Answering Christianity Research Center
MAIN BOARD (You must register to post) => GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS => Topic started by: Mohamed Saif on July 31, 2016, 10:53:30 AM
-
Assalamu Alaikum
Dear brother
I read your article on Apostasy in the below link. It was interesting and convincing. I have been researching for years on why Islam Executes Apostates and I have found it on this site.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/apostates.htm
But there was another article (not from this site) on Apostasy that states that Apostates should be killed. But they have given valid reasons. It is in contradictory to your article which states that Apostates should not be killed and there is absolute freedom of religion in Islam. Your article states that it was a temporary law at the time of the prophet as Islam was still growing.
So I am not sure which article is accurate. The link for the other article on Apostasy is given below.
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2012/05/punishment-apostasy-islam-rationale.html
http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/of_course_apostates_should_be_killed
Please help me on this
Thank You
-
Assalamu Alaikum
Dear brother
I read your article on Apostasy in the below link. It was interesting and convincing. I have been researching for years on why Islam Executes Apostates and I have found it on this site.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/apostates.htm
But there was another article (not from this site) on Apostasy that states that Apostates should be killed. But they have given valid reasons. It is in contradictory to your article which states that Apostates should not be killed and there is absolute freedom of religion in Islam. Your article states that it was a temporary law at the time of the prophet as Islam was still growing.
So I am not sure which article is accurate. The link for the other article on Apostasy is given below.
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2012/05/punishment-apostasy-islam-rationale.html
http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/of_course_apostates_should_be_killed
Please help me on this
Thank You
All scholars agree that apostates should be killed. Osama's points are not valid and the hadith (Who ever changes his religion kill him) is agreed upon and authentic. The article at letmeturnthetables and Bassam Zawadi's articles are the accurate and the true ones. Killing of apostates is also found in the bible.
-
Assalamu Alaikum
Dear Brother
Thank You for your response. But if Apostates should be executed then isn't it contradicting the Quranic verses of freedom of religion. I'll quote the verses below.
Noble Verse 5:3 ".....This day those who reject faith given up all hope of your religion: Yet fear them not But fear Me (Allah). This day have I (Allah) perfected your religion for you, completed my favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your (complete) religion....".
Noble Verses 15:2-3 "Again and again will those who disbelieve, wish that they had bowed (to God's will) in Islam. Leave them alone, to enjoy (the good things of this life) and to please themselves: let (false) hope amuse them: soon will knowledge (undeceive them)."
Noble Verses 10:99-100 "If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed, all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe! No soul can believe, except by the will of God, and He will place doubt (or obscurity) on those who will not understand."
Noble Verse 18:29 "Say, 'The truth is from your Lord': Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it): for the wrong doers We have prepared a Fire whose (smoke and flames), like the walls and roof of a tent, will hem them in: if they implore relief they will be granted water like melted brass, that will scald their faces, how dreadful the drink! How uncomfortable a couch to recline on!"
Noble Verse 27:92 "And to rehearse the Qur'an: and if any accept guidance, they do it for the good of their own souls, and if any stray, say: 'I am only a Warner.'"
Noble Verse 10:99 "If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!"
"No soul can believe, except by the will of God, and He will place doubt (or obscurity) on those who will not understand. (The Noble Quran, 10:100)"
"Say: 'Behold all that is in the heavens and on earth'; but neither Signs nor Warners profit those who believe not. Do they then expect (any thing) but (what happened in) the days of the men who passed away before them? Say: 'Wait ye then: for I, too, will wait with you.' (The Noble Quran, 10:101-102)"
"It is true thou wilt not be able to guide every one whom thou lovest; but Allah Guides those whom He will and He Knows those who receive guidance. (The Noble Quran, 28:56)"
There are more verses. But these are the ones i quote. According to these verses God did not prescribe any punishment to apostates. But in fact it says to "leave them alone." So according to theses verses apostates should not be killed. There is absolute freedom of religion in Islam. If the prophet executed apostates then didn't he contradict the Quran.
Please Reply
Thank You
-
Assalamu Alaikum
Dear Brother
Thank You for your response. But if Apostates should be executed then isn't it contradicting the Quranic verses of freedom of religion. I'll quote the verses below.
