Islam: when is a person considered a Muslim?

[Shakeel]

As you can see from the varied responses here when someone is considered a Muslim varies with the sect and the person.

Two Muslims have replied neither contradicting each other in that. What varied responses?

 

[JustGeorge]

I hear you and usually I see it the same way. Judaism/Christianity had similar fundamentals and they have discarded them (mostly). Islam needs an enlightenment, urgently. It is just frustrating how slow that process is - and a positive outcome isn't guaranteed.

Its newer. Where was Christianity about 500 years ago? (When it was Islam's age.)

 

[Shakeel]

The problem is women being harassed for they what she wears

And them wearing something indecent.

And a lot of people do say "we don't want Islam."

I'm referring to the particular people mentioned.

You make it sound eas

No. I make it sound simple. It is at the end of the day. Life is full of choices.

If it really mattered little, why do so many apostates--or even those who break away from mainstream Islam in places like Iran or Saudi Arabia and aren't apostates--flee to the West for their life?

I mean, it matters little because if they die disbeliving they'll go to hell so it doesn't really matter what happens in this life unless it brings them back to Islam.

Why should hiding non-faith be desirable or even a consideration?

Not having faith in itself is not desirable, but no one can be forced to believe.

That sounds very cruel and barbar

It's very simple.

 

[Shakeel]

Who defines them?

Islamic law.

But do you agree that leaving Islam deserves death?

Yes or no. Simple binary question.

I already answered that in my first post.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And them wearing something indecent

So what? That's no reason, defense, or excuse to harass her.

I'm referring to the particular people mentioned.

So am I. Which includes children who you claim are all born Muslim but reach adulthood without actually accepting Islam (if even knowing anything of it).

No. I make it sound simple. It is at the end of the day. Life is full of choices.

None of them acknowledged the problems of just leaving.

It isn't desirable, but no one can be forced to believe.

It is an option you listed. But it's not acceptable, however lots do it due to fear (this isn't exclusive to Islam).

It's very simple.

Totalitarian tyranny usually is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Two Muslims have replied neither contradicting each other in that. What varied responses?

I have seen Muslims justify the death penalty for leaving Islam. Did they both agree to that? Besides the world of Islam is much much greater than two members on this forum. Your question fails on at least two levels.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Great. Thank you very much.

Im sure you do know though that this verse when speaking of "it was made plain to them" or "shown to them" does not really mean it was embedded into them. It is shown by faneron or manifestation. That means humans are shown, not programmed. I mean it does not really say they are programmed.

But I get what you are saying. Thanks a lot.

Different Christians interpret different parts of the Bible in multiple ways. I don't agree with that interpretation, but then I do not agree with much of the Bible anyway. So I have a bit of bias there.

 

[paarsurrey]

Should anything negative happen to someone for deciding not to be a Muslim at this point? According to some, they should be killed. Is this thinking in error?

Definitely, I understand, such a thinking is in error, as most people follow the vested clergy instead of checking with the truthful and reason oriented Quran:
4:138
اِنَّ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا ثُمَّ کَفَرُوۡا ثُمَّ اٰمَنُوۡا ثُمَّ کَفَرُوۡا ثُمَّ ازۡدَادُوۡا کُفۡرًا لَّمۡ یَکُنِ اللّٰہُ لِیَغۡفِرَ لَہُمۡ وَ لَا لِیَہۡدِیَہُمۡ سَبِیۡلًا ﴿۱۳۸﴾ؕ
Those who believe, then disbelieve, then again believe, then disbelieve, and then increase in disbelief, Allah will never forgive them nor will He guide them to the way.
4:139
بَشِّرِ الۡمُنٰفِقِیۡنَ بِاَنَّ لَہُمۡ عَذَابًا اَلِیۡمَۨا ﴿۱۳۹﴾ۙ
Give to the hypocrites the tidings that for them is a grievous punishment,
Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search

One can believe and if dissatisfied at one's heart can disbelieve as is evident in the verse of the Quran; such a person is not to be killed as this is not mentioned in it, please. Right?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

To label little children as Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Jujuists, Communists, Libertarians, or whatever their parents happen to be, is child abuse. Period.

