Apostacy In Islam

I was talking to my friend Samuel Taylor on the issue of Apostacy or Irtidad in Islam. He was of view that Islam and Muslims don't allow choice to human beings. I am of view that Islam gives choice to a man or woman to choose right path. A man is allowed to study, debate and to understand Islam. After that, he/she should embrace Islam. I have studied an article on this topic. I hope it will be helpful to understand the Islamic law for Apostacy with this Article. The article is written by Sayyed Muhammad Rizvi.

The article is as under:

In the name of Allãh, the Beneficent, the Merciful.
May Allãh send His blessings upon Muhammad & his progeny.
In the question forwarded to me by the 'Aalim Network about the punishment given to an apostate, I could sense the plea for understanding the law of Islam and the rationale behind that law. The issue of apostacy in Islam is a very complex and sensitive issue; and, therefore, I intend, with the tawfiq of Allãh, subhãnahu wa ta'ãla, to answer in detail using the notes I have from a talk I gave in Toronto in May 1990.
First we shall explain our view about faith in God and whether or not Islam can be forcefully imposed on others; then comes the Islamic view on the choices a person has after he has willingly joined the Islamic faith; and, finally, we shall discuss the issue of apostacy.
1. Faith in God: A Force or a Choice?
According to Islam, every child is born with the built-in ability to know and believe in his Creator; he has the cognition that has been placed by Allãh in his nature (fitra). Allãh describes the human soul in a very beautiful way. After swearing by the most majestic signs of His creation, Allãh says: "...and by the soul and He who perfected it! Then He inspired to it [the ability to understand] what is good for it and what is evil for it. Successful is he who purifies it, and failure is he who corrupts it." (91:1-10)
Allãh has made our souls such that we are able to distinguish what is good and what is evil. But for a human soul to function on its fitra, there is a condition-it must be kept pure, it must be immunized against spiritual corruption. The soul is like a bulb which can give light, provided it itself is not surrounded with a thick cover or dust; every human being has that light in his soul; however, those who keep it pure can enlighten their path with it, while those who allow the 'spiritual dirt' to accumulate on it cannot see their path towards Allãh. (Incidentally, kufr literally means a cover.) The Prophet of Islam emphasized the same thing when he said, "Every child is born with the believing nature (al-fitra), it is his parents who make him into a Jew or a Christian."
Besides this fitra, Allãh has also provided us with various means to know Him and believe in Him; He sent prophets and messengers, He sent books, and above all He created thousands of signs in nature which remind us of Him. "Soon We shall show them Our signs on the horizon (ãfãq) and in themselves (anfus), until it becomes clear to them that this is the Truth." (41:53)
2. Can Islam be Imposed Forcefully on Others?
Having accepted that from the Islamic point of view, faith in God is ingrained in human nature, and that it is only the parents and the society that corrupt the soul and divert it from the Right Path, the question comes: Can Islam be imposed forcefully on non-Muslims? Or we may even ask: Is jihãd a means of imposing the faith of Islam on non-Muslims?
I do not intend to get into the issue of jihãd; but, briefly stated, the majority of Shi'a mujtahideen do not believe in initiating a jihãd without the clear permission of a ma'sûm Imam. Even those who allow the initiation of jihãd, do not believe that jihãd can be used to impose Islam on non-Muslims. At most, they say that jihãd can be initiated to remove tyranny and oppression from a non-Muslim society in order to remove the factors which prevent the Divine message from reaching to the masses. Jihãd cannot be used for imposing Islam on others; it is just for putting an end to the aggression on Muslims or for helping the oppressed non-Muslims. (The history of Muslims bears out this idea; an unbiased historian can clearly separate the spread of the Muslim rule over areas outside Arabia [by military might] and the spread of Islam [without force] in those same regions.)
The Qur'ãn clearly says that, "There is no compulsion in the religion." (2:256) What this verse actually means is that: "There is no compulsion in [accepting] the religion of Islam." Why? The verse continues, "Surely the Right Path is clearly distinct from the crooked path." So Muslims can always show the difference between the right and the wrong paths, but not force the non-Muslims to accept Islam.
3. What After Submission?
What we have said above was about accepting Islam, coming into the fold of Islam. We have made it very clear that no one can be forcefully brought into the fold of Islam; Islam cannot be imposed on any person or society. This was all about a person who is outside the fold of Islam.
Now we move on to the next step. If a person is raised in a society which protects his soul from the impurities of kufr and shirk, or if a person is shown the Right Path and accepts it willingly - can such a person reject the Islamic faith? Is he allowed to apostate (become murtad)? Can he declare that he does not believe in God, Prophet Muhammad and the Day of Judgement?
Once a person enters into the fold of Islam, the rules change. As soon as you become a Muslim by your own choice, you are expected to submit yourself to Allãh totally and completely. "O You who believe! Enter into submission, kãffatan!" (2:208) Kãffatan in the sense of "all" and "completely". Once a person becomes a believer, he surrenders the right of making decisions to Allãh and Messenger: "No believing man and no believing woman has a choice in their own affairs when Allãh and His Messenger have decided on an issue." (33:36)
