1. As we have mentioned above, the first discourse (verses 1-37) was revealed in 9 A.H./631 C.E. at a time when the Prophet (peace be on him) had already sent Abu Bakr as leader of the Pilgrims to perform Hajj. Since these verses were revealed during Abu Bakr's absence, the Companions in Madina asked the Prophet (peace be on him) to have them conveyed to Abu Bakr with the instruction that they may be recited publicly during the Ḥajj. The Prophet (peace be on him), however, decided that the verses should be recited on his behalf by someone from his own family. Accordingly, he entrusted the task to 'Ali and directed him that not only should he publicly recite the verses concerned, but should also make the following proclamation on that occasion: (i) that no one who refuses to accept Islam would enter Paradise; (ii) that no polytheist would henceforth be allowed to perform Ḥajj; (iii) that naked circumambulation around the Ka'bah - a pre-Islamic Arabian practice - would henceforth be forbidden; (iv) that the treaties concluded between the Prophet (peace be on him) and the unbelievers which were still in force since the other party had not broken them, would be honoured until the expiry of their terms. (See Qurtubi's comments on verses 1-2 quoting Tirmidhi and Ibn Kathir's comments on verses 1-3.)
It is worth noting that the first Hajj of the Islamic era after the conquest of Makka in 8 A.H./630 C.E. was performed largely in accordance with the then prevalent practices. However, in 9 A.H./631 C.E. the Muslims performed the second Ḥajj according to the rules prescribed by Islam whereas the polytheists performed it according to their own customs. It was in 10 A.H./632 C.E. that the third Hajj, more commonly known as the Hajjat al-Wādā' (The Farewell Pilgrimage) was performed in a purely Islamic manner. The Prophet (peace be on him) did not perform the first two Pilgrimages. He did, however, lead the third Hajj when polytheism had been fully extirpated.
2. The Qur'an had already laid down the rule: 'If you fear treachery from any group, then publicly throw their covenant at them, for Allah does not love the treacherous' (8: 58). Thus the Muslims were required to publicly terminate their treaties before they engaged in hostilities with groups whom they feared would violate those agreements. To take up arms against a people with whom one is bound by a treaty without its annulment is tantamount to treachery and as such does not become the Muslims. This Qur'ānic principle also applied to those tribes that, despite their treaties, had constantly conspired against an were openly hostile to Islam whenever the opportunity presented itself. This was very much the attitude of all the polytheistic tribes with the notable exception of the Banū Kinānah and the Banu Damrah, and perhaps of a couple of other lesser known tribes.
This public dissociation with polytheism and its adherents by the Qur'ān amounted to the outlawing of polytheism and polytheists in Arabia. The polytheists thereafter had no shelter in the land since the greater part of Arabia had come under Islam's sway. The polytheists looked ever for an opportunity (such as the threat of the invasion of the Islamic state by the Byzantines or the Sassanids, or of the possible death of the Prophet (peace be on him)) to violate their treaties and to fling the Islamic realm into civil war and anarchy. However, God and His Messenger had turned the tables on them before they had the chance. The public annulment of the treaties presented the polytheists with three alternatives. They could either come out into the open and engage in conflict with the Islamic state which would have led to their total extinction. They could flee from Arabia or they could embrace Islam and submit themselves and the lands which they controlled to the Islamic state.
The wisdom of this action can be better appreciated if one considers the level of denunciation which, broke out in different parts of Arabia in less than two years after the Prophet's death, and which jolted the very foundation of the newly-established Islamic order. Had this declaration of 9 A.H./631 C.E. not struck a death-blow to the forces of polytheism, and had the Islamic order not been firmly entrenched, the movement of apostasy which arose in the early days of Abu Bakr's Caliphate would have surfaced earlier and been more forceful. It might also have led to a much fiercer civil war and rebellion, and the course of Islamic history might well have been different altogether.
3. This proclamation was made on the 10th of Dhu al-Hijjah, 9 A.H./631 C.E. The polytheists were granted a respite of four months concluding on the 10th Rabi' al-Awwal, 10 A.H./631 C.E. They were thus offered the opportunity to take stock of their situation. If they decided that they should fight it out, they could do so. Similarly, they could choose either to leave the land, or after careful consideration embrace Islam.
4. The 10th of Dhu al-Hijjah is known as Yawm al-Naḥr (the Day of Sacrifice). According to authentic traditions, the Prophet (peace be on him) asked the audience on the occasion of Hajjat al-Wada' (The Farewell Pilgrimage): 'Which day is it?' They replied: 'It is Yawm al-Naḥr (the Day of Sacrifice).' The Prophet (peace be on him) said: 'This is Yawm al-Ḥajj al-Akbar (the day of Greater Pilgrimage).' It is in contrast to al-Ḥajj al-Asghar, (that is, 'Umrah or Minor Pilgrimage) that the Pilgrimage performed on the appointed dates in the month of Dhu al-Hijjah is called 'the Greater Pilgrimage'.
5. The Muslims were directed to maintain agreements with those who had not been guilty of violating agreements with them. Any act which contravened this idea would not be God-fearing and Muslims should abstain from it since God loves those who fear Him.
6. The expression 'sacred months' in the above verse means something rather different from its usual understanding, whereby fighting during those four months was prohibited. Here the expression refers merely to the four months of respite granted to the polytheists. Since it was not lawful for Muslims to attack the polytheists during those months, they were charac- terized as 'ḥurum' (sacred, prohibited).
7. Apart from a disavowal of unbelief and polytheism, the Muslims are required to establish Prayers and pay Zakāh. Without these, their claim that they had abandoned unbelief and embraced Islam would have no credence. Abu Bakr referred to this verse as the basis of his action in response to the movement of apostasy during his reign. A group of those who had launched a rebellious movement against Islam after the death of the Prophet (peace be on him) contended that they had not renounced Islam and were even prepared to observe the Prayers. They were not prepared, however, to pay Zakāh. Many of the Companions were puzzled as to how the sword could be unleashed against a people who claimed to profess Islam and observed Prayers. Abu Bakr referred to the above verse which enjoins Muslims to allow such polytheists to have their way provided they give up polytheism, establish Prayers and pay Zakāh. However, the injunction would not apply if they failed to fulfil any one of these three conditions.
8. If during the war any enemy expresses the desire to learn about Islam, the Muslims should provide him asylum, allow him to come to their land, and help him understand their religion. Thereafter if he decides not to accept Islam, they should escort him to wherever he wishes to go. In Islamic legal terminology, the person who enters Dār al-Islām under its protection is called musta'min.
9. This alludes to the Kinanah, Khuza'ah and Damrah tribes.
10. Although the unbelievers negotiated a peace treaty with the Muslims, their hearts were nevertheless full of treachery. Their intentions were borne out by their deeds for whenever they concluded a treaty it was apparent that they had done so only with the intention of breaking it.
11. The unbelievers had neither consideration either for their moral obligations nor had any compunction in their transgressions.
12. On the one hand, the Book of God invited the unbelievers to virtuous conduct, to righteousness, and to the observance of Divine Law. On the other hand, the worldly life offered them ephemeral benefits which they expected to gain by giving a free, unbridled rein to their lusts. On comparing the two, they preferred the latter to the former.
13. Not only did those wicked people choose error in preference to true guidance, they even had the brazenness to try to obstruct the spread of the truth, to prevent people from responding to righteousness. They tried to gag the mouths of those who invited people to the truth. In short, they spared nothing in their efforts to prevent the establishment of a righteous way of life. They sought to make life extremely difficult for those who, convinced of the truth of their way of life, tried to sincerely follow it.
14. This reiterates the statement that if the repentance of the unbelievers is not accompanied by the establishment of Prayers and the payment of Zakāh, then they would not be considered as part of the Islamic fraternity on the grounds of their mere repentance. As to the Qur'anic statement that they would become brethren in faith, it means that if they fulfil the requisite conditions, it would no longer be permissible for Muslims to fight against them, and also that their lives and property would become sacred. Moreover, they would be entitled to enjoy equal rights in the Islamic society. They would be treated like other Muslims in all social and legal matters. Nor would they be discriminated against in any way, nor any obstacles placed in front of them which might impede their progress in achieving what they might be capable of achieving.
15. It appears from the context that the expression 'their oaths' stands here for their repudiation of unbelief and so their acceptance of Islam. For, in view of their previous record of treaty violation, it was simply out of the question for any new treaty to be concluded with them. In fact, their persistent violation of such treaties had brought about the proclamation from God and His Messenger that all treaties with them be annulled (see verse 1 above). The Qur'an unequivocally declares that no treaty may be concluded with such people. The only way for such persons to be let alone was if they renounce unbelief and polytheism and perform the duties of Prayer and Zakāh.
This verse also contains a clear injunction with regard to apostasy. The verse does in fact hint at the apostasy movement that was to break out after a year and a half of Abu Bakr's Caliphate. In dealing with apostates Abu Bakr acted on the directive set forth in the present verse. (For a detailed discussion of apostasy see Sayyid Abu al-A'lá Mawdūdī, Murtadd ki Sazā Islāmi Qânün Mén (Lahore, 1953).
16. From here on the discourse is directed to the Muslims who are ...orted to wage war and to disregard worldly interests, blood ties, and everything else, in matters relating to faith.
For a fuller appreciation of the true spirit of this part of the discourse, one should take into account the circumstances which then confronted the Muslims. At that time, Islam had no doubt gained such an ascendancy that no power in Arabia could challenge its supremacy. To the superficial eye it might well have seemed highly dangerous to nullify all agreements with the unbelievers for the following reasons:
(1) It was feared that doing many things at once the annulment of treaties with polytheistic tribes, the ban on polytheists from performing Pilgrimage, the transference of custody of the Ka'bah to the Muslims, and the total abolition of the evil practices of the time of Ignorance - would be dangerous. It was feared that these steps might inflame even the polytheists and hypocrites into a decisive encounter against the Muslims in their attempts to defend their interests and their inherited way of life.
(2) The decision to institute Hajj as an exclusively Muslim religious rite and to ban the polytheists from entering the Ka'bah was, for the polytheists, highly controversial. This step not only offended the religious feelings of a vast section of the Arabian population, but was also detrimental to their economic interests for Makka was the centre of the Arabs' economic life.
(3) It was also feared that the declaration would put the faith of those who had embraced Islam after the Treaty of Hudaybiyah and the conquest of Makka to a severe test as many of their kith and kin still professed polytheism. In addition, the interests of some of them were closely linked with the Jahiliyah system. A deadly blow aimed at the polytheists of Arabia implied that recent converts to Islam would not only be required to shed the blood of those who were near and dear to them, but also to destroy the positions and privileges which they had enjoyed for centuries.
All of these apprehensions proved groundless. For, far from causing turmoil, the public disavowal of all affinities with the polytheists prompted those tribes which had still clung to polytheism to make their way to the Prophet (peace be on him). They steadily came to him, embraced Islam and pledged themselves to obey him. The delegations, comprised of ordinary tribesmen as well as chiefs and princes, came from all parts of Arabia. Once they had declared their conversion to Islam, the Prophet (peace be on him) allowed them to retain their former positions. But at the time when the new policy was being launched it was impossible for people to foresee the advantages that would follow. It should also be remembered that if the Muslims were not prepared to expend their energies for ensuring the enforcement of that decision, such advantages might not have accrued at all.
It was necessary, therefore, at this stage to urge the Muslims to fight in the cause of God, to remove the misgivings which they entertained about the new policy, and to impress upon them that they should allow no consideration to prevent them from carrying out the directives of God. This constitutes the theme of the present discourse.
17. Here the misunderstandings of those Muslims who considered that the Prophet's annulment of all agreements with the polytheists would plunge the land into a blood-bath is dispelled. It is pointed out that whilst a storm of bloody strife might well ensue, it is equally possible that the event might prompt some people to repent. This possibility was not, however, clearly spelled out. An explicit statement would, on the one hand, have made the Muslims complacent about their war preparations. On the other hand, such a statement might have negated the grim and threatening tone of the verse. Its present form alerts them to the precariousness of their situation, and sets in motion a process that might lead them to assimilate into the Islamic body-politic.
18. This is addressed to the recent converts to Islam. The verse makes it plain to them that unless they prove that they hold their faith to be dearer than their lives, properties and blood ties, then they cannot be declared true believers. On the basis of what had happened it might have been claimed that they had embraced Islam merely because it was now established as the supreme force in the land. This was the result of the true believers' valiant struggle.
19. Those who associate others in the divinity of the One True God cannot be considered legitimate custodians, servants and caretakers of those places consecrated exclusively for the worship of God. The polytheists of Arabia, by explicitly rejecting the call to monotheism and by refusing to consecrate their worship and servitude to the One True God, had forfeited their right to the custodianship of the Ka'bah which had after all been erected for the worship of God alone.
The Qur'an thus lays down a principle which is of general application. The specific command itself, however, was prompted by the decision to put an end to the polytheists' custodianship of the Ka'bah and the Holy Mosque around it, and to confer it instead upon the believers.
20. No matter what service the polytheists had proffered as custodians of the House of God had gone to waste for they had tainted it with polytheism together with other practices of Jahiliyah. The little good they did was outweighed by the sins they committed.
21. To act merely as the custodians and caretakers of a religious shrine and to ostentatiously perform a few religious rites with the intent of creating the impression of piety for the sake of superficial observers, was of no value in the eyes of God. A man's worth in the sight of God depends on his faith and the sacrifices he makes in this cause. Whoever is in possession of such qualities, regardless of his lineage, is of value to God. Conversely, those who enjoy an illustrious lineage and ceremoniously perform religious rites on appointed occasions but who are devoid of the qualities outlined above, deserve no respect whatsoever. Nor is it proper to allow the custodianship of holy places and religious institutions to remain in the hands of such worthless people merely on the basis of their hereditary claims to them.
22. It is possible that God might deprive them of the blessing of true faith and of their present pre-eminence and confer the same on some other group, making this latter group the standard-bearers of Islam and guides to righteousness in place of the former.
23. Those who anticipated a blood-bath throughout Arabia as a result of the annulment of agreements with the polytheists are being asked to shed their fears. They are also told that God helped the believers on earlier occasions when they were confronted with grave danger, and He was still there to help them. Had the success of the mission of Islam been dependent merely on the resources of the believers, Islam would not have spread beyond Makka and it would have certainly been wiped out in the Battle of Badr. Islam survived, however, for God was there to help it. Incidents in the past confirmed that if Islam had flourished it was due to the power of God. The believers should, therefore, feel assured that He will enable Islam to flourish as He had done before.
Allusion is made here to the Battle of Hunayn which took place in Shawwal 8 A.H./630 C.E. in the Hunayn valley, about one year before the revelation of this verse. In this battle the Muslim army consisted of twelve thousand people - so far the strongest Muslim army. The army of the unbelievers was much smaller. Yet the archers of the Hawāzin tribe put up a very tough fight and routed the Muslim army. Only the Prophet (peace be on him) and a handful of intrepid Companions stood their ground. This enabled the Muslim army to reconsolidate its position and eventually win the battle. Had the outcome of the battle bee different, the Muslims would have lost much more by this defeat than what they had gained by the conquest of Makka.
24. The grace and magnanimity with which the Prophet (peace be on him) treated his defeated enemies won most of them over to Islam. By references to such instances the Muslims are being told that they should have no reason to believe that circumstances would necessarily lead to the total obliteration of all the polytheists of Arabia. In view of past experiences they should rather believe that once people are deprived of the false props which enabled them to cling to Jähiliyah, they will automatically move towards Islam.
25. The polytheists were not only forbidden to perform Hajj, but also to enter the precincts of the Holy Mosque. This was done so as to ensure there would be no revival of polytheism or Jahiliyah in the future. That 'the polytheists are unclean' does not imply bodily impurity; rather it is their beliefs, morals, deeds, practices and customs which are unclean. Hence a ban was placed on their entry into the precincts of the Holy Mosque.
According to Abū Ḥanifah, the importance of this verse lays with the fact that the unbelievers are no longer allowed to enter the precincts of the Holy Mosque to perform Hajj and Umrah, or the religious rites of Jahiliyah. However, Shafi'i interprets the verse in an absolute sense and rules out totally their entry into the Holy precincts. Likewise, Mälik holds that the ban was not confined to the Holy Mosque; the unbelievers may not enter any mosque. The last opinion, however, is not sound since the Prophet (peace be on him) had allowed unbelievers to enter his own mosque in Madina. (See Qurtubî's comments on verse 28 - Ed.)
