Blasphemy and Apostasy in Islamic History - II
Hasan A. Yahya, Ph.Ds
Apostasy constitutes a politico-religious rebellion, these politico-religious in Islam are explained as:
The sayings and doing of the Prophet, the decisions and practices of the caliph Abu Bakr, the consensus of opinion of the companions of the Prophet and all the later Muslim jurisconsults and even certain indirect verses of the Qurâ??an, all prescribe capital punishment for an apostasy. (cited in Rahman 1972:5)
A Muslim authority commentator, Al-Samarâ??i, in his Ahkam al-Murtadd, the judgment of apostasy, wrote in the introduction of his book,
â??In the book (Qurâ??an) I found sometimes â??al-riddahâ? mentioned expressly and sometimes by import. I followed up the verses in the various commentaries and I arrived at the conclusion that the punishment of the apostate (which is death) is NOT to be found in the Book but finds mention in the Sunnah only.â? (Ibid:9-10)
From this statement, we see that there was no mention of such penalty for apostasy in Qurâ??an, because God have postponed the punishment until later , to the Day of Judgment. Another explanation is that the door of repentance is always open, where Surat al-Tawbah (repentance) verses 11-12, show that in case of repentance from apostasy and disbelief, the apostate became as any other Muslim, if he performed prayer and pays his alms dues. We can deduce that people do not repent after their death, and this what Qurâ??an means by repentance of the apostates.
The realistic stance of Qurâ??anic verses is amply illustrated in the following commandments where Islam is left to people freely to follow or reject, it is the greatness of Islam, that it gives the choice for human beings even to disobey God. Every one is responsible for his choice, whether it was good or evil. Tolerance in Islam springs from its message conveyed by Qurâ??an and its messenger. Some of these commandments as they spelled in Qurâ??an give the choice for people to be good and follow Islam, or to remain astray and face the consequences of their choice in the Day of Judgment. Examples of these commandments are:
â??Lo! Those who believe (in Muhammadâ??s message), and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabeâ??ans-whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does right-surely their reward is with their Lord and no fear shall come upon them, nor shall they grieves.â? (Qurâ??an 2:63)
â??Lo! Those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers, on them shall be the curse of Allah and of angels and men combined.â? (Qurâ??an 2:257)
â??There no compulsion in religion. Surely the light direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejects false deities and believes in Allah has grasped a firm handlehold which will never break. And Allah is Hearer, Knower.â? (Qurâ??an 2:257)
The above Ayat have taken a large debate among Muslim Ulama and Fuqaha. It contains the charter of freedom of conscience which is not found in any other religion. Two schools can be distinguished dealing with apostasy, one is represented by Ibn al-Arabi, the other is Ibn Taymiyyah and the majority. Ibn al-Arabi in his Ahkam al-Qurâ??an declares dogmatically that to compel to the truth is part of the Faith, on the authority of Hadith, â??I have been commanded to fight people til they recite the declaration of faith (La ilah illa Allah:There is no god but Allah),â? which he considers to have been derived from the Qurâ??anic verse: â??And fight them until persecution is no more and religion is for Allah Alone.â? (al-Anfal:40; al-Baqarah:194)
Rahman comments on Ibn al-Arabiâ??s statement saying: â??the verse clearly and explicitly enjoins fighting to end religious persecution and lends no support to the theory of justification of force even in the interest of truth.â? (p:20)
The opposing school is represented by Imam Ibn Taymiyyahâ??s opinion, as summarized by Sheikh Abu Zahra of al-Azhar, Egypt. He says:
â??On the first question as to whether it is permissible to fight, the disbelievers on the ground of their disbelief or on that of their tyranny and transgression, the Imam refers to two schools of thought among Ulama. The first school holds that, according to Imam Malik, Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal, Imam Abu Hanifah and Others, and the majority of Ulama and Aâ??immah, fighting with disbelievers is allowed only if they are bent upon oppression and tyranny. From this opinion it follows that war with infidels is not permissible in any other circumstances. Consequently fighting can be restored to as a defensive measure or in response to aggression, even if it turns out to be a case of emergencyâ?¦. (762 words) www.hasanyahya.com
Related posts: