Hi! I am new to this sub and I found it while searching for theological issues with world religions. I have a question that I've been struggling to find the answer off any website on the internet.

So here's my question -:

What is/are the implication(s) of the attributes of Allah being created or uncreated? Like how does it affect the islamic deity and the religion of Islam in general? Does it prove the existence of Allah or nullify it?

Please answer based on both the views, created and uncreated and also please site your sources wherever necessary.

Thanks in advance!

P.S I personally don't think that created or uncreated attributes would have any effect on Allah as he's supposed to be self sufficient, being a non muslim I could be totally wrong though!

when I was a child, I saw someone possessed by a jinn and doing weird movements like crawling on the floor really fast like an animal, sudden super strength, hissing and attacking people.

this was a young girl and her behaviour switched over night, Quran was read on her and she was fine.

Christians don’t believe in jinn, so how could this be?

Hey,

I came to ask for the historical interpretation of this idea that is prescribed in the Islamic tradition. I’ve come across many interpretations of this verse each differing from another ( mostly by apologists) . If possible, can someone give an insight on how the earliest of scholars interpreted this. I would like replies from both Muslims and non Muslims for this matter ( so it’s fair)

A reply would be appreciated

Here is the link to this quote:

zakariyya al ansari shafi

(And He prevented) his nation at the beginning of Islam (from fighting the disbelievers) and they were commanded to be patient with their harm by His Most High’s saying {You will surely be tested in your wealth} [Al Imran: 186] the verse (Then he was commanded with it when they were initiated) with it by His Most High’s saying {And fight in the way of Allah those who fight you} [Al Baqarah: 190] (Then it was permitted) for him (to initiate it in months other than the months (The sacred months) with His saying {So when the sacred months have passed} [At-Tawbah: 5] the verse (Then He commanded it absolutely) without restricting it to a condition or time with His saying {And kill them wherever you find them} [Al-Baqarah: 191]

https://shamela.ws/book/11468/1723

I have a question? Now is the kill them wherever you find them only for muslims in muhammad's time or even after muhammad's death(to the day of judgement according to muslims) according to zakariyya? How do you know this? Does he truly support offensive jihad? This quote isn't taken out of context or anything ,right? It's probably pretty clear, but i just like to have other people spell it out for me. In other words. I try to head off muslim apologist.

To add further context, I'm 18m and I never got religious till I was 15, and began exploring my identity of faith a couple days after I turned 17. In the middle of that time frame, I filled my room with islamic decor and accessories, as well as being extremely open about my connection with islam. It was obvious that I was religious at the time, and that became the standard for my parents and oldest brother, who is religious to a point that he reminds me of my parents, who are extremely traditional and strict.

I developed an open mind, and began listening to multiple sides, such as watching debates, reading islamic, atheist, or christian articles and arguments. I read debunking's, errors, mistakes, it all came crashing too quickly, and my life felt like a lie, years of my life felt untrue to me. I fell into state of lying to myself to forget the stuff I saw/read/listened to and forced myself to pray, but it felt more as if I was rewinding a movie rather than portraying my true intentions like I did before. I was trying to project my past and forget my current self.

As I got better with accepting my beliefs and coming to terms with all the lies I've been fed, I started expressing me, rather than expressing Islam. This means removing the islamic accessories and wall decor I put up. I left some up because my dad wouldn't talk to me after he found out I took only some and not even all of them off. I started doing things I actually enjoy without feeling immense guilt or fear for god and my parents.

The main issue comes with my parents and brother. I want to decorate my room how I want it, with musical artist posters and other things I like, because it would make me happy, however my parents and brother typically comment the phrase "You used to be so good, what happened to you?" I occasionally get compared to my old religious self, and it really irritates me. I can't be me, without someone being disappointed in or mad at me. My brother even told me once, "I do not take you seriously anymore because you're not religious like you used to be" and it really hurt to hear that come from my brother. My brother pretty much tells me to treat my parents as if god is speaking through them, because they're that wise, and any advice/command they give, you must listen.

I want to reach out and ask, how do I do the things that make me happy and enjoy without feeling so shackled? Why can't my family allow me to be myself, I'm my own person aren't I?

Anti-Islams and sectarians when I show them as verse of Quran that open-endedly calling for free of slaves as moral duty, they lies and say it's for "making up of sins" or "charity" (even if it was it's based on Islamic morals), it does not allow to enslave criminal prisoners of war.

