Citadel of Riba in the Maldives

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَذَرُوا مَا بَقِيَ مِنَ الرِّبَا إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ

فَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلُوا فَأْذَنُوا بِحَرْبٍ مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ ۖ وَإِن تُبْتُمْ فَلَكُمْ رُءُوسُ أَمْوَالِكُمْ لَا تَظْلِمُونَ وَلَا تُظْلَمُونَ

O you who believe! Be afraid of Allah and give up what remains from Riba , if you are believers.

And if you do not do it, then take a notice of war from Allah and His Messenger but if you repent, you shall have your capital sums. Deal not unjustly, and you shall not be dealt with unjustly .

SURAH AL BAQARAH 2:278-279

The Evils of Democracy

The following article is taken from the website of The Islamic Foundation of the Maldives.

Democracy is a system of infidelity which opposes the decree of the Creator and an evil that was born and raised in the lands of the West. Islam and democracy can not coexist in the religion of Allah, the Lord of all the worlds.

There is no such thing called ‘Islamic Democracy’ as some people put it because those people who adopt, implement or approve and agree to espouse democracy with its basic principles and fundamentals are openly hostile to the faith of monotheism.

When democracy is implanted in a Muslim society, it becomes a trial which sets apart the faithful Muslims from hypocrites and apostates. Those Muslims who take it upon themselves to fight and defend democracy without a religiously compelling reason hate to see Islam triumph over all other way of life. Most often they love to be in the company of the infidels, hypocrites or apostates and be praised by them while calling themselves ‘moderate Muslims’. There is no such thing as ‘moderate Islam’ or ‘radical Islam’ in the revealed religion of the Almighty Allah. These are terms invented by the enemies of Islam to create divisions within the nation of Islam.

If someone deeply looks into democracy, he will realise its damaging aspects on any society. Democracy which emerged in the lands of the infidels demands the separation of powers: the executive, the legislative and the judiciary are to function as completely separate entities. Moreover, democracy aims to change the established Sharia and demands to keep separate the religion and the state, which is unacceptable in Islam. In a democracy, the secular majority wins and rules over the divine commandments. If an undesired group or party wins power through elections, then the election results are annulled and the constitution is amended to bar that party from competing in elections again. Such examples could be seen in Algeria, Turkey, Palestine and Kenya.

Democracy spurs sedition and discord by gathering people in parties and blocs, the consequences of which would be hatred, fighting and bloodshed. Huge sums of money are required for the working and functioning of political parties. In most democracies, the murky business of obtaining funds for political parties involve corruption, bribery and selling of state secrets. The electoral campaigns comprised of boasting, showing and presenting one’s deeds and withholding from others the deeds that they are due, as well as the use of falsehood and deceit in order to gain people’s votes.

Democracy makes the entire people equal, as there is no difference between a knowledgeable specialist and an ignorant person, an eminent scholar of Islamic theology and an illiterate drug addict, a monotheist and a polytheist, a believer and a hypocrite, an adulterer and a pious man, a child rapist and a holy person. The proper functioning of democracy demands that most criminals have to be ‘rehabilitated’ and not punished for heinous crimes. The prisons in these countries should include gyms and other sports or recreational facilities, swimming pools, libraries with internet services, the best food, medicals etc. To add more, there is a system of parole which allows the criminals to leave the ‘prison’ before the end of their sentences.

Democracy is a system that wastes money and resources of the countries in the elections. These elections are filled with problems of intimidation, fraud, ballot rigging and other irregularities. No interim government is allowed to take over before fresh elections begin; instead the old leadership remains in power during and immediate aftermath of new elections, paving way for more social unrest. Many a times the opposition refuses to accept the election results with accusations of fraud and call on people to come out on streets to protest causing pandemonium and bloodshed. You will realize the deficiency of this democracy and its reprehensible failure to manage people’s affairs when those in the opposition constantly call for premature elections, along with its ensuing chaos and disorder.

