|
[l] Muhammad Iqbal Siddiqi, seeking to counter the argument that the Islamic punishment for apostasy is too severe, writes:
"If Islam were a mere religion in the sense in which this term is commonly used, a hotchpotch of dogmas and rituals, having no direct relation with the economic, political and social structure of society, then such severe punishment for apostasy would have certainly been the height of high-handedness because the change of religion would not have, in the least, disturbed the social order. But the problem is that in Islam the Kingdom of Heaven whose foundations are firstly laid in the heart of man is to be essentially externalised in every phase of social set up i.e. in politics, in economics, in law, in manners and in international relations. In such circumstances it is quite obvious that when a person rebels against the Kingdom of Heaven within his heart, he commits high treason against the Kingdom of Heaven on earth, the visible and concrete expression of the Kingdom of Heaven within the heart. The persons who commit treason are always dealt with severely in every political order. A stern attitude is always adopted by all sane governments against rebels and disruptionists, and so is the case with Islam. There is nothing unusual in what Islam has done. In Islam religion is not a matter of private relationship between man and Allah, but is intertwined with society. So when he abandons Islam he in fact revolts against the authority of the Islamic State and society."[54]
On the other hand, El-‘Awa, an Egyptian lawyer and Islamic scholar, claims that while in other cases of Shari‘ah offences Muslim jurists have tried to moderate the punishments meted out to offenders, in relation to apostasy they have made it more severe, extending the cases in which the punishment is to be carried out by broadening the meaning of words and acts considered as formal apostasy beyond the actual meaning of apostasy which is simply to change one’s religion.[55] He thinks this happened historically because of the fear that apostates would serve as examples for others to follow, thus harming the public interest and weakening Islam, and also because of the strength of the Arabic imperative "kill him" in the above mentioned hadith which led the jurists to place the punishment for apostasy in the hadd category. El-‘Awa himself disagrees with this traditional consensus, claiming that as the Qur’an itself does not prescribe a punishment for apostasy its punishment should fall under the ta‘zir (discretionary) rather than hadd category. This distinction would allow a discrimination between a simple change of religion in which case no punishment needs to be applied, and cases in which harm is caused to society where the punishment must be inflicted. He claims that there have always been a small minority of jurists holding to this position, including the famous medieval scholar Ibn-Taymiyya.[56]
[/l]
[l] conclusion [/l]
[l]
The above discussion illustrates the complexities of Muslim political and religious identities and the seriousness attributed by many Muslims to the rejection of Islam by a Muslim. This attitude is a result of the way Islamic sources and history have been interpreted by jurists and scholars right from the beginning. Despite differences and minority opinions there is broad agreement in Islamic law, both Sunni and Shi‘a, about the basic penalties for apostasy, including the execution of male apostates.[57] Muslims are highly sensitive to the issues raised by the Islamic laws on apostasy, sensing themselves to be under attack from the liberal West, accused of negating universally accepted individual human rights. Notwithstanding the defensive efforts of some more liberally minded scholars, apostasy continues to be highly repulsive to most Muslims, who would instinctively justify the strict penalties as commensurate with the perceived severity of the crime against the very basis of the Muslim community (umma), amounting to deliberate treason and betrayal of the cause.
Barnabas Fund
May 2003
[1] Unlike Protestant Christianity, Islam is a religion concerned more with orthopraxy (the right thing to do) than with orthodoxy (the right thing to believe). Similar to rabbinic Judaism it is, among other things, a codified system of law (the Shari‘ah) claimed to be divinely given, and based on the Qur’an, the hadith (the collected sayings and deeds of Muhammad), as well as on the consensus of Islamic jurists (ijma‘) and analogical reasoning (qiyas). The Qur’an and hadith are seen as divinely inspired texts. Religious law encompasses all of life and is still of paramount importance for most Muslims.
[2] Mohamed S. El-Awa, Punishment in Islamic Law: A Contemporary Study, (Plainfield: American Trust Publications, 2000), pp. 49-50, 53.
[3]Muhammad Iqbal Siddiqi, The Penal Law of Islam , (Lahore: Kazi Publications, 1979) p. 97.
[4] Abul A‘la Mawdudi, The Punishment of the Apostate According to Islamic Law, Lahore: Islamic Publications, 1963. English translation by Syed Silas Husain & Ernest Hahn, 1994. p, 17.
[5] Rudolph Peters & Gert J.J. De Vries, “Apostasy in Islam”, Die Welt des Islams, Vol. XVII, No. 1-4, 1976-7, pp. 14-18.
[6] ‘Ali, Y., The Holy Qur’an, The Islamic Foundation, UK, 1975, p.1729.
[7]Zwemer, S., The Law of Apostasy in Islam, Marshall Brothers Ltd, UK, 1924, p.34-5.
[8] Gibb, H. and Kramers., Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, E.J. Brill, Leiden, 1974, p.413.
[9]Siddiqi op. cit. p. 97
[10] Abul A‘la Mawdudi, The Punishment of the Apostate According to Islamic Law, Lahore: Islamic Publications, 1963 English translation by Syed Silas Husain & Ernest Hahn, 1994. pp, 18-19.
[11]Zwemer, op. cit. p. 33-4.
[12]Pickthall, op. cit. p. 57, footnote.
[13] ‘Ali, Y, op. cit. p. 207, footnote 606.
[14] See S.A. Rahman, Punishment of Apostasy in Islam, Lahore: Institute of Islamic culture,1978, pp.16-25. Rahman on p. 16 declares this verse to be “one of the most important verses of the Qur’an, containing a charter of freedom of conscience unparalleled in the religious annals of mankind . . .”. He goes on to criticise the attempts by Muslim scholars over the ages to narrow its broad humanistic meaning and impose limits on its scope in their attempts to reconcile it with their interpretations of Muhammad’s Sunna.
[15] S.A. Rahman, Punishment of Apostasy in Islam, pp. 15-16 where he claims Ibn al-‘Arabi, Zamakhshari and al-Baydawi held this view. See also the discussion in Mohamed S. El-Awa, Punishment in Islamic Law: A Contemporary Study, pp. 50-51.
[/l]
|