90:12-13:

And what can make you know what the steep path (is)? It's freeing of slaves

That is a moral duty to get close to God, not to "make up for sins"

2:177:

Righteousness is not a matter of turning your faces eastward or westward. Rather, righteousness is believing in God... free slaves; performing prayers...

9:60:

The Sadaqat are only meant for... for freeing slaves... an obligation from God

----------------------------------

Now they will bring up the so called "right hand possesed" which are literally not slaves, but those you pledged your oaths to, in English always translated as right hand nonsense, "aymanikum" figuratively always means oaths:

And those whom pledged your right hands - then give them their share 4:33

Assalamu Alaykum, so i have a question regarding the first four books of Allah actually more about the first two like the Torah and the Injeel. Allah is all powerful and all knowing and that is included in his attributes but why didn't he preserve the Torah and the Injeel like how he is preserving the Quran? Now i do understand that the Torah is over 5000 years old and the Bible is over 2000 years old and someone "could" change things about them but why couldn't Allah stop that said person or people? Allah has drowned Firaun in the story of Prophet Musa A.S and caused Namrod's death in the story of Prophet Ibrahim A.S but why couldn't he do something similar like that to someone who was about to corrupt the Torah and Injeel? Also why didn't Allah create the quran before like why didn't he make it his first and final revelation to mankind? Allah is all knowing and that's a fact in islam. Could anyone clarify me on this beause i am a bit confused. Walaikum salam!

A lot of people confused the monotheist God of the Quran that transcends everything has nothing to do with a tribal feuding jealous pantheist god who is competing with other existing "Gods".

Stop equating the two.

4:33 It said "pledged oaths to (Aymanukum)". but he completely ignored it and just translated it as "pledged to", while in 4:24/25 translated it as "right hand", even though they are the same words and people.

Both sectarians and anti-islam detractors love zoroastrian hadiths and ibn kathir, and taqiyyah.

Islam preaches to hide women, isolate them from society. Women must not generate any desire, no erotic feelings etc...

How does it relate with the famous oriental dance, known to have been regular in the caliphs courts ?
Besides, this dance occurs often at marriages or some events.

This is a contradiction

It seems nobody talks about this. There is supposed to be another Kaba in heaven right above the Kaba on Earth. This only makes sense on a stationary flat earth.

If Earth is a rotating sphere in an expanding universe, then the bayt al-ma'mur is making some crazy expanding spirals around the whole universe in a speed unimaginably way above the speed of light. Also Allah's throne is above it, so I guess he's rotating too around Earth behind the edges of the universe?

They probably thought that Mecca is the center of the flat stationary Earth and god is right above it.

Here is a question that I have asked many people, including a number of pastors, when they have said that Muslims worship a different god, a demon, or even Satan:

What is the fundamental difference between the nature of Allah as presented in the Quran, and Yahweh as presented in the Old Testament?

I usually get no answer, but when I do, it is usually:

Why are you defending Islam?

You are not a real Christian.

You are a Muslim pretending to be a Christian.

When someone does give a substantive answer, they always start quoting New Testament, talking about the deity of Christ, Islam's denial of Christs sonship, denial of the Trinity, that Allah is not the Christian God, etc.

They don't seem to be able to limit their answer to just the Old Testament per the question. I say that the Old Testament does indeed present the true God, and I think that every Christian would agree with that.

One answer that I have gotten twice [from pastors] is that Quran denies the immanence of God.

However, Quran explicitly affirms both the Immanence and transcendence of God as does the OT.

The biggest difference that I have found is that OT Yahweh does not torture unbelievers in fire for eternity like Allah and Jesus do.

I heard and read that some scholars said that it is legal for a muslim man to marry a non muslim women, but not vice versa. Is that true? if so those are some massive double standards! That would be yet another reason islam is evil!

It seems that whenever I find a book or an article that critiques Islam, discussed the origins of the Quran, especially the theory that it borrowed heavily from other cultures and religions, you find that the author is either shunned away by “most scholars” or labeled as “anti-Islam”.

I want an honest and academic work on Islam, especially the origins of the Quran, but I don’t want to follow someone who has personal bias and animosity towards Islam that may impact their work. I also don’t want to fall for an “academic” who applies their own “culturally sensitive” beliefs and attitudes that they end watering down a legitimate study and criticism of Islam.

Academia generally have their own political and social attitudes that lean heavily towards one side of the spectrum, and I’m wondering if that impacts their approach to Islam and the Quran, and if so, how can I trust them?

How can I go about finding the middle ground? Whom should I read?

