Huge Clash between Humanity and Islam

(Credit: afiefh)

Here is the verse:

Quran 2: 256: لَآ إِكْرَاهَ فِى ٱلدِّينِ (There is no compulsion in religion).

And here is the context of this verse (as given by Ibn Kathir and Ibn Jarir).

When the children of a woman (in pre-Islamic days) did not survive, she took a vow on herself that if her child survives, she would convert it a Jew. When Banu an-Nadir were expelled (from Arabia), there were some children of the Ansar (Helpers) among them. They said: We shall not leave our children. So Allah the Exalted revealed; "Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error."

Here are the interpretations by Muslim Scholars:

Al-Saadi: ولا تدل الآية الكريمة على ترك قتال الكفار المحاربين، وإنما فيها أن حقيقة الدين من حيث هو موجب لقبوله لكل منصف قصده اتباع الحق، وأما القتال وعدمه فلم تتعرض له، وإنما يؤخذ فرض القتال من نصوص أخر، ولكن يستدل في الآية الكريمة على قبول الجزية من غير أهل الكتاب
- The noble verse does not indicate abandoning fighting the warring infidels, but rather it states that the reality of religion, insofar as it requires its acceptance by every fair-minded person whose intention is to follow the truth, is not addressed in the verse. Rather, the obligation of fighting is taken from other texts, but evidence is given in the noble verse for accepting the jizya from people other than the People of the Book.
Ibn Kathir: وقد ذهب طائفة كثيرة من العلماء أن هذه محمولة على أهل الكتاب ومن دخل في دينهم قبل النسخ والتبديل إذا بذلوا الجزية . وقال آخرون : بل هي منسوخة بآية القتال وأنه يجب أن يدعى جميع الأمم إلى الدخول في الدين الحنيف دين الإسلام ، فإن أبى أحد منهم الدخول فيه ولم ينقد له أو يبذل الجزية ، قوتل حتى يقتل .
- Translation: Many scholars have said that this applies to the People of the Book and those who entered their religion before it was abrogated and changed, if they pay the jizya. Others said: Rather, it was abrogated by the verse on fighting, and that all nations must be called to enter the true religion of Islam. If one of them refuses to enter it and does not submit to it or pay the jizya, he is to be fought until he is killed.
Baghawi: وقال قتادة وعطاء : نزلت في أهل الكتاب إذا قبلوا الجزية وذلك أن العرب كانت أمة أمية لم يكن لهم كتاب فلم يقبل منهم إلا الإسلام فلما أسلموا طوعا أو كرها أنزل الله تعالى : ( لا إكراه في الدين ) فأمر بقتال أهل الكتاب إلى أن يسلموا أو يقروا بالجزية فمن أعطى منهم الجزية لم يكره على الإسلام وقيل كان هذا في الابتداء قبل أن يؤمر بالقتال فصارت منسوخة بآية السيف وهو قول ابن مسعود رضي الله عنه
- Qatada and Ata’ said: It was revealed about the People of the Book if they accepted the jizya. This is because the Arabs were an illiterate nation who did not have a book, so nothing was accepted from them except Islam. When they converted to Islam willingly or unwillingly, God Almighty revealed: “There is no compulsion in religion.” So He ordered fighting the People of the Book until they converted to Islam or agreed to pay the jizya. Whoever among them paid the jizya was not forced to convert to Islam. It was said that this was at the beginning before he was ordered to fight, so it was abrogated by the verse of the sword. This is the statement of Ibn Mas’ud, may God be pleased with him.
Qurtubi's tafsir includes 6 different opinions. I'll shorten them slightly, but the full version is linked: اختلف العلماء في معنى هذه الآية على ستة أقوال : 1. قيل إنها منسوخة. 2. ليست بمنسوخة وإنما نزلت في أهل الكتاب خاصة. 3. ما رواه أبو داود عن ابن عباس قال : نزلت هذه في الأنصار. 4. قال السدي : نزلت الآية في رجل من الأنصار يقال له أبو حصين. 5. معناها لا تقولوا لمن أسلم تحت السيف مجبرا مكرها. 6. وهو أنها وردت في السبي متى كانوا من أهل الكتاب لم يجبروا إذا كانوا كبارا ، وإن كانوا مجوسا صغارا أو كبارا أو وثنيين فإنهم يجبرون على الإسلام.
- Translation: Scholars differed on the meaning of this verse into six opinions: 1. It was said that it was abrogated. 2. It was not abrogated, but was revealed specifically about the People of the Book. 3. What Abu Dawud narrated on the authority of Ibn Abbas, who said: This was revealed about the Ansar. 4. Al-Suddi said: The verse was revealed about a man from the Ansar called Abu Haseen. 5. Its meaning is: Do not say about someone who converted under the sword, forced and coerced. 6. It was revealed about the captives, as long as they were from the People of the Book, they were not forced if they were adults, and if they were young or old Zoroastrians or pagans, then they were forced to convert to Islam.
Tabari's opinion also includes a ton of citations, so I'll shorten it here: اختلف أهل التأويل في معنى ذلك. فقال بعضهم: نـزلت هذه الآية في قوم من الأنصار- أو في رجل منهم - كان لهم أولاد قد هودوهم أو نصروهم، فلما جاء الله بالإسلام أرادوا إكراههم عليه، فنهاهم الله عن ذلك، حتى يكونوا هم يختارون الدخول في الإسلام. [...] ولم يؤمر يومئذ بقتال أهل الكتاب، وقال: أبعدهما الله! هما أول من كفر! فوجد أبو الحصين في نفسه على النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم حين لم يبعث في طلبهما، فنـزلت: فَلا وَرَبِّكَ لا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّى يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا [ سورة النساء: 65] ثم إنه نسخ: " لا إكراه في الدين " فأمر بقتال أهل الكتاب في" سورة براءة " وقال آخرون: بل معنى ذلك: لا يكره أهل الكتاب على الدين إذا بذلوا الجزية، ولكنهم يقرون على دينهم. وقالوا: الآية في خاص من الكفار، ولم ينسخ منها شيء. وقال آخرون: هذه الآية منسوخة، وإنما نـزلت قبل أن يفرض القتال. قال أبو جعفر: وأولى هذه الأقوال بالصواب قول من قال: نـزلت هذه الآية في خاص من الناس
- Translation: The interpreters differed about the meaning of this. Some of them said: This verse was revealed about a group of the Ansar - or about a man from them. [...] Back then, he was not yet commanded to fight the People of the Book [...] Then it was abrogated: “There is no compulsion in religion,” so it ordered fighting the People of the Book in Surat Bara’ah. Others said: Rather, the meaning of this is: The People of the Book are not forced to change their religion if they pay the jizyah, but they are to remain in their religion. They said: The verse specifically refers to specific infidels, and nothing was abrogated from it. Others said: This verse was abrogated, and it was only revealed before fighting was made obligatory. Abu Jaafar said: The most correct of these statements is the statement of the one who said: This verse was revealed about a specific group of people.

