I wish to refer to the Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi's letter Have zero tolerance on apostasy and the letter Apostasy - no need to return to 7th century by Dr Syed Alwi Ahmad.

Muslims should accept rulings based on 'dalil' (evidence) from the Quran or the Hadith (sayings and actions of the Prophet Muhammad [peace be upon him]). It is essential to put these texts and rulings of the Syariah (Islamic law) above all else.

It's true that we do not have to return to the 7th century. After all, Muslims in this so-called 'modern world' are applying the contents of the same Quran and the Hadith of the yesteryears.

But modernity is not to be confused with refusal to accept the true teachings and rulings of the Syariah. Modern or otherwise, the Quran and the Hadith are here to stay, whether we (Muslims) like it or not. And stay it must.

No one can interpret the ruling of the Syariah in a manner not intended by the law giver. These include those who blindly follow the people of 'bidah' (innovation) in their misinterpretations such as the Murji'ah, Mu'tazilah and Khawaarij (all misguided groups).

The saheh (authentic) hadith indicates that it is essential to put the apostate to death. Imam Al-Bukhari narrated that Ibn Abbaas said: The messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever (a Muslim) changes his religion, (from Islam to other faiths), put him to death'.

In another saheh hadith, Imam Al-Bukhari and Imam Muslim narrated that Abdullaah bin Mas'ood said: 'The messenger of Allah said: 'It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim, except in one of the three cases - a soul for a soul (murder); a previously-married person who commits zina (adultery); and the one who leaves his religion (Islam).

The general meaning of these hadith indicates that it is essential to put the apostate to death. However, there are various conditions set by the Syariah before an apostate can be put to death.

The apostate is not to be killed without warning. Even though his crime is so great, he is given a last opportunity, a respite of three days in which to repent. If he repents, he will be left alone, if he does not repent, then he will be killed. This is in accordance to the Syariah.

Unless of course, we wish to be 'modern' and ignore this. There are detailed explanations with regards to this too, which I am not able to put forth here.

Moderation can be explained by not going to the extreme or beyond the limit set by the Syariah while at the same time not falling short of its requirements. In short, whatever is in accordance to the Syariah is moderate; whatever exceeds the Syariah is extremism and whatever falls short of the Syariah is laxity.

As for our non-Muslim friends, they may find all these rulings very strange and even harsh in nature. They must understand that it is an obligatory notion upon all Muslims (whether modern or otherwise) to adhere to the Syariah rulings.

There is also no question of contradiction when Elfie mentioned : 'Freedom of religion is not be confused with freedom to simply leave the religion ...'. At least, not for Muslims.

Again, his argument is based on the Syariah law which, for Muslims, is above all else. What seems to be a major contradiction here is that whilst some stress that they are not encouraging apostasy of Muslims, they are not resolutely rejecting the Syariah's ruling on apostasy either. This is a blatant contradiction.

Let me just pose a question to Muslims: if the punishment for murder (intentional) and espionage (also known as treason) is death, then what should be the punishment for the one (Muslim) who disbelieves in Allah and rejects His religion?

Is espionage or the shedding of blood worse than leaving the religion (Islam) of the Lord and rejecting it? We require an honest answer on this.

Elfie was right in asserting his views on apostasy in accordance to Syariah rulings. There is certainly a major confusion within the Muslim world with regards to freedom of religion and human rights, the latter which some think stand above the Syariah law.