Verses 1–9
Introduction
This chapter recollects the friendship of (some of) the believers (in Medina) with the enemies of God from among the stubborn disbelievers (in Mecca). It accentuates the prohibition of such an attitude. The chapter begins with this theme and terminates with it too. It also contains some rules regarding women who migrate (to Medina), and rules regarding the pledge of allegiance of believing women. Thus the chapter’s Medinan provenance is patently manifest.
Commentary
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا عَدُوِّي وَعَدُوَّكُمْ أَوْلِيَاءَ تُلْقُونَ إِلَيْهِمْ بِالْمَوَدَّةِ وَقَدْ كَفَرُوا بِمَا جَاءَكُمْ مِنَ الْحَقِّ يُخْرِجُونَ الرَّسُولَ وَإِيَّاكُمْ ۙ أَنْ تُؤْمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ رَبِّكُمْ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ خَرَجْتُمْ جِهَادًا فِي سَبِيلِي وَابْتِغَاءَ مَرْضَاتِي ۚ تُسِرُّونَ إِلَيْهِمْ بِالْمَوَدَّةِ وَأَنَا أَعْلَمُ بِمَا أَخْفَيْتُمْ وَمَا أَعْلَنْتُمْ ۚ وَمَنْ يَفْعَلْهُ مِنْكُمْ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ سَوَاءَ السَّبِيلِ ١
(60:1) O you who believe, do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies/friends offering them friendship while they have disbelieved in what came to you of the truth, driving out the Messenger and yourselves simply because you believe in Allah your Lord—not if you emigrated in order to strive in My service and to seek My pleasure. You secretly confide to them friendship but I am most knowing of what you conceal and what you declare. And whoever does it among you then certainly he has lost the straight path.
The content of these verses indicates that some of the believers from the emigrants (al-muhājirūn) were secretly confiding friendship to the polytheists in Mecca. This was so that they may protect by it those of their relatives and children who had remained behind in Mecca after they themselves had left it by emigrating to Medina. Consequently, these verses were revealed where God prohibits them from that. What is historically related corroborates this meaning, which is that these verses were revealed in respect of Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa. He secretly conveyed a letter to the polytheists in Mecca, informing them in it of the Messenger of God’s resolve to march forth to Mecca in order to conquer it and free it from their control. Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa did that so that it could serve as leverage for him against the polytheists in his quest to protect his relatives and children who were in Mecca. So God informed His Prophet of it, and these verses were revealed. You shall be presented with the relevant anecdote in the forthcoming section titled ‘Examining Narrations’ God-willing.
The meaning of the word ʿaduww that occurs in the beginning part of this verse which reads ‘O you who believe, do not take My enemies (ʿaduwwī) and your enemies (ʿaduwwakum) as allies/friends...’ is well-known. It is applied to the singular (enemy) as well as to the plural (enemies) while its meaning in this verse is that of the plural due to contextual evidence. The relevant contextual evidence in this case is the occurrence of plural words and pronouns such as awliyāʾ (allies/friends), ilayhim (to them), and others in this verse. The reference of the word ʿaduww in this verse is to the Meccan polytheists. They were God’s enemies because they had taken partners for Him whom they worshipped while they did not worship God, in addition to which they rejected His call and belied His Messenger. They were the believer’s enemies too and this was because of the believer’s faith in God and their sacrifice of their wealth and selves in God’s service. Thus whoever was hostile and inimical to God was consequently hostile and inimical to the believers too.
This verse mentions the Meccan polytheists’ enmity with the believers when (it could be argued) mentioning their enmity with God was sufficient in the context of forbidding taking them as allies. And yet the verse mentions their enmity with God and with the believers. This leads to the question: why does it do that? And the answer is that it does so in order to emphasize a warning and to reiterate forbiddance just as when it is said: ‘whoever is God’s enemy is your enemy too, so do not take him as your ally/friend’.
The meaning of ‘offering friendship’ is to manifest it or to convey it, while this part of the verse occurs here either adjectivally (ṣifa) or as describing the state, condition or circumstance (ḥāl) of the grammatical subject of the masculine second person plural present tense verb (in the jussive) (lā) tattakhidhū ((do not) take (which is a reference to the Medinan believers) at the moment when the action of this verb takes place).
The part of this verse which says ...while they have disbelieved in what came to you of the truth... refers to the true religion which the book of God describes and to which the Prophet calls. This part of the verse occurs as a circumstantial clause (jumlatun ḥāliyya) (describing the state, condition or circumstance of the grammatical object of the masculine second person plural present tense verb (in the jussive) (lā) tattakhidhū, which is God’s and the believer’s enemies (that is, the Meccan polytheists) at the moment when the action of this verb takes place).
The part of this verse which reads ...driving out the Messenger and yourselves simply because you believe in Allah your Lord... is a circumstantial clause (jumlatun ḥāliyya) (describing the state, condition or circumstance of the grammatical subject of the masculine third person plural past tense verb kafarū (they have disbelieved), which is a reference to God’s and the believer’s enemies (that is, the Meccan polytheists)). The meaning of ‘driving out the Messenger and yourselves’ is to compel the Messenger and the believers to leave Mecca and emigrate to Medina. The phrase an tuʾminū billāhi rabbikum has the letter lām implicit to it (li-an tuʾminū billāhi rabbikum), related to the masculine third person plural present tense verb yukhrijūna (they drive out), and the meaning is: ‘they compel the Messenger and yourselves to emigrate from Mecca—li īmānikum billāhi rabbikum—because of your faith in God your Lord’. The description of God here as rabbikum—your Lord—is in order to indicate that the Meccan polytheists were persecuting the believers for a matter that was true and obligatory for the latter, and not for a crime, since a person’s faith in his Lord is obligatory on him and not a crime.
The part of this verse which reads ...not if you emigrated in order to strive in My service and to seek My pleasure... relates to O you who believe, do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies/friends offering them friendship... The apodosis of this conditional sentence is elided because the part of the verse to which it relates indicates and clarifies it. This is while the word jihādan (to strive) is a verbal noun and identified as being mafʿūlu lahu and (similarly so is) the word ibtighāʾ (which) means ‘to demand’. This is while the word al-marḍāh (pleasure) is a verbal noun akin to al-riḍā. Consequently, the meaning obtained is: ‘do not take my enemy and your enemy as friends if you have emigrated for the sake of striving in My service and in order to seek My pleasure’.
