Dr. Ibrahim Jalingo, an Islamic scholar and the National Chairman of the Council of Ulama, has sparked intense public debate following a controversial statement supporting the death penalty for individuals who renounce Islam.
The cleric made his remarks in a post shared on Thursday via his official Facebook page, where he defended a Hadith that prescribes capital punishment for apostates.
Writing in the Hausa language, Jalingo offered a firm rebuttal to critics who challenge the authenticity of certain Hadiths, particularly one that states: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.” He described such critics as victims of “compound ignorance” and accused them of intentionally misrepresenting Islamic teachings to create confusion among Muslims.
His response was directed at those questioning the consistency of the Hadith tradition with the Qur’an. One such critic, identified as Issiyaku Abdulkadir, had apparently presented a list of 100 Hadiths he claims contradict the Qur’an. Jalingo used this as an opportunity to launch a detailed theological counterargument.
“Today, I came across the first among what these fabricators call the ‘100 Hadiths that contradict the Qur’an.’ They claim believers in divine revelation cannot respond to these contradictions. The Hadith they referenced is: ‘Whoever changes his religion, kill him,’” Jalingo stated in his post.
He went on to issue a strong critique of his opponents, accusing them of misguiding the public. “Let it be known that Hadiths are not merely interpretative texts. They, like the Qur’an, are divinely inspired. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: ‘Indeed, I was given the Qur’an and something like it along with it.’ This affirms the divine origin of Hadith literature,” Jalingo argued.
To reinforce his position, the cleric cited several Qur’anic verses which, in his view, support the Hadith’s stance on apostasy. Among them was Surah At-Tawbah (9:5), which mentions combat against polytheists, and verses from Surah Al-Baqarah and Surah An-Nisa’ that refer to fighting non-believers in specific historical contexts.
He also addressed the popular Qur’anic verse “There is no compulsion in religion” (Surah Al-Baqarah 2:256), arguing that it has been abrogated by later revelations and should not be interpreted as a blanket guarantee of religious freedom. “Claims that this Hadith contradicts the Qur’an show a fundamental misunderstanding of Islamic jurisprudence and the concept of ‘naskh’ (abrogation), which is well-established in Islamic theology,” Jalingo said.
Jalingo’s tone grew increasingly combative as he criticized those spreading opposing views, using harsh language to discredit them. He likened their rhetoric to that of “prostitutes and effeminate men,” a choice of words that has drawn strong backlash online.
The cleric’s remarks have since gone viral, drawing a mix of reactions across social media. While some have applauded his defense of traditional Islamic scholarship, others have condemned his advocacy of capital punishment and his disparaging treatment of dissenting voices.
Broader Implications and Reactions
This incident has reignited ongoing debates within Muslim communities about the role of Hadith in modern jurisprudence, the limits of religious freedom, and the ethical boundaries of public discourse among religious leaders. While conservative scholars argue that Hadiths are essential to understanding and applying Islamic law, reformist voices stress the need for contextual interpretation, especially on sensitive issues like apostasy.
Human rights advocates have also weighed in, warning that such endorsements of capital punishment for apostasy could fuel religious intolerance and justify violence under the guise of doctrinal purity.
The controversy underscores the tensions between traditional interpretations of Islamic law and contemporary human rights frameworks, a debate that continues to shape religious discourse across the Muslim world.
