Critics of Islam often say that Islam is one of the most intolerant religions in the world. To support their claims they quote various verses from the Quran along with various Hadiths. In this article, we will examine those quotes under our Lens, show other Quranic rulings that talk about apostasy and compare other religions’ (Hinduism, Christianity and Judaism) tolerance level regarding the apostates….
Quran 4:89 – They only wish that you should reject Faith, as they do, and therefore become like them: But do not take friends from their groups until they flee, to the way of Allah (away from what is forbidden). But if they become those who deny (Faith), catch them (by force) and kill them wherever you find them; And do not take friends or helpers from their groups-
The most common tactic employed by the Islamophobes is the presentation of verses in isolation. The very next verse Quran 4.90 says: Except those who join a group that has an understanding (of peace) with you, or those who approach you with their hearts not willing to fight you and also not willing to fight their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you therefore if they withdraw from you, but fight you not, and (they also) send you (assurances of) peace, then Allah has opened no way for you (to war against them). Reading these two successive verses successively, it is proved that only those are allowed to be fought (and killed) who wage war upon Muslims first.
Quran 9.5 – But when the forbidden (four) months are over then fight and kill the (distrusted) pagans wherever you find them, and catch them, attack them, and stay waiting for them in every stage (of war); But if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then make it easy for them: Verily, Allah is Often Forgiving (Ghafoor), Most Merciful (Raheem).
Quran 9.11 – But if they repent, perform regular prayers, and give regular charity- They are your brothers in Faith: (Like this) We explain the Signs in detail, for those who understand. 9.12. But if they break their word after their promise, and make fun of you for your Faith- (Then) you fight the leaders of disbelief: Their words (of promise) are nothing to them: Like this they may be restrained.
The above three verses talk about a treaty (promise) of immunity that the Prophet Mohammad ﷺ (may peace be upon him) made with the Meccan Pagans. This verse clearly states that if the promise of safety is broken in the name of faith, only then Muslims are allowed to fight. The Quran 9.13 (Will you (believers) not fight the people who have broken their promises, plotted to drive away the Messenger (Muhammad, from Makkah) and became aggressive by being the first ones (to injure) you? Do you fear them? No! It is Allah Whom you should more truly fear, if you believe) later confirms this conclusion.
Quran 2.216 –Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But you may dislike a thing that is good for you and that you may love a thing that is bad for you. But Allah knows and you know not.
Again this verse is being looked in isolation. The very next verse Quran 2.217 states: They ask you (O Prophet), concerning fighting in the Sacred Months (Muharam, Rajab, ZulQuadah and Zul-Hajjah): Say: “Fighting in there is a serious (offense): But in the sight of Allah it is more serious to prevent access to the Path of Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and to drive out its Members.” Persecution and injustice are worse than killing. And they will not stop fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can. And if any of you turn away from their Faith and die in unbelief, their works will bear no fruit in this life and the Hereafter; They will be companions of Fire and will abide in there. This proves that the apostates being talked about are the true whistle-blowers of the fight.
Quran 9.73 – O Prophet! Struggle hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their home is Hell- Truly an evil place (to hide).
Another attempt at isolation of Quranic verses. Quran 9.74 says: They swear by Allah that they said nothing (evil), but truly they have told lies (and falsehood), and they did this after accepting Islam; And they plotted a scheme (against the Prophet) which they could not carry out: This evil action of theirs was the only return for the bounty with which Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad) had made them rich! If they repent, that will be the best for them; But if they go back (to their old ways), Allah will punish them with a painful penalty (both) in this life and in the Hereafter: They shall have no one on the earth to protect or help them. It is hence clear that the struggle against those disbelievers is being talked about, who fight against the Muslims.
Quran 88.24 – Allah will punish him with a severe punishment
This verse doesn’t even calls out for the death penalty. Chapter 88 is titled “The Overwhelming event” for it talks about the punishment of Hell. This verse is also for that purpose only. It doesn’t says that anything about a death penalty.
Quran 9.66 – “You do not make excuses: You have rejected Faith after you had accepted it. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others among you:” (This is) because they were in sin.
