إشكالية قتل المرتد وقفات استدلالية في ضوء أدلة الحرية الدينية

Abstract EN

Legislation is one of the influences that govern the human reality, and accordingly many social behaviors are formed, in addition to its culture and civilizational structure, and there are many transformations that societies undergo that lead to the growth of cases of apparent incompatibility between religion and reality, due to a misunderstanding of the legislative texts on the one hand, and the rigidity of jurisprudence from On the other hand, and it is a phenomenon that has prevailed in most Islamic schools of thought, but the stalemate is a transitional or periodic stage if true to the emergence of a spirit of criticism and renewal within the framework of the interpretation of religious texts, especially in the juristic field.

This clash between religion and reality occurs on the basis of a recurring reading of the religious text due to several factors, the most important of which is religious confusion in historical terms, and the failure to notice some of the provisions that came in a specific time, and were not olute rulings, as well as what is related to the method followed in reading religious texts, most of which contribute to the emergence Doctrinal issues do not keep pace with reality, and therefore inconsistent with the assumption that they are olute provisions that are suitable for all times and places.

One of the most important of these issues was the killing of the apostate, and he, as an agreed Islamic ruling, is one of the contemporary problems facing the Islamic jurisprudence system in general, because killing the apostate contradicts the principles of religious freedom advocated by the owners of the Enlightenment from within and outside religion, and on the level of Addressing the problem of killing the apostate, it is difficult to draw up approaches between the entitlement to kill the apostate on the one hand, and the entitlement to life on the other hand, and upon reviewing the evidence for the apostasy's killing, many evidentiary gaps in that evidence became evident, so what is true of them at the level of the apostate was related to Fights and hostility to the Muslim community or causes corruption that affects the ideological and moral structure of society, and therefore it is necessary to distinguish between the fact that the apostate is killed simply because of a religious change, or killed for specific reasons that accompanied that change, while killing for the sake of changing the belief only, it was discussed in the light of evidence The problem is that the killing is for specific reasons such as fighting or spoiling the Islamic society, then the killing is for these two reasons only.