> Muslim Response Repelling Doubts about Apostasy

[al-boriqee]

Below was a pm, but I felt that the question and the answer would befit the open audience

Originally Posted by someone

I hope this find you in the best of health and Imaan.

I was discussing the issue of killing the apostate in Islam. And we were talking about the free choice in the early beginning, and if the one chose what he want to believe in he must be 100& sure about that because Islam is not a game where you can enter or live whenever you want.

Now, I need help on this ayah:

There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower. (2:256)

It can be applied very well in case of those who entered Islam having a different religious background that they are free to chose.

But how it can work for those who are born Muslims and decided at one point of their life to apostate and leave Islam?

a quick reply will be very appreciated.

BarakAllah feek.

Wasalam Alykom

because it is necessary to gather all of the shariah evidences first before usurping on of the evidences to the exclusion of others.

once we have gathered all, it becomes quite clear that the specified reality upon which Allah was talking about in this ayaah is about trying to make people enter into Islam who were originally kaafir asli.

That is because we already have shariah evidence from the prophet and companions who when apostasy took place, then execution of the murtadd was at the very least, put on the table, or at most, carried out.

So in reality, if people were to adopt this argument, they will naturally have to ask Abu Bakr
'Ya aba bakr, why on earth are you killing these apostates, Itaqillah aba Bakr for Allah said 'la ikrah fi deen"

thus they would be accusing those who knew Islam best of destroying the meaning of Allah's speech when in reality it is they who understood the qasd of Allah's speech and the newly invented madhaab of liberalism i.e. al-murji'a, who twist and destroy the religion to be other than the qasd of the risaalah.

The ayaah is inapplicable to those who enter Islam and then leave it OR who were born Muslim. Once your Muslim, your locked in because the existence of the shahaada is determinating factor of a contractual agreement i.e. a covenant.

when a soul performs the shahaada, that soul has made a covenant with Allah and Allah stipulates within the statement "muhammada rasulullah" is which he agreed to abide by, his obedience to 'muhammada rasulullah' by default entails that he abide by the stipulations upon which the messenger set in stone, one of them being that if he retracts from his covenant, then he will be executed. This is the agreement he agreed to make by stating the kalimatu-tawheed whether he knows it or not.

secondly all of this is all pertaining to a Muslim state. In other words, execution for apostasy happening in mecca before the Islamic state would not have been applicable. the same for any state in which Islam is not the source of legislation.

This denotes the fact that in reality, execution for apostasy being only applicable in a state of Islam should denote to anyone with brains that execution for apostasy is synonymous with treason laws of various countries.

therefore, since none of the above which was stated is applicable in non shar'i based systems, then the peoples argumentation against execution for apostasy is LIKE their arguing against countries who likewise execute the one who has committed treason.

On this tangent, when people exclude criticizing other countries for doing the exact same thing and only isolate Islam from everyone else to be the recipient of their criticism, then it follows that their criticisms is naturally ultra biased and everything but objective.

the reason for their idiocy is because they have a problem when a nation defines its allegiance and enmity based on faith, rather in their view, countries should perform their allegiance and enmity based on nationalism. Islam is a faith based system and all others bases their systems on ethnical or geographic boundaries. So in reality, the term irtaad (apostasy), it cannot be translated into english. it has to be explained and a more synonymous term for irtaad is "treason". We call it apostasy because it is "faith based" however, its reality is still treason.

[salamfromrom]

The ayaah is inapplicable to those who enter Islam and then leave it OR who were born Muslim. Once your Muslim, your locked in because the existence of the shahaada is determinating factor of a contractual agreement i.e. a covenant.

Being born upon the fitrah is clearly not the same thing as uttering the shahadah knowing full well the implications of this, something that only an able minded person who is able to think for himself can do (not a small child who has not developed the capacity to reason)

when a soul performs the shahaada, that soul has made a covenant with Allah and Allah stipulates within the statement "muhammada rasulullah" is which he agreed to abide by, his obedience to 'muhammada rasulullah' by default entails that he abide by the stipulations upon which the messenger set in stone, one of them being that if he retracts from his covenant, then he will be executed. This is the agreement he agreed to make by stating the kalimatu-tawheed whether he knows it or not.

The shahadah is something that is entered into by a person with a working intellect. I think that by saying ''when a soul performs the shahaada'' you are attempting to somehow get around the fact that a person who utters the shahadah must be a living, breathing human being with an intellect and abilities to reason and think for himself.


People who enter islam must do so willingly and not be forced by fallacious and illogical arguments such as ''well you were born to muslim parents so you can never choose.'' Wallahi, i think that one of the greatest gifts we have been given by Allah(swt) is the power of choice, to look at the world and come to our own free conclusions about wether we wish to believe or disbelieve.

Everyone is entitled to this choice at least once. Everyone, with no exceptions.

Salam

[Unknown]

Is there evidence that a judge or a magistrate makes the decision and not a civilian? I'm asking because I know 2 apostates. As far as I know, the same ruling on apostacy is in the Old Testament.

[salamfromrom]

The punishment for Apostasy can only be carried out by the authorities in an Islamic State who rules according to Shariah.

From bro al-boriqee's post above:

In other words, execution for apostasy happening in mecca before the Islamic state would not have been applicable. the same for any state in which Islam is not the source of legislation.

