My question is about sura 2:34 'And behold, we said to ANGELS:"bow down to Adam". And they bowed down, except Iblis. He refused and was haughty.

My understanding from the holy Qura'n about the angels, is that they always obey Allah Tala and they don't have any free will. What I would like to understand, is if iblis was an angel, how he could have disobeyed since he did not have any free will. Furthermore, if he was not an angel, how did he disobey since Allah tala only asked the angels to bow down.

The Qur’an has clearly stated that Iblees (satan) was not an angel but a jinn. It Qur’an says:

In view of this statement of the Qur’an, it is obvious that Iblees was a jinn and not an angel.

This brings us to the second part of your question that if Iblees was not an angel then how can it be said that he disobeyed Allah’s command by not bowing down in front of Adam, especially when, according to the Qur’an, the directive was given to angels. In my opinion, the answer to this question is that by directing the angels to bow down before Adam, Allah had directed a higher cadre creation to bow down, the lower cadre creations like jinns and any others that were present may or may not have been included in the directive. This style of speech is used in almost all human languages. For instance, when someone says: “When the chief Justice enters the room all the parliamentarians shall pay their respects by standing up for him”, he may imply that all those who are present shall stand up to pay their homage, but uses the word “parliamentarians” liberally – i.e by addressing the dominant group that is present and actually implying all those that are present, whether they are parliamentarians or not. Or he may actually imply that it is only necessary for the parliamentarians – and no one other than the parliamentarians – to stand up, using the words “parliamentarians” literally. Thus, when Allah directed the angels to bow down to Adam, the directive could have been construed to be solely for those that are included among the group called “angels” (the word “angels” being used literally) or on the other hand, it could also have been construed to be a general directive for all those present which means that the word “angels” has been used liberally – i.e. by addressing the dominant group that is present and actually implying all those that are present whether they are angels or not.

Thus, considering only the words that you have referred to (Al-Baqarah 2: 34) a person may be of the opinion that Iblees was included in the addressees while another person may construe that he was not. The same could have been the case with Iblees – he could have construed that he was included in the directive or he could have felt that it was meant solely for the angels. But to clarify this situation, the Qur’an at another instance explains:

At another instance, the Qur’an explains:

Then again, the Qur’an says:

In all these verses, we see that Iblees was asked why did he refuse to bow down to Adam. Had Iblees construed from the words of Al-Baqarah 2: 34 that the directive was only for the angels, he would have said so in reply to the question. But as we know, and the reply given clearly shows that the reason Iblees did not bow down to Adam was only his pride. This really means that the words of the directive although they could have been construed to be addressed to the angels alone were actually meant for all those that were present and the angels were addressed liberally. Moreover the dialogue between Allah and Iblees also shows that there was no doubt in Iblees’s mind that he also was supposed to bow down to Adam in response to Allah’s directive.

I hope this helps. In case any aspect of my answer remains unclear, please feel free to write back to me at your convenience.

Regards