Compulsion in religion

[MuslimAgorist]

First a warning. Caveat Emptor. Buyer beware. Providing an exegesis of a Quranic verse is an ambitious task for a layman such as me, and I am unqualified. Everything right and true is from Allah, not from Al Azhar, not from Al Jazeera, not from Al Qaida, but from Allah. If there is wisdom in my words, and those words ring true for you, it is by His Will. It is my opinion that Believers should form their own opinion. So, test what I say in the laboratory of your own nervous system. If you independently agree with me, alhamdullillah, but don’t be pointing at me on The Last Day. In that context … this is the perfect verse to be discussing.

2:256 "There shall be no compulsion in religion: Truth has become distinct from error, and whoever rejects false deities and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold, which never dbreaks. And Allah is Hearing, Knowing."

The placement of this verse in the Quran remarkable. It immediately follows Ayatul Kursi, which is the most read, most widely memorized, and most prolifically displayed verse in the Quran. So, this statement regarding compulsion is imbedded within potent statements on creed. It may be the only verse of its kind, but clearly Allah intended it to be well known… and therefore well understood.The only published explanations of this verse that I can find are concerned entirely with prohibiting forced conversion. This is a reaction formation to attacks against Islam regarding how it spread historically. It is not an actionable interpretation by Muslims for Muslims. They do not discuss the implications of prohibiting coercion in other matters. So, I’ve done a little processing and I’d like to decompress the issue as I see it.

Read more

 

[sur]

u r right... it applies to other matters too.. e.g, to "leaving islam"....

If u say penalty for leaving islam is DEATH, then u r in a way "COMPELLING" that perosn to stay in islam..... i.e. going against Quran.


Similarly compelling ppl to any other issue is going against this verse, UNLESS it's a issue that can affect society, then one can be compelled to adopt the right path .....

 

[MSalman]

It is my opinion that Believers should form their own opinion. So, test what I say in the laboratory of your own nervous system.

:hmm: this just raised my eyebrow

In order to understand this ayah one needs to understand the sabab al-nazool (the reason of revelation) of this ayah. The ayah is in reference to compelling people to become Muslim. They cannot be compelled to become Muslim, but they certainly can be compelled to comply with the laws of Islam. In fact, they are even compelled to stay Muslim if they decide to apostate.

Concerning the sabab al-nuzul of this verse, it is reported that in Jahiliyya, some of the Aws and Khazraj would entrust their children to the Jews to raise them. Therefore, some would grow up as Jews. When some of the Jewish tribes were expelled from Madina, these offspring of the Ansar who were Jews chose to go with their Jewish brethren-in-faith into exile.

Their parents were unhappy about this and wanted to compel them to accept Islam and to stay with them in al-Madina, so this verse was revealed.

There is a difference between making people accept Islam and making them submit to judicial system of an Islamic state so that the justice can be established. The ayah is talking about the former and not the latter.

and Allah knows best

@sur

this issue has been discussed so many times before and I do not want to start it again in this thread. The ahadith are clear on the subject and so is the ijmaa' of the sahaba (may Allah be pleased with them). And none of that agrees with you

 

[cat eyes]

i think this thread is gona get closed also :giggling:

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

In order to understand this ayah one needs to understand the sabab al-nazool (the reason of revelation) of this ayah. The ayah is in reference to compelling people to become Muslim. They cannot be compelled to become Muslim, but they certainly can be compelled to comply with the laws of Islam. In fact, they are even compelled to stay Muslim if they decide to apostate.

Which means there clearly is compulsion in religion.

Peace

 

[Rabi Mansur]

Greetings,


Which means there clearly is compulsion in religion.

Peace

Amen to that. If there were no compulsion in religion, then one should be free to leave.

:hmm:

 

[MSalman]

Greetings,


Which means there clearly is compulsion in religion.

