Juristic Essentials of Apostasy from a Freely-thinking Point of View

Abstract

That apostasy must be punished is a definite juristic judgment. In addition to critics, a good number of those who support Islamic jurisprudence believe that this judgment is in a sharp contradiction to a self evident human right, i.e., freedom of speech and religion. Several books and essays have been written in this connection. However, in our opinion, they have all dealt with the problem on the basis of that very belief without going any further than gathering views and comparing them they offer no answer to that problem and are incapable of solving that paradox. Rereading juristic texts and analyzing such terms as belief, infidelity, and apostasy, the present essay attempts to clarify whether that claim is true or false. Survey of juristic texts and theological essentials of freely-thinking in Islam on the one hand and consideration of the correct meaning of belief, infidelity, and apostasy on the other lead us to the conclusion that there is no paradox in this connection for Quranic verses and hadiths treat the apostate as apostate because of his being naturally a warrior infidel. Infidel has its own specific definition in Islam according to which the infidel does not lie in the realm of intellectuality and belief so that his punishment could harm freedom of religion

Keywords

• freedom of religion
• apostasy
• infidelity
• denial
• apostate