26. Although the People of the Book pretend to believe in God and the Hereafter, in fact they do not. Belief in God does not simply mean verbal affirmation of God's existence. It rather means that man should acce God as the One and Only Lord, and should neither associate himself r anyone else with God's being, His attributes, His claims against man, or with His authority. Nevertheless, both the Christians and Jews are guilty of doing this, their actions identified at length in the following verse. Their profession of faith is, therefore, of no use and cannot be taken as evidence of true belief in God.
Likewise, belief in the Hereafter does not just mean affirmation of man's resurrection after death. True belief in the Hereafter necessitates a firm conviction that no intercession, ransom, association with saints, or spiritual leaders will be of any use in the Next Life, nor will anyone be able to expiate for others. One should hold firm in the belief that full justice will be done in God's court where nothing else matters but one's faith and deeds. A mere verbal affirmation of belief in the Hereafter is, therefore, meaningless. The Christians and the Jews have corrupted their faith since they have distorted certain basic components of that belief. Their belief in the Hereafter is also inauthentic.
27. The People of the Book do not follow the Law revealed by God through His Messenger (peace be on him).
28. The purpose for which the Muslims are required to fight is not as one might think to compel the unbelievers into embracing Islam. Rather, their purpose is to put an end to the sovereignty and supremacy of the unbelievers so that the latter are unable to rule over men. The authority to rule should only be vested in those who follow the true faith; unbelievers who do not follow this true faith should live in a state of subordination. Unbelievers are required to pay jizyah (poll tax) in lieu of the security provided to them as the Dhimmis ('Protected People') of an Islamic state. Jizyah symbolizes the submission of the unbelievers to the suzerainty of Islam. 'To pay jizyah of their own hands humbled' refers to payment in a state of submission. 'Humbled' also reinforces the idea that the believers, rather than the unbelievers, should be the rulers in performance of their duty as God's vicegerents.
Initially the rule that jizyah should be realized from all non-Muslims meant its application to Christians and Jews living in the Islamic state. Later on, the Prophet (peace be on him) extended it to Zoroastrians as well, granting them the status of Dhimmis. Guided by the Prophet's practice the Companions applied this rule to all non-Muslim religious communities living outside Arabia.
Some nineteenth-century Muslim writers and their followers in our own times never seem to tire of their apologies for jizyah. But God's religion does not require that apologetic explanations be made on its behalf. The simple fact is that according to Islam, non-Muslims have been granted the freedom to stay outside the Islamic fold and to cling to their false, man-made, ways if they so wish. They have, however, absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God's earth nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines. For if they are given such an opportunity, corruption and mischief will ensue. In such a situation the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.
It is sometimes asked: 'What do non-Muslims get in return for jizyah?' In our view, jizyah is the compensation which non-Muslims pay for the freedom they are provided to adhere to their erroneous ways while living under an Islamic state. The amount so received should be spent on the administration of that righteous state which grants them freedom and protects their rights. One of the advantages of jizyah is that it reminds the Dhimmis every year that because they do not embrace Islam, they are not only deprived of the honour of paying Zakāh, but also have to pay a price - jizyah - for clinging to their errors.
29. The Jews consider Ezra (c. 450 B.C.) to be the reviver of their faith. According to their tradition, it, was Ezra who compiled the Torah and revived the Law which had been lost in the dark period following the death of the Prophet Soloman (peace be on him). As a result of their captivity in Babylon the Jews had become oblivious to their Scripture, Law, traditions, and national language - Hebrew. The Jews hold Ezra in great esteem for his revival of their faith. Some Jewish sects, however, revered Ezra to the point of deifying him, some even considering him the son of God. The above verse does not suggest that all Jews were guilty of this deification. It only points to the erroneous Jewish concept of God which resulted in the appearance of certain groups within the Jewish community itself who held Ezra to be the son of God.
30. "The unbelievers of old' refers to the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Persians and others who had gone astray. Influenced by their thoughts, superstitions, and myths, both the Jews and Christians invented false doctrines. (For further elaboration of this point see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. II, al-Ma'idah 5, n. 101, pp. 181-5 - Ed.)
31. As reported in a tradition, 'Adi b. Ḥātim, a Christian convert to Islam, once requested the Prophet (peace be on him) to explain the import of the following Qur'ānic statement: 'They (the Jews and Christians) take their priests and monks as lords apart from Allah.' In reply the Prophet (peace be on him) asked him: 'Is it not so that you consider unlawful whatever your priests declare to be unlawful, and consider lawful whatever your priests declare to be lawful?' Adi confirmed that such was the practice of the Jews and Christians. Thereupon the Prophet (peace be on him) told him that doing so amounted to 'taking them as lords apart from Allah'. This means, according to the Qur'an, that those who declare things to be lawful or unlawful without sanction from the Book of God, in fact place themselves in the position of God. Similarly, those who accept the right of such persons to make laws according to their will take them as their lords.
Both these charges against the Jews and the Christians that they declared one person or another to be the son of God, and that they invested human beings with the authority to make laws independent of Revelation - have been mentioned in order to emphasize that their profession to believe in God was false. They might well be believers in the existence of God. But their concept of God is so erroneous that their belief is no better than disbelief.
32. The word used in the verse is al-din (the way). In Arabic this word signifies, as we have explained earlier (see Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. I, al-Baqarah 2, n. 204), a way of life to which one subjects oneself because of one's belief that he who prescribed it enjoys supreme authority and is worthy of obedience. The verse explains that the purpose of the Prophets was to establish the supremacy of the Guidance and the Right Way revealed to them by God over and above all other systems of life. In other words, a Prophet is never sent with a sanction to let the way of life revealed to him be subjected to other ways of life. Nor is a Prophet sent to be content to exist at the sufferance of the false ways of life which hold sway over man's life. Since a Prophet is the representative of the Lord of the universe, he seeks to make the Right Way prevail. If any other way of life continues to exist, it should be satisfied with the concessions made to it by Islam. For example, the rights granted to the Dhimmis to enjoy the protection offered by Islam in lieu of jizyah. (See Tafhim al-Qur'ān, al-Zumar 39, n. 3; al-Mu'min 40, n. 43, and Fușşilat 41, n. 20.)
33. The false pretenders to piety issued false religious decrees in return for pecuniary benefits, took bribes, accepted presents and offerings, and invented a variety of religious rituals that forced people to buy their salvation from them. They also extorted money from the people on every conceivable pretext, creating situations in which it would become impossible for people to escape their extortionate clutches, be the occasion one of birth, marriage or death. People were made to believe that their fate was in the pretenders' hands, that they could make or ruin you. Driven by pecuniary motives alone, they led people into error and engrossed them in it. Whenever a call for reform is made, such people are the first to oppose it and use every possible device to that wicked end.
34. Ever since God created the universe, the moon has unfailingly appeared every month in the form of a crescent and then completed its full cycle ending with its disappearance from the sky. As a result of this, twelve months have always constituted a year. However, the Arabs, in accordance with their practice of nasi', increased the number of months to thirteen or fourteen to enable them to interpose in the calendar a sacred month which they declared to be free of the restrictions they were required to follow during the 'sacred months'. (For further elaboration see n. 37 below.)
35. They were asked not to disregard beneficial considerations, for waging war in those months was prohibited, nor to wrong themselves by creating disorder during those days. The four months alluded to here are the months of Dhu al-Qa'dah, Dhu al-Hijjah and Muharram for Hajj (Major Pilgrimage) and Rajab for 'Umrah (Minor Pilgrimage).
36. The Muslims are told that they are free to fight in the sacred months if the unbelievers attack them. If the unbelievers fight unitedly against the Muslims in disregard of the sacred months, the Muslims may also unitedly fight against them. (For an explanation of this verse, see al-Baqarah 2: 194.)
37. Nasi' was practised by the Arabs in two ways:
(1) In order to shed blood or to plunder, or to satisfy a blood vendetta; here they declared a sacred month to be an ordinary one, and compensated for this violation later on by declaring one of the ordinary months to be sacred.
(2) With a view to harmonizing the lunar calendar with the solar calendar the Arabs used to add a month to the lunar calendar. Their purpose in so doing was to ensure that the Hajj dates should consistently fall in the same season so that they were spared the hardship and inconvenience resulting from observation of the lunar calendar for the fixation of the Hajj dates. As a result of this practice, Hajj was performed once on its appointed date, the days on which the 9th and 10th of Dhu al-Hijjah truly fell, and then for the next thirty-three years it was performed on days which were fictitiously declared to be the 9th and 10th of Dhu al-Hijjah. Allusion to this is found in the Prophet's address during the Farewell Pilgrimage:
'The time has returned to what it was when God created the heavens and the earth. (Bukhārī, 'Tafsir', 'Bāb inna ‘iddat al-Shuhur 'ind Allah ithna 'ashar Shahran fi Kitab Allah' - Ed.)
By forbidding nasi', a major step was taken to frustrate the principal purposes of the pre-Islamic Arabs. The first of these purposes involved, quite obviously, undisguised sin. It consisted, in practice, of legalizing what God had declared unlawful; by resorting to chicanery the Arabs attempted to give their impious act a semblance of legality. As for the second purpose (viz. to keep the Hajj permanently fixed to the solar calendar), it might seem innocuous and beneficent at first sight. In actual fact, however, even this purpose amounts to an act of rebellion against the law of God.
God chose the lunar calendar in connection with the rites of Hajj for a number of reasons, one of which seems to be that man should accustom himself to following the law of God in all possible conditions and circumstances. To take the case of Ramaḍān, because it follows the lunar calendar, it falls in different seasons. Sometimes it falls in summer, sometimes in winter, and sometimes in spring or autumn. Men of faith, however, obey God in every season, in all kinds of weather conditions, and this provides them with excellent moral training. Similarly, as the lunar calendar is followed in determining the dates of Hajj, then this also falls in different years in different seasons. People, therefore, have to undertake long journeys in varying conditions to perform Pilgrimage. This is certainly a test of their mettle and helps them acquire the capacity to remain steadfast in their obedience to God. Now, if for the sake of man's own convenience - be it in relation to tourism, business or fun - the Muslims were to decide that Hajj and Ramaḍān should always fall during the pleasant seasons of the year, this would amount to a rebellion against God; for some of God's purposes would be blatantly violated. Moreover, since Islam is a universal religion, it is inconceivable that a particular month of the solar calendar should be permanently fixed for Pilgrimage or Fasting, for some people would find it convenient whilst others, travelling from other parts of the world, would find it permanently inconvenient.
It is worth noting that the proclamation to abolish nasi' was made during the Hajj in 9 A.H./631 C.E. The following year, in 10 A.H./632 C.E., Hajj was performed on the appointed dates and in accordance with the lunar calendar. From that time onwards Hajj has always been performed on its due dates.
38. This verse marks the beginning of the second discourse of the surah (comprising verses 38-72). It was revealed during the preparations for the Tabuk expedition.
39. The statement that the goods of this world will count for little in the Hereafter is open to two possible interpretations. First, it may mean that on witnessing the eternal life and immeasurable bounties of the Next Life one will realize the triviality of pleasures gained in worldly life. This would make people deeply regret, despite having been duly warned and out of sheer short-sightedness, that they sacrificed the everlasting and immense bliss of the Hereafter for the ephemeral pleasures of this world.
Second, that the enjoyments of this world will be of no avail in the Next Life. For, howsoever well provided one might be with worldly goods, one has to leave them behind at the time of death. Once a man dies all his worldly possessions remain behind and no part of them can be transferred to the Next World. Whatever good will come to man's share in the Next Life will be in consideration of the sacrifices he has made in seeking God's good pleasure.
40. This verse formed the basis of a legal ruling issued by the jurists regarding jihad. They concluded that as long as the Muslims as a whole, or the Muslims of a particular area or a section thereof, have not been summoned to jihäd, it would remain merely fard bi al-kifayah (the collective duty of all Muslims). Thus, if some Muslims engage in jihad, other Muslims are absolved from that obligation. However, if the Muslims are called upon by their leader to make jihād – no matter whether all Muslims are so called, or the Muslims of a particular area, or a section thereof - jihad would become obligatory on every Muslim who has been so called upon. The matter is of such vital importance that if those who fail to perform this duty without any legitimate excuse claim to be Muslims, such a claim will not be entertained.
41. The Muslims are told to disabuse their minds of the misconception that but for them God's purposes would not be achieved. On the contrary, if they have served the cause of God they should gratefully recognize God's favour on them insofar as He has provided them with a golden opportunity to serve the cause of their faith. If they allow such an opportunity to slip, then God will lavish that favour on some other people. (For details of the Hijrah see Ibn Hishām, vol. 1, pp. 484–96. See also the comments of Qurtubi and Ibn Kathir on the verse - Ed.)
42. This statement occurs in connection with the migration of the Prophet (peace be on him) to Madina on the very night the Makkan unbelievers planned to kill him. A majority of Muslims had already migrated to Madina in their twos and threes. Those Muslims who remained in Makka were either helpless or were not dependable; their faith being suspect. When the Prophet (peace be on him) learned of the plot to assassinate him, he left Makka in the company of only one person, Abū Bakr. Anticipating a hot pursuit by the enemy, the Prophet (peace be on him) travelled southward instead of following the northern route which leads to Madina. He also secluded himself in a cave, Thawr, for three days.
As the Prophet (peace be on him) had anticipated, his bloodthirsty enemies began their mad pursuit. They searched every nook and cranny around Makka. Some of his pursuers even reached the mouth of the cave where the Prophet (peace be on him) was in hiding. This naturally caused Abu Bakr considerable consternation as he and the Prophet (peace be on him) were just a step away from being caught. The Prophet (peace be on him) remained unperturbed. He comforted Abu Bakr, saying: 'Grieve not, for Allah is with us.' (For relevant details of the Hijrah see Ibn Hisham, vol. 1, pp. 484 ff. - Ed.)
43. The directive: 'Go forth in the way of Allah, whether you are equipped lightly or heavily', is comprehensive in its meaning. In the first place, it instructs Muslims to go forth and fight in the cause of God. They should comply with this request regardless of whether they feel happy to do so or not; whether they are amply resourceful or otherwise; whether the circumstances are favourable or adverse, and whether they are young and healthy or old and weak.
44. The idea of marching across, vast stretches of desert to reach Tabuk appeared arduous for a number of reasons. Because of the prospect of an armed encounter with a power as great as that of the Romans; because the journey was to take place in the blazing heat of summer; and because the harvesting season was just at hand - this was of great importance that year when famine conditions prevailed.
45. Proffering excuses, the hypocrites asked the Prophet (peace be on him) to exempt them from jihad. Even though the Prophet (peace be on him) was aware of the falsity of their excuses, he granted them an exemption. This, however, did not meet with the approval of God, and the Prophet (peace be on him) was told that his leniency towards the hypocrites was not well-placed for the latter had used the exemption to disguise their hypocrisy. Had they not been exempted, their deliberate abstention from jihad would have revealed the hypocrites in their true colours.
46. One thus learns that an encounter between the forces of Islam and unbelief serves as a touchstone for distinguishing a true believer from a hypocrite. Whenever such an encounter takes place, a sincere believer is bound to exert himself to the utmost in his support of Islam, not sparing any effort or resource in that connection. On the contrary, if a person shirks from supporting Islam and is overly concerned with saving his own skin, his conduct negates his claim to be a sincere believer.
47. God did not like that people should rise to fight in His cause unwillingly, without sincerity of purpose. The situation with the hypocrites was that they lacked the spirit of jihad; they had no zeal for a struggle to uphold Islam. If they were to participate half-heartedly in jihad merely under the pressure of Muslim public opinion, or with the intent to cause mischief, this might have resulted in much greater damage as is clearly mentioned in the next verse (i.e. verse 47).
48. Some of the hypocrites even had the affrontery to seek their exemption from jihad by fabricating excuses weaved from religious and moral pretensions. This is well illustrated by the plea of Jadd b. Qays which has been recorded in the traditions. He told the Prophet (peace be on him) that he was infatuated with feminine beauty, a weakness which he claimed was well known to his fellow-tribesmen. He pleaded that if he were to see Roman women, he might be unable to keep himself under control. He asked, therefore, for an exemption from jihad in order that he remain beyond such temptations. (See Ibn Hishām, vol. 2, p. 516. See also the comments of Qurtubi on the verse - Ed.)