Democracy leaves the door wide open for spoilers and all the undesired elements in the society to carry on with their work of spreading mischief in the land. Also democracy coexists with the oppressive regimes and the spoilers of social life with all its constituents. Gay and lesbian rights movements, narcotics and other substance abuse groups would spring up into action. Therefore, homosexual marriages, selling of intoxicants and the right to renounce Islam have to be allowed under the guise of protecting human rights. Hence, a need for legislation to regulate all such cursed acts and behaviour which in tern produces deputies who pass on laws against the prescribed laws of Almighty God.

In a democracy candidates jockey for positions of power with promises which they do not keep after winning the election. The candidacy for elections is contrary to the guidance of Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) who said that Muslims do not confer the command of an emirate on he who asks for it. Less privileged or deprived people have no chance of being on the electoral lists because becoming a candidate requires spending huge amounts of money in order to get people’s votes, which apparently go to the one who pays out more for bribery or propaganda work on the media. So, in a democracy money can buy positions of power, as such, the seats of the legislature or parliament mainly consists of people from the upper class or people backed by them. It is absolutely impossible to enact any laws in urging their businesses to spend money in a way that might benefit the poor. The reality is, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

The most prominent people in a democracy are the politicians. The pious scholars of Islam, renowned scientists and men of knowledge have to follow the guidelines set by these politicians. Some of these so called politicians occupy seats in the cabinet, parliament and others work as party activists etc, but the truth is, they are ‘political prostitutes’. Most often they shift from one alliance to another or change parties and is devoid of any shame in behaving so for their worldly gains.

If you take a closer look at democracy, you will realise the deficiency and failure of that system to manage the people’s affairs and elect leaders capable of running the country in a way which benefits the masses. You will also undoubtedly ascertain the appropriateness of the Islamic way in generating the leaders and appointing rulers or emirs.

It is wrong to say that Muslim lands had been ruled by dictators or authoritarian rulers in the past centuries. The revealed Holy Scripture of the Muslims instructs the rulers to rule justly by obeying the commandments of Allah and with consultation (shura). Throughout history the Muslims always had Consultative Assemblies comprised of learned men to advice those in power. The idea of dictatorship, authoritarianism, monarchy or royal dynasty rule began to creep into the Muslim lands when Muslim masses influenced by the West began to forget the proper method of statehood in Islam.

The Maldives have been ruled for quite a long period of time by authoritarian rulers with the power to enact draconian laws through the rubber stamp parliament. The Maldivian people were sick and tired of their ruling elites, their extravagant behaviour, nepotism and corruption etc. The rampant moral degeneration, drunkenness and drug addiction made the Maldivian society plunge into chaos in the years between 2003-2008. The opportunity was ripe for the irreligious people who opposed the authoritarian regime to manipulate the situation by calling on the West to impose democracy on Maldives amid threats of economic sanctions. There were many who thought that after democracy had been installed the problems created by the old authoritarian regime would disappear once and for all. However, in addition to those social problems that already remain, democracy has begun to create more problems in people’s lives by dividing the masses into parties or groups. More often, rival factions compete for influence within the same party and today the so called political parties in Maldives are on the verge of bankruptcy or collapse and state funding is insufficient to keep them functioning. Soon the political parties in Maldives have to rely on foreign donations and grants of which the most likely consequence of this would be foreign control. Money can buy power, so if the West decides to bring a certain opposition party into power, they increase funding for that particular party. In addition to all these problems, the party in power and the opposition parties are always at each other’s throats, as a result the ordinary people have to bear the brunt of the entire disharmony or disruptions within the community.

