> Compelling non-Muslims to accept Islam or pay Jizyah?

[salamfromrom]

I'm sorry but deeply disturbing is the only way I can describe the following fatwa from Islamqa. Sorry if the quote is a bit long, I'm quoting the whole text due to it being relevant, and highlighting the most important parts

There is no compulsion to accept Islam
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?.



Praise be to Allaah.
The scholars explained that these two verses, and other similar verses, have to do with those from whom the jizyah may be taken, 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. The kuffaar should be compelled to enter Islam if they are not people from whom the jizyah may be taken, because that will lead to their happiness and salvation in this world and in the Hereafter. Obliging a person to adhere to the truth in which is guidance and happiness is better for him than falsehood. Just as a person may be forced to do the duty that he owes to other people even if that is by means of imprisonment or beating, so forcing the kaafirs to believe in Allaah alone and enter into the religion of Islam is more important and more essential, because this will lead to their happiness in this world and in the Hereafter. This applies unless they are People of the Book, i.e., Jews and Christians, or Magians, because Islam says that these three groups may be given the choice: they may enter Islam or they may pay the jizyah and feel themselves subdued.

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):

“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]

He did not say, “if they pay the jizyah”. The Jews, Christians and Magians are to be asked to enter Islam; if they refuse then they should be asked to pay the jizyah. If they refuse to pay the jizyah then the Muslims must fight them if they are able to do so. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allaah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allaah and His Messenger (Muhammad), (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued”

[al-Tawbah 9:29]

And it was proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) accepted the jizyah from the Magians, but it was not proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or his companions (may Allaah be pleased with them) accepted the jizyah from anyone except the three groups mentioned above.

The basic principle concerning that is the words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning):

“And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism, i.e. worshipping others besides Allaah), and the religion (worship) will all be for Allaah Alone [in the whole of the world]”

[al-Anfaal 8:39]

“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]

This verse is known as Ayat al-Sayf (the verse of the sword).

These and similar verses abrogate the verses which say that there is no compulsion to become Muslim.

And Allaah is the Source of strength.

Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat li’l-Shaykh Ibn Baaz, 6/219

Ok, I still cant believe what I just read, but my question is: Have any of you brothers come across or are aware of such a fatwa? and if so, how prevalent is this view among the scholars, namely that certain non-muslims should be compelled to become muslims (impossibility since you cant force someone to believe). The fatwa seems vague. I mean if this is correct , what are we supposed to to with atheists and other groups from whom the jizya cannot be taken and they refuse to convert...?

Salam a leikum

[al-boriqee]

inshallah

when i get a chance, i'll explain it and i'll also explain the corrupted view of Munajjid on islamqa as he tends to have a few major corruptions in his views and ideas which inexorably result in fatawaa that actually oppose the hukm of Allah.

but give me time

[salman]

subhaanAllah, couldn't you find a better title ya akhee al-kareem? Actually, within the light of this whole subject and context, the fatawa of the shaykh would make more sense than just picking out his words. In fact, I do not have a problem with what he is saying after having read few more fatawas on the site on similar subject.

both of you ikhwaan need to hold your horses and know where you stand and address the scholars in proper manner - really disappointed, specially you akhee boriqee. I will make special request to Ustad Ayman to explain this matter here, insha'Allah.

[optimist]

understanding and interpretations of laypeople hold no value in front of people of knowledge and the actual rulings of the deen

Salam,

Brother salman, it was totally unfair to delete the verses of the Quran I quoted. Even brother Al boriqee did not support the fatwa. Why didn't you delete his post as well? By the way, how many scholars you have who support the above fatwa? Are majority of Islamic scholars are "laypeople" according to your interpretation? Please you must allow intelligent discussion in the forum. Now you have a duty to tell all the members the meaning of the following verses. If you are not able to, let Ustad Ayman explain to us the meaning.

“ If Allah had willed so, all men on Earth would have become convinced (of the message but He did not will it so and gave Man the freedom of choice). Then, are you (the Messenger) going to push people to conviction (against their will)?” (10:99).

“If We had wanted (all men to forcibly follow Our way), We would have provided guidance to each single person….. “ (33:13)

“There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejects false deities and believes in Allah has grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.”(Qur'an 2:256)

“If their aversion (to the truth) is grievous to thee, then, if thou can, seek a way down into the earth or a ladder into the sky that thou may bring to them a portent (to convince them all). If Allah willed, He could have brought them all together to the guidance; so be not thou of the ignorant.” (6:35).

“Say, "The truth is from your Lord": Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it): (18:29)

“Tell them that your Preserver has sent down the Truth to you. Whoever chooses the right path, shall benefit; whoever chooses the wrong path, shall bear its consequences. You have not been appointed a foreman over them to force them into submission!” (10:108).

