A hadith states: Kill the one who changes his religion
Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari:3017
. Whereas the Holy Quran says {لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ}
Reference: (Surah Al-Baqarah:256)
. Translation: There is no compulsion in religion. This verse and reason both require that a person is free to choose a religion; therefore, if someone wants to leave a religion, no force or compulsion should be applied!First Point
According to some people, the criterion for a hadith being contrary to the Quran is that if something is in the hadith but not in the Quran, they consider it to be against the Quran. However, this is not called contradiction but is called an additional ruling. Contradiction occurs when the Quran affirms something and the hadith denies it or states the opposite. The matter regarding the punishment of an apostate is the same: the hadith affirms this punishment and the Quran does not deny it. Therefore, convincing someone that it is against the Holy Quran is merely a fallacy and creates a misunderstanding in the mind.
Second Point
The authenticity of a hadith does not depend on whether its content is in accordance with the Holy Quran or not, because the judgment of conformity or non-conformity is made by human intellect, and there is no fixed criterion for it. To some, the hadith may seem to contradict the Holy Quran, and to others, it may not. Such an unregulated matter cannot be made a standard for verifying hadith. It is like making the authenticity of a hadith dependent on personal liking or disliking; if the heart likes it, the hadith is authentic, and if it dislikes it, then it is not authentic. Every wise person knows that then no hadith would remain.
Therefore, just as there is no condition for the proof of any verse of the Holy Quran that it should not contradict any other verse, similarly, no such condition can be imposed on the authenticity of hadith, because the Prophetic hadith was also given to us by Allah Almighty through the Noble Messenger ﷺ.
Third Point
The punishment for apostasy is death; there is consensus of the Ummah on this, and it is also the practice of the Companions.
❀ Hazrat Abu Bakr fought against those who apostatized from Islam after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, and all the Companions agreed with him on this and none of them opposed it.
Reference: Sahih Bukhari (6526)
.❀ Hazrat Umar ibn Al-Khattab also ordered the killing of a group of apostates, as narrated by Abdul Razzaq in his book
Reference: "Al-Musannaf” (19754)
: Abdullah bin Utbah reports that Hazrat Ibn Mas'ud captured those in Iraq who had apostatized from Islam, and wrote to Hazrat Umar about them.Hazrat Umar replied: "Offer them the religion of truth and the testimony of La ilaha illallah; if they accept it, leave them alone, and if they do not accept it, kill them."
Thus, some of them accepted Islam and were spared, and some did not accept it and were killed.
❀ Similarly, Hazrat Ali ibn Abi Talib also killed a group who had apostatized from the religion, and Hazrat Abdullah ibn Abbas endorsed this killing, as is established in
Reference: Sahih Bukhari (6922)
.❀ Imam Abdul Razzaq narrated in
Reference: "Al-Musannaf” (19758)
from Abu Amr Al-Shaibani: Mustawrad Al-Ajli became Christian after embracing Islam, so Hazrat Utbah ibn Farqad sent him to Hazrat Ali. Hazrat Ali made him repent, but when he did not repent, Hazrat Ali killed him.❀ Hazrat Abu Musa Ash'ari and Hazrat Mu'adh ibn Jabal also killed a Jew who had first embraced Islam and then apostatized.
Reference: Sahih Bukhari (7157) and Muslim (1824)
narrate from Hazrat Abu Burda that a man came to Hazrat Abu Musa who was first a Muslim and then became Jewish. Hazrat Mu'adh said: "I will not sit down until I kill him; this is the judgment of Allah and His Messenger ﷺ."❀ Ibn Abd al-Barr, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "Whoever apostatizes from the religion, his blood becomes permissible and his neck is to be cut off, and there is consensus of the Ummah on this."
Reference: (Al-Tamhid 5/306)
❀ Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi, may Allah have mercy on him, said: "There is consensus among the scholars that it is obligatory to kill the apostate. This has been narrated from the Companions, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Mu'adh, Abu Musa, Ibn Abbas, Khalid, and others, and no one has denied it, therefore this is a consensus."
