> Apostasy in Islam

[salman]

as-salamu alaykum ya ikhwaan

let us stay on topic - the discussion on heretic kafir perwaiz has been moved to other thread

brother optimist, please discuss the hadith related questions in the relevant thread - let us not to have this discussion all over the board

[optimist]

Originally Posted by salman

Death penalty is carried on an apostate after number of conditions are mentioned.

Salam,

I havn't find in any of your previous discussions the so called “conditions” that you talking about now. I quote from some of your posts;

http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/quran-hadith-prophet-muhammad/apostasy-islam-635/page3

Post 22 You said:
“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 their 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”

Under Post Number 17, you said;
“This is what has been decreed for them and they were raised as Muslims and knew what is Islam. When they leave Islam and deny to come back to it after given time to re-think about their choice, then they are the same as those who were not raised as Muslims, then accepted as Islam but then left Islam. No one is stopping anyone to not make any choice but if they are living in an Islamic state then they should know the consequences of their choice - given that their apostasy becomes apparent.”

http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/shariah-usul-al-fiqh/specification-apostasy-1799
Post Number 4

“First, we believe that everyone is born as a Muslim. If the child grew up as a Muslim, then this was decreed for him. He didn't get the chance to choose to enter Islam; it was decreed for him that he would born in a Muslim family. It is responsbility of Muslim parents to give their children good Islamic education. If the child decides to leave Islam, then he was aware of the consequences and he would get what is coming for him.”

Can you tell me what we should do with this girl who decided to leave Islam?

No one is stopping her but how dare you actually say that? Someone is violating the rights of Allah and you are just 'cool' about it without hating it or felling some kind of remorse. Would you like to choose hell fire for yourself? We should be making dua'a for her and using other means to get her back into Islam. This is what we suppose to do when someone decides to apostate or has apostatized. We do not just say 'let them be'.

No one is “violating” the rights of Allah. It is only that some one is exercising the right (of free will) given by Allah. But this is a serious issue in the sight of Allah if someone after accepting Islam leaving Islam.


"How shall God guide those who reject faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the apostle was true and that clear signs had come unto them? But God guides not a people unjust. Of such the reward is that on them (rests) the curse of the God, of His Angels, and of all mankind" (3:86)


As per the above verse, the reward for someone leaving Islam after accepting (witnessing that Allah is God, the apostle is true and Islam is the religion) is the curse of Allah, His angels and all mankind. I do not know anything about her faith in Islam before she decided to join Christianity. I said “let her leave Islam” due to the fact that, at the least from some corners, there is talk going on now that sinse she is an apostate now she should be punished with "death penalty".

There is no question of praying for someone who deliberately leave Islam. How can you pray for someone when the reward for people who deliberately leave Islam is curse from everyone. (By the way, I have never seen any of your posts suggesting making Dua’a and expressing remorse for someone leaving Islam….all of your postings before were, always I felt like, giving a warning to return back to Islam and if not "death penalty").

Well, I said we should organize a party for her because enemies of Islam are using this as an opportunity to insult Islam and also project that the plight of women in Islam is very bad. This fairwell part is just to tell her that we do not need her and also to show her the number of women converting into Islam every month.

Wassalam

[salman]

Originally Posted by optimist

Salam,

I havn't find in any of your previous discussions the so called “conditions” that you talking about now. I quote from some of your posts;

wa'alayka as-salam

It is not my fault if you do not read carefully and neither try to study the laws of Islam and their implication. Even if I did not explicitly mention them (even though I did i.e., post #44 of this thread), they can be found in the texts which we appeal to. The conditions are simple:
1) the person must be living in an Islamic state or a Muslim country where the hadd is carried out
2) he is given time to repent and invited back to Islam (i.e., his doubts are clarified if he has any). Some scholars say that repentance of extreme/major apostasy is not accepted.

General condition within Shari'ah before hadd can be applied on anyone is that the person must be sane and baligh and he committed the crime willingly and knowingly.

None of my statements which you brought have anything to do with what we are discussing here.

Originally Posted by optimist

Can you tell me what we should do with this girl who decided to leave Islam?

nothing, except that we give her da'wah if possible and make dua'a for her if she has doubts and have not completely crossed the line.

Originally Posted by optimist

No one is “violating” the rights of Allah. It is only that some one is exercising the right (of free will) given by Allah. But this is a serious issue in the sight of Allah if someone after accepting Islam leaving Islam.

inna lillahi wa inna alayhi raaj'ioun. Will you say the same thing when someone kills your relative or friend? When someone disobeys the rules of Allah then that is violation of His rights because it is right of Allah that we worship Him and obey His Commands. And when we see someone violating the right of Allah, then we suppose to hate it and not have this 'cool' attitude.