Noble Verse 5:3 ".....This day those who reject faith given up all hope of your religion: Yet fear them not But fear Me (Allah). This day have I (Allah) perfected your religion for you, completed my favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your (complete) religion....".
Noble Verses 15:2-3 "Again and again will those who disbelieve, wish that they had bowed (to God's will) in Islam. Leave them alone, to enjoy (the good things of this life) and to please themselves: let (false) hope amuse them: soon will knowledge (undeceive them)."
Noble Verses 10:99-100 "If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed, all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe! No soul can believe, except by the will of God, and He will place doubt (or obscurity) on those who will not understand."
Noble Verse 18:29 "Say, 'The truth is from your Lord': Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it): for the wrong doers We have prepared a Fire whose (smoke and flames), like the walls and roof of a tent, will hem them in: if they implore relief they will be granted water like melted brass, that will scald their faces, how dreadful the drink! How uncomfortable a couch to recline on!"
Noble Verse 27:92 "And to rehearse the Qur'an: and if any accept guidance, they do it for the good of their own souls, and if any stray, say: 'I am only a Warner.'"
Noble Verse 10:99 "If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!"
"No soul can believe, except by the will of God, and He will place doubt (or obscurity) on those who will not understand. (The Noble Quran, 10:100)"
"Say: 'Behold all that is in the heavens and on earth'; but neither Signs nor Warners profit those who believe not. Do they then expect (any thing) but (what happened in) the days of the men who passed away before them? Say: 'Wait ye then: for I, too, will wait with you.' (The Noble Quran, 10:101-102)"
"It is true thou wilt not be able to guide every one whom thou lovest; but Allah Guides those whom He will and He Knows those who receive guidance. (The Noble Quran, 28:56)"
There are more verses. But these are the ones i quote. According to these verses God did not prescribe any punishment to apostates. But in fact it says to "leave them alone." So according to theses verses apostates should not be killed. There is absolute freedom of religion in Islam. If the prophet executed apostates then didn't he contradict the Quran.
Please Reply
Thank You
Apostasy is a different thing. The apostate himself is worse than the kafir. I suggest that you go read the two articles.
-
-
Osama Abdullah is unfortunately trying to liberalize Islam, and it is not working out well for him. The general consensus established amongst the Muslim communities of the world is that apostates should be put to death, by stoning. Iran follows this, so does Saudi Arabia.
-
At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter whether the majority of Muslims believe in the death penalty or not. This is appeal to authority or the bandwagon fallacy.
The relevant thing is whether the original sources of Islam, the Qur'an and Hadith can be used to prove the punishment. The Qur'an doesn't talk about it and even appear to be contradicting the punishment. Hadith literature, on the other hand, is from where the entire evidence for such a punishment comes from. It should be mentioned here, that while Qur'anic interpretation has comparatively less difference of opinion, Hadiths have a lot more debate on their interpretations.
One likely reason earlier Muslim generations did not question the law as much as today's generation does, is because of the difference in their environment. In those times the other major religion Christianity enforced the punishment so Muslims are likely to not have much misgiving about it. An indication of this is seen when past Muslims and even present-day Muslims still use the presence of this punishment in the Bible as evidence of this being a divine law for Islam too. For critical Muslims, such evidence is hugely problematic.
In any case, many arguments have been made against the evidence in support of this punishment which has made it equivocal and uncertain for a lot of Muslims.
-
Did you even read those link's?
It doesn't even count for Today Brother.
Even Many Quran Verse's Refutes this...
I even ade a video about in my youtube channel even Shabir Ally respond this...
-
At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter whether the majority of Muslims believe in the death penalty or not. This is appeal to authority or the bandwagon fallacy.
The relevant thing is whether the original sources of Islam, the Qur'an and Hadith can be used to prove the punishment. The Qur'an doesn't talk about it and even appear to be contradicting the punishment. Hadith literature, on the other hand, is from where the entire evidence for such a punishment comes from. It should be mentioned here, that while Qur'anic interpretation has comparatively less difference of opinion, Hadiths have a lot more debate on their interpretations.