Peace

I think it would be best that you read my post and not quote me out of context:

a) Forcing non-Muslims to accept Islam
b) Forcing people to follow the judicial system of the state
​

The ayah is talking about a) hence there is no compulsion in religion. As far b) then whoever is living under a state then the state has the right to force people to follow the judicial system to bring an order or what have you. The issue of apostasy follows under b) and not a); therefore, the point of compulsion in religion is mute here. No sane person will ever object to the fact that the state cannot enforce laws upon people. Whether those laws are just or unjust is an entirely different discussion.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

I think it would be best that you read my post and not quote me out of context:

I did read your post. I always read all of a post if I intend to reply to it.

a) Forcing non-Muslims to accept Islam
b) Forcing people to follow the judicial system of the state
​

The ayah is talking about a) hence there is no compulsion in religion. As far b) then whoever is living under a state then the state has the right to force people to follow the judicial system to bring an order or what have you. The issue of apostasy follows under b) and not a); therefore, the point of compulsion in religion is mute here. No sane person will ever object to the fact that the state cannot enforce laws upon people. Whether those laws are just or unjust is an entirely different discussion.

You seem to be saying that you can't force someone to become a Muslim, but you can force them to obey the laws of the state.

What if the religion forms the laws of the state, though? In that case, if there's compulsion in the state, then there's compulsion in the religion.

Peace

 

[GuestFellow]

^ Ah...

There is a difference between obeying Islamic state laws and practicing as a Muslim. When a non-Muslim enters a Muslim country ruled under Shariah law it does not mean they are forced into accepting Islam by taking the shahadah.

Islamic state laws cover topics such as crime, economics and so on. Obeying state laws and abiding by these regulations does not make you a Muslim. Besides some parts of the Shariah is not even applicable to non-Muslims.

EDIT: typo

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

When a non-Muslim enters a Muslim country ruled under Shariah law it does not mean they are forced into accepting Islam by taking the shahadah.

Ah, I see you've inserted a 'not' there. You had me confused with the first version of your post.

You are an example of good proofreading to everyone. :statisfie

Islamic state laws cover topics such as crime, economics and so on. Obeying state laws and abiding by these regulations does not make you a Muslim. Besides some parts of the Shariah is not even applicable to non-Muslims.

That seems fair enough, but it's not really what I'm thinking about.

In fact, they are even compelled to stay Muslim if they decide to apostate.

That's the kind of compulsion I mean, and I think it is fair to say that Islam encourages it.

Peace

 

[GuestFellow]

Greetings,


Ah, I see you've inserted a 'not' there. You had me confused with the first version of your post.

You are an example of good proofreading to everyone. :statisfie

>_>

That's the kind of compulsion I mean, and I think it is fair to say that Islam encourages it.

Peace

Did you not read this?

I think it would be best that you read my post and not quote me out of context:

a) Forcing non-Muslims to accept Islam
b) Forcing people to follow the judicial system of the state
The ayah is talking about a) hence there is no compulsion in religion. As far b) then whoever is living under a state then the state has the right to force people to follow the judicial system to bring an order or what have you. The issue of apostasy follows under b) and not a); therefore, the point of compulsion in religion is mute here. No sane person will ever object to the fact that the state cannot enforce laws upon people. Whether those laws are just or unjust is an entirely different discussion.

He had already explained his point.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Did you not read this?

Yes. I read it and responded to it. Why is it relevant to bring it up again now?

I claim that despite the 'no compulsion in religion' verse, there is compulsion in Islam - the compulsion to stay Muslim. Why is nobody able to address this point without equivocating?

Peace

 

[optimist]

^ Ah...

There is a difference between obeying Islamic state laws and practicing as a Muslim. When a non-Muslim enters a Muslim country ruled under Shariah law it does not mean they are forced into accepting Islam by taking the shahadah.

Islamic state laws cover topics such as crime, economics and so on. Obeying state laws and abiding by these regulations does not make you a Muslim. Besides some parts of the Shariah is not even applicable to non-Muslims.

