In a statement that has sparked intense discussions across Nigeria and beyond, prominent Islamic scholar and National Chairman of the Council of Ulama, Dr. Ibrahim Jalingo, has publicly voiced support for the death penalty in cases of apostasy—where an individual renounces Islam.
Taking to his official Facebook page on Thursday, Dr. Jalingo expressed strong backing for a well-known Hadith which mandates capital punishment for those who abandon their faith. He dismissed critics of the Hadith as being plagued by what he called “compound ignorance,” and warned against questioning the authenticity of established Islamic teachings.
“The Hadith that states ‘Whoever changes his religion, kill him’ is not in contradiction with the Qur’an,” Jalingo asserted. “In fact, both are divine revelations meant to complement each other.”
Apostasy and its punishment have long been contentious topics within Islamic discourse. Critics often cite Qur’anic verses that promote religious freedom, such as “There is no compulsion in religion” (Surah Al-Baqarah 2:256), arguing that capital punishment for changing one’s faith contradicts Islam’s core message. However, Jalingo strongly refuted this perspective.
READ MORE: Third Sydney Mosque Targeted in Disturbing Islamophobic Threats
In his post, he responded to an online critic, identified as Issiyaku Abdulkadir, who had challenged the Hadith’s validity. Dr. Jalingo accused him of fabricating contradictions between Hadith literature and the Qur’an, branding his views as misinformed and malicious.
“This supposed list of ‘100 Hadiths contradicting the Qur’an’ is nothing but a display of ignorance. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) made it clear that he was given the Qur’an and something like it—which refers to the Hadith,” Jalingo wrote.
Backing his stance with Qur’anic verses, he cited Surah At-Tawbah (9:5), Surah Al-Baqarah (2:193), and Surah An-Nisa (4:89, 4:91), emphasizing what he interpreted as divine support for punishing apostates and non-believers in certain contexts. He further argued that the verse promoting religious freedom had been abrogated, replaced by later revelations advocating stricter consequences.
“Abrogation (naskh) is a valid concept in Islamic jurisprudence. The verse on no compulsion in religion has been superseded by later rulings and Hadiths,” he stated.
Dr. Jalingo’s remarks also included a scathing personal attack on his critics, likening their arguments to those of “prostitutes and effeminate men,” a statement that has raised concerns over the tone and language used in religious discourse.
Reactions Across Social Media
The cleric’s comments have ignited a social media storm, with reactions sharply divided. While some conservative and hardline Islamic followers applauded his firm defense of Islamic tradition, others—including many within the Muslim community—have condemned the statement as incendiary and contrary to modern interpretations of religious freedom.
Human rights advocates and interfaith organizations have voiced alarm at the endorsement of capital punishment over matters of belief, calling for peaceful theological dialogue instead of inflammatory rhetoric.
A Broader Debate on Apostasy in Islam
The controversy reignites an age-old debate within the Muslim world: Should the punishment for apostasy still be applied in contemporary times? While traditional scholars argue for adherence to classical jurisprudence, reformists emphasize a contextual reading of scripture that aligns with modern principles of freedom of belief.
Dr. Jalingo’s post serves as a stark reminder of how interpretations of Islamic law can vary widely, and how those interpretations continue to impact discussions on human rights, religious tolerance, and interfaith coexistence.
As the debate rages on, one thing is clear—this incident will remain at the heart of ongoing discussions surrounding the relationship between Hadith, the Qur’an, and the evolving practice of Islam in the 21st century.