If we read this verse with its predecessor Quran 9.65 (If you question them, they say (with force): “We were only talking simply and in joke.” Say: “Was it at Allah, and His Signs, and His Messenger (Muhammad), about whom you were mocking? ), it becomes crystal clear that the sin being talked about isn’t just disbelief, it also includes the mocking and abusing of Islam and its principles.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 260 – Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn ‘Abbas, who said, “Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, ‘Don’t punish (anybody) with Allah’s Punishment.’ No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.’ “
This Hadith is a part of Book 52- The Book of Jihad. All the principles of all the Hadith books are meant to be read in its entirety as the Hadiths are nothing but reported sayings of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ (may peace be upon him) and it is difficult to report all the details like background, events, etc. in a single Hadith. This means that all these are complementary Hadiths (also remember that none of the Hadith collections is complete). Now looking at another Hadith from the same book , Number 261 (A group of eight men from the tribe of ‘Ukil came to the Prophet and then they found the climate of Medina unsuitable for them. So, they said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Provide us with some milk.” Allah’s Apostle said, “I recommend that you should join the herd of camels.” So they went and drank the urine and the milk of the camels (as a medicine) till they became healthy and fat. Then they killed the shepherd and drove away the camels, and they became unbelievers after whey were Muslims. When the Prophet was informed by a shouter for help, he sent some men in their pursuit, and before the sun rose high, they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and whey were left in the Harra (i.e. rocky land in Medina). They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died (Abu Qilaba, a sub-narrator said, “They committed murder and theft and fought against Allah and His Apostle, and spread evil in the land.”)), it is quite evident that mere apostasy couldn’t be the only reason for death penalty.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 83, Number 37 – …Allah’s Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate….
The Hadith clearly mentions “a man who fought against Allah and his Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate” . No need of further explanation.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57 – Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to ‘Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn ‘Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Apostle forbade it, saying, ‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'”
Under the 8th century Abbasids, zanadiqa word was used for the accusation of secretly harboring Manichaean beliefs, while still claiming to be Muslims.( Source: Zaman, Muhammad Qasim (1997), Religion and Politics Under the Early ‘Abbasids: The Emergence of the Proto-Sunni Elite, Brill, pp. 63–65.) Hence, the death penalty is not for mere apostasy, but for hiding their true nature and deceiving just to obtain some worldly gains (either directly from Muslims or by acting as backstabbing enemy)
Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 89, Number 271 – A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Mu’adh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Mu’adh asked, “What is wrong with this (man)?” Abu Musa replied, “He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism.” Mu’adh said, “I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 58 – Abu Musa said, “I came to the Prophet along with two men (from the tribe) of Ash’ariyin, one on my right and the other on my left, while Allah’s Apostle was brushing his teeth (with a Siwak), and both men asked him for some employment. The Prophet said, ‘O Abu Musa (O ‘Abdullah bin Qais!).’ I said, ‘By Him Who sent you with the Truth, these two men did not tell me what was in their hearts and I did not feel (realize) that they were seeking employment.’ As if I were looking now at his Siwak being drawn to a corner under his lips, and he said, ‘We never (or, we do not) appoint for our affairs anyone who seeks to be employed. But O Abu Musa! (or ‘Abdullah bin Qais!) Go to Yemen.'” The Prophet then sent Mu’adh bin Jabal after him and when Mu’adh reached him, he spread out a cushion for him and requested him to get down (and sit on the cushion). Behold: There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu’adh asked, “Who is this (man)?” Abu Muisa said, “He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism.” Then Abu Muisa requested Mu’adh to sit down but Mu’adh said, “I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice. Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, “Then we discussed the night prayers and one of us said, ‘I pray and sleep, and I hope that Allah will reward me for my sleep as well as for my prayers.'”
The above two Hadiths are complementary and the second one clearly states that that the man was killed not merely for apostasy, but for his sin was posing to accept Islam, merely to obtain employment. Hence, the real charge was not apostasy but being a zanadiqa.
Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 64 – Allah’s Apostle: ‘During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for whoever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection.’
The next Hadith Number 65 (That they visited Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri and asked him about Al-Harauriyya, a special unorthodox religious sect, “Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about them?” Abu Sa’id said, “I do not know what Al-Harauriyya is, but I heard the Prophet saying, “There will appear in this nation… he did not say: From this nation… a group of people so pious apparently that you will consider your prayers inferior to their prayers, but they will recite the Quran, the teachings of which will not go beyond their throats and will go out of their religion as an arrow darts through the game, whereupon the archer may look at his arrow, its Nasl at its Risaf and its Fuqa to see whether it is blood-stained or not (i.e. they will have not even a trace of Islam in them).”) complements this Hadith. From these words it is evident that the people who have been ordered to kill aren’t merely apostates or disbelievers, but zandiqa persons (those who claim to be Muslims, but aren’t).
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 11, Number 626 – The Prophet said, ‘No prayer is harder for the hypocrites than the Fajr and the ‘Isha’ prayers and if they knew the reward for these prayers at their respective times, they would certainly present themselves (in the mosques) even if they had to crawl.’ The Prophet added, ‘Certainly I decided to order the Mu’adh-dhin (call-maker) to pronounce Iqama and order a man to lead the prayer and then take a fire flame to burn all those who had not left their houses so far for the prayer along with their houses’
Ask this question first: Did the Prophet ﷺ (may peace be upon him) actually did that?? No!! Now ask yourself have you ever disobeyed your parents in your childhood despite their several warnings, and then your parents have said something like they will beat you up but didn’t?? I’m sure that the answer is yes. They did it because in many cases where reward motivation fails, fear motivation proves to be successful. This fear motivation is the same one which every single business in todays world employs as its core policy. This Hadith simply shows the importance of the Fajr and ‘Isha prayers.