The Messenger of Allah (sal-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said: “Whoever of you sees an evil action, let him change it with his hand [by taking action against it], and if he cannot, then with his tongue [by speaking out against it], and if he cannot, then with his heart [by feeling that it is wrong], and this is the weakest of faith” (Reported by Muslim, no. 70).

Let me put it how ustad Abu Taubah, may Allah preserve him, explained: imagine someone beating up on your mother, disrepsecting your mother, saying bad things about your mother or not giving her rights, what would you do? Would you then say, "it is alright because someone is exercising his freedom of free choices and let him be"? If you say this, then you are not a good son and your mother should disown you. If you say no "I will stand up for my mother (at least hate such thing in my heart)", then who has more rights on you: your mother or Allah Azza wa Jal, Who created you and your mother and gave you everything you have!?

Like ustad said, this is problem with us; everyone wants their rights, scream about it and make big fuss about it; however, when it comes to fulfilling the rights of Allah, we turn our faces and pretend as if we do not know anything.

Originally Posted by optimist

"How shall God guide those who reject faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the apostle was true and that clear signs had come unto them? But God guides not a people unjust. Of such the reward is that on them (rests) the curse of the God, of His Angels, and of all mankind" (3:86)

As per the above verse, the reward for someone leaving Islam after accepting (witnessing that Allah is God, the apostle is true and Islam is the religion) is the curse of Allah, His angels and all mankind.

and your point is? We all know that this is the reward the person will get in this duniya and hereafter in addition to death penalty if he does not repent and living in an Islamic state or a Muslim country where the hadd ruling is carried out.

Originally Posted by optimist

I do not know anything about her faith in Islam before she decided to join Christianity. I said “let her leave Islam” due to the fact that, at the least from some corners, there is talk going on now that sinse she is an apostate now she should be punished with "death penalty".

your point only holds for this specific case since she is not living in an Islamic state. However, if she wasn't then your point is a grave mistake since you are inciting disobedience to Allah by not supporting the shari' hadd. As far what people are saying, they are ignorant just like many Muslims out there.

Originally Posted by optimist

There is no question of praying for someone who deliberately leave Islam. How can you pray for someone when the reward for people who deliberately leave Islam is curse from everyone.

making dua'a for a kafir's guidance is allowed in the shari'ah and it has nothing to do with actions of the kuffaar and Allah's punishment upon them. The dua'a is the weapon of the believers and we know that Allah's Mercy is greater than His Anger. Whether Allah will accept the dua'a is a different story. Regarding the kufaar, what is forbidden is making dua'a for their forgiveness.

For more on this please refer to this and this

Originally Posted by optimist

(By the way, I have never seen any of your posts suggesting making Dua’a and expressing remorse for someone leaving Islam….all of your postings before were, always I felt like, giving a warning to return back to Islam and if not "death penalty").

because before we are talking about the ruling itself and not the people. and regarding the issue of making dua'a for those who are not upon haqq, allhamdulillah, I often bring it up. allhamdulillah, at least now you know my position. Everything good is from Allah and it is His Blessing and Mercy upon us that many of us striving hard to follow the people of the Sunnah. and may Allah write us among the people of the Sunnah, ameen. The thought of arrogance and thinking that we come up thing ourselves is a fitnah from shaytan and our nafs/egos and may Allah protect us from such fitnah, ameen.

كذلك كنتم من قبل فمن الله عليكم

Even as he is now, so were you yourselves before till Allâh conferred on you His Favours (i.e. guided you to Islâm) [Surah an-Nisaa (4): 94 - interpretation of the meaning]

Originally Posted by optimist

Well, I said we should organize a party for her because enemies of Islam are using this as an opportunity to insult Islam and also project that the plight of women in Islam is very bad. This fairwell part is just to tell her that we do not need her and also to show her the number of women converting into Islam every month.

ya akhee, this is not what we suppose to do. She most likley left Islam due to her parents not teaching her Islam properly and being too harsh with her or maybe due to doubts she had or maybe similar other reasons. Therefore, we follow the proper shari'ah guidelines: we hate her action, speak up against it, call her to Islam, make dua'a for her. And after that if she still remains persistent, then we let her be like we do for rest of the Islamophobes.

Regardless of what we do, the kuffaar will continue to follow their god (iblees) and mock and insult Islam. And so what if they insult Islam, they only expose their own ignorance and deviant thought. We are not here to care about what they say about Islam (not saying that we should not defend Islam) rather we are here to please Allah Azza wa Jal. Thus we do what pleases our Lord.

and Allah knows best

[Aayah]

I am not aiming to revive this long discussion again, but to get an answer for my question.