“We created Man, gave him listening and sight, and showed him the way. Now, it is upto men to accept or reject it” – (76:3).

“The Quran is a reminder. So, whoever wishes to, may recall (the Truth through it)” – (80:11-12).

“We have showed him both the (good and bad) ways. So, whoever so wishes, should take his Preserver’s way” – (73:19; also: 25:57).

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by salman

subhaanAllah, couldn't you find a better title ya akhee al-kareem? Actually, within the light of this whole subject and context, the fatawa of the shaykh would make more sense than just picking out his words. In fact, I do not have a problem with what he is saying after having read few more fatawas on the site on similar subject.

both of you ikhwaan need to hold your horses and know where you stand and address the scholars in proper manner - really disappointed, specially you akhee boriqee. I will make special request to Ustad Ayman to explain this matter here, insha'Allah.

asalamu alaikum

i know the issue more in depth and I know that there are two aspects to "compelling". That is not the issue. The issue I find is Munajjid's awkward stances that resemble the super salafis who take a portion of what an alim says and runs with it without any baseerah in it.

Even the hard liner Anwar al-Awlaaki does not propagate the message that is apparent in the above fatwa, and you and I know clearly Anwar's stance on this whole matter.

there was more to the subject than what he made tahqeeq of.


@ salamfromromania

the original fatwa has two aspects of compelling

firstly, the compelling of the kuffar is in terms of either accepting them to become muslims, or accepting the jizya

the jizya is understood as compelling them to submit to the state of Islam due to the portion of the ayaah

"and they feel themselves subdued"

when the kuffar accept the jizyah, they have accepted the hukm of Allah to be the established structure of the society.

there was no verses that "aborgate" the verse of "no compulsion in religion". I think this is where Munajjid fell into an error because what happened was that the verse has been marginalized with takhsees (specification) and not naskh (abrogation) and this is the error that some jurists have feel into which Ibn Taymiyyah highlighted on general terms whereby they would view an ayaa ias being abrogated when in actuality it was merely specified and they did not note the difference.

as for compelling the msuhriks to Islam as the only option, most of the fuqaha viewed otherwise and every single sultanate and khilafa on the planet did not perform what Munnajjid states is the "stronger" opinion to perform. Even Ibn Katherr states in his tafseeer the issue of accepting the jizyah from the majoos, and other people wallahul-alim

@optimist
it may be that our opposition to the fatwa is totally on a different basis. I do not reject the fatwa, or at least a portion of its information, based on "my view of the qur'an and how it opposes the qur'an". My stance is surrounded on a fiqh based aspect to the matter and the understanding of certain principles, and it has nothing to do with a reliance of the intellect as the core for judging the truthfulness of he matter, which is why we may be coming at it from divergent foundations.

I gotta go

[salamfromrom]

Salam

thank you for the clarification bro boriqee. And you are right bro Salman, I was wrong to chose such a title to the thread. May Allah(swt) forgive me.

[salman]

Originally Posted by optimist

Salam,

Brother salman, it was totally unfair to delete the verses of the Quran I quoted. Even brother Al boriqee did not support the fatwa. Why didn't you delete his post as well? By the way, how many scholars you have who support the above fatwa? Are majority of Islamic scholars are "laypeople" according to your interpretation? Please you must allow intelligent discussion in the forum. Now you have a duty to tell all the members the meaning of the following verses. If you are not able to, let Ustad Ayman explain to us the meaning.

wa'alayka as-salam

I deleted them because you being a layman unfairly attacked the people of knowledge. You do not have a clue why some of the scholar have made these statements; they did not invent from blue - they made their ijtihad and they gave their evidence and reasoning from the Shari'ah. I did not delete akhee boriqee's post because 1) I already made clear that I did not like his manners while addressing this issue 2) just like us his asl of not agreeing with this fatawa is different than yours and he has clarified it.

Go read the tafsir of ibn kathir regarding this ayah and you will know that there were number of scholars who held the opinion that this ayah is only applicable to people of the book and not others. And Abdullah ibn Abbas (radiAllahu anho) and some of the other Salaf (may Allah have mercy on them) included the Magians being among the group from whom the jizyah can be taken. Thus, some of the scholars said this ayah is only for Jews, Chrisitans, and Magians and rest must be compelled to accept Islam. Please read below when I further summarize few points on this issue.

In matters of deen, the personal understanding of laypeople have no basis and the intelligent discussion is not to unfairly and unjustly attack the people of knowledge without having grasped the whole issue and making some comment after reading only one fatawa. this is the main problem in our day of age: we access the views of the scholars from secondary sources and not directly reading the books of the scholars and understanding the whole context and their reasoning.

I will ask ustad Ayman as he is knowledgeable and can articulate better; however, there is no guarantee that he will make a reply.