Now even the question of apostacy, irtidãd or deserting of one's faith, for a Muslim, becomes a shar'í/religious issue-even in this issue he is governed by the laws of Islam. And Islam clearly says: No! You cannot become an apostate. After coming into the fold of Islam, rejection of the fundamentals is not tolerated. If there are doubts in your mind about the fundamental beliefs of Islam, then discuss, question, debate, study and solve them BUT you are not allowed to leave Islam, desert your own fitra! There are quite a few examples of such discussions by people like Ibn Abi 'l-'Awjã' (during the days of Imam Ja'far as-Sãdiq) and Ishãq al-Kindi (during the days of Imam Hasan al-'Askari) who were attempting to write an answer to the Qur'ãn!
On the issue of openly rejecting Islam, Islam cannot just stand aside and see one of its followers going astray. It would allow discussions to understand and solve the problems, but not allow its followers to lower themselves from the sublime status of "surrendering to the will of Allah-Islam" to the status of those "who have hearts but do not understand, ears but do not hear, and eyes but do not see."
4. Apostacy is Equal to Treason
Why does Islam not allow apostacy? Apostacy or irtidãd in Islam is equal to treason.
The Western world limits treason to political and military terms. In the USA, treason consists "only in levying war against Americans, and in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." However, sometimes even the Western world stretches the concept of political treason to include things which are not related to politics or military matters. For example, in England, treason includes violating the King's consort, or raping the monarch's eldest married daughter, as well as the sexual violation of the wife of the eldest son and heir. Even now, "polluting" the Royal bloodline or obscuring it is included in the definition of treason. (See Professor Ali Mazrui, The Satanic Verse or a Satanic Novel, p. 4-5, who probably is the first Muslim to have used the term treason in comparison with apostacy in the context of the Rushdie affair.)
Why has England included such non-political and non-military matters in treason? Because the Royal family and the purity of its bloodline is one of the most significant part of the British society and culture. In Islam, the concept of treason is not limited to political and military affairs, it also has a spiritual and cultural dimension to it. In the Islamic order of sacredness, Allãh, then the Prophet and then the Qur'ãn occupy the highest positions. Tawhid, nubuwwa, and qiyãma form the constitution of Islam. Just as upholding and protecting the constitution of a country is sign of patriotism, and undermining it is a form of treason-in the same way open rejection of the fundamental beliefs of Islam by a Muslim is an act of treason. Apostacy, i.e., the public declaration of rejecting the fundamentals of Islam, has also negative influence on the Muslim society; it is indeed a major fitna.
And that is why Islam has prescribed harsh punishment for irtidãd. It must be emphasized that irtidãd which we are discussing here involves open rejection, without any force and with the realization of what one's statements or actions imply. The punishment prescribed by the shari'a for apostacy is death.
Even the terms used by the shari'a for apostates give the idea of treason to this whole phenomenon. "Murtad" means apostate. Murtad can be of two types: fitri and milli. (1) Murtad Fitri means a person born of a Muslim parent and then he rejects Islam. Fitri means nature or natural. The term "murtad fitri" implies that the person has apostated from his nature, the nature of believing in God. (2) "Murtad Milli" means a person who converted to Islam and then later on he rejects Islam. Milli is from millat which means a community. The term "murtad milli" implies that the person has apostated from his community.
In the first case, the apostacy is like treason against God; whereas in the second case, the apostacy is like treason against the Muslim community. Probably, that is why there is also a difference in dealing with these two kinds of murtads:
A former kãfir who became a Muslim and then apostates (Murtad Milli) is given a second chance; if he repents, then he is not to be killed.
But one who is born as a Muslim and then apostates (Murtad Fitri) he is to be killed even if he repents. His repentance might be accepted by Allãh but he still has to go through the punishment prescribed for his treason in this world.
This punishment is only applicable in case of apostacy by men; in case of women, the punishment is not death but life imprisonment. And if such a woman repents, then her repentance is accepted and the punishment is suspended.
In the writings of some of the mujtahideen, I have sensed that the punishment of a murtad is to be implemented only in dãru 'l-Islãm (i.e., the Muslim world) and not if the murtad flees to dãru 'l-kufr (i.e., the abode of kufr).
What are the sources for these laws? The sources on which these punishments have been outlined in the sharí'a are the authentic and reliable ahãdíth from the Imams of Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). Those who know Arabic and have the aptitude to handle the fiqh istidlãli text may refer to the late Ayatullãh al-Khu'i's Takmilatu Minhãju 's-Salihiyn, vol. 1, pp. 324-337 for the ahãdith used by our jurists.
This is not a new issue or a controversial one among the Shi'a jurists. Even the scholars of the past centuries had the same views; for example, Shaykh at-Tusi (d. 460 AH) in an-Nihãya; Ibn Idris (d. 598 A.H.) in as-Sarã'ir; Ibn Hamza at-Tusi in al-Wasila, al-Muhaqqiq al-Hilli (d. 676 A.H.) in Sharãya'u 'l-Islãm, al-'Allãma al-Hilli (d. 726 A.H.) in Qawã'idu 'l-Ahkãm, and the First Martyr (d. 786 A.H.) and the Second Martyr in Sharhu 'l-Lum'ati 'd-Dimishqiyya. Those who might suspect a division on this issue between the "usuli" and the "akhbãri" schools, they should know that even the muhaddithin have chapters in their collections of hadith on "the punishment for murtad" citing the ahãdíth on this subject. See, for example, Shaykh Hurr al-'Ãmili, who has seven pages of ahãdíth under the title "abwãb haddi 'l-murtad - sections on the punishment for murtad" in volume 18 of his Wasã'ilu 'sh-Shí'a.

