مَن كَفَرَ بِٱللَّهِ مِنۢ بَعْدِ إِيمَٰنِهِۦٓ إِلَّا مَنْ أُكْرِهَ وَقَلْبُهُۥ مُطْمَئِنٌّۢ بِٱلْإِيمَٰنِ وَلَٰكِن مَّن شَرَحَ بِٱلْكُفْرِ صَدْرًا فَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ
<p>Commentary</p><p>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).</p><p>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.</p><p>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)</p><p>The Definition of ikrah or Compulsion</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p><p>Related Ruling</p><p>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:</p><p>لَا یَحِلُّ مَالُ امرِءً مُسلمً اِلَّا بِطِیبِ نَفپسً مِّنہُ</p><p>The wealth and property of a Muslim does not become lawful unless it be with a whole-hearted pleasure from the person.</p><p>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.</p><p>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:</p><p>ثُلث جِدُّھنُّ جُّد و ھزلھنّ جدّ النکاح و الطلاق والرّجعۃ (رواہ ابداؤد والترمذی و حسنہ)</p><p>"There are three things in which not only the serious words, but also the non-serious words are counted as serious".</p><p>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)</p><p>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.</p><p>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:</p><p>رُفِعَ عَن اُمَّتِی الخَطآُء والنِّسیَنُ وَ مَا استُکرِھوا عَلَیہ (رواہ الطبرانی عن ثوبان ؓ</p><p>Removed away from my Ummah are mistake, forgetting and what they are compelled to under coercion. (Reported by al-Tabarni from Sayyidna Thawban)</p><p>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</p>
CommentaryFrom 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 CompulsionLiterally, 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 RulingThere 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 مِّنہُThe 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