Nasa'i 4060 / 4079 record the same apostasy hadith found in Bukhari 6878 (entry b12), Tirmidhi 1402 (entry t02), and Abu Dawud 4361 (entry d03). The Nasa'i version provides independent chain attestation, with the apostasy death-penalty teaching preserved across all major Sunan and Sahih collections.

The substantive issues are addressed in entries b12, t02, and d03. The Nasa'i entry adds:

1. Cross-collection independent attestation. The apostasy hadith is in Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi, Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah — every major canonical collection. Cross-collection consistency is overwhelming. The teaching is not Bukhari-specific or Tirmidhi-specific; it is the consensus of the canonical record. Rudolph Peters and Gert J.J. de Vries, "Apostasy in Islam," Die Welt des Islams, n.s. Vol. 17 (1976), pp. 1–25, established the foundational modern scholarly survey confirming this cross-collection consensus and its doctrinal consequences across the Sunni schools.

2. The Nasa'i placement. Nasa'i's collection is organised around fiqh applications. The hadith's placement in the section on hudud (fixed Quranic-derived punishments) confirms its operative role: classical fiqh treated apostasy as a hadd offence with death as the prescribed punishment. Wael B. Hallaq, Sharī'a: Theory, Practice, Transformations (Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 311–18, documents how the hudud category carried mandatory fixed penalties derived from prophetic precedent — "offenses whose punishments are fixed and are God's right" — precisely the mechanism by which this hadith generated a legally binding capital sentence across the classical schools.

3. The persistent jurisprudential tradition. Nasa'i's preservation of the hadith in the legal-genre collection demonstrates that the early Sunni tradition treated apostasy as a hadd offence requiring capital punishment. All four Sunni schools and the major Shia school have applied this framework. Rudolph Peters, Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and Practice from the Sixteenth to the Twenty-First Century (Cambridge University Press, 2006), documents the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali schools' unanimous application of the death penalty for apostasy, differing only on procedural details such as the length of the repentance period (istitāba). Jonathan A.C. Brown, Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy (Oneworld, 2014), a work broadly sympathetic to Islamic legal tradition, nonetheless acknowledges that capital punishment for apostasy was a settled ruling within classical Sunni scholarship and that modern attempts to overturn it face substantial hadith-authority obstacles.

4. Modern application. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, Sudan, Yemen, the UAE, and Qatar all retain apostasy as a capital crime, citing this and parallel hadith as foundational. The Nasa'i preservation is part of the textual basis. Robert Spencer, The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion (Regnery, 2006), frames the canonical attestation of "whoever changes his religion, kill him" as the direct textual anchor for ongoing state-level enforcement of apostasy law in Muslim-majority countries.

The analysis from entries b12, t02, and d03 applies fully here.