Rendering the prohibition to take God’s and the believer’s enemies as friends conditional to their emigration in God’s service and to seek His pleasure is from the perspective of making an instruction (that is, the prohibition) conditional to a realized matter (that is, the emigration, which had already taken place), and in the spirit of stress and emphasis in respect of it, and to indicate an association between the condition and the instruction similar to the instruction of a parent to the child when the parent says: ‘if you are my child... (the realized matter and the condition) ...then do not do such and such’ (the instruction, which is rendered conditional to the mentioned condition).
You secretly confide to them (tusirrūna ilayhim) friendship (bi al-mawaddat) but I am most knowing of what you conceal and what you declare: It is said in Arabic asrartu ilayhi ḥadīthan which means ‘I secretly revealed (or disclosed in confidence) to him a story/piece of conversation’. Thus the meaning of this part of the verse You secretly confide to them (tusirrūna ilayhim) friendship (bi al-mawaddat) is that you (secretly) apprise them of what you conceal (in your hearts) of friendship—as opined by al-Rāghib—while the word al-iʿilān (to declare) is the contrary of the word al-ikhfāʾ (to conceal). This is while the part of this verse that says ...but (or while) I am most knowing of what you conceal and what you declare occurs as describing the state, condition or circumstance (al-ḥāl) of the grammatical subject of the masculine second person plural present tense verb tusirrūna (you secretly confide), which are the believers, at the moment when the action of this verb takes place). The word aʿlamu (I am most knowing) that occurs in this verse is a superlative noun (ism tafḍīl), however some Qur’an commentators have opined that the word aʿlamu here is the first person singular present tense verb (aʿlamu—I know) rather than a superlative noun (aʿlamu—I am most knowing), rendered transitive by the particle bi, and this is because the word al-ʿilm may perhaps be rendered transitive by this particle.
The sentence, …You secretly confide to them friendship but I am most knowing of what you conceal and what you declare occurs as an explanatory resumption of the narrative. This is just as if (the concerned Medinan Muslims) said (feigning ignorance), after having heard the immediately preceding prohibition, ‘what have we done?’ And the retort made would be: ‘you secretly inform them (that is, the Meccan polytheists) of your friendship for them while I (your Lord, God) am most knowing of what you conceal and what you declare’, meaning: ‘I am most aware of your speech and deeds; an awareness and knowledge that makes your concealment and manifestation equal to Me’.
It also becomes clear from here that this part of the verse, which mentions two things (concealing and declaring), and reads ...what you conceal and what you declare..., has these two things have the same meaning, which is that the acts of concealment and manifestation near God are one and the same due to His encompassing what is apparent and what is hidden. Thus it should not be countered that the mention of ...what you conceal suffices from the mention of ...and what you declare on the basis of the argument that the one who knows what is hidden is obviously all the more knowing of what is manifest (since the phrase what you conceal and the phrase what you declare together have the same meaning).
The end of this verse which reads And whoever does it among you then certainly he has lost the straight path serves as an indication of (some of) the (Medinan) Muslim’s concealing of friendship for the polytheists, which was in the form of support for them. The phrase sawāʾa al-sabīl consists of appending the adjective (sawāʾa (straight)) to the noun (al-sabīl (path)) (in the form of a possessive constructive) meaning thereby al-sabīl al-sawiyy and al-ṭarīq al-mustaqīm (the straight path), and this phrase serves as the grammatical object (al-mafʿūl) of the verb ḍalla (which is the reason the noun sawāʾa has the accusative case ending (al-manṣūb)). Or, the noun sawāʾa has the accusative case ending (al-manṣūb) due to the suppression of the preposition ʿan (before it, which would have rendered the accusative noun sawāʾa with a genitive case ending (majrūr)), the implication being fa qad ḍalla ʿan sawāʾi al-sabīl—then certainly he has strayed from (ʿan) the straight path—and this path is the path of God (sabīl allāh)
إِنْ يَثْقَفُوكُمْ يَكُونُوا لَكُمْ أَعْدَاءً وَيَبْسُطُوا إِلَيْكُمْ أَيْدِيَهُمْ وَأَلْسِنَتَهُمْ بِالسُّوءِ وَوَدُّوا لَوْ تَكْفُرُونَ ٢
(60:2) If they gain dominance over you they will be your enemies and extend their hands and tongues against you for evil, and they will like it if you disbelieve.
Al-Rāghib says: The word al-thaqf—with a fatḥa on the letter tha and a sukūn on the letter qāf—means: “perceiving or diagnosing and doing, accomplishing or achieving something with skill, dexterity, and cleverness.” He also says: ‘If you perceived or diagnosed something by means of your sight due to dexterity and skill in vision or expertness in vision, then let it pass, it is (still) said thaqafta kadhā (you adroitly perceived such and such). Thus the word is used in respect of perception and diagnosis even if perception and diagnosis are not coupled with accomplishment and achievement of what is perceived and diagnosed’.
This is while others have explained this word to mean ‘victory and triumph’, and perhaps this meaning for this word in this verse is in light of contextual suitability. Nevertheless, both meanings are close to each other.
This verse is in the context of clarifying (to the concerned Medinan Muslims) that secretly confiding friendship to the polytheists would not benefit them at all in winning their friendship and support and removing their enmity, and that the polytheists would continue to be their enemies without any change of heart were they to overtake and triumph over them, despite them (that is, some of the Muslims) offering them friendship.
The part of this verse which reads ...and extend their hands and tongues against you for evil, and they will like it if you disbelieve serves as an explanation for the part ...they will be your enemies...., to which it is conjoined. This is while the ‘extension of hands for evil’ means murder and captivity and all kinds of persecution and torture while ‘extension of tongues for evil’ means curses, insults, revilement, and abuse.
It is clear that the clause ...and they will like it if you disbelieve... is directly connected to the outcome ...they will be your enemies... (the outcome being dependent on the condition If they gain dominance over you...). The verb waddū (translated as ‘they liked/desired’) is used here with a future tense implication (‘they will like’), which is typical in a conditional sentence comprising both a condition and a resulting action. Thus the meaning obtained is that: “they will reach out to harm you with their hands and slander you with their tongues, hoping to see you reject faith. This behavior is similar to how they previously tortured and persecuted the believers in Mecca, inflicting punishment with the intention of making them forsake their religion.” And God knows best.
لَنْ تَنْفَعَكُمْ أَرْحَامُكُمْ وَلَا أَوْلَادُكُمْ ۚ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ يَفْصِلُ بَيْنَكُمْ ۚ وَاللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ ٣
(60:3) Never will your relatives or your children benefit you on the day of resurrection. He will separate you, and Allah sees well all that you do.
