Is it considered disbelief to limit the apostasy (ridda) punishment solely to the warring apostate, while acknowledging the established nature and consensus (ijma') on the apostasy punishment? And is merely disagreeing with a consensus that one acknowledges to exist considered disbelief?

Interpretation (ta'wil) is one of the impediments to declaring someone a disbeliever (takfir) according to the Sunnis. It is defined as a Muslim committing an act of disbelief while believing it to be permissible or lawful due to an evidence he deems valid, or for a reason he considers an excuse. This occurs due to a deficiency in understanding religious texts, without an intentional desire to violate them. Therefore, one who acts based on interpretation is excused and is not declared a disbeliever until the proof is established against him and his misconception is removed. The Qur'an, the Sunnah, and the consensus of the Companions, the Tabi'un (successors), and the Imams all indicate that one who acts based on interpretation does not exit the fold of Islam, and the rulings applicable to disbelievers are not applied to him. Scholars have often refrained from declaring many innovators as disbelievers due to the presence of interpretation.