Archive

Archive for the ‘Apostasy’ Category

Is hadd punishment for apostasy or similar crimes to be implemented only by the sultan (ruler) or his deputy? Sh. Ibn Taymiyyah

January 11, 2015 4 comments

 

Regarding the query that hudood punishment can only be carried out by the ruler or his deputy. Then Shaikh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah [rahimahullah] said:

 

1 – The master may carry out the hadd punishment on his slave, based on the evidence that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Carry out the hadd punishments on those whom your right hands possess.”

[Narrated by Ahmad (736) and others; classed as hasan by al-Arna’oot because of corroborating evidence. Al-Albaani was inclined to the view that these are the words of ‘Ali, as stated in al-Irwa’ (2325).]

 

And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“If the slave woman of one of you commits zina, let him carry out the hadd punishment on her.”

[Narrated by Abu Dawood (4470); there is a similar report in al-Saheehayn.]

 

I do not know of anyone among the fuqaha’ of hadeeth who disagreed with the view that he should carry out hadd punishments on her, such as the hadd punishments for zina, slander and drinking; there is no difference of opinion among the Muslims concerning the fact that he may carry out disciplinary punishments (ta’zeer) on him. But they differed as to whether he may carry out punishments of execution or amputation on him, such as executing him for apostasy or for reviling the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or cutting off his hand for stealing.

 

Two reports were narrated from Imam Ahmad concerning this. The first says that it is permissible, which is the view narrated from al-Shaafa’i, and the second says that it is not permissible, like one of the two views of the companions of al-Shaafa’i. This is also the view of Maalik. And it was narrated in a saheeh report from Ibn ‘Umar that he cut off the hand of a slave of his who stole, and it is narrated in a saheeh report from Hafsah that she executed a slave woman of hers who admitted to practising witchcraft, and that was based on the opinion of Ibn ‘Umar. So the hadeeth is evidence for those who say that it is permissible for the master to carry out the hadd punishment on his slave on the basis of his knowledge, in all cases.

 

 

2 – The most that can be said about that is that he [one acting without the permission of ruler] is transgressing the position of the ruler, and the ruler may pardon the one who carried out a hadd punishment that must be carried out without referring the matter to him.

 

3 – Although this was a hadd punishment, it also comes under the heading of killing a harbi (a non-Muslim in a state of war against Islam), and it is permissible for anyone to kill a harbi.

 

4 – Similar things happened at the time of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), such as:

#the hypocrite who was killed by ‘Umar without the permission of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), when the hypocrite did not agree with the ruling of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Then Qur’aan was revealed approving ‘Umar’s action.

 

# And there was the daughter of Marwaan who was killed by that man, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) called him the supporter of Allaah and His Messenger.

That is because the one whose execution becomes necessary because of his plot to corrupt the religion is not like one who is executed because of his sin of zina and the like.

End quote from al-Saarim al-Maslool (285-286).

Taken from: Islamqa

 

Is executing the sorcerer a penalty for apostasy or for a criminal offence? Sh. Ibn Uthaymeen


 

Question: Is executing the sorcerer a penalty for apostasy or for a criminal offence?

 

Answer: It can be a punishment for apostasy or for a criminal offence. This depends on the previous verdict regarding the sorcerer‘s status.

If he is judged as a Kafir (disbeliever), he is penalized by death for apostasy; if not, he is penalized by death for a criminal offence. In either case the sorcerer must be executed because of the graveness of his crimes.

For instance, he seeks to destroy the lives of husbands and wives. He also seeks to have people enslaved under the influence of magic so that he can carry out his evil designs on them, e.g., commit adultery with a bewitched woman. Because of such serious crimes, he has to be executed without advising him to repent, for he has committed legally punishable crimes.

 

However, if the sorcerer‘s activities are considered acts of Kufr, he is to be advised to repent. This reflects the problem created by classifying apostasy among criminal offences, for, if one heeds the advice and repents of apostasy, he is pardoned. Also, punishment for criminal acts is a kind of atonement for the criminal who is a Muslim, not a Kafir. In contrast, apostasy is not atonable, so whoever is punished for it must not have a Muslim burial, and must not be buried in Muslim burial grounds.

 

Thus, the death penalty for sorcerers is consistent with Shari‘ah, for they are up to nothing but destructive corruption. Therefore, by executing them, people are saved from their danger and are deterred from practising witchcraft.

 

[Ibn-Uthaymeen, The Precious Collection, Vol. 2, pp. 132-133]

The one who criticises the people of the Sunnah is an innovator [Point 140: Explanation of the Creed (Kitaab Sharh us-Sunnah)

January 29, 2013 2 comments

Book Name: Explanation of the Creed (Kitaab Sharh us-Sunnah)

Author: by Abu Muhammad Al-Hasan ibn ‘Alee ibn Khalaf Al-Barbahaaree (d. 329H) rahimahullaah

Translator: Abu Talhah Dawud Burbank

140: The one who criticises the people of the Sunnah is an innovator

If you hear a man saying,

“So and so is a Mushabbih” or that “So and so speaks with tashbeeh,” then suspect the one saying so and know that he is a Jahmee.

