In an article today for Public Discourse, prominent Muslim scholar Abdullah Saeed argues that the hadith of Islam (the sayings and actions attributed to Muhammad, the second most important source after the Quran), do not support the practice of execution for conversion from Islam to another religion. Saeed’s article is a follow-up to his recent piece outlining the Quranic case against killing apostates.
Both articles offers an opportunity to learn why a Muslim would argue in favor of religious freedom and against the death penalty for apostasy. This is important today not only for freedom of conversion from Islam to other faiths or to no faith, but also for protection of Muslim reformers in Muslim-majority areas who all too often face pressure to be silent under threat of being accused of “apostasy”. To read Saeed’s article, go here.
Jennifer S. Bryson is Director of the Islam and Civil Society Project at The Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, NJ.
April 4th, 2011 | 10:28 pm
“All surviving Islamic schools of law argue that the apostate should be put to death.”
You’re trying to put out a fire with a Dixie cup.
April 4th, 2011 | 11:10 pm
It’s all rather academic in light of the overwhelming consensus of Muslim opinion–even among “enlightened”, westernized Muslims–that apostates can and should be put to death.
April 5th, 2011 | 1:37 am
Are you shocked? Only in Academia is it possible to overlook the immorality of killing people because they exercise free speech. An intelligent man or woman will argue the relevance of a single statement from an Islamic hadith (traditional statement deemed as true) to support the idea that Mohammad the Prophet may not have approved of the death penalty for every case of apostacy afterall. Should we be favorably impressed? We are told that adultery is a reason for death. Insults to the Koran or Islam may be under certain circumstances justify reasons for death. It is generally well known that Jihad requires death for infidels like Jews and Christians when the time is appropo. And now we have thirty people murdered by a raging mob of Muslims because of the burning of the Koran – a single offensive and intolerant insult to a controversal religion which itself is known for the horrendous terrorist acts of a significant minority of its adherents. The well written article may impress scholars who debate about specific texts and their application while ignoring the horror of its accepted practices concerning death and punishment. Indeed, officially accepted behaviors which are drawn from the barbarism of ancient days and yet defended in the year 2011. This is an ancient truth worth repudiating in the strongest terms.
April 5th, 2011 | 1:41 am
Are you shocked? Only in Academia is it possible to overlook the immorality of killing people because they exercise free speech. An intelligent man or woman will argue the relevance of a single statement from an Islamic hadith (traditional statement deemed as true) to support the idea that Mohammad the Prophet may not have approved of the death penalty for every case of apostacy afterall. Should we be favorably impressed? We are told that adultery is a reason for death. Insults to the Koran or Islam may be under certain circumstances a justifiable reason for death. It is generally well known that Jihad requires death for infidels like Jews and Christians when the time is appropo. And now we have thirty people murdered by a raging mob of Muslims because of the burning of the Koran – a single offensive and intolerant insult to a controversal religion which itself is known for the horrendous terrorist acts of a significant minority of its adherents. The well written article may impress scholars who debate about specific texts and their application while ignoring the horror of its accepted practices concerning death and punishment. Indeed, officially accepted behaviors which are drawn from the barbarism of ancient days and yet defended in the year 2011. This is an ancient truth worth repudiating in the strongest terms.
April 5th, 2011 | 7:20 am
It seems likely that the majority of Muslims believe that apostates should be put to death. Most are silent on the subject, but complicit in the belief. If they get the upper hand politically, one can guess that this apparent silent majority will become more visible.
In any case, whether those believing are a majority or a very numerous minority, the putative 10% of the world’s Muslims who are radical in their intent to put violent beliefs into practice, are not likely to be persuaded by nuanced arguments of the sort presented in this article.
In other words, there’s no way to duck from the reality that we are in a protracted religious war. Our side definitely has the disadvantage here. In a culture where many would sooner fight for their local NFL team than for their religion, we can’t begin to understand what we’re up against, or muster the will to engage.
April 5th, 2011 | 10:19 am
I would repeat and reinforce Mr. Koehl’s comments. Discussions by Muslims like Mr. Saeed obfuscate, because they create the assumption in religiously literate non-Muslims that the Qur’an is something like the Bible,and Hadith are something like, say (for Jews) the Talmud.
Most of what Muslims practice is not found in the Qur’an. It gives none of the details of the practice of Shahadah, of the prayers, of Zakat or fasting, or of Hajj. All of those practices are based on Ahadith and the Sunna–the collective Tradition of the community.
