot Lis Sarakhsi Vol. 10 Pg. 98, Badai’ 7/134, Raddul Muhtar 4/226- Darse Tirmidhi 5/111)

http://islamqa.org/hanafi/muftisays/10603

format_quote Originally Posted by Serinity

You made me realise something fundamental.. (I think). It is that Shariah Law is not rigid, it is flexible. A person who is forced to steal (because of fear of death by poverty, etc.) is not to be punished. Because life is more important than wealth.

Laws change based on circumstances. Generally, a theif's hands is to be cut off, but in certain circumstances, you can not do that. Because if one dies by not stealing, then one has to steal, even if the victim losses wealth. Because life is more important than wealth.
So only the apostates who pose a risk to society, are to be executed?

JazakAllah khayr.

With regards to the Maqasid of Shariah and the example of Umar not cutting the hand of the thief during the time of famine, the following extract mentions important principles and clarification:

...Allah is the most eloquent in speech and precise in conveying His intent. His words coupled with the authentic Sunnah form the basis of Law and Islam. There is unanimous agreement that the Qur’an and the authentic Sunnah are the two main reference points in every issue. In stark contrast, that which is known as ‘the spirit of the law’ (the aims of the shari’ah) are the result of human reasoning (Ijtihad) and are not fundamental pillars upon which the law is based. Instead, they are matters open to discussion, addition or deletion (as is apparent by the aforementioned difference on the precise number of Maqasid). Thus, they are not an independent Islamic source which stands at the same rank as the sources themselves such as the Qur’an and Sunnah¹⁸. If the Maqasid are not equal to the sources of Islam; the Qur’an and Sunnah, can they be given authority to override any part of those sources? Was the intent of deriving these Maqasid and this spirit to make them a moderator over the revelation?


The finite and deficient creation cannot encompass the infinite perfection and wisdom of its Lord. It is therefore not fitting that the intellect be the soul reference in deciding the intent of Allah. The revelation came to complete the intellect of man and strengthen it by providing a stable, constant and consistent framework within which to operate. The revelation on the other hand is not in need of being supported nor completed¹⁹. The perfect wisdom of Allah is better suited to prescribe the greatest benefit to mankind in all matters, and any explicit command or proscription from Him reflects this infinite wisdom. A command in the revelation to do something is nothing other than an explicit intent of the Shari’ah that is realised by enacting that order²⁰. Thus, “Cut off the thief’s hand, male or female, as a recompense for that which they committed, a punishment from Allâh. And Allâh is All-¬Powerful, All-¬Wise”²¹ ‘is an order to establish a legal aim which is to protect (possessions and) wealth which cannot be attained except by cutting the thief’s hand. It cannot be said that cutting the thief’s hand will cause harm to the perpetrator of the crime and this contradicts the preservation of life which is an aim of the Shari’ah, or that this punishment is not suited to a modern civilised society geared to preserving life and limb. This understanding completely removes Allah’s commands in achieving His intent; rather it contradicts those aims’²². Such a perspective and approach results in rendering the Shari’ah inconsistent such that it could never be from God the All-Wise.


It is preposterous that so called ‘evidence’ to support the notion of innovation and extending beyond the ‘literal’ dictates of revelation attempts to misconstrue an action of a companion such as Umar (RA); one who was famous for his precise execution of the letter of the law in all affairs, perhaps even for his stringency in doing so. The case in question is when he did not apply the prescribed punishment of cutting the thief’s hand during a time of famine. The reality of the matter, however, just proves Umar’s strict adherence to the letter of the law. In relation to this incident Ibn al-Qayyim relates the agreement of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal with Imam al-Awzaee regarding ceasing the cutting of hands in a time of famine: ‘this is pure analogy and what the principles of the Shari’ah demand. During a famine people are overcome by need and necessity, such that it is rare for a thief to be free of dire need for what will end his hunger. This is a doubt which prevents cutting (the hand) of the one in need and it is stronger than many of the doubts that the jurists mention’²³. Umar understood that the cutting of the hand only applied where there was no doubt involved in the crime, a principle not only agreed upon by the ummah from the time of the companions, rendering it mandatory to follow and obey²⁴, but a principle that even exists in ‘progressive’ legislative systems today. In times of famine the struggle is to stay alive even if that means theft. Thus, establishing whether the theft was committed out of dire necessity or not would become mandatory so as to remove any doubt concerning applying the prescribed punishment. Dealing with the famine and removing the doubt around theft would allow the application of this commandment with certainty as required²⁵. Umar (RA) showed clearly in his action how the revelation deals with the prescribed punishments in circumstances which force people to commit crimes. It was not the setting of a precedent but rather the application of what he learnt from the actions of the Prophet (saw) in ascertaining the cause for committing the crime with certainty before applying the punishment. Also, it is important to note that Umar (RA) did not announce a moratorium publicly, or even a temporary one, but when the case was brought before him for judgement he ruled that the punishment of theft should not be executed due to doubt surrounding the crime²⁶. The Prophet (saw) specifically²⁷ ordered the Muslims to follow in the footsteps of Abu Bakr and Umar specifically and the rightly guided caliphs generally²⁸, so thus, what Umar did was already a divinely sanctioned implementation of the revealed law and as for those who come later then their Ijtihad does not have the same divine approval and authority.


