Dealing with apostates and heretics┇Shaikh Muhammad al Munajjid

At such times of crisis, when our deen is being abused, many do not know what to do with the apostates and heretics. Many become friends with them, others on the contrary try to kill them; what a mess and confusion! Therefore, a need arose for this explanation.


Shaikh al Munajjid is known well as a established scholar, and regularly answers on www.islamqa.info


Do read, share and benefit the needy!

Bismillahir Rahmaan ar-Raheem

Warning to all apostates:


We believe that if the apostate dies on apostasy, then his deeds will be destroyed, and he will stay in the fire forever, and Allah will not accept any of his good deeds. Be his charity, or keeping good relations or whatsoever,he'll have nothing on the Day of Resurrection. But he'll have his worldly benefits: Health, wealth, children, popularity, etc. But on the Day of Resurrection, everything will be over, nothing will be with him. 


'And whosoever of you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever.' [Baqarah 2:217] 


And we believe that these apostates cannot harm Allah in any way whatsoever. And that they're not harming but themselves! Allah says: 'O you who believe! Whoever from among you turns back from his religion (Islam), then Allah will bring a people whom He will love and they will love Him; humble towards the believers, stern towards the disbelievers, fighting in the Way of Allah, and never afraid of the blame of the blamers. That is the Grace of Allah which He bestows on whom He wills. And Allah is All-Sufficient for His creatures' needs, All-Knower.' [Maaidah 5:54] 



Allah welcomes all those who repent:


Similarly, we believe with regards to the apostates that the door of repentance is open. And how much ever extreme he has gone in kufr and deviance, and submerged into heresy. If he repents truly, then Allah would forgive him. If he were to say: 'Oh, but because of me thousands were deviated.' We say: Repent to Allah and openly declare. 


One must declare openly. Allah says: 'Repent and do righteous deeds and openly declare' (Baqarah 2:160) So we believe that the door of repentance is open for even the apostates and that when he grieves over his past, and is determined not to return back to it. 

• And if he apostatized by doing something, then he must abandon that. 
• And if he apostatized by not doing something, then he must now do that. To return to the deen. 
• And if it was by saying something, then utter the shahaadah. 
• And the repentance of the one who declared something halal that is agreed to be haram is that he must now believe in its prohibition with having grief over his past, and resolves truly not to return back to it. 

With repentance comes forgiveness from punishment of this world and the hereafter:



Okay, if the apostate repented, will he be completely free from the punishment? Not necessary, some sort of punishment may still be applied according to the case.


A man was taken to Shaikh Muhammad ibn Ibraheem, and was invited to perform Salah, but he stubbornly said: 'I am a free man, I pray in my house or in the masjid. Or I do not pray. I want to go to fire, I do not want to enter Jannah. I am a Christian! What do you say now?' So shaikh judged him to be an apostate, on his this statement. As he lives among Muslims, acknowledges well the statements of scholars, and now nothing is hidden from him. It is not hidden from him that if someone believes in Christianity becomes an apostate. And that the statement 'I am a Christian' is itself apostasy from the religion. 


Thus, shaikh judged him to be an apostate and then said: 'We advised him to return, so he repented to Allah and sought forgiveness. And it became apparent that he grieved over what he had done. So we informed him that upon him is to testify that there is none worthy of worship but Allah, and that Muhammad is his slave and messenger. And must disassociate every other religion. And he did that. So he was not executed due to repentance. But he had done a major crime among Muslims, so he deserves a severe punishment. To deter him, and as lesson for others. He may be punished by beating or imprisonment or whatever the ruler prefers.


 So the shaikh did not say: 'Fine, he has returned to Islam, and uttered the shahaadah, etc., so let him go.' But this happened in the midst of the Muslims. Were he left simply... I mean, this is with regards to those who attended, heard and the story reached. These shouldn't dare to speak the same. So this is why discretionary punishment must be applied. And thus, it is on the mufti or the ruler or the judge to decide.


 But as we said: The repentance of the apostate is accepted, his blood becomes protected with his return to Islam, and he enters the deen once again. 



Taking law in your hand is Haraam (not permissible):


And one of the matters with regards to dealing with the apostate is that the scholars will give the ruling but application of the punishment is exclusive to the ruler or the judge appointed by him. And it is not to be applied by ordinary people. Not even a scholar, student of knowledge, or preacher has the right to apply the punishment. Applying the punishments is exclusive: Why? Because if it was left open for all... One would say: 'I saw an apostate so I cut his neck.' 'I have proof that this guy stole and I know what theft is, so I cut his hand.' 'I saw them fornicating so I stoned them.' So where would this end? Done! Everyone would claim that they saw, and he deserves the punishment and so on. 



In-fact, it is from Islamic Jurisprudence to not even apply the hadd at war-time unless Muslims join the kuffar. The punishment of theft is not to be applied if it was due to starvation. The punishment is not to be applied in a land where there is no ruler of the Muslims. Because what would happen in the absence of the ruler? For eg. If there is a province where there is chaos, but no established ruler. And people were to come and apply hadd, for eg. they have the weapons with them or power. They went and cut the hand, or killed the man. Then it is possible that the people of his tribe would revenge. As it is an open land with chaos, without any established ruler. Because if a land has an established ruler, then no one would be able to do that. They would say: 'We'll revenge by killing the executioner. And the judge as well!' And so on..



 These matters related to jurisprudence of applying the punishments, many do not understand. Many of the over-zealous ones do not have any knowledge of this: How to do, how not to do. These are distinctions. On the contrary, they say: 'Ah! this is treachery' and 'weakness' and 'you are under-rating' etc.


 Dear brother, there is no established ruler here. This may lead to multiple revenges, and increase in chaos. This is why you will find that the fuqaha', pious scholars and researchers say that punishments cannot be applied in this situation. And it is not permissible to apply, and it is sinful to do so! That's a strong statement. Strange? This issue is understood by this scholar, but those over-zealous ones are ignorant about it. 


Thus, scholars are to give the ruling, but application of the punishment is exclusively for the ruler. The hadd punishments can only be carried out by a Muslim ruler or his deputy. And not for ordinary people, as it leads corruption, chaos and opens the door to tribulations. 


Ibn Muflih wrote about the ruling on the apostate: 'And no one is to kill him but the ruler or his deputy according to the common opinion of scholars.' [Al Mubdi' (9/175)] 


And shaikh Ibn Al Uthaimeen said: 'And it is not permissible for anyone to kill him (i.e., apostate). Although his blood is not sanctioned. Because this violates the right of the ruler and will lead to chaos among the people.... and this is why none must carry his execution other than the ruler or his deputy.' [Sharh al Mumti' (14/455)] 


And the destruction that this causes is siege of this religion. Only due to this killing which was not even to be done. Or because the one who did does not even has the right to do so, nor is he responsible for it. Fine, there are many places where there is no Muslim ruler, so will it be simply left? Yes, if there is no established ruler, then this is a function which cannot be performed. And it should not be said: It should be carried in all circumstances. And by whatever way possible! Nah, as this will open door for more evil and tribulation.



 - Shaikh Muhammad Al Munajjid (al mawqif minal mukhalafeen - al murtaddiddeen waz zandaqah)