Death Penalty for Apostasy in Islam

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michael
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 17
  • Views Views 8K
Michael

Michael

Senior Member
Messages
87
Reaction score
28
I have heard that in most Islamic countries, a Muslim who converts to another religion is to be killed. The Wikipedia article on countries which have capital punishment listed that Egypt has capital punishment for apostasy.

I have heard that there is a Hadith where the Prophet (SAWS) said "Whoever changes his religion, kill him". Can anyone provide me with the source of that Hadith and tell me if it is sahih?

This seems totally barbaric to me. If Islam is the truth, then people would stay with it. If it isn't, then such measures would be needed to stop people leaving. Plus this violates the Universal Declaration for Human Rights - everyone is allowed freedom of religion.
 
Michael said:
I have heard that in most Islamic countries, a Muslim who converts to another religion is to be killed. The Wikipedia article on countries which have capital punishment listed that Egypt has capital punishment for apostasy.

I have heard that there is a Hadith where the Prophet (SAWS) said "Whoever changes his religion, kill him". Can anyone provide me with the source of that Hadith and tell me if it is sahih?

This seems totally barbaric to me. If Islam is the truth, then people would stay with it. If it isn't, then such measures would be needed to stop people leaving. Plus this violates the Universal Declaration for Human Rights - everyone is allowed freedom of religion.
Click to expand...

This is one of the most misunderstood concepts of Islam non-Muslims seem to have.

It is true that it is permissible for a person to be executed for apostacy. But, there are very specific conditions that have to be met in order for the death penalty to be imposed. Under those conditions apostacy is very similar to treason against the country, for which the death penalty is used in most of the world's countries.

Bro. Ansar Adil once posted an excellent explanation as to what apostacy actually entails and under what conditions the death penalty is permitted. I will try to find the link to his post.
 
peace be upon you Micheal

Islam is not just a simple religion, it is a way of life, it teaches norms, ethics, values, trading. Islam teaches us how to wake up, how to dress, what to do in the toilet, how to bath, its a complete religion. In an Islamic state, death penalty is applicable for leaving Islam, because apostasy would be considered as treason to the state, well it is a much more complicated matter and need lot of analyze.
But you should check for it with someone who has more knowledge than me, cause i don't remember when i came by it.
 
i would like to remark that ayaat 256 of surah 2, it stand for non-believers, they are not forced to embrace Islam, but from the moment you embrace Islam, then there is no other way, you have to accept everything prescribed to you.
 
I find the ambiguity and the varied applications of the death penalty in different countries both confusing and frightening. Some of the quote below seems to suggest that it was only to be applied under circumstances in which the Prophet (pbuh) found himself. Yet, it is still in the active legal code of some Muslim countries. And I would think, that this reflects a broader attitude of ostracism, even in places where the death penalty could not be legally imposed.

Sahih Bukhari, Book.84, Hadith.57] Narated By 'Ikrima : Some Zanadiqa were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn' Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Here is another narrative;
[Sahih Bukhari, Book.83, Hadith.17] Narated By 'Abdullah : Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam and leaves the Muslims."

There is mixed opinion among muslims as to whether a capital punishment is to be dished out for an apostate. There are muslim countires as you've rightly pointed put who have prescribed death punishment while other counties, like the one from where i come from, Pakistan, have not.
It is important to realise what was meant by Apostasy at the time of the Prophet[p] because back then, you were either on the muslim's side or enemy's, people who would revert back to Paganism would only join the Pagans for material desires and to cause harm to the muslims thus we read in another Hadith narrative;

[Sahih Bukhari, Book.83, Hadith.37] Narated By Abu Qilaba: '...."By Allah, Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."
Click to expand...

I also find the death penalty for marital infidelity unduly harsh, to say the least, but that is a topic for another thread.

Is there anything in the Qur'an which says "judge not, lest ye be judged", or something to that effect?