Ciao

- viole

How Atheists' ism is different and better in this connection please?
If yes, then kindly quote from one's ism, please.
Right?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Therefore, all non muslims in the world today are guilty of apostasy. And therefore worthy of death.
Right?

Ciao

- viole

Not true, please.
Kindly read my post #48 ^ ,please.
Right?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I believe there is no law in the Qu'ran to execute apostates, Anything else is not from God but from the wicked hearts of men.

I agree with one's "believe"-ing here, please.
Right?

Regards

 

[Meow Mix]

You're implying they were apostates. Which is a grave accusation, by the way, seeing as the punishment for it is excecution. They didn't say anything about it though. There is no reason to assume they were apostates. If they were, wouldn't they say so? Wouldn't it be just what you want to hear: "we don't want Islam." But they said no such thing.

Why would anybody say that if they would be murdered for it? This situation you describe is grotesque and monstrous: that people born to Muslim parents must go along with Islam (and all of its prescriptions for women that might have other dreams) or be murdered. It's a despicable situation. I'd shelve those kinds of beliefs somewhere on the same shelf as Nazism in terms of murdering people for merely being different.

They have the choice of leaving Islam or not, seeking out people who don't believe, moving away or hiding their apostasy. Little does it matter what they do if they leave Islam.

"Believe, hide, or die" is not a choice, and it's absurd that you treat it as if it is; and it's callous that you hand-wave the fact that these beliefs would lead to children literally being murdered.

Yes, there is an expectation of hijab (covering almost the whole body) if a woman is a Muslim. Yet women in Afghanistan, too, have been neglecting this duty for a long time. They should fear Allah's punishment.

There is no specific punishment for not wearing hijab in Islam.

If someone grows up and they don't believe Islam is true though, if they have Muslim parents, they must pretend to be Muslims or die (or lose all of their family if they have to run away): according to some beliefs (I will not pretend this despicable situation applies to all Muslim beliefs).

Any "god" that commands this situation is a monster. I cannot fathom how fellow human beings would believe this and say such a conception of god is good. It's unconscionable.

 

[BrightShadow]

When is a person considered to be a Muslim?

I'm most interested in a child born to Muslim parents: are they considered a Muslim from birth? (Does this depend on whether one has Sunni, Shia, etc. interpretations of the religion?)

I'll be up front about why I ask: I'm curious about whether a teen leaving the religion is considered an apostate for instance, and what that means, and why.

Thanks

If I want to learn something about a religion such as Islam - I would examine its primary doctrine first. In this case it is the Quran! I would not listen to its practitioners first because in my opinion 99% are clueless as to what they are really following!

I don't believe anywhere in Quran states that apostate (someone who abandons Islam) should be killed. In fact it teaches the opposite

Islam's primary source says - "there is no compulsion in religion". So why not just go with that?

[Quran 2:256] Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.

[Quran 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!

[Quran 76:29] This is an admonition: Whosoever will, let him take a (straight) Path to his Lord

So, when clear-cut directions are given that there is no compulsion in religion and that Muslims should let nonbelievers take whatever path they want - then where did this alternate and opposite theory come from? And why some Muslims advocating that Islam demands apostates killed?

I believe just like every other religions - practitioners of Islam has also created a murky version of their religion with all the cultural diffusion and teachings from secondary sources that were written or collected at least 214 years after their Prophet's departure.
The sheer reason that there are multiple sects in Islam shows that they all cannot be representing the true teachings of Islam. From the get-go the followers of Mohammad split into two groups because they couldn't even agree who would be Muhammad's successor! Regardless of the claim that they do not have any big differences in the core belief of Islam -this political division was unwarranted in my opinion and Muhammad should have prepared them better IMO.