I like quoting these sources because it comes from well respected scholars and shows receipts. It makes it harder for the muslim apologist to use the bias card.

I already know the articles about child marriage and apostasy, but is there any other articles like that?

here's my first attempt:

Islam (version 2.0)

• There's only one god, named Allah.
• Allah created the universe, and then let it be, never to interfere with it again.
• She created the universe in such a way where intelligent live evolves.
• Intelligent life is capable of discovering any truth. More clearly, intelligent life are not perfect, but they can always get closer to the truth.
• Contradictions do not exist in reality. If there's a contradiction, it's in our knowledge.
• Conflicts of interest between intelligent life are not inherent. Any conflict can be resolved where all parties are happy with the result, including the process to reaching the result.

What do you think?

Would you convert to my religion?

By the way, feel free to make your own religion, using some, all, or none of these bullet points.

To be clear, this is my religion, but I do not subscribe to this religion. If you convert, that's on you, I don't agree with it. What I do agree with is the bottom 3 bullet points.

I am creating a compendium of everything wrong with islam. I heard about the hadith where two qirats are taking from your heaven points for keeping a dog or whatever. But, just to shut all doors to apologist, do the classical scholars hold the same view? Can anyone give me some links/quotes of classical scholars saying what the plain meaning of the hadith says, and supporting the prohibition on keeping dogs as pets?

Some of these might also be classified as critiques and i hope i am not coming off as offensive as i am genuinely curious.

1. How do you justify surat an nisa (4:34) when it says to "discipline them gently" aka slap them according to most opinions i have heard, i don't see how this is mean to be a revelation from the all mighty all merciful god, it sounds more like men making rules on how they can control their women. Please explain to me the justification for this, i would really like to understand better.
2. I have heard lots of people say Islam is just a copy of Zoroastrianism and that the zoroastrians also used to pray 5 times a day and clean themselves before prayer AND that even they're prophet Zoroaster also traveled to heaven during a night journey to meet god, lots of ex Muslims say Mohammad copied from this.
3. The idea that an all merciful god can create such an awful place as hell and put non Muslims there, this question can pretty much be asked to any religion but in this case i am asking you Muslims, i can understand if god wants to put the likes of Hitler and Stalin etc in eternal hellfire but i just don;t see the justification of putting non believers in there especially regular boring every day folk who haven't hurt anyone there only sin was not believing in god which i just don't really see warranting eternity in hellfire, it seems complexity insane (no offense), correct me if i am wrong but i believe Allah even states in the Quran that he doesn't need anyone's worship so that begs the question why such an extreme punishment.

That's all i have for now, i appreciate any and all comments. Once again i can't stress enough i do not mean any offense, i am genuinely curious about this stuff, thanks so much in advance.

I'm creating a big compendium of things wrong with Islam, and I'm specifically focusing on death for apostasy, right now. Also, can any arabic speakers see if the arabic matches the english translation of these paragraphs? Here they are:

https://shamela.ws/book/26333/201

The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, only said: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him ,” and this apostate who has returned to Islam is not continuing to change.

The meaning of the hadith of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, is: whoever persists in changing it; do you not see that he has forbidden the blood and wealth of whoever says there is no god but God, and this one says there is no god but God; so how can I kill him, when he, may God bless him and grant him peace, has forbidden killing him? 

https://shamela.ws/book/26333/202

Abu Yusuf said: With these hadiths, those who have seen the jurists - and they are many - argue for repentance, and the best thing we have heard in that regard, and God knows best, is that they should be asked to repent, and if they repent, then fine, otherwise their necks should be struck, according to what came from the famous hadiths and what was upon those jurists we met.

Here is the arabic: https://shamela.ws/book/26333/201

https://shamela.ws/book/26333/202

Is abu yusuf supporting death for apostasy here in the first two paragraphs ?It looks like he does, because he quotes the  “Whoever changes his religion, kill him ,” hadith and he seems to believe that this hadith is authentic because abu yusuf specifically says "the hadith of the Prophet" line in the second paragraph. He then goes on to say "The meaning of the hadith of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, is: whoever persists in changing it". So i get from this that abu yusuf is saying the apostate who refuses to repent from apostasy and doesn't return to islam is the one muhammad was talking about in that hadith above. Is my assesment correct?