49. These hypocrites made the pretence that they were afraid of evil temptations and hence should be spared being sent to the war-front. But the fact of the matter is that they were fully given over to a variety of evils - hypocrisy, lies, deceit, and pretence of piety. They sought to persuade their God of their fears from even minor temptations. But it is quite clear that withholding their support to Islam in its crucial encounter with unbelief is in itself the worst kind of evil.
50. Instead of bringing them any good, their false pretence of piety led them ultimately to Hell.
51. The above Qur'anic passage delineates the differences in the attitude of a man of God and a man of the world. In all his actions the man of the world seeks to satisfy himself by the attainment of worldly ends. If he is able to attain those ends, his joy knows no bounds. If he fails, he feels overly dejected. Moreover, a worldly person depends on material resources alone. If material circumstances seem favourable, that boosts his spirit. In unfavourable circumstances, he feels altogether heart-broken.
A man of God, on the contrary, is prompted in all his actions by the desire to please God. Therefore, far from depending on his own strength or on material resources, he depends upon God. Regardless of whether he meets with success or suffers reverses in his struggle for the cause of the truth, he remains calm since he believes that both are essentially God given; that it is the omnipotent will of God which is at work in both cases. Adversities do not dishearten him. Success does not make him swagger. For, apart from considering both success and failure to be from God, he regards each of them as a test from God, and his attention is focused on how he might successfully pass that test.
Moreover, since his basic purposes are not of a worldly nature, he does not measure his success or failure by a worldly yardstick. The good pleasure of God being his sole end, a man of God measures his success or failure with reference to the extent to which he was able to devote his life and resources in God's cause. If a man does exert himself fully in the performance of his duty, it is immaterial whether he attains any success in this world or not. For he is convinced that even if he loses all that he has in this world his resources, and even his life - this will not be allowed to go unrewarded by God in Whose cause he had made that sacrifice. Such a man is also not daunted by adverse circumstances, for he places his trust in God, the Lord of all resources. Reposing his trust in God, he continues to strive with the same zeal and determination with which a worldly person strives when the circumstances seem favourable.
That is the reason why God directs the believers in the above verse to tell the hypocrites, who are enamoured of worldly life, that the basic attitude of the believers is altogether different from theirs. The two groups also entertain entirely different notions as to what causes happiness and grief. The believers derive their contentment and happiness from one source, and the hypocrites from an entirely different source.
52. The hypocrites, despite their profession of belief in Islam, refrained from openly taking sides with Islam in its encounter with unbelief. They were disposed to a 'wisdom' which ensured they remain on the fence and watch from a safe distance the outcome of the encounter between the two forces Islam and unbelief. The result could be either the victory of the Prophet (peace be on him) and his Companions, or their total destruction by the mighty Roman army. In response to their attitude the hypocrites were told (see verse 52) that both consequences were good in the eyes of the Muslims. For if the believers emerged victorious, the good of it, for them, would be self-evident. However, even if the Muslims perished whilst sincerely striving for their cause, this is a great achievement in the eyes of a Muslim, even though the superficial judgement of the world would deride it as a disgraceful end. This is so because the criterion used by a Muslim to measure his success or failure is quite different from that used by others. A Muslim's success does not essentially consist of such worldly achieve- ments as the conquest of a territory or the establishment of an empire. His true success depends on devoting all his physical and mental energy to upholding the Word of God. If a Muslim devotes himself to this cause, he will be reckoned successful even if the result of his efforts, from a worldly point of view, might add up to zero.
53. Some of the hypocrites who were unwilling to take the risk of joining the Muslims in their jihad, were also keen not to lose their credibility among the Muslims by totally dissociating themselves from it since this would have amounted to a public proclamation of their 'hypocrisy'. Hence they took the position that while they would like to be exempted from actual fighting, they would be willing to make financial contributions to the cause of jihad.
54. Here, the real cause of hypocrisy has been pin-pointed - excessive love for their offspring and worldly possessions. Given this weakness, it was obvious that the hypocrites would ultimately be disgraced among the Muslims and lose all the prestige, influence and social status which they had hitherto enjoyed in the Arab society. For while the hereditary chiefs would lose their locus standi, those belonging to the lower rungs of society - the common slaves and the offspring of slaves, the ordinary cultivators and shepherds - would attain honour and status in the new social order if they remained faithful to the cause of Islam.
An illustration in point is the following incident which took place in the time of 'Umar. Some leading members of the Quraysh, including Suhayl b. 'Amr and Ḥarith b. Hishām once called upon ‘Umar. While they were seated in 'Umar's company they noticed that 'Umar received the Anṣār and Muhajirun with great consideration and asked them to sit beside him in preference to the Quraysh notables whom he asked to move aside so that after some time they were relegated to the rear-most seats. When the Quraysh notables came out of the meeting Harith addressed his colleagues thus: 'Look! How we were treated today!' To this Suhayl b. 'Amr replied: "Umar is not to be blamed for meting out this treatment to us. Rather it is our own fault. We had rejected this religion when we were invited to accept it while they [the Anṣar and Muhājirūn] readily accepted it.' They later visited 'Umar and told him: 'Today we saw how you treated us. We realize that we are to be blamed for it. Is there a way for us to make amends?' Without giving any reply 'Umar pointed to the Roman border. His message was loud and clear. If they could show the readiness to sacrifice their lives and wealth in the cause of God, this might help them regain their lost positions.
55. Apart from being subjected to worldly disgrace and ignominy, the hypocrites would undergo a greater suffering: they would not be able to enjoy the blessing of true faith till their last breath and this would be because of the hypocritical traits which they had nourished in themselves. Furthermore, after ruining their lives in this world, they would proceed from it to meet an even more calamitous end in the Next Life.
56. Almost all the hypocrites of Madina were rich and elderly people. According to the description of the hypocrites in Ibn Kathir's al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, only one of them was young and absolutely none of them was poor. (See Ibn Kathir, al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, vol. 3, pp. 237-41 - Ed.) They had successful businesses and sprawling estates in Madina. Their extensive experience in worldly matters had turned them into perfect time-servers. When soon after the advent of Islam in Madina a large number of its inhabitants embraced Islam with sincerity and devotion, the hypocrites found themselves in a tight corner. For, on the one hand, they found their fellow tribesmen, including some of their own sons and daughters, full of sincere devotion to Islam. In such a situation were they to reject and publicly renounce Islam, this could mean the very end of their prestige and influence. This could also invite severe opposition from members of their own household. On the other hand, if they aligned themselves with the Muslims, it was obvious that it would incur the hostility of all Arabia, and possibly of a number of neighbouring countries and empires. At the same time, they were so strongly in the grip of their own self-interest that they had lost the capacity to appreciate the truth for its own sake; they were unable to comprehend the idea of placing the truth above everything else and courting all possible risks and endangering their lives and wealth for its sake. Thus their self-interest dictated that they should profess belief in Islam in order to retain their prestige in Madina as well as to protect their estates and commercial interests. This profession of Islam was a mere sham so as to ward off the dangers inherent in sincere and unreserved identification with Islam.
The Qur'an accurately portrays their state of mind and stresses that they had not sincerely identified themselves with the Muslims. They had willy-nilly become a part of the Muslim body-politic, merely out of the fear of economic loss. They had professed their identification with the Muslims because they were afraid of the many losses which they might incur by openly renouncing Islam while living in Madina. Such a step was not only likely to destroy their social position but might even rupture their relations with their wives and children. Also, if they decided to leave Madina, it would entail colossal material loss. So in the final analysis they did not even have any sincere devotion to unbelief which would prepare them to suffer losses for its sake.
All these factors ensured that the hypocrites stayed on in Madina, performing Prayers even though they detested it, and paying Zakah even though they paid it in the spirit in which one pays a penalty. However, day in and day out their formal profession to faith in Islam made them vulnerable to the demands to engage in jihad against one formidable power or another, and to risk their lives and property for the sake of Islam. These demands made them so restless that they would have been happy to seek refuge in any hole and hiding place, if such were available, which promised them security for their interests.
57. For the first time in the history of Arabia all those who possessed wealth exceeding a certain minimum were asked to pay Zakāh. This Zakāh was levied on agricultural produce, cattle, merchandise, minerals, and gold and silver according to a set of varying rates of 2.5 per cent, 5 per cent, 10 per cent and 20 per cent. Since Zakāh was collected and spent in an organized manner, the Prophet (peace be on him) received and distributed funds on a scale previously unknown to the Arabs.
This spectacle of wealth distribution whetted the hypocrites' appetites. However, as we know, the Prophet (peace be on him), who oversaw the distribution of Zakāh, excluded himself and the members of his family from any share in it. How could he then tolerate that Zakāh should be appropriated by undeserving persons? This attitude of the Prophet (peace be on him) offended the hypocrites and evoked their spite. The hypocrites obviously could not spell out the true reason for their wrath. It was embarrassing for them to say that they were annoyed since they were not permitted to misappropriate Zakāh funds. They, therefore, kept their real grievance hidden and time and again found false reasons for accusing the Prophet (peace be on him) of partiality and injustice in the distribution of Zakāh.
58. The Qur'an says that the hypocrites should have better felt content with the share of the spoils granted to them by the Prophet (peace be on him), with the living which they made because of the grace of God, and with the prosperity which they enjoyed.
59. The hypocrites should have felt secure economically for they were entitled, like before, to receive their due shares besides Zakāh out of the wealth that would come to the treasury.
60. Rather than focus one's attention on the world and its worthless riches, one should turn one's attention to God and His grace and bounty, seeking His good pleasure. One's hopes should be centred upon Him alone; and one should be totally satisfied with whatever wealth God bestows.
61. The Qur'anic term faqir (the poor) applies to those who depend for their subsistence on others. The word includes all those who are needy regardless of whether they are so because of factors such as physical disability or old age. It also includes those who have become needy owing to accidental circumstances which have rendered them orphans, widows, unemployed, or temporarily disabled. Likewise, it also includes those who, after temporarily receiving some assistance, are likely to become self-sup- porting.
62. Maskanah from which the word miskin (pl. masākīn) is derived, denotes helplessness, destitution. Thus masākīn are those who are in greater distress than the ordinary poor people. Explaining this word the Prophet (peace be on him) declared that masäkin are those who cannot make both ends meet, who face acute hardship and yet whose sense of self-respect prevents them from asking for aid from others and whose outward demeanour fails to create the impression that they are deserving of help. The words used in a tradition are the following: 'Miskin is he who lacks the resource that would suffice him, who does not look as one deserving of charity, nor does he resort to begging.' (Bukhārī, 'Zakāh', 'Bāb Qawlihi Ta'ālá lā Yas'alūn al-Nās ilḥāfa . . . ` – Ed.) In short, he is both self-respecting and poor.
63. 'Those employed to administer them' refers to those appointed by the state to collect ṣadaqat (alms), to ensure the safe-keeping of the funds collected, to maintain their accounts, and to disburse them. Even when such persons are not poor or needy, they will be compensated for their services out of the collected funds. The Qur'ānic verse (al-Tawbah 9: 103) which directs: 'And out of their goods take alms' indicates that the collection and disbursement of Zakah constitutes one of the duties of the Islamic state.
In this connection it is noteworthy that the Prophet (peace be on him) declared it unlawful for himself and the members of his family (i.e. Banu Hashim) to receive Zakāh. Hence, while the Prophet (peace be on him) worked for the collection and distribution of Zakah, he did so without taking any remuneration for the work. Likewise, he laid down the rule that while it was lawful for members of his family (i.e. Banu Hashim) to gratuitously render any service in connection with Zakāh, it was unlawful for them to do so in lieu of compensation. According to the rules laid down by the Prophet (peace be on him), whereas the members of his family are obligated to pay Zakāh like any other Muslim if they possess the prescribed minimum of wealth, it is unlawful for them to receive it even if they are poor or needy, or in debt, or wayfarers. There is some disagreement among jurists as to whether the members of the Prophet's family may receive Zakāh from one another. According to Abū Yusuf, it is lawful to do so when they are poor or needy or wayfarers or in debt. But most of the jurists do not hold even this to be lawful.
64. The words, refer to those whose hearts are won over for the cause of Islam. The rule embodied in this verse is that Zakah funds may be used to calm those who are actively engaged in hostile activities against Islam, or to win over the support of those who are in the unbelievers' camp. Zakāh may also be used for securing the loyalty of those converts to Islam about whom it might be legitimately feared that if no consideration is shown them they may revert to unbelief. It would be lawful that regular stipends or lump sum amounts be paid to such persons on a regular or temporary basis in order to secure either their support and backing for Islam, or preferably their conversion to it, or at least to neutralize such persons even if they remain in the opposite camp. Apart from Zakah, money obtained from spoils and other sources of revenue may also be used for this purpose. It is not necessary that the recipients who fall into this category be paid out of Zakāh only if they are poor or needy. Rather, they may be paid even if they are rich.
That stipends and grants were made in the time of the Prophet (peace be on him) for reconciling the hearts of certain people to Islam is an established fact. It is, however, a controversial question whether payments for this purpose may be made after the time of the Prophet (peace be on him). Abū Ḥanifah and his disciples are of the view that such payments are no longer permissible because this category of expenditure stands abolished since the time of the caliphate of 'Umar. Shafi'i holds the view that payments may be paid to sinful Muslims in order to reconcile them fully to Islam. No such payment may, however, be made to the unbelievers. Nonetheless some jurists are of the opinion that this category of expenditure is permissible whenever a genuine need for it exists. (See Qurtubî's comments on the verse. See also Jaṣṣāṣ, vol. 3, p. 124 - Ed.)
The Ḥanafi opinion is supported by reference to an incident in the days of Abu Bakr. 'Uyaynah b. Hisn and Aqra' b. Häbis visited Abu Bakr and asked him to grant a piece of land. Abu Bakr complied. In order to formalize the grant they sought to have the document witnessed by some leading Companions. Some Companions obliged them. However, when they approached 'Umar for that purpose, he tore the document into pieces before their very eyes and said: "The Prophet (peace be on him) no doubt used to pay you in order to reconcile your hearts [to Islam]. But those were the days when Islam was weak. Now Islam does not stand in need of [the support of] persons like you.' Returning to the Caliph Abu Bakr they lodged a complaint against 'Umar and even taunted him by saying: 'Who is the Caliph, you or 'Umar?' However, neither Abu Bakr nor any other Companion expressed any disapproval of 'Umar's stand. Basing their judgement on this the Hanafi jurists contend that since the number of Muslims has increased and Islam has become powerful enough to defend itself, this category of expenditure has lost its rationale. So, in the unanimous view of the Companions, it now stands abolished once and for all. (See Jaṣṣāṣ's comments on the verse in vol. 3, p. 124 - Ed.)
Shafi'i, however, makes a different plea. According to him, the Prophet (peace be on him) never paid any unbeliever out of Zakah money for the purpose of reconciling his heart to Islam. Whenever he paid some unbeliever, he drew on the spoils of war. (He paid out of Zakāh funds only to sinful Muslims whose hearts he sought to reconcile - Ed.)
In our opinion, there seems to be no worthwhile evidence to support the view that this category of expenditure stands abolished for ever. Whatever 'Umar said in respect of the people mentioned in the above incident is perfectly justified. If at any given time the Islamic state does not consider it necessary to spend from Zakāh to reconcile people to Islam, it may do as it decides; expenditure on this category of people is not an obligation. On the contrary, if the need for reconciling people to Islam is seen to arise under changed circumstances, Muslims may resort to paying them from Zakāh funds since God has kept a provision for it. What 'Umar and the other Companions agreed, in view of the circumstances of that time, was that it was unnecessary to reconcile people to Islam by making payments from Zakāh. This opinion cannot, however, be made the basis for concluding that the Companions abolished for all time to come payments which had been provided for in the Qur'an for important religious considerations.