The so called democrats in Maldives claim that they were the only ones who worked tirelessly to bring an end on nearly half a century of oppression. They say that these religious mullahs and bearded fundamentalists only acted like timid chickens and were unable put up a formidable resistance even to defend their ideals. They dare to say that these religion mongers kept hiding behind the backs of prodemocracy activists just to gain favours when everything happens to be over. If so, then why for the past three decades countless number of Muslim scholars, bearded men who offered five daily prayers and burqa clad women continuously ended up in jail or in house arrest? Where were the prodemocracy activists and human rights campaigners then when breast feeding mothers were taken into police custody on the suspicion of trying to endanger religious harmony? The so called prodemocracy activists only emerged during or after September 2003 when a violent drug addict was beaten to death by prison guards and the shooting incident there which killed some few other drug related criminals. It was so because the democrats got convinced that the authoritarian ruler faced pressure from the West to allow political parties to be formed in the Maldives. The democrats might try to argue that they were in opposition since the early 1990’s. It is a wrong notion to say that they were campaigning for democracy then. The voices raised in those days were not for democracy but for reform or perhaps for change of power. Those voices then got disappeared into the wilderness because they were not backed by the West.

Spread of democracy in Muslim lands is a victory for diabolical forces of Jews and Christians who spend vast amounts of money and sacrifice much to keep Muslims divided.

Written by Ibrahim Nazim

http://islamicfoundationofthemaldives.org/node/10

"Kuffar friendly Islam"

Several times in the past I have had blogs deleted by wordpress and other blog sites for speaking about Islam as it was revealed and this is not something surprising as Allah says:

They want to extinguish Allah's Light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow except that His Light should be perfected even though the Kafiroon hate it.
Surah At-Taubah 9:32

And He said:

“And the Jews and Christians will never be pleased with you until you follow their way…”
Surah Al-Baqarah 2:120

Recently I came across a blog hosting site called muslimblogs.com and I thought that this was an excellent chance to be able to blog about real Islam without having to worry about being censored. However it turned out that this is not the case.

After posting 2 posts on the issue of Jihad, I had them and all user comments deleted (and also another article about Al Wala Wal Bara) and I received the following email from muslimblogs:

Aslaam U Alikum,

We've recieved two warning mails, one from Google and other from Hosting site. Google is saying they will block MuslimBlogs.com site in their search engines. Our hosting site is also saying that they will not continue to host our site, if we remain continue publish Jihadi material.

They clearly state your blog name: maldives.muslimblogs.com

For that reason, we're deleting all your posts related to Jihad. There're hundred and thousands of things about Islam, you can write about. For security of our bloggers, we're deleting your posts.

In future, if we found any such posts, we'll permanently disable your blog.

I hope you understand.

Mohammad

Content Manager

MuslimBlogs.com

I agree that there are thousands of different issues related to Islam which we can write about. But it must also be noted that Jihad is one of those issues and as Muslims we do not hide any part of Islam.

The Prophet told us that Jihad is the peak of Islam and there are many other ayats and ahadith which talk about its benefits. Yet a so called Muslim hosting site refuses to let us promote this beautiful part of our dean. If we followed what the brother said in his email above then the blog would have been deleted for simply posting particular ayats or surahs from the Quran.

The religion of Islam is complete and we are proud of every part of it and we refuse to not speak about subjects such as Jihad, Al Wala Wal Bara, Enjoining good and forbidding evil or any other part of Islam just because the kuffar dont like it.

Sadly we have had to switch the blog to blogspot as despite it being kuffar owned, there is much more freedom here to talk about the religion as it was actually revealed.

To the brothers at MuslimBlogs I would say to fear Allah and accept the religion in its totality as He (SWT) said:

This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.
Surah Al Maidah 5:3

And do not to hide any part of Islam in order to make it more kuffar friendly as Allah said:

'What, believe you in part of the Book and deny part thereof? And what is the reward of those who do so except ignominy in the present life, and on the Day of Resurrection to be returned unto most grievous punishment' al-Baqarah 2: 85

Shaykh Az-Zarqāwī Regarding Al-Walā' and Al-Barā'

“Here, we are not fighting for a handful of dirt, nor for some imaginary borders drawn by Sykes-Picot; likewise, we are not fighting here to replace a Western Tāghūt, with an ‘Arab Tāghūt. Rather, our Jihād is loftier and higher. Verily, we fight to make the Word of Allāh, the Highest, and to make the Dīn entirely for Allāh.

وَقَاتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ وَيَكُونَ الدِّينُ كُلُّهُ لِلّه

“And fight them until there is no more fitnah (shirk), and the religion (worship) will all be for Allāh (in the whole of the world).” [Al-Anfāl: 39]

So anyone who opposes this aim, or stands in the way of this goal – then he is an enemy of ours, and a target of our swords, regardless of what his name or lineage is.

Verily, we have a Dīn which Allāh has sent down as a Scale and Judge. Its statement is decisive, and its verdict is not a joke.

This is the relationship which we have with mankind. Thus, our standards - and praise is to Allāh - are Heavenly, and our verdicts are Qur’ānic, and our decisions are based upon the Prophetic Law. The American Muslim is our brother, beloved; and the Arab apostate is our enemy, despised – even if he and we came out of the same womb.”

- The Commander of Tanthīm Al-Qā’idah Fī Bilād Ar-Rāfidayn, Shaykh Abū Mus’ab Az-Zarqāwī, may Allāh have mercy upon him. Taken from the video,“And the Dīn Will Be Entirely for Allāh”; time span 27:58-29:13.

Abū Mus`ab Sayyid the night before his martyrdom

May Allah Accept him amongst the Shuhaada

Zakir Naiks misguided view of Jihad

Zakir Naik recently gave a lecture in the Maldives entitled “Jihad and Terrorism – an Islamic Perspective”. The reality however is that this lecture did not present the Islamic perspective, but rather Naik’s own misguided and distorted view of Jihad and terrorism. Sadly many people are taken in by Naik and believe what he said to be the truth, despite this not being supported by the Quran, Sunnah and the opinion of the Ulaama.

In this article I will briefly touch on some of the issues he spoke about and how they contradict what Islam actually says and also how he uses distorted logic to push his illogical positions.I would urge the Muslims to go to the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah to gain knowledge of the religion, rather than taking it from those who are not ulaama and who speak the opposite of what the scholars say, and most importantly refer every point made by anyone back to the Quran and Sunnah and only accept it if it is in agreement with the revelation.

While opposing much of what Zakir Naik promotes, I do recognise the massive achievements he has made in the field of dawah to non Muslims and I do not in any way seek to detract from that. Falsehood however must be opposed with the truth.

“9/11 was an inside job”

It was claimed by Zakir Naik that the Washington and Manhattan raids of September 11 where in fact done by the US Government and could not possibly have been done by the Mujahideen. This is a claim which many of us have heard before, but it usually comes from conspiracy theorists and not someone as well known and respected as Dr Naik.

When one examines his reasoning behind this belief then there is really no basis for it whatsoever, especially as Muslims. He claimed that something like 70 US scientists said that it was an inside job, a statement which may well be true and for some reason seemed to convince many. But this fact which was used as a “proof” is in fact a refutation of the argument he puts forward. In all there are about 480000 scientists in the United States, so saying that 70, 700 or even 7000 believe something is certainly not a proof of anything but rather a proof that they hold is a fringe belief. Also if we are to judge the truth of something based on what US scientists believe then we would have to conclude that Islam is wrong and that Darwins theory of Evolution is correct.

But more importantly than this, the Mujahideen claimed responsibility for this attack on numerous occasions and we have seen the martyrdom videos of many of the lions who carried out the blessed raids. So as Muslims we are obliged to believe our brothers in the Mujahideen rather than to believe the conspiracies of the kuffar. Allah says in the Quran:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِن جَاءَكُمْ فَاسِقٌ بِنَبَإٍ فَتَبَيَّنُوا أَن تُصِيبُوا قَوْمًا بِجَهَالَةٍ فَتُصْبِحُوا عَلَىٰ مَا

فَعَلْتُمْ نَادِمِينَ

O you who believe! if an evil-doer comes to you with a report, look carefully into it, lest you harm a people in ignorance, then be sorry for what you have done.
Surah Al Hujurat 49:6

So how can we as Muslims justify believing the kuffar over the righteous Muslims who have sacrificed their lives and their wealth to make the religion of Allah supreme?

