Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Although Islam is considered monotheistic I would imagine that in a case of 'oness' (coercion) one would still not be allowed to convert. Is conversion to Islam considered to be a case of יהרג ואל יעבור (One should choose death over transgression.)? Why?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 18 down vote accepted

The Rambam in his אגרת השמד says outward acceptance of Islam is not ייהרג ואל יעבור. On the other hand, the Radvaz quotes the Ritva as saying that this is ייהרג ואל יעבור. According to the Rambam, outward acceptance of Islam is not ייהרג ואל יעבור because Islam is not עבודה זרה, and even though it is heretical because it denies the Torah, one does not have to give up his life for claiming to believe in Muhammad. The Ritva on the other hand would hold that since accepting Islam means rejecting the Torah for Muhammad, it is ייהרג ואל יעבור.

(For some secondary sources on this topic see Haym Soloveitchik, "Maimonides' Iggeret ha-Shemad: Law and Rhetoric"; Marc Shapiro, "Islam and the Halakhah.")

share|improve this answer
    
Quran does not reject torah it is a false accusation , all which was discussed positively here web.archive.org/web/20121015164750/http://www.judaism-islam.com/… –  Ali May 4 '13 at 16:40
    
@Ali, what Islam says about the acceptability of Jews converting to Islam is not relevant for this site. This answer brings relevant sources on both sides. –  Monica Cellio May 19 '13 at 2:24
    
@MonicaCellio I never claimed that, what I did claim is that the answer is based on a flawed premise that Muslims reject Torah , which is simply a strawman. Should'nt you be asking the Muslims whether they reject the Torah rather than a 3rd party about the opinions of Muslims. –  Ali May 28 '13 at 13:39
    
@Ali, let me amend my previous statement: what Islam says about anything other than Islam itself is not relevant on this site, and what Islam says about Islam has very limited utility (pretty much only in the space of "is such-and-such practice against halacha?", where an explanation of such-and-such practice is needed, and no I am not encouraging more of that type of question, which is not very interesting to most Yodeyans). Also, links to an Islamic proselytizing site that apparantly didn't even stick around are particularly unwelcome here. Finally, I trust the Ritva way more than you. –  Monica Cellio May 28 '13 at 14:00
1  
@Ali, you yourself have said that Islam considers the torah to have been "corrupted". That means that, to accept Islam, a Jew has to "downgrade" his understanding of torah from the truth that it is to, I dunno, "some good ideas unless Muhammad disagrees"? If you accept torah as true you cannot accept Islam's ideas about torah, God, prophets, and so on. "Not avodah zara" does not mean "ok, go for it". But wfb's answer already covers this well, so I'm not going to argue with you about it. –  Monica Cellio May 28 '13 at 15:04

I recently went to a shiur on this topic after posting this question. The Rabbi said that there is much debate on what the Rambam actually held with regards to this i.e. whether he was writing as a response to the Jews of Fez and their 'coerced conversion' at the hands of the Almohads. The Rambam was writing in response to an unnamed chacham who was espousing very harsh claims that these Jews were 'goyim' and would do better not to daven and perform any rituals at all. The Rambam went to Fez, Morocco, (for unknown reasons) in the thick of Almohad control without being subject to the harsh sanctions. His letter (iggeret hashmad) was in response to this chacham.

The Rambam made a few major points to this specific community in Fez:

1) Judaism is not all or nothing. Every mitzvah is important regardless of your status. The mitzvah of a tzaddik is important and so to is the sin or a rasha. Nothing is beyond any of us.

2) Although they had declared the 'shahada' (basic statement of Islamic conversion that Allah is G-d and mohammed the prophet) they clearly did not mean it and the Almohads knew this. The Rambam was reassuring the community to continue practicing Judaism and to not feel the overwhelming guilt that this chacham was placing upon them. [As wfb mentioned above, others disagreed with the conversion and said that it would have been better to have died, because declaring belief in mohammed would be contrary to (at least) the Rambam's 13 ikarim, namely that Moshe's prophecy being infallible.]

3) One cannot slander an entire community.

4) Although the conversion is not ideal, they should at least yearn and try to escape if the time was right and not a danger to their life. Otherwise they could lead astray and fall into a false sense of security.

Although the iggeret ha'shmad seems to sway towards the conversion not being ייהרג ואל יעבור there are those that debate this. The Rambam doesn't pasken lechatchila what to do in this situation, its a response to a situation; which of course gives rise to this debate in the first place. Some say that within the Mishneh Torah itself it contradicts the Rambam's overtones in this very letter. (see Chaim Soloveitchik as mentioned above)

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.