The Quranic disasters Q2:256 and Q9:5

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Oct 5, 2013 at 08:43

LK wrote

Of course, you'll never hear the Islamists cite this most important verse in the Quran.

You are very wrong the most important verse in the Qur'an is really ayat al-sayf or the sword verse or Q9:5 because it abrogated as we are told many verses including Q2:256

Yet the primitive minds not only implement all the anti women ones i.e. 4:34 but also the negative hadiths that many came up with for centuries after the death of Hz.Muhammed. The rest is archaic, tribal, regional traditions and mentality

Listen you are not an Arab it is their religion and they are the ones that tell us what it is all about not you whose ancestors were forced to convert to the religion of the Arabs have no saying in what Islam is all about that is the truth

You need to read the early Islamic literary sources the likes of al-Tabari and it is very revealing and in short the Ulama could not reconcile Q2:256 or لا اكراه في الدين or no complusion in religion with the vile Q9:5 also known as ayat al-sayf or اية السيف or the sword verse

After all how can Allah says that there is no compusion in religion then he would say to kill the polytheists and to fight the Jews and Christians? it just did not add up

The way out as you shall see was the doctrine of al-Nasikh wa al-mansukh or الناسخ والمنسوخ where later prescriptions will abrogate earlier prescriptions in same subject matter in other words Q9:5 would abrogate Q2:256 or problem solved but in the meantime how would they explain Q2:256? and this was indeed a problem

Now here is what al-Tabari tells us about Q2:256

اخْتَلَفَ أَهْل التَّأْوِيل فِي مَعْنَى ذَلِك

Or the masorites (read this as the ulama) disagreed on the meaning of la ikrah fi al-deen

What a disaster this means that no one had a clue about what to make out of this verse and this is as early as you can get it also means that al-Tabari had no clue about what did this verse mean! After all how can Muslims tolerate let us say the polytheists of Mecca?

And he indeed provides many different and conflicting answers and opinions but the one he seems to like most is a strange story

فَقَالَ بَعْضهمْ : نَزَلَتْ هَذِهِ الْآيَة فِي قَوْم مِنْ الْأَنْصَار , أَوْ فِي رَجُل مِنْهُمْ كَانَ لَهُمْ أَوْلَاد قَدْ هَوَّدُوهُمْ أَوْ نَصَّرُوهُمْ ; فَلَمَّا جَاءَ اللَّه بِالْإِسْلَامِ أَرَادُوا إكْرَاههمْ عَلَيْهِ , فَنَهَاهُمْ اللَّه عَنْ ذَلِك , حَتَّى يَكُونُوا هُمْ يَخْتَارُونَ الدُّخُول فِي الْإِسْلَام . ذِكْر مَنْ قَالَ ذَلِك :

And this is how it goes Jews (or may be Christians) used to adopt Muslim orphan children and raise them as Jews and when Islam became deen al-haq the question was what to do with these children and should they be converted by force to Islam as per Q9:5 and the answer from Allah was Q2:256 or in other words this must be a rare case of abrogating Q9:5 in a very selected case which did not make sense back then and now

And as usual in Islam no one has a clue and it is all guessing and it is because Muhammad was a poor theologian

So you see this is an example where there is really no way out and Muslims have one of two ways get rid of the old litarary sources the likes of al-Tabari and start from the beinging or more of the same

I do believe that Islam as we know it be it the the sunni or the shia varieties will be a thing of the past and we will be only be left with mystical Islam or Sufi Islam

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".