One likely reason earlier Muslim generations did not question the law as much as today's generation does, is because of the difference in their environment. In those times the other major religion Christianity enforced the punishment so Muslims are likely to not have much misgiving about it. An indication of this is seen when past Muslims and even present-day Muslims still use the presence of this punishment in the Bible as evidence of this being a divine law for Islam too. For critical Muslims, such evidence is hugely problematic.
In any case, many arguments have been made against the evidence in support of this punishment which has made it equivocal and uncertain for a lot of Muslims.
Excellent post. I should add that, I am close to several, well educated Muslims who have told me that if there is a contradiction with Qur'an and the hadith, the word of the Qur'an shall override the word of the hadith. In other words, the Qur'an is of a greater authority (And, it's not like Christians and the Bible, Muslims acknowledge that hadith can be contradictory or even outright false).
-
At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter whether the majority of Muslims believe in the death penalty or not. This is appeal to authority or the bandwagon fallacy.
The relevant thing is whether the original sources of Islam, the Qur'an and Hadith can be used to prove the punishment. The Qur'an doesn't talk about it and even appear to be contradicting the punishment. Hadith literature, on the other hand, is from where the entire evidence for such a punishment comes from. It should be mentioned here, that while Qur'anic interpretation has comparatively less difference of opinion, Hadiths have a lot more debate on their interpretations.
One likely reason earlier Muslim generations did not question the law as much as today's generation does, is because of the difference in their environment. In those times the other major religion Christianity enforced the punishment so Muslims are likely to not have much misgiving about it. An indication of this is seen when past Muslims and even present-day Muslims still use the presence of this punishment in the Bible as evidence of this being a divine law for Islam too. For critical Muslims, such evidence is hugely problematic.
In any case, many arguments have been made against the evidence in support of this punishment which has made it equivocal and uncertain for a lot of Muslims.
So you are stating that the majority of scholars are wrong? Here is the evidence for the killing of the apostates:
Ibn 'Abbas said:
"The Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'"
??????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????? ?????????? ?????? ??????????? ????? ?????????? ????????? ???? ??????????? ????? ????? ????? ???????? ????? ??????? ??????? ??? ???? ???? ???? ? "? ???? ??????? ??????? ???????????? ?"? ?.?
Grade : Sahih (Darussalam)
Reference : Sunan an-Nasa'i 4059
In-book reference : Book 37, Hadith 94
Narrated Mu'adh ibn Jabal:
AbuMusa said: Mu'adh came to me when I was in the Yemen. A man who was Jew embraced Islam and then retreated from Islam. When Mu'adh came, he said: I will not come down from my mount until he is killed. He was then killed.
Grade: Sahih (Al-Albani)
Reference: Sunan Abi Dawud 4355
In-book reference : Book 40, Hadith 5
Abdullah bin abi Sarh Repented so he wasn't killed. With all due respect, you should stop trying to change our religion to make it fit modern customs. The apostate is killed and that is what our religion tells us. And their is a huge wiseness in this action. This was preformed by the Prophet (PBUH), his companions, and the ta'be'een.
-
But did Abdullah ibn Sa'd ibn Abu Sarh convert back to Islam?
-
But the Quran directly said that who ever changes his religion to leave him alone. There is no punishment prescribed in the Quran.
-
But did Abdullah ibn Sa'd ibn Abu Sarh convert back to Islam?
Yes, he did. https://islamqa.info/en/168773
But the Quran directly said that who ever changes his religion to leave him alone. There is no punishment prescribed in the Quran.
The Quran never said to leave them alone. Where did you get this from? The verses that you brought have nothing to do with the issue. They have to do with the kuffar. The punishment for adultery isn't found in the Quran. So does that mean that we shouldn't punish the adulterer? I remember Umar ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said that he was afraid that people will stop the punishment of stoning because it is not found in the Quran. He also said that in the end of the times there will be people who will claim to follow the Quran but reject the Sunnah. And you are an example of that (no offense). Thanks for strengthening my faith brother.
"That is because they believed, and then they disbelieved; so their hearts were sealed over, and they do not understand." 63:3
https://islamqa.info/en/20327
This is the religion of Allah. Stop trying to change it.
-
Dear brother
Thank you for your response. And as for your response saying that I'm trying to change God's religion. I wasn't trying to change it. It was only a doubt which I had.