Salam

[Unknown]

Why? Basen on what evidence?



Is there anything by the Orthodox scholars that affirm, with evidence by the Qur'aan and or the Sunna, that the laws of Allah, the punishment, must be carried by a magistrate or a judge? Because I have never come across one yet.

[salman]

^sister, this is understood by default that hadd is only carried by those who have the knowledge and have an authority. Please read Islam Question and Answer - Who is the one who should carry out the hadd punishment for zina?. Here is the relevant part we are looking for:

If it is asked: who is it that should carry out this hadd punishment for zina?

The answer is:

No one should carry out the hadd punishments without the permission of the ruler. If there is no ruler who rules according to sharee’ah then it is not permissible for the ordinary people to carry out the hadd punishments. Whoever does that is sinning, because carrying out the hadd punishments requires examining the matter and requires shar’i knowledge in order to know the conditions of proof.

The ordinary people have no knowledge of such things, and the carrying out of one of the hadd punishments by the ordinary people leads to many evils and the loss of security, whereby people will attack one another and kill one another or chop off one another’s hands on the grounds that they are carrying out hadd punishments.

Al-Qurtubi said:

There is no dispute among the scholars that qisaas (retaliatory punishments) such as execution cannot be carried out except by those in authority who are obliged to carry out the qisaas and carry out hadd punishments etc, because Allaah has addressed the command regarding qisaas to all the Muslims, and it is not possible for all the Muslims to get together to carry out the qisaas, which is why they appointed a leader who may represent them in carrying out the qisaas and hadd punishments.

Tafseer al-Qurtubi, 2/245, 246.

Ibn Rushd al-Qurtubi said:

With regard to the one who should carry out this punishment – i.e., the hadd punishment for drinking alcohol – they agreed that the ruler should carry it out, and that applies to all the hadd punishments.

Bidaayat al-Mujtahid, 2/233.

Al-Shawkaani said:

It was narrated from Abu’l-Zinaad from his father that the fuqaha’ of the people of Madeenah used to say that no one should carry out any of the hadd punishments except the ruler, unless it is a man carrying out the hadd punishment for zina on his male or female slave. Nayl al-Awtaar, 7/295, 296.

The family of the woman should prevent her from committing immoral actions and should prevent the things that lead to that, such as going out, speaking to non-mahram men, and everything that may enable her to commit evil. If the only way is to detain her and tie her up, then they have the right to do that, so they should detain her in the house.

But as for killing her, they should not do that. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked about a married woman who had children and who formed an attachment to a man and committed immoral actions with him. When she was found out, she tried to leave her husband: did she have any right to her children after doing this? Was there any sin on them if they cut off relations with her? Was it permissible for the one who has proof of that to kill her secretly? If someone else did that would he be sinning?

He replied:

Praise be to Allaah.

Her sons’ and male relatives’ duty is to prevent her from committing haraam actions, and if the only way they could do that is by detaining her, then they should detain her. If it means that they have to tie her up, then they should tie her up. But the son should not beat his mother, and with regard to treating her kindly, they have no right to do otherwise. It is not permissible for them to cut off ties with her so that she is free to do evil actions, rather they should try to prevent her from doing evil as much as possible. If she needs provision and clothing they should provide that for her. And it is not permissible for them to carry out the hadd punishment – execution or otherwise – on her, and they will be sinning if they do that.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 34/177-178.

[salamfromrom]

salam

@Unknown: Only the government can implement the laws. You and me cannot implement justice, immense fitnah would be created.


Edited: Thx Akhee Salman, and Sorry for being rude sister.

[salman]

^wa'alaykum as-salam

akhee, there is no reason to doubt sister's intentions. She just wants to hear it from someone knowledgeable and trustworthy and there is nothing wrong in that.

[Unknown]

It is a sad thing that some get away with crimes such as apostasy, illegal sex etc...
Yet, some have guts to argue and look for loop holes in Shar'ah. Not to mention how dangerous that is and how you ruin your shahadat that way.
Muslims were sent to obey the law. The Jews and others were destoyed for not obeying the law.

"O people! Allah sent Muhammad with the truth, and revealed to him the Book. One of the things that was revealed to him was the Ayah of stoning to death, which we have recited and understood. The Messenger of Allah carried out the punishment of stoning and after him we did so, but I am afraid that as time goes by, some will say that they did not find the Ayah of stoning in the Book of Allah, and they will go astray because they abandoned one of the obligations revealed by Allah. Stoning is something that is prescribed in the Book of Allah for the person -- man or woman -- who commits illegal sex, if he or she is married, if decisive evidence is produced, or if pregnancy results from that, or if they confess to it.'' It was also recorded in the Two Sahihs in the lengthy Hadith of Malik, from which we have quoted briefly only the portion that is relevant to the current discussion.

Tafsir.com Tafsir Ibn Kathir

[salman]

Let's focus on topic and learn to forgive and have husan al-dhaan for each other. Do not let little mistakes make our hearts harsh for each other. The believers are kind to each other and harsh to disbelievers. Let us be balance and not be harsh all the time. May Allah guide us all, make us adopt the balanced adab, and soften our hearts for each other, ameen.