Now again normally these arguments raised by Christians with the sincere aim to malign Islam and since we're on the subject, why not also have a look into the Bible and see what should be done to a person who leaves his religion. In the book of Deuteronomy, we read;
If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son, or your daughter, or the wife of your bosom, or your friend who is as your own soul, entices you secretly, saying, 'Let us go and serve other gods,' which neither you nor your fathers have known....You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. [Deu 13:6,10] Similarly;
If there is found among you, within any of your towns which the LORD your God gives you, a man or woman who does what is evil in the sight of the LORD your God, in transgressing his covenant, and has gone and served other gods and worshiped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the host of heaven, which I have forbidden, and it is told you and you hear of it; then you shall inquire diligently, and if it is true and certain that such an bominable thing has been done in Israel, then you shall bring forth to your gates that man or woman who has done this evil thing, and you shall stone that man or woman to death with stones. [Deu 17:2-5]

Indecisive on Islam you may be but you can sure bet based on the Bible, death to the Apostate
Click to expand...

The above quote would suggest that the same attitude is prevalent today amongst Christians. This was a historical attitude, and is not accepted today in mainstream Christianity even in the milder form of ostracism. For example, when I formally left the Evangelical Lutheran Church, the pastor told me that he would not excommunicate me, and that I was welcome back anytime.
 
I have read the arguments on the question of executing apostates and if I have understood them they are that it is regarded as akin to treason.

In the (closed) thread . . http://www.islamicboard.com/clarifications-about-islam/4738-islam-apostasy.html . . . Ansar Al-‘Adl a Moderator on this forum states the following . . . . .

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. . . . .

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.

AND

Apostasy is defined as a Muslim making a statement or performing an action that takes him out of the fold of Islam. The punishment prescribed for it in the Sunnah is execution, and it came as a remedy for a problem that existed at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him). This problem was that a group of people would publicly enter into Islam together then leave Islam together in order to cause doubt and uncertainty in the hearts of the believers. The Qur’ân relates this event to us:
A group from the People of the Scripture said: ‘Believe in what came down upon those who believe at the beginning of the day, then disbelieve at the end of the day, so perhaps they might return from faith.
Thus, the prescribed punishment for apostasy was instituted so that apostasy could not be used as a means of causing doubt in Islam.
At the same time, the apostate is given time to repent, so if he has a misconception or is in doubt about something, then his cause of doubt can be removed and the truth clarified to him. He is encouraged to repent for three days.


The argument given in the (closed) thread (and this thread) that execution of apostates is justifiable because it is treason hinges on the existences of a ‘Muslim/Islamic state.’


The author of the article at this link . . . http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2009/04/islamic-state-muslims-prophet . . . states:

“Islamic state”, . . . contrary to popular Muslim opinion, there is not a shred of theological, historical or empirical evidence to support the existence of such an entity. Its supporters tend to mumble vaguely about this or that verse from the Quran, or make vacuous references to the life example of the Prophet Muhammad. But the Quran prescribes no particular model of government, nor does it detail a specific political programme that Muslims must adopt. In fact, the concept of the state appears nowhere in the Quran.

Can anybody show me the text in Islam teachings that defines ‘Islamic State;’ what constitutes an Islamic State?
 
Thinker..

there is an excellent book:

http://www.islamicboard.com/creative-writing-art/134268745-books-you-love-hate-33.html#post1138652

Gossamer skye said:
Most of the books I read now a days if at all are short stories given that I need to manage my time for my other affairs and to be quite honest, I find that reading books outside of Medical ones sort of frivolous.. I do believe in unwinding and I try to do it on this forum (doesn't work) or by purchasing Nancy Drew PC games (I am quite the Sleuth -- NOT) :X

anyhow, I finally decided that I'd take myself up on my offer to be a better Muslim :X and that I would read more Islamic books.. the problem with me when I start a book is that I have no consciousness of time whatsoever, I can neglect everything including prayers (astghfor'Allah) until I am done with it, and have in the past finished 500~600 page books in a matter of a day, day and a half most.. so it is a stretch to get a book so intriguing and put it down to fulfill other duties ... Hence the fact I enjoy short stories because well, if you are too engrossed, you'll be done in 15~20mins max (depending on your speed of reading) but I digress..

in fact you can simply skip to this part which is, you must absolutely get this book, you must find whatever means to have it, it is honestly that good




when reading books, I'll usually skip such things as intro, and dedications yada yada, but, I was so blown away by this author Dr. Al-Azami that even his dedication nearly drove me to tears

he wrote

For my dear mother, whose face I was too young to remember, whose greatest wish for me (as I was later told) was to memorize the Quran, and who I hope to meet again in the Gardens of Heaven. May Allah accept from us the best of our deeds..

