Freedom of religion and belief in islam

[The Middle Path]

Peace fellow members,

A while ago I came across a paper that I'd like to share with you all. The paper is titled "Freedom of Religion and Belief in Islam", and the author of the paper is Mohsen Kadivar. The paper is published in the book "The New Voices of Islam: Rethinking Politics and Modernity". The editor of the book is Mehran Kadivar.

I think the aforementioned paper is a valuable contribution to quranic studies. It's a really good paper, in my opinion. I strongly recommend it.

https://english.kadivar.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Freedom-of-Religion-Belief-in-Islam.pdf

[Jafar]

Anyone who promote Freedom of choice on joining Religion, Creating Religion or Not Joining any Religion is providing good service to humanity as a whole. And that definitely include freedom of making statement, opinion and expression.

There are no compulsion in attitude/opinion/perception.

[The Middle Path]

I concur with you.

Another scholar and religious reformer who was a countryman of Mohsen Kadivar have also made valuable contributions to quranic studies. There is a good article about him on wikipedia. Let me share some parts of the article in this thread.

Ahmad Hokmabadi Tabrizi (Persian: سید احمد حکم‌آبادی تبریزی, romanized: Ahmad-e Hokmabadi-ye Tabrizi;‎ 29 September 1890 – 11 March 1946), later known as Ahmad Kasravi (Persian: احمد کسروی, romanized: Ahmad-e Kasravi), was a pre-eminent Iranian linguist, nationalist, religious reformer, historian and former Shia cleric...

A proponent of reform in Islam,[23] he was respected for his deep knowledge of the religion, as "even his orthodox opponents admit that Kasravi was an able theologian and regard his Shari'ate Ahmadi as the best book on the fundamentals of Islam and Shi'ism of his time",[24] and, like Dr. Ali Shariati some three decades later, Kasravi considered that there were two kinds of Islam:

One is the religion that that honourable Arab man brought one thousand, three hundred and fifty years ago and was established for centuries. The other is the Islam that there is today and has turned into many colours from Sunnism, Shi'ism, Esmaili, Aliollahi, Sheikhi, and Karimkhani, and the like. They call both Islam, but they are not one. They are completely different and are opposite of one another.... Nothing is left of that Islam. This establishment that the mullas are running not only does not have many benefits but also causes many harms and results in wretchedness.[25]

Basically, he believed and wrote that "all the present-day representations of Islam have deviated from the essence and the true concept of its foundation".[26] He was particularly critical of Shia (since its formation since the sixth emam, Emam Jafar Sadegh) and Sufism, to which he ascribed many ills, from its supposed promotion of stagnation, "irrationality" or even being a tool of the Orientalists.[27] His main target in that field was the famous E. G. Browne, appreciated by Iranian intellectuals of all tendencies, whom he accused to have favoured Sufi poetry in his history of Persian literature, and thus trying to characterize the Iranian spirit with the errors he thinks belong to Sufis (immorality, irrationality, ...), further promoting idleness and passivity in order to keep Iran subjugated to foreign imperialists.[28] His criticism of Hafez Shirazi followed the same path, considering him "a source of disgrace",[29] saying that his "immorality" was due to the fact that the Mongols were the new rulers in the region, not respectful of Islamic law, thus letting some Sufis (like Hafez) "free to indulge in drinking wine, whereas previously they had to be cautious not to offend the Islamic sentiments of the rulers and the religious authorities."[30] Kasravi was also critical about the Baháʼí Faith and considered it as another continuation of the same deviation that started from Shia (penetration and influence of Old Iranian and Judaism beliefs about " a supposed to come saviour" into Islam) to Shaykhism (followers of Shaykh Ahmad Ahsaei) then Babism (followers of Ali Mohammad, the Bab), then into the Baháʼí Faith. Abbas Amanat, professor of history at Yale University, believes that Kasravi's work regarding the Bahá'í called Bahaigari is "a short polemic of little historical value". He further explains "in his criticism of the Bab, he hardly takes into account the historical circumstances under which the movement first appeared and his pontifical judgements no doubt are influenced by his own vision of pakdini".[31] It should be noted, however, that Amanat considers himself a follower of the Baháʼí Faith.[32]

Kasravi's "views threatened both modernist (blind followers of western culture in materialistic concept) intellectuals and the traditionalist cleric class (who worked along and gave legitimacy to traditionalists and Shia leaders who oppose progressive needed changes to modernize the country), not only because of his vision of religion (apart from Shi'a faith and Sufism, he was also sceptical of the Baháʼí), but also due to his critical stance on secularism and the fact that he was "the first Iranian to criticize modernism and Eurocentrism before Al-e Ahmad coined the term 'Weststruckness' and made it a genre."[33]

The whole article can be read in this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Kasravi

[Wakas]

https://misconceptions-about-islam.com/misconception.php?id=4

Misconception: No freedom of religion
Background: Some think that in Islam there is no freedom of religion allowed. For example, residents of a Muslim country or under Islamic law are not allowed to practice their own faith.

The Quran states, in no uncertain terms, that there is no compulsion in religion:

Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in God has grasped the most sure hand-hold, that never breaks. And God is Hearing, Knowing. [2:256]

Each to their own way:

"Nor will I serve what you serve,
Nor will you serve what I serve,
To you is your system, and to me is my system."
[109:4-6]

This is a reminder, so let he who wishes take a path to his Lord. [73:19]

The Quran states that God could have made all those on earth believe, thus asks who is man to enforce such a thing if God did not:

And if your Lord had pleased, surely all those who are in the earth would have believed, all of them; will you then force men till they become believers? [10:99]

Again, reminding us not to compel but simply warn by means of The Quran, with wisdom and kind words:

We know best what they say, and you are not one to compel them; therefore remind by means of The Quran who fears My warning. [50:45]

You shall invite to the path of your Lord with wisdom and kind words, and debate with them in the best possible manner. Your Lord knows best who has strayed from His path, and He knows best who are the guided ones. [16:125]

Interestingly, all examples in The Quran of persecution due to faith are as a threat from non-believers and tyrants against believers [e.g. 11:91, 19:46, 36:18, 26:116, 7:123-124]. Thus it could be argued a trait of an ignorant society is no freedom of religion.

And lastly, a proof beyond doubt, is that The Quran itself states anyone compelled or forced to believe or admit to something under duress is invalid with God:

Whoever rejects God after having believed; except for one who is forced while his heart is still content with belief; and has opened his chest to rejection, then they will have a wrath from God and they will have a great retribution. [16:106]

Thus, no enforcement of faith can take place in a society governed by the laws of The Quran.

Please also read chapter 9 in which the believers of the time were living side by side with polytheists (i.e. those who associate partners with God). Also the numerous examples of the presence of Jews and Christians with the muslims of the time.