Also for the third paragraph, if a scholar(like abu yusuf) points out that the hadiths and jurist all say to kill the apostates who refuse to repent from their apostasy. Does that mean this is also abu yusuf's opinion? Because in islam, if you go against the hadiths and consensus, then that means your opinion is wrong, right. And i don't see Abu yusuf disagreeing with these hadiths and jurist. So that means he also supports the view that the apostate should be killed if he refuses to return to islam, right? Is my assesment correct here?

Like doesn't the quran and hadiths say that allah is responsible for every thing good or bad that happens to you? And doesn't the hadiths say that allah creates people specifically to go to hell? Can i have links to the quran and hadiths that say this? Also, can i have some links to classical scholars saying this? I'm creating a compenium of everything wrong with islam.

Hey guys, I've seen a lot of videos that says Allah is Satan or muslims worship Baal or Lucifer etc. and in my opinion I believe it, because Bible says that Satan is greatest deciever and Qur'an says Allah is greatest deciever of all... What is your opinion about this, and can you give me more evidences that Allah might actually be Devil?

Why, if Muhammad had so many wives and sex slaves, didn’t he have more children? And the children he did have didn’t survive until adulthood except for one. Seems in the end his line was only through a female daughter who survived into adulthood. For a polygamist warlord, shouldn’t he have had a lot more children?

Here a link to these passages: https://shamela.ws/book/1655/1663

Have you seen, if imprisonment was a right upon her, how she would stop imprisonment from the apostate slave girl when her family needed her? Or have you seen the family of the slave girl when they needed her and she had stolen, would she cut off her hand if she stole and kill her if she killed and not hand her over to them because of their need for her?

He said: Yes. I said: Because a right cannot be denied to a slave woman, just as it cannot be denied to a free woman. He said: Yes. I said: Then how did you deny her imprisonment if it was a right in this situation? Or did you imprison the free woman if imprisonment was not a right? He said: I said to him: Does a free woman go beyond being in the meaning of what the Messenger of Allah - may Allah bless him and grant him peace - said: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him,” so that she changes her religion and is killed? Or is this in the case of a man and not her? So who ordered you to imprison her? Have you ever seen such imprisonment? Imprisonment is only to make clear to you the punishment. Her disbelief has become clear to you. If she deserved to be killed, then kill her. But if she did not, then her imprisonment is an injustice to her. He said: Then what do you say?

I said: I say that killing her is a text in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, because of his saying: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him,” and his saying: “The blood of a Muslim man is not permissible except in one of three cases: disbelief after faith, adultery after marriage, or killing a soul without a soul.” She was a disbeliever after faith, so her blood is permissible, just as if she was an adulteress after marriage, or A woman who kills a person without a soul is killed, and it is not permissible to carry out a punishment on her and neglect the other. I say that the analogy in this case is to the ruling of Allah, the Blessed and Most High. If this were not the case, she would have killed. This is because Allah, the Most High, did not differentiate between her and a man in the punishment. Allah, the Blessed and Most High, said: {And the male thief, male or female, cut off their hands}. And He, the Most High, said: {The adulterer and the adulteress, flog each of them with a hundred lashes.} And He said, {And those who accuse chaste women and do not produce four witnesses, flog them with eighty lashes.} So the Muslims said about those who accuse chaste women, they should be flogged with eighty lashes, and they did not differentiate between her and the man who accuses her, since she accuses him, so how did you differentiate between her and the man in The limit?

(Al-Shafi’i said) : May God forgive him. We said to him: The text is against you and the analogy is against you, and you claim analogy when you contradict it. He said: As for Abu Yusuf, he said what you said and claimed that the apostate woman should be killed. I said: I hope that this is the case

In the third passage is the "i said" part al shafi's own words? Is the part after the "i said" al shafi's own words? Is this al shafi supporting death for apostasy? That's what it looks like to me. It just confuses me because al shafi is spoken in third person in the fourth passage, so i was wondering if maybe the third passage after the "i said" is not al shafi, but just someone close to him? Or is the "(al shafi said)" part just added by the publisher? I just want to be 100% sure, before using it against muslim apologists. I'm probably just overthinking something very obvious! Also what does the arabic version on this passage say? Does it say the same thing? That al shafi is supporting death to apostasy?

Heres the arabic link: https://shamela.ws/book/1655/1663

Muslims tend to portray pre -islamic arabic world as barbaric and cruel. I am interested in how it actually was..

Several sects deny abrogation, there is no agreed list of which verses exactly were 'replaced with better versions'.