Thank you
-
-
Dear brother
Thank you for your response. And as for your response saying that I'm trying to change God's religion. I wasn't trying to change it. It was only a doubt which I had.
Thank you
It's a tactic most religious people use when they're nervous and grounded in an online debate. "You're blaspheming the Lord!"
-
But did Abdullah ibn Sa'd ibn Abu Sarh convert back to Islam?
Yes, he did. https://islamqa.info/en/168773
But the Quran directly said that who ever changes his religion to leave him alone. There is no punishment prescribed in the Quran.
The Quran never said to leave them alone. Where did you get this from? The verses that you brought have nothing to do with the issue. They have to do with the kuffar. The punishment for adultery isn't found in the Quran. So does that mean that we shouldn't punish the adulterer? I remember Umar ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said that he was afraid that people will stop the punishment of stoning because it is not found in the Quran. He also said that in the end of the times there will be people who will claim to follow the Quran but reject the Sunnah. And you are an example of that (no offense). Thanks for strengthening my faith brother.
"That is because they believed, and then they disbelieved; so their hearts were sealed over, and they do not understand." 63:3
https://islamqa.info/en/20327
This is the religion of Allah. Stop trying to change it.
Asalamu alaykum,
We reject hadith when it contradicts the quran. The quran promotes freedom of religion.
And about adultery... it doesnt matter if Umar said that he was afraid that people would adandon the stoning of the adulterer, this is one dimentional thinking. Remember, Umar is a fallible human being who can make mistakes, and even if it was true that he said that, we cannot verify it for certainty because the hadith are the sayings of the sayings of the sayings of what the sahaba said.
And please do not be passive aggresive, "thank you for increasing my faith in islam"... it is one of the worse feminine personality traits.
May Allah protect you from polytheism, one of the greatest sins, the raising of the sayings of men as divine revelation i.e. granting common men godhood:
"Shall I seek other than Allah for judge, when He it is Who hath revealed unto you (this) Scripture, fully explained? Those unto whom We gave the Scripture (aforetime) know that it is revealed from thy Lord in truth. So be not thou (O Muhammad) of the waverers." [6:114]
-
Although, there have been made some criticisms on them, I personally do not absolutely deny the Hadiths. The issue I have is with their interpretation, like why is it supposed to be a part of the everlasting Shariah, or applied unconditionally on everyone, and above all the derivation of the ruling that: a person who didn't convert to Islam but was born in a Muslim family, when such a person adopts a religion other than Islam he should also be killed.
-
Although, there have been made some criticisms on them, I personally do not absolutely deny the Hadiths. The issue I have is with their interpretation, like why is it supposed to be a part of the everlasting Shariah, or applied unconditionally on everyone, and above all the derivation of the ruling that: a person who didn't convert to Islam but was born in a Muslim family, when such a person adopts a religion other than Islam he should also be killed.
Asalamu alaykum,
Im assuming this is directed at me? Or in general.
Anyway, i do not reject all the hadith, but i certainly reject the hadith that stipulate laws that are not inside Allahs speech (the quran), this is what every follower of Allah's religion should do.
In the hadith (in accordance with al-Quran) there are many spiritual benefits for Muslims, this can only be a good thing.
-
it doesnt matter if Umar said that he was afraid that people would adandon the stoning of the adulterer, this is one dimentional thinking. Remember, Umar is a fallible human being who can make mistakes, and even if it was true that he said that, we cannot verify it for certainty because the hadith are the sayings of the sayings of the sayings of what the sahaba said.
Wisdom.
Anyway, i do not reject all the hadith, but i certainly reject the hadith that stipulate laws that are not inside Allahs speech (the quran), this is what every follower of Allah's religion should do.
That's called cherry picking.
-
One should bear in mind apostasy in hadiths are referring to period of time where a believer turns into disbelievers due to hardship that a believer needs to undergo during that time.
As a believer during the period where they need to purify Arabia, they need to undergo warfare. This is one of the reason that will cause those who had believe to turn into disbelief even after witnessing signs/miracles from Creator.
Other hardship reasons that may cause apostasy; abandoning wealth becomes poor, abandon family etc.
