From the foregoing, it is clear that: 1. The non-excommunication of the perpetrator of disbelief attributed to Islam is due to ignorance of the rulings of apostasy, not due to ignorance of the reality of faith, and this is for those who disavow the disbelief of the perpetrator of disbelief. 2. There is no necessary connection between not excommunicating the perpetrator of disbelief and calling his disbelief faith. Whoever affirms Islam for the perpetrator of disbelief affirms Islam for him because of the rituals of Islam he has shown, not because of the disbelief he has committed. In reality, he refrains from excommunicating him for fear of falling into what is forbidden, not due to his ignorance of faith or to reject the legal ruling. 3. Excommunication is a legal ruling, and when a Muslim utters the two testimonies, he has fulfilled the origin of religion. If he is ignorant of the ruling of excommunication, due to confusion in a specific situation, or lack of knowledge, or misunderstanding, or due to a doubt that has arisen for him, then all of this does not indicate that he has nullified the origin of religion, nor his ignorance of it. The greatest evidence for this is the disagreement of the Companions regarding the excommunication of some hypocrites, and they did not excommunicate them for that, because they had fulfilled the origin of religion, and some rulings of the Sharia were hidden from some of them, including the ruling of excommunication for some hypocrites, while they disavowed what the hypocrites were upon of disbelief.

I ask Allah Almighty to guide us all to the truth and to the straight path. And praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds. And may Allah bless Muhammad and his family and companions and grant them peace.