> Apostasy in Islam

[optimist]

Originally Posted by salman

I am sorry if I come out harsh but I do not think that I can swallow this baseless rubbish!

Salam,

Brother, being emotional is of no use. You can not provide a speck of evidence from Quran to prove that an apostate should be put to death. I have quoted numerous verses and prove me my understanding of the meaning of those verses wrong. All the scholars that you have quoted only relying on a hadith reported from the prophet where the prophet is reported to have said; "whoever changes religion kill him". They assume first the report is true, which in fact contradicts many verses of the Quran. I am not rejecting what our prophet has said, what I am saying is that the prophet would not have said any such things. Do you want to hear a strange confession by Imam Tabari

“I am writing this book as I hear from the narrators. If anything sounds absurd, I should not be blamed or held accountable. The responsibility of all blunders rests squarely on the shoulders of those who have narrated these stories to me.”

Tabari's Tareekhil Umam Wal Mulook (The History of Nations and Kings) popularly called "Mother of All Histories" is the first ever "History of Islam" written by 'Imam' Tabari (839-923 CE) at the junction of the third and fourth century AH.

You are even claiming even a child born for a muslim parents can not change religion. Tell me why prophet Nuh did not kill his son? Tell me what is the use of forcibly keeping someone who has no faith in Islam? We can threaten people with death if they change to another religion. And because of fear of death they may still continue to live as hypocrites in Islam. You can not have their heart in Islam. Tell me what is the use of having these people in Islam?

wassalam

[salman]

Bismillah

Originally Posted by optimist

Salam,

wa'alayka as-salam

Originally Posted by optimist

Brother, being emotional is of no use.

*smack* - I am not talking with emotions; I want some evidence and some logical answers to my questions - PERIOD

Originally Posted by optimist

You can not provide a speck of evidence from Quran to prove that an apostate should be put to death.

so what!? The Qur'an does not say either that do no put apostate to death. The Qur'an is silent on this issue! Please clarify what is your position:

a) Apostates cannot be put to death
Or
b) Apostates are put death only when they rebel

Originally Posted by optimist

I have quoted numerous verses and prove me my understanding of the meaning of those verses wrong.

None of the ayaat you posted say that apostates cannot be put to death. you are NOT knowledgeable enough to assert your understanding of the Qur'an or hold onto your personal understanding. By the Command of Allah you are obliged to ask people of knowledge. Then why do you not follow the Qur'an my respected brother?

Originally Posted by optimist

All the scholars that you have quoted only relying on a hadith reported from the prophet where the prophet is reported to have said; "whoever changes religion kill him".

my good brother, there is more than just one hadith and there is ijma'a on this issue among the companions of Allah's Messenger (sal-allahu alayhi wa sallam). ya akhee you should know that once ijma'a is established then going against is means that you got it all wrong. You will have to be joking me if you were to claim that you are more knowledgeable then the Sahaba and their students!

Originally Posted by optimist

They assume first the report is true, which in fact contradicts many verses of the Quran.

1 - No scholar assumes that the report is true. If they were to do that then they would not have classifieds ahadith in different categories

2 - Do you have an evidence that they assumes this report is sahih? Bring something in takhreej of this hadith! Again, it is not a single hadith, there are many others

3 - It does not contradict the Qur'an; the contradiction would occur only when the Qur'an says explicitly: "do not kill the apostate" but the hadith says "kill the apostate".

Originally Posted by optimist

I am saying is that the prophet would not have said any such things.

why? and how do you know? The Prophet (sal-allahu alayhi wa sallam) said that he has given the sword to fight till the religion of all is Islam. Are you going to reject this too because the Qur'an says no complusion in religion!? The Prophet (sal-allahu alayhi wa sallam) said that he has not come except to complete and perfect our characters. Are you going to say Prophet (sal-allahu alayhi wa sallam) would have not said such a thing because the Qur'an says the Prophet (sal-allahu alayhi wa sallam) is only a messenger!? So where would you stop: when you left with no deen!?

