Islamic Cleric Advocates for Death Penalty for Apostasy
Islamic Cleric Advocates for Death Penalty for Apostasy
Dr. Ibrahim Jalingo, the National Chairman of the Council of Ulama, has publicly supported the death penalty for individuals who renounce their faith in a statement shared on his official Facebook page on Thursday.
In his post, Jalingo passionately defended a Hadith that prescribes execution for apostates, criticizing those who question the validity of the Hadith and labeling them as “compound ignorant.” His remarks came in response to criticisms that claimed the Hadith contradicted the teachings of the Quran.
A Hadith refers to the sayings, actions, or approvals of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and is considered a vital source of Islamic guidance, second only to the Quran.
Jalingo’s detailed theological rebuttal targeted what he termed “fabricators” attempting to undermine the Hadith’s authority. He cited a specific Hadith: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him,” and expressed gratitude to someone, Issiyaku Abdulkadir, for presenting this challenge to him.
“By engaging with this so-called list of ‘100 Hadiths’ that supposedly contradict the Qur’an, I’m presented with an opportunity to highlight this individual’s ignorance,” Jalingo stated in his post.
He went on to assert the divine nature of both the Quran and Hadith, arguing that the Prophet Muhammad indicated their equal authority, noting that while the Quran presents matters concisely, Hadiths provide additional context.
In a move likely to ignite significant debate among scholars and human rights advocates, Jalingo upheld the Hadith endorsing punishment for apostasy, referencing Quranic verses to bolster his stance. He cited Surah At-Tawbah, Surah Al-Baqarah, and Surah An-Nisa to assert that the command to kill polytheists aligns with Islamic law regarding apostates.
Jalingo stated that the commonly referenced verse promoting freedom of religion has been abrogated, asserting that interpretations suggesting otherwise are incorrect and rooted in ignorance.
In a controversial conclusion, he disparaged his critics, likening their arguments to those of individuals he described in derogatory terms.
The post has since gained traction on social media, sparking a mix of support from hardline followers and condemnation from other segments of the Muslim community, who consider the remarks dangerous and inflammatory.