Nothing to do about born in Muslim family and later apostate due to foreign lifestyle. It is up to the ruler to whether apply killing punishment as Quran also do not abrogate the Israelite Law of punishing an apostate in end of days.
-
Not exactly cherry picking. The Hadith also includes laws that conform to modern morality too. If I remember correctly, for example, non-Muslim women, children, old men and physiologically impaired persons are exempt from paying the Jizya. If a Muslim rejects all the laws which he doesn't like and accepts the ones he does, without any common objective criteria to judge among the two, then that Muslim is likely committing the cherry picking fallacy.
That "common objective criteria" for Muslims having non-conservative interpretations happen to be usually either historical criticism of the Hadiths involved or the lack of evidence for the idea that a particular law defined in some particular Hadiths has the status of being a part of God's everlasting divine law and not some temporary law, according to the needs of the age. In the latter case, it is upon the Muslim generations to decide whether they want to continue with that law or not. Discontinuing with such laws would not incur sin on the Muslims.
-
Osama Abdullah is unfortunately trying to liberalize Islam, and it is not working out well for him. The general consensus established amongst the Muslim communities of the world is that apostates should be put to death, by stoning. Iran follows this, so does Saudi Arabia.
I am not trying to liberalize Islam. I am very conservative myself. I am only going by what Islam says. Anyway, the brothers have done beautiful jobs explaining the point well. May Allah Almighty bless them. Ameen. No need for me to be redundant here.
Take care,
Osama Abdallah
-
Meaning of Osama Abdallah = Lion Slave/Servant of Allah ;)
-
Meaning of Osama Abdallah = Lion Slave/Servant of Allah ;)
Now you know why they built the sphinx
(http://www.guardians.net/egypt/sphinx/images/sphinx-front-wa-2001.jpg)
-
Meaning of Osama Abdallah = Lion Slave/Servant of Allah ;)
Now you know why they built the sphinx
(http://www.guardians.net/egypt/sphinx/images/sphinx-front-wa-2001.jpg)
LoL
-
-
Critics do give some arguments against the reliability of Ikrimah and this narration (like how Ali was unaware of a Prophet's command and Ikrimah was), but in any case, as far as this narration (and the one similar to it in Jami` at-Tirmidhi) is concerned, there is no indication that these people were born in Muslim families and had not converted to Islam.
-
Yup. And when the Christians stopped doing that look at what happened. Adultery is ok and permissible, a man having sex with an other man is OK, Gays get baptized and married in churches, drinking and getting drunk is now something that most Christians do even though Paul forbid it, and way more! And the funny thing is, Christianity is a LAWLESS religion! Also, how am I nervous in a debate?
Slippery slope fallacy.
-
Assalamu alaikum,
@iKnowi
I see no contradicton between the hadith and the Quran. The verses that you mentioned only applies to the people who have a treaty with the Muslims (either by paying the Jizyah or by having a peace treaty with the Muslims) and the apostate CANNOT be a Mu'ahid. I honestly didn't expect you people to go as far as to say that the adulterer shouldn't be stoned! The prophecy is being fulfilled! The prophet (PBUH) stoned the adulterer and ALL scholars agree on that. The hadiths are from Umar (RA) and they are authentic. There is no doubt on that. Are you gonna reject what the second best man (after the prophets peace be upon them) on Earth said because of your personal emotions? The adulterer gets stoned in most religions. STOP trying to change our faith because of your emotions! What Umar (RA) said matters a LOT. So according to you, almost ALL the scholars are wrong and YOU are right!? What is so feminine about what I did? Are you kidding me? I'm sorry if I sound offensive, but I am afraid that what is happening to the Christians will happen to us. We will try to reform our religion and change because of our modern values and then we will be split into many sects. This is the religion of Allah, it is NOT a toy.
Asalamu alaykum,
Please read the following article: http://islamic-myths.com/2008/01/23/stoning-to-dead-is-against-islam/
The quran is very detailed, this can be seen by hijab rulings, inheretence percentages etc. If Allah wanted the stoning of the adulterer he would mention it in his book, surely. It is such a severe punishment and determines ones qadr... how do you know that this adulterer might not grow up to be an ardent defender/scholar of islam?