Abu Dawud Book 033, Hadith Number 4346 – …..”Was not there a wise man among you who would stand up to him when he saw that I had withheld my hand from accepting his allegiance, and kill him?” …..
Islamophobics claim that in this Hadith Prophet Muhammad ﷺ (may peace be upon him) is chastising his companions for allowing an apostate to “repent” under duress. In order to counter it, first understand that this is not the full Hadith. The complete Hadith is as follows: On the day of the conquest of Mecca, Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn AbuSarh (an apostate) hid himself with Uthman ibn Affan. He (Uthman) brought him (i.e. sought protection for him) and made him stand before the Prophet (pbuh), and said: “Accept the allegiance of Abdullah, Apostle of Allah!” He (Prophet ﷺ (may peace be upon him)) raised his head and looked at him three times, refusing him each time, but accepted his allegiance after the third time.Then turning to his companions, he said: “Was not there a wise man among you who would stand up to him when he saw that I had withheld my hand from accepting his allegiance, and kill him?” They said: We did not know what you had in your heart, Apostle of Allah! Why did you not give us a signal with your eye? He said: It is not advisable for a Prophet to play deceptive tricks with the eyes. Now had the Prophet ﷺ (may peace be upon him) really been chastising his companions, he wouldn’t have accepted Abdullah back and would have killed him instead. Also how can he chastise by giving such a statement after accepting Abdullah back? Had he really wanted to do as the Islamophobes claim, he would have given this statement before accepting his allegiance. This is further confirmed by the last sentence of the Hadith. Moreover a report conveyed by ‘Ikrimah in the commentary of at-Tabarî about verse 6:93 says (and proves) that Abdullah Ibn Sâd Ibn Abî Sarh converted back to Islam before the conquest of Mecca by the Prophet ﷺ (may peace be upon him). Though this commentary’s account is disruptive in nature, it makes perfect sense when the above mentioned Hadith is read in its entirety.
Malik’s Muwatta Book 036, Hadith Number 015 – The Messenger of Allah said, “If someone changes his religion – then strike off his head.”
Malik’s Muwatta Book 036, Hadith Number 016- A man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab from Abu Musa al-Ashari. Umar asked after various people, and he informed him. Then Umar inquired, ‘Do you have any recent news?’ He said, ‘Yes. A man has become a kafir after his Islam.’ Umar asked, ‘What have you done with him?’ He said, ‘We let him approach and struck off his head.’ Umar said, ‘Didn’t you imprison him for three days and feed him a loaf of bread every day and call on him to tawba that he might turn in tawba and return to the command of Allah?’ Then Umar said, ‘O Allah! I was not present and I did not order it and I am not pleased since it has come to me!’
The Muwaṭṭaʾ in its final form is the result of lifetime spent by Mālik in gathering and disseminating this knowledge of Madinan ʿamal, of which it is the distillation. The basic text was in place by the year 150 AH, but underwent serious editorial changes over the next thirty years which are reflecting in various transmissions that have survived today. ʿAtiq al-Zubayrī said: “Mālik included some ten thousand ḥadīths in his Muwaṭṭaʾ. Each year he would revise it and drop some narrations from therein so much so that we are left with this amount of it. Had he lived longer he would have dropped the rest of it.” [Source: ʿIyad Ibn Musa Ibn ʿIyad al-Sabti, Tartib al-Madarik wa-Taqrib al-Masalik li-Maʿrifat aʿlam Madhhab Mālik, 1966, Volume II, Silsilah al-Tarikhiyah: Rabat (Morocco), p. 73.] Also the book was transmitted by Malik’s students after his death. Hence it is very likely that two students hearing the Muwaṭṭaʾ and then transmitting it, one during Mālik’s early life and the other towards the end of his life, will hear two very different versions of the same book simply because Mālik was constantly in the editing the text year after year. Although, overall similarity between the different transmissions speak highly for the authenticity of the text. Now understand that these are the only two Hadiths in Muwatta regarding the apostasy judgement and it is proved that these two complementary narrations don’t tell the whole story of that man who was killed (not even his name). Further Quran 4.137 (Verily, those who believe, then (later) disbelieve, then believe (again) and (again) disbelieve, and go on increasing in disbelief- Allah will not forgive them, nor guide them on the (righteous) Way) clearly shows that even after rejecting Islam twice, no punishment is prescribed for the apostates.
Sunan an-Nasa’i Volume 5, Book 37, Hadith 3978 – It was narrated that Abu Hurairah said: “When the Messenger of Allah [SAW] died, and Abu Bakr (became Khalifah) after him, and the ‘Arabs reverted to Kufr, ‘Umar said: ‘O Abu Bakr, how can you fight the people when the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: I have been commanded to fight the people until they say La ilaha illallah, and whoever says La ilaha illallah, his wealth and his life are safe from me, except for a right that is due, and his reckoning will be with Allah, the Mighty and Sublime?’ Abu Bakr said: ‘I will fight whoever separates Salah and Zakah, for Zakah is the compulsory right to be taken from wealth. By Allah, if they withhold from me a young goat that they used to give to the Messenger of Allah [SAW], I will fight them for withholding it.’ ‘Umar said: ‘By Allah, as soon as I saw that Allah has expanded the chest of Abu Bakr to fighting, I knew that it was the truth.’