In summary, there re various opinions on whether this is abrogated or not, but the idea is quite simple:

If the verse is referring to a specific group of people, then it is not abrogated.
If it is referring to people who are subjugated and pay the jizya then it is not abrogated.
If it is general, then it is abrogated.

Muhammad himself compelled polytheists to accept Islam, otherwise they should be killed

What more proof do we need about this compulsion, when Muhammad himself ordered to kill all polytheists who didn't accept Islam? He didn't even accept Jizya from polytheists (Jizya was allowed only for the people of the Book (i.e. Christians/Jews/Magians).

Imam Wahidi recorded the following tradition under the commentary of verse 5:105:

Ibn 'Abbas said: “The Messenger of Allah sent a letter to the people of Hajar, whose chief was Mundhir ibn Sawa, inviting them to Islam, or to pay the Jizyah if they chose not to embrace Islam. When Mundhir ibn Sawa received the letter, he showed it to the Arabs, Jews, Christians, Sabeans and Magians who were around him. They all agreed to pay the Jizyah and disliked embracing Islam. The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, wrote back to him, saying: 'As for the Arabs, do not accept from them except Islam otherwise they will have nothing but the sword. As for the people of the Book and the Magians, accept the Jizyah from them. When this letter was read to them, the Arabs embraced Islam while the people of the Book and the Magians agreed to pay the Jizyah.