And i also encourage you to adopt a more solipsist mindset: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemological_solipsism
And you said "thank you for strenghening my faith in islam", this is textbook passive aggresiveness and i consider it one of the worse personality traits. Sorry if you didnt mean it that way but i dont know how else to interpret that line other than passive aggresiveness.
Finally, modern day scholarship trumps older scholarship, we are in a new computer age, we have connectedness that we never had before, it is a truly unique point in human history. Now we can commincate with eachother more easily and help eachother in deciphering this perfectly preserved text, examples include the reinterpretation of the wife beating verse 4:34 of which the translators have actually CHANGED their translation in light of modern day scholarship... And MANY others (most of which are scientific).
And if you say that Mohammed pbuh said that no one understood the Quran after me better than my sahaba (Umar, Uthman etc), what he really meant was at that specific time period, not now; did the sahaba have access to the number 19 miracle? Nope. Did they understand the verses on evolution? Nope. And so on.
May Allahs peace and blessing be on you, i do not want to attack you, only inform you. I want to end here because ive had these sorts of discussions before but they end up going nowhere, people will believe what they want to believe (most of the time, anyway).
Salaams.
-
Not to criticize anyone, but just to state some facts and what the scholarly difference of opinion is on the matter.
[/size][/color]R[/font][/size][/color]egarding the matter of stoning, as far as my Islamic knowledge goes, [/font][/color][/size]the article that was linked [/color][/size]has a lot of incorrect and inaccurate material included[/size][/size][/color].[/font]
[/size][/color]In the second Caliph Hadith the author is probably talking about, if I am not very much mistaken, Caliph Umar never said that the verses were "lost". Caliph Umar said those verses, although revealed, were removed from the Qur'anic text on the command of Prophet Muhammad and therefore no longer part of the Qur'an. Most scholars accept this narration while those scholars who reject abrogation of this kind might criticize the authenticity of the narration, but even they do not reject the idea that stoning was one form of punishment during the Prophet's time[/font][/size][/color].[/font]
[/size][/color]T[/font][/size][/color]here is also the problem with the Qur'an being compiled during the reign of the third Caliph, while there are narrations that indicate the author's viewpoint, there are other narrations which provide evidence that the Qur'an was already compiled in a book form during the first Caliph's reign[/font][/size][/color].[/font]
[/size][/color]A[/font][/size][/color]side from the Sahih Bukhari narration cited, as far as I know there are [/font][/size][/color]many[/size][/font][/size][/color] other narrations talking about the punishment of stoning[/font][/size][/color]. [/font][/size][/color]A[/font][/size][/color]lso, on the matter of the Hadiths books being compiled 200 years later, this is highly misleading. It is true that by 250-300 years our most reliable Hadith books [/font][/size][/color]Sahih Bukhari[/size][/font][/size][/color] and [/font][/size][/color]Sahih Muslim[/size][/font][/size][/color] get compiled but there were many other books and authors [/font][/size][/color]before[/size][/font][/size][/color] these works. From what I have read, we even have extant manuscripts of Hadith books dating about 70-90 after the Prophet's death.[/font]
[/size][/color]A[/font][/size][/color]s a person somewhat versed with the ideas of Javed Ahmad Ghamindi, I was surprised to read his name used in the article. Ghamidi is a strong believer in the Qur'an being [/font][/size][/color]Al-Furqan[/size][/font][/size][/color] (the measure or the criterion) and [/font][/size][/color]does[/size][/font][/size][/color] happen to base his judgment on other Islamic issues, laws and Hadiths by putting first what the Qur'an says on the matter. Because of this, even though, he argues against the stoning punishment being the one and only punishment for adulterers, as far as I know, he still maintains that under special circumstances it [/font][/size][/color]can[/size][/font][/size][/color] be given. He does not reject that this punishment was given by the Prophet.[/font]
[/size][/color]Ghamidi basically argues that stoning was according to the [/font][/size][/color]Surah Maidah[/size][/font][/size][/color] punishments for the person creating corruption in the land. One of the four punishments mentioned there is a torturous death, which in 7th century Arabia was stoning. Therefore, the people who were stoned were either rapists or people who were habitual in such crimes. In any case, according to Ghamidi, stoning [/font][/size][/color]did[/size][/font][/size][/color] happen. Under normal circumstances however, the punishment for adultery according to Ghamidi's arguments is in line to what the author is basically saying, [/font][/size][/color]w[/font][/size][/color]hich is to put in simple terms, that the Qur'anic punishments are not abrogated by Hadiths[/font][/size][/color].[/font]
[/size][/color]Additionally, regarding 4:34, although if Hadith literature is not taken into account, it [/font][/size][/color]is very much possible to come to the "modern" interpretation, however, the[/font][/size][/color] conservative interpretation appears to be closer to the original meaning. Even Ghamidi, whose interpretations are very non-conservative in the cases of adultery punishment and even [/font][/size][/color]Hijab[/size][/font][/size][/color], maintains the conservative opinion in the case of 4:34.[/font]
-
Jzk for the clarification.