Originally Posted by optimist

Do you want to hear a strange confession by Imam Tabari

“I am writing this book as I hear from the narrators. If anything sounds absurd, I should not be blamed or held accountable. The responsibility of all blunders rests squarely on the shoulders of those who have narrated these stories to me.”

Tabari's Tareekhil Umam Wal Mulook (The History of Nations and Kings) popularly called "Mother of All Histories" is the first ever "History of Islam" written by 'Imam' Tabari (839-923 CE) at the junction of the third and fourth century AH.

akhee, how is this relevant to what we are discussing and how is this an evidence for your shallow understanding? How is this strange? How does this also not apply to you and Shaykh Kutty and Qardawi!? Are you claiming perfection for yourself and scholars you appeal to!?

The Shaykh al-Mufasreen, the Imam, the faqeeh, ibn Jarir al-Tabari (rahimahullah) is simply freeing himself from the week narrations which he may have included in his tareekh. In fact, the statement of Imaam Malik ibn Anas (rahimahullah) is sufficient to disapprove the accusations of those who think the people of sunnah deem the scholars infallible. He (rahimahullah) said that every person can be refuted except the Messenger of Allah (sal-allahu alayhi wa sallam). However, it does not mean that scholars are wrong in pretty much everything. Or they have to be wrong in issues which do not please our nafs.

I am amazed at you brothers' double standards, you do not want us to appeal to Salaf, the best of Muslim Ummah, and their understanding of Islam, but you want to us buy the words of contemporary scholars, the likes of Shaykh Qardawi and Kutty, etc. What value these scholars have in front of the Salaf? Are they more knowledgeable than Salaf? Why have no one in history of Islam uttered what you and these contemporary scholars came up with? Were the Muslim Ummah for 14 centuries disobeying Allah and contradicting His rulings!?

Originally Posted by optimist

You are even claiming even a child born for a muslim parents can not change religion.

ya akhee al-kareem, please do not attack me with a straw man like brother Salam. I DID NOT say that child born in Muslim family does not have the choice to change his deen. What I was saying is that unlike children born in non-Muslim families the children born in Muslim families do not have choice like them: whether to embrace Islam or not, because they are born in Muslim family and raised up as that. This is something which has been decreed by Allah. However, this does not mean that they cannot decide to change thier deen once they grow up. and if they were to leave Islam then they have apostated. Every single human being can choose whatever he wants to believe in and he is accountable for his own affairs.

Originally Posted by optimist

Tell me why prophet Nuh did not kill his son?

did Allah Ta'ala order Nuh (alayhi as-sallam) to kill the apostates?

Originally Posted by optimist

Tell me what is the use of forcibly keeping someone who has no faith in Islam? We can threaten people with death if they change to another religion. And because of fear of death they may still continue to live as hypocrites in Islam. You can not have their heart in Islam. Tell me what is the use of having these people in Islam?

akhee, another straw man - I did not even argue against this. Killing an apostate in Islamic state is law of Allah and if you have problem with this law then take up with your Lord. If someone wants to leave Islam then he can do exactly as brother Qatada suggested earlier, PERIOD. We are not asking them to live as munafiq, we are asking them to accept Islam and live and die as Muslims. They are choosing this by their own will!

Again, I ask you brothers to fear Allah and remain silent about issues for which you have no knowledge and I make dua'a to Allah that He opens your hearts and guides us all to haqq, ameen

and Allah knows best

[salman]

Bismillah

Originally Posted by salamfromrom

Salam a leikum

wa'alayka as-salam akhee

first pardon my harshness and know by Allah my harshness is only due to my love and care for you. I do not want to see my fellow believers to be misguided by some fancy explanations or understanding which never appeared in 14 centuries of Islamic history.

Originally Posted by salamfromrom

I was under the impression that this whole life is a simple test: To choose and believe in Islam or to disbelieve. This choice obviously implies that the person who is making the choice is able-minded enough to understand the implications of his choice, which is something a child can't do.