Please read our detailed article: The Verse of Killing All Polytheists (Quran 9:5) Remains Valid Today in the case if Shafii, Hanbali, or Salafists Establish an Islamic State

The largest Islamic Fatwa website “Islam Question Answer” (which is run by Saudi Mufties) writes:

https://islamqa.info/en/34770

Question:

Some friends say that whoever does not enter Islam, that is his choice and he should not be forced to become Muslim, quoting as evidence the verses in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And had your Lord willed, those on earth would have believed, all of them together. So, will you (O Muhammad) then compel mankind, until they become believers”
[Yoonus 10:99]
“There is no compulsion in religion”
[al-Baqarah 2:256]
What is your opinion concerning that?.

Answer:

The scholars explained that these two verses, and other similar verses, have to do with those from whom the jizyah may be taken (i.e. Ahle Kitaab), such as Jews, Christians and Magians (Zoroastrians). They are not to be forced, rather they are to be given the choice between becoming Muslim or paying the jizyah.

Other scholars said that this applied in the beginning, but was subsequently abrogated by Allaah’s command to fight and wage jihad. So whoever refuses to enter Islam should be fought when the Muslims are able to fight, until they either enter Islam or pay the jizyah if they are among the people who may pay jizyah (i.e. Ahle Kitaab).
The kuffaar should be compelled to enter Islam if they are not people from whom the jizyah may be taken (i.e. Ahle Kitaab), because that will lead to their happiness and salvation in this world and in the Hereafter ...
Some of the scholars are of the view that others may also be given the choice between Islam and jizyah, but the most correct view is that no others should be given this choice, rather these three groups are the only ones who may be given the choice, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) fought the kuffaar in the Arabian Peninsula and he only accepted their becoming Muslim. And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Then when the Sacred Months (the 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikoon (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush. But if they repent [by rejecting Shirk (polytheism) and accept Islamic Monotheism] and perform As-Salaah (Iqaamat-as-Salaah), and give Zakaah, then leave their way free. Verily, Allaah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful”

[al-Tawbah 9:5]

Ibn Kathir writes in the commentary of verse 2:256 (link):

وقد ذهب طائفة كثيرة من العلماء، أن هذه محمولة على أهل الكتاب، ومن دخل في دينهم قبل النسخ والتبديل إذا بذلوا الجزية، وقال آخرون بل هي منسوخة بآية القتال، وإنه يجب أن يدعى جميع الأمم إلى الدخول في الدين الحنيف، دين الإسلام، فإن أبى أحد منهم الدخول فيه، ولم ينقد له، أو يبذل الجزية، قوتل حتى يقتل، وهذامعنى الإكراه، قال الله تعالى { سَتُدْعَوْنَ إِلَىٰ قَوْمٍ أُوْلِى بَأْسٍ شَدِيدٍ تُقَـٰتِلُونَهُمْ أَوْ يُسْلِمُونَ } [الفتح: 16] وقال تعالى: { يَٰأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِىُّ جَـٰهِدِ ٱلْكُفَّـٰرَ وَٱلْمُنَـٰفِقِينَ وَٱغْلُظْ عَلَيْهِمْ } [التوبة: 73] وقال تعالى: { يَٰأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ قَاتِلُواْ ٱلَّذِينَ يَلُونَكُمْ مِّنَ ٱلْكُفَّارِ وَلِيَجِدُواْ فِيكُمْ غِلْظَةً وَٱعْلَمُوۤاْ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ مَعَ ٱلْمُتَّقِينَ }[التوبة: 123] وفي الصحيح: " عجب ربك من قوم يقادون إلى الجنة في السلاسل " يعني: الأسارى الذين يقدم بهم بلاد الإسلام في الوثائق والأغلال والقيود والأكبال، ثم بعد ذلك يسلمون، وتصلح أعمالهم وسرائرهم، فيكونون من أهل الجنة.