He starts the book with a look at pre-Islamic Arabia, he does tell you the names of the first Jewish tribes settling there due to Abraham and the ZAMZAM well, a fact Christians and Jews omit of course until whining about Banu Quryzah.. he covers geopolitical conditions, the prophet ancestory and their guardianship of Makkah, religious conditions of Makkah, birth of Muhammad, the conquests of Khalid ibn Ilwaleed, as well as the Rampant apostasy during the time of Abu Bakr advent to the Death of our beloved prophet. He speaks of a christian prophetess Named Saja bint al-Harith bin suwaid.. honestly the first time I have even heard of her..

Yes I can't put the book down, but I have to write you this.. I think this book truly is a must for every Muslim.. He is amazing at rebutting basless allegations against Islam by so-called doctors in their field.. honestly if you read this book, you'd realize how just how long Islam has been a threat and how long the crusades whether physical or through written mediums have existed. And how hilarious the things they take for sources like finds in Yemen where for instance in the older versions vowels were implied but not used I refer you as an example to the way Al'rahman is written in Arabic without the A or with the A..

You'll feel so good reading this book (all around) the history, the religion, the time period) you'll feel the grief as Khubaib bin Adi-al-Ansari) is cut from limb to limb and left to bleed to renounce his faith, Queryshis laughing as he bleeds and sweats in complete pain before they finally behead him..

if you are still not convinced, know this much, any fellow that comes here with a cut and paste from the web can be more than adequately refuted just using one paragraph of this book..

I feel that much richer having read just a few chapters in a few hrs..

I hope you too will get it and enjoy it insha'Allah

:w:
Click to expand...

it will give you an idea of what the early Islamic state was like and how it was established.. I think you'll really enjoy it..

I tried to find it online as a PDF but can't find it. But I think it will answer many of your questions, in an honest fashion...

peace
 
Greetings Thinker,

Thinker said:
The argument given in the (closed) thread (and this thread) that execution of apostates is justifiable because it is treason hinges on the existences of a ‘Muslim/Islamic state.’


The author of the article at this link . . . http://www.newstatesman.com/religion/2009/04/islamic-state-muslims-prophet . . . states:

“Islamic state”, . . . contrary to popular Muslim opinion, there is not a shred of theological, historical or empirical evidence to support the existence of such an entity. Its supporters tend to mumble vaguely about this or that verse from the Quran, or make vacuous references to the life example of the Prophet Muhammad. But the Quran prescribes no particular model of government, nor does it detail a specific political programme that Muslims must adopt. In fact, the concept of the state appears nowhere in the Quran.

Can anybody show me the text in Islam teachings that defines ‘Islamic State;’ what constitutes an Islamic State?
Click to expand...
The author of that link also believes, "any historical precedent that revolves around the presence of a divinely guided prophet-as-political-leader seems wholly irrelevant, in an era in which we have no divinely guided prophet to lead us." Does he not know that Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was the Final Prophet for all of mankind? This is a huge flaw in his understanding of Islam, hence the rest of what he has to say should hardly be taken seriously. I don't know why you even felt the need to dig up an article like this.

Coming to the part you quoted - before one goes about making claims about lack of evidence, one should first understand what the sources of evidence are. When deriving evidence in Islam, we must look at the Qur'an and Sunnah together, never exclusively. It is a major failing to solely rely on the Qur'an. Moreover the author of that article contradicts himself when he says there is no historical evidence, then later decides there is, but calls it "wholly irrelevant".

However, the Qur'an does contain guidance regarding the State. It provides guidance on the social conditions of society - for the ruler regarding his people and the people regarding their rulers. There is guidance at a family level and community level. The Qur'an also lays down the foundations for economics - a proper perspective of making money as well as spending it in the right channels.

