Sharia in detail: apostasy, women, slavery, jihad

Apostasy from Islam (ridda) is one of the most contested questions in classical and modern fiqh. The two key texts pull in different directions. Q 2:256: There is no compulsion in religion. Bukhārī 6878: Whoever changes his religion, kill him.

Classical Sunni fiqh — the four schools (Ḥanafī, Mālikī, Shāfiʿī, Ḥanbalī) — all prescribe execution for sane adult male apostates after a period of asking them to repent. Differences exist on female apostates (Ḥanafīs prescribe imprisonment, the other three execution) and on the length of the repentance window (typically 3 days, sometimes longer). Ibn Rushd's Bidāyat al-mujtahid is the standard comparative-fiqh source.

Modern reformist scholars push hard the other direction. Mohammad Hashim Kamali argues that the apostasy hadith refer to political treason in seventh-century Medina, not personal belief change in the modern world. Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi distinguishes minor apostasy (private) from major apostasy (active hostility). Some reformists argue Q 2:256 should govern. The picture in living Islamic law is contested.

Pew Research data shows wide variation in support for legal penalties for apostasy: above 80% in some countries (Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan) and below 20% in others (Turkey, Tunisia, Albania). Generalisations either way are wrong.

Three further substantive areas where the classical and modern positions diverge.

Women. Classical fiqh on women is not monolithic. The Qurʼān assigns specific protections (mahr, inheritance rights at a time when many cultures had none, prohibition of female infanticide). Classical fiqh applies Q 4:34 (the discipline of disobedient wives), Q 2:282 (testimony asymmetry), and Q 4:11 (inheritance asymmetry) in directions modern reformists contest. Amina Wadud and Asma Barlas lead a Muslim feminist hermeneutic that re-reads these texts within their seventh-century context. The classical fiqh tradition has not been overturned in mainstream Sunni scholarship.

Slavery. Classical Islamic law permits slavery and concubinage with female captives (Q 4:24; see also Bukhārī 4138 on captives). Manumission is encouraged but not required. The Christian engager should not pretend that abolition in the Muslim world arose from internal Islamic ethical movement; it came mostly from external (largely British) pressure across the 19th-20th centuries. The asymmetry with the Christian abolitionist movement (Wilberforce, the Quakers, evangelical anti-slavery societies) is real and pastorally meaningful.

Jihad. Classical fiqh distinguishes jihad al-nafs (inner struggle) from jihad al-sayf (warfare). The schools all permit defensive jihad and most permit offensive jihad against non-Muslim polities under specified conditions. Q 9:29 on the jizya tax governs the classical relationship to ahl al-kitāb (People of the Book) under Muslim political rule. Modern Muslim scholars including Tariq Ramadan and Khaled Abou El Fadl have argued that the classical doctrine of offensive jihad is not binding in the modern era. The reformist case is real; it has not become the consensus position.

Sharia is the area where Christian engagement most easily turns into headline material that does damage and saves no one. Three commitments help.

• Use the actual sources. Quote Q 2:256 and Bukhārī 6878. Cite Ibn Rushd alongside Kamali. Take Pew data seriously. Caricature collapses credibility.
• Distinguish the four schools. Sunni fiqh is not monolithic; the Ḥanafī minority position on female apostates differs from the Mālikī majority position. Modern Shia jurisprudence differs again.
• Recognise the Muslim diversity. Most Muslims you will meet are not classical-fiqh maximalists. Many privately hold reformist views; many practice cultural Islam without engaging fiqh at all. Treat the friend in front of you as the friend in front of you.

The Christian conversation invites the Muslim friend to the same posture Christians have learned with their own hard texts: read them honestly, in their tradition, and in conversation with where the moral arc actually bends. The Christian arc bends through the Sermon on the Mount and the cross. The Muslim arc bends — for some — through the modern reformist movement; for others, back toward classical fiqh. The conversation matters because real lives are at stake.