Tafsir of Surah An-Nahl - Verse 108

Allah's Wrath against the Apostate, except for the One Who is forced into Disbelief

Allah tells us that He is angry with them who willingly disbelieve in Him after clearly believing in Him, who open their hearts to disbelief finding peace in that, because they understood the faith yet they still turned away from it. They will suffer severe punishment in the Hereafter, because they preferred this life to the Hereafter, and they left the faith for the sake of this world and Allah did not guide their hearts and help them to stand firm in the true religion. He put a seal on their hearts so that they would not be able to understand what is beneficial for them, and He sealed their ears and eyes so that they would not benefit from them. Their faculties did not help them at all, so they are unaware of what is going to happen to them.

لاَ جَرَمَ

(No doubt) means, it is inevitable, and no wonder that those who are like this -

أَنَّهُمْ فِى الاٌّخِرَةِ هُمُ الْخَـسِرونَ

(in the Hereafter, they will be the losers.) meaning, they will lose themselves and their families on the Day of Resurrection.

إِلاَّ مَنْ أُكْرِهَ وَقَلْبُهُ مُطْمَئِنٌّ بِالإِيمَـنِ

(except one who was forced while his heart is at peace with the faith) This is an exception in the case of one who utters statements of disbelief and verbally agrees with the Mushrikin because he is forced to do so by the beatings and abuse to which he is subjected, but his heart refuses to accept what he is saying, and he is, in reality, at peace with his faith in Allah and His Messenger . The scholars agreed that if a person is forced into disbelief, it is permissible for him to either go along with them in the interests of self-preservation, or to refuse, as Bilal did when they were inflicting all sorts of torture on him, even placing a huge rock on his chest in the intense heat and telling him to admit others as partners with Allah. He refused, saying, "Alone, Alone." And he said, "By Allah, if I knew any word more annoying to you than this, I would say it." May Allah be pleased with him. Similarly, when the Liar Musaylimah asked Habib bin Zayd Al-Ansari, "Do you bear witness that Muhammad ﷺ is the Messenger of Allah" He said, "Yes." Then Musaylimah asked, "Do you bear witness that I am the messenger of Allah ﷺ" Habib said, "I do not hear you." Musaylimah kept cutting him, piece by piece, but he remained steadfast insisting on his words. It is better and preferable for the Muslim to remain steadfast in his religion, even if that leads to him being killed, as was mentioned by Al-Hafiz Ibn `Asakir in his biography of `Abdullah bin Hudhafah Al-Sahmi, one of the Companions. He said that he was taken prisoner by the Romans, who brought him to their king. The king said, "Become a Christian, and I will give you a share of my kingdom and my daughter in marriage." `Abdullah said: "If you were to give me all that you possess and all that Arabs possess to make me give up the religion of Muhammad ﷺ even for an instant, I would not do it." The king said, "Then I will kill you." `Abdullah said, "It is up to you." The king gave orders that he should be crucified, and commanded his archers to shoot near his hands and feet while ordering him to become a Christian, but he still refused. Then the king gave orders that he should be brought down, and that a big vessel made of copper be brought and heated up. Then, while `Abdullah was watching, one of the Muslim prisoners was brought out and thrown into it, until all that was left of him was scorched bones. The king ordered him to become a Christian, but he still refused. Then he ordered that `Abdullah be thrown into the vessel, and he was brought back to the pulley to be thrown in. `Abdullah wept, and the king hoped that he would respond to him, so he called him, but `Abdullah said, "I only weep because I have only one soul with which to be thrown into this vessel at this moment for the sake of Allah; I wish that I had as many souls as there are hairs on my body with which I could undergo this torture for the sake of Allah." According to some reports, the king imprisoned him and deprived him of food and drink for several days, then he sent him wine and pork, and he did not come near them. Then the king called him and asked him, "What stopped you from eating" `Abdullah said, "It is permissible for me under these circumstances, but I did not want to give you the opportunity to gloat." The king said to him, "Kiss my head and I will let you go." `Abdullah said, "And will you release all the Muslim prisoners with me" The king said, "Yes." So `Abdullah kissed his head and he released him and all the other Muslim prisoners he was holding. When he came back, `Umar bin Al-Khattab said, "Every Muslim should kiss the head of `Abdullah bin Hudhafah, and I will be the first to do so." And he stood up and kissed his head. May Allah be pleased with them both.