Conclusion

It is not for the Mujtahid (the scholar who makes Ijtihad) to create or prescribe what is best for mankind²⁹. His role is to apply what has been explicitly stated by the revelation; without contradicting it, to all circumstances and events. {quotes}Intellectual opinions and thought must work within the limits set by revelation and not attempt independence.{/quotes}
Such an attempt would lead to the denial of Islam in totality. The revelation sets explicit limits and boundaries for mankind. If the violation of these limits is allowed then the revelation has been rendered futile. In the words of Shatibi: ‘If the intellect is allowed to violate the limits set by revelation then there is no purpose of those limits. Since the aim was to set a limit, if it is allowed to go beyond that limit then the limit is useless, and this in the Shari’ah is batil’³⁰...

https://www.islam21c.com/islamic-law...-with-maqasid/

We must be careful when discussing Islamic rulings and where there is doubt we must refer them to the People of Knowledge. We cannot put forward our own opinions and thoughts and ignore the proper methodology used in deriving rulings, otherwise we will end up following our desires and not the Revelation of Allaah . If you look at this post, you will gain an idea of the breadth of topics a student of knowledge must study. This short video posted here also highlights the depth and complexity involved as well as the need to humble ourselves when speaking about deen.

May Allaah guide us to the correct understanding of His deen and forgive us for our errors, Aameen.

I would suggest reading other threads as well, that have already discussed on this topic.

Punishment for apostasy


Is apostasy allowed in Islam?

Greetings,

format_quote Originally Posted by Dy77778

And you believe that in 2017? That is totally asinine.

Whilst man in the 21^st century has achieved so much in terms of technology and advancement, the human race is responsible for so much of the harm and evil on this planet and its inhabitants. Whether we realise it or not, our minds are limited in scope in determining what is best for mankind unless we seek guidance from the one who knows us the best: our Creator.

Why on earth would you kill an apostate? My only assumption that you are afraid this is not the truth.

The execution of the apostate is something that is commanded by Allaah , when he commanded us to obey the Messenger . Our acceptance of Islamic law stems from our belief that Allāh legislates for us laws that are best for us whether we realise their benefits or not. Otherwise, if our acceptance or rejection of Islamic law was based on our own personal preference, we would have no need for Divine guidance from Allāh since it would have to be measured against our own personal preference.

In general, Muslims hold that there are very strong, rational reasons for them to believe in their religion. It is not simply a matter of blind faith. For example, the excellence of the Qur'an, its unquestionable historical authenticity, the numerous miracles related to it and the life of the Prophet all point to this Book being a true revelation from God and this message being divine in origin. Thus, before a Muslim is asked to override something found in his religion, one needs to bring very strong evidence that something is mistaken or unacceptable in the religion of Islam.

I can never condone murder of another human being. How barbaric.

The only argument brought against capital punishment for apostasy is an emotional one. Do you consider the death penalty meted out by numerous countries such as the USA as murder? From their perspective, they are bringing criminals to justice. The fact is that different places have different laws for the same crime. In the USA, some states apply the death penalty for first degree murder, others apply life imprisonment. Moreover, a crime in one place is not considered a crime in another. As examples, assisted suicide is illegal in some countries yet open practice in others. Holocaust denial is illegal in some countries but not others. In some places possession of certain drugs like marijuana is illegal, whilst it is allowed in others. Wherever you live, the laws are made to be obeyed and a person does not have a choice to disregard laws just because he doesn't agree with them. You may disagree with capital punishment for apostasy, but there is no intellectual reason to prove it is wrong.

I did consider Islam for some time, but after really reading the quran and hadith and actually reading posts on here I see islam is not this great
religion of peace but a cult of violence, subjugation and death.

A holistic reading of the Qur'an and Hadith will help you understand the noble aims and objectives of Islamic Law and the mercy in its teachings. I hope you will learn more about Islam and see this for yourself, .

There is NO KILLING APOSTATES IN ISLAM UNLESS THEY COMMIT TREASON FIRST - WHY YOU NOT SAYING THIS MUHAMMAD?

Scimi

salaam

No being against killing apostates is not an "emotional" point of view - its a rational one. If a christian converted to Islam and the christian rulers or community decided to kill the converted Muslim because they believed he was an apostate? would any Muslim agree with that? Is that freedom of religion? or is that just a way of making more hypocrites in your society?