Finally in relation to these raids, it was claimed that the Mujahideen would be unable to carry out such attacks. Do those who make such claims not understand that Allah is on the side of the Mujahideen and that He is القادر The All Powerful.

وَرَدَّ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِغَيْظِهِمْ لَمْ يَنَالُوا خَيْرًا ۚ وَكَفَى اللَّهُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ الْقِتَالَ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ قَوِيًّا عَزِيزًا

And Allah repelled those who disbelieved, in their rage, not having obtained any good. And sufficient was Allah for the believers in battle, and ever is Allah Powerful and Exalted in Might.

Surah Al Ahzab 33:25

“The best jihad today is dawah”

We do not doubt the important role that dawah has in Islam and indeed we respect the dawah that Zakir Naik has given to non Muslims, May Allah Reward him for it. However his claim that dawah is the best jihad today is not only something which contradicts what the Ulaama say, but a claim which goes against the Quran itself.

Allah says in the Quran:

لَّا يَسْتَوِي الْقَاعِدُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ غَيْرُ أُولِي الضَّرَرِ وَالْمُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ ۚ فَضَّلَ اللَّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ دَرَجَةً ۚ وَكُلًّا وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الْحُسْنَىٰ ۚ وَفَضَّلَ اللَّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ أَجْرًا عَظِيمًا

Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward

Surah An Nisa 4:95

So we can see clearly that Allah tells us that those who stay at home (which includes those who do dawah) are not equal to those who go out and fight in the path of Allah, yet Zakir Naik tells us the opposite saying that in fact dawah is the greatest jihad, despite Allah making it clear that fighting is.

When asked what is the greatest Jihad, Sheikh Bin Baz (RA) gave the following answer:

There are different kinds of Jihad – with one’s self, wealth, supplication, teaching, giving guidance, or helping others in good in any form. The highest form of Jihad, however, is with one’s life; then comes Jihad with one’s wealth and Jihad with teaching and guidance, and in this way Da’wah is a form of Jihad, but Jihad with one’s life is the highest form.

Fatawa Islamiyah Vol.8, p.24, DARUSSALAM

So what should be clear to anyone is that what Zakir Naik and those of similar beliefs are promoting is in direct contradiction to what the ulaama say and what the Quran says.

“No Jihad without a Khaleefah”

During the question and answers session following the lecture,a brave sister made clear the real meaning of Jihad (see video above) and that it is wajib upon the ummah. She also pointed out the terrors being faced by our brothers and sisters in lands such as Afghanistan and Iraq. Zakir Naiks reply to this sister was not only incorrect, but arrogant and rude and he even said that he would buy her a ticket to Abu Gharib herself if she wanted to go. Is this the methodology that a Muslim should take in addressing a noble sister (May Allah reward her for speaking the truth)?

In his answer he again claimed that the best Jihad today was the media, despite this being the opposite of what the Quran says, as I have shown and he went on to slander the mujahideen by saying the majority of them bomb markets and this is nothing but a lie and slander upon our brothers on the front lines.

In his justification for his saying that we should not try to physically fight the Crusader invaders, Dr Naik claimed that there is no Jihad today as there is no Khaleefah, thus exposing his complete lack of understanding of the fiqh of Jihad.

The reality is that when a Muslim land is invaded then jihad becomes fard ayn and a Khaleefah is not one of the requirements for this. The requirement for a khaleefah is for offensive Jihad only and not the defensive Jihad which is occurring throughout the world today. This is an issue on which there is ijma (consensus) amongst the Ulaama and something which should be known to even the most uneducated of Muslims.

Muhammad bin Ja’far al-Kattani said:

“Fuqaha and ulama said: If enemy attacks a muslim country or gathers it’s army to the border in order to enter into a muslim country, then Jihad becomes fardul-ayn upon its inhabitants and leader. It’s obligatory upon every old and young, every free man and slave and even upon women it they have strenght to combat. And fighting against the enemy should not be stop for consultation with imam or for a permission from Imam, especially if imam is far away from them.”
an-Nasiha, p: 77

And this is the position of all the Ulaama and something on which we could give books of rulings upon.