First of all - when a religion has sects - you know there is a problem. These people identify themselves as different sects and think they are doing their religion a favor, in fact they are just splitting it into pieces. I am sure Mohammad would have never wanted his followers to split into different sects. It is ironic that they claim to follow Muhammad's example but the first thing they do is just the opposite!
At first they had differences in acknowledging leadership (successor) - but soon they begin to have differences in interpreting Sunnah and AHadith. It doesn't matter if the difference are minor or big. Now one sect rely heavily on Sunnah and Ahadith and the other (apart from Ahadith) heavily rely on leadership (Imams etc.). In my personal opinion both are pursuing wrong angle. The only doctrine the followers of Muhammad should be following IMO is their primary doctrine (Quran) and there shouldn't be any sects in Islam because their book (Quran) warns against it...

[Quran 6:159] As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.

In following verses it is clear to me that Muslims are advised not to consult any other document and change any fundamental concept from Quran. In other verses it tells Muslims - that enough information is already there in Quran. So common sense should dictate that information from other source such as Ahadith should be ignored especially if it violates with Quran's original teachings but do Muslims follow that direction from Quran? Of course not!

Here are couple of verses that tells that Quran says not to alter anything.
[Quran 18:27] And recite (and teach) what has been revealed to thee of the Book of thy Lord: none can change His Words, and none wilt thou find as a refuge other than Him.
[Quran 45:6] These are Allah’s verses that We recite to you rightly. Then, in which discourse, after Allah and His verses, will they believe?

But of course the practitioners of this religion are following Ahadith that was collected and written at least 214 years after Muhammad's departure.
Remember a collector may have come across a same Hadith from 5 different sources and all these sources could live far apart from each other but the collector was collecting hadith 200 years later to begin with - so, he should consider that 100 years earlier someone's great grandfather could have spread a false Hadith and that could have spread far away to those multiple sources. Now unless the collector can go back in time a hundred years and check if all those 5 sources didn't lead back to the same original bad source (that great grandfather who lied) then there is no way to know if it is a true Hadith or not. He may think it is authentic because 5 sources said the same thing!
Anyhow, I do not know the exact process of authentication. So, I will leave it at that!
However, on the contrary, if someone had collected the Ahadith as soon as Muhammad passed away by talking to all his followers separately then it could have been a bit more authentic IMO
Since many followers are following Ahadith and even interpreting Quran differently - I think it is probably better to take whatever a random follower says with a pinch of salt! However, sometimes a good scholar can be sought!

 

[Meow Mix]

Its like this. In general Islamic philosophy, every human being is considered born a muslim. This is Islamic philosophy. All of this would probably depend on your epistemology.

An apostate is by definition someone who leaves a particular religion. So teen or grey all over, apostasy is simply "leaving a religion". But I think you have something more serious to this question. I believe you are referring to the baggage this apostate matter carries. Why not hammer the nail on the head and ask what you exactly mean by that MM?

I was asking mostly because of the things Shakeel has been saying: I had no idea that according to some people, if your parents are Muslims then you are considered a Muslim and therefore an apostate if you decide not to be a Muslim in your teens. I had no idea that some people believe that means you should be murdered.

Now I understand not all Muslims believe this. I know there are a lot of dark beliefs and interpretations in a lot of religions that aren't shared by everybody.

It started with a thread where terrified women were being accosted by men, and a couple people said things like (paraphrased) "it's because they weren't dressed in burkas," and it just made me think "well what if they don't want to wear burkas?" "What if they don't want what (these conservative interpretations of) Islam prescribes for them?"

So I wondered, what choice do they have? I remembered that some interpretations of Islam prescribe harsh penalties for apostasy, and remembered from somewhere that having Muslim parents meant you could never choose not to be a Muslim because you're considered a Muslim from birth (so it's always apostasy) -- again, according to some interpretations.

So I thought "isn't this a trap? If your parents just HAPPEN to be Muslim, you could never decide not to be one without "committing apostasy," and so you never really have a choice in the matter, do you?"

Anyway, again, I know not all Muslims believe this. I was asking to see how dark some interpretations could get, though.