EDIT: typo

:thumbs_up

 

[MSalman]

What if the religion forms the laws of the state, though? In that case, if there's compulsion in the state, then there's compulsion in the religion. Peace

the same religion says that you cannot force people (non-Muslims) into Islam. Since Islamic state is based upon Islamic rulings; hence, this law will be applied. If this law is broken then that is not Islam

That's the kind of compulsion I mean, and I think it is fair to say that Islam encourages it.

Just to clarify I said those who decides to apostate and not those who have already apostatized. Do you know how they are compelled? Compulsion does not always have to be negative! You are compelled to not to kill otherwise severe punishment. You are compelled to not drive fast. Is that a negative compulsion!? They are compelled by giving da'wah and asking to repent; thus, coming back to Islam. If they do not repent then they are put to death as long as they are within an Islamic state but if they flee to a kafir land then Muslims are not to pursue them because Islamic laws cannot be applied in a kafir land on people in that land.

gibson, at the end of the day, Islam has laws just like your secular country has laws. We can argue about it all day and say that this law is not fair and that law is not fair without reaching any beneficial conclusion. Your source of law is your limited intellect, knowledge and corrupt understanding of truth whereas our source is the Creator who knows what is best for His creation. And no one is asking you to like Islam. Your choice, if you choose Islam good for you and if you do not then you are among the losers.

PS: I will double check the part of what methods are allowed in Shari'ah to compel apostates to remain Muslims

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Thank you for continuing to help me with this subject. I am genuinely trying to understand the Islamic attitude to apostasy here, and as with other areas of the religion, I am encountering great difficulty.

the same religion says that you cannot force people (non-Muslims) into Islam. Since Islamic state is based upon Islamic rulings; hence, this law will be applied. If this law is broken then that is not Islam

I can see that this is true, but it's not really related to what I'm saying.

Just to clarify I said those who decides to apostate and not those who have already apostatized.

This is interesting. Could you explain what the difference is and how a sharia system would view these cases differently?

Do you know how they are compelled? Compulsion does not always have to be negative! You are compelled to not to kill otherwise severe punishment. You are compelled to not drive fast. Is that a negative compulsion!?

No, but it is still compulsion.

Nobody is arguing that there is no compulsion in law - of course there is.

Islam claims to be a coherent and complete philosophical system, but when Allah says that there is to be "no compulsion in religion" (2:256), that logically excludes the possibility of having any binding laws within the religion at all, since laws involve compulsion.

Another thing that makes your analogy puzzling is the fact that killing and driving fast are both activities that endanger or destroy life. Relinquishing a religion doesn't.

They are compelled by giving da'wah and asking to repent; thus, coming back to Islam. If they do not repent then they are put to death as long as they are within an Islamic state but if they flee to a kafir land then Muslims are not to pursue them because Islamic laws cannot be applied in a kafir land on people in that land.

That sounds like a fair amount of compulsion to me.

gibson, at the end of the day, Islam has laws just like your secular country has laws. We can argue about it all day and say that this law is not fair and that law is not fair without reaching any beneficial conclusion.

It may or may not be fair, but what I'm drawing your attention to is what looks like an obvious contradiction.

Your source of law is your limited intellect, knowledge and corrupt understanding of truth whereas our source is the Creator who knows what is best for His creation. And no one is asking you to like Islam. Your choice, if you choose Islam good for you and if you do not then you are among the losers.

Well, thank you. What a charming thing to say to a fellow human being.

PS: I will double check the part of what methods are allowed in Shari'ah to compel apostates to remain Muslims

That would be interesting.

Thanks again.

Peace

 

[Rabi Mansur]

I guess I never saw where he addressed the contradiction.

Did I read that right? You can be put to death in as Islamic state if you leave the religion and refuse to "repent" and come back?

That gives me the shudders.