Jami at-Tirmidhi volume 5, Book 38, Hadith 2607 – Narrated Abu Hurairah: said: “When the Messenger of Allah died and Abu Bakr became the Khalifah after him, whoever disbelieved from the Arabs disbelieved, so Umar bin Al-Khattab said to Abu Bakr: ‘How will you fight the people while the Messenger of Allah has said: ‘I have been ordered to fight the people until they say La Ilaha Illallah, and if they say that, then their blood and wealth will be protected from me, except what it makes obligatory upon them, and their reckoning is with Allah?’ So Abu Bakr said: ‘By Allah I will fight whoever differentiates between Salat and Zakat. For indeed, Zakat is the right due upon wealth. And by Allah! If they withhold even (camel) tethers which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah I will fight them for withholding it.’ So Umar bin Al-Khattab said: ‘By Allah! I saw that Allah had opened Abu Bakr’s chest to fighting, so I knew that it was correct.’”
Quran 2.256 –Let there be no force (or compulsion) in religion: Surely- Truth stands out clear from error…
Allah wants us to use our rationality and our intellects in finding the truth, it doesn’t just want to hand it to you, it wants you to be free in making choices; in other words rationality stands out clear from error. When presented this verse, Islamophobes reject it on the basis of the fact that there is no word for ‘let’ in Arabic text of this Quranic verse. This true, but they fail to realize that there is no translation of the Quran in English, rather these English verses are translations of the meaning of the Holy Quran
Quran 18.29– And say: “The Truth is from your Lord:” Then let him who will, believe (in it), and let him who will, reject (it)…
The Qur’an unequivocally says ‘let him’, no force; no intimidation may be used. So how can one be punished by death?
Quran 4.137– Verily, those who believe, then (later) disbelieve, then believe (again) and (again) disbelieve, and go on increasing in disbelief- Allah will not forgive them, nor guide them on the (righteous) Way.
This verse very clearly shows that even after rejecting Islam twice, no punishment is prescribed for the apostates (as they are allowed to believe in Islam the second time also).
Quran 10.99– If it had been your Lords Will all of them would have believed- All who are on earth! (But) will you then compel mankind, against their will, to believe?
Hence, in Islam one cannot compel a person to believe against their will..
Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 89, Number 318 –A bedouin gave the Pledge of allegiance to Allah’s Apostle for Islam. Then the bedouin got fever at Medina, came to Allah’s Apostle and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Cancel my Pledge,” But Allah’s Apostle refused. Then he came to him (again) and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Cancel my Pledge.” But the Prophet refused Then he came to him (again) and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Cancel my Pledge.” But the Prophet refused. The bedouin finally went out (of Medina) whereupon Allah’s Apostle said, “Medina is like a pair of bellows (furnace): It expels its impurities and brightens and clears its good.
This was an open case of apostasy. But the Prophet neither punished the Bedouin nor asked anyone to do it. He allowed him to leave Madina. Nobody harmed him.
Mahabharata 12.39. …………..Charvaka said, ‘All these Brahmanas, making me their spokesman, are saying, ‘Fie on thee! Thou art a wicked king. Thou art a slayer of kinsmen. What shalt thou gain, O son of Kunti, by having thus exterminated thy race? Having slain also thy superiors and preceptor, it is proper for thee to cast away thy life.’ Hearing these words of that wicked Rakshasa the Brahmanas there became deeply agitated. Stung by that speech, they made a loud uproar. And all of them, with king Yudhishthira. O monarch, became speechless from anxiety and shame.’ Yudhishthira said, ‘I bow down to you and beseech you humbly, be gratified with me. It doth not behove you to cry fie on me. I shall soon lay down my life.’ Vaisampayana continued, ‘Then all those Brahmanas, O king, loudly said, ‘These are not our words. Prosperity to thee, O monarch!’ Those high-souled persons, conversant with the Vedas, with understanding rendered clear by penances, then penetrated the disguise of the speaker by means of their spiritual sight.’ And they said, ‘This is the Rakshasa Charvaka, the friend of Duryodhana. Having put on the garb of a religious mendicant, he seeks the good of his friend Duryodhana. We have not, O thou of righteous soul, said anything of the kind. Let this anxiety of thine be dispelled. Let prosperity attend upon thee with thy brothers.’ Vaisampayana continued, ‘These Brahmanas then, insensate with rage, uttered the sound Hun. Cleansed of all sins, they censured the sinful Rakshasa and slew him there (with that very sound). Consumed by the energy of those utterers of Brahma, Charvaka fell down dead, like a tree with all its sprouts blasted by the thunder of Indra……..