Having studied the Qur’an, and encountered numerous anomalies of interpretation, I would put it this way: the Qur’an is the excuse for Muslim practice, and not the reason. It gives Muslims a holy book, like the Tanakh or NT, but it itself doesn’t ground the practice.
The real ground of Muslim practice is the Sunna, which in pedantic terms can be defined as the “unwritten” Tradition (capital T), in contrast to the “written” sayings of the Ahadith, which were eventually (after about 850 CE) collected. Put another way, the Sunna is the taken-for-granted practice of Muslims, which they get to define as they choose.
So Mr. Saeed’s careful exegesis is all for nought, since until consensus of the community (the “Umma”) changes, the actual practice will never change.
April 5th, 2011 | 11:21 am
“It seems likely that the majority of Muslims believe that apostates should be put to death. Most are silent on the subject, but complicit in the belief. If they get the upper hand politically, one can guess that this apparent silent majority will become more visible.”
It more than seems likely. Surveys of Muslims conducted not only in traditionally Muslim countries, but even among Muslims living in the West show very strong majorities favor death for apostates–as well as for those who violate a range of other acts prohibited by Sharia, including adultery, homosexual fornication, and blasphemy. That’s the problem you get when you consider a seventh century document written by a raving Arabian lunatic to be God’s final, absolute and irrevocable revelation to mankind.
April 5th, 2011 | 11:37 am
I suppose this would be useful if it were the grounds for a multi-generational project of teaching Muslims to understand the Koran better and be more faithful to it. As Christians, this doesn’t make a lot of sense — we should be more interested in evangelizing them.
Barring such a project, the present reality is that a sufficient number of Muslims either actively or tacitly support death for apostates to make it a working feature of the situation *we are actually dealing with.*
April 5th, 2011 | 4:24 pm
Deep rooted popular opinions such as this are generally not suppressed through some internal process of conversion. The Jews did not cease to be messianic and apocalyptic because they had some epiphany while reading Torah. Nor did the Hindus suddenly decide to suppress sutee and thugee because of some divine revelation. Rather, all these fundamental changes were imposed from outside, and by force.
With regard to the Jews, it took three cataclysmic wars to pound the notion of an earthly priest-king anointed of Yahweh who would deliver Israel from the gentiles out of their thick heads. After the last one, Bar Kochba’s rebellion of 135, the Romans largely depopulated Judaea, banned Jews from stepping foot in Jerusalem, renamed the province Syria-Palestina, and built a temple to Jupiter atop the Temple Mount. After that, the Jews thought it best to focus on prayer and pietism.
Similarly, it took the English and their stubborn Anglican sensibilities to transform the Hindus. As famously recounted, the British Governor General, Sir Charles Napier, announced that suttee was henceforth abolished. A delegation of Brahmins came to him, complaining that sutee was a time-honored custom, and that the English were interfering with Indian traditions. Napier replied, “We English also have a custom: if a man burns a woman alive, we hang him. You shall build your funeral pyre. Next to it, we shall build a gallows. Let each people act according to their tradition”. Sutee was extirpated (except in the most remote parts of the subcontinent) in short order thereafter.
Basically, at some point, someone will have to do this with Islam, saying, “We, too, have a custom: if a man kills someone for leaving a religion, or if he stones a woman for adultery, we arrest him and put him to death (or at least in prison for the rest of his life).
April 5th, 2011 | 5:11 pm
Mr. Koehl
Hear, hear. Exactly right, both to history and application.
April 5th, 2011 | 10:04 pm
‘Love of money ( pleasure ) is the root of all evil’ we are told .
if such is the case , the lawyers who are experts in the abuse cases could use their by now hopefully unwanted skills , to turn against the real abuse in the situation being discussed .
Would be interesting to see how several million dollar settlements world wide against any and all imams /mullahs who have anything to do with such religious violence would play out !
April 5th, 2011 | 11:30 pm
Basically, at some point, someone will have to do this with Islam, saying, “We, too, have a custom: if a man kills someone for leaving a religion, or if he stones a woman for adultery, we arrest him and put him to death (or at least in prison for the rest of his life).
Yep.
April 8th, 2011 | 9:33 am
NN36dC http://dhY3n0fjvTtj48mG9sFnCv.com
April 10th, 2011 | 3:13 pm
One scholar of Islam does not Islamic practice make.
This guy is just ramming his head against the wall.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact