IS THERE CONSENSUS THAT IKRÂH (COERCION) IS ONLY VALID IN SPEECH?

[Mudâfa’at’ut Tawhîd]

Türkçe

Salam Aleykum. I would like to ask you a question. Is it correct for those who say that ikrah is only in speech and not in deeds, to takfir those who say ikrah is both in speech and deeds? In other words, is there ijma regarding ikrah is only in speech?

Bismillâh. Al-Hamdulillâh. Wa's Salâtu wa's Salâmu alâ Rasulillâh.

Wa Alaykum.

The claim that "there is consensus that Ikrâh (coercion) is only valid in speech" does not reflect the truth. This is because, Ikrâh being valid in both speech and deeds is the view of most scholars. However, there are conditions and limits to Ikrâh, and even though Ikrâh is valid in deeds, it may vary according to the deeds in question.

Among the scholars who said that Ikrâh is not valid in deeds are Ibnu Abbâs Radiyallâhu Anh, al-Hasan'ul Basrî according to one of the two opinions narrated from him, Abu'l Âliyah, Abu'sh Sha'thâ, ar-Rabî bin Anas, adh-Dhahhâk, Qatâdah, al-Awzâ'î, Ahmad according to a narration, Sahnûn, and Muhammad Ibn'ul Hasan ash-Shaybânî Rahimahumullâh.¹

Among the scholars who say that Ikrâh is valid in deeds as it is valid in speech are Umar Ibn'ul Khattâb Radiyallâhu Anh, al-Hasan'ul Basrî according to one of the two opinions narrated from him, Masrûq, Makhûl, Mâlik, ash-Shâfi'î, Abû Hanîfah, Ahmad according to the well-known narration, and the scholars of Iraq Rahimahumullâh.²

Ibnu Hajar Rahimahullâh said, "According to the majority, there is no difference between coercion in speech and deeds."³

Ibnu Atiyyah Rahimahullâh and Ibnu Rajab Rahimahullâh have also ascribed this view to the majority.⁴

As seen, there are different views and a well-known dispute on this issue. The claim that Ikrâh is only valid in speech and that there is consensus in this regard, moreover, the claim that those who say that Ikrâh is only valid in speech declare Takfîr upon those who say that Ikrâh is also valid in deeds, reflects grave ignorance. This is because this is denying a view preferred by the majority of the Ummah and presenting the view preferred by the minority as consensus. The claim that the scholars who said that Ikrâh is not valid in deeds declare Takfîr upon the scholars who say that Ikrâh is valid in deeds is also incorrect. While mentioning the dispute, the scholars did not mention one side declaring Takfîr upon the other, moreover, the claim that they declared Takfîr upon each other necessitates Ibnu Abbâs Radiyallâhu Anhumâ, who said that Ikrâh is not valid in deeds declaring Takfîr upon Umar Ibn'ul Khattâb Radiyallâhu Anh, who said that Ikrâh is valid in deeds, etc.

The one who exceeds the legitimate dispute and claims that Takfîr will be declared in this regard, is faced with declaring Takfîr upon the Ummah. Ignoring the legitimate dispute regarding this issue and marketing this as an absolute consensus and bringing Takfîr to the agenda is evident misguidance. Since no scholar put forth a deviated view in this issue, what remains is the opinion of those who do not even have enough faith to be Muslim, which is not even worth bringing up. What was not in the religion yesterday cannot be included in the religion today. What was in the religion yesterday is also in the religion today. This issue in question is not from the religion.

Taking a person out of the fold of Islâm or including them in Islâm is the most important matter of the religion. Therefore, it is necessary for the person who advises his soul to not speak on such matters without Shar'î knowledge and evidences, and he should beware of including a person in Islâm and excluding another out of the fold of Islâm merely with his comprehension and what is approved by his intellect. If the opinion of a person who rules by his whims reaches the point of declaring Takfîr upon the Ummah of Islâm or rendering those who possess clear Kufr as Muslim, then he is indeed astray.

Again, every person should refrain from quarreling ignorantly regarding Allâh and His religion. Unfortunately, modern-day people often discuss such matters without any knowledge and are quick to deem things that are not Kufr to be Kufr and deem things that are Kufr to be Islâm, meanwhile, they are unaware of their own compound ignorance. Many among the parties of such debates are people who have not received an Islâmic education, who do not have a share of knowledge and wisdom, and who made their religion a subject of debate on social media. Unfortunately, the condition of these people is akin to the condition of those whom Allâh has described as follows in His statement,

"And among men is he who disputes about Allâh, without knowledge or guidance, or an enlightening Book; twisting his neck (in arrogance) to mislead people from the way of Allâh. For him in the world is disgrace, and We will make him taste on the Day of Resurrection the punishment of the burning fire." (al-Hajj, 22/8-9)

We ask Allâh for well-being and peace.

Our advice to you is to turn to the essence of Tawhîd, which comprises of the foundation of Islâm, and try to comprehend it properly. Knowing the disputes regarding the issue of Ikrâh and the preferred and non-preferred views is of no benefit to a person who has been unable to comprehend the essence of Tawhîd. On the other hand, it is possible for a person who has comprehended the essence of Tawhîd to enter Paradise with the mercy of Allâh, even though he is not knowledgeable about the disputes in matters of jurisprudence. May Allâh enable you to be from among His servants who are rightly guided, who live upon Islâm and the Sunnah, and who die upon Islâm and the Sunnah, Âmîn.

And Allâh knows best. May the peace and blessings of Allâh be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and companions.

^1- Al-Qurtubî, al-Jâmi, 10/182-183; Ibn'ul Mulaqqin, at-Tawdîh, 32/12; al-Qayrawânî, an-Nawâdir wa'z Ziyâdât, 10/246-247; Ibnu Rajab, Jâmi'ul Ulûm, print of Arnâ'ût, 2/372.

^2- Al-Qurtubî, al-Jâmi, 10/182-183; Ibn'ul Mulaqqin, at-Tawdîh, 32/12; al-Qayrawânî, an-Nawâdir wa'z Ziyâdât, 10/246-247; Ibnu Rajab, Jâmi'ul Ulûm, print of Arnâ'ût, 2/371.

^3- Ibnu Hajar, Fath'ul Bârî, 12/312.

^4- Ibnu Atiyyah, al-Muharrar'ul Wajîz, 3/423; Ibnu Rajab, Jâmi'ul Ulûm, print of Arnâ'ût, 2/371.