Referring to this well known episode of the killing of Charvaka (an apostate from Hinduism), which occurs in the Santiparva of the Mahabharata, we can say that the claims of the Hindus that killing of apostates is not prescribed in their Holy books, are nothing but falsehood. After the great Kuruksetra war, when the Pandava brothers were returning truimphantly, thousands of brahmins gathered at the city gate to bestow their blessing on Yudhisthira. Among them was Charvaka. He moved forward and without the consent of the rest of the brahmins, he addressed the king thus: This assembly of the Brahmins is cursing you for you have killed your kins. What have you gained by destroying your own people and murdering your elders? You should die. This outburst of Charvaka, abrupt as it was, stunned the assembled brahmins. Yudhisthira felt mortally wounded and wanted to die. But then the other brahmins regained their senses and told the king that this Charvaka was only a demon in disguise. And then they burnt him, dissenting Charvaka to ashes.
Now the question arises.that why was the need felt for the redactors of the Mahabharata to kill off Charvaka? That too by BURNING HIM ALIVE?? To this Hindus claim that the Charvaka philosophers had become too outspoken in their criticism of hinduism. For a long time, their criticism of orthodox hinduism was tolerated, but it seems that they crossed all norms of decency when they started using words like these: The three authors of the Vedas were buffoons, knaves, and demons. All the well-known formulae of the pandits, jarphari, turphari, etc. and all the obscene rites for the queen commanded in Aswamedha, these were invented by buffoons, and so all the various kinds of presents to the priests, while the eating of flesh was similarly commanded by night-prowling demons. [Source: Madhavacarya, Sarvadarsana-sangraha, English translation by E. B. Cowell and A. E. Gough, 1904 quoted in Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya (ed.), Carvaka/Lokayata: An Anthology of Source Materials and Some Recent Studies (New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 1990)]. This is in direct contradiction with their claims that there is no punishment for apostasy in Hinduism. Also, if their claims are to be believed, then why wasn’t Charvaka killed when he made such a statement?? Why was he proclaimed as a demon only when he showed the king his faults. The reason is obvious that anyone who doesn’t agrees with the Hindu cultures, is to be killed. The abuse of Vedas (and Brahmin-bashing) are merely a veil to hide this fact. This is further supported by the fact that later, they hounded the Charvaka philosophers to such an extent that their work isn’t found anymore (also why even call him a demon??? See verses below to know that every criticizer, apostate and blasphemer has been called a demon in Hinduism). The reason we know about their philosophical positions today is through the writings of their philosophical opponents.
Valmiki Ramayana, Ayodhya Kanda 2.109. Rama says, ….”I blame this act of my father’s, viz.,-that he took (for his priest) one of perverse understanding, who rangeth by help of such an intellect-who is frightfully atheistic, and who hat swerved from the path of righteousness. As a thief is, so is a Buddha, and know that in this matter, an atheist is in a like predicament. Therefore, such an one, when capable of being punished like a thief for the good of the people, should be punished like a thief; and let no Brahmana ever speak with an atheist.”
Hence, Rama in Valmiki Ramayana says that Buddhists are thieves and should be punished like a thief. The original verse in Sanskrit is “यथा हि चोरः (As a theif) स तथा हि बुद्ध (so is Buddha/Buddhist) |” Hindu scholars are deliberately distorting this translation. Hari Prasad Shastri translates it as Charvaka school, and another one translates it as atheistic way even when there is a clear mention of the word Buddha which is translated into English as Buddha or Buddhist. Buddha in Sanskrit means intellectual so here it is surely not condemning ‘Intellectual’ and also it makes no sense at all. Jabali was persuading Rama to follow atheistic philosophy and Buddhism is also considered atheistic philosophy so by keeping all these in mind the word Buddhah here refers to Buddha/Buddhist.
Skanda Purana 220.127.116.11-62. “…They came to the brave king Ama stationed in Kanyakubja, who was surrounded by heretics. After arriving at the city of Kanyakubja, O king, they stayed for a few days on the banks of Ganga. Those Modha Brahmanas became tired. The king was informed by spies and they were brought to his presence…Even as the Brahmanas were standing, he asked all of them,’O Brahmanas, tell (it now) why you have come. What is the matter?’ The Brahmanas said: O king, we have come here from Dharmaranya to you. (It is) your son-in-law Kumarapala (Kumbhipala in v43) by whom the edict of authority of the Brahmanas, which was wonderful, has been destroyed. He has done so, because he follows the Jaina cult and has been instigated by Indrasuri…On hearing the words of the Brahmanas, the king, spoke to them: ‘You all may go quickly and at my behest say to King Kumarapala: Return the settlement of the Brahmanas to them.”
