Does Islamic Law prescribe death penalty for an act of Apostasy?

Apostasy (Irtidad) literally means to ‘backslide.’ In Islamic terminology it is ‘turning away from Islam’ or ‘severing the ties with Islam.’ In Quran one of the supreme sources of Islamic Law (Shariah) there is no single verse prescribing an earthly punishment for apostasy. Instead Quran speaks of God’s eternal damnation to apostates in the Hereafter alone. It is stated in the Quran:

“Those who turn back as apostates after guidance was clearly shown to them – The evil one has instigated them and buoyed them up with false hopes… But how (will it be) when the angels take their souls at death, and smite their faces and their backs? This is because they followed that which called forth the wrath of Allah, and they hated Allah’s good pleasure; so He made their deeds of no effect.”[1]

“Those who believe, then reject faith, then believe (again) and (again) reject faith, and go on increasing in Unbelief – Allah will not forgive them nor guide them on the way.”[2]

“O you who believe, if any from among you turn back from his faith, soon will Allah produce a people whom He will love as they will love Him…”[3]

“…Nor will they (enemies of Muslims) cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith if they can and if any of you turn back from their faith and die in unbelief, their works will bear no fruit in this life and in the Hereafter; they will be companions of the fire and will abide therein.”[4]

In the Ahadith (the actions, sayings and approvals) of Prophet Muhammad there are a few reports alleging that the Prophet ordered the killing of a few apostates who refused to repent. However, all such reports were deemed Daeef (weak in its chain of transmission) by Hadith scholars.[5] For example, the famous scholar Muhammad Ash-Shawkani wrote that there were problems with the isnad (chain of narration) of these reports and thus they are not considered to be reliable, especially in a serious matter such as capital punishment.[6] None of these reports were narrated by earlier and far more reliable sources of Hadith such as Al-Bukhari and Muslim.[7] But Sahih Bukhari does contain Ahadith regarding apostasy not prescribing death penalty for the same. To quote a few:

“Jabir ibn Abdullah narrated that a Bedouin pledged allegiance to the Apostle of Allah for Islam (i.e. accepted Islam) and then the Bedouin got fever whereupon he said to the Prophet ‘cancel my pledge.’ But the Prophet refused. He (the Bedouin) came to him (again) saying, ‘cancel my pledge.’ But the Prophet refused. Then he (the Bedouin) left (Medina). Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Medina is like a pair of bellows (furnace): it expels its impurities and brightens and clear its good.”[8]

“Aisha narrated that the Prophet said: ‘The blood of a Muslim… cannot be shed except in three cases: a married person who commits adultery; he is to be stoned and a man who went out fighting against God and his messenger; he is to be killed or crucified or exiled from the land and a man who murders another person; he is to be killed on account of it.”[9]

However, there is one hadith that throws the issue into some confusion, and is perhaps the most quoted one by those who are of the view that apostasy is a capital crime requires discussion and analysis later, is:

“Narrated Ikrima (that the Prophet said): …Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.”[10]

Furthermore, there broadly exist two kinds of interpretations of jurists: Classical[11] and Modernists[12]. The former hold the opinion that the punishment for an act of apostasy is not only physical death but also ‘Civil death’ which eliminates certain civil rights including: invalidating an apostate’s marriage or stripping property or inheritance rights. These jurists exclusively relied on the Sunnah of the Prophet to support their view because most verses in the Quran about apostasy only mention an afterlife punishment.

Hanafite (classic) theory excludes some categories from capital punishment: (1) Women; who are kept in hostage instead. They shall be beaten every three days in order to affect their return to Islam. It is argued that because of her physical disposition the female apostate could hardly pose a threat to the Islamic State. Shi’ite law equally forbids the execution of female apostates and imposes solitary confinement during which they shall be beaten at the hours of the Salah. (2) Hermaphrodites; (3) Discriminating minors; their acts of apostasy are deemed legally valid by the Hanafites although according to other Schools, no minor is qualified to produce an acceptable apostasy, (4) Converts to Islam.

The Malikite school of thought equally recognizes the death penalty for an act of apostasy but with a condition attached that prior to apostasy the apostate needs to have been “a good Muslim.” In Malikite (classic) theory, a person who embraced a faith by merely pronouncing the Shahadah (Islamic Creed, i.e. there is no God but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah) without conforming to religious orthodoxy (such as daily prayers) would not be considered qualified to perform a legally valid act of apostasy. The other schools, however, makes no such distinctions. The classic schools, with the exception of Hanafites, acknowledge the possibility of revocation and repentance by the apostate/s relying on the Quranic provision of Surah 16, verse 125.[13]

Imam Shafi holds the view that whoever pronounces the Shahadah was regarded as a Muslim. It is irrelevant how often the Muslim broke away from Islam, on the subsequent pronouncement of Shahadah by the former apostate he will be saved from the death penalty. But if an apostate does not repent or does not pronounce the Islamic Creed again, he will be executed.