 

[Sampharo]

MuslimAgorist,

I saw your link and read the article which I assume is something you wrote. I found this paragraph that I would like to quote here:

"It is my contention that if we carry this verse to its logical conclusion it means much more than a religion without coercion. A deen without coercion means politics without coercion. It means personal relationships without coercion. It means a comprehensive way of life without coercion. So, just as Islamic theology should be characterized by open debate and a free market of ideas, an Islamic order should be characterized by political liberty, and the Islamic family should be characterized freedom of association."

If this is indeed something you wrote, then Excuse me, what on Earth are you talking about? Are you stripping down God's religion to some string of sub-certainty conclusions to suggest a "philosophical" understanding that over-rides the set limits and laws that God has placed to us?

Such matters weigh practically nothing to actual Islamic knowledge and would like to alert you that such contemplative approach is the heart and soul of "taking God's verses in mockery" and is forbidden misguidance. Of course you are "free" to practice what you will, you're not free to change fundamentals of Islam by pure desire and bending words out of its context.

Quran interpretation has basis that people study years just to understand the process. It is also attached many times to historical events. Abrogation of rules is an established system and was not set by philosophers based on desires and thoughts, it was set by Shariah and revealed knowledge to the prophet. "No Compulsion In Religion" refers to land under Islamic rule and to leave christians and jews to maintain their religion. That's it.

As for "the reasoning" that you keep saying God has asked us to use, it wasn't to reanalyze and reject and accept rulings without evidence and actualy AGAINST established evidence and documented orders and actions, it was regarding contemplating in creation and God's words to realize his existence and the impossibility of the Quran being anything other than inspired by God. What you are venturing into seems to be using reasoning, philosophy, theory and logic to manipulate the verses after the laws and practice was set in the example of the prophet and companions, ultimately to come around and re-establish your own desirable way of life and force people to accept it in the name of freedom, while still branding it Islam.

May God grant you real guidance

 

[MSalman]

Greetings,

Thank you for continuing to help me with this subject. I am genuinely trying to understand the Islamic attitude to apostasy here, and as with other areas of the religion, I am encountering great difficulty.

ok, I will have husn al-dhan (benefit of doubt) for you

This is interesting. Could you explain what the difference is and how a sharia system would view these cases differently?

to be honest, I do not know - I will have to check with knowledgeable brothers.

No, but it is still compulsion.

And I did not deny it. I was only clarifying the part that some may think it is physically forcing them

Nobody is arguing that there is no compulsion in law - of course there is.

then what is point of this discussion

Islam claims to be a coherent and complete philosophical system,

explain the underlined part to me please and what do you mean by this and what are you referring to? thanks

but when Allah says that there is to be "no compulsion in religion" (2:256), that logically excludes the possibility of having any binding laws within the religion at all, since laws involve compulsion.

you are doing exactly what these Muslims are doing - taking it out of context. And you keep repeating it despite the fact I have explained this to you. You see these kinds of points does not show me that you are really trying to understand things here.

Last time, the ayah is not general - it talks about specific case. Hence, NO CONTRADICTION!

Another thing that makes your analogy puzzling is the fact that killing and driving fast are both activities that endanger or destroy life. Relinquishing a religion doesn't.

analogies are NOT meant to be taken in absolute or equal sense. They are presented just to explain things. I only brought them to show that compulsion exists in every judicial system as you agreed. Thus, if we are argue that Islamic law is not fair (for sake of arguing) then we can argue about other laws as well. So my point was from fairness point of view.

Secondly, note that your explanation is Islamic logic: clarifying some wisdom or reasoning behind some ruling. I do not know where you get that relinquishing a religion does not endanger people's lives!? It does endanger as some extremists may kill them or attack relatives or the apostate may incite wars or spread other type of fitnah which would lead to physical fights. This type of violation of Islamic law is more dangerous than the two examples I presented.