Furthermore, the Qur'an presents the foundations of politics, illuminating its characteristics and revealing its routes. It provides guidance on both foreign and domestic affairs. As for foreign policies - the Qur'an details issues of truces, armistice and the fulfilling of contracts if the situation calls for it. And as for domestic - its topics return to the establishment of safety and peace within society, while halting aggression and returning things to their rightful owners.

The main entities that are the focus of preservation in domestic policy are six:

1. Religion - the Shariah came to protect it, hence the deterrence from changing religion and its vanquishing
2. Life
3. The mind and intellect
4. Family and genealogy
5. Reputation and honour
6. Property and wealth

Thus, following the Qur'an is a guarantee for a society's well-being, both domestic and foreign.

And if one wishes to see all of this in practice - they should look at how the best role model, Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) governed his people and how his successors followed his example and the righteous people after them. One will find therein all the definitions to be sought regarding the matter.


For further information, one can refer to:

Islam The Perfectly Complete Religion by Muhammad Al-Ameen Ash-Shinqeetee

The Use & Abuse of Maqaasid as-Sharia
 
Muhammad said:
However, the Qur'an does contain guidance regarding the State. It provides guidance on the social conditions of society - for the ruler regarding his people and the people regarding their rulers. There is guidance at a family level and community level. The Qur'an also lays down the foundations for economics - a proper perspective of making money as well as spending it in the right channels.
Click to expand...

With respect, guidance on how people should live their lives and how they should be ruled is not the same as defining a 'State.'

The author in the article at the link given, a Muslim, suggest that there is no evidence in the Qu’ran for the establishment of an Islamic State. If he is wrong there must be some text which suggests otherwise. The question I asked is simple; where is it, what does it say and how does it define ‘State?’

Below is a definition of a ‘State.’ It seems to me to be a reasonable definition of a State. Do you accept this definition? If so, I suggest that you could never have an Islamic State that complied with that definition. If you don’t have a ‘State,’ a Nation State, you can’t have a crime of treason against the State and consequently the argument that apostasy is akin to treason goes out of the window.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/State

As a noun, a people permanently occupying a fixed territory bound together by common habits and custom into one body politic exercising, through the medium of an organized government, independent sovereignty and control over all persons and things within its boundaries, capable of making war and peace and of entering into international relations with other states.

PS why does every post, posted to this thread have to be vetted?
 
Greetings Thinker,

Thinker said:
With respect, guidance on how people should live their lives and how they should be ruled is not the same as defining a 'State.'
Click to expand...
My post was addressing a wider question raised by the claim: "...But the Quran prescribes no particular model of government, nor does it detail a specific political programme that Muslims must adopt. In fact, the concept of the state appears nowhere in the Quran."

Yet if the Qur'an contains all the guidance mentioned earlier, does it not prescribe a particular model of government and detail a political programme for Muslims to adopt? Does it not outline or at least make reference to the concept of a state, contrary to what that article suggests?

Moreover, the article claims, "there is not a shred of theological, historical or empirical evidence to support the existence of such an entity..." How can one deny that an Islamic State ever existed, when we consider the leadership of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), as well as that of his successors?

As for the definition of a state, I think you are making things more complicated than they need to be. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was a physical embodiement of the teachings of the Qur'an. He showed the Muslims how to implement it. And his companions were the ones who best understood his message and thus went on to successfully implement it after him. Therefore, if we wish to understand what is meant by an Islamic state, we simply have to study the lives of our righteous predecessors and there will be ample lessons to take note of and examples to follow.

On the specific issue of apostasy, the one who leaves Islam will be asked to repent by the sharee’ah judge in an Islamic country; if he does not repent and come back to the true religion, he will be killed.