As for Shafi'i's view, it seems justified to the extent that when other sources are available, the Islamic state should refrain from making use of Zakah funds for this purpose. However, when it becomes necessary to draw on Zakāh, there seems no valid basis for making a distinction between sinful Muslims and unbelievers. For the Qur'an has not sanctioned payments for this purpose in view of the recipient's claim to faith. Rather, payment has been allowed in consideration of certain advantages that would accrue if certain people were won over to the cause of Islam. When the circumstances are akin to those in which the Qur'an laid down this provision, the Imam of the Muslims would be perfectly justified in making use of Zakah for this purpose. If the Prophet (peace be on him) did not draw on Zakāh in this connection, it was because he had other funds available to him to cover the need. However, had it been unlawful to make such payments to the unbelievers the Prophet (peace be on him) would have specified this.
65. This means that Zakāh may be used to secure the emancipation of slaves. This may be done in two ways. First, if a slave has entered into an agreement with his master that he would be granted freedom on payment of a specified sum of money, financial assistance may be provided to him to make that payment and thus secure his freedom. Second, Zakāh funds may be used to buy slaves with the intention of setting them free. All jurists agree that the first of the two alternatives is lawful. As regards the second method, 'Ali, Sa'id b. Jubayr, Layth, Thawri, Ibrāhīm al-Nakha'i, Sha'abi, Muḥammad b. Sirin, and the Ḥanafi and Shafi'i jurists in general hold it to be unlawful whereas Ibn 'Abbas, Ḥasan Baṣrī, Mālik, Aḥmad b. Hanbal and Abu Thawr consider it lawful to use Zakah funds for this purpose as well.
66. Another use of Zakāh funds is to help those debtors - whether they are employed or unemployed, rich or poor - who would be reduced to a state of poverty if they were to pay off all their debts from the funds available to them. Several jurists are of the opinion, however, that such help should not be rendered to those who incur heavy debts either as a result of their extravagance or their spending on evil purposes. Such persons may, however, be helped from Zakāh funds if they repent.
67. The expression 'in the way of Allah' has a wide and general connotation and encompasses all good deeds which please God. Some authorities, therefore, believe that Zakāh may be spent on all good purposes. But the truth of the matter is and this is also the view of a great majority of past scholars that 'in the way of Allah' stands for 'jihād in the way of Allah'. This expression signifies struggles launched with a view to overthrowing ungodly systems and replacing them by the Islamic system of life. All those who participate in this struggle may be given assistance from Zakāh funds, whether it be for journey expenses, for providing means of transport, for arms and equipment or for other goods relating to warfare. Such assistance may be provided even to those who are otherwise well off and need no financial assistance in connection with their own living. Likewise, help on a temporary or regular basis may be provided out of Zakah to those who voluntarily devote themselves to this cause wholly or on a part-time basis, either for a specified period of time or permanently.
While discussing this question the jurists generally use the word ghazw which is equivalent to qital (fighting). This has given rise to the misconcep- tion that Zakah funds may be spent exclusively on 'fighting in the cause of God'. Jihad is, however, an all-embracing concept which covers every kind of struggle to bring down ungodly systems of life, to uphold the Word of God, and make the Islamic system of life prevail. This struggle may be supported by Zakāh funds whether Islam is in its early stage of propagating its message and persuading people to embrace it or in its later stages when the struggle assumes a combative dimension.
68. A traveller, though otherwise rich, is entitled to receive help out of Zakāh funds if he needs such help during his journey. Some jurists, however, subject this help to the condition that the journey should not have been undertaken for an evil purpose. There is no basis, however, for such a stipulation in the Qur'an or Ḥadith. The broad principles of Islam also indicate that a person's sinfulness does not disqualify him from receiving help. Rendering assistance to sinful people in times of dire need, and a generally graceful and benevolent attitude towards them, often serves as an effective means of reforming them.
69. One of the allegations of the hypocrites against the Prophet (peace be on him) was that he allowed everybody to speak his mind and that he listened to them. Strangely enough, the hypocrites tried to give an evil interpretation to this character trait. They misconstrued it as proof of the Prophet (peace be on him) being credulous and gullible. What actually irked the hypocrites on this count was that the sincere believers informed the Prophet (peace be on him) about their conspiracies, mischievous deeds and hostile talk. Incensed by this, the hypocrites protested that the Prophet (peace be on him) lent credence to the reports of down and outs.
70. The Qur'ānic response to these taunting remarks is an exhaustive one and covers two points. First, that the Prophet (peace be on him) does not pay any attention to reports that are likely to give rise to evil and mischief; he acts only on those reports which would bring good to all, the reports which are conducive to the best interests of Islam and Muslims. Second, that the Prophet's propensity to listen to everybody is in fact in the interests of the hypocrites themselves. For had the Prophet (peace be on him) not been forbearing and cool-tempered he would not have listened with patience to their false professions to faith, to their specious protesta- tions of goodwill, to their lame excuses to justify their shying away from fighting in the way of God. Had he been otherwise, the Prophet (peace be on him) would have dealt severely with the hypocrites and would have made their life in Madina extremely difficult. In short, the hypocrites had every reason to be thankful for this trait in the Prophet's character.
71. The hypocrites are told that they are wrong in assuming that the Prophet (peace be on him) believes in all that is narrated to him. Though he listens to everybody, he trusts only the true believers. As for the reports brought to the Prophet (peace be on him) about the hypocrites, these were not carried by characterless story-tellers. Rather they were brought to the Prophet's notice by trustworthy and righteous believers.
72. Although the hypocrites did not sincerely believe in the Messenger- ship of the Prophet (peace be on him), they were convinced, in view of their long experience, that he did have access to some supernatural source of information which apprised him of their clandestine activities. The same source, they thought, helped the Prophet (peace be on him) gain access to their closely-guarded secrets. This enabled the Prophet (peace be on him) to reveal through the Qur'an (which, according to the hypocrites, was the Prophet's own work rather than a revelation from God) their hypocrisy as well as their nefarious designs against the Muslims.
73. When preparations for the Tabuk expedition were under way, the hypocrites used to scoff at the Prophet (peace be on him) and the Muslims. They did so with the idea of demoralizing those Muslims engaged in jihäd preparations. Many such reports are recorded in the traditions. Of these, one goes thus: 'Some hypocrites were talking idly in their private meeting. One of them said: "Do you think that fighting against the Roman warriors is like the mutual fight among the Arabs? I am sure that no sooner than the war breaks out you will find these [Muslim] warriors tied by ropes." (See Ibn Hisham, vol. 2, p. 525 and Waqidī, vol. 3, p. 1003; Ţabari, vol. 3, p. 108, and the comments of Ibn Kathir on verses 65-6 - Ed.) To this another added: "It will be much better if, apart from that, each one of
them is whipped a hundred times as well." (See Wāqidī, vol. 3, p. 1004 and Ibn Hisham, vol. 2, p. 525 - Ed.)* On seeing the Prophet (peace be on him) busy in jihad preparations, a hypocrite derisively told another: "Just look at this man! He is out to conquer the Roman and Syrian fortresses!" (See Qurtubî's comments on the verse - Ed.)
74. Jesters and clowns among the hypocrites could be pardoned for having indulged in such idle talk in view of their non-serious approach to life. But those hypocrites who deliberately uttered such derisive remarks with a definite view to demoralize and unnerve the Muslims undoubtedly stood guilty of committing an unpardonable crime.
75. An instinctive interest in evil, and hostility to goodness are common denominators of all hypocrites. If a person is inclined to evil, they lavish their sympathy, counsel, encouragement, and support upon him. They do
*We are not sure about the actual sources from which the author derived the statement mentioned above. The statement in the two sources that we have been able to locate seems to have a somewhat different signification. The statement in Ibn Hisham is the following:
فقالَ مُحْسن بن حمير: والله لودِدْتُ انّي أَقاضَى على أن يُضْرب كُلُّ [رجل ] (۲) منا
مائة جلدة، وإِنَّا نَنْفَلتُ أن يَنْزلَ فينا قرآن لمقالتِكُمْ هذه "
- Ed.
not fail to intercede on his behalf, and spare no eloquence in their praise of him. They join hands in his evil deeds and urge others to take part in them as well. They also encourage the evil-doer to continue in the same vein. Their attitude leaves no room for doubt that evil gratifies them to the core. For the mere sight of a good deed puts them off. The very thought of goodness distresses them. They are ill-prepared to see anybody suggest an act of goodness. When they see anyone proceed in that direction they writhe in pain. They resort to a variety of devices to obstruct people from doing good and to dissuade them from it.
Another trait common to all hypocrites is their unwillingness to spend in good causes. This characterizes not only those hypocrites who are miserly but also those who are otherwise spendthrift. The ill-gotten wealth of the hypocrites is either stored in their coffers or is squandered on unlawful pursuits. They are utterly extravagant if the purpose be evil, but are totally close-fisted if money is needed for a good cause.
76. The foregoing characterized the hypocrites in the third person. Here, suddenly, they are addressed directly in the second person.
77. The narrative again reverts to a description of the hypocrites in the third person.
78. This refers to the areas where the people of Lot lived.
79. The Qur'an emphasizes that earlier communities were not destroyed because God had any grudge against them which prompted Him to seek their destruction. This calamitous end was the natural result of their own actions. God gave them every opportunity to choose the right path. He gave them every opportunity to think and to understand. He sent Messengers to admonish them, and who warned them of the dire consequ- ences of their wickedness, who explained clearly which way leads to salvation and which to destruction. But when they failed to pay any heed to these admonitions and persisted in following the wrong path, they inevitably met with disastrous consequences. This constitutes the import of the above verse: 'It is not Allah Who wrongs them; it is they who wrong themselves.'
80. The Muslims and hypocrites stood apart, each a separate entity. Superficially they seemed identical insofar as both groups recognized Islam as their religion and outwardly followed the same set of religious practices. Nevertheless, they differed in character, temperament, behaviour, and habits; in short, in their total orientation. In the case of the hypocrites, faith was merely a verbal claim devoid of true conviction. This claim was repudiated by their life-style. Their case is similar to that of a man who fills up a container with filth, and labels it perfume; a claim which will instantly be known to be false by the stench it gives off.
In the case of the true believers, their claim can be verified by reference to their character and conduct. The label of perfume is justified by the sweet smell! Both the hypocrites and true believers passed off as members of the same Muslim community due to the label of Islam. Nevertheless, the characteristics of the two were so radically different that they could not be considered one community. The hypocrites, by dint of their heedlessness to God, their instinctive interest in evil, their revulsion against goodness, their unwillingness to co-operate with good causes, were a community by themselves. On the other hand, the true believers - men and women - constituted a distinct community because they shared many traits. They were instinctively disposed to righteousness, they abhorred evil, and remembrance of God was the very breath of life for them. They also spent freely in the way of God, and the dominant characteristic of their life as a whole was obedience to God. These common characteristics developed a sense of common identity among them and made them quite distinct from the hypocrites.
81. This marks the beginning of the third discourse of the surah (comprising verses 73-129), which was revealed after the expedition to Tabuk.
82. So far the hypocrites had mainly been treated with tolerance and forbearance for two reasons. First, the Muslims could not afford to open a front against the enemies within while they were involved in a fight against the enemies without. Second, this policy was intended to provide an opportunity to those in the ranks of the hypocrites who were merely victims of doubt and scepticism, but were not incorrigibly corrupt. It was conceivable that some belonging to this category might attain genuine belief and conviction in Islam.
Neither of these two reasons existed any longer. The Muslims held sway over virtually the whole of Arabia and in fact a new phase of conflict with powers outside Arabia had just begun. To strike a severe blow at the enemy within had, therefore, become both possible and necessary. This step was necessary in order to prevent the internal enemies from collaborating with the external enemies and so create a difficult situation in the Muslim body-politic. The hypocrites had already been granted respite for a full nine years during which time they had had every opportunity to see, think about, make their judgements on Islam. They could have made good use of this long period of respite if they had even the slightest ability to accept the truth. The Qur'an, therefore, declared that in addition to waging jihad against the unbelievers, the Muslims should also wage ‘jihād' against the hypocrites, and should henceforth treat them severely. This declaration thus marked the end of the period of leniency shown to the hypocrites. The directive to wage jihad against the hypocrites and to show severity to them did not mean that Muslims should start a war against the hypocrites. Rather, the directive meant that Muslims should no longer be indulgent towards the hypocrites' nefarious activities. The previous policy of over- looking their hypocrisy had allowed the hypocrites to be considered by the generality of Muslims as part of the Muslim body-politic, which in turn had enabled them to meddle in the affairs of the Muslim society and inject their poisonous influence into it. The present directive marked the end of that policy. From now on if anyone adopted a hypocritical attitude whilst living in the midst of Muslims, their behaviour clearly showed that they owed allegiance neither to God nor to the Prophet (peace be on him), such people should be fully exposed, be subjected to public censure, be deprived of the influence and authority they had enjoyed before, be socially ostracized, and be excluded from consultation in matters relating to the affairs of the Muslim community. Nor should their witness be accepted in the courts. They should also be barred from holding public office. No deference should be shown to them on social occasions. Muslims should treat them in a way which would make them realize they had lost their prestige in the Muslim society and that no Muslim held them in esteem. If any hypocrite committed treachery, no connivance should be shown to his crime. Rather, he should be tried publicly and be awarded a befitting punishment.
This was a timely directive for its absence could well have led to the disintegration of the Islamic society. For a community that breeds hypoc- rites and traitors in its midst and holds them in esteem will inevitably face moral degeneration, and ultimately, total destruction. Hypocrisy is like a plague, and the hypocrite is the carrier of those germs, infecting people all around. If the rats, hypocrites, carrying the germs of plague are allowed to move about freely, this would expose the entire population to grave risk. If hypocrites hold respectable positions in society, this might motivate others to follow suit and encourage them to commit downright treachery. Such a situation is likely to make many a person entertain the idea that sincerity, honesty and true faith do not contribute to a person's success. All one has to do is make a verbal declaration of faith and then go about doing as one pleases and nothing will prevent one from flourishing. The Prophet (peace be on him) alluded to this pithily in one of his sayings: 'He who shows respect to one who introduces an innovation in Islam, lends a hand to the demolition of Islam.' (For this tradition see Bayhaqi, Shu'ab al-Iman, quoted in Mishkāt al-Maṣābīḥ, ‘Bāb al-I'tiṣān, bi'l-Kitāb wa'l- Sunnah' - Ed.)
83. There is no certainty about what constitutes the 'word of unbelief' mentioned in the above verse. However, there are references in traditions to the many blasphemous utterances of the hypocrites. For example, a hypocrite is reported to have told his Muslim relatives: 'If the message delivered by him [the Prophet (peace be on him)] is really genuine, then we are worse than donkeys.' (Wāqidī, vol. 3, p. 1004 - Ed.) According to another report, during the expedition to Tabuk when a she-camel of the Prophet (peace be on him) went astray and the Muslims set about searching for it, a group of hypocrites made much fun of the incident, saying to one another: (Just look at this man!) He brings us news about the heavens but cannot tell where his she-camel is.' (See Wäqidī, vol. 3, p. 1010; Ibn Hisham, vol. 2, p. 523 - Ed.)
84. This alludes to the conspiracies contrived by the hypocrites during the expedition to Tabuk. One of these, according to traditionists, was that the hypocrites had planned to throw the Prophet (peace be on him) into a ravine during his return from Tabük. On learning of this evil design, the Prophet (peace be on him) directed his army to take a longer route through the valley while he himself followed a shorter route together with 'Ammar b. Yasir and Ḥudhayfah b. al-Yaman. During his journey the Prophet (peace be on him) came to know that about a dozen masked hypocrites were in pursuit of him. As soon as this was known, Hudhayfah hastened towards them with the intention of driving them away. The hypocrites spotted this from afar and were afraid. In addition, fearing that they would be identified, they immediately took to their heels. (See Aḥmad b. Hanbal, vol. 5, p. 453; Wāqidī, vol. 3, pp. 1042-3 - Ed.)
Another conspiracy hatched by the hypocrites was that they secretly decided that as soon as the news would come that the Muslim army had been defeated by the Romans they would install 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy as the ruler of Madina. They went about planning for this since they had not even a shred of doubt that the Muslim army was doomed. (See the comments on this verse by Qurtubi - Ed.)