Large number of Scholars are of opinion that this verse (2:256) "There is no compulsion in religion" was meant only for the People of Book (i.e. only Jews and Christians will not be compelled to accept Islam), but they have to pay Jizyya.
While, other Scholars say that this verse of "No Compulsion" had been abrogated (even for the People of Book) through the verse of sword (verse 9:5)"...Therefore, all people of the world should be called to Islam. If anyone of them refuses to do so, or refuses to pay the Jizya they should be fought till they are killed. This is the meaning of compulsion.
Allah says in verse 48:16;"O Prophet, fight with them till the time they accept Islam."...
In the Sahih, the Prophet said: "Allah wonders at those people who will enter Paradise in chains", meaning prisoners brought in chains to the Islamic state, then they embrace Islam sincerely and become righteous, and are entered among the people of Paradise.

A few more historical facts are as under:

(1) The Verse of “No Compulsion in religion” was revealed in the initial period of Medina when Muslims were weak.

(2) Verse of Sword (i.e. Killing all the Mushrikeen) was revealed at the end of the 9th Hijri, when Muslims got full power and control and no power was left in Arabia to stop Muslims from using power.

(3) Thus, Muhammad killed all the Polytheists (Mushrikeen) in Arabia. This practice also continued during the era of Companions (Sahaba).

(4) Then came Abu Hanifa, who was the first one who said it was only obligatory upon Prophet Muhammad to kill all the Mushrikeen, but now Muslims could also take Jizya from Polytheists and let them live.

(5) But Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal and Imam Shafii and Imam Ibn Hazm contradicted this new fatwa of Abu Hanifa, while there was an Ijma of Companions (Sahaba) that Polytheists should be kept killing even after the death of Prophet Muhammad.

Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani writes in his book “Fath-ul-Bari” (link):

وروى عبد بن حميد في تفسير سورة البروج بإسناد صحيح عن ابن أبزى " لما هزم المسلمون أهل فارس قال عمر : اجتمعوا . فقال : إن المجوس ليسوا أهل كتاب فنضع عليهم ، ولا من عبدة الأوثان فنجري عليهم أحكامهم فقال علي : بل هم أهل كتاب "’
Translation:
According to an "authentic tradition" when Muslims defeated the Persians, then Umar Ibn Khattab (the 2nd Caliph) collected the Companions (Sahaba) and asked them that Zoroastrians are neither from people of book (Ahl-e-Kitaab) that we take Jizya from them, nor are they from Polytheists that we kill them.
Upon that Ali Ibn Abi Talib (the 4th Caliph) witnessed that Zoroastrians are among the people of book.

And Saudi Mufti Albani graded this hadith of Sunan Abu Dawud as “authentic” (link):

لم يكن عمر يأخذ الجزية من المجوس حتى شهد عبد الرحمن بن عوف أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أخذها من مجوس هجر .
Translation:
Umar Ibn Khattab didn't want to take Jizya money from Zoroastrians (but wanted to kill them as Polytheists), but companion Abdul Rehman bin Auf told him that Prophet Muhammad took Jizya money from Zoroastrians too.

Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani also recorded the following “authentic” tradition (link):

وروى أبو عبيد بإسناد صحيح عن حذيفة " لولا أني رأيت أصحابي أخذوا الجزية من المجوس ما أخذتها "
Translation:
If my companions had not taken Jizya money from Zoroastrians, then I would have not taken it from them (but killed them as polytheists).

(6) If today any Islamic Caliphate is established from followers of Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal (i.e. Salafies) or Imam Shafii, then once against this Islamic Caliphate is going to compel the Polytheists/Atheists to accept Islam or otherwise they will slaughter them.

So this much to “No Compulsion”.

Actually, compulsion is everywhere when a person is denied his basic human right and threatened to be killed if he leaves Islam.

And compulsion is there when non-Muslims are not allowed to do Tableegh of their views and they will be killed if they do so.

For more, please see:

http://web.archive.org/web/20160306112927/http://www.answering-islam.de/Silas/swordverse.htm