The beginning part of the verse occurs as a rebuttal to what perhaps may be imagined or construed (by those Medinan Muslims) as an excuse for offering friendship to the Meccan polytheists. This potential excuse would be that such an attitude would protect their relatives and children from the persecution of the polytheists; relatives and children whom they had left behind in Mecca in the midst of the polytheists.
Thus the rebuttal (in this verse) is: “ahead of you is a day in which you shall be held accountable for your sins and evil deeds and shall be recompensed for them, among which is friendship with the disbelievers. On that day, your relatives and children shall not benefit you; those whose protection from the polytheist’s persecution you had given preference to over the protection of your own souls from God’s punishment; a protection which would have been earned by letting go of the friendship of the disbelievers.”
The clause, He will separate you... means that God shall separate you on the day of resurrection by sundering the worldly causes (that bind you) as He says So when the trumpet is blown, there shall be no ties of kinship between them...(). This is because ‘kinship’, which involves two people or more tracing their origin to one womb, has its effects influenced and impacted by mercy, love, kindness, the spirit of aiding and supporting each other, tribal affinity, service, and other such effects in the context of social life. The human being’s need for social relations and social life drives him to it naturally, on the basis of considered opinions and beliefs, which his social understanding has created in him. This is while there is no information regarding these opinions outside of the context or circumstance of social life.
Thus when the realities come to the fore, and the veils are lifted on the day of resurrection, these opinions and claims shall fall away from the human being and the independent associations between causes and effects shall be sundered as God says ...certainly the ties between you are now cut off and what you asserted is gone from you...() and as He says ...and they see the chastisement and their ties are cut asunder ().
Thus on that day, kinship ties shall be sundered and the one possessing kinship will not be able to benefit at all due to his kinship. Therefore it does not behove a person to betray God and His Messenger by being friendly with enemies of the faith for the sake of his kinsmen and children for the latter shall not be able to save him from God’s retribution that day.
It is also suggested that the meaning of the statement …He will separate you... is that God will separate you on the day of resurrection due to what that day holds of horrors, which would cause everyone to flee from each other; an understanding based on the following verse The day on which a man shall flee from his brother, and from his mother and father, and from his spouse and son. Everyone on that day shall have an affair that shall occupy him! (). However, the previous interpretation is best in light of the context.
It is also suggested that the meaning (of …He will separate you...) is that God shall distinguish some from the others on that day, making the faithful and obedient to enter paradise and the unfaithful and sinful to hell (thereby separating them). Consequently, a believing relative in paradise will not see his disbelieving relative in hell. Although this interpretation is not invalid in and of itself, it is unsuitable contextually, since there is no evidence here for the disbelief of the relatives and children.
It is also said that the separation mentioned is the separation caused due to judgment, and therefore the meaning is: ‘God shall judge between you on the day of resurrection.’ However this interpretation also suffers from the same problem as the previous interpretation, which is that of contextual unsuitability. This is because the separation caused by judgment would be appropriate if there existed differences (between the relatives in Medina and those in Mecca) such as in the following verse Surely your Lord will judge between them on the day of resurrection concerning that wherein they differ (). However, this verse under consideration manifests no such relevance.
The ending statement ...and Allah sees well all that you do occurs as a completion to the beginning part of this verse Never will your relatives or your children benefit you... as if affirming it, and thus the meaning obtained is: ‘your relatives and children shall never benefit you on the day of resurrection in saving you from the effects of this treachery and its like, and God sees well all that you do. Nothing of this treachery is hidden from Him and He will undoubtedly take you to task for it’.
قَدْ كَانَتْ لَكُمْ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ فِي إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ إِذْ قَالُوا لِقَوْمِهِمْ إِنَّا بُرَآءُ مِنْكُمْ وَمِمَّا تَعْبُدُونَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ كَفَرْنَا بِكُمْ وَبَدَا بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةُ وَالْبَغْضَاءُ أَبَدًا حَتَّىٰ تُؤْمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَحْدَهُ إِلَّا قَوْلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ لِأَبِيهِ لَأَسْتَغْفِرَنَّ لَكَ وَمَا أَمْلِكُ لَكَ مِنَ اللَّهِ مِنْ شَيْءٍ ۖ رَبَّنَا عَلَيْكَ تَوَكَّلْنَا وَإِلَيْكَ أَنَبْنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ ٤
(60:4) Indeed, there is for you a good example in Abraham and those with him when they said to their people ‘indeed, we dissociate from you and from what you worship besides Allah. We have rejected you, and there has appeared between us and you enmity and hatred forever, until you believe in Allah alone’. This is except for the speech of Abraham to his father ‘I shall certainly ask forgiveness for you, however I do not own anything for you from Allah. Our Lord, we place our trust on You, and to You we turn, and to You is the final return’.
This and the next verse address the believers. The word uswa, which occurs in this verse, means ‘to follow, to adhere, to emulate and imitate’ while the part of this verse that says ...and those with him... indicates, on the basis of its apparent connotation, that there were with Abraham, believing individuals in addition to his wife and the Prophet Lot.
The sentence, ...when they said to their people ‘indeed, we dissociate from you and from what you worship besides Allah...’ means ‘we are innocent and free of any association with you and your idols’. This occurs as a proclamation clarifying the rejection of what associating with the polytheists and their idols would imply, which is the implication of belief in myths and legends (viz-a-viz idols and idol worship) and the implication of following and emulating them (that is, the polytheists in their polytheism).
The next statement ...We have rejected you, and there has appeared between us and you enmity and hatred forever, until you believe in Allah alone clarifies the meaning of al-barāʾa (dissociation) by means of its effects, which is rejection and denial of them (al-kufr), and enmity with them (al-ʿadāwa) as long as they remained polytheists, until they became monotheists, bringing faith in the one true God.
The intent of ‘rejecting them’ (...We have rejected you…) is to reject their polytheism, the intent of which is understood on the basis of what is expressed and exemplified by the believers’ speech ...until you believe in Allah alone, while rejecting their polytheism is to oppose them in their practice of it, practically and in deed, just as ‘enmity and hatred’ ...and there has appeared between us and you enmity and hatred forever means separation and disunion from them, and opposition to them by means of the heart.
Thus the believers manifested their dissociation from the polytheists by three means: (a) opposing them in deed for their polytheism, (b) hating and being inimical to them in their hearts, and (c) resolving to continue all that as long as the polytheists remained polytheistic till they became monotheists, believing in one God.