That sounds like a fair amount of compulsion to me.

straw man; never denied it; see above

It may or may not be fair, but what I'm drawing your attention to is what looks like an obvious contradiction.

see above

Well, thank you. What a charming thing to say to a fellow human being.

every kafir is a loser in the sight of Allah, the Lord; the Creator. So your complaint has little value whether we put that that fact on the table or not. Secondly, do you expect me to be nice to you and act 'goody goody' and not tell you the truth? Would that not be deception!? Thirdly, we do not hesitate to speak the truth whether people like it or not as Allah says in the Qur'an. Maybe someone can quote those ayaat for you.

That would be interesting.

you might have to wait for sometime since we are busy with ramadhan and other projects

and Allah knows best

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

ok, I will have husn al-dhan (benefit of doubt) for you

to be honest, I do not know - I will have to check with knowledgeable brothers.

Thank you.

then what is point of this discussion

I'd like to see how you explain the apparent contradiction that I've pointed out.

explain the underlined part to me please and what do you mean by this and what are you referring to? thanks

Islam claims to be a coherent and complete philosophical system, which essentially means:

It is a way of life that makes complete sense in every part, and every part fits in perfectly with all the other parts. Also, it is complete - no other system is needed.

Is that a fair description of the claims Islam makes for itself?

you are doing exactly what these Muslims are doing - taking it out of context. And you keep repeating it despite the fact I have explained this to you. You see these kinds of points does not show me that you are really trying to understand things here.

You may think you've explained it, but I'm still none the wiser.

Last time, the ayah is not general - it talks about specific case. Hence, NO CONTRADICTION!

What is this specific case that you speak of?

Here is the ayah in question, together with the ones before and after it, in the translation of Mohsin Khan:

255 Allah! La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), Al-Hayyul-Qayyum (the Ever Living, the One Who sustains and protects all that exists). Neither slumber nor sleep overtakes Him. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is he that can intercede with Him except with His Permission? He knows what happens to them (His creatures) in this world, and what will happen to them in the Hereafter. And they will never compass anything of His Knowledge except that which He wills. His Kursi extends over the heavens and the earth, and He feels no fatigue in guarding and preserving them. And He is the Most High, the Most Great.
256 There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.
257 Allah is the Wali (Protector or Guardian) of those who believe. He brings them out from darkness into light. But as for those who disbelieve, their Auliya (supporters and helpers) are Taghut [false deities and false leaders], they bring them out from light into darkness. Those are the dwellers of the Fire, and they will abide therein forever.

The bolded section of Ayah 256 looks very much like two general statements. Can you show why you think differently?

Also, how does including the context of the ayah affect its meaning?

I do not know where you get that relinquishing a religion does not endanger people's lives!? It does endanger as some extremists may kill them or attack relatives or the apostate may incite wars or spread other type of fitnah which would lead to physical fights. This type of violation of Islamic law is more dangerous than the two examples I presented.

I suppose I underestimated humanity's capacity for idiocy.

It's pretty alarming that you think apostasy is worse than murder, by the way.

straw man; never denied it; see above

You didn't deny it, but Allah did. That is the point.

Secondly, do you expect me to be nice to you

Yes.

I am a human being, as deserving of respect as anyone else.

The Qur'an commands you to "argue with them in a way that is better" (16:125) and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said "The Muslim does not slander, curse, speak obscenely or speak rudely." (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, who said, this is a ghareeb hasan hadeeth; it was classed as saheeh by al-Albaani.)

If your own scriptures can't convince you to behave in a civilised way, then what chance do I have of doing the same?

Peace

 

[Uthman]

Greetings czgibson,

Also, how does including the context of the ayah affect its meaning?

This is related to a sub-topic of Islamic Sciences known as asbaab-an-nuzool (causes of revelation), the knowledge of which is essential in order to properly interpret the Qur'an. Verses of the Qur'an were often revealed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in response to a specific event. Perhaps Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, the great classical scholar, explains it best when he says:

The knowledge of asbaab an-nuzool aids in understanding the verse, for knowledge of it's cause of revelation produces knowledge of it's application.
​