|
This is a good question, and one that has received a lot of attention in the contemporary era. Classically, many Muslims held that death is generally the punishment for apostasy (with some exceptions and conditions). Some Muslims today see this more in line with a modern treason law. That is, today, while killing someone for apostasy is considered a violation of human rights, killing someone for treason against their own nation is considered acceptable. This is because, in the past, religion was a primary marker of public identity and deliniation of the state; whereas, in the modern world, religion is considered a private matter and a matter of personal belief, and national identity is considered primary. Also, this law is based on hadith. Some people have challenged the authenticity of hadith that say this, because it seems to go against the Qur'anic view that there should be no compulsion in religion; it also seems unusually harsh, since the Prophet had a merciful and lenient character. Other people hold that it may have been appropriate in the time of the Prophet (where leaving the Muslim community would generally mean militarily aiding the enemy) but it is no longer valid today. So, basically, one can say that, yes, this is a classical view; but it is still a subject of much discussion. Also, note that even if the classical law is correct, it is not acceptable for a person to go around killing people because he or she thinks they are apostates. There are a number of pieces on this on al-Islam.org, which you can read by going to Google and typing "apostasy al-islam.org". |
Islam does not force faith on any one. Allah, The Glorious says in the Holy The faith is a matter between man and his Creator. But if he starts destroying the faith of others, he will be entitled to punishment. Even the punishment is not Wassalam. |
|
as salam alaikum if a person is openly a sinner, unjust or oppress other people, he is considered a wrongdoer (zalim). If a person consciously, willingly and openly fights the truth, while knowing that it is the truth, it is disbelief (kufr) or apostasy (irtidad). If a person reveals what a Muslim person hide from his sins, it is called backbiting (ghibah). So the basic difference is that declaration of zulm, kufr and apostasy are related to open attitudes and behaviors while backbiting is related to something that a Muslim person wish to conceal about himself. As far as the Khawarij, their enmity against Ali, peace be upon him, has been seen as an aversion for the truth even if it is not improbable that among their ranks were also unaware people misled by their leaders. With prayers for your success. |
Bismillah Thank you for your question. A solitary report that contradicts the infallibility of the Imam (as) would not be accepted. May you always be successful. |
We use cookies to enhance your experience on our site. Essential cookies are necessary for the site to function. Analytics cookies help us understand how you use the site. Learn more
Control how we use cookies on this site. Essential cookies cannot be disabled as they are required for the site to function.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site.