Sheikh Abd al-Mut‘al al-Sa‘idi… When Difficult Texts Were Re-read Through the Lens of Freedom
If Muhammad Abduh reopened the door to the use of reason, then Abd al-Mut‘al al-Sa‘idi entered through that door into the most sensitive terrain:
the texts that had been misused to justify coercion, suppress opinion, and confiscate freedom.
Al-Sa‘idi’s project was neither sermonic nor a conciliatory gray discourse. Rather, it was a direct confrontation with the most tense issues in the relationship between Islam and freedom of opinion and expression.
He posed a question that many had not dared to ask—a question simple in its appearance, yet startling in its implications:
Was fighting in Islam intended to compel people to accept the religion, or to protect the call to faith from aggression?
This question, long avoided by Islamic jurisprudence, al-Sa‘idi raised again with the calmness of a researcher, not the fervor of a preacher.
A New Reading of the Verses of Fighting
Al-Sa‘idi did not deny the verses concerning fighting; rather, he rejected reading them outside their historical and contextual framework.
He affirmed that the first permission for fighting was a response to injustice and a protection of freedom of belief—not a means to impose religion.
﴿Permission to fight has been granted to those who are fought, because they have been wronged. And indeed, God is capable of granting them victory. Those who were expelled from their homes without right, only because they said: Our Lord is God. And if God did not repel some people by means of others, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques—in which the name of God is mentioned much—would surely have been demolished. And God will certainly support those who support Him. Indeed, God is Powerful and Mighty﴾ (39–40).
Fighting, in its essence,
was a defense of the human right
to worship God without persecution or coercion.
﴿Fight them until there is no persecution and the religion is for God. But if they desist, then there is no aggression except against the wrongdoers﴾ [Al-Baqarah: 193].
Protection of All Houses of Worship
Among the most important points al-Sa‘idi emphasized was the Qur’an’s affirmation of protecting all places of worship:
monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques.
In this sense, the defense of religious freedom was not exclusive to Muslims but a general principle encompassing everyone.
Such an interpretation fundamentally undermines the discourse of religious confrontation and establishes coexistence as a principle rather than an exception.
No Fighting Without Aggression
Al-Sa‘idi stressed a decisive principle:
There is no aggression except against the wrongdoers.
If aggression ceases, the justification for fighting disappears.
Through this understanding, al-Sa‘idi rejected the idea of “permanent war,” or what some jurists—and later radical Islamist movements—called offensive jihad. He excluded the notion of coercion in the name of religion.
Religious Freedom… A Principle, Not a Grant
In his book Religious Freedom in Islam,
al-Sa‘idi rejected the idea that faith can be imposed by force.
True faith, in his view, arises only from conviction and can only remain sound within a free environment.
For that reason, freedom of belief is not merely a human right but also a religious condition for the validity of faith itself.
Why Was Al-Sa‘idi Different?
Because he did not confine himself to speaking about freedom in general terms. Instead, he confronted directly the texts that had been used to justify its opposite.
He also clearly distinguished
between religion and the interpretations of jurists,
between revelation and politics.
The Cost of Courage
Such arguments did not come without a price.
Al-Sa‘idi faced harsh attacks, accusations of negligence, and attempts to marginalize him.
Yet his ideas endured, because they were not built on reaction but on a calm scholarly reading grounded in the text itself.
His Place in the Path of Renewal
Abd al-Mut‘al al-Sa‘idi represents a crucial link between rational reform and the reconstruction of political and religious jurisprudence on the basis of freedom.
In this sense, he was not merely an interpreter
but a corrector of course.
In the next episode (22):
we turn to another influential Azharite voice
who confronted his era from within the institution rather than from outside it:
The Grand Imam Sheikh Mahmoud Shaltut,
when freedom of ijtihad becomes a condition for the renewal of Sharia.
To be continued.
Cairo: five in the evening, according to the time of Al-Mahrousa.