The Original article can be viewed at http://www.al-islam.org/short/apostacy.htm

Justification of Hijab; a simple logical example

Hijab is considered a sign of oppression of Muslim women by many non-Muslims. How could be it justified? They say, 'Islam is taking the choice and freedom away from women.' While they haven't studied Islam and its laws, as they should. Or they have some knowledge about Islam, but they have studied Islam from such source that only search defects and short comings in Islam (though they are unable to find it).

To examine the objections about Hijab, we should understand it that Islam is a complete code of life. You are bound to obey a law in full, when you agree to follow it. Islam is a code of life, which have its own values and virtues, which differ from any other religion or culture. Islam is needed to be followed in all its commands. When we talk about the CHOICE, we should know that there is no choice after accepting a law. For example, when you become citizen of a country, or you get a visa of a specific country. You should abide by rules and regulations of that country. You can't ask them that you want to do this and that, and you don't want to do this and that. No, you have to follow the rules. Otherwise, they will refuse to give you citizenship or visa. Take the same example about Islam. When we have accepted Islamic laws and rules as they are true and revealed by Allah, then we don't have any choice, to accept what we like and to reject what is objectionable to the World and its FREE culture. It is a logical justification of almost all Islamic laws.

Now, coming to the main purpose of Hijab, Islam wants to protect women's modesty and their honour. It is described in the Holy Qur'an, that Muslim women should cover their body, so that they will be identified ( as a Muslim Women) and will not be molested.

Dr. Zakir Naik describes six criteria for Hijab:

1. The first criterion is the extent of the body that should be covered. This is different for men and men. The extent of covering obligatory on the male to cover the body at least from the navel to the knees. For women, the extent of covering obligatory is to cover the complete body except the face and the hands upto the wrist. If they wish to, they can cover even these parts of the body. Some scholars of Islam insist that the face and the hands are part of the obligatory extent of ‘hijab’. All the remaining five criteria are the same for men and women.


2. The clothes worn should be loose and should not reveal the figure.
3. The clothes worn should not be transparent such that one can see through them.
4. The clothes worn should not be so glamorous as to attract the opposite sex.
5. The clothes worn should not resemble that of the opposite sex.
6. The clothes worn should not resemble that of the unbelievers i.e. they should not wear clothes that are specifically identities or symbols of the unbelievers’ religions.

It was a logical justification of Hijab for women in Islam. You can send me your comments if you have some different view.

Karachi: Searching for Books

How to find a book in Karachi? I am uncertain about it. It is very difficult to find a book here. I needed Shakespeare's TWELFTH NIGHT and its notes. I searched about 20 book stores for it. But i was unable to find it. Even i searched Gulshan-e-Iqbal, where I was sure to find the desired book. But the book sellers replied with a simple NO.

On the other hand, there are many computer and CDs related shops in every town. I was surprised to know that there are about 3 computer shops in comparison to 1 Book shop. It shows the intention of our society. Computer is getting importance in every field. while books are losing its importance in the society.

I believe that Computer and TV cannot replace the importance of Books. Books give us the KNOWLEDGE and Computer and TV give us the INFORATION. Both are different. So what do you want to get? Knowledge or Information?

Are the Islamic punishments severe?

It makes me very surprised when i hear such kind of questions and objections about Islam, from Non-Muslims which don't make sense. For example; the matter of Islamic punishements, Hijab and Jihad are some hot issues which are presented as a sign of barbarism and extremism. While i think, every religion and even every state has the right to enforce its laws for the welfare of its citizens. Then why Islamic punishments and some other matters are considered to be against human rights? why the world have double standards?

As far as Islamic laws about punishments are concerned, we can say that there is great care in these laws for all human beings. Decision to punish someone due to commiting a crime should be made very carefully. Two, and in some cases, four witnesses are required to enable the judge to punish someone in the particular crime. Otherwise, he/she will not be punished. only light punishements will be enforced. This is a light side of Islamic Jurisprudence which makes it possible to avoid wrong decisions, so that innocent people would not be punished due to merely suspecision. Another point that should be noted is that Islam not only wants to punish the guilty but also wants to make the punishment an example for the society, so that people will think 100 times before commiting a crime. And the society will be safer and safer everyday.
On the other side, the human rights associations should also look at the current scenorio, where innocent people are killed with CARPET BOMBING. It is also unlawful to kill or imprison someone without a proper trial. How can a man justify it?
I think the Islamic laws are not severe than CARPET BOMBING.