An Islamic cleric and the National Chairman of the Council of Ulama, Dr. Ibrahim Jalingo, has stirred nationwide controversy after endorsing the death penalty for individuals who renounce Islam.
In a statement posted Thursday on his official Facebook page, Jalingo defended a Hadith that prescribes the execution of apostates and slammed critics of Hadith literature as being guilty of “compound ignorance.” His remarks have ignited fierce debates across social media and among religious scholars.
Cleric Defends Controversial Hadith
Jalingo’s comments came in response to ongoing criticisms that certain Hadiths—records of the Prophet Muhammad’s (peace be upon him) sayings and actions conflict with Qur’anic teachings. One such Hadith, which reads, “Whoever changes his religion, kill him,” has long been the subject of debate among Islamic scholars.
Responding to a critic identified as Issiyaku Abdulkadir, Jalingo wrote:
“Today, I came across the first Hadith among the supposed ‘100 Hadiths’ which the fabricators claim contradict the Qur’an… This will, God willing, give me the opportunity to expose his ignorance to the world.”
He argued that both the Qur’an and Hadith are divine revelations, stating:
“The Qur’an is a revelation from Allah, and so is the Hadith… The Qur’an often addresses matters briefly, and the Hadith comes to elaborate on them.”
Claims of Abrogated Verses
Jalingo supported his position by citing several Qur’anic verses, including Surah At-Tawbah (9:5), Surah Al-Baqarah (2:193), and Surah An-Nisa (4:89 and 4:91), which he claimed endorse fighting non-believers. He argued that these verses override earlier ones that advocate religious freedom.
He stated:
“The verse ‘There is no compulsion in religion’ has had its ruling abrogated by the verses we’ve just quoted, as well as by the Hadith: ‘Whoever changes his religion, kill him.’ Abrogation is a well-established concept within the revelation of the Glorious Qur’an.”
Backlash and Division
Jalingo’s post has gone viral, sparking heated discussions among Islamic scholars, human rights activists, and the wider public. While some hardline followers praised him for standing firm on traditional Islamic interpretations, others condemned the statements as dangerous, inflammatory, and contrary to modern human rights principles.
In a particularly controversial part of his post, Jalingo lashed out at his critics, writing:
“This is a brief response to the compounded ignorance of this individual whose approach and manner resemble that of prostitutes and effeminate men.”
The post continues to generate significant attention online, with many calling on religious and government authorities to address the implications of Jalingo’s remarks.
