Abstract:
One of the main discussions in the Islamic jurisprudence and the interpretation of the noble Qur’ān is the freedom of religion from the viewpoint of Islam. According to the Rejection of Duress verses, anyone is free to choose his religion, and according to the appearance of the Sword verses, people are not free to choose their religion. Then, there can be four relationships between the Sword and the Rejection of Duress verses: 1) the Sword verses abrogate the Rejection of Duress verses and so, with the revelation of these verses, the ruling for the freedom of religion has been abrogated; 2) the Rejection of Duress verses have abrogated the coercion to choose religion; 3) the Sword verses specify the generality of the Rejection of Duress verses, i.e. people are free to choose their religion except for the cases mentioned in the Sword verses; 4) the Sword verses regard the external duress and the Rejection of Duress verses concern the internal duress. Therefore, people are free internally rather than externally to choose their religion. Due to the revelation of the verse 29 of the Repentance chapter (which conditions the freedom of the People of the Book to maintain their religion to paying jizya), the first possibility is rejected, because it requires the Sword verses to be abrogated after their abrogation of other verses. The second possibility, too, requires the antecedence of the abrogating over the abrogated. In this article, the accuracy of the third possibility is argued for based on a novel method and new arguments.
Machine summary:
Solving the Seeming Contradiction between the Sword and the Rejection of Duress Verses and its Effect on the Freedom of Religion Muḥammad Riḍā Shāyiq Assistant Professor, Department of Jurisprudence & the Principles of the Islamic Law, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran (Recived: June 26, 2019; Revised: December 5, 2019; Accepted: December 17, 2019) Abstract One of the main discussions in the Islamic jurisprudence and the interpretation of the noble Qur’ān is the freedom of religion from the viewpoint of Islam.
In other words, the last verse mentioned above clearly proves that the Sword verse does not abrogate the Rejection of Duress verses, because if it did so, it was meaningless to announce the freedom of the People of the Book to maintain their religion (provided that they pay jizya).
Moreover, the verses that imply the compulsion of people to accept Islam during the reign of Imām Mahdī (my God hasten his reappearance) have weak chain of transmission and it is not difficult to interpret them in line with the first group narrations.
Third, the narration used by Ibn ‘Arabī as evidence is related to polytheism, that is to say, the Prophet (s) fought for monotheism, but not every monotheist is a Muslim and the Muslim jurisprudents – following the Qur’ān – have not taken the People of the Book as part of the polytheists and have not ruled for treating them with the decrees related to polytheists.