This is a caption

“This is a caption”
Narges Tousliani

The issue of apostasy (someone who leaves the religion of Islam) and blasphemy (insulting the Prophet) is one of the most controversial topics in Islam. In traditional jurisprudence, the harshest punishment is prescribed for apostasy and blasphemy. However, in recent years, some religious scholars have had a different approach to this issue, and have only considered certain forms of apostasy, such as mass apostasy or apostasy out of enmity, as deserving of punishment. Mohsen Kadivar, a philosopher, theologian, and professor at Duke University in North Carolina, has a completely different approach to the two issues of apostasy and blasphemy in his book “Punishment for Apostasy and Freedom of Religion: A Critique of Punishment for Apostasy and Blasphemy in the Light of Jurisprudential Arguments”. Kadivar’s approach, although from the perspective of a Muslim, is in line with the standards of human rights regarding

In this book, Kadiyur first refers to the arguments of supporters and critics of the concept of apostasy and the punishment for it in Islam. He then explains his own view that there is no earthly punishment in Islam for someone who leaves the religion. The Quran only speaks of the punishment in the afterlife for someone who leaves Islam out of enmity. He provides various reasons to support his claim. Some of these reasons are legal (such as the argument that issuing a judicial sentence is the responsibility of a legitimate court and execution by anyone other than a legitimate court is considered illegal and chaotic) and some are jurisprudential (such as challenging the credibility of narrations about the concept of apostasy and the punishment for it, or criticizing claims about the spiritual and general nature of killing an apostate). Some reasons are also rational (such as the inconsistency of the punishment for apostasy with the laws of the Quran, including the verse “There is no compulsion in religion,”

Kadivar also refers to historical documents in this regard. For example, that contrary to popular belief, no one was sentenced to death solely for apostasy at the order of the Prophet, Imam Ali, or the Imams. Rather, the order for the execution of individuals was due to committing crimes such as murder, espionage, or participating in war against the Prophet and Muslims. Kadivar concludes, through studying the historical context of that time, that in reality, apostasy during the time of the Prophet was a political matter and a means of retaliation against non-Muslim warriors, rather than a matter of belief.

In the second section of his book, Kadiour discusses the concept of freedom of expression in Islam and its limits. He refers to the “standards of the Quran and the traditions of the Prophet and the Ahl al-Bayt” and explains the limits of freedom of expression in the context of international standards (restrictions on freedom of expression that violate the rights and dignity of others, or threaten national security, order, public health, and morality, as well as the prohibition of any propaganda for war or any form of national, racial, religious, or other hatred). Kadiour considers insulting (not criticism or scientific objections) the Prophet of Islam (and other prophets of religions) as “religious hatred” and believes that restrictions should be imposed on it in order to create a healthy world based on necessary respect. He sees the consequences of “no clear distinction between criticism and insult on one hand” and “disrespect and mockery of religious beliefs by hostile non-believers” as

In this book, Kadiour does not mention other controversial forms of religious freedom and expression in Islam – for example, the right to promote the Baha’i faith in Muslim society. However, it seems that according to the author’s general argument about the compatibility of freedom of speech and religion in Islam and human rights, this issue should be addressed in the same way as it is in human rights (meaning that the principle is freedom of religion unless it is accompanied by incitement of hatred); but in any case, considering that some of the restrictions imposed by the government on Baha’is are labeled as religious promotion, it is necessary for religious intellectuals to specifically examine this issue.