Originally Posted by al-boriqee

asalamu alaikum

i know the issue more in depth and I know that there are two aspects to "compelling". That is not the issue. The issue I find is Munajjid's awkward stances that resemble the super salafis who take a portion of what an alim says and runs with it without any baseerah in it.

Even the hard liner Anwar al-Awlaaki does not propagate the message that is apparent in the above fatwa, and you and I know clearly Anwar's stance on this whole matter.

there was more to the subject than what he made tahqeeq of.

akhee, it is not matter of disagreeing, it is matter of our manners while addressing the people of knowledge. The senior members like yourself need to set an example for rest of us and not give opportunities to people like bro optimist to further sharpen up their kallam against the scholars. this is exactly like IA! Shaykh Munajjid did not make a single comment regarding this and if you read other fataws on jihad where he did make his comments then his stance will be clear, insha'Allah. You are accusing him of running around with one fatawa when you are doing the same: judging based upon one fatawa. And the shaykh never said that this is the "stronger" view; he simply presented the fatawa of shaykh ibn Baz (rahimahullah).

We have not seen other fatawas of Shaykh ibn Baz (rahimahullah) on this specific topic or when he made this fatawa - he may have changed his view in latter part of his life. Allahu A'lam

it is unfair and unjust on part of all three of you for singling out Shaykh ibn Baz (rahimahullah) or Shaykh Munajjid Hafidhullah when you know that this view was also held by some scholars in the past. Whether it is invalid or weak is another issue. I can give the benefit of doubt to others for being ignorant of this but you should not have used such a kallam.

habibi, i hope you understand what I am trying to say - barak Allahu feeka and Jazak Allah khayr for clearing it up

@salamfromrom

barak Allahu feeka ya akhee al-kareem. Here is the understanding of layperson like yourself regarding this issue and I hope it helps, insha'Allah:

1 - in order to understand this whole issue one need to understand the purpose of jihad. The purpose of jihad is to make it easier for non-Muslims to accept Islam, ruling people by Shari'ah to bring justice within society and fighting those who are stubborn and humiliating them by compelling them to submit to Shari'ah and pay jizyah or accept Islam. Here is a hadith from Sahih Muslim (3261):

Narrated that Buraydah said: When the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) appointed a commander to lead an army or a raiding party, he would advise him to fear Allaah with regard to himself and the Muslims with him, then he said: “Fight in the name of Allaah and for the sake of Allaah. Fight those who disbelieve in Allaah, fight but do not steal from the war booty (before it is shared out), betray, or mutilate. Do not kill children. If you meet your enemy of the mushrikeen, call them to three things, and whichever one of them they respond to, accept that from them and leave them alone. Then call them to Islam and if they respond, accept that from them and leave them alone. If they refuse but they pay the jizyah, then they have responded to you, so accept that from them and leave them alone. If they refuse then seek the help of Allaah and fight them…”

The bottom line is that so the religion of Allah takes over all the other religions. Shaykh ul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 28/263:

The purpose is that all religion should be for Allaah alone, and that the word of Allaah should be supreme. The word of Allaah is a comprehensive phrase that refers to His words that are contained in His Book. Hence Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Indeed We have sent Our Messengers with clear proofs, and revealed with them the Scripture and the Balance (justice) that mankind may keep up justice” [al-Hadeed 57:25]

The purpose behind sending the Messengers and revealing the Books was so that mankind might keep up justice with regard to the rights of Allaah and the rights of His creation. Then Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And We brought forth iron wherein is mighty power (in matters of war), as well as many benefits for mankind, that Allaah may test who it is that will help Him (His religion) and His Messengers in the unseen” [al-Hadeed 27:25]

So whoever deviates from the Book is to be brought back with iron, i.e. by force. Hence the soundness of the religion is based on the Qur’aan and the Sword. It was narrated that Jaabir ibn ‘Abd-Allaah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) commanded us to strike with this, meaning the sword, whoever turns away from this, meaning the Qur’aan.

2 - regarding the ayah there is no compulsion in religion: the scholars differed, some specified it but vast majority generalized it. However, they all understood that this ayah has only to do with non-Muslims, meaning the kuffaar cannot be forced to accept Islam. This is completely different than what we hear from few people in our time: this ayah is applicable to everyone (Muslims and non-Muslims) a complete alien opinion and they use this to reject many hadoud, i.e., killing an apostate. The scholars who specified the ayah only for three groups of people, like the fatawa mentions, most likely based it upon their ijtihad of this ayah being abrogated by the ayah of sword. The well known view as mentioned by many scholars is that the correct view is that the ayah is general. Allahu A'lam

[salamfromrom]

Salam

I must say I completely agree with the view that we should establish shariah on every country on earth. (even though there will naturally be obstacles to this , especially now in a nuclear armed world)

If I may, I would like to ask for clarification for the following (I really dont know what the word ''compelled'' means in this context)

Thus, some of the scholars said this ayah is only for Jews, Chrisitans, and Magians and rest must be compelled to accept Islam.