There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that children born to muslim parents have somehow been denied the choice to accept or reject islam by Allah (SWT). Every human being , regardless of where and to whom he is born has the right to choose or reject islam upon careful consideration (something a child cannot do).[/quote[agreed upon and it seems you have misunderstood me, I have not argued against this. I have tried my best to clarify myself in the above post.

No, their parents knew what Islam is, nobody knows what Islam is until they grow up and start thinking freely.

again, I did not argue against this; you simply misunderstood me or I was unable to articulate properly.

Originally Posted by salamfromrom

This is deeply disrespectful to me akhee. Do you also use the same language to describe Sheikh Yusuf Estes or even bro Abdul-Fattah who holds the same position? (I'm sorry to be dragging you into this too akhee Abdul-fattah , but I feel I must)

akhee, my comment was general and not specifically directed to you. Please forgive me for Allah if you felt that way. The issue is not who is holding onto what, the issue is that what is their academic position in Islam and do their opinions make any sense. Neither you and Akh Abdul, nor Shaykh Yusuf Estes are students of knowledge let alone scholars who can weight the text. This opinion regarding apostasy is new and not a single scholar in Islamic history has uttered this. If there was dispute among the Salaf and the group was divided into two, then I would mention the difference of opinions and let you have your way. However, this is not the case, the ijma'a is an evidence within sharee'ah and it is established ijma'a among the Salaf except that the opinion of ahnaf and Imam Sufyaan al-Thawari (rahimahullah) is that women are exempted from this ruling. However, to my knowledge, their position is weak and a minority opinion.

The thing is that everyone says we follow the Qur'an ans sahih Sunnah, but the differences arise on how do we understand and interpret these Nasus (texts). Therefore, the people of Sunnah understand these Nasus how the Salaf understood it - the first three generations of Muslims, because they are best among the Muslim ummah; thus, the are hujjah for everyone - by no mean they are perfect. Off course, we also appeal to khalaf (latar) scholar who followed the sunnah of the Salaf. To my knowldge, one can categorizes the opinions as:

1 - the ijma'a - all scholars of one time agreeing upon a ruling - one the ijma'a is established and latar on someone goes against it then it means, he got it all wrong. However, deviancy from ijma'a or khalaf (disagreement) with ijma'a can only be done by mujtahid scholars and not the awam or students of knowledge because they are not qualified for it

2 - the majority and minority opinions, where the opinion of majoirty has strong textual evidence or vice versa - for awam and students of knowledge either one is fine but once they find out which one is stronger they must reject the weaker one

3 - almost fifty fifty but one opinion has stronger evidence or they both have strong evidence - either one is fine but again if one has stronger evidence and you get ilm of it then it is obligatory upon you to follow that

regarding 2) and 3), obviously, I am not asking or promoting ijtihad by laypeople because we are obliged to ask the people of knowledge and if they say fullan opinion is strong then we take that

the knowledgebale brothers can correct me, insha'Allah

and Allah knows best

[Abdul-Fattah]

Selam aleykum
I posted this copy paste in the previous thread about apostacy, and there was nobody who refuted it then.

"Is Killing An Apostate in the Islamic Law?"
by Ibrahim B. Syed, Ph. D. President of the Islamic Research Foundation International, Inc.

Ridda or Irtidãd: Literally means "turning back". The act of apostasy -- leaving Islam for another religion or for a secular lifestyle. Murtadd: Literally means "one who turns the back." An apostate.
Murtad Fitri: Literally means apostate - natural. A person born of a Muslim parent who later rejects Islam.
Murtad Milli: Literally means apostate - from the community. A person who converted to Islam and later rejected the religion.

Due lack of education and critical thinking several myths have taken root in the Muslim world over the ages, and there have not been any efforts in the past to clear these doubts. On the contrary, there has been a sort of effort to strengthen these myths and misconceptions. These misinterpretations of Islamic teachings have taken their toll on the Muslim world and have strengthened a misplaced perception that Islam is a symbol of obscurantism, a religion of intolerance and answers everything with the sword.

