Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:256

It has been said that this [verse], extending to His saying, the Exalted: (eternally), is part of the remaining [text] of the Throne Verse (Ayat al-Kursi). The truth is that it is not, but rather an independent, newly commenced sentence brought forth after clarifying the proofs of Oneness, to signal that compulsion in religion is inconceivable. This is because, in reality, [compulsion] is the forcing of another to perform an action in which he sees no benefit, while the religion is entirely beneficial. According to this [view], the sentence is a statement of reality and the true state of affairs; as for that which appears to be otherwise, it is not true compulsion.

It is permitted that it be a statement in the sense of a prohibition—that is, "Do not use compulsion in the religion or force others into it." In this case, it is either general and abrogated by His saying, the Exalted: (Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites), which is narrated from Ibn Mas’ud, Ibn Zayd, and Sulayman ibn Musa; or it is specific to the People of the Book who have accepted the jizya, which is narrated from al-Hasan, Qatadah, and al-Dahhak. There is [material] in the occasion of its revelation that supports this: Ibn Jarir narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them both—that a man from the Ansar of the Banu Salim ibn ‘Awf, called al-Husayn, had two Christian sons. He himself was a Muslim, and he said to the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—"Shall I force them? For they refuse to be anything but Christians." Then Allah, the Exalted, revealed this [verse] concerning him.

The al (definite article) in (al-din) refers to a specific entity (lil-‘ahd), or it is a substitute for the genitive construction—that is, the religion of Allah, which is the nation of Islam. The agent of compulsion, in any case, is other than He, the Exalted. Some people have said that the meaning is: "There is no compulsion from Allah, the Exalted, in the religion, nor any coercion; rather, the matter is founded upon enablement and choice." Were it not for this, there would be no trial and the examination would be void. The verse is like His saying, the Exalted: (So whoever wills, let him believe, and whoever wills, let him disbelieve). This is the position taken by al-Qaffal.

(Right-guidance has become clear from error) — An explanation initiated with the particle of verification (qad) to further confirm its content; that is, through what has been mentioned of His attributes—the Exalted—in which it is impossible to imagine that another shares in any way, belief has become distinguished from disbelief, and the correct from the erroneous. Al-rushd (right-guidance), with a damma on the ra and a sukun on the shin according to the well-known [recitation], is the verbal noun of rashada, with a fatha on the shin, yarshudu with a damma. It is also read with a fatha on both the ra and shin, with the verb being rashada, yarshadu, like ‘alama, ya‘lamu. It is the opposite of al-ghayy (error), the origin of which is following the path of destruction. Al-Raghib said: "It is like ignorance (jahl), except that jahl is said in consideration of belief, and ghayy is said in consideration of actions." Therefore it is said: "Ignorance is removed by knowledge, and error is removed by right-guidance." It is said of one who hits the mark: rashada, and of one who misses: ghawa. It is also said of one who fails: ghawa, as in the [poetic] saying: "Whoever encounters good, people praise his affair; and whoever strays (yaghwu), he shall not lack a blamer for his error."

(So whoever disbelieves in al-Taghut) — That is, Satan. This is narrated from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab and al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali—may Allah be pleased with them both—and Mujahid and Qatadah held this opinion. It is related from Sa’id ibn Jubayr and ‘Ikrimah that it is the soothsayer (kahin); from Abu al-‘Aliyah that it is the sorcerer; from Malik ibn Anas that it is everything worshipped besides Allah, the Exalted; and from some others that it is idols. It is best to speak of its generality: everything that transgresses (tagha). Restricting it to some in those accounts is by way of illustration.

Al-Taghut is an intensive form, like Jabarut and Malakut. There is disagreement regarding it: it is said to be a verbal noun in origin, and thus it remains singular and masculine like other verbal nouns applied to entities; this is the view of al-Farisi. It is said it is a singular generic noun, thus it maintains the singular and masculine; this is the view of Sibawayh. It is said it is a plural; this is the view of al-Mubarrad. Its pronoun is sometimes feminine, as in His saying, the Exalted: (And those who avoided al-Taghut that they should worship it [her]...). This is a consideration of gender. Its etymology is from tagha, yatgha or tagha, yatghu. The verbal noun of the first is tughyan and the second is taghwan. Its origin, in the first, is taghyut, and in the second, taghwut. The lam was moved forward and the ‘ayn moved backward; the weak letter became mobile and was preceded by a fatha, so it was changed into an alif. Thus, its template on the first is fa‘alut and on the second fa‘alut.

The mention of disbelief in al-Taghut is placed before the mention of belief in Allah, the Exalted, out of concern for the necessity of "clearing" (negating false deities first), or in observance of the actual sequence of events, or due to its connection to the word "error" (ghayy).

(And believes in Allah) — That is, affirms Him according to what His messengers—peace be upon them—have brought.

(Has grasped) — That is, has reached the limit in grasping, such that it is as if, while he is attached to it, he demands from himself an increase in it and steadfastness upon it.

(The firm handhold) — This is faith, as stated by Mujahid; or the Qur’an, as stated by Anas ibn Malik; or the word of sincerity (Ikhlas), as stated by Ibn ‘Abbas; or true belief; or the cause that leads to the pleasure of Allah, the Exalted; or the covenant. In any case, it is permissible for al-‘urwah (the handhold) to be an explicit metaphor, with istamsaka (grasped) acting as its reinforcement, or another dependent metaphor. It is also permissible to treat the speech as a representation based on the analogy of the intellectual state—derived from clinging to the truth which admits no contradiction in any way, due to its establishment by bright, definitive proofs—to the sensory state derived from grasping a firm rope, secure from breaking, without specifically addressing the constituent words. Some investigators chose this, and it is not without beauty. Treating al-‘urwah as a metaphor for "sound reasoning that leads to true belief," as has been said, is not good, because that is not mentioned at all at the time of the condition.

(No breaking for it) — That is, no snapping for it. Infisam and inqisam are two dialects; with the fa (infisam) is more eloquent, as al-Farra’ said. Some distinguish between them: the first is a breaking without separation, and the second is a breaking with separation. In this case, the negation of the second is known from the negation of the first by priority (awlawiyyah). The sentence is either a new commencement to confirm the firmness of the "handhold" previously mentioned, or a circumstantial clause (hal) describing the handhold, with the agent being istamsaka, or from the hidden pronoun in (al-wuthqa), because it is a superlative form, the feminine of awthaq. (For it) is in the position of the predicate.

(And Allah is Hearing) — of words.

(Knowing) — of intentions and beliefs. The sentence is an appendix that encourages belief and deters from disbelief and hypocrisy, because it contains promise and warning. It is said: it also contains an indication that both belief (internal) and affirmation (external) are necessary for faith.