باسمك
اللهم
In virtually every Muslim-majority country today there are
severe restrictions on religious freedom along with political freedom and civil
liberties. Certain Muslim-majority countries have instituted laws that criminalize
blasphemy and apostasy. I strongly believe that such things are contrary to the
letter and spirit of Islam as understood from the enlightened teachings of the
Holy Quran. Regarding religious freedom, Allah Most High says:
وَقُلِ الْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّكُمْ ۖ فَمَن شَاءَ فَلْيُؤْمِن وَمَن شَاءَ
فَلْيَكْفُرْ
And say, the Truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills
let him believe; and whoever wills let him disbelieve
(Surah 18:29)
Humans are granted free will, and as individuals are
entirely free to either accept or reject Islam. No one has the authority to
compromise this essential freedom, especially not in the name of our Religion
and Scripture. A large segment of our medieval minded and bigoted Mullas
who ascribe authority to themselves on the basis of possessing knowledge of the
Religion and expertise in the divine Law, claim that the penalty for apostasy
from Islam is death. This flies in the face of the fundamental principle laid
down in the blessed Ayah of the Quran:
لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ
There is no compulsion in Religion
(Surah 2:256)
It is quite strange that the majority of contemporary,
and perhaps historical, traditionalist Muslim scholarship has been adamant
about the death penalty for the “crime” of apostasy. As a Muslim, I of course
believe that anyone who outright renounces Islam, the Oneness of Allah and the
Prophesy of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, shall be condemned to Hell in the Afterlife, but that there is
no prescribed legal punishment to be enforced by the state for the “crime” of
apostasy in this transient world. The Verse “there is no compulsion in Religion”
is definitive and decisive. No amount of sophistry or polemical gymnastics can
nullify the Word of God. Although Islam, the message of the Prophets, stresses
the imperative of worshiping Allah alone, it simultaneously grants everyone the
right to worship whoever or whatever they want instead of Allah:
فَاعْبُدُوا مَا شِئْتُم مِّن دُونِهِ
So worship what you wish besides Him
(Surah 39:15)
On what basis do the narrow-minded Mullas and so-called Islamists
restrict the application of this universal principle of religious freedom
enshrined in the holy Scripture? How can it be said that everyone is free to
worship as they please except the apostate from Islam, who is liable to capital
punishment?
Now consider the following Ayah of the holy Quran which
manifestly debunks the idea that the apostate is meant to be killed by the Muslim
government:
إِنَّ
الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا ثُمَّ كَفَرُوا ثُمَّ آمَنُوا ثُمَّ كَفَرُوا ثُمَّ ازْدَادُوا
كُفْرًا لَّمْ يَكُنِ اللَّـهُ لِيَغْفِرَ لَهُمْ وَلَا لِيَهْدِيَهُمْ سَبِيلًا
Indeed, those who have believed then disbelieved, then believed,
then disbelieved, and then increased in disbelief - never will Allah forgive
them, nor will He guide them to a way
(Surah 4:137)
In other words, it is possible that an individual will go
back and forth between belief and apostasy, indicating there is no worldly
punishment for apostasy in our Shari’ah. Those who argue that according to the
Shari’ah, an apostate is not immediately executed but given a brief respite
(three days according to most) to reconsider his apostasy and so there is the
possibility of recanting and returning to the Faith must nevertheless reflect
carefully on the words: “then increased in disbelief”. What this illustrates is
a scenario in which an apostate, after having renounced Islam, is not executed,
but persists in his apostasy and gradually becomes hardened in his rejection of
and animosity to Islam. Logically, such a scenario as illustrated by the holy
Quran cannot occur in an Islamic state in which apostates are executed within
days of having renounced Islam.
Apparently, the basis for the apostasy law propounded by
the Mullas is the noble example of the Prophet’s first successor, Abu Bakr رضوان الله عليه. Upon the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه
وسلم and the election of Abu Bakr رضى الله عنه to the office of succession and
leadership of the community of Believers, there was a mass apostasy from Islam
by the various tribes throughout Arabia. Sayyidina Abi Bakr رضى الله عنه waged holy war against these
apostate tribes and subdued them against the odds with divine aid. This is the
precedent cited by the Mullas and politically inclined “Islamic” parties as
justification for their doctrine that the apostate is liable to execution. But
a deeper analysis of the Ridda Wars (the Wars of Apostasy) reveal that caliph
Abu Bakr and the sincere, devoted Companions of the Prophet رضى الله عنهم who raised the sword against the apostate tribes did so to
put down armed insurrections that were openly challenging the writ of the
state. It was not an inquisition, nor were the apostates killed merely on the
basis of their individual apostasy. They were fought and killed for rebellion
against the only legitimate political administration of Arabia - namely the
caliphate of Abu Bakr رضى الله عنه based in Medina.