So in conclusion I would again appeal to the Muslims to not rely upon people such as Zakir Naik to gain their religion from, but rather go to the Scholars and read what they have to say, especially the classical scholars. Most importantly refer everything back to the Quran and Sunnah.

And when the Sultan farts openly

إذا لحن الطاغوت يوماً بقــولةٍ قالوا على رِسلكم إنّه يُعربُ

وإذا ضرطَ السلطان جهراً بضرطةِ قالوا له ما هذا النفس الطيّـبُ!!

When one day the Tāghūt makes a la’hn [1] in his saying,

They will say ‘wait! It shall be [thus] given the I’irāb[2]

And when the Sultan farts openly

They[3] would say what is this nice breath!!!

***

And verily we say it with a raised voice and so each who has ears can hear: <<>

-Abū Mu’hammad Al Maqdesī فك الله أسره-

(Tabsīr ul ‘Uqalā)

---

[1] (Mistake in placing an I’irāb; dhamma, Fat’ha, Kasrah )

[2] Meaning: wait it will be given the I’irāb that way or it is a Mu’rab.

[3] Scholars of the Sultan

The Call 2010

www.thecall.mv

Some of the rulings on apostasy and apostates

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

The Muslim should not incline more towards one scholarly opinion rather than another just because it is in accordance with his whims and desires or his reasoning. Rather he has to accept the ruling based on evidence from the Qur’aan and Sunnah. It is essential to put the texts and rulings of sharee’ah before all else.

Secondly:

Apostasy (riddah) and going out of Islam are things that may be done in the heart, on the tongue or in one’s actions.

Apostasy may take place in the heart, such as disbelieving in Allaah, or believing that there is another creator alongside Allaah, or hating Allaah or His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Apostasy may take the form of words spoken on the tongue, such as defaming Allaah or the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Or apostasy may take the form of outward physical actions, such as prostrating to an idol, mistreating the Mus-haf, or not praying.

The apostate (murtadd) is worse than one who is a kaafir in the first place.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said, refuting the pantheistic belief of the Baatinis:

It is well known that the kaafir Tatars are better than these (Baatinis), because the latter are apostates from Islam, of the worst type of apostates. The apostate is worse than one who is a kaafir in the first place in many aspects.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 1/193

Secondly:

Not every Muslim who falls into kufr is a kaafir and apostate. There are reasons why a Muslim may be excused and not judged to be a kaafir, for example: ignorance, misunderstanding, being forced, and making mistakes.

With regard to the first, a man may be ignorant of the ruling of Allaah, because he lives far from the Muslim lands, such as one who grows up in the desert or in a kaafir land, or has only recently come to Islam. This may include many of those Muslims who live in societies where ignorance prevails and knowledge is scarce. These are the ones concerning whom the questioner is confused as to whether they are to be judged as kaafirs and executed.

The second reason is if a person interprets the ruling of Allaah in a manner not intended by the Lawgiver, such as those who blindly follow the people of bid’ah (innovation) in their misinterpretations, such as the Murji’ah, Mu’tazilah, Khawaarij and the like.

The third reason is if an oppressor overwhelms a Muslim and will not let him go until he makes a blatant statement of kufr out loud in order to ward off the torture, when his heart is at ease with faith.

The fourth is when words of kufr come to one’s lips without meaning it.

Not everyone who is ignorant about wudoo’ and prayer can be excused, when he seed the Muslims establishing prayer and praying regularly, and he can read and hear the verses on prayer. What is preventing him from praying or from asking about how it is done and what its essential conditions are?

Fourthly:

The apostate is not to be put to death immediately after he falls into apostasy, especially if his apostasy happens because of some doubt that arose. Rather he should be asked to repent and he should be offered the opportunity to return to Islam and resolve his doubts, if he has any doubts. Then if he persists in his apostasy after that, he is to be put to death.