85. Prior to the migration of the Prophet (peace be on him), Madina (i.e. Yathrib) was a small Arabian town and the Aws and Khazraj, the two main clans habiting the town, did not enjoy any extraordinary position of authority or affluence. However, within eight or nine years of the Prophet's migration, during which the Anṣär exposed themselves to every kind of risk and danger and extended their full support to the Prophet (peace be on him), Madina became the capital of the whole of Arabia. The farmers belonging to the Aws and Khazraj clans became, as it were, the notables of the new society and administered the newly-founded state. Madina was flooded with affluence as a result of the conquests made by the Muslims and the attendant overflow from the spoils of war and the prosperity of trade and commerce. Alluding to this, the Qur'an reproaches the hypocrites who, instead of being grateful to the Prophet (peace be on him) through whom they had achieved such prosperity, directed their spite and anger towards him.
86. The ingratitude of the hypocrites for which they were rebuked (see verse 74 above) is evident from their conduct. Reference has been made to this in order to emphasize that the hypocrites were a bunch of die-hard criminals who lacked even the most rudimentary virtues such as grateful- ness, acknowledgement of beneficence, and faithfulness to covenants.
87. This refers to the stinginess of the hypocrites in response to the appeal of the Prophet (peace be on him) to make contributions to the war fund on the occasion of the expedition to Tabuk. Not only that, they even made fun of the sincere believers when they gave generously. About each of them they had something to say. If wealthy Muslims donated a large amount an amount which was in accord with or beyond their means - they accused them of insincere ostentation. And if the poor Muslims donated modest amounts out of their hard-earned income, they scoffed, saying: 'Look! Here is the farthing that will help conquer the forts of the Roman Empire!' (See the comments of Ibn Kathir on the verse - Ed.)
88. 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy, the ringleader of the hypocrites, died some time after the Prophet's return from Tabuk. His son, 'Abd Allah b. 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy, who was a sincere believer, called on the Prophet (peace be on him) and requested him to give his gown away so that it might be used as a shroud for 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy's burial. The Prophet (peace be on him) generously acceded to this request. 'Abd Allāh also requested the Prophet (peace be on him) to lead the Funeral Prayer for 'Abd Allāh b. Ubayy. Acting with the same magnanimous spirit, the Prophet (peace be on him) promised to oblige. Although 'Umar tried to dissuade the Prophet (peace be on him) from doing so in view of 'Abd Allah b. Ubayy's ignominious role in opposing Islam, the Prophet (peace be on him) ignored his protest and did not mind praying for the forgiveness of this arch-enemy of Islam. This was out of his mercy and tenderness which embraced friend and foe alike. However, as soon as the Prophet (peace be on him) rose to lead the Funeral Prayer the above verse was revealed, forbidding him to do so. (Bukhārī, ‘Tafsir', 'Bāb Qawlihī Ta'ālá istaghfir lahum aw lā tastaghfir lahum' and ‘Bāb lá tuṣallī ‘alá Aḥad minhum' - Ed.) For a policy had already been laid down that no further allowance should be given to the hypocrites (see verse 73). They should no longer be allowed to flourish and that there should be a total abstention from anything that might encourage them.
A rule which has been derived from this incident is that the leaders of the Muslim community should not lead or offer the Funeral Prayer of notorious sinners. After the revelation of the above verse, the Prophet (peace be on him) used to inquire about the conduct of the deceased before leading any Funeral Prayer. If the deceased was a notorious sinner, he advised the relatives of the deceased to make alternative arrangements.
89. It was indeed shameful of the hypocrites that despite their physical fitness and material resourcefulness they failed to go to the battle-front to take part in the jihad. And this though they were behind none in claiming to be Muslims. They preferred to stay back in their homes like women when they should have been on the battlefield at that critical moment. Since they had deliberately adopted this stance, they were stripped of those noble feelings which makes a man ashamed of his unbecoming conduct.
90. The word al-A'rab refers to the bedouin who either lived in the desert or in the villages around Madina.
91. If a man's profession to faith is not backed by a true affirmation of the Message of the Prophet (peace be on him), submission to God, and sincerity in devotion, it is merely an act of the tongue which does not
prevent him from according precedence to his material interests and worldly concerns over God and the religion of God. Such a profession of faith is no better than unbelief. Such people will, therefore, be treated by God in the Hereafter as unbelievers and rebels. This is notwithstanding the fact that it might not be possible in this world to declare them unbelievers since they verbally profess Islam, and hence Muslims will have no option but to treat them, on a social and legal level, as Muslims. This is because in the life of this world people can be declared unbelievers only when they are guilty of open denial, rebellion, treachery or infidelity. Hence it is difficult to judge all hypocrites, from a legal point of view, as unbelievers. But escaping the judgement of human beings in this world does not guarantee man's escape from God's judgement and punishment in the Next World.
92. This makes it clear that even those who are otherwise apparently exempt from jihād are in fact not automatically so on grounds of physical disability, sickness or indigence. They are exempt only when these disabilities are combined with their true loyalty to God and His Messenger. If someone lacks this loyalty, he cannot be pardoned for the simple reason that when it became obligatory for him to wage jihad he was sick or indigent. God does not look at such external criteria for exemption from duty. For God can examine what is at the bottom of each man's heart. He can examine both inner and outer conditions and test whether one's excuse is that of a loyal servant or of a rebel and traitor.
If several persons happen to fall sick on the eve of jihad, it will hardly be possible for a human being to distinguish the sickness of one from that of another. But God knows well that each case is different from the other. For instance, there will be those who, if they fall sick on the eve of jihād, will thank the heavens for their sickness since it has provided them with a timely excuse to stay away from the war-front. There will be others who react quite differently. They will probably lament their sickness which has prevented them from doing their duty and from having the honour of taking part in jihad. Whereas the people of the former category will not be content with securing an exemption for themselves from fighting, but will probably also try to dissuade others from jihad, there will be others who, even though they themselves are unable to take part in jihad for reasons beyond their control, will urge others to hasten to the war-front. Likewise, while people belonging to the first category will spread all kinds of rumours in order to demoralize the believers, the people of the latter category will try to compensate for their inability by reinforcing the home front, and thus at least make some contribution to the cause of jihad. Though people of both categories failed to join jihad, God will judge them differently in view of their different attitudes. God might pardon the latter, but the former must be convicted for treachery and disloyalty even though both could present a justifiable excuse for not engaging in jihād.
93. Those who had a sincere desire to serve Islam but could not do so owing to some genuine reason feel as grief-stricken as a worldly person does when he has been afflicted of misfortune such as when he loses his job or narrowly misses a treasure. Such persons would be deserving of the same reward from God as those who actually did serve the cause of Islam. For even though they might not have been able physically to contribute to the struggle in the way of God, their hearts were there. This explains why the Prophet (peace be on him), whilst returning from Tabuk, told the Companions: 'You have never undertaken a march nor crossed a valley but that some people, who are actually in Madina, were with you.' In utter surprise they asked: 'Did they do so while they were staying in Madina itself?' The Prophet (peace be on him) affirmed: 'Yes, they did so even while staying in Madina. For they had been forced by circumstances into staying back or else they would never have stayed back.' (See Bukhārī, 'Maghäzi', 'Bāb Nuzul al-Nabī al-Hijr'; Muslim, 'Imārah', 'Bāb Thawāb man ḥabasahū ‘an al-Ghazw Maraḍ aw ‘Udhr ākhar' – Ed.)
94. Two different verbal forms of the same word i'rāḍ have been used in this verse. In the first instance it denotes 'to turn away' in the sense of being indulgent. In the second instance it means to turn away in disgust. The word has been used in an imperative form and contains the injunction to sever all connections with those persons.
95. The word al-A'rab, as we have explained earlier (see n. 90 above), signifies the bedouin - whether of the desert or the countryside - in the vicinity of Madina. For a long time they had followed a policy of opportunism with regard to the conflict between Islam and unbelief. However, as Islam established its sway over the greater part of Hijaz and Najd and the power of the tribes hostile to Islam began to weaken, they saw their interests lay in entering the fold of Islam.
Of them, only a minority embraced Islam out of true conviction and with the readiness to fulfil its demands. For a majority of these bedouin, acceptance of Islam was the outcome of sheer expediency and self-interest, sincere belief playing scarcely any part in it. They were primarily interested in the advantages that accrue to those belonging to the ruling party. But they were intensely resentful of practically everything relating to Islam.
They were resentful of the moral discipline which Islam imposed on them. They were unhappy with the duty placed upon them to observe Fasting. They were unhappy at the imposition of Zakāh on their cattle and agricultural produce. They were also disconcerted by the tight grip imposed by the many regulations which they were required to follow for the first time in their history. They also resented the idea of sacrificing their lives and property not in connection with tribal feuding or razzias, which were close to their hearts, but in the way of God.
Thus a deep sense of dissatisfaction continued to smoulder in the bedouins' hearts and a great number of them invented ever new excuses to circumvent the requirements of Islam. They were a cynical lot who cared nothing for right and wrong or for the true welfare of humanity. Theirs was a small world, confined essentially to their economic interests, their conveniences and privileges, their lands and properties, their camels and goats, and the very limited world around their tents. If they did believe in anything higher, it was a kind of superstitious reverence for saints and holy men to whom they made offerings. In return for those offerings they were supposed to guarantee them material prosperity and immunity from natural calamities. They were also expected to provide them with amulets and pray for their worldly success. Such was their outlook that they could not subscribe to a faith that would seek to subject their entire cultural, social and economic life to a rigorous moral and legal discipline, and which would also ask them to sacrifice their lives and wealth in order to promote its universal reform mission.
In the above verse the Qur'an refers to this attitude of the bedouin who, compared with town dwellers, were relatively more prone to hypocrisy and unbelief. Town dwellers fare better since they have the opportunity to
meet learned and pious people and thus gain some knowledge of religion and its requirements. The bedouin, however, tend to engross themselves in the pursuit of their bread and butter alone, leaving them no leisure time for higher pursuits. At the end of the day they are no more than economic brutes, and as such are ignorant. In this context it may be added that movements towards apostasy and the refusal to pay Zakāh which broke out only a couple of years after the revelation of these verses (i.e. verses 97-9) during Abu Bakr's Caliphate, were mainly the result of the bedouins' attitude.
96. Essentially, the bedouin looked upon Zakāh as a kind of fine or penalty imposed upon them. Likewise, they also resented the Islamic duty of showing hospitality to strangers. The same was true of the financial contributions they were required to make in connection with jihad. They made those contributions reluctantly and only with the idea of assuring the Muslims of their faithfulness rather than to please God.
97. The hypocrites had become so adept at keeping their hypocrisy hidden that despite his unusual insight even the Prophet (peace be on him) could not quite see through them.
98. The 'double punishment' mentioned in this verse will consist of the following. First, instead of gaining wealth, prestige, and honour the hypocrites will suffer worldly losses and be subjected to humiliation even though it is their excessive love of the world which led them to hypocrisy and rebellion against God. Second, the cause of Islam, which they seek to frustrate by their evil machinations, will flourish before their very eyes and despite their vicious efforts to the contrary.
99. The above Qur'ānic verse brings into sharp relief the difference between the attitudes of a hypocrite and a sinful believer. In light of this, it has to be determined how Muslims should treat people whose claim to be Muslim is false.
The verse lays down that those who profess to be Muslims, but who in fact have no sincere allegiance to God, to the religion propounded by Him, and to the Muslim community, should be treated firmly and severely if their behaviour provides incontrovertible evidence of this. If such people make contributions in the cause of God, they must not be accepted. Nor may the believers, however closely related they be, perform the Funeral Prayers of such persons and pray for their forgiveness. But, if an otherwise sincere believer commits an act inconsistent with the requirements of sincerity and confesses to it, he should be forgiven. The charity offered to him should be accepted and Prayers should be made to God for his forgiveness.
The question arises: How can a sinful believer be determined from a hypocrite, when the act which has been committed is contrary to Islam and Muslims? In our view, the following criteria, hinted at in these verses (101 ff.) could be of help in making a distinction between a sinful believer and a hypocrite:
(1) A sinful believer would be inclined to confess his faults clearly rather than try to explain them away by presenting lame excuses and far-fetched explanations.
(2) The past record of the person concerned should be looked into to see whether or not insincerity towards Islam is a regular trait of character. If that record shows that he has on the whole been a righteous person, that his life is marked by sincere service to, and sacrifice for the cause of Islam and Muslims, and by an eagerness to excel others in good deeds, it can be safely concluded that if he committed any offence, it was not because of lack of faith and sincerity. It was merely a lapse on his part and was presumably a temporary occurrence.
(3) However, a serious lapse on the part of a person necessitates that a keen eye should be kept on his post-repentant behaviour. This is necessary to decide whether his confession of having committed a lapse and his repentance over it were merely an act of the tongue, or whether there was indeed a deep feeling of regret indicative of a change of heart. If there is convincing evidence of sincere regret and an earnest effort to make amends, and his overall conduct shows that he wants sincerely to wipe out all traces of weakness in his faith, it will be concluded that his repentance is genuine. Such repentance can be considered evidence of his true faith and sincerity.
Traditionists have mentioned the incident in which the Qur'anic passage in question was revealed. This is reproduced here in extenso since it helps to better understand the verses. According to the traditionists, the verses were revealed in connection with Abu Lubābah b. 'Abd al-Mundhir and his six companions' conduct. Abū Lubabah had embraced Islam as early as the occasion of the Bay'ah of 'Aqabah before the Prophet's migration to Madina, and thereafter took part in the battles of Badr, Uḥud, and other military campaigns. At the time of the Tabūk expedition, however, he succumbed to the evil propensities of self and stayed back from jihād without any real justification. The same was true of some of his companions who were otherwise quite sincere believers. After the Prophet's return from Tabuk and on coming to learn about God's proclamation regarding those who had failed to join jihad, Abū Lubabah and his companions were seized by an overwhelming feeling of remorse and shame. Even before they were asked to explain their conduct, they tied themselves to a pillar and vowed to abstain from food and sleep until they were either forgiven or met with death. They underwent this self-inflicted chastisement for several days with the result that they eventually fell down unconscious. Finally, on being told that God and His Messenger had relented towards them, they went to the Prophet (peace be on him) and told him that their repentance included giving away their house - the comfort of which had rendered them heedless to the duty of jihad in the way of God. The Prophet (peace be on him), however, directed them not to give away their whole property; giving away one third of it was sufficient. They instantly gave away one third, making it a waqf (endowment). (See the comments of Qurtubi on verse 102 - Ed.)
If one reflects on this incident one will realize the kinds of weaknesses which are pardoned by God. Abū Lubabah and his companions were not chronic victims of insincerity. On the contrary, their past record showed that they were men of sincere faith. Moreover, they did not invent excuses to cover up their faults, rather they readily confessed it. Not only that, their subsequent actions made it abundantly clear that they were genuinely repentant and were eager for the atonement of their sins.
These verses (see 102 ff. Ed.) also embody an important point. In order to atone for one's sin, it is not enough to repent merely with one's heart and tongue, important though that is. True repentance should also be evident from one's action. One way to do this is to give away a part of one's wealth to charity. This would help get rid of the evil embedded in one's self which had prompted the sin in the first place, and would increase the potential to return to the right way. For confessing to one's sin is not unlike the feeling of someone who falls into a pit. The shame and remorse felt indicate that one realizes the wretchedness of one's state of being at the bottom of the pit. The subsequent efforts to atone for one's sins by giving to charity and doing other good works amounts to an attempt to get out of the pit.
100. Man will ultimately be judged by God and no act of his will remain hidden from Him. Even if a man succeeds in keeping his hypocrisy concealed and makes people believe that he is a sincere believer, this will not protect him from punishment for his hypocrisy.
101. The circumstances surrounding the cases of the persons referred to in the above verse were unclear: that is, it was not easy for people to determine whether they belonged to the category of sinful believers or to that of hypocrites. Judgement on these cases was, therefore, deferred. This does not mean that God was in a state of doubt and indecision about them. What this statement means is that the Muslims could take a definite position about them only on the basis of sufficient and tangible evidence. For judgements based on esoteric grounds have no validity. Only those judgements which are supported by tangible evidence and reasoning carry any weight.