And there is no bigger misconception-strengthened with misunderstanding of Islamic beliefs over the years-other than the belief that Islam doesn't tolerate apostasy. The Christian missionaries and the Western world are cashing in on it. Ulama have tried to strengthen their point of view and several leading Muslim reformists have failed to tackle the issue. This misconception has also presented Islam as a medieval and killer religion. Islam bashers have time and again tried to carry the point by pointing out that Islam orders the killing of a
person if he or she reverts to another religion from Islam.

No body is forthcoming to challenge this widely held belief as well as put forth a convincing argument about the misinterpretation of Qur'anic teachings by Ulama.

The Qur’an is completely silent on any worldly punishment for apostasy and the sole Tradition that forms the basis of rulings is open to many interpretations.

Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said: ‘Whosoever changes his religion, Kill Him (man baddala Dinahu faqtuluhu)’”
It is this last quote from the Prophet that forms the basis of the said ruling.

While jurists are agreed on the authenticity of this tradition, they differ very widely on the appropriate interpretation and thus, the law concerning apostasy. Understanding the different viewpoints, and arriving at the truth is crucial to our discussion of this subject.

This tradition does not refer to Muslims who leave the religion of Islam for other religions. Finally, there is the crucial dispute over the nature of the punishment and the crime. Al-Nakha’ee and, according to Sha’rani, al-Thawri, hold that the apostate is a grave sinner who should however be continuously called back to the fold for the rest of his life, and not killed. By implication, they do not consider the offence a hadd (fixed penalty) offence with a fixed punishment that must be carried out. This view is similar to the view that apostasy is a
sin that carries no fixed punishment, and any penalty for it is discretionary (ta’zeer). This is a view held by the Hanbali scholar, Ibn Taimiya and he attributes it as well to the Maliki Imam al-Baji. Among Hanafites, the jurist Shamsuddeen al-Sarakhshi holds the same view. He says in al Mabsut that the fixed penalties or hudud are generally not suspended because of repentance, especially when they are reported and become known to the Imam.
He then adds in the case of apostasy “renunciation of the faith and conversion to disbelief is admittedly the greatest of offences, yet it is a matter between man and his Creator, and its punishment is postponed to the day of Judgement. (“fa’l jaza’ ‘alayha mu’akhkhar ila dar al-jaza”).

If repentance is accepted, then apostasy is not a hadd offence with a fixed punishment. Secondly, once scholars accept that a Muslim apostate has the right to be given the opportunity to repent, they lose the right to set a time limit for his repentance.

Allah (SWT) says in the Glorious Qur’an (39: 53-54: Say: “ O you servants of Mine who have transgressed against your own selves! Despair not of God’s mercy. Behold God forgives all sins, for verily He is much forgiving, a dispenser of grace! Hence, turn toward your sustainer and surrender yourselves unto him before the suffering (of death and resurrection) comes upon you for then you will not be succored.”

Any scholar who says the death sentence applies to leaving the faith, then the convict is to be given a life-time to repent, and this is the view of Sufyan al-Thawri, Ibrahim al-Nakha’ee, Shamsuddeen al-Sarakhshi, Imam al-Baji and, by strong implication, Ahmad Ibn Taimiya. One must conclude that the death sentence is not for “simple apostasy” (mujarrad al-ridda), but for apostasy accompanied by treason and sedition, or by the abuse and slander (sabb) of the Noble Prophet.

Freedom to convert to or from Islam

"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance." Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Glorious Qur'an says, "Let there be no compulsion in the religion: Surely the Right Path is clearly distinct from the crooked path." Al Baqarah, 2:256.

"Those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe again, then disbelieve, and then increase in their disbelief
- Allah will never forgive them nor guide them to the path." Surah An-Nisa', 4:137.

For example, the Qur'an says: "Let him who wishes to believe, do so; and let him who wishes to disbelieve, do so."
(Al-Kahf: 29)

In another verse, Allah Almighty says: "Yours is only the duty to convey the message; you are not a guardian over them." (Al-Ghashiyah: 21- 22)

The quotation from Surah An-Nisa', 4:137, shown above, seems to imply that multiple, sequential apostasies are possible. That would not be possible if the person were executed after the first apostasy.