The following might also be helpful, bearing in mind there are other rulings and conditions surrounding the issue of apostasy.
Why death is the punishment for apostasy:​

1. This is the ruling of Allaah and His Messenger, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Whoever changes his religion, kill him." (reported by al-Bukhaari, al-Fath, no. 3017).​

2. The one who has known the religion which Allaah revealed, entered it and practised it, then rejected it, despised it and left it, is a person who does not deserve to live on the earth of Allaah and eat from the provision of Allaah.​

3. By leaving Islaam, the apostate opens the way for everyone who wants to leave the faith, thus spreading apostasy and encouraging it.​

4. The apostate is not to be killed without warning. Even though his crime is so great, he is given a last chance, a respite of three days in which to repent. If he repents, he will be left alone; if he does not repent, then he will be killed.​

5. If the punishment for murder and espionage (also known as high treason) is death, then what should be the punishment for the one who disbelieves in the Lord of mankind and despises and rejects His religion? Is espionage or shedding blood worse than leaving the religion of the Lord of mankind and rejecting it?​

6. None of those who bleat about personal freedom and freedom of belief would put up with a neighbour’s child hitting their child or justify this as "personal freedom," so how can they justify leaving the true religion and rejecting the sharee’ah which Allaah revealed to teach mankind about His unity and bring justice and fairness to all?​


​
Peace.
 
Thinker said:
PS why does every post, posted to this thread have to be vetted?
Click to expand...
The Discover Islam section is primarily for basic articles explaining Islamic concepts to new Muslims or Non-Muslims, as well as for people to ask questions on the fundamentals of Islam. The section is not for discussion or debate. Sometimes threads that turn into discussions are moved into Clarifications about Islam, which is a more appropriate place for them.
 
I think Islam has moved past this, especially since they are the truth and allow people to also realize that and convert
 
hopeful19 said:
I think Islam has moved past this, especially since they are the truth and allow people to also realize that and convert
Click to expand...
Islam is a religion for all times and places; it's laws do not bend according to people's desires.
 
:salamext:



Apostasy:

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.



Muslims aren't the only ones who practise this law

If someone argues that this is something unique to Islam only, then it isn't. Look at how the Spanish Inquisition [Reconquista] killed thousands of Muslims so that they would become Christians. Unlike the Spaniards in that scenario - who spied on Muslims in every way to find out whether they were hiding Islam in their hearts - the Muslims are ordered to accept what is at face value. i.e. if someone leaves Islam, the scholars have to answer the persons doubts and give them a time period (3 days) so they can think about it, ask more questions to clarify their doubts, and return back to their Islam.

If this person then accepts Islam, although in his heart he still hides disbelief - we accept his Islam at face value.

[add hadith of Usama b. Zayd]


apst-1.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh162/speed2kx/apst.jpg

The fact that he was given the opportunity to repent and return to islam shows that they were willing to answer his doubts if he had any.


If someone hides their disbelief in their heart, are they liable to punishment?

No. If someone hides their disbelief in their hearts, then no muslim can be suspicious on him and claim this person to be a disbeliever. This person has kept their disbelief in their heart, so it remains there. If however, this person spreads their disbelief and tries to influence others to leave Islam in the state, then he is causing harm to the society, and therefore he is liable to punishment.




A Matter of Allegiance.

When people become Muslim, they are pledging themselves to Allah [God], the believers, and the state. By disassociating yourself and breaking the pledge - you're committing apostasy, and even treason.

In many nations, including the US, the punishment for treason is death. In other states, its life imprisonment, and that is also like death (because you don't have any access to the world.)


If in those nations, its perfectly valid to punish someone for treason, then it is perfectly valid for the Muslims to make their own rules and decide what the punishment should be for one who commits treason, and spreads harm (even making others who are ignorant doubt their islam is a harm and form of corruption in society.)

It's a crime in many nations today (including the UK) to believe in the superiority of another ideology in comparison to Democracy. In Islam, it is a crime for a Muslim to believe that any other ideology is more supreme than Islam (because by him/her professing that islam is from Allah/God, they are by default agreeing that His law is the most supreme).

If someone professes this to others, then he is committing a crime and liable for punishment from the state (whether that state is the UK, or an Islamic state.) In both cases, the person will have to retract their statement and prove that they are loyal to their ideology - to be able to get their rights once again.


​
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top