The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Punishment for Apostasy: Arguments from Two Traditionally Trained Muslim Scholars in Favor of its Abolition
Abstract
This article explores and compares the views of two traditionally educated Muslim scholars, namely Taha Jabir al-Alwani (d 2016) and Hussein Ali Montazeri (d 2009), about the classical rulings on apostasy in Islam. The article argues that both al-Alwani, a Sunni scholar educated at al-Azhar, and Montazeri, a graduate of the Shiʿi seminary in Qom, defend freedom of religion in the sense of converting from Islam to another religion—an idea that stands in sharp opposition to the classical rulings on apostasy in Islamic sources which prescribe capital punishment for such an act. As the article demonstrates, these scholars’ views, despite certain differences in their method of argumentation, advance the development of new ideas about religious freedom in Islamic scholarship, especially among traditional circles.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Montazeri argues that the Qur'an does not prescribe the death penalty for apostates.
“Montazeri gives various reasons and cites multiple religious sources in reaching this view, including the fact that the Qur”
From Wasatiyya Discourse in Shi’i Islam: Ayatollah Montazeri and Human Rights Jurisprudence (2022) · cites this paper as Akbar 2021b
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wasatiyya Discourse in Shi’i Islam: Ayatollah Montazeri and Human Rights Jurisprudence
Ghobadzadeh, N. (2022) · Religions · doi:10.3390/rel13020126 · Cited by 18
“Montazeri gives various reasons and cites multiple religious sources in reaching this view, including the fact that the Qur “ ān does not prescribe the death penalty for apostates (Akbar 2021b, p. 9).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Akbar, A.
- Affiliations
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Akbar, Ali
- ORCID
- Akbar, Ali
- Venue
- Oxford Journal of Law and Religion
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2021-02-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 71-90
- ISSN
- 2047-0770 (ISSN-L)
- 2047-0789
- OpenAlex
- W3191252705
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 3.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- Oxford Journal of Law and Religion (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Religious Freedom and Discrimination
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Islamic Studies and History
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Islamic Thought and Society Studies
- Keywords
- apostasy, death penalty, religious freedom, Sunni scholars, Islamic jurisprudence
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review