Regarding this post:

Originally Posted by Qatada

asalaam alaikum


check this;

It has been suggested Britons fighting for the Taleban or radical Islamist preachers could be charged with treason...

BBC NEWS | Magazine | What are the laws on treason?

Keep in mind that the bolded part is a reaaaaallly subjective issue, and its open to interpretation. So Allahu a'lam, it may be that some law is passed against Muslims in support of an Islamic state, which would be treason.

The punishment of death was just abolished in 1998, but lifetime imprisonment is possible. But in the US, you don't know what they'll come up with.


In the UK, the treason law is for the following reasons (which seem that its only disrespect for the queen or her family):

I wanna know If there are countries ("non-muslim" countries) that still use the death punishment for treason.



Wasalam alykom

[Umar^111]

Originally Posted by optimist

Salam,


I love the prophet and the true companions of the prophet more than I love my father, mother, wife and my little kid.

Wassalam

sorry but this caught my eye what do you mean by True Companions before we go on pls

[Aayah]

Again, this is not for a debate, and I don't to revive the long discussion in this thread again. I need help on this please.

Can someone check this article: Apostasy.doc short refutation about Apostasy, please?

In terms of Arguments used there, the order of paragraphs, the evidences from Quran and Sunnah, Grammers...etc


I was wondering if its a good idea to use the treason penalty as death to be a good example for that, but I am not sure how this law is still practiced in today's world as I didn't find much about it in my search. So I refrained from including that in the article.




JazakumAllah khair in advance


و السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

[optimist]

Originally Posted by Umar^111

sorry but this caught my eye what do you mean by True Companions before we go on pls

For you to know why I said "true companions", you have to first understand the definition of Sahaba given by different scholars including Bukhari.

The definition by Imam Al-Bukhari: Bukhari defined the Sahabi (single of Sahaba) as the one who was in the company of the Prophet Muhammad or just SEEN him. Ibn Hanbal also accepted this definition and clarified it by adding "The Sahabi is anyone who accompanied the Prophet for a year, a month, a day or even an hour or even just seen him."

The definition by Abdullah Ibn Umar Ibn Al-Khattab "anyone who has seen the Prophet Muhammad even for one hour as long as he reached the puberty, and is a known Muslim who understood his religion and accepted it."

The definition of Al-Tabaey Saeed Ibn Al-Museeb; "Only those who accompanied the Prophet Muhammad for a year or two and fought with him in a battle or two should be considered Sahaba". This is a definition accepted and encouraged by Imam Al-Ghazali

Actually, Bukhari’s definition that anyone who has seen the Prophet is a Sahabi has no support from the Qur'an. The Qur'an gives stories of the hypocrites and the wicked people of Medina, where the Prophet lived, who have seen the Prophet and listened to his message and his ceremonies. Undoubtedly, they cannot be considered his Sahaba (Companions), but Bukhari did view them such simply because they have seen the Prophet. Therefore it is fundamentally wrong to place our faith in or to take for granted the prevalent theory that each and everyone who lived contemporaneously with the Prophet was an honest and trustworthy companion.

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by optimist

Actually, Bukhari’s definition that anyone who has seen the Prophet is a Sahabi has no support from the Qur'an. The Qur'an gives stories of the hypocrites and the wicked people of Medina, where the Prophet lived, who have seen the Prophet and listened to his message and his ceremonies. Undoubtedly, they cannot be considered his Sahaba (Companions), but Bukhari did view them such simply because they have seen the Prophet. Therefore it is fundamentally wrong to place our faith in or to take for granted the prevalent theory that each and everyone who lived contemporaneously with the Prophet was an honest and trustworthy companion.

this is why people who are ignorant should just plainly shut up

al-bukharees definition of a sahaabi is not "anyone who just seen him" because that would not only include the munafiqeen, it would include the kuffar of the earth who saw him. Bukharee's definition is one who saw him and died on emaan. thus his definition was restricted to this. No one from this ummah understood al-Bukharee's breakdown the definition you slandered him with through your ignorance, and that is a testimony of not only your state, but the preposterous nature of the inkarul-hadeeth i.e. hadeeth rejectionist movement.

anyways this was the view of Ibn Hajr except that Ibn Hajr ammended it by saying "anyone who accompanied him" because there were some sahabi who were blind, but their blindness does not strip them from being a sahaabi." thus the whole ummah adopted the view of bukharee and his successor, Ibn Hajr al-asqalaani's definition as the standing definition of a sahabi.