Also, the later day adherents of classical interpretation argue in support of the death penalty for the apostate on the reasoning that Islam is not only a religion but also a social and political order. A person who disagrees with the basis of organized Islamic society has only two alternatives: he may either go out of the boundaries of the society or submit to deprivation to all rights as a citizen. As the latter state would be worse than death, it is better to kill the person.[14] Abdul Qadir Awdah, another classical jurist, stressed that by abandoning Islam one rebels against the Islamic state and society. Therefore, it is highly probable that the apostate will attempt to destroy the structure of Islamic society and to change the contents of the Islamic religion. Moreover, having lost his loyalty to Islam, he is prone to support the foreign nations against Islamic state. Following this reasoning, some of the Muslim Countries like Saudi Arabia, Islamic Republic of Iran and Yemen still recognize apostasy as a capital crime in their legal systems as an ultimate punishment.

On the contrary, Modernists take an entirely different approach towards the death penalty of an act of apostasy. They hold an opinion that there is no verse in the Quran that prescribes earthly punishment for apostates. In fact, there are numerous verses in the Quran that speak of religious freedom and conscience.[15] David Forte asserts that ‘the Quran condemns the apostate to eternal damnation but imposes no earthly penalty…. The death penalty arose later in the law.’[16] They further hold that the apostate cannot be put to death on the mere ground of apostasy. This should only be done if he poses a threat or a danger to the Islamic state. There should not be any difference between an apostate and a born unbeliever. The Muslims is under an obligation to invite them to Islam but if he/she does not repent, various methods of compulsion (fear of death or life imprisonment) should not be exercised as it is explicitly forbidden in the Quran.[17] This might be the reason why most of the Muslim Countries today do not explicitly recognize death penalty for an act of apostasy in their legal systems, for example Pakistan.

From the brief yet all-encompassing discussion it can be concluded that the interpretation of the modern jurists is more appropriate. It is based on the Quran and Authentic Ahadith of the Prophet; the two supreme sources of Islamic Law. Classical jurists rely more on a Hadith mentioned above which explains that any person who changes his Islamic religion he/she shall be put to death, which is true. But they seem to disregard other Ahadith on the issue where the Prophet does not imposed death penalty or does not himself carry out the punishment but rather shows a mere disapproval on the act of a person (Muslim) severing his ties with Islam. Had it been law the Prophet should have executed the apostate irrespective of the circumstances. This however is not the case.

Furthermore, the classical jurists argue that an act of apostasy per se is the danger to the Islamic society and therefore the apostate should be killed in all circumstances. This argument can be rebutted by saying that it is not necessary that every apostate will pose a threat to the Islamic society. In such a situation it is incumbent to ask rather find whether it is necessary to kill such an apostate? Questions like this will recur and require intensive reasoning by the jurists of our time to decipher: What could be the stance of the Prophet had he faced such a situation today?

Therefore I have discovered for now that the death penalty is not an appropriate punishment for an act of apostasy in Islamic law. There are Scholars who say that apostasy per se is an offence punishable by death whereas there are other scholars who opine that death penalty should only be imposed if an apostate actually poses a threat to the Islamic society. The latter arguments and reasoning seem much stronger and the matter must be reviewed in the light of authentic Islamic sources which seem to be neglected till now.

[1] Abdullah Yusuf Ali, The Holy Quran: English Translation and Commentary, Surah Muhammad, Chapter    47, Verses 25-28

[2] Surah Nisa, Chapter 4, Verse 137

[3] Surah Maidah, Chapter 5, Verse 54

[4] Surah Baqarah, Chapter 2, Verse 217

[5] Dr. Jamal Badawi, Is Apostasy a Capital Crime in Islam? p. 4

[6] ibid

[7] ibid

[8] Sahih Al Bukhari, translated by Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Maktabat Al Riyadh Al Hadithah: Riyadh 1982, Vol.9, Hadith 316, p. 241

[9] Sunan Abu Dawud (Arabic), Edited by M.M. Abdul Hamid, Al Maktabah Al Asriyyah: Beirut, Vol.4, Hadith 4353, p.126

[10] Sahih Al Bukhari, Vol.9, Hadith 57

[11] Classical jurist mainly includes: Imam Jafar Sadiq, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi, Imam Ahmed Bin Hanbal, and the later day adherents (Imam Ghazali and Abu Al Ala Mawdoodi).

[12] Modern Jurist mainly includes: S.A. Rehman, Muhammad Rashid Rida, Mahmud Shaltut, Abd al Mutaali al Saidi, Dr. Jamal Badawi, Abdullah An Naim and Grand Ayatollah Hussain Ali Montezeri

[13] “Invite (all) to the way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and Most Gracious: for your Lord knows best, who have strayed from His path, and who receive guidance.”

[14] Abu Al Ala Mawdudi, Murtadd ki saza islami qanun men. 4^th ed. Lahore: Islamic publications, 1963; p.45-48

[15] Surah Kahf, Chapter 18, verse 29; Surah Baqarah, Chapter 2, verse 256; Surah Ghashiyah, Chapter 88, verses 21 and 22; Surah Al Imran, Chapter 3, verse 20

[16] David F. Forte, Studies in Islamic Law: Classical and Contemporary Application, (Austin & Winfeild Publishers, Oxford, 1999), p.160

[17] Abdul Mutaali al Saidi, al-Hurriyyah al- diniyyah fi al-Islam (Religious Freedom in Islam)