The sentence, This is except for the speech of Abraham to his father ‘I shall certainly ask forgiveness for you, however I do not own anything for you from Allah...’ is an exception (al-istithnā) to what the preceding part of this verse denotes (which preceding part is known as the general statement or the generality (al-mustathnā minhu)). This is that Abraham and those with him dissociated from their polytheistic people; stating that in absolute terms, and that they had sundered all relations that bound them to their people, and connected them together, except for what Abraham said to his father, which was ‘I shall certainly ask forgiveness for you, however I do not own anything for you from Allah....’
However, this speech of Abraham was not due to him turning himself towards his father (in friendship) but rather due to a promise that he had made him specifically, hoping that he would turn away from polytheism and believe in the One, True God. This is evidenced from the following speech of God And Abraham asking forgiveness for his father was only due to a promise he had made him; but when it became clear to him that he was an enemy of Allah, he dissociated himself from him; most surely Abraham was very tender-hearted, forbearing (). This signifies that Abraham had promised his father (that he would seek forgiveness for him from God) at a time when it had not yet become apparent to him that his father was an enemy of God, steeped in his enmity of God, and established in his polytheism. This is while he used to hope that his father would turn away from polytheism, and he used to wish and desire that his father would turn penitent and believe. However, when his father’s deeply entrenched enmity became clear to him, he despaired of his faith, and dissociated from him.
This is while the verse which describes his contentious debate with his father in Sūrah Maryam reads as follows He said: Peace be on you, I will seek forgiveness for you from my Lord; surely He is ever Affectionate to me: And I will withdraw from you all and what you all call on besides Allah.... () It includes his promise to his father in favor of seeking forgiveness for him from God as well as his informing him of his withdrawal from him. If his promise to his father to seek forgiveness for him from God was from the perspective of turning towards him in friendship then it would have been more fitting and suitable for him to say ‘and I withdraw from the people’ and not that he should say (as he does in fact) ‘I withdraw from you all’, thereby including his father among those whom he withdrew from. And withdrawal (al-iʿtizāl) is nothing but dissociation (al-tabarrī).
Thus, the exception in this verse is a connected one (istithnā muttaṣil) in that the believers did not address their people except by dissociation. Consequently, the meaning obtained is: ‘they (the believers) conveyed to their people their decision to dissociate from them as is contained in their speech to them, except the statement of Abraham to his father, which was ‘I shall surely seek forgiveness for you from God’ which was neither dissociation nor turning towards him with friendship, rather it was a promise which he had made his father, hoping that he would believe in God.’
There is an alternative interpretation here, which is that the meaning and import of this verse ...but when it became clear to him that he was an enemy of Allah, he dissociated himself from him...() is that Abraham’s conclusive dissociation was after his promise to his father and after the latter’s enmity to God became apparent to him. This is while the verse under scrutiny here, which is ...when they said to their people ‘indeed, we dissociate from you...’ serves as information about the believers’ conclusive, categorical dissociation. Thus the exception comprising Abraham’s statement to his father is a promise (al-waʿd) which occurred before his conclusive, categorical dissociation, and it is not from the class or category (jins) of the general statement or the generality (al-mustathnā minhu) (preceding the exception), in which case the exception is an unconnected one (istithnā munqaṭiʾ) and not a connected one (istithnā muttaṣil).
Therefore, supposing that the exception is an unconnected one (istithnā munqaṭiʾ), it is permissible that it is an exception to Indeed, there is for you a good example in Abraham and those with him.... and restricted to ...when they said to their people ‘indeed, we dissociate from you...’ (This would be the general statement or the generality (al-mustathnā minhu)). Consequently, the meaning obtained would be: ‘there is a worthy exemplar for you in the dissociation of Abraham and those with him, from their people, save what Abraham said to his father as a promise.’
However, if it is assumed that the exception is a connected one (istithnā muttaṣil) then the explanation is as previously stated. As for the general statement or the generality (al-mustathnā minhu), it is the part of God’s speech that says Indeed, there is for you a good example in Abraham...’ And the meaning therefore is: ‘you have in Abraham an exemplar with respect to all his characteristics save his statement to his father ‘I shall certainly ask forgiveness for you...’ for that is not an example for you to follow and emulate.’
Thus the verse Indeed, there is for you a good example in Abraham... till its end, is not in the context of affirming the emulation of Abraham with respect to all his characteristics (khiṣāl), including the promise to seek forgiveness, or forgiveness itself being (part of) the general statement or generality (al-mustathnā minhu) (for the promise to seek forgiveness was from Abraham’s characteristics (khiṣāl)); rather it is in the context of affirming emulating him with respect to his dissociation from his polytheistic people while the promise to seek forgiveness in the hope of penitence and faith (on the part of his father) is not part of dissociation although it is also not part of inclining towards him in friendship.
The sentence, ...however I do not own anything for you from Allah... serves as the completion of Abraham’s statement. It is a statement that propounds the reality of the matter in that his prayer for forgiveness for his father or seeking it from God was not from the category or kind of seeking where the one seeking something owns or possesses what he seeks from the one whom he is seeking from, rather it is the kind of seeking where the poverty of creatureliness, bondage, and servitude and the humbleness and servility that comes with such a state, beseeches from the sufficiency of lordship and divinity, and the might and majesty that comes with such a state. Thus it is in the prerogative of God to accept the prayer of forgiveness and respond to it positively by being merciful due to His munificence and generosity or for Him to turn away and withhold His mercy. This is because none owns anything against God while He is the Master and Owner of everything. Thus He says ...Say: Who then controls anything against Allah...? ()
In sum, Abraham’s statement ...however I do not own anything for you from Allah... is in the nature of admitting and acknowledging his inability and incapacity (near God) and an attempt to rectify what he perceived and sensed of the defect in affirming capacity and ability to himself when he said to his father ...‘I shall certainly ask forgiveness for you...’ which is similar to what Shuʿayb said ...and my success in my task can only come from Allah... () which was an attempt to rectify what he perceived and sensed of the defect of affirming capacity and ability to himself in an original and independent manner with respect to what he said to his people ...I desire nothing but reform so far as I am able... ().
Our Lord, we place our trust in You, and to You we turn, and to You is the final return: This is the conclusion of the statement transmitted from Abraham and those with him, and part of what is assigned to be emulated from them. It is a supplication from them to their Lord and an imploring to Him by them after they had dissociated from their people by means of that fierce dissociation described in this verse so that He may protect them from its consequences, and forgive them, and not let them down in their faith in Him.