Skanda Purana 18.104.22.168-38. “On hearing this straight from his preceptor, the powerful ruler of Kanyakubja named Ama continued to rule the kingdom. He became an emperor and was keen in protecting the subjects. Due to the advent of Kali, the subjects became inclined to commit sins. Inciting by Ksapanas (Buddhist mendicants) and following their instructions, the subjects gave up their Vaisnava cult and adopted the Buddhist way of life.  All the different castes were converted to Jaina cult. Brahmanas were not honoured. No religious rites like Santika and Paustika were performed. No one ever used to perform charity. Time passed like this.”
Skanda Purana 22.214.171.124. “[Kumarapala said] O Brahmanas, I shall not abide and honour the Royal Charter issued by Rama. I disown the Brahmanas who indulge in violence and kill animals in Yajna. There is no question of my having any respect for and devotion to these killers.”
Skanda Purana 126.96.36.199-24. “[The king said] May all of you go where Rama and Hanuman are staying. Rama will give everything. What for did you come here, O Brahmanas? I will never give. I will never give even a Varatika (a cowrie); no village and no means of livelihood. Go wherever it pleases you. On hearing the terrible words, the Brahmanas were excited with anger. They said, ‘Well, suffer the anger of Rama and Hanuman now.’ After saying this, they threw down the packet of hair from the left armpit given by Hanuman in the abode of the kind. The excellent Brahmanas then retired. When the group of the Brahmanas departed, the whole place was ablaze with columns of flames. Everything became full of flames of fire. All the royal paraphernalia got enveloped in fire: the umbrellas, the chowries, the treasury rooms, the arsenals etc. The queens, the princes, the elephants and many horses, the vehicles and conveyances of all sorts all were completely burning…Seeing everything burnt down, the naked Jaina mendicants, trembling again and again, took in their hands their pots, auspicious sticks, red blankets and without shoes or sandals fled away to ten directions.”
These verses tell the story about a king who embraced Jainism. And was later forced to embrace Hinduism by the Brahmins. The text depicts Jainism negatively. Kumarapala (1143-1172 A.D) was a Shaivite king and he was converted to Jainism by the Jain saint named Acharya Hemachandra. King Kumarapala stopped appeasing the Brahmins, he forbade animal slaughter which was part of Vedic Yajna (sacrifices), he took away their authority and possessions so they went away from the kingdom and resided there. Kumarapala stripping the Brahmins off their authority is what irked the Brahmins and was the main cause of all these things. Then another king who was the father in law of Kumarapala summoned them and inquired everything and told them to go to Kumarpala and to ask him to return their possession. Kumarapala refused and criticized the Vedic sacrifices that includes slaughtering animals and all. This angered the Brahmins, so after praying to Hanuman they received a talisman that were hairs and threw it in the palace and it burnt everything, the Jain mendicants fled for their lives.
Atharva Veda 20.93.2. Crush with thy foot the niggard churls who bring no gifts. Might art thou: There is not one to equal thee.
Atharva Veda 20.56.6. These people, Indra, keep for thee all that is worthy of thy choice. Discover thou, as Lord, the wealth of men who offer up no gifts: bring thou to us this wealth of theirs.
This verse refers to the Panis tribe, according to some scholars the Panis tribe were also part of the Vedic society but were plundered and killed because they made no offerings to Ishwar, this is why they are considered Niggards. But Yaska gives a different meaning, Yaska writes that Panis tribe were Demons. One is not to be deluded by the usage of the word Demon here as Demons and Barbarians are those who does not follow the Veda or who lives beyond the boundaries of Aryavarta. The Vedic followers are commanded here to crush the Panis tribe only because they make no offerings to Vedic Gods. There are more evidences to show that tribes were plundered and killed just because they made no offerings to Vedic gods. The verses below shows a few of those.
Rig Veda 10.105.8. Grind off our sins: with song will we conquer the men who sing no hymns: Not easily art thou pleased with prayerless sacrifice.
Rig Veda 8.70.11. ”May your friend, the cloud, hurl that infidel down from heaven who differs from us in rites and rituals, is inhuman, who does not observe fire sacrificials, and who does not show reverence to Nature’s bounties.”
Rig Veda 7.97.9. ”O Lord of knowledge, this laudation is for you…destroy the godless and the malice of our enemy.”
Nirukta 5.17. When, with his foot, will he trample the unworshipping man like a mushroom
Rig Veda 8.64.1-2. ”May our hymns please you; O lord of resolute will power, please display your bounty. May you drive off the infidels. May you crush with your foot the niggard churls who offer no homage. You are powerful; there is none so powerful as you are.”
Rig Veda 5.2.10 ”May you roaring flames, O adorable Lord, be manifest in the sky as sharp weapons, to destroy infidels. In his exhilaration may his shining splendour inflict destruction. The godless hands try to bind him from all sides but do not succeed.”
Rig Veda 8.76.11 ”Both the heaven and earth shudder when you, O the resplendent Lord, uttering your fearful roar, crush down the infidel.”