Abrogation vs static eternal truth

https://quranx.com/6.115 "**And the word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can alter His words**, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing."

https://quranx.com/15.9 “Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian.”

https://quranx.com/2.106 "**We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?**"

https://quranx.com/16.101 "**And when We substitute a verse in place of a verse - and Allah is most knowing of what He sends down** - **they say, "You, [O Muhammad\], are but an inventor [of lies]." But most of them do not know.**"

https://quranx.com/14.1 “Alif, Lam, Ra. **[This is] a Book which We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad\], that you might bring mankind out of darknesses into the light by permission of their Lord - to the path of the Exalted in Might, the Praiseworthy -**

https://quranx.com/5.72 "They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers."

https://quranx.com/44.58 "And indeed, We have eased the Qur'an in your tongue that they might be reminded."

https://quranx.com/44.59 "So watch, [O Muhammad\]; indeed, they are watching [for your end]."

https://quranx.com/10.37 "And it was not [possible] for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah, but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds."

https://quranx.com/22.52 “And We did not send before you any messenger or prophet except that when he spoke [or recited], Satan threw into it [some misunderstanding]. But Allah abolishes that which Satan throws in; then Allah makes precise His verses. And Allah is Knowing and Wise.”

https://quranx.com/12.1 "Alif, Lam, Ra. These are the verses of the clear Book."

https://quranx.com/12.2 "Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur'an that you might understand."

https://quranx.com/87.6 “We will make you recite, [O Muhammad], and you will not forget,”

https://quranx.com/87.7 “Except what Allah should will. Indeed, He knows what is declared and what is hidden.”

https://quranx.com/85.21 "But this is an honored Qur'an"

https://quranx.com/85.22 "[Inscribed\] in a Preserved Slate."

Why would an all-knowing being reveal verses to Muhammed and then make Muhammed forget them before reciting them so improved versions can be revealed????

Let’s start with the harsh reality—many people are forced to fast during Ramadan, even if they don’t want to. Non-Muslims in Muslim-majority countries often fear legal consequences if they eat during the day, and in many households, family members pressure each other into fasting, using emotional blackmail. Even if it’s not illegal to eat, the constant worry about "what will people think?" pushes people into fasting against their will. In some cases, families can go as far as hurting or punishing someone who refuses to fast, leaving no room for personal choice.

Now, let's talk about the actual fasting, or rather, the lack of it. When most people think of fasting, they imagine going without food. But in Islam, Ramadan has become the opposite. It’s not about abstaining; it’s about shifting meals to nighttime and feasting. Muslims simply rearrange their meals, eating heavily at night and sleeping during the day to avoid hunger. They call it fasting, but it’s really feasting, plain and simple.

This rearranged schedule does more harm than good. People gorge themselves on unhealthy food twice a day for an entire month, leading to a spike in hospital visits. Digestive problems, skyrocketing diabetes cases, and obesity are all on the rise, especially in Gulf countries where food consumption soars during Ramadan. Food bills can increase by 50% to 100%, turning the "holy month of fasting" into an indulgent binge-fest.

From a spiritual angle, this so-called fasting is equally problematic. In the Bible, Matthew 6 says that when you fast, you shouldn’t make it obvious or show off. But during Ramadan, fasting is a public spectacle for everyone to see. Jesus condemned those who fasted just to appear righteous, and here we have people not only pretending to fast but also seeking praise for it. It’s double hypocrisy—bingeing and calling it fasting while wanting to be admired for their so-called piety.

Ramadan isn’t just physically harmful—it damages people spiritually too. Productivity drops by 35-50%, people overeat, fall ill, and still call it fasting. Many families go into debt, stocking up on food to maintain this cycle of overindulgence, all while believing they are serving God. Instead of self-control, Ramadan has turned into a month of gluttony. The truth is, it should be called the month of binge eating, not fasting.

Ultimately, Ramadan forces people into a cycle of physical, emotional, and spiritual harm, with fasting in name only. Both those who genuinely wish to fast and those who are pressured into it are caught in a cycle of overindulgence and false piety.

Like, can someone give me a list of antisemitic quran verses, hadiths, and classical scholarly fiqh opinions? I'm collecting evidence and sources for a saved post that i can copy and paste to show people. One i remember is that gharquad tree hadith. But, what are some others?

u/Xusura712

u/creidmheach

Someone claims that in Shia Islam there is a hadith that says "multiple cities would become like one city." They also claim there is a hadith that says "women would prevent men from worshipping god"

I can't seem to find these alleged hadiths anywhere but from the person who claims they exist. They claim the signs are "based" off of  Sharh Ausul al-kafi and Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih.