Abraham and those with him had begun their supplication to God with an introduction in which they mentioned their state in which they were in with respect to dissociating from God’s enemies. Hence, they said ...Our Lord, we place our trust in You (rabbanā ʿalayka tawakkalnā), and to You we turn (wa ilayka anabnā)... by which they meant: we were surely in a position in life where we were established and capable and where we managed and looked after our own affairs, however now we are returning to You, which is al-ināba, and as for our affairs, which we used to manage and look after, we have bequeathed them to You and rendered Your will in place of our will, for You are our trustee in that. You may manage them as You wish and however You wish, which is al-tawakkul.
Thereafter they said ...and to You is the final return. They meant that the destiny of everything, from deeds and the doer of deeds, is to You. Hence, by placing our trust in You and turning to You, we have let flow the course on which flows the reality of all matters with respect to the destiny of everything, which is to You, whereby we have emigrated to You and bequeathed the management of our affairs to You.
رَبَّنَا لَا تَجْعَلْنَا فِتْنَةً لِلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَاغْفِرْ لَنَا رَبَّنَا ۖ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ ٥
(60:5) Our Lord, do not make us a (test and) trial for those who disbelieve, and forgive us our Lord. Indeed You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.
The sentence, Our Lord, do not make us a (test and) trial for those who disbelieve, and forgive us our Lord... is the content of the believer’s supplication in which they beseech God to safeguard them from the consequence of their dissociation from the disbelievers, and to forgive them. The word fitna which occurs in this verse means ‘that by which somebody is tested and tried’, while the intent of ...make us a (test and) trial for those who disbelieve... is to grant the disbelievers power and dominance or control and sway over the believers so that He may try and test the disbelievers. Consequently, the disbelievers would bring forth as much corruption as they possibly could and harm the believers by different means of harm and injury simply because the believers believed in God and rejected the disbeliever’s gods, and dissociated from them and from what they worshipped.
The believers repeated their plea to God (in the form of) rabbanā (our Lord), in their supplications, again and again, in order to invoke divine mercy while the end part of this verse that says ...Indeed You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise means: ‘the victor, the dominant, the triumphant one who is not conquered or overpowered; the one who is perfect, accurate, skilful, and excellent in his actions; the one who is not rendered incapable and helpless in responding to their supplications. Thus He protects them from the intrigues and plots of His enemies and knows well how to protect and safeguard them’.
Exegetes have diverse additional opinions with regards to the interpretation of these two verses, which we have not cited here in order to maintain brevity; however, whoever wishes to sample them may refer to the detailed discussions.
لَقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِيهِمْ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ لِمَنْ كَانَ يَرْجُو اللَّهَ وَالْيَوْمَ الْآخِرَ ۚ وَمَنْ يَتَوَلَّ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْغَنِيُّ الْحَمِيدُ ٦
(60:6) Certainly, there is in them for you a good example for whoever hopes in Allah and the last day, but whoever turns away then indeed Allah is free of need, praiseworthy.
This verse is a repetition of the narrative of Abraham and those with him being exemplars, mentioned in (). This repetition occurs in order to emphasize an affirmative response, and in order to demonstrate that this example is for those who desire God and the last day. Furthermore, just as Abraham and those with him are emulated in their dissociation from the disbelievers, likewise, they are worthy of emulation in their supplication and humble and earnest invocation.
It is apparent that the intent of ...for whoever hopes in Allah.... is to hope and desire His reward by means of faith in Him while the intent of ...for whoever hopes in ... the last day... is to hope and desire what God has promised and prepared for the believers of reward, which is equivalent to faith.
The ending statement ...but whoever turns away then indeed Allah is free of need, praiseworthy... means that God is free of needing their obedience and He is free of needing their compliance with His instruction to dissociate from the disbelievers, rather they are the ones to benefit from that, while God is essentially self-sufficient and free of needing them and their obedience. Furthermore, He is praiseworthy in what He commands and prohibits them since His commands and prohibitions aim only to rectify their condition and to render their lives happy and blessed.
عَسَى اللَّهُ أَنْ يَجْعَلَ بَيْنَكُمْ وَبَيْنَ الَّذِينَ عَادَيْتُمْ مِنْهُمْ مَوَدَّةً ۚ وَاللَّهُ قَدِيرٌ ۚ وَاللَّهُ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ ٧
(60:7) It may be that Allah shall place love and friendship between you and those from them whom you have been enemies with, and Allah is All-Powerful and Allah is Oft-Forgiving, most Merciful.
The masculine third person plural suffix pronoun hum (them) attached to the preposition min (thereby becoming minhum and meaning: ‘from them’) refers to the disbelievers in respect of whom the believers were instructed to be inimical. These were the Meccan disbelievers. This is while the intent of the part of this verse that speaks about God placing love and friendship between the believers and the disbelievers is placing the same by granting the disbelievers success and good fortune (al-tawfīq) to accept the Muslim faith, thereby effecting a reconciliation between them, which is what happened when God enabled the conquest of Mecca for the believers. It does not mean an abrogation of the instruction to be inimical to them and to dissociate from them (while they continued to remain polytheists).
Hence, the meaning obtained is: “it is hoped and anticipated from God that He shall place between you—the community of believers—and those whom you have been inimical with from the disbelievers—and these are the Meccan disbelievers—love and friendship by means of granting them success and the good fortune (al-tawfīq) to accept the Muslim faith. Consequently, the mutual enmity shall be reversed into love and friendship while God is All-Powerful and He is Oft-Forgiving of the sins of His slaves. He is merciful towards them when they repent and submit to Him by becoming Muslims. Hence it is imperative for the believers to hope and anticipate that God shall substitute their enmity with friendship by means of His power, forgiveness, and mercy.”
لَا يَنْهَاكُمُ اللَّهُ عَنِ الَّذِينَ لَمْ يُقَاتِلُوكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ وَلَمْ يُخْرِجُوكُمْ مِنْ دِيَارِكُمْ أَنْ تَبَرُّوهُمْ وَتُقْسِطُوا إِلَيْهِمْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُقْسِطِينَ ٨
(60:8) Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you on account of your religion and do not drive you out of your homes that you deal kindly and justly with them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.
This and the next verse contain an elaboration of the prohibition mentioned at the beginning of this chapter. The intent of the part of this verse that says ...those who do not fight you on account of your religion and do not drive you out of your homes... is a reference to other than the polytheists of Mecca. It is a reference to those polytheists who did not fight the believers and did not drive them out of their homes and had a peace treaty with the believers. This is while such words as al-birr (kindness, charitability), al-iḥsān (goodness), and al-iqsāṭ (justice) are a reference to just interaction and behavior. The statement ...that you deal kindly and justly with them... functions as a substitute (al-badl) for the clause ...those who do not fight you on account of your religion and do not drive you out of your homes. This is while the statement ... Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly occurs as a justifying explanation for the statement, Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you on account of your religion and do not drive you out of your homes that you deal kindly and justly with them.