[optimist]

Originally Posted by al-boriqee

this is why people who are ignorant should just plainly shut up

al-bukharees definition of a sahaabi is not "anyone who just seen him" because that would not only include the munafiqeen, it would include the kuffar of the earth who saw him. Bukharee's definition is one who saw him and died on emaan. thus his definition was restricted to this. No one from this ummah understood al-Bukharee's breakdown the definition you slandered him with through your ignorance, and that is a testimony of not only your state, but the preposterous nature of the inkarul-hadeeth i.e. hadeeth rejectionist movement.

Anyone who has just seen the prophet by default being a Muslim also, and it is never implied here that a jew or a Kuffar who has seen the prophet is a Sahabi. However, based on Bukhari's definition of Sahaba, even a hypocrite could be regarded as a Sahaba. The Quran testifies that;

"...and among the townspeople of al-Madinah (there are some who) persist in hypocrisy whom thou (O Muhammad) know not". (9:97)

"And among those around you of the wandering Arabs there are hypocrisy ..." (9:101)

These were people who had seen the prophet, those who enjoyed the Prophet's company, those who uttered the Shadat and the Prophet has accepted of them as Muslims and they lived among Muslims as Muslims and enjoyed all the benefits. Are they also Sahaba? How do you know which one is a hipocrite and which one not? How do you know which one 'died with emaan' and which one died without emaan?

Also, lexically and terminologically, those who assassinated Umer, Utman & Ali all were Sahaba, whose who poisoned Al-Hassan were Sahaba. Those who terminated the Prophet's progeny in Kerbela were Sahaba. The killer and his victim are both in the Paradise since they are Sahaba! The poisoner and the poisoned are equally in the Paradise since both are Sahaba! Can't you see the contradiction in the definition of Sahaba? Also could you tell me why there are differences in the definition of Sahaba accepted by different scholars? Why there is no unanimous opinion among Islamic scholars?

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by optimist

However, based on Bukhari's definition of Sahaba, even a hypocrite could be regarded as a Sahaba. The Quran testifies that;

it was told to you that Bukharees definition of a sahabi is
1. one who saw the prophet
AND
2. who had EMAAN and died on it

and yet you still keep advocating your lie. Do you have a brain Optimist?
Thus his definition, as was pointed out before which your brain did not calculate, does NOT include a hypocrite, which you are required to retract right now, or else you will be deemed as a liar to all and sundry

These were people who had seen the prophet, those who enjoyed the Prophet's company, those who uttered the Shadat and the Prophet has accepted of them as Muslims and they lived among Muslims as Muslims and enjoyed all the benefits. Are they also Sahaba? How do you know which one is a hipocrite and which one not? How do you know which one 'died with emaan' and which one died without emaan?

because during the time of the messenger of Allah, Peoples Islam was based on their reality (of what was in their heart).
Umar said
"when the revelation was with us, men use to be judged based on their reality (their hearts), but when the revelation ceased, men thenafter were judged based on their speech and action"

in other words, from the time after the prophet, all people could only be judged by their deeds, but during the time of the prophet, people's reality was what was judged, like in the case of Abu Lahab for example. Likewise the munafiqeen were known and the people of true faith were known. Thus your concept of "who knows who had faith" has no bearing at all

Also, lexically and terminologically, those who assassinated Umer, Utman & Ali all were Sahaba, whose who poisoned Al-Hassan were Sahaba. Those who terminated the Prophet's progeny in Kerbela were Sahaba. The killer and his victim are both in the Paradise since they are Sahaba! The poisoner and the poisoned are equally in the Paradise since both are Sahaba!

wrong. the people who killed Uthmaan and Ali were called the "khawaarij" an the khawaarij were known because they were deprived of any of the prophet companions with them. IN other words, these people whom you speak of, are essentially not sahabi, they never saw the prophet at all.

likewise, someone who saw the prophet, but accepted Islam AFTER the death of the prophet is not called a "sahabi" he is called a "muqadrum" as stated by Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaani which lexically means in the state between two states so to speak.

Can't you see the contradiction in the definition of Sahaba?

no, the only contradiction is between what you advocate, and what actually is. that is the only contradiction that comes about whenever you speak on any given subject.

Also could you tell me why there are differences in the definition of Sahaba accepted by different scholars? Why there is no unanimous opinion among Islamic scholars?

I just told you what the unanimous opinion of the scholars is, which is the adoption of Ibn Hajr's opinion and Ibn Salah and Bukharee

secondly, these differences constitute a minute difference in wording constituting more of semantics rather than actual difference, something I do not except you to be aware of though.

now, as a mere practice of simple and basic Islam, you know you do not know what your taking about, so please be quite

al-Bukharee starts off with his saheeh by saying
"chapter: knowledge precedes speech and action". a simple concept as basic as this is something that is striped from todays world and even more stripped from revisionist and hadeeth rejectionism.