-
-
-
Asalamu alaykum,
You mention that all scholars agree that stoning is applied to the adulterer, Shabir Ally (arguably the most famous and best Muslim debator alive today) disagrees: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x41Oz3PpeRs
So clearly that isnt true.
And about modern scholars being greater than classical scholars, sorry but i didnt convey what i meant properly. What i meant was that we can utilize the classical scholars criticisms AND we are in the computer age, so everyone can he better equiped and build a more reliable picture of Islam, both academics and laymen, by using ALL available tools (including classical scholars remarks).
And i am not emotional/liberal over the issue, if the Quran stated capital punishment (rajm) as punishment for adultery then so be it, but it doesn't. And i completely agree that we are in the prime age of fitna, but 100 lashings is enough of a deterrent for adultery.
I remember attending a lecture, dont know if its on youtube, about scholars being given too much authority. I agree.
I was raised sunni but im not emotionally attached to the sunnah like you are; this life is merely a passing phase and i do not want shirk to be on my record.
Salaams.
-
-
this is difficult to explain
I follow the ideology that not everything in sahih bukhari,muslim,ahmed,tabari,etc is 100% authentic. There are many contradictions which are irrefutable (unlike the ''supposed contradictions'' from the quran).
Now let's just assume its 100% authentic , you have to understand its context. Is leaving the US army punishable by lifetime prison? no. Is leaving the US army during a war/operation punishable? yes
and not ALL scholars agree, many scholars today disagree , this includes some top theologians from Saudi Arabia who have a degree in Islamic jurisprudence
-
Operation "Destroy Abdullah Almadi" from all directions and all topics :).
-
Just to clear up any misunderstandings, my posts have nothing to do personally with Abdullah Almadi (keeping a healthy distance from this Abdullah vs. Osama "discourse").
I should also mention that probably most notable scholars also don't absolutely believe that the Hadith books are 100% authentic (and definitely not Tabari and Ahmad). A point of significant importance is that of context. The interesting thing with the "kill whoever changes his religion" narration is that we have no context. Additionally, there are other very similar narrations which happen to interchange the crime of simple apostasy with the crime of apostasy with the addition of fighting God and His Messenger, implying that the context of the punishment included the condition of fighting for the "proscribed" punishment as-well.
-
Just to clear up any misunderstandings, my posts have nothing to do personally with Abdullah Almadi (keeping a healthy distance from this Abdullah vs. Osama "discourse").
But why? Why don't you contribute to the discussion to make it more interesting and fun?
-
Hey guys i thought this would be an interesting read for you regarding apostasy.
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/mna/chapter_7.html
-
Asalamu alaykum,
You mention that all scholars agree that stoning is applied to the adulterer, Shabir Ally (arguably the most famous and best Muslim debator alive today) disagrees: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x41Oz3PpeRs
So clearly that isnt true.
And about modern scholars being greater than classical scholars, sorry but i didnt convey what i meant properly. What i meant was that we can utilize the classical scholars criticisms AND we are in the computer age, so everyone can he better equiped and build a more reliable picture of Islam, both academics and laymen, by using ALL available tools (including classical scholars remarks).
And i am not emotional/liberal over the issue, if the Quran stated capital punishment (rajm) as punishment for adultery then so be it, but it doesn't. And i completely agree that we are in the prime age of fitna, but 100 lashings is enough of a deterrent for adultery.
I remember attending a lecture, dont know if its on youtube, about scholars being given too much authority. I agree.