Hence the meaning obtained is: “God does not forbid you by His instruction contained in the verse O you who believe, do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies/friends.... () from behaving civilly and interacting with justice with those who do not fight you on account of your religion and do not drive you out from your homes. That is because such civil behavior and just interaction with them would be a behavior based on justice from yourselves, and God loves those who act justly.”
It is claimed that this verse is actually abrogated by () which says ...so fight the polytheists wherever you find them (). However this is not true for the verse under scrutiny here, which is (), only includes within its ambit or scope of application, the non-Muslims living under Shariʿa law (ahl al-dhimma) and those with whom a treaty exists (ahl al-muʿāhada). As for those who are at war with the Muslims (ahl al-ḥarb), then () does not apply to them. This is while () applies to those polytheists who are at war with the Muslims (ahl al-ḥarb) rather than those who have a treaty with them (ahl al-muʿāhada). Thus how can a verse, which does not compete or contradict another verse in terms of its meaning, be abrogated by the latter?!
إِنَّمَا يَنْهَاكُمُ اللَّهُ عَنِ الَّذِينَ قَاتَلُوكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ وَأَخْرَجُوكُمْ مِنْ دِيَارِكُمْ وَظَاهَرُوا عَلَىٰ إِخْرَاجِكُمْ أَنْ تَوَلَّوْهُمْ ۚ وَمَنْ يَتَوَلَّهُمْ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ ٩
(60:9) Allah only forbids you from those who fought you on account of your religion and drove you out from your homes, and support your expulsion, that you make them friends/allies. And whoever makes them friends/allies then those are the wrongdoers.
The identity of ...those who fought you on account of your religion and drove you out from your homes, and supported your expulsion... is the Meccan polytheists while the clause ...and supported your expulsion... means to support and aid in expulsion. The phrase “...that you make them friends/allies...” (an tawallau hum) functions as a substitute (al-badl) for the part that says “...those who fought you on account of your religion and drove you out from your homes, and expressed support for your expulsion...” (alladhīna qātalūkum fī al-dīn wa akhrajūkum min diyārikum wa ẓāharūkum ʿalā ikhrājikum).
The concluding sentence ...And whoever makes them friends/allies then those are the wrongdoers occurs as a restriction of individuals or their separation and isolation, it being a reference to those who ally with the polytheists of Mecca and with those who support and help the latter against the Muslims, in that they are the wrongdoers and disobedient towards the prohibition. It does not include the generality of those (believers) who maintain a civil and just interaction with the disbelievers or it occurs as an emphasis for the prohibition against befriending them (that is, the Meccan polytheists).
Examining Narrations
- Tafsīr al-Qummī in relation to O you who believe, do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies/friends offering them friendship...() that it descended in respect of Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa. The wording of the verse is general but its meaning is specific. The reason for its revelation was that Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa had embraced the Muslim faith and had emigrated to Medina from Mecca; however his family remained in Mecca. The Quraysh feared that the Messenger of God would march forth to Mecca and attack them, so they went to Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa’s family and asked them to write a letter to him, asking him for information regarding (the Prophet) Muḥammad’s plans for Mecca. Did he intend to march forth to Mecca and attack them? So Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa’s family wrote to him asking him the same and he wrote in reply that the Messenger of God indeed intended to march forth to Mecca and attack them. He handed over his letter to a woman by the name Ṣafiyya who hid it in the upper side of her head near the forehead, and left (for Mecca), whereupon Gabriel descended to the Messenger of God and informed him of what had transpired. Consequently, the Messenger of God sent Amīr al-Muʾminīn ʿAlī and al-Zubayr ibn al-ʿAwwām in search of her. They caught up with her and Amīr al-Muʾminīn ʿAlī asked her: ‘Where is the letter?’ She replied: ‘I do not have anything’, so they searched her but did not find anything. Al-Zubayr ibn al-ʿAwwām said: ‘We do not find anything with her’ at which Amīr al-Muʾminīn ʿAlī said: ‘I swear by God that the Messenger of God has not lied to us, and neither has he lied against Gabriel informing him of the events. Nor has Gabriel lied against God, glorious is His praise’. (Turning to the woman, he threatened her, saying) ‘By God, you shall certainly bring out the letter or else I shall chop off your head and take it to the Messenger of God’. So she said: ‘Step aside from me so that I may bring it out’ and she brought out the letter from where she had hidden it in her forelock. Amīr al-Muʾminīn ʿAlī took it and brought it to the Messenger of God. The Messenger of God (summoned Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa and) asked (him): ‘Ḥāṭib, what is this?’ He replied: ‘By God, Messenger of God, I have not become a hypocrite or changed (sides). I testify that there is no God but (one) God and that you are the Messenger of God in truth, however my family wrote to me about the good behavior and positive treatment of the Quraysh towards them, and I desired to repay the Quraysh for their good behavior and treatment (of my family)’. That is when God revealed to the Messenger of God O you who believe, do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies/friends offering them friendship while they have disbelieved in what came to you of the truth... () up until... and Allah sees well all that you do ().
- Imām ʿAlī relates: ‘The Messenger of God sent al-Zubayr, al-Miqdād, and me forth, instructing us: “Set out until you reach the garden (or meadow) of Khākh (a halting station for travellers on the road to Mecca), for there you shall find a female traveller with whom will be a letter. Confiscate it from her and bring it to me.” So we set out till we arrived at the garden where we found the female traveller. We told her: “Bring out the letter.” She replied: “I do not have a letter.” We threatened her, saying: “You shall certainly bring out the letter or cast off your garments.” So she brought out the letter from the braids of her hair. We brought the letter to the Prophet and it proved to be from Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa, addressing some polytheists in Mecca, informing them of some of the plans of the Prophet. The Prophet (summoned Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa and) asked (him): “Ḥāṭib, what is this?” He replied: “Do not make haste in judging me, Messenger of God. I was a man allied to the (tribe of) Quraysh although I was not part of them while the emigrants (al-muhājirūn) with you enjoy close kinship with them. The emigrants (al-muhājirūn) use this close kinship to protect their families and wealth in Mecca. So I desired, in light of the fact that such an advantage of close kinship with the Quraysh eluded me, that I should bring about an advantage for myself over them which would help me protect my family. I did not do all that in the spirit of rejecting the faith, or in the spirit of disbelief, or with the aim of apostatizing from my faith,” whereupon the Prophet said: “He has said the truth.” ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb said (at that moment): “Give me leave, Messenger of God so that I may strike his neck (and cut off his head)!” The Messenger of God said: “He is a man who witnessed and took part in the battle of al-Badr, and what do you know, perhaps God was aware of the veterans of the battle of al-Badr, and so He said “Do as you wish for I have forgiven you.” Then descended the verse O you who believe, do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies/friends offering them friendship while they have disbelieved in what came to you of the truth... () and it was in respect of this incident.’