Ibn Qudaamah said in al-Mughni, 9/18:

The apostate should not be put to death until he has been asked to repent three times. This is the view of the majority of scholars, including ‘Umar, ‘Ali, ‘Ata’, al-Nakhaii, Maalik, al-Thawri, al-Awzaa’i, Ishaaq and others. Because apostasy comes about because of doubt, and cannot be dispelled in an instant. Time should be allowed for the person to rethink the matter, and the best length of time is three days.

End quote.

The saheeh Sunnah indicates that it is essential to put the apostate to death.

Al-Bukhaari (6922) narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever changes his religion, put him to death.”

Al-Bukhaari (6484) and Muslim (1676) narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allaah and that I am the Messenger of Allaah, except in one of three cases: a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a previously-married person who commits zina; and one who leaves his religion and separates from the main body of the Muslims.”

The general meaning of these ahaadeeth indicates that it is essential to put the apostate to death whether he is waging war on Islam (muhaarib) or not.

The view that the apostate who is to be put to death is the one who is waging war on Islam (muhaarib) only is contrary to these ahaadeeth. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said that the reason why he should be put to death is his apostasy, not his waging war against Islam.

Undoubtedly some kinds of apostasy are more abhorrent than others, and the apostasy of one who wages war against Islam is more abhorrent than that of anyone else. Hence some of the scholars differentiated between them, and said that it is not essential to ask the muhaarib to repent or to accept his repentance; rather he should be put to death even if he repents, whereas the repentance of one who is not a muhaarib should be accepted and he should not be put to death. This is the view favoured by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him).

He said:

Apostasy is of two types: ordinary apostasy and extreme apostasy, for which execution is prescribed. In both cases there is evidence that it is essential to execute the apostate, but the evidence indicating that the sentence of death may be waived if the person repents does not apply to both types of apostasy. Rather the evidence indicates that that is allowed only in the first case – i.e., ordinary apostasy – as will be clear to anyone who studies the evidence that speaks about accepting the repentance of the apostate. In the second type – i.e., extreme apostasy – the obligation to put the apostate to death still stands, and there is no text or scholarly consensus to indicate that the death sentence may be waived. The two cases are quite different and there is no comparison between them. It does not say in the Qur’aan or Sunnah, or according to scholarly consensus, that everyone who apostatizes in word or deed may be spared the death sentence if he repents after he is a captured and tried. Rather the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and scholarly consensus, differentiate between the different kinds of apostates.

Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 3/696

Al-Hallaaj was one of the most well known heretics who were put to death without being asked to repent. Al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad said:

The Maaliki fuqaha’ of Baghdad at the time of al-Muqtadir were unanimously agreed that al-Hallaaj should be killed and crucified because of his claim to divinity and his belief in incarnation, and his saying “I am al-Haqq [God],” even though he outwardly appeared to adhere to sharee’ah, and they did not accept his repentance.

Al-Shifa bi Ta’reef Huqooq al-Mustafa, 2/1091.

Based on this, it is clear that what the questioner says about the apostate not being killed unless he is waging war on Islam is mistaken, and the differentiation that we have quoted from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah may dispel any confusion and make the matter clearer.

Waging war against Islam is not limited only to fighting with weapons, rather it may be done verbally such as defaming Islam or the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or attacking the Qur’aan, and so on. Waging verbal war against Islam may be worse than waging war against it with weapons in some cases.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:

Muhaarabah (waging war against Islam) is of two types: physical and verbal. Waging war verbally against Islam may be worse than waging war physically – as stated above – hence the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to kill those who waged war against Islam verbally, whilst letting off some of those who waged war against Islam physically. This ruling is to be applied more strictly after the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Mischief may be caused by physical action or by words, but the damage caused by words is many times greater than that caused by physical action; and the goodness achieved by words in reforming may be many times greater than that achieved by physical action. It is proven that waging war against Allaah and His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) verbally is worse and the efforts on earth to undermine religion by verbal means is more effective.

Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 3/735

Fifthly:

With regard to not praying, the correct view is that the one who does not pray is a kaafir and an apostate. See question no. 5208.

And Allaah knows best.

http://islamqa.com/en/ref/14231/apostasy

Books