I was raised sunni but im not emotionally attached to the sunnah like you are; this life is merely a passing phase and i do not want shirk to be on my record.
Salaams.
As'salamu Alaikum dear brothers,
I have covered the topic of fornication, and showed from the Glorious Quran and Hadiths that the punishment for fornication in Islam is limited to 100 lashes as the Glorious Quran Commands. Please visit:
www.answering-christianity.com/was_muta_immoral.htm
Take care,
Osama Abdallah
-
Some thoughts on the article:
The article is written by members of the Ahmadiyya community, which makes it likely to be outright rejected by many Muslims, although such an action would be an obvious fallacy.
"The concept has therefore arisen from the conduct and policies of the post-Khalifat-i-Rashida1 Muslim governments of Baghdad."
It can be argued that this is untrue because history books detail the punishment to have been meted out during the times of the Rashiddun Khalifas too. However, those are only historical narratives and not hadiths which go through an exhaustive authentication process and therefore can not be used as basis for Islamic Shariah.
"... the use of force for the spread of its ideology"
Although, this became a common practical implementation of this punishment, Muslims who are proponents of the punishment definitely do not see this as a method of forcing their ideology on others. They argue that the individual of his/her own free will chose Islam (and with it all of its laws), no one forced them into accepting the religion.
As Surah Tauba is mentioned in the article, for information purposes I should also mention that some critics of the capital punishment for simple apostasy, argue that the people who were killed for changing their religion from Islam were on the basis of the fifth verse of this Surah. Here, Muslims, after the passage of four months, are ordered to fight the idolaters who either still remain polytheist or have not vacated a specific geographical location (probably the area of Hijaz). Some of them probably left while others converted to Islam. From these particular set of converts, if someone later apostatised, for them was ascribed the capital punishment as that punishment had already been defined for them and had been stopped only because of their conversion.
Regarding a woman's apostasy, in classical Islamic fiqh only the Hanafi school of thought holds that women cannot be killed (although they still can be imprisoned for an indefinite time until they "repent"). The other three schools of thought don't have any such restriction. Additionally, according to some jurists, also in cases where apostate women have been involved in active violent rebellion, they can be killed.
"It should be remembered that these traditions were compiled some three to four centuries after the advent of Islam..."
This is pretty much false or at-least misleading. The final compilation and authentication process can be argued to have been completed about three centuries after the Prophet's death, but the first writing down of the traditions happened much before. From what I have read, we even have extant manuscripts of haidth books dating from the end of first century Hijra. Additionally, the authentication (and therefore compiling) process is always an ongoing process, the latest, if I'm not mistaken, was Sheikh Albani's performed just a few decades ago.
"There are no two opinions regarding the accepted fact that whenever any so-called tradition attributed to the Holy Prophet of Islamsa contradicts any clear injunction of the Holy Quran, such a tradition is rejected as false and is not accepted as the word of the Holy Prophetsa."
As much as most Muslims would like to believe, this is not an "accepted fact". In early Muslim history, there were found to be apparent contradictions between what the Qur'an said and what was reported about the Prophet's actions (i.e. hadiths). When it came to widely accepted hadiths, a reconciliation was needed, which came in the form of the concept of abrogation of Qur'anic commandments by actions attributed to the Prophet in hadiths. This is pretty much the case for the issue of stoning of adulterers.
Why was Maulana Maududi specifically criticised? Some can argue against the article as being slightly non-objective because of this.
Most other things in the article, I agree with, found to be irrelevant or don't know enough to comment upon. One interesting question that I should add is the odd nature of the fact that the Ikramah hadith accepted by so many scholars was apparently not accepted by Imam Muslim.
For a more thorough investigation of the relevant hadiths in this regard, I would recommend Dr. Ahmad Shafaat's THE PUNISHMENT OF APOSTASY IN ISLAM, Part II: An Examination of the Ahadith on the Subject (http://islamicperspectives.com/PunishmentOfApostasy_Part2.html).
-
There is one Hadith I know which says that a Bedouin accepted Islam and left Islam the next day. But he wasn't executed.
-
That hadith and the criticism on such an interpretation of it have been discussed in the above referenced Dr. Ahmad Shafaat's article.