Yajur Veda 7.36 ”We learned persons accept as our ruler, thee, the introducer of new plans for our advancement, the master of loyal subjects, the embodiment of virtue, the most advanced in noble qualities and acts, the queller of the irreligious…”
Yajur Veda 7.44 ”…This fourth warrior, full of delight, should subdue the irreligious foes.”
Yajur Veda 13.12 ”O king, make progress in thy duty of administration, extend happiness to the virtuous. O terrible chastiser, burn down the irreligious foes. O splendid person, humiliate and consume utterly like dried up stubble, him, who encourages our foe.”
Atharva Veda 11.2.23 He who dwells fixed in the atmosphere, smiting the blasphemers of the god that do not sacrifice, to him be reverence with ten sakvarî−stanzas!
Atharva Veda 11.2.21 Do not covet our cattle, our men, our goats and sheep! Bend thy course elsewhere, O strong god (ugra), slay the offspring of the blasphemers!
Atharva Veda 5.20.4-5 ”Let this war-drum victorious in the battle, loudly roaring and becoming the means of seizing whatever may be seized, be seen by all. Let this war-drum utter wonderful voice and let the army-controlling man capture the possessions of the enemies. Amid the conflict of the deadly weapons let the woman of enemy waked by the roar and afflicted run forward in her terror hearing the resounding and far reaching voice of the wardrum, holding her son in her hand.”
Rig Veda 10.118.8 So, Agni, with thy glowing face burn fierce against the female fiends, Shining among Uruksayas.
Rig Veda 8.59.11 The man who brings no sacrifice, inhuman, godless, infidel, Him let his friend the mountain cast to rapid death, the mountain cast the Dasyu down.
Nirukta 7.23 Dasyu (demon/dacoit) is derived from (the root) das, meaning to lay waste.
Rig Veda 10.22.8 Around us is the Dasyu, riteless, void of sense, inhuman, keeping alien laws. Baffle, thou Slayer of the foe, the weapon which this Dasa wields.
Rig Veda 6.44.11 ”Give us not, O showerer of benefits, to the wicked. Relying upon your friendship, O Lord of riches, may we remain unharmed. Many are the boons you distribute amongst men; may you demolish those who make no libation, and root out those who present no offerings.”
Rig Veda 1.176.4 Slay everyone who pours no gift, who, hard to reach, delights thee not. Bestow on us what wealth he hath: this even the worshipper awaits.
Rig Veda 1.81.9 …Discover thou, as Lord, the wealth of men who offer up no gifts: bring thou to us this wealth of theirs.
Atharva Veda 2.19.1 Burn thou, O Agni, with that heat of thine against the man who hates us, whom we hate.
Atharva Veda 10.5.15 ”…By him we attack on him who hates us and whome we abhor. We overthrow and slay him through this knowledge, through this act and through this fatal weapon.”
Atharva Veda 10.5.25 …from earth we bar him who hates us and whom we hate.
Rig Veda 3.53.21 ”O resplendent Lord, brave and opulant, protect us this day against our foes with many and excellent defences, may the vile wretch who hates us fall before us; May the breath of life depart from him whom we hate.”
Yajur Veda 15.15 This one in front, golden-tressed, with sunbeams; the leader of his host and his chieftain are Rathagritsa and Rathaujas, and Puñjikasthalâ: and Kratusthalâ his Apsarases. Biting animals are his weapon, homicide his missile weapon; to them be homage: may they protect us, may they have mercy upon us. In their jaws we place the man whom we hate and who hates us.
Atharva Veda 10.3.3 This charm shall conquer and cast down thy foemen. Be thou the first to slay the men who hate thee.
Atharva Veda 13.3.1 ‘…O Rohita (King) agitate destroy and entangle in snares the man doing wrong to Brahman.”
Atharva Veda 12.5.52 Rend, rend to pieces, rend away, destroy, destroy him utterly. Destroy Angirasi! the wretch who robs and wrongs the Brahmans, born.
Manu Smriti 9.31-33 A Brahmana who knows the law need not bring any (offence) to the notice of the king; by his own power alone be can punish those men who injure him. His own power is greater than the power of the king; the Brahmana therefore, may punish his foes by his own power alone. Let him use without hesitation the sacred texts, revealed by Atharvan and by Angiras; speech, indeed, is the weapon of the Brahmana, with that he may slay his enemies.
Atharva Veda 12.5.62 ”Rend, rend to bits, rend through and through, scorch and consume and burn to dust, the one who rejects the Vedas”
Vishnu Purana 3.17 When the glorious Vishnu heard their prayers he emitted from his person an illusory form wliich he gave to the celestials and said. “This illusory form shall so deceive the Daityas, so that being led astray from the path of the Vedas, they may be put to death ; for all gods, demons and others, who shall transgress the authority of the Veda, shall perish by my prowess which I exercise for the preservation of the universe. Go then ; be not affraid ; this illusory form shall go before you. celestials, it shall be of great service to you, this day.