Author’s comment: The meaning contained in this report is also transmitted in a number of reports from a number of the Prophet’s companions such as Anas ibn Mālik, Jābir ibn ʿAbdillāh, ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās, and from a group of Muslims of the second generation (al-tābiʿūn) such Ḥasan and others. As for the content of the report cited above, it requires critical scrutiny.
The obvious meaning of this report, rather the explicit meaning of it, is that Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa deserved to be killed for what he had done or that he deserved some punishment for what he had done if not punishment by death. (Nevertheless, he did deserve punishment). However he was exempted from the punishment because he was a veteran of the battle of al-Badr. Thus a veteran of the battle of al-Badr was not punished for any sin or offense he committed as the statement of the Prophet to ʿUmar explicitly declares in this report. This is the statement that says “he is a man who witnessed and participated in the battle of al-Badr and what do you know, perhaps God was aware of the veterans of the battle of al-Badr, and so He said ‘do as you wish for I have forgiven you.’” In the variant of this report transmitted by al-Ḥasan, it says: ‘They are surely the veterans of the battle of al-Badr, so avoid (punishing) the veterans of the battle of al-Badr. They are surely the veterans of the battle of al-Badr, so avoid (punishing) the veterans of the battle of al-Badr. They are surely the veterans of the battle of al-Badr, so avoid (punishing) the veterans of the battle of al-Badr.’
But what contradicts this statement of the Prophet is what transpired during the incident of al-Ifk (the incident of the lie perpetrated against the Prophet’s wife ʿĀʾisha). The Prophet applied the ḥadd penalty to Musṭaḥ ibn Uthātha after the descent of the revelation which cleared ʿĀʾisha of any blame and proved her innocence. Musṭaḥ ibn Uthātha was among those who had falsely blamed ʿĀʾisha, however he was also one of the foremost of the emigrants (muhājirūn) and one of those who had witnessed and taken part in the battle of al-Badr as recorded in the ṣaḥiḥ compilations of al-Bukhāri and Muslim! Despite being a veteran and a participant in the battle of al-Badr the Prophet applied the ḥadd penalty on him as the many reports transmitted in the context of the commentary of the verse of al-Ifk attest.
What God’s (alleged) statement addressing the veterans of the battle of al-Badr entails, that is: ‘do as you like for I have forgiven you’, and which denotes that whatever they may commit of sin or offense is forgiven to them, is obviously not realized or achieved, save by the removal of all religious responsibilities from them, from the obligatory (wājib), prohibited (ḥarām), recommended (mustaḥab), and reprehensible (makrūh) acts! This is because there is no meaning or sense in assigning a responsibility by God in favor of an imperative when its consequence is abolished for the person concerned and when obeying or disobeying the imperative is rendered the same as far as its consequences are concerned for the person subjected to such an imperative. This is what God’s (alleged) statement ‘do as you wish for I have forgiven you’ suggests. It suggests general permissiveness on the basis of what spontaneously comes to mind regarding it.
The first necessary consequence of that is an all-inclusive forgiveness for them for sins committed; sins which the intellect obviously judges as not qualifying for pardon for its perpetrator save by means of repentance. Examples of such sins are: worshipping idols, disobeying God and His Messenger, belying the Prophet, contriving falsehoods against God and His Messenger, belittling the faith and its necessary, established laws. This is because of the Qur’anic verses in respect of these sins: verses which proscribe them, deny pardon for them without repentance by the perpetrator. Similar to these sins are misdeeds such as: wrongfully killing an innocent soul, spreading corruption in the earth, destroying crops, bespoiling lineages, permitting the shedding of blood, permitting violation of honor, and permitting wrongful confiscation of property. It is clear that the danger lies in the possibility of associating (such open-ended) forgiveness with these misdeeds and sins, not the actual application of forgiveness to them. So it cannot be countered that God safeguards such a person, who has already been forgiven, from committing such sins, even if He forgives him if he were to commit them.
The second necessary consequence of that is that God’s (alleged) speech ‘do as you wish for I have forgiven you’ specifies the totality of the laws of the Shariʿa for the veterans of the battle of al-Badr, from ritual laws (al-ʿibādāt) to social laws (al-muʿāmalāt), in that none of these applies to the veterans of al-Badr or relates to them! However, if that had been the case, then such blanket permissiveness would have been widely known among the Prophet’s companions and indisputably accepted for the veterans of al-Badr, which is that this particular group is liberated from every religious duty and responsibility, and freed from the limits that arise due to the responsibility of worship. This is while the veterans of al-Badr themselves would be more deserving among themselves, and indeed very keen to safeguard the meaning and implication of liberation and freedom (from religious responsibilities) that this statement indicated, in terms of its significance and importance. And yet, there is no such evidence that proves this in the transmission of their reports or what is preserved of their reports, rather what may be understood from their biographies and especially their behavior during the trying crises which engulfed the Muslim community after the Prophet’s demise, is contrary to that, so much so that it is impossible for anyone to deny that.
In addition, the freedom of a group of people and their liberation from the bonds of responsibility such that they may do whatever they wish and not care if they disobeyed God and His Messenger in the process, however great, serious, and despicable their acts may be, goes against the benefit and purpose of what religion calls to. It goes against the obligation of commanding good and forbidding wrong, and it goes against the purpose and wisdom of spreading godly teachings far and wide by transmission from the Messenger of God; teachings which the Messenger of God came forth with. This is because the people would have no reason or motivation to trust this particular group of people in what they said or transmitted of God and His Messenger’s instructions, and this is because this particular group of people would be absolved of any wrong or any offence they committed, even if they came up with any lie, blasphemy or calumny or openly committed every wrong act and abomination!
