firedragon
Veteran Member
Done.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Killing the apostate! Islamic?? Whats the source? Whats there to consider?
- Thread starter firedragon
- Start date
Done.
Eziekhal Masango
New Member
Thank you
firedragon
Veteran Member
The honour is mine.
Shakeel
Well-Known Member
I have seen nothing but claims with no reference, let alone evidence.
I never even begun with that since you can't prove anything you say. Why would I run around getting evidences and references for you?? I have no reason to do that. By all appearances your goal is to waste everybody's time.
Nah, its perfectly legitimate to question a dogmatic character such as the dogmatic Jesus or one of the many dogmatic Muhammad's.
Actually oral traditions are of unknown age, they may go back to Muhammad or they may not. You can only date when they were first put to written record, not when they originated.
Did you see the Arabic text posted in post#161?
Can you read it?
If not have you at least searched for an arab friend to read it for you?
If you have read it what is the problem with it?
Thanks for sharing your approach to that verse.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Nope.
Why not? Peoples actions are often swayed by characters they emulate, and many people emulate characters that are dogmatic and not historical in nature.
Shakeel
Well-Known Member
I saw it. It doesn't look like Arabic to me. Except for the part in the beginning and the middle, it looks like Persian, but it could be Arabic in a weird font or handwriting. Either way, it is so smudgy, I can't separate all the letters and dots if they are indeed Arabic. Furthermore, it isn't that difficult to name a book and the contents or a website. If the claim is true, the news have travelled to those learned in the English language and can be found on the Internet. This is just another time wasting method.
Hello, Daniel.
The ḥādīth is found in Sahih Bukhari: Volume 9; Book 89 (‘Judgements’); Number 318. It speaks of a Bedouin who had given a pledge of allegiance to the Prophet for Islam. The Prophet is then asked – on three occasions – to the cancel that pledge, but on every occasion, he refuses to do so. The Bedouin is then permitted to leave Medina, unharmed.
The Pledge of Allegiance contained a promise to worship Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) alone; not to kill one’s children in time of need (you will recall that the pagan Arabs buried unwanted girls alive); not to steal; not to accuse an innocent person (and to spread such accusation among people); and not to refuse doing good to others.
The Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) is reported to have said: ‘Whoever amongst you fulfils his pledge, his reward will be with Allāh; and whoever commits any of those sins and receives the legal punishment in this world for that sin, then that punishment will be an expiation for that sin; and whoever commits any of those sins and Allāh does not expose him, then it is up to Allāh. If He wishes He will
punish him or if He wishes, He will forgive him.’ (Sahih Bukhari: Volume 9; Book 89; Number 320).
The Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) had no authority to grant the Bedouin’s request; to negate the promises that this man had made; promises given, ultimately, to Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) Himself.
Two things strike me about this ḥādīth: That the man was confident enough to approach the Prophet and declare his desire to leave Islam. Clearly, he did not fear for his life. And that he was allowed to leave Medina unharmed, in spite of his apostasy.
Peace.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Based on this some of the scholars have made fatawa's that says in an Islamic state, if a Muslims leaves Islam it is the responsibility of the state to find another state for this person. They make the case that their should be a treaty between two different states to have this agreement to exchange citizens.
But there is another angle to look at in this matter. There are other significant opinions that when someone those days says they wish to leave Islam, it means they are going to join the opposite state which is sedition. There are enough evidences that during the prophets lifetime there were many non-muslims living within the state. Thus this is a very plausible explanation. There is a lot of scholarship behind it.
The verb radda means “to avert or turn away something in and of itself, or in one of its states.” One might say, “I averted it,” or “I brought it back” (radadtuhu ), as a result of which “it was averted,” or, “it was brought back” (irtadda ). God declares, “His punishment shall not be averted (la yuraddu) from people who are lost in sin” (6:147). In a reference to the bringing back of something in itself, God declares, “...and if they were brought back (ruddu) [to life], they would return to the very thing which was forbidden to them” 6:28); “And after a time We allowed you to prevail against them once again (radadnd lakum al-karrah ) (17:6)”; “Bring them back (ruddiiha) unto me!” (38:33); “And thus We restored him (radadnahu) to his mother” (28:13); “
As shown above, the term riddah in the Qur’an means an explicit retreat from and abandonment of Islam after one’s having entered it.All commentators on the Qur’an have interpreted it to mean a retreat from Islam to unbelief, pointing out that the verses dealing with it communicate a warning to those who have entered Islam against abandoning it or taking lightly the thought of doing so. At the same time, these verses urge everyone who has entered Islam to cling to it steadfastly because it is the true guidance which is the most authoritative, solid basis for life and living; it means integrity along the path, and proceeding through life on the basis of the manifest truth which keeps those who follow it from losing their way. This is the view put forward by al-Qurtubl in his exegesis of Qur’an 2:217; he is followed in this view by al-Zamakhsharl, who affirms that this and similar verses address a warning to Muslims, urging them to persevere in Islam and to die as Muslims. This view is likewise expressed by al TabarsI, al-AlusI, al-Nlsaburl, al-BaydawI and al-Jabarl in Jami al Bayari.
Even the muslim gentleman in this thread tried to make murder of apostates an Islamic law according to even the Quran. When presented with the verse that says La Ikraaha fiddheeni he said its abrogated. In his Tafsir al-Manar, Rashid Rida mentions the reason forwhich this verse was revealed. In so doing, he leaves no room for claims to the effect that this verse has been abrogated, or for interpretations that are not in keeping with its inclusive nature. What a lot of people do when trying to demonise Islam is they cherry pick a verse without looking at the whole Quran as one book, or if they dont even have a verse to support themselves, they will go to what people do, or even if that won't work because there is an explicit verse in the Quran that says "no compulsion in religion" he will say "that verse was abrogated". Its honestly "a lie".
What I have noticed mostly in this type of rhetoric is that they have no clue of all the scholarship around this matter, and they say "scholars say this or that" but dont name the scholars and why they would agree with them, so it is an absolutely dishonest attempt at making Islam a murderous theology. This is done by a few Muslims like ISIS/DAIS supporters, and non-muslims who dont know any better. The principles and epistemic methodology of the Qur’an clearly specify the unqualified nature of religious freedom. The Qur’an hedges this freedom about with safeguards and guarantees in no fewer than two hundred verses, and states clearly that the punishment to be meted out to the unbeliever or the apostate is one that will take effect in the afterlife.
Peace.
firedragon
Veteran Member
And how!.
Peace.
Sorry I didnt understand your question.
Shakeel
Well-Known Member
If this refers to me, it is a misrepresentation of my words.
Sorry, brother. The expression 'and how!' is used in the UK to affirm total agreement with what has been said. I ought to have used ! instead of ?
Senior moment.
You wrote: 'What a lot of people do when trying to demonise Islam is they cherry pick a verse without looking at the whole Quran as one book,'
AND HOW!!!
Peace.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Wow. Thats such an old phrase. Apologies. When we were young we used to use this but the good old English has faded away.
Wow. Thats such an old phrase. Apologies. When we were young we used to use this but the good old English has faded away.
Very much like their rugby team in this year's Six Nations!
In my opinion you contradict yourself here, you say in the hadith the man gave his allegiance pledge to Muhammad, in which case Muhammad had the authority to break it.
Also, if Muhammad had no authority to speak for Allah why did Muhammad break the pledge in the end?
So some scholars have decided upon exile for the non-Muslim and you claim there is no compulsion in Islam?
In my opinion