From the above verses it can be argued that religious freedom and the absence of compulsion in religion requires that individuals be allowed adopt a religion or to convert to another religion without legal penalty.

Hence the death penalty is not an appropriate response to apostasy.

The former Chief Justice of Pakistan, SA Rahman, has written that there is no reference to the death penalty in any of the 20 instances of apostasy mentioned in the Qur'an.

Muslims who support the death penalty for apostasy use as their foundation the above cited hadith, in which the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said: "Kill whoever changes his religion." But this is a weak foundation because this hadith was only transmitted from Muhammad (pbuh) by one individual. It was not confirmed by a second person. According to Islamic law, this is insufficient confirmation to impose the death penalty.
The Shari`ah has not fixed any punishment for apostasy.

The hadith is so generally worded that it would require the death penalty for a Christian or Jew who converted to Islam. This is obviously not the prophet's intent. The hadith is in need of further specification, which has not been documented. Many scholars interpret this passage as referring only to instances of high treason.
(e.g. declaring war on Islam, Muhammad (pbuh), God, etc.).

There is no historical record, which indicates that Muhammad (pbuh) or any of his companions ever sentenced anyone to death for apostasy.

The issue of killing a murtad or the apostate is not a simple one. Scholars have debated it from various angles and it is not simply an issue of killing someone for choosing one religion or another.

The question of apostasy has been debated among scholars based on their interpretations of some hadiths since the Qur'an does not specify any worldly punishment for it. For example, there was a case at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) where a man came to him in three consecutive days and told him that he wanted to apostate. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never took any action against him, and when the man finally left Madina, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never sent anyone to arrest him, let alone kill him.

This is why some scholars distinguished between individual apostasy and apostasy which is accompanied by high treason. So, it cannot be confused with the freedom of conscience for every individual, which has been guaranteed in the Qur'an through hundreds of verses.

For example, one version of a hadith narrated by `A'isha (RA) concerning apostasy relates to one who left his religion and fought against Muslims.

QUR'ANIC VIEWS

The Qur’an has referred to the issue of apostasy at more than one place (for example see Al-Baqarah 2: 217, Al-Baqarah 2: 108, A’l Imra’n 3: 90, Al-Nisa’ 4: 137 and Al-Nahl 16: 106). But at none of these places does the Qur’an mention the punishment of death for such people who change their religion. The Qur’an does mention that such people shall face a terrible punishment in the hereafter but no worldly punishment is mentioned at any of these instances in the Qur’an. This situation obviously raises a question mark in the mind of the reader that if Allah had wanted to give the punishment of an apostate a permanent position in the Shari`ah, the punishment should have been mentioned, at least at one of the above mentioned places. If the Qur’an had kept completely silent about the apostate, the matter would have been different. But the strange thing is that the Qur’an mentions apostasy, and still does not mention the punishment (if any) it wants the apostate to be subjected to.

Furthermore, the Qur’an has strictly disallowed the imposition of the death penalty except in two specific cases. One of them is where the person is guilty of murdering another person and the other is where a person is guilty of creating unrest in the country (fasa’d fil-ardh) like being involved in activities that create unrest in a society, for example activities like terrorism etc. The Qur’an says:

Whoever kills a person without his being guilty of murder or of creating unrest in the land, it is as though he kills the whole of mankind. (Al-Ma’idah, 5: 32)

Obviously, apostasy can neither be termed as "murder" nor "creating unrest in the land".

Thus, in view of the above facts, we are left with one option only. We can only say that either the saying has been wrongly ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), as it is clearly contradictory to the Qur’an and the Prophet could not have said anything contradictory to the Qur’an, or that the saying ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) relates not to all apostates but to a particular and specific people.