All the above would apply even more so to the person of the Prophet for he was the chief of the veterans of al-Badr! God had sent him forth as a messenger, as a witness, as the bearer of glad tidings, as a warner, as one who called towards God with God’s permission, and as a light-giving lamp, as is mentioned in Q. Hence how would hearts trust, be at ease, or feel confident with the teachings of one who was allowed to get involved in every type of lie, falsehood, wrong, and evil? How would souls accept that such a person be described with those noble attributes with which God praises him? Rather, how would it be possible for God, in His wisdom, to mandate testimony (al-shahāda) in favor of such a person, and to mandate response to the call of such a person when such a person could not be trusted in respect of his condition or speech? How could it be possible for God, in His wisdom, to consider such a person a light-giving lamp while He had permitted him to enliven falsehood as He had permitted him to illuminate the truth, and had permitted him to lead mankind astray while He had sent him forth to guide them? This is while the Qur’anic verses that argue in favor of the infallibility of the prophets, and the safeguarding of revelation from corruption, reject all of that! Moreover, all of that would invalidate the integrity of the contents of many Qur’anic verses which contain reproof and censure of the companions and the believers because of some of their acts of disobedience such as the verses revealed during the battle of Uḥud, al-Aḥzāb, Ḥunayn, and others, which admonish and reprimand them due to their defeat and their running away from the battlefield and the army. This is because God has promised hellfire as punishment for that! From among the clearest verses in this regard are the (censorious and reproaching) verses relating to the incident of al-Ifk, while from those involved in this sorry incident was Musṭaḥ ibn Uthātha, a veteran of the battle of al-Badr. From those verses are: Every man of them shall have what he has earned of sin... () while this verse does not exempt anyone from among them, and the verse When you received it (that is, the lie) with your tongues and spoke (it) with your mouths whereof you had no knowledge of, and you deemed it an easy matter while with Allah it was grievous (). And the verse Allah admonishes you that you should not return to the like of it ever again if you are believers ().
Thereafter, the clearest verses that demonstrate their incongruence with the cited report are these self-same verses of Sūrah al-Mumtaḥana, whose reason for revelation (sabab al-nuzūl) this report under critical scrutiny describes, such as the verse O you who believe, do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies/friends offering them friendship... () and the likes of ...And whoever does it among you then certainly he has lost the straight path (). And the verse ...And whoever makes them friends/allies then those are the wrongdoers (). It is known that these verses address and censure the generality of the believers. They warn the believers as a whole against offering friendship to the disbelievers, and against secretly confiding friendship to them when in fact, it was one of those believers, in this case, Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa who had indeed taken the disbelievers as friends and had deceived the Muslim faith and the Muslims! So the chapter takes the act of one believer and attributes it to the generality of believers and addresses the censure and threat to all. So if in fact Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa, who was a veteran of the battle of al-Badr, was free and released of all responsibility, the pen having had been lifted from him, and if he was truly the addressee of the likes of such speech as ‘do as you wish for I have forgiven you’, in (the sense) that he would have no sin to his credit whatever he does, nor any deviation attributed to him, nor would he be characterized by injustice and inequity, and that no censure would be levelled against him or any threatening warning, (and so if this was the case) then what is the reason in attributing or ascribing the deed of one person (that is, the deed of Ḥāṭib ibn Abī Baltaʿa), a deed which is characterized by unsatisfactory and negative qualities, to the generality of Muslims? Especially on the assumption that there is no quality or characteristic save the unsatisfactory and the negative in the deed of this one person! In such a case, the matter eventually leads to the assumption that one person brings forth an evil deed, which is permitted to him. He is not censured or blamed for it; however everyone else that ever brings forth such a deed is censured, blamed, and threatened with reprisals for it! In other words, the original perpetrator of a sin is permitted to carry out the misdeed and then another is punished or censured for that deed without being able to do anything about it, in the sense that unlike the veterans of al-Badr, he is not given a chance to mitigate the punishment or remove it. God’s speech is far exalted and far above such an assumption!
- Asmāʾ bint Abī Bakr relates: ‘My mother visited me hoping for help and favor. This was at the moment when the Quraysh were concluding a peace treaty with the Messenger of God (at al-Ḥudaybiyya). She was still a polytheist at this time. So I asked the Prophet: “Should I maintain ties of kinship with her and behave courteously with her?” At that moment God revealed the verse Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you on account of your religion and do not drive you out of your homes that you deal kindly and justly with them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly (). Consequently, he (the Prophet) replied in the affirmative, saying: “Yes, maintain ties of kinship (with her, be kind and courteous to her).”’
- Qatāda said: (The verse) Allah does not forbid you from dealing kindly and justly with those who do not fight you on account of your religion.... () was abrogated by (the verse) ...so fight the polytheists wherever you find them ().
Author’s comment: You now know the argument against this view (as elaborated in the main text).
- Imām al-Ṣādiq said: ‘Part of the most reliable and trustworthy handle of faith is that you love for the pleasure of God and hate for the pleasure of God, that you grant for the pleasure of God and refuse for the pleasure of God, Glorious and Mighty is He.’
- Imām al-Ṣādiq said: ‘All those who did not love on the basis of religion and did not hate on the basis of religion have no religion for themselves.’
The clause, ...offering them friendship... occurs in Arabic as tulqūna (you offer) ilayhim (to them) bi al-mawaddati (friendship). The prepositional construction bi al-mawaddati (consisting of the preposition bi [ḥarf jarr] and the noun governed by it in the genitive case al-mawaddati [majrūr]) occurs as the grammatical object (al-mafʿūl) of the masculine second person plural present tense verb tulqūna (you offer) while the preposition bi is identified as bā zāʾidatun li al-taʾkīd—the redundant particle bā of emphasis. This is similar to () which reads in Arabic as wa lā tulqū (and do not cast) bi aydīkum ((with) your (own) hands) ila al-tahlukati (to [your own] destruction). (Auth.) ↩︎
Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Aḥmad, al-Ḥamīdī, ʿAbd ibn Ḥamīd, al-Bukhārī, Muslim, Abu Dāwūd, al-Tirmidhī, al-Nasāʾī, Abu Awānah, Ibn Ḥibbān, Ibn Jarīr, Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Abī Ḥātim, and Ibn Mardawayhi while al-Bayhaqī and Abu Naʿīm jointly transmit it in their works of Dalāʾil al-Nubuwwah from him. ↩︎
Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of al-Bukhārī, Ibn al-Mundhir, and al-Naḥḥās, while al-Bayhaqī transmits it in Shuʿab al-Īmān from her. ↩︎
Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Abu Dāwūd who records it in his al-Taʿrīkh, and Ibn al-Mundhir from him. ↩︎
Al-Kāfī, by means of the compiler’s chain of transmission terminating at Saʿīd al-Aʿraj from him. ↩︎
Tafsīr al-Qummī, by means of his chain of transmission terminating at Isḥāq ibn ʿAmmār from him. ↩︎