If you hear a man saying,

“So and so is a Naasibee,” know that the one saying so is a Raafidee.

If you hear a man saying,

“Tell me about Tawheed” and “Explain Tawheed to me,” know that he is a Khaarijee, a Mu’tazilee [1].

(If you hear a man) saying,

“So and so is a Mujbir (Jabariyy),” or, “He speaks with Ijbaar,” or he speaks about ‘Justice,’ (‘Adl), know that he is a Qadiriyy, since these names are a novelty introduced by the innovators [2].

____________________________________________________________

NOTES

[1] What the author means here by ‘Tawheed’ is the Tawheed claimed by the Mu’tazilah as one of their five principles, that is: the denial of Allah’s attributes, i.e. something contrary to true Tawheed.

[2] The author indicates how the extreme innovators accuse the people of the Sunnah, those who do not share their deviation, but take the middle path. So when they (the people of the Sunnah), for example, give due love and respect to the Companions, they are accused by the Raafidees of having less love for ‘Alee (radiallaahu anhu) than is due and indeed of hating him and the family (Ahlul Bait) of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) and of being Naasibees. Whereas, the Naasibees would accuse them of being Raafidees, and so on with the rest of the misguided sects.

Imaam Abu Haatim ar-Raazee (rahimahullaah) said,

“The sign of the people of innovation is that they attack those who cling to the narrations.

The sign of the heretical apostates is that they call Ahlus-Sunnah ‘The worthless ones,’ intending thereby to annul the narrations.

The sign of the Jahmiyyah is that they call Ahlus-Sunnah ‘Mushabbihah’ (those who declare Allah to be like the creation).

The sign of the Qadariyyah is that they call Ahlus-Sunnah ‘Jahmiyyah.’

The sign of the Murji’ah is that they call ‘Ahlus- Sunnah ‘antagonists and claimants to deficiency.’

The sign of the Raafidees is that they call Ahlus-Sunnah ‘Naasibees.’ Ahlus-Sunnah only have one name”

(Ahlus-Sunnah [pp.21-22] of Abu Haatim ar-Raazee and Abu Zur’atur-Raazee, checked by Saalih ibn ‘Uthmaan al-Lahhaam and as-Sunnah [p.179] of al-Laalikaa’ee with a saheeh isnaad)

The types of Apostasy


Question:It is said that ridda (apostasy) can be either fi’liyyah (through actions) or qawliyah (through statement). It is hoped that you can explain for me in a brief and clear manner the types of apostasy related to 1) action 2) speech and 3) belief?

 

 

Answer: Ar ridda (apostasy) is: disbelief after Islaam.

It can be through statement, action,i’tiqaad (belief) and doubt.

So whoever:

 

1) makes shirk with Allaah or

 

2) rejects His ruboobeyah (Lordship) or His wahdaaniyah (Oneness) or

 

3) (rejects) an Attribute from amongst His Attributes or

 

4) (rejects) some of His Books or His Messengers or

 

 

5) insults/reviles Allaah or His Messenger (sal Allaahu alaiyhi wa sallam) or

 

6) (rejects) anything from those forbidden matters, whose forbidden nature is agreed upon or who seeks to make (that thing) permissible or

 

7) rejects the obligation of a pillar from amongst the five pillars of Islaam or has a doubt about the obligation of this (pillar) or

 

8. (who doubts) the truthfulness of Muhammad (sal Allaahu alaiyhi wa sallam) or any of the other Prophets or

 

 

9) (who doubts) the Resurrection after Death or

 

10) who prostrates to an idol or a star or anything like that –

 

then indeed he has committed kufr (disbelief) and apostatised from the religion of Islaam.

 

So it is upon you to read the chapters of the ruling of apostasy from the Books of Islaamic Fiqh – for indeed they (the scholars of fiqh) paid great attention to this – may Allaah have mercy upon them.

In this way you will know – from the preceding examples – about the apostasy through speech, action and belief and the manner of apostasy through doubt.

Permanent Committee for Research and Verdicts
Shaykh `Abdul-`Azeez Bin Baz
Shaykh `Abdullah bin Ghudayaan
Shaykh `Abdullaah bin Qu`ood
Shaykh `Abdur-Razzaaq al-`Afeefee
Question 2 from fatwa no: 7150 P 8 Volume Two Fatawa of the Standing Committee
Translated by Abu Abdir Rahmaan ibn Najam
Categories: Apostasy
%d bloggers like this: