[Shahnawaz]

2. HOW DOES ISLAM DEFINE APOSTASY? IS IT PERMISSIBLE FOR A MUSLIM TO CONVERT TO ANOTHER FAITH? HOW CAN LAWS AGAINST APOSTASY AND BLASPHEMY BE RECONCILED WITH THE KORANIC INJUNCTION OF "NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION"?

Traditional human communities believe that truth leads to salvation, and error to damnation. It is probable that very many religious people in a variety of denominations still believe this. Historically, religiously-faithful princes have therefore seen it as necessary to use the coercive power of the state to forbid apostasy. One of the most powerful and persistent manifestations of this understanding in history was the Inquisition, which was definitively abolished in 1834. Protestant countries also respected this drastic principle; in fact, the first converts to Islam in Britain were impaled on stakes. In a Hindu context, ‘apostasy’ was often classified as violation of caste rules and boundaries, and similarly drastic consequences could follow. After the Mongol sack of Baghdad in 1253, Buddhists who converted to Islam were routinely put to death.

The four canonical schools of Sunni Islamic law, and also most pre-modern Shi’a jurists, recommend similarly drastic penalties, although the judge is enjoined to ‘look for ambiguities’ in order to avert the death penalty wherever possible.

The Ottoman Caliphate, the supreme representative of Sunni Islam, formally abolished this penalty in the aftermath of the so-called Tanzimat reforms launched in 1839. The Shaykh al-Islam, the supreme head of the religious courts and colleges, ratified this major shift in traditional legal doctrine. It was pointed out that there is no verse in the Qur’an that lays down a punishment for apostasy (although chapter 5 verse 54 and chapter 2 verse 217 predict a punishment in the next world). It was also pointed out that the ambiguities in the hadith (the sayings of the Prophet) suggest that apostasy is only an offense when combined with the crime of treason. These ambiguities led some medieval Muslims, long before the advent of modernisation, to reject the majority view. Prominent among them one may name al-Nakha’i (d.713), al-Thawri (d.772), al-Sarakhsi (d. 1090), al-Baji (d. 1081), and al-Sha’rani (d.1565). The debate triggered by the Ottoman reform was continued when al-Azhar University in Cairo, the supreme religious authority in the Arab world, delivered a formal fatwa (religious edict) in 1958, which confirmed the abolition of the classical law in this area.

Among radical Salafis and Wahhabis who do not accept the verdicts of the Ottoman or the Azhar scholars, it is generally believed that the majority medieval view should still be enforced.

The best discussion of the controversy is the book by Mohammed Hashim Kamali, "Freedom of Expression in Islam" (Cambridge, 1997).

Come on now, it hardly takes a rocket scientist to figure out the partners of a group such as "the Radical middle way".
These men are single handedly tearing away the very core of Islam, all under the giuse of Scholarly verdicts. These groups are the partners of the enemies of Islam.

[Shahnawaz]

Another example of how obvious their deviency is. Just look at how the kuffar loud these groups, while trying to justify the crimes against Islam at the same time. I sorry if I seem obsessed, but I'm taken aback by these people. How are people not rejecting them???

The fight-back by moderate Muslims has begun
This is no Clash of Civilisations. It is a clash within Islam.
Johann Hari
The Independent
16 February 2006

Seventeen years ago, the streets of Westminster and Bradford filled with smoke and shrieks as Muslim protestors threatened to “burn alive” a man who had dared to use his freedom of speech in a way they disliked. On the surface, it seems like little has changed since the Salman Rushdie affair, when a theocratic dictator demanded the slaughter of perhaps our greatest novelist and much of the democratic world equivocated. Once again, artists are driven into hiding in a liberal democracy for apparently insulting Islam. Once again, most of the democratic world resorts to a “yes… but…” non-defence of freedom. But this time there is a difference – an inspirational difference.

This time, moderate Muslims are fighting back. Slowly, steadily, a stream of heroic Muslims are standing up, loudly refusing to be defined by fanaticism and death-threats. In Jordan, the newspaper editor Jihad Momani has risked his life to publish the cartoons alongside an editorial demanding, “What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony in Amman?”

[Kadhim]

Originally Posted by Shahnawaz

Come on now, it hardly takes a rocket scientist to figure out the partners of a group such as "the Radical middle way".
These men are single handedly tearing away the very core of Islam, all under the giuse of Scholarly verdicts. These groups are the partners of the enemies of Islam.

I didn't realize that capital punishments for apostasy represented the "core" of Islam. I was under the impression that the core was tawhid, Qu'ran, belief in prophethood, prayers, fasting, hajj, charity, etc.

[ChotooMotoo]

Originally Posted by Kadhim

I didn't realize that capital punishments for apostasy represented the "core" of Islam. I was under the impression that the core was tawhid, Qu'ran, belief in prophethood, prayers, fasting, hajj, charity, etc.

Then you would be correct.

[Shahnawaz]

Capital punishment is mentioned in the Quran and the Sunnah, therefore a direct result of believing in those two.
Does anyone else think chotoo & co should go into go into hibernation for a while, seeing as though Ramadan is dawning upon us and wot not. It could be a God-Send.

[shadha]

No where in the Qur'an does it command that the apostate be put to death. No where.


shadha-

[Shahnawaz]

I said capital punshment was mentioned in the Quran, and it is.
Capital punishment for Apostacy is mentioned in the Ahadith.


Narrated 'Ikrima: 'Ali burnt some people and this news reached ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as [Muhammad] said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for [Muhammad] said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.'"

[rahat]

Didn't the Ottoman empire crumble like ... 80 years ago? How is this a current issue?

-
rahat

[Shahnawaz]

This man has revealed his fisq on a number of occaisions. Asking commen sense questions to him are futile.

Oh but you may like him, he parrots the Shia' in his hatred for orthodox Islam and calls it Wahabiyyah.

[rahat]

I'm ... not exactly clear on that, so just to make sure: That was about me, right?

-
rahat

[Shahnawaz]

NO! It was about the "Shaykh" (lol) in question. Don't flatter yourself like that.