Reference: (Al-Mughni 12/264)
It should be remembered that the punishment for apostasy and the implementation of all Islamic hudud (legal punishments) is the exclusive right of the ruling authority or the judge or court appointed by the ruling authority. Apart from this, no ordinary individual, regardless of their status or rank, has this right; otherwise, chaos would ensue in society.
Fourth Point
The verse (لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ) pertains to forcing someone into religion by compulsion; it has no relation to punishing apostasy or not punishing it. If the meaning of "no compulsion" is accepted to mean that no punishment should be given for apostasy, then logically, all punishments should be denied, not just the punishment for apostasy. Because without compulsion, no punishment can be given. Therefore, this verse would not only oppose the punishment for apostasy but would oppose every punishment, even if it is mentioned in the Quran. Obviously, it is not possible to deny all punishments, so it is proven that the meaning attributed to this verse, on which the hadith was considered contradictory, is not correct.
The correct meaning of the verse is that Islam does not advocate forcing anyone into it, because force is applied only when the arguments are not clear, or when it is against reason and nature, or when it is burdensome on the heart. However, there is no such defect in the religion of Islam; its arguments are clear, it is exactly in accordance with reason and nature, and it is not burdensome on the heart due to its ease. Therefore, if a person does not accept it despite such clear arguments, then this religion has no need to force him into it, and the faith that is forced upon someone is not valid either
Reference: (Tafseer Saadi)
.Its example can be understood like this: if some food is so delicious that everyone desires to eat it, does anyone force anyone to eat such food? The need to force someone to eat arises only when the food itself is not delicious, such as the food for prisoners or the sick. This is why immediately after (لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ), it is stated (قَد تَّبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ) that guidance has become distinct and separate from misguidance. That is, there is no compulsion in it precisely because it is completely clear.
Fifth Point
An apostate is not killed immediately after apostasy, especially if their apostasy is due to some doubt; rather, they are given the opportunity to repent and invited to return to Islam. If they have any doubt, it is removed, and if after that they still insist on disbelief, then they are killed.
Ibn Qudamah has stated in
Reference: "Al-Mughni" (12/268)
: ((An apostate is not killed until he is given three opportunities to repent. This is the opinion of most scholars, including Hazrat Umar, Ali, Ata, Nakha'i, Malik, Thawri, Awza'i, Ishaq, and the companions of opinion. Because apostasy usually occurs due to some doubt, and that doubt is not immediately removed, it is necessary to wait for some time, and the best period for this is three days)).Sixth Point
Why is this the punishment for an apostate? To understand this, if the character of a rebel or traitor is considered, it can be easily understood. Just as a rebellious person challenges the existence of a state, and if his rebellion is not stopped, the problem grows and the entire existence of the country is put at risk, similarly apostasy actually challenges the existence of Islam. Just as rebellion cannot be ignored by considering it a personal stance of an individual, apostasy cannot be ignored by calling it personal freedom. Just as any state reserves the right to defend its existence, Islam also reserves this right. In short, by prescribing the death penalty for an apostate, Islam has not done anything unusual; rather, the punishment for a rebel in every country's law is more or less the same.
Seventh Point
As far as a person's religious freedom is concerned, which the West nowadays loudly proclaims that every person is free to choose their religion, to enter any religion or leave any religion. In reality, even those people do not give a person complete freedom to choose religion; their religious freedom is only to the extent that a person keeps religion separate from governmental affairs. But as soon as someone interferes in governmental affairs, they become liable for punishment. Keeping religion separate from governmental affairs is called secularism, which in itself is a religion. That is, the Western world also does not allow a person to leave secularism, or in other words, just as leaving Islam is apostasy in our view, leaving secularism is apostasy in their view, and in both views, this is a punishable offense.
Eighth Point
Generally, those who do not believe in any divine religion object to the punishment of an apostate. This is because they do not consider harm to religion as harm, although they do consider harm to life as harm. Therefore, it seems reasonable to them that someone can be killed in retaliation for killing, but killing someone for apostasy is against reason. However, harm to religion is more dangerous than harm to life. Just as a murderer becomes a threat to people's lives, similarly, an apostate becomes a threat to people's religion. Just as punishing a murderer brings safety to the lives of others, punishing an apostate brings safety to people's religion. Therefore, only one who believes in religion can understand the importance of killing an apostate.