Commentary

From the first verse (106) comes the religious ruling about a person who has been compelled to utter a word of infidelity (kufr) under the threat that he would be killed if he did not do that. If he feels that, in all likelihood, the people threatening him have full capability of doing just that, then, this is a state of duress. If he were to utter some word of disbelief verbally - but, with a heart firm on Faith, a heart that shuns saying what is false and evil - then, there is no sin on him, nor will his wife become unlawful for him. (Qurtubi, Mazhari).

This verse was revealed about the noble Sahabah who were arrested by the Mushriks. Their disbelieving captors had told them that they must return to infidelity failing which they would be killed.

Those so arrested were Sayyidna ` Ammar ؓ ' and his parents, Sayyidna Yasir and Sayyidah Sumayyah and Sayyidna Suhaib, Bilal and Khabbab ؓ . Out of these, Sayyidna Yisir and his wife, Sayyidah Sumayyah ؓ ، totally refused to utter any word of disbelief. Sayyidna Yasir ؓ was killed while Sayyidah Sumayyah ؓ ، was tied in between two camels who were made to run which tore her apart in two separate body parts. This was how she met her shahadah (martyrdom in the way of Allah). And these are the same two blessed souls who were the first to meet their shahadah for the sake of Islam. Similarly, Sayyidna Khabbab ؓ totally refused to utter any word of disbelief and it was in perfect peace that he accepted the fate of being killed by the disbelievers. Out of the remaining, Sayyidna ` Ammar ؓ went by making a mere verbal declaration of his disbelief in the face of such a danger to his life, but his heart was perfectly satisfied and firmly set upon his Faith. Once he was released by the enemy, he presented himself before the Holy Prophet ﷺ and narrated this event with great pain. The Holy Prophet ﷺ asked him, "when you were making this statement, what was going on in your heart?" He submitted, "As for my heart, it was at peace and firmly set on my Faith." The Holy Prophet ﷺ put him at rest by telling him that he was not to face any punishment for that. It was in confirmation of this verdict by him that the present verse was revealed. (Qurtubi, Mazhari)

The Definition of ikrah or Compulsion

Literally, Ikrah means using threat or violence to force a person to act against his or her will. Then, it has two degrees. In the first degree of Ikrah, one is not willing by heart to do something, but is also not that denuded of choice and volition to say no. In the terminology of Muslim jurists, this is known as اِکراہ غیر ملجیء (ikrah ghayr mulji': state of compulsion not forced actually). Under such duress, saying any word of disbelief (kufr) or doing something unlawful (haram) does not become permissible. However, there are some supplementary injunctions which do re-lease some adverse effects even against this situation. Relevant details appear in Books of Fiqh. In the second degree of Ikrah, one is just sucked out of all choice so much so that should he fail to carry out the order of the perpetrators of this coercion (Ikrah), he would be killed or some of his organ is amputated. This, in the terminology of Muslim jurists, is called Ikrah Mulji' which means a compulsion which makes one totally choice-less and helpless. When under the state of such duress, the mere verbalization of the word of disbelief - subject to the condition that one's heart is firm and at peace with Faith - is permissible. Similarly, short of killing another human being, should one be coerced to do some other unlawful deed, it will bring no sin to commit that unlawful act.

But, the concessions given in both kinds of Ikrah are subject to a condition that the coercer threatening to do what he says he will do should actually be capable of doing just that, and the coerced should have the overwhelming likelihood that should he fail to oblige him, he would go ahead and definitely do what he is threatening to do.

Related Ruling

There are two kinds of transactions. (1) Those in which the transaction can be effected only by mutual consent and heartfelt willingness of the parties, like sale, gift, etc. There is the definitive authority of the Holy Qur۔ an to this effect. The Holy Qur'an says, لَا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوَالَكُم بَيْنَكُم بِالْبَاطِلِ إِلَّا أَن تَكُونَ تِجَارَ‌ةً عَن تَرَ‌اضٍ مِّنكُمْ "Do not eat up the wealth of others, unless there is a trade with mutual consent" (4:29) And then it appears in Hadith:

لَا یَحِلُّ مَالُ امرِءً مُسلمً اِلَّا بِطِیبِ نَفپسً مِّنہُ

The wealth and property of a Muslim does not become lawful unless it be with a whole-hearted pleasure from the person.