Shaykh Subhani

Shaykh Inayatullah Subhani (author of the Book Apostasy doesn't carry death penalty in Islam) says that neither Islam forces any person to embrace neither Islam nor it forces him to remain within its fold. He writes, "Apostasy has been mentioned several times in Qur'an. It also describes the bad treatment that will be meted out for committing apostasy, but it never talks of punishment for the crime in this world." The learned scholar mentions three Ayaat (verses) from Qur'an on apostasy (Al-Baqara 217, Muhammad 25-27 and Al-Maida 54) and then says that none of these Ayaat prescribes any punishment for that though these Ayaat pass strictures on the people who commit it. There are several other Ayaat on the same issue and none of them prescribes either death penalty or any other punishment for apostasy in this world. He then adds that had there been some punishment in Islam for
apostasy there was no reason as to why the issue was mentioned repeatedly in Qur'an but no punishment was prescribed.

Misinterpretation of the hadith, Man baddala Dinahu faqtuluh (kill him who changes his religion) has caused the problem. This order has been made to look general and permanent, though it was said in a particular circumstance for a particular group. Shaykh Subhani writes that this order was made to counter a scheme prepared by Jews of Madinah. They had planned that some of them embrace Islam for some time and then return to their old religion.
Then some other people do the same. It was aimed to create restlessness among Muslims against their own leadership so that the strong Muslim unity should start crumbling. It was made clear in Qur'an in (Aal Imran, 3: 72-73).

To counter this planning the Prophet (SAW) ordered his companions to act in such a manner. Despite this order lengthy investigations were made to ascertain that the case was true and the person concerned was given adequate time to explain before the punishment was carried out.

Shaykh Subhani says lack of clear grasp of Qur'an misguided even leading Ulama. Otherwise it was not difficult to understand the hadith. Qur'anic teachings on the issue were not kept in mind.

He emphasizes that people who were awarded death penalty for reverting to other religions from Islam during the time of the Prophet (SAW) or during the reign of his caliphs were not given the punishment for the crime of apostasy but for the fact that they were at war with Muslims and Islamic government.

Shaykh Subhani regrets that punishment that was prescribed for certain people under special circumstances was made to look like a general order. He says that it was the order for people who posed threat to Islamic state and became at war with Islam and not for any person who reverts to other religion.

A number of Islamic scholars from past centuries, Ibrahim al-Naka'I, Sufyan al-Thawri, Shams al-Din al-Sarakhsi, Abul Walid al-Baji and Ibn Taymiyyah, have all held that apostasy is a serious sin, but not one that requires the death penalty. In modern times, Mahmud Shaltut, Sheikh of al-Azhar, and Dr Mohammed Sayed Tantawi have concurred.

In conclusion, we must never confuse the issue of killing a murtad with the freedom of conscience guaranteed in the Glorious Qur'an. For a detailed discussion, one should read (1) the Dr. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi's book on this issue:
Jareemat ar-riddah wal murtadd (The Crime of Apostasy and Apostate) - published by Ar-Risalah foundation.

(2) Apostasy doesn't carry death penalty in Islam (Book: Tabdili-e-Mazhab aur Islam) by Maulana Inayatullah Asad Subhani)-published by Idara Ihya-e-Deen, Bilariya Ganj, Azamgarh (UP, India) Pages: 108, Price Rs 30.

REFERENCES
1. Apostasy -- Irtidad -- in Islam

2. "Islam, Apostasy and PAS," 1999-JUL-22, at: http://www.muslimtents.com/sistersinislam/

3. S.A. Rahman, "Punishment of apostasy in Islam," Kazi Publ., (1986). Limited availability from Amazon.com online
bookstore).

[salman]

^wa'alayka as-salam akhee

Bismillah

bro, it was not refuted for two reasons:
1) you did not want to continue this discussion
2) it is same contemporary stuff and there is no point of refuting every single point. and I personally do not have the strength to maintain good adab while refuting this, because this is how poorly it is written. If Dr. Ibrahim had even a single tiny bit of hayaah and geerah for deen then he would not have said what he has said

A number of Islamic scholars from past centuries, Ibrahim al-Naka'I, Sufyan al-Thawri, Shams al-Din al-Sarakhsi, Abul Walid al-Baji and Ibn Taymiyyah, have all held that apostasy is a serious sin, but not one that requires the death penalty.