102. Before the arrival of the Prophet (peace be on him) in Madina there lived a man called Abū ‘Amir. He belonged to the Khazraj clan and had converted to Christianity. Being an ascetic and a scholar of the Scriptures, Abū Āmir was held in great esteem by the bedouin of both Madina and the adjoining areas. His popularity among the masses was at its zenith when the Prophet (peace be on him) arrived in Madina. But his religious scholarship and ascetic way of life, rather than assisting him to recognize the truth, in fact became a hindrance. The result was that Abū 'Amir not only failed to embrace Islam, but looked upon the Prophet (peace be on him) as his rival in the field of religious leadership.
In the beginning Abū 'Amir cherished the hope that the hostile force of the Quraysh would be enough to nip Islam in the bud. But contrary to what he had expected, the Quraysh were badly routed in the battle of Badr. After that event, he was unable to restrain himself. He moved out of Madina the same year and began to visit different tribes and incite them against Islam. In fact he was one of the people whose vicious efforts instigated the Battle of Uḥud. It is also said that he arranged for several pits to be dug in Uḥud, and as we know, the Prophet (peace be on him) fell into one of them during the course of the battle and was badly injured. Later, when the Battle of the Ditch (Ghazwat al-Khandaq) took place, he took a major role in provoking many of the tribes to join the forces that invaded Madina. In all the battles that took place thereafter right up to the Battle of Hunayn, this Christian monk consistently allied himself with the forces of polytheism against Islam.
In the end, he utterly despaired that any power in Arabia would be able to resist the stormy onslaught of Islam. He therefore turned to Rome and warned Caesar of the impending Islamic menace. It was because of his initial efforts that Caesar commenced his preparations to invade Arabia, and on knowing of such activity the Prophet (peace be on him) decided to pre-empt it by dispatching a military expedition to Tabuk. (For further information about Abū ‘Amir see the comments of Qurtubi on al-A'raf 7: 175 and al-Tawbah 9: 107 - Ed.) A group of hypocrites in Madina actively collaborated with Abū 'Āmir in his efforts. They also supported Abū 'Amir's plan that, by taking advantage of his position as a clergyman, he should persuade Caesar as well as the Christian chiefs of northern Arabia to strike a deadly blow against Islam. On the eve of Abū ‘Amir's departure to Rome, he was party to a decision made by a group of hypocrites in Madina to erect a mosque of their own so that they could carry on their insidious activities under the garb of religion. They thought that this religious act -- building a mosque - would provide the 'Muslim' hypocrites -- as distinct from the generality of Muslims - a safe meeting place for organizing themselves into a force that would carry on its activities without inviting any suspicion. The mosque was to serve as the centre for hatching conspiracies against Islam, a centre to which the agents of Abū 'Amir, carrying the latter's instructions, could come safely and stay in as travellers and holy men. The above verse (i.e. 107) alludes to this vile conspiracy which lay behind the building of the mosque. (See the comments of Qurtubi on verse 107 - Ed.)
At that time there were two mosques in Madina: the mosque of Qubā which was situated on the outskirts of the town, and the Prophet's mosque which was in the heart of Madina. There was, therefore, hardly any need for another mosque. Nor were the Muslims of the day possessed of that naive religious zeal which prompts people to construct mosques as an act to ensure their heavenly rewards even if there is no need or justification for it. Not only that, there seemed no reason to expect that the construction of a new mosque would yield any positive benefit; there were, in fact, reasons to believe that it would indeed be harmful. For a new mosque was likely to create dissensions in the ranks of the Muslims and this is unacceptable under a sound Islamic dispensation. The hypocrites, knowing there was no convincing justification for a new mosque, began to put forward flimsy grounds to justify their intent. They pleaded to the Prophet (peace be on him) that such a mosque was necessary because of the difficulties of praying, congregationally, five times a day, and particularly at night in cold and rainy weather; this was especially difficult for the old and the disabled who lived at some distance from the Mosque of the Prophet (peace be on him).
When the mosque (called Masjid Dirār) constructed on such pietistic pretexts - was ready, the hypocrites approached the Prophet (peace be on him) asking him to inaugurate the mosque by leading the Prayer there. The Prophet (peace be on him) declined, saying that he was preoccupied with the Tabuk expedition, and asked them to bide their time. (See Ţabari, Ta'rikh, vol. 3, p. 110; Ibn Hishām, vol. 2, p. 529 – Ed.) As the Prophet (peace be on him) left for Tabük, the hypocrites began hatching their conspiracies against Islam in the new mosque. They even decided that as soon as the Muslims were crushed by the Romans and they were absolutely sure this was imminent they would install 'Abd Allah ibn Ubayy as the ruler of Madina. But the outcome of the expedition was quite different from that which the hypocrites had expected and it threw cold water on all their hopes. During his return when the Prophet (peace be on him) reached a place called Dhu Adan in the vicinity of Madina, the above verses were revealed. The Prophet (peace be on him) immediately sent a few people to Madina with the directive to raze Masjid Dirar to the ground before he even entered Madina.
103. The word juruf used in the above verse applies in Arabic usage to the bank of a river or stream, the supporting ground of which has been washed out, rendering it hollow and leaving the surface standing without any support. This simile describes adequately the situation of ungodly people.
The structure of such peoples' lives is comparable to a building which is constructed on the river bank which has been rendered hollow by water and hence lacks foundations and strength. The simile is both apt and picturesque insofar as it brings sharply to mind a graphic enactment of the whole situation. Extending the above simile it may be said that the outward facet of worldly life in which men of all sorts the believers and the unbelievers, the sincere and the insincere, the pious and the sinners are found at work resembles the upper surface of the land on which all buildings are erected. The upper surface is not stable in itself since its stability depends on the support of compact soil beneath. If an ignorant, short-sighted person constructs his house on a piece of land of which the lower level has been rendered hollow by water, that construction will be fatal not only for that person, but will also make the capital invested by him in the construction of that house useless.
In exactly the same way, a person's actions are as such insignificant. Actions are only meaningful and significant if their foundation is God-fear- ing, if they are based upon belief in ultimate answerability to God, and upon a commitment to follow the requirements of His good pleasure. Those simpletons who are satisfied with the external glitter of worldly life and whose actions are not prompted by God-fearing, nor involve concern for God's good pleasure, themselves cause the erosion of the lower layer of soil under the building which they erect. The ultimate outcome of such an act is that the foundations are destroyed and the building collapses, bringing about the total undoing of the person concerned.
104. The 'straight way' is the one that leads to the true success and felicity of man.
105. They have committed hideous sins such as erecting 'Masjid Dirār' and as a result their hearts have become saturated with unbelief, and incapable of belief. The case of these people is more hopeless than of those who publicly erect temples for worship or who declare war against Islam and take part in military action aimed at the extirpation of Islam. However iniquitous these declared unbelievers might be, there remains the hope that at some stage they may be guided to the Right Way. For even though they are misguided, their behaviour shows that they are honest, sincere and courageous in their convictions. All those who possess such valuable qualities can become great assets for the cause of true faith once they are able to re-orient themselves. But there is no hope for those cowardly and crafty people who go so far as to build a 'mosque' in order to undermine the cause of Islam, and who do so with the pretension of serving the cause of Islam. They will never be guided to the Right Way. Their cynical and utterly depraved behaviour has undermined their capacity to appreciate the truth for its own sake.
106. When a man has true faith it involves a commitment to devote himself sincerely to God and God's promise of reward in return for that commitment. This two-way commitment has been described as a 'transaction'. What this means is that faith is not just the affirmation of a set of metaphysical propositions. It is in fact a contract according to which man places all that he has his life, his wealth at the disposal of God; he 'sells' them to God. In return, he accepts God's promise of Paradise in the Next Life.
In order to fully understand this point and its implications it is necessary to explain the nature of the 'transaction' mentioned in the verse.
To start with, it is evident that God is the Owner of all that man has -- his life, his wealth, his everything - for He is the Creator of man as well as of all his possessions. Viewed from this angle, any transaction of sale and purchase between man and God is, strictly speaking, out of the question. For man does not possess anything of his own which he might sell. Nor is there anything which God does not own and which would necessitate purchase on His part. Nonetheless, God has bestowed upon man free-will and freedom of choice and this is the basis of the transaction mentioned above, as we shall see.
The conferment of free-will does not alter the basic reality of God's godhead. However, it enables man to freely accept or reject the basic reality. Investing man with free-will does not mean that man has thereby been made the absolute owner of himself, of his mental and physical abilities, and of the worldly possessions that he has come to acquire. Nor does it mean that God has conferred upon man the right to utilize his native abilities and material possessions as he pleases. The conferment of free-will simply means that God does not compel man to behave in the manner prescribed by Him. Hence man can follow one of two courses: he can, if he so decides, recognize God as his true Master and in consideration of that fact use his native abilities and material possessions in the manner prescribed by God. On the other hand, he can if he so decides, disregard God as his master, arrogate to himself mastery over himself, his abilities and material possessions, and hence consider himself entitled to use his abilities and possessions in the manner he pleases.
It is here that the concept of 'transaction' becomes relevant. The 'transaction' referred to in the above verse should not convey the impression that God intends to purchase what man owns. For, God is the true owner of all that man has. Hence the 'transaction' concerns what God Himself has granted man by way of trust, and with regard to which God has given man the freedom to act either in good faith or contrary to it. It is this freedom which man holds in trust from God which He asks man to recognize -- and to do so purely of his own volition rather than compulsorily. Man is the trustee and not the absolute owner, and he is asked to avoid committing any breach of this trust which, by the nature of things, man is in a position to do. When someone voluntarily makes a bargain with God, committing his life in this manner, surrendering to God the freedom which God Himself has conferred upon him, then God recompenses him for his voluntary relinquishment of freedom by granting him Paradise in the never-ending life of the Hereafter. It is the believer who, by making such a commitment with God in expectation of reward, enters into a transaction with God. Such is the substance of the transaction that it is equivalent with faith itself. Conversely, when someone refuses to make this transaction, and behaves in a manner which is inconceivable with such a transaction - then this person is an unbeliever. The technical term applied to this refusal to make the transaction is unbelief (kufr).
Having considered the nature of the transaction, let us now consider its implications:
(1) God has presented man with two severe tests. First, the conferment of freedom tests man's mettle: will he acknowledge the lordship of his Creator and act gratefully towards Him or will he prove to be ungrateful and rebellious. The second, relates to whether or not man will put his trust in God, whether or not he will surrender his freedom and sacrifice his worldly advantages and pleasures in return for God's promise of Paradise and eternal felicity in the Next Life.
(2) At this stage a clear distinction ought to be made between two kinds of faith. Faith in one sense is required in order that a person be considered a member of the Muslim community. In its second sense, faith has a certain spiritual content because of which a person is considered to be a believer in the reckoning of God. Requirements of faith in the second sense are higher than of faith in the first sense.
Faith in the first sense has, of necessity, a legal meaning. Hence verbal profession of articles of faith suffice to make a man be considered a Muslim in the legal sense. A Muslim may be declared to have gone out of the fold of Islam only if he does something which is flagrantly opposed to his profession of faith.
As for the faith which is of value in the sight of God, its requirements are quite different. Even if a person observes Prayer and Fasting, that might not be deemed enough. For if a man considers himself the absolute master of his body and soul, of his heart and mind, of his wealth and resources, and of the different things which are under his control, deeming that he has the right to use them as he pleases, then such a person is not a believer in the sight of God regardless of what others think of him. For such a person does not commit himself to the transaction mentioned in the present verse and which the Qur'an considers to be at the very core of faith. To exert oneself and one's abilities and possessions in a way disapproved of by God and not to exert them in the manner prescribed by Him, betray a false claim to faith. For such an attitude clearly shows that either the person concerned does not consciously 'sell' his life and wealth to God, or that he still considers himself despite the transaction he has made with God-the true owner of his possessions. (3) This concept of faith enables us to make a clear distinction between Islamic and the un-Islamic ways of life. A Muslim who truly believes in God follows the Will of God in all walks of life. At no time does his attitude betray any claim on his part to be independent of God. True, occasionally he will commit sins, but this is only a momentary lapse where he has overlooked the implications of his transaction with God.
This transaction is not just meant for the personal lives of the believers. The collective lives of the believers should also reflect the implications and requirements of the transaction. The Muslim body-politic must not pursue a course of action, whether it be political, economic or social, in disregard of the Islamic Law. And if they ever lapse into the same kind of mistake as human beings are prone to do in their personal lives, they should again submit to God's Will and abandon any claim of the right to act independently of God. For the very notion that man has the right to work in disregard of God, that he has the right to determine what he should do and what he should not, is essentially an un-Islamic attitude even if that attitude might be adopted by those called 'Muslims'.
(4) The 'transaction' in question binds man to adhere to the Will of God
alone so that it leaves no room for man to follow his own desires. To arbitrarily declare something to be the Will of God and to follow it amounts to following one's own will rather than God's, and this militates against the basic terms of the 'transaction' between man and God. Only those individuals and groups who derive guidance for their life as a whole from the Book of God and the directives of His Messenger can be truly considered faithful to the transaction made with God.
These being the implications of the transaction with God, it is clear why the grant of reward by God to those men who live up to their commitment to Him has been deferred to the Next Life. For Paradise is not given for merely professing that one has sold one's life and possessions to God. Rather it is a reward for man's action in accordance with that profession. That is, Paradise is a reward granted to him who abstains from using his life and wealth as though he has the right to use them as he pleases. Thus, the transaction will mature only when the life of man- the seller - will come to an end and it is proved that he did truly abide by the terms of the transaction he had made with God. Then, but not before, can it be decided how he should be recompensed.
It will be illuminating to look at this matter by reference to its circumstantial context in the Qur'an. It occurs in connection with those who claimed to be believers and yet had not lived up to that claim. When put to the test, they preferred not to sacrifice their time, wealth, material interests and lives for the sake of God and His religion. They were either lazy, insincere or downright hypocritical. The attitude demonstrated by these groups of people was subjected to a severe reproach in the Qur'an, and the people themselves were told unequivocally that faith does not consist of a mere verbal affirmation of God's existence and unity. True profession of faith rather amounts to affirming that one's life and wealth all belong to God alone. If some people do not sacrifice their lives and wealth in compliance with God's command and use those possessions in opposition to the Will of God, their profession of faith is blatantly false. True believers are those who have sold their lives and wealth to God and regard Him as the sole Master of all their possessions. Accordingly, they are willing to sacrifice their lives and wealth unquestioningly at His behest. and refrain from expending their abilities or financial resources in disregard of His command.
107. The statement that the Torah, the Gospels and the Qur'an assure Paradise to the believers if they sell their lives and wealth to God has been called into question on the grounds that there is no trace of such a promise in the Torah and the Gospels. Insofar as the Gospels are concerned this objection does not hold water. For Jesus makes numerous statements in the Gospels which substantively amount to what the Qur'an says here. Consider, for instance, the following:
Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5. 10).
He who finds his life will lose it: and he who loses his life for my sake will find it (Matthew 10. 39).
And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for my name's sake, will receive hundred fold, and inherit eternal life (Matthew 19. 29).
True, the Torah in its present form does not contain any explicit promise of Paradise to those who sell their lives and wealth to God. The existing Torah is altogether shorn of the notion of Life after Death, of the Day of Judgement, and of Divine Reward and Punishment even though these doctrines have always formed an inextricable part of true faith. Absence of any reference to this promise in the Torah should not leave the impression that the original Torah did not contain such a promise. What really accounts for its omission in the extant Torah is that in the days of their all-round degeneracy the Jews became too worldly and materialistic to conceive of any reward other than a worldly one. They, therefore, debased all reference in the Scriptures to promises of reward for obedience by forcing upon these a worldly interpretation. As for the descriptions of Paradise, they construed them to be descriptions of Palestine, the land of their dreams. Nevertheless we find in the Torah such statements as the following:
Hear, O Israel: The Lord our god is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might (Deuteronomy 6. 4-5).
Is not he your father, who created you, who made you and established you? (Deuteronomy 32. 6).
When it comes to God's reward for being faithful to the covenant with Him, it is interpreted by the Jews to mean Palestine. When a land flowing with milk and honey is mentioned (see Deuteronomy 6. 3), it is given a purely earthly interpretation. This anomaly can be explained by reference to the fact that the extant Torah is neither complete nor free from distortions since it embodies man's additions such as the exegetical notes of theologians side by side with the Word of God. In the Torah extraneous elements have become so mixed up with the original divine revelation that it is simply impossible to distinguish the original divine elements from national traditions, racial prejudices and superstitions, dreams and aspira- tions, and legal deductions. (See Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. I, Al 'Imrän 3, n. 2, pp. 233–5 – Ed.)