Atharva Veda 20.93.1 …destroy the enemies of Vedas
Rig Veda 6.22.8 …burn down the enemies of God, Vedas and the malice…
Rig Veda 6.52.3 …cast your destroying weapon for the destruction of the enemies of Veda, wealth and crops.
Rig Veda 6.72.1 …ye killed all darkness and the Gods’ blasphemers.
Rig Veda 2.23.14 Burn up the disbelievers/blasphemers/criticizers/demons with thy fiercest flaming brand, those who have scorned thee in thy manifested might…
Atharva Veda 2.12.6 …Burn down the enemies of Vedas.
Rig Veda 2.23.4 ”O God and learned person! you take the people to the target through the path of religion and justice and protect them. If you commit a sin, the soul or God is not infested with it. Those who denounce the Vedas and God, you cast your anger on them. Therefore, we should admire your greatness.”
Rig Veda 6.14.3 “Adorable Lord takes manifold treasures of disbelievers for the preservation of the worshippers. Faithful devotees triumph over wicked and unrighteous and humble him who does not abide by the prescribed conduct of life.”
Rig Veda 9.13.9 ”May you (O love divine), the beholder of the path of enlightenment, purifying our mind and destroying the infidels who refuse to offer worship, come and stay in the prime position of the eternal sacrifice.”
Swami Dayanand Saraswati wrote, “The Dwijaas( the twice-born) – Braahmanaas, Kshatriyas, Vaishyaas are called Aryas, while the Shudras are called Anaryas, or Non-Aryas.” ATHARVA VEDA 19:62. In the face of these Vedic authorities how can sensible people believe in the imaginary tales of the foreigners. In the Devaasurawars, Prince Arjuna and King Dashrathaand others of Aryavarta used to go to the assistance of the Aryas in order to crush the Asuras. This shows that the people living outside Aryavarta were called Dasyus and Malechhaas… Besides, Manu also corroborates our position. He says, “The countries other than Aryavarta are called Dasyus and Malechha countries.” MANU 10:45, 2:23. The people living in the north-east, north, north-west were called Rakshasas.” [Source: Satyarth Prakash, by Dayanand Saraswati, Ch 8, page 266, Tr. Chrinajiva Bhardwaja] Now even if we believe this source’s credibility or not, yet the above verses are sufficient proof of apostasy and blasphemy laws in Hinduism.
Moreover, it is clear that Hindus’ claim of pluralism faith that you can even be atheist and attain salvation, is baseless. They never furnish reference showing that even an atheist who doesn’t believe in god and Veda, who never sacrificed for Devas or worshipped them can go to heaven temporarily and attain salvation. Buddhism and Jainism are condemned in Hindu scriptures because of their atheistic doctrine then how can Hindus claim that you can be a atheist? Why Hindu scriptures stresses on the atheistic doctrines of Buddhism and Jainism while condemning them and rejecting them as false religions? Recently, Hindutva apologetics hace started citing Mimamsa philosophy to support their argument. But Mimamsa has both theistic and atheistic doctrines, it rejects a personal god but believes in the authority of the Vedas. Now, is there any atheist on the face of this earth who claims the Vedas to be authoritative? Atheism is strongly condemned in Hindu scriptures, Vedas even calls for death of godless atheists. Buddha is criticized for rejecting the Vedas so how can Hindus claim this? If they want to prove that Atheist can attain salvation then they should furnish reference showing that a man who doesn’t believe in god, in Vedas, in Brahmins, who doesn’t worship and who doesn’t sacrifice can attain salvation. That’s it. No need for further discussion. Hindu scholars have also translated the word Nastika as infidel. Nastika in Sanskrit is literally translated as Atheist. But in Vedic (Hindu scriptures) terminology an atheist doesn’t necessarily means the one who doesn’t believe in god, but it has several meaning, a non-Hindu is also considered to be atheist, a censurer of Vedas is also considered an atheist etc., as evident from the above verses.
- Islamic View- Blasphemy means Fight and kill ONLY those who fight you in the name of religion.
- Hinduism View–
However, todays world doesn’t lives as per the books. Here are some examples:
- In Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Yemen apostasy laws have been used to charge persons for acts other than conversion.
- Faisal, a 32 year old man from Kodinhi, Malappuram district of Kerala, India was hacked to death by a group of RSS workers (a radical Hindu terrorist organization, supported by the present (2017) Government of India) for converting to Islam, on 19 November 2016.
- Even in today’s world, you will see many Jews killing others in the name of faith. (e.g. Israel-Palestine relations and its outcome)
- Christian Honor killings: http://www.islamophobiatoday.com/2014/05/09/jordanian-man-killed-his-daughter-for-converting-to-islam/
- Even those religions, which don’t preach killings of any kind, like Buddhism, have gone rogue these days. Just look at what they have done to Rohingyas in 2016.