By compelled,do they mean that:

1. they should accept being dhimmis in an islamic state

or

2. become full muslims or face execution (no other option is to be given to them)

I don't understand what they mean when they say that jizya is not to be taken from them. how can these people (atheists and other groups from which jizya cannot be taken) live under the protection of the islamic state and not pay any taxes?

[al-boriqee]

akhee, it is not matter of disagreeing, it is matter of our manners while addressing the people of knowledge. The senior members like yourself need to set an example for rest of us and not give opportunities to people like bro optimist to further sharpen up their kallam against the scholars. this is exactly like IA! Shaykh Munajjid did not make a single comment regarding this and if you read other fataws on jihad where he did make his comments then his stance will be clear, insha'Allah. You are accusing him of running around with one fatawa when you are doing the same: judging based upon one fatawa. And the shaykh never said that this is the "stronger" view; he simply presented the fatawa of shaykh ibn Baz (rahimahullah).

We have not seen other fatawas of Shaykh ibn Baz (rahimahullah) on this specific topic or when he made this fatawa - he may have changed his view in latter part of his life. Allahu A'lam

it is unfair and unjust on part of all three of you for singling out Shaykh ibn Baz (rahimahullah) or Shaykh Munajjid Hafidhullah when you know that this view was also held by some scholars in the past. Whether it is invalid or weak is another issue. I can give the benefit of doubt to others for being ignorant of this but you should not have used such a kallam.

habibi, i hope you understand what I am trying to say - barak Allahu feeka and Jazak Allah khayr for clearing it up

1. You are absolutely right that I need to be an example and that is not our adaab towards those of ilm.

However, after establishing that as a fact, Munajjid is not from the relied upon scholars like Fawzaan, Bakr Abu Zayd, or any of the lajna ad-daa'ima of whom the ummah or the people of the sunnah rely upon for fatwa.

I remember when Faalih al-Harbi and some of the other scholars shiyookh like Fawzi al-Athari and others whose rank equals or outweigh Munajjid in terms of scholarship, the people who defended them for their errors were from among those super salafis. From the matter of truthfulness is that we apply the rules of Islam to any AND ALL, no matter who they be. We don't criticize and expose the faults of those whose faults need to be exposed simply because those faults are among those matters that we are opposed, and then remain silent when the Shaykh that we like errors extremely in other errors just on the basis that we like and respect them.

Look at Shaykh Rabee. Rabee is an Imaam and Muhadith and Munajjid Dwarfs in comparison to Rabee and does not reach his ankle, and whom ALL of the Senior scholars recognized Rabee from their "rank" or class. Yet look what happened. If we do not remain silent about some of the ills of Rabee, who is Munajjid to be free from the same criticism based on the general rule of "our adaab to scholars"

This does not subtract our respect for those shaykhs, but we are to highlight where it is that they err, so imagine Munajjid's err which is slightly more severe than those other shaykhs whose views are understood to be extreme or not to be taken.

2. I thought from previous research that Bin Baz's opinion is not like this. This is what I was saying that there is not a full tahqeed that is presented by Munajjid, he just quoted some excerpts of what he views is best and then ran with it to be applicable to the person who asked the question.

3. I have not singled him out from the rest of the scholars of the past because I said earlier that this is a view that virtually no one adopted. There is not a single case in history where any khalifa from the rightly guided ones or other than them who applied this view that was never even adopted by the majority of the fuqaha. Most of the fuqaha of all schools said other than this fatwa. Ibn katheer does not even sanction this view. The reason why I attacked the fatwa itself is because it is something that has never been a part of Islamic discussion except in recent times finding precedence by general statements of some scholars that don't even allude in a clear way to the notion of the fatwa.

I then got on Munajjid for supporting this type of weird fatwa that is known from him from time to time.

As for Bin Baz, if this was his view, then it would be similar to the error of others like al-Albanee who erred in claiming that the niqaab is not waajib.

4. I understand exactly what your saying.

so I will watch my tongue and my manners even on Shaykh Munajjid. Just consider my speech in the first point above only because there are some matters where Munajjid has fallen into serious errors but that is another issue altogether.

[salman]

Jazak Allah khayr akhee. just to clear up, I am not saying that Shaykh Munajjid is among the kabir ulama or he cannot make mistakes or we cannot disagree with some of his views. I am just saying that we need to maintain good adab because he is still a person of knowledge unlike us and specially when he is from the people of sunnah and free from any partisanship.