108. The word ta’ibūn used in the above verse may be translated literally as 'those who turn to God in repentance'. However, the context in which this word occurs indicates that repentance is a recurring characteristic of believers, implying that far from repenting once, they constantly turn to God in repentance. We have tried to convey this nuance in the translation of the verse.
The need to repent time and time again stems from the fact that man is prone to become oblivious to the transaction which he has made with God. For by all appearances it looks as though man himself is the master of his life and wealth. As compared with this, the notion that God is the true master of man's life and wealth seems abstract. A believer may, therefore, often lapse into momentary forgetfulness of his transaction with God and behave in a manner counter to its spirit. What marks out a true believer, however, is that at the very moment he becomes aware of his lapse. he repents over his obliviousness, his unconscious defiance of the requirements of the transaction he has made with God. (For an understanding of 'transaction' see n. 106 above - Ed.) Full of regret he turns to his Lord asking for pardon, and renews the commitment he has made to Him.
This recurrent turning to God in repentance, this constant striving to return to the course of obedience and submission ensures the permanence and vitality of a person's faith. Given man's inherent frailties it seems that had there been no repentance, it would have been virtually impossible for man to remain continually faithful to the terms of the transaction he has made with God. Hence the believer has not been portrayed in the Qur'ān as one who, once he adopts the course of obedience to God, never suffers a lapse. What is praiseworthy about the believer is that after every lapse he returns to the same course - obedience to God.
Mentioning 'repentance' as a characteristic of a believer is also quite significant in the present context. For in the preceding verses the address was directed to those who had acted in a manner inconsistent with the requirements of their faith. Hence, after explaining the true nature and requisites of faith, they are told that turning to God in repentance is an unmistakable characteristic of the believer. Far from persisting in his deviation, no sooner does a believer become conscious of his lapse, than he turns to God in repentance.
109. The word al-sā'iḥūn used in the text has been interpreted by some commentators of the Qur'an as al-ṣā'imün, i.e. those who fast. (Both Ibn Kathir and Qurtubi mention this as one of the meanings of the word al-sa'iḥun-Ed.) But that is an extended rather than a literal meaning of the word. The tradition in which the Prophet (peace be on him) is reported to have explained it to mean 'those who fast', lacks authenticity. What, therefore, seems appropriate is to interpret the word al-sā'iḥun in its literal sense: 'those who move about the earth (in the cause of Allah)'.
The addition of the words 'in the cause of Allah' to qualify the words 'those who move about' is quite justified. There are several instances in the Qur'an when a word has been used in its literal sense but which has also been qualified by its purpose - its being for the sake of God. One notable example is the use of the word infäq, which literally means 'to spend', and is not restricted in Arabic usage to spending 'in the way of God'. But that is the sense in which it has been used in the Qur'an even when there is no specific reference to that effect. Hence, the word al-sa'iḥün signifies all those who move about the earth for higher purposes rather than in mere pursuit of pleasure and enjoyment: who engage in journeys to seek the good pleasure of God, in journeys which are for the sake of jihad, in journeys for establishing and upholding God's religion, in journeys involving migration from a region under the dominance of unbelief, in journeys to spread the true faith, to reform men, to acquire useful knowledge, to observe the signs of God, or, to seek a lawful livelihood.
This characteristic of a believer that he moves about in the cause of God has been especially mentioned so as to emphasize to those who failed to join jihad despite their claim to be believers, that when a true believer is summoned to jihad he simply cannot enjoy the cosy comfort of his home. On the contrary, a true believer moves about the earth and exerts himself so as to make the true religion prevail.
110. It is a characteristic of the believers that they faithfully observe the limits prescribed by God in all matters, whether these relate to doctrine or modes of worship, to ethics and morality or to social, cultural, economic or political life, or to the laws of war and peace. They act both individually and collectively in strict conformity with the limits set by God. They neither transgress these limits by giving free rein to their desires, nor replace Divine Law by something man-made.
'To strictly guard the limits prescribed by Allah' also means that those limits are enforced and none may be allowed to transgress. Hence, the true believers are those who not only themselves observe the limits prescribed by God, but also exert themselves so as to establish and safeguard those limits in the world and try to ensure that they are not violated.
111. If a person prays to God for someone's pardon it implies, first of all, sympathy and concern for the offender, and a belief that the offence is pardonable. Such an attitude towards an offender who is otherwise faithful is quite all right. But to sympathize with, and love those who have indulged in open rebellion and to consider that rebellion pardonable is quite a different matter. Such an attitude is not only wrong in principle but leaves one's loyalty open to doubt. Were we to pray for someone's pardon merely on grounds of kinship, it would mean that we hold our tie of kinship to be more important than our loyalty to God. It also shows that our loyalty to God is not unallied for we desire that God should be influenced by the love we have for His rebels, that He should at least pardon our relatives even if He hurls all other criminals into Hell.
All such things are wrong, are inconsistent wit he dict. es of sincere devotion and loyalty to God, and are discordant with the spirit of true faith which requires absolute love and devotion to God. True faith requires that we should consider God's friends as our friends and God's enemies as our own enemies. It is significant that the verse in question does not say that Muslims should not seek pardon for those who ascribe divinity to others than God. The verse rather characterizes it as something unbecoming of the Prophet (peace be on him) and the believers (al-Tawbah 9: 113). What is thus suggested is that the believers themselves should have such loyalty and sincerity for God that it prevents them from entertaining any sympathy for those who have rebelled against Him. It is noteworthy that the words of the verse are: 'It is not fitting for the Prophet and those who believe that they should pray for forgiveness for those who ascribe divinity to others than Allah.' The expression seems to say to people: 'What good is there if you refrain from praying for forgiveness for such people because We asked you not to? Nay, your religious commitment and your conscience should be so sensitive about such matters as to make you instinctively feel that it is not befitting for you at all to sympathize with the rebels of God or to consider their crime pardonable.'
It may, however, be clarified that the kind of sympathy which is forbidden those who have rebelled against God is sympathy which interferes with, and prevents one from fulfilling one's religious obligations. So far as human sympathy is concerned - consideration, compassion and affection - far from it being forbidden, it is praiseworthy for a believer to possess such attributes. The worldly obligations that one owes one's kinsmen - whether they are believers or unbelievers must be fulfilled. Likewise, those in distress - the needy, the sick, the injured, the orphans - must be helped irrespective of their religious faith. In such matters any discrimination between a believer and an unbeliever is out of the question.
112. Here allusion is made to the Prophet Abraham (peace be on him) who said to his unbelieving fath as he severed his ties with him:
Abraham said: 'Peace be to you. I will pray to my Lord for your forgiveness. For He is to me Most Gracious' (Maryam 19: 47).
Except the saying of Abraham to his father: 'I shall certainly pray for your forgiveness though I have no power to get anything for you from Allah' (al-Mumtahanah 60: 4).
It was in view of the above promise that Abraham prayed for his father's forgiveness:
And forgive my father, for indeed he is among those gone astray, and do not disgrace me on the Day when (all men) will be raised, the Day when neither wealth nor children will avail, but only he (will prosper) who brings to Allah a sound heart (al-Shu'ara' 26: 86-9).
As for the prayer of Abraham for his father's forgiveness its guarded terms should be noted. Moreover, no sooner had Abraham realized that he was praying for the forgiveness of one who had publicly rebelled against God and who was hostile to the religion of God, than he gave up praying for his forgiveness. Also, as a true believer should do in such a situation, he dissociated himself from the person who had rebelled against God, even though that person was none other than his own father who had brought him up with much compassion and tenderness.
113. The word awwāh used in respect of Abraham in the above verse denotes a tender-hearted, lamenting, tearful and wistful person. The other word which has been used here – ḥalīm - denotes someone who can keep control over himself, who does not lose control of himself in anger, hostility and opposition, and who does not transgress the limits of moderation in love and friendship.
Both words have been very appropriately employed here for Abraham and convey a set of meanings. Abraham was very tender-hearted (awwāh), so he shuddered at the very thought of his father ending up as fodder for Hell, and hence he prayed for his forgiveness. At the same time, the fact that Abraham was " person who kept control over himself (ḥalīm), is borne out by the fact that he prayed for his father even though the latter had perpetrated cruelties on him while trying to dissuade him from the way of Islam. Also, being God-fearing and of temperate disposition, Abraham was not carried away by feelings of love for his father to the extent of exceeding the appropriate limits. Realizing that his father had rebelled against God, Abraham dissociated himself from him.
114. In dealing with men, God first explains to them the doctrines and practices which they should shun. However, if they persist in their wrong ways, God withholds Himself from guiding them and lets them follow the wrong ways they choose to follow.
This verse embodies a basic principle which can help one understand all those Qur'anic verses in which both guiding people to the right way and causing people to go astray are mentioned as God's own acts. To provide guidance on God's part consists of enunciating the Right Way through His Prophets and Scriptures, and then enabling those who are willing to follow that way to do so. Likewise, God's act of causing people to go astray means that God does not compel those who insist on not following the Right Way after it has been made plain to them, and enables them to proceed in the direction they have decided to proceed in.
115. God pardoned minor omissions on the part of the Prophet (peace be on him) and his Companions. The Prophet's lapse (see n. 45 above), consisted of granting exemption to those who had sought his permission although they were fully able to make jihad.
116. This refers to some sincere and devoted Companions who initially shrank from jihäd. However, being genuine believers and true lovers of Islam, they were able to overcome their initial reluctance and fear.
117. This is an assurance that God will not take them to task for their momentary dereliction of duty. For God does not punish man for a weakness which does not manifest itself in action and which he himself is later able to overcome and correct.
118. When the Prophet (peace be on him) returned to Madina after the expedition to Tabük, those who had stayed behind came to him offering all sorts of excuses for not having joined the expedition. Eighty of them were hypocrites and only three were sincere Muslims. The hypocrites made lame excuses which the Prophet (peace be on him) accepted at their face value and excused them. Then came the turn of the three sincere Muslims who confessed their fault explicitly without reference to extenuating circumstances. The Prophet (peace be on him) deferred his decision on their cases and directed the Muslims not to have any association with them till God settled the matter. The present verse embodies the decision that God made in their case. (It may be noted that this incident is different from the one mentioned earlier whereby seven Companions subjected themselves to punishment before their indictment, see n. 99 above.)
119. The three Companions referred to in this verse are those who stayed behind - Ka'b b. Mālik, Hilāl b. Umayyah and Murārah b. Rabi., Apart from their firm belief in Islam and the many sacrifices they had earlier made in its cause, Hilal and Murārah had also taken part in the Battle of Badr - an indubitable testimony of their unflinching faith in Islam. As for Ka'b b. Malik, though he did not have the privilege of participating in the Battle of Badr, he had accompanied the Prophet (peace be on him) on all other military campaigns. Notwithstanding their illustrious services to the cause of Islam in the past, they were reproached severely for having slacked off in their duty to join the jihad to which all the able-bodied Muslims had been summoned. After his return from Tabük, the Prophet (peace be on him) asked all Muslims to sever their ties with these three.
Forty days later even their wives were asked to part company with them. The anguish they then suffered in Madina - their home town has been graphically set forth in the above verse. After having undergone the tormenting social boycott for a full fifty days, they were eventually pardoned by God.
The following is the incident as it was related by Ka‘b to his son, ‘Abd Allah many years later when Ka'b was old and blind, and 'Abd Allah used to hold his hand to walk him around:
Preparations for the expedition to Tabuk were afoot, and whenever the Prophet (peace be on him) appealed to the Muslims to take part in jihad, I prepared myself to go forth. But on returning home I would always say to myself that it was a bit early; when the time to depart would come, it would take me no time to get ready. Time passed by and the hour for the army to proceed arrived, but I had not made my preparations. I said to myself: 'Let the army move out, and I will catch up with it in a day or two.' But the same slackness prevented me from proceeding till the time for accompanying the others was past.
What tormented me most was that the only persons with whom I had remained behind in Madina were either the hypocrites or the disabled whom God had excused from jihād.
When the Prophet (peace be on him) returned, he always used to go to the mosque first and pray two rak'ahs and then sit down to receive people. When the Prophet (peace be on him) did so, those who had stayed behind came to him, making excuses and taking oaths (to support their statements). In all there were more than eighty people. The Prophet (peace be on him) accepted their apparent claims and let them take a pledge of fealty (bay'ah). He also prayed to God for their forgiveness. As to whether those statements were true or not, he left that to God's judgement.
When my turn came, I went forth to the Prophet (peace be on him) and greeted him. The Prophet smiled and said:
'What prevented you from going to jihād?' I said: 'O Messenger of Allah! Had I been sitting with any other person than you, I would have resorted to specious explanations to calm his anger and so that my excuses would have been accepted before my leaving. For I have the gift of eloquence. But, by God, I am sure that if I lie to gratify you this would certainly bring God's wrath upon me. And if I tell you the truth, and this truth angers you, I seek only a felicitous end with God. For, by God, I have no valid excuse. By God, never was I stronger and more resourceful than at the moment when I stayed back.'
The Prophet (peace be on him) said: 'As for this one, he has indeed spoken the truth. So wait until God decides in your case.' Some persons of the Salimah tribe walked, following me, and said: 'By God, we did not know that you had sinned ever before. If you were incapable of making excuses to the Messenger of God (peace be on him) as the others who had stayed behind did, then the Prophet's prayer for your forgiveness would have been enough to efface your sins.'
They continually approached me until I thought of going back to the Messenger of God (peace be on him) and contradicting my own statement. Then I said to them: 'Did he [i.e. the Prophet (peace be on him)] receive the same kind of answer from any other person as he received from me?' They said: 'Two other persons met the Prophet (peace be on him) and both said like you said, and they were told the same as you were told.' I asked: 'Who are those two?' They said: 'Murarah ibn Rabi' al-'Amri and Hilal ibn [Umayyah] al-Waqifi.' They thus spoke of two Muslims who took part in the battle of Badr and were exemplary men. When they mentioned to me the actions of these two, I firmed up in my determination to maintain my truthful statement.
Then the Prophet (peace be on him) prohibited people to talk to the three of us from among those who had remained behind from jihad. So people avoided us, people changed towards us so much so that the whole world seemed to have changed. It was no longer the same earth that I had known. We remained in this state for fifty nights. As for the two of my companions, they surrendered to the changed state of affairs, confined themselves to their houses, and wept continuously. But I was the youngest and the most persevering of them all. I used to go out, pray with the Muslims, go about the market place, and none would speak to me. I would visit the Prophet (peace be on him) and greet him while he would be in his assembly after prayer and I would ask myself: 'Did he move his lips to answer the greeting or not?' Then I would pray close to him and stealthily glance at him. When I began praying, he would look at me, but when I glanced at him, he turned his face away. When this harsh punishment from the Muslims continued for some time I once climbed the wall of Abū Qatadah - he was the son of my uncle and the dearest person to me and greeted him. By God, even he did not answer the greeting. I said to him: 'Abū Qatādah, I ask you in the name of God: Do I love God and His Messenger (peace be on him)?' He remained silent. I repeated the question, imploring him to answer. He again kept silent. Once again I repeated the question, imploring him to answer. He only said: 'God and His Messenger (peace be on him) know better.' On hearing this, tears flowed from my eyes, and I climbed down the wall. While I was walking through the market-place a Nabataean of Syria, who had come to Madina to sell foodstuff, said: 'Who will lead me to Ka'b ibn Mālik?' People began to gesture, pointing in my direction until he came to me and gave me the letter of the Ghassanid prince. Since I was a scribe I read the letter and to my surprise I found in it [the following message]: 'I have come to learn that your companion [i.e. the Prophet (peace be on him)] has been harsh to you. God has not placed you in an abode of humiliation, or in a position where your rights and dignity might be violated. Join us, and we shall sympathize with you. When I read this I said: 'This is also a test!' So I headed to the baking oven and heated it up [and threw the letter in it].