 

[Meow Mix]

Sis. Are you asking this question from a societal point of view or a theological point of view? There are some societies where no girl is "expected" to wear a veil. There are some societies where men are expected wear a veil and women have their own sexual freedom, but of course, this is very very very very rare. There are some societies where the government itself has laws that impose a veil or head cover on women. There were also some other Islamic societies that practically banned the veil at least at institutions.

So if you clarify your question, I think I might be able to give you a better answer, if interested.

I've gotten some very conservative interpretations that I hope are extreme in this thread (one that leads to murdering children!). I'm sure there are interpretations that don't lead to people with Muslim parents being forced to believe or die: that's what I'd like to hear about too, to counterbalance the extreme interpretations.

 

[Meow Mix]

If I want to learn something about a religion such as Islam - I would examine its primary doctrine first. In this case it is the Quran! I would not listen to its practitioners first because in my opinion 99% are clueless as to what they are really following!

I don't believe anywhere in Quran states that apostate (someone who abandons Islam) should be killed. In fact it teaches the opposite

Islam's primary source says - "there is no compulsion in religion". So why not just go with that?

[Quran 2:256] Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.

[Quran 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!

[Quran 76:29] This is an admonition: Whosoever will, let him take a (straight) Path to his Lord

So, when clear-cut directions are given that there is no compulsion in religion and that Muslims should let nonbelievers take whatever path they want - then where did this alternate and opposite theory come from? And why some Muslims advocating that Islam demands apostates killed?

I believe just like every other religions - practitioners of Islam has also created a murky version of their religion with all the cultural diffusion and teachings from secondary sources that were written or collected at least 214 years after their Prophet's departure.
The sheer reason that there are multiple sects in Islam shows that they all cannot be representing the true teachings of Islam. From the get-go the followers of Mohammad split into two groups because they couldn't even agree who would be Muhammad's successor! Regardless of the claim that they do not have any big differences in the core belief of Islam -this political division was unwarranted in my opinion and Muhammad should have prepared them better IMO.

First of all - when a religion has sects - you know there is a problem. These people identify themselves as different sects and think they are doing their religion a favor, in fact they are just splitting it into pieces. I am sure Mohammad would have never wanted his followers to split into different sects. It is ironic that they claim to follow Muhammad's example but the first thing they do is just the opposite!
At first they had differences in acknowledging leadership (successor) - but soon they begin to have differences in interpreting Sunnah and AHadith. It doesn't matter if the difference are minor or big. Now one sect rely heavily on Sunnah and Ahadith and the other (apart from Ahadith) heavily rely on leadership (Imams etc.). In my personal opinion both are pursuing wrong angle. The only doctrine the followers of Muhammad should be following IMO is their primary doctrine (Quran) and there shouldn't be any sects in Islam because their book (Quran) warns against it...

[Quran 6:159] As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.

In following verses it is clear to me that Muslims are advised not to consult any other document and change any fundamental concept from Quran. In other verses it tells Muslims - that enough information is already there in Quran. So common sense should dictate that information from other source such as Ahadith should be ignored especially if it violates with Quran's original teachings but do Muslims follow that direction from Quran? Of course not!

Here are couple of verses that tells that Quran says not to alter anything.
[Quran 18:27] And recite (and teach) what has been revealed to thee of the Book of thy Lord: none can change His Words, and none wilt thou find as a refuge other than Him.
[Quran 45:6] These are Allah’s verses that We recite to you rightly. Then, in which discourse, after Allah and His verses, will they believe?

But of course the practitioners of this religion are following Ahadith that was collected and written at least 214 years after Muhammad's departure.
Remember a collector may have come across a same Hadith from 5 different sources and all these sources could live far apart from each other but the collector was collecting hadith 200 years later to begin with - so, he should consider that 100 years earlier someone's great grandfather could have spread a false Hadith and that could have spread far away to those multiple sources. Now unless the collector can go back in time a hundred years and check if all those 5 sources didn't lead back to the same original bad source (that great grandfather who lied) then there is no way to know if it is a true Hadith or not. He may think it is authentic because 5 sources said the same thing!
Anyhow, I do not know the exact process of authentication. So, I will leave it at that!
However, on the contrary, if someone had collected the Ahadith as soon as Muhammad passed away by talking to all his followers separately then it could have been a bit more authentic IMO
Since many followers are following Ahadith and even interpreting Quran differently - I think it is probably better to take whatever a random follower says with a pinch of salt! However, sometimes a good scholar can be sought!