Dr. Ibrahim I ask you to fear Allah for speaking and writing such a great lie against these Imams. None of them held a belief which you are propagating. If these Imams were alive today, they will be the first ones to slap your face and issue a fatawa against you for rejecting the hukm of Allah. May Allah Ta'ala guide you and guide us all, ameen

Funny thing is that just like every other devaint, these guys do not even agree with each other while making up lies and attributing to these scholars: did these Imams say no death penalty for apostates or did these Imam say death penalty for apostates if they rebel? Which one of the lies is true?

my question to you brothers are simple:

1) bring me something from the heritage of the Salaf to prove your case because they are the best among the Muslim ummah.

2) if you cannot and you will not be able to then do not imply that the Muslim ummah for 14 centuries was committing a heresy and contradicting what Allah Azza wa Jal legislated

3) if this view is the correct view then why it has only appeared in our times...surely other scholars should have reached the same conclusion in the past!

4) why do these scholars not quote the early scholars' tafseer for the ayaat they appeal to rather than asserting their own understanding unless they were to claim that they more knowledgeable than the early scholars!?

PS: having few degrees under you belt does not mean that you are a scholar. wAllahi, I am very reluctant to write what I am writing because I fear of my ignorance and tongue but at the same time I cannot stay quite while these people distort the teachings of Islam and misguide the awam (laypeople - like myself). The statement of ibn Qadamah (rahimahullah) is sufficient to blast their incorrect view.

[Abdul-Fattah]

Selam aleykum

Originally Posted by salman

1) you did not want to continue this discussion

Yes, and I didn't discuss, instead I provided a copy paste, and you said you'd refute it, but then didn't.

2) it is same contemporary stuff and there is no point of refuting every single point. and I personally do not have the strength to maintain good adab while refuting this, because this is how poorly it is written. If Dr. Ibrahim had even a single tiny bit of hayaah and geerah for deen then he would not have said what he has said

Not a very convincing argument brother.

1) bring me something from the heritage of the Salaf to prove your case because they are the best among the Muslim ummah.

I don't know which scolars fall under your definition of being a salaf, and quite frankly I don't care, you shouldn't accept one scholars view over the other based on the prestigue of his name, but rather on the daleel they give, and isn't that what salifism is all about in the first place? I mean this is exactly what I hate about the group that calls themself salafi's.

When a non-salafi says: this and this scolar says that and that, they usually reply, well look at the daleel, and not the name of the scholar. And this is a good reply, mashaAllah. But then when the opinions of the salafi scolars are under fire, their suddenly is a double standard, and the methodology seems to change.

3) if this view is the correct view then why it has only appeared in our times...surely other scholars should have reached the same conclusion in the past!

This argument is actually responded to in the article, there were scholars of different times who held this view. I mean, you did READ the article before replying-rejecting it, right?

[salman]

^wa'alayka as-salam

akhee, what is your position regarding this issue?

a) Apostates should not be put to death
or
b) Apostates should not be put to death except when they rebel against an Islamic state

I need to know before I can continue so that I can address you accordingly. btw, spend sometime reading the previous posts in this thread

[Abdul-Fattah]

Selam aleykum
Answer: b)
And to your suggestion, way ahead of you...

[salamfromrom]

Salam

Answer: I don't care about the ruling of apostasy per se,

I ONLY care about the fact that a lot of muslims believe that it's ok to punish a person who was born to muslim parents who once attaining the capacity to think for himself is punished if he chooses to reject islam.

If the scholars say it's ok to kill a muslim who after knowingly embracing Islam (and being of sound judgement) decides to renounce Islam, I have nothing against that. As I've said before , I only wish that every human being is given the choice to accept or reject Islam. Being born to muslim parents shouldn't matter. The choice has to be personal and not coerced in any way.

[optimist]

JazakAllah Khair bro Abdul fattah for post number 25