And when forty of the fifty days passed and no revelation came, suddenly an envoy of the Prophet (peace be on him) advanced towards me and said: The Messenger of God orders you to stay away from your wife.' I said: 'Should I divorce her or what should I do?' He said: 'Just stay away from her; do not be close to her.' He also sent envoys to the other two companions even as he had sent them to me. So I said to my wife: 'Go and stay with your family and remain with them until God decides this matter. . .
Then on the morning after fifty nights had passed and when I had performed Morning Prayer on the roof of one of our houses and was sitting in the state described by God [in His Book] - the state in which my soul had become a burden and the earth despite its vastness had become constricted for me - [see verse 118] - I heard suddenly the cry of a crier [Abu Bakr, according to reports], who had climbed Sal [a mountain in Madina] saying at the top of his voice: 'Ka'b ibn Malik, rejoice at the good news.' I fell prostrate and knew that the moment of deliverance had come. The Prophet (peace be on him) announced to people at the time of the Morning Prayer that God had accepted our repentance, and people went forth announcing the good news. I headed towards the Messenger of God (peace be on him) and crowds of people met us on the way, congratulating us on the acceptance of our repentance. When I entered the mosque and greeted the Messenger of God (peace be on him) he said - his face beaming with joy - 'Rejoice at the best day of your life since your mother gave birth to you.' I asked the Prophet (peace be on him): 'Is this pardon from you or from God?' The Prophet (peace be on him) said: 'No; it is from God, the Mighty, the Exalted.' Then as I sat before him I said: 'O Messenger of God! As a part of my repentance I should give charity out of my wealth for the sake of God and His Messenger.' The Prophet said: 'Retain a part of your property; that is better for you.' I said: 'I will hold my share in Khaybar.' I continued: 'O Messenger of God! God delivered me out of this trial because of my truthfulness. Now an aspect of my repentance is that I shall speak nothing but the truth as long as I live.' (Riyāḍ al-Ṣāliḥīn, ed. Subḥī al-Ṣāliḥ, 3rd edition, 1976, Beirut, pp. 57 ff. The story has been summarily mentioned in Bukhāri, 'Tafsir', 'Bāb Surat al-Bara'ah'. For a detailed description see Ibn Hisham, vol. 2, pp. 531-7; Waqidī, vol. 3, pp. 1049-55; and Qurtubî's comments on verse 118 Ed.)
Full as this incident is of lessons, it especially brings home the following points to every Muslim.
First, that whenever there is a conflict between Islam and unbelief, it is imperative that a Muslim identify with Islam and actively participate in the struggle on its behalf. This is of such crucial importance that even if Muslim fails to actively support Islam in such a struggle, let alone if he supports the forces of unbelief, that even if this happens just once in a life-time and without any male fides, his life-long record of righteous behaviour and religious devotion are liable to go to waste. The matter is so grave that even lapses of persons of proven integrity and faith - men who had actively participated in the battles of Badr, Uḥud, Khandaq (Ditch) and Hunayn were not condoned.
Second, that any slackness in performing one's duty should not be taken lightly. For trivial slackness can lead to sins of a grave nature, and a Muslim cannot claim acquittal on the grounds that what lay at the core of the matter was slackness rather than any act with evil intent.
The episode narrated above also provides us with a valuable insight into the spirit of the society which had developed under the able leadership of the Prophet (peace be on him). The episode shows that on the one hand there were the hypocrites, who were known for their treachery, and yet their lame excuses were entertained and their failings overlooked. The reason for this had to do with the fact that no good was ever expected of them; their treachery was too well-known to elicit complaint.
On the other hand, there was a limited number of trustworthy Muslims, persons of proven integrity who were guilty of not participating in jihād. They confessed their fault and were subjected to a severe reproach. The reason for the treatment meted out to them was not that there was any doubt about the sincerity of their faith. The point of reproach was precisely that even though they were sincere, they had behaved in a manner becoming only of a hypocrite. These sincere Muslims, to use the famous expression employed by Jesus, were the salt of the earth. And if they themselves came bereft of salt, from where would one obtain it?
What is particularly noteworthy about the incident is the behaviour of both the leader and the followers, including the defaulters. The way in which the leader awarded the punishment, and the remarkable manner in which it was received by the defaulters, and again the manner in which the whole community enforced it. The role of each is so superb that one is hard put to decide who occupies pride of place in the incident.
The leader, no doubt, decided to pronounce a harsh punishment. But the spirit actuating his decision was that of love and compassion rather than of anger and hatred. His eyes seemed fiery like those of a raging father, yet the corner of his eyes revealed that any hostility towards the defaulter was simply out of the question. It was his misbehaviour that had wounded the heart. Were he to make amends, he would become as dear as he always was. The conduct of the defaulter was exemplary in its own way. He writhes in pain at the harsh punishment awarded him, but that does not prompt him to swerve from the path of obedience. Nor is he seized by a fit of arrogance and haughtiness. Not only does his attitude remain free from open affrontery to his leader; he does not even nurse a grievance against him in his heart. As a result of the incident, his love for, and devotion to the leader is in fact increased. All through those fifty agonizing days if there was one thing that he restlessly thirsted for it was the glow of affection in the eyes of the Prophet (peace be on him), which he cherished as his last source of hope. That look of affection in the Prophet's eyes was his last hope in life and was no less dear to him than a patch of cloud in the sky to a drought-stricken farmer.
The exemplary discipline and the high moral spirit displayed by the whole Muslim community also calls for admiration. No sooner had the Prophet (peace be on him) put the defaulter under reproach than all Muslims severed their ties with him. No one, not even his kith and kin and close friends, talked to him in private, let alone in public. Even his wife parted company with him. He implored them in the name of God to tell him if his integrity was suspect. But even his life-long friends curtly told him to turn to God and to His Messenger (peace be on him) for the answer. The members of the Islamic community not only displayed a high level of discipline but their moral standards were also so high that even during this crisis not a single person slandered the defaulter who had fallen from grace. On the contrary, each member of the community felt a deep concern for his brother in disgrace and looked forward to his early redemption. And as soon as he was pardoned, each of them flocked to his house to heartily felicitate him. This constitutes the model of a righteous community, the community that the Qur'an seeks to establish in this world.
Viewed from this background, the verse in question highlights the point that the pardoning of the three Companions and the spirit of compassion and love shown them, was the result of the high degree of sincerity displayed by them during their fifty-day ordeal. Had their offence been followed by a show of arrogance and haughtiness, and had they greeted the Prophet's award of punishment with anger and hostility as does an egotist whose pride is wounded, the attitude of the community towards them would certainly have been different. Likewise, had the defaulters behaved during their period of punishment as though they would have preferred to leave the community rather than endure an action that hurt their pride, or if they had kept themselves busy during those fifty days trying to spread disaffection among the community and seeking to wean away the disgrun- tled elements from the Muslim body-politic, then they would surely have been expelled once and for all from the fold of Islam. They would have been left to wander in the wilderness of their egotism, to engage in self-worship as they pleased, and be deprived for ever of the honour to take part in the struggle to uphold the Word of God.
The three Companions of the Prophet (peace be on him) however, behaved differently. Even though the options of rebellion and disobedience were obviously open to them, they proved by their action that their devotion to God was total, and that such devotion left no room for them to worship any other god, not even their own ego. Their conduct also made it plain that they were fully committed to the Muslim body-politic; that regardless of what happened to them there was no question of any backsliding. No matter how they were treated in the Muslim community, it was in that community that they would live and in it that they would die. They were willing to bear disgrace in their own community rather than consider the highest positions of honour and prestige outside of it.
Given this excellent conduct, was there any other course left for the community but to warmly embrace such men? This explains the compassion and kindness which characterizes verse 118 of the Qur'an which mentions the pardoning of these Companions: . . . Allah turned to them (in mercy) that they might turn to Him (in repentance).' The verse in question portrays graphically that their Lord had first turned His attention away from the three fallen servants. But He saw that instead of running away, they remained at His portal with broken hearts. Moved by this show of loyalty, God's love and kindness was aroused to a state of rapturous passion and the Lord came out to bring back the delinquent servants to His mansion.
120. For a better appreciation of the above verse, it should be read in conjunction with verse 97 above:
The bedouin Arabs surpass in unbelief and hypocrisy, and are most likely to be unaware of the limits prescribed by Allah in what He has revealed to His Messenger.
This verse states that the desert Arabs were generally victims of hypocrisy because of their ignorance, that being cut off from centres of knowledge and unable to enjoy the company of scholars, they were ignorant of the limits laid down by Islam. In the present verse the Muslims are told what steps they should take so as to remedy the situation. The directive that is given here is not to allow the bedouin to remain steeped in their age-old ignorance. Systematic efforts should be made to remove their ignorance and to develop an Islamic consciousness among them. This did not necessitate the migration en masse of the bedouin to Madina in quest of knowledge. Rather, a few drawn from each desert village and tribe were required to visit such seats of learning as Makka and Madina, to study Islam, and to try to create an awakening and consciousness among their people upon their return.
It was an important and timely directive aimed at strengthening the Islamic movement. For in its earlier phase when Islam was a new phenomenon and was pressing its way gradually through a hostile environ- ment, there was no need for such a directive. In the early phase anyone who embraced Islam did so after thoroughly understanding it and becoming fully convinced of its truth. However, when the Islamic movement gained momentum and established its hegemony on a piece of land, whole armies of people began entering its fold. Of these, only a few fully understood the implications and requirements of the Islamic faith. Many of them were prompted by the herd instinct, driven by the prevalent popular current towards Islam.
This rapid spread of Islam was apparently a source of strength for Islam since the number of its adherents swelled day by day. However, a great many of those converts to Islam, devoid as they were of true Islamic consciousness and understanding and of the sincere spirit to follow its moral standards, were not very helpful for the Islamic order. On the contrary, such a development was harmful as became evident during the preparations for the expedition to Tabuk. The moment when the Islamic movement spread at such a pace was chosen by God to issue directives that would assist its consolidation as well. The way forward lay in educating and training people drawn from every section of the population so that on their return they may, in turn, educate and train their own people. If this could be done it would ensure that Islamic consciousness and knowledge of Islamic injunctions would spread on a wide scale among the Muslims.
A clarification in this connection seems necessary. The directive laid down in the verse does not simply aim at spreading literacy, at developing the capacity to read books. The verse rather enunciates the purpose to be promoting an understanding of Islam to the extent whereby people eschew un-Islamic attitudes of life. This is the aim of education which God has laid down for Muslims for all times to come. This aim should serve as the criterion of success or failure of every educational effort that the Muslims may ever make. This does not mean that Islam is not concerned with spreading literacy or developing basic educational skills, or imparting worldly knowledge. What we wish to emphasize is that the distinctive educational objective of Islam is to impart an education that develops among Muslims a profound understanding of Islam. Even if all Muslims become highly educated and each of them attains the heights of scientific achievement as those of Einstein and Freud, such an education would be a curse according to Islam if it neither promotes among the Muslims a good understanding of Islam nor helps them refrain from un-Islamic attitudes.
The actual words used in the verse are also quite significant: li yatafaqqahu fi al-din. Unfortunately in the later period of Muslim history the purpose of the verse was misconceived and the effects of this misconception continue to vitiate the system of religious education, nay the very religious life of the Muslims. To reiterate and clarify, the purpose of education as laid down in the verse is to develop an understanding of Islam, to gain insight into its system, its nature and spirit, to develop mental attitudes and practical conducts which are in consonance with the spirit of Islam.
Unfortunately a serious misconception has found its way into the Muslim society. The Muslims at some stage in their history became convinced that the purpose of the verse was to encourage them to learn fiqh (Jurispru- dence), which is the root word used in the present verse and signifies 'understanding'. Now, jurisprudence gradually developed into a branch of knowledge and was called Fiqh. It concerned itself with the external and formal rules of human conduct, without necessarily being concerned with their spirit and purpose. This concern with the formal rules of external behaviour should have formed only a part of the Muslims' intellectual activity, but instead it became an all-absorbing pre-occupation. It would need volumes to speak of the harm done to Islam and Muslims by this intellectual deviation. Suffice it to say here that this misconception made the Muslims focus all their attention on the skeleton of Islam as distinct from its spirit. This also bred a soulless religious formalism which was regarded as the zenith of Muslim religious life.
121. The above verse, taken at face value, might be interpreted to mean that the responsibility for fighting against the enemy falls, in the first instance, on Muslims who live nearest the enemy territory. However, on reading the verse in conjunction with the succeeding passage it appears that the reference is to fighting against the hypocrites, the enemy within the Islamic society. The hypocrites were clearly established and their interaction with different sections of the Islamic population had caused much damage. It had already been urged in the opening part of the discourse (see verse 73 ff. above) that jihad should be waged in order to rid Islam of the internal enemy. The same directive is now being reiterated at the end of the discourse in order to shake Muslims into realizing the importance of the matter and to urge them to wage jihad to crush these enemies and to disregard all ethnic, family and social ties which they have shared with them.
It is worth noting that in the previous injunction on the subject (see verse 73 above), the Muslims had been commanded to launch jihād against the hypocrites and unbelievers whereas in the present verse the word qital is used. This latter usage suggests that the Muslims should spare no effort in their drive to crush the hypocrites. Likewise, it should also be noted that whereas in the earlier verse (i.e. 73), both hypocrites and unbelievers are mentioned, the present verse mentions only the unbelievers. This is so because the hypocrites, whose unbelief had become crystal clear, had no right to claim any relief on grounds of their formal profession to faith.
122. The lenient policy shown the hypocrites so far should now be given up. (See also verse 73 above where substantively the same directive was given.)
123. The note of warning to the Muslims contained in the above verse has two different meanings, and perhaps both are intended. First, the Muslims are warned that making any allowance to the hypocrites in view of their personal, social and business ties with them, is inconsistent with God-fearing behaviour. It is not possible to fear God and at the same time have relationships of deep friendship and love with His enemies. If Muslims care for God's support and favour they should give up those relationships. Second, the Muslims are warned that God's command to be stern towards and fight against the hypocrites should not mean disregard of moral and humanitarian considerations. For, regardless of what they do, Muslims are always required to act within the limits prescribed by God. Transgression of these limits will render them undeserving of God's support.
124. For a detailed discussion of the increase and decrease in faith, hypocrisy and unbelief, see al-Anfäl 8, n. 2 above.
125. Circumstances often arose which made it possible to test the claim of the hypocrites to be believers, and invariably their claim was proved hollow. From time to time, for instance, a Qur'ānic injunction would be revealed in opposition to their instinctive desires. Occasionally, they would be faced with a demand of faith which was prejudicial to their worldly interests. Sometimes circumstances would place them in a situation of conflicting loyalties and they were forced to make a clear choice: did they hold God, God's Messenger and God's religion dearer than their personal, family and tribal interests? At times war would break out and one's loyalty was put to the test: to what extent was one prepared to sacrifice life, property, time and energy for the sake of the religion which one claimed to believe in? On all such occasions the filth of hypocrisy that lay hidden behind a cloak of false profession to faith came to the surface. In fact on such occasions when the hypocrites cast aside the obligations of faith, they became more hardened in their hypocrisy.
126. Whenever a surah was revealed to the Prophet (peace be on him), he recited it at a public gathering of Muslims. While the Prophet (peace be on him) recited it, the true believers listened to it in rapturous attention. The hypocrites, however, behaved at such gatherings in an altogether different way. They attended these meetings as it was obligatory for every believer to do so and their absence would have exposed their hypocrisy. Nonetheless, they evinced no interest in the Prophet's recitation, and their presence was only ever half-hearted. Their only concern was to register their physical presence at the gathering, and they would depart at the first opportunity. The above Qur'ānic verse presents a graphic account of their conduct.
127. The Qur'an demonstrates the utter foolishness of the hypocrites insofar as they were ignorant of their true interests and welfare, oblivious to their salvation, and absolutely ignorant of the great favour God had shown them by revealing the Qur'an and sending His Prophet (peace be on him). Engaged in their trivial pursuits and narrow interests, they could not see that by embracing the true faith they could assume not only the leadership of all mankind in this life, but also attain eternal felicity in the Next. Their behaviour deprived them of the opportunity to benefit from the vast, unlimited treasures of faith which could have led them to eternal happiness, success, power and greatness. The hypocrites were indeed altogether unfortunate to miss this golden opportunity while the true believers availed themselves fully of it.