Thank you for this response!

It was a little shocking to see the extreme conservative interpretation, so I hoped we would see other interpretations highlighted in the thread as well. <3

This seems to me a lot more harmonious with the world, and a lot less murderous and callous than other interpretations that were posted. It's shocking to me that people would believe those other interpretations and call them good.

 

[firedragon]

I was asking mostly because of the things Shakeel has been saying: I had no idea that according to some people, if your parents are Muslims then you are considered a Muslim and therefore an apostate if you decide not to be a Muslim in your teens. I had no idea that some people believe that means you should be murdered.

Now I understand not all Muslims believe this. I know there are a lot of dark beliefs and interpretations in a lot of religions that aren't shared by everybody.

It started with a thread where terrified women were being accosted by men, and a couple people said things like (paraphrased) "it's because they weren't dressed in burkas," and it just made me think "well what if they don't want to wear burkas?" "What if they don't want what (these conservative interpretations of) Islam prescribes for them?"

So I wondered, what choice do they have? I remembered that some interpretations of Islam prescribe harsh penalties for apostasy, and remembered from somewhere that having Muslim parents meant you could never choose not to be a Muslim because you're considered a Muslim from birth (so it's always apostasy) -- again, according to some interpretations.

So I thought "isn't this a trap? If your parents just HAPPEN to be Muslim, you could never decide not to be one without "committing apostasy," and so you never really have a choice in the matter, do you?"

Anyway, again, I know not all Muslims believe this. I was asking to see how dark some interpretations could get, though.

Your questions are absolutely legitimate. And some interpretations are truly dark and evil which I definitely agree. But sometimes sis, they are not interpretations, they are injunctions. And that is done by Muslims themselves.

 

[Meow Mix]

Your questions are absolutely legitimate. And some interpretations are truly dark and evil which I definitely agree. But sometimes sis, they are not interpretations, they are injunctions. And that is done by Muslims themselves.

Other interpretations/understandings have since been posted that are much better

 

[firedragon]

I've gotten some very conservative interpretations that I hope are extreme in this thread (one that leads to murdering children!). I'm sure there are interpretations that don't lead to people with Muslim parents being forced to believe or die: that's what I'd like to hear about too, to counterbalance the extreme interpretations.

There are some who call themselves Muslim but dont know the ABC's a child would know. There are some basics a Muslims is taught when he becomes a Muslim even today. Like the basics, anywhere in the world. There are some who dont even know that. E.g. When you become a Catholic you are taught some dogma. Some things like Jesus is called Christ. Can anything become more basic than that? There are some who dont know that ABC, like any kindergarten kid would have, but they know the dirtiest, most evil murderous things in the most fanatical extreme of Islam (mostly found with a quick search on google). They will justify death and murder, but lack the ABC in Islam.

I find that strange.

 

[firedragon]

Other interpretations/understandings have since been posted that are much better

In some areas they practice a thing called "Naseeha" in Islamic theology. This is an injunction, not an interpretation. For example, in some countries, homosexuality is punishable by death. Now how do they do this "interpretation"? There is nothing about that in any version of the Shariah. I mean Shariah is absolutely removed from the Quran though it is supposed to be, but even that Shariah that is so far from the Qur'an doesnt have anything about homosexuality. So you know what they do??

Just because they want to kill a homosexual, they say "because homosexuality is LIKE adultery" they will be stoned to death. Do you understand sis? That is not an interpretation, that is by definition called an injunction. Because one wants to do something, they have found a way, not an interpretation.

Cheers.