Only way one can make sense of killing the apostates in hadiths is under treason.

peace

format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar

There is NO KILLING APOSTATES IN ISLAM UNLESS THEY COMMIT TREASON FIRST - WHY YOU NOT SAYING THIS MUHAMMAD?

Scimi

Maybe because he believes killing apostate is good? like a lot of muslims it seems.......

I am simply putting here what scholars have stated on this issue;

...2 – The one who announces his Islam has joined the jamaa’ah (main body) of the Muslims, and whoever joins the main body of the Muslims is required to be completely loyal and to support it and protect it against anything that may lead to fitnah or destroy it or cause division. Apostasy from Islam means forsaking the jamaa’ah and its divine order, and has a harmful effect on it. Execution is the greatest deterrent that will prevent people from committing such a crime...
https://islamqa.info/en/12406


...There are many reasons for punishing the Murtad severely. They include the following:

1. This penalty is designed to deter someone who embraces Islam out of hypocrisy and urges them to hold fast to Islam. They should have deep insight and be aware of the consequences of Riddah in the worldly life and in the Hereafter. Anyone who professes Islam has accepted, at their discretion and consent, to adhere to all its rulings and obligations. Among these rulings is putting the Murtad to death.

2. Anyone who professes Islam has become a member of the Muslim community. Those members must have loyalty to this community, support it, and combat anything that may cause Fitnah (temptation), destruction, or disunity in the Muslim Ummah (nation based on one creed).

A Murtad gives up their loyalty to the Muslim community. Even more, they jeopardize it and expose it to afflictions whose consequences are even worse. Islam has laid down this severe punishment to prevent this crime and to deter people from committing it...
http://www.alifta.net/Fatawa/fatawaD...eNo=1&BookID=7


...So, any person who enters Islam and then gives it up, commits a major sin for which he deserves to be beheaded because he left, by this act, the Muslim community, and betrayed himself. This treason to the Muslim community
[...]
Even in countries where the death penalty is opposed serious acts against their constitutions may be punishable by death or life imprisonment. Apostasy from Islam (the religion of Allah) and rebellion against its system, which the person first chose freely and accepted without compulsion is much worse than rebelling against man-made systems and institutions which are fabricated and have nothing to do with absolute justice the Justice of Allah.
There are many evidences proving this...
http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/in...twaId&Id=85488


...A person is condemned to death because he has committed an unforgivable crime. A country is based on certain entrenched values. There is no compromise on such values.

One who opposes these values is convicted of treason. The penalty of treason in many countries is death. If death is the consequence of rebelling against man made laws which are deficient, then shouldn’t rebellion against the laws of Allah which are perfect be viewed more seriously...
http://www.askimam.org/public/question_detail/19729


...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)...
https://islamqa.info/en/14231

format_quote Originally Posted by Simple_Person

That is the problem with many people now a days, they follow blindly what a hadith says, even though it might contradict the basic logic, rationality, reason AND EVEN the Qur'an it self.

A Hadith can never contradict logic, rationality or the Qur'an. This is because both our intellect and the deen of Islam are from Allaah . The problem lies in our understanding of a particular Hadeeth, in that we fail to look at all of the textual evidences together and understand them according to the correct methodology. This is why I highlighted earlier the need to refer to the People of Knowledge who can apply the various sciences of Islam to arrive at the correct conclusion regarding a matter.

But yeah, what can you do with people that refuse to ponder about this issue. Following blindly is NEVER recommended especially in these times. During time of Rasullah(saws) when he said something, just do it and not ask why. However Raullah(saws) has is not living with us right now.

O you who believe! Make not (a decision) in advance before Allah and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), and fear Allah. Verily! Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing. [Al-Hujuraat: 1]

The only saying of the faithful believers, when they are called to Allah (His Words, the Qur'an) and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), to judge between them, is that they say: "We hear and we obey." And such are the successful (who will live forever in Paradise). And whosoever obeys Allah and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), fears Allah, and keeps his duty (to Him), such are the successful. [An-Noor: 51-2].

Once it is established that a ruling is from the Prophet then we do follow it blindly because the Prophet received Revelation from Allaah and was protected from error. We do not need to 'ponder about the issue' before accepting it, otherwise we are giving preference to our limited intellect above the Revelation of Allaah , and we seek refuge in Allaah from that. It makes no difference whether the Prophet commanded you to do something during his lifetime or whether you receive that command a thousand years later; the deen of Islam has been protected by Allaah and will remain until the end of time.

Do any of us really think we can simply read the English translation of one or two hadith, and think our interpretation should be placed above the 1400 years of Islamic scholarship, that somehow they were all wrong and in 2017 we have finally got it right? We are disrespecting our own religion by speaking about matters we do not know about. For that reason, I advise myself and everyone else to please refer matters to the scholars and refrain from speaking without knowledge. I do not think anything remains to be said in this thread.