This is further indicated by the fact that Abu Bakr رضى الله عنه
insisted on fighting even
those tribes which did not technically renounce faith in Islam but failed to
acknowledge the authority of the caliphate. Here I am referring to the tribes
that refused to pay their share of the Zakat to the Caliphate which was
authorized to collect it and distribute it on their behalf, while they had
previously given it to the Prophet صلوات الله والسلام عليه for him to distribute on their
behalf when he was alive. All of the Prophet’s Companions, including sayyidina
Umar رضى
الله عنه who would
later become the second successor, implored sayyidina Abi Bakr رضى الله عنه
not to fight those tribes
which denied the Caliphate and wished to distribute their Zakat independently.
But he disregarded their counsel because he was being divinely inspired in his
determination to fight the opponents of the Caliphate, even if they were
confessionally Muslim.
Therefore,
the Arabic word murtad which is translated to mean apostate, may be
applied to an individual who though confessionally a Muslim, has back peddled
in another way, such as by breaking his allegiance to the Caliph or Imam of the
Muslims, or by rebelling against the state, or by isolating himself from the
congregation and broader society of the Muslims.
As
for an individual who renounces Islam as his personal faith, without any element
of violent rebellion against the political administration of the Muslims under
which he is legally subject, in my view the blood of such an individual is
still inviolable. Here I can cite instances from the life of the Prophet صلى الله عليه
وسلم to demonstrate this fact:
عَنْ أَنَسٍ
ـ رضى الله عنه ـ قَالَ كَانَ رَجُلٌ نَصْرَانِيًّا فَأَسْلَمَ وَقَرَأَ الْبَقَرَةَ
وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ، فَكَانَ يَكْتُبُ لِلنَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم، فَعَادَ
نَصْرَانِيًّا فَكَانَ يَقُولُ مَا يَدْرِي مُحَمَّدٌ إِلاَّ مَا كَتَبْتُ لَهُ،
فَأَمَاتَهُ اللَّهُ فَدَفَنُوهُ
Anas
رضى
الله عنه narrates that there was a Christian man
who became a Muslim and would recite al-Baqarah and Aali Imran.
He used to write (the Revelation) for the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. Then
he went back to Christianity and would say “Muhammad knows only what I have
written for him”. So Allah caused him to die and they buried him. (Sahih
al-Bukhari)
Note that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, who possessed temporal power
and authority at the time of this individual’s apostasy, did nothing to him and
the apostate died without being killed or executed. It is also noteworthy that
this apostate did not keep his renunciation of Islam a private affair, but
actually went about propagandizing against Islam and the Prophet صلى الله عليه
وسلم. Nevertheless,
because his activity was non-violent he was unharmed and enjoyed the right of religious
freedom until his last breath.
I must point out that there isn’t a single verse in the holy
Quran, which otherwise contains many laws and regulations for the Believers,
that stipulates any kind of Earthly punishment for apostasy or blasphemy. On
the contrary, as I have already demonstrated, the Quran and Sunnah clearly
establish the principles of religious liberty and freedom of conscience.
To be continued إن شاء الله
The term murtad or apostate is not always used in the sense of someone exiting the circle of Islam, but may also be used in the sense of someone cutting themselves off from the Muslim community. Hence, the tyrant Hajjaj bin Yusuf accused Salamah b. al-Akwa' رضى الله عنه of having become an apostate by living in the desert among the Bedouins: يَا ابْنَ الأَكْوَعِ ارْتَدَدْتَ عَلَى عَقِبَيْكَ تَعَرَّبْتَ (Sahih Muslim) This term may be used in its linguistic sense to describe someone who has left the Jama'ah of the Muslims, withdrawn his hand from the Imam of the time, or joined a misguided sect and left the creed and way of the people of the Sunnah.
ReplyDelete