Can somebody verify if they actually exist?

Family bonds are some of the strongest connections we have. We trust and care for our loved ones. But what happens when religion causes family members to hurt each other? We often hear about cases where a father kills his daughter or a brother kills his sister because of religious disagreements. This makes us ask some important questions:

• Are these actions just isolated cases, or do they have a deeper history?
• Is it acceptable in Islam to kill family members if they are seen as infidels or apostates?

Many Muslims say that these actions do not represent true Islamic values. They often refer to a verse in the Quran (Surah Isra 17:33) that says, “Do not take a human life, which is sacred to Allah, except with a legal right.”

But what does “legal right” mean here? In some interpretations, leaving Islam is seen as apostasy, which makes it acceptable to kill someone who does so. How can this make sense when some early Muslim leaders were promised paradise?

For example:

• Umar ibn al-Khattab killed his uncle.
• Abu Ubaidah ibn al-Jarrah killed his father.
• Mus’ab ibn Umair killed his brother.
• Hamzah killed his cousins.

Strangely, many of these early leaders ended up fighting and killing each other over money and power later on.

So, it’s not surprising when we hear about Muslims harming their relatives over religious disagreements, especially when these figures, who are supposed to represent good values, acted

the link: the link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-XcnvqaIQ3DOkfvVmv-WINDerCRjNrXQ/view

Not in the link:

Abu yusuf student of abu hanifah himself

https://shamela.ws/book/26333/201

The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, only said: “Whoever changes his religion, kill him ,” and this apostate who has returned to Islam is not continuing to change.

The meaning of the hadith of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, is: whoever persists in changing it; do you not see that he has forbidden the blood and wealth of whoever says there is no god but God, and this one says there is no god but God; so how can I kill him, when he, may God bless him and grant him peace, has forbidden killing him? 

Abu Yusuf said: With these hadiths, those who have seen the jurists - and they are many - argue for repentance, and the best thing we have heard in that regard, and God knows best, is that they should be asked to repent, and if they repent, then fine, otherwise their necks should be struck, according to what came from the famous hadiths and what was upon those jurists we met.

Abu Al-Barakat Al-Nasafi (d. 1310 AD, Hanafi)

Islam is presented to the apostate and his doubts are exposed

He is imprisoned for three days, and if he converts to Islam, otherwise he is killed

His conversion to Islam means that he disavows all religions except Islam or whatever

he has converted to

https://shamela.ws/book/14262/252

qudduri

The Mukhtasar al-Quduri (Hanafi fiqh)

if that link doesn't work

https://archive.org/details/the-mukhtasar-al-quduri/The_Mukhtasar_Al_Quduri/page/n557/mode/2up?q=killed

al kasani https://shamela.ws/book/8183/1865

As for the ruling on apostasy, we say - and with Allah the Most High is success: Apostasy has many rulings, some of which relate to the apostate himself, some of which relate to his property, some of which relate to his actions, and some of which relate to his children. As for that which relates to himself, there are types: one of which is the permissibility of shedding his blood if he is a man, whether free or not. A slave; because his infallibility is lost due to apostasy. The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said : “Whoever changes his religion, kill him . ”

Likewise, when the Arabs apostatized after the death of the Messenger of God , may God bless him and grant him peace, the Companions unanimously agreed to kill them. It is also recommended that he be given the opportunity to repent and Islam be offered to him in the event that he converts to Islam, but it is not obligatory. Because the call has reached him, if he converts to Islam, then welcome and welcome to Islam. If he refuses, the Imam will consider this matter. If he hopes that he will repent, or he asks for a postponement, he will give him a postponement of three days. If he does not hope that he will repent and he does not ask for a postponement, he will kill him immediately

Ibn juzayy maliki: https://shamela.ws/book/6193/235 turns away from Islam, either by explicitly declaring his disbelief, or by a word that requires it, or by an action that includes it. He must be given a chance to repent and is given a period of three days. Al-Shafi’i said in one of his two opinions that he must be given a chance to repent immediately. Ali ibn Abi Talib, may God be pleased with him, said that he must be given a month to repent. Sufyan al-Thawri said that he must be given a month to repent. If he repents, his repentance is accepted. If he does not repent, he must be killed. His heirs, whether Muslims or non-Muslims, do not inherit from him. Rather, his wealth becomes spoils of war for the Muslims. Unless he is a slave, then his property belongs to his master. If a woman apostatizes, her ruling is the same as that of a man. 

more coming below!