If such transactions were to be arranged and executed under duress (with Ikrah), they have no validity in the sight of the Shari` ah of Islam. In normal practice, once the person concerned comes out of the state of Ikrah (compulsion, duress), he will have the option to reassess the sale or gift done under duress and exercise his free will to retain or cancel it.

Then there are some transactions which depend on verbal commitment only. Here, the intention and the volition in the heart or pleasure and will are not the binding conditions of the transaction - such as, marriage, divorce, revocation of divorce, freedom of a slave etc. For such matters, it is said in Hadith:

ثُلث جِدُّھنُّ جُّد و ھزلھنّ جدّ النکاح و الطلاق والرّجعۃ (رواہ ابداؤد والترمذی و حسنہ)

"There are three things in which not only the serious words, but also the non-serious words are counted as serious".

It means if two individuals go through the process of Offer and Acceptance in Marriage in accordance with attending conditions, or some husband divorces his wife by pronouncing it verbally, or verbally revokes the divorce given by him earlier - whether that be in jest with no intention in the heart for marriage or divorce or revocation - still, by a mere saying of the respective words, the marriage will stand solemnized, the divorce will become effective, and the revocation will turn out right. (Mazhari)

According to Imam Abu Hanifah, al-Sha` bi, Zuhri, Nakha` i and Qatadah رحمۃ اللہ علیہم ، may the mercy of Allah be upon them, this very injunction applies to 'divorce under duress' طلاق مکروہ : Talaq Mukrah). It means that such a person being under duress was though not ready to divorce willingly and by heart yet, rendered helpless, he uttered the words of divorce. Now, the actualization of divorce is connected with nothing but the pronouncing of the words of divorce. The intention and will of the heart is not a condition here - as proved from the Hadith cited above. Therefore, this divorce will become effective.

But, according to Imam Shafi` i, and Sayyidna and Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ ، the 'divorce under duress' (under the state of Ikrah) will not take effect because it appears in Hadith:

رُفِعَ عَن اُمَّتِی الخَطآُء والنِّسیَنُ وَ مَا استُکرِھوا عَلَیہ (رواہ الطبرانی عن ثوبان ؓ

Removed away from my Ummah are mistake, forgetting and what they are compelled to under coercion. (Reported by al-Tabarni from Sayyidna Thawban)

According to Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ، this Hadith is related to injunctions of the 'Akhirah (Hereafter), that is, something said or done contrary to the Shari` ah by mistake and forgetfulness or under duress will bring no sin. As for the rest of the injunctions pertaining to the mortal world as well as the incidences of doing things like that therein are to occur as felt and sensed. It goes without saying that the vestiges and rulings generated by this occurrence shall continue to bring their relevant effects. For example, someone killed someone else by mistake, then, there is no doubt that he will neither incur the sin of killing him nor face the punishment of the Hereafter, but the way the tangible effect of killing has occurred in the form of the victim's loss of life, very similarly, its subsequent Islamic legal effect will also follow: his wife will, after the period of Iddah, be able to enter a second marriage contract and the wealth and property left by him will be distributed in the form of inheritance to his legal heirs. Similarly, when words to the effect of divorce, marriage or revocation were said verbally, then, their consequential Islamic legal effect will also follow. (Mazhari, Qurtubi) وَ اللہُ سُبحَانہ اعلم

Before God, reality is what counts and not simply outward appearances. This is why liberal concessions have been made to man in Islam. If a person is truly loyal to God in his heart, but under serious compulsion and to save his own life he utters something against his faith, he will not be castigated for this by God. But those who have changed from the inside and who, under the influence of Satanic doubt or the pressure of circumstances, have willingly adopted some way other than God’s way are not pardonable. When an individual behaves faithlessly rather than as a man of faith, the reason for it is always worldliness. Looking to the salvaging of his worldly interests, he adopts the way of the unbeliever. Had he understood the value of the Hereafter, worldly interest would have appeared of so little worth to him that renouncing the Hereafter for the sake of the world would have seemed absurd. If, in the eyes of any individual, worldly benefits appear to outweigh the gains of the Hereafter, the result is necessarily that he is not able to judge matters from the point of view of the Hereafter. He sees and hears, but due to his inclination toward the world, he loses sight of the various aspects of the Hereafter. He is only able to see those aspects which are connected with worldly considerations. Those who reach this stage of neglectfulness are fated to suffer eternal loss.