Tafsir of Sad 38:25

(i.e., that for which he sought forgiveness). Ahmad and ‘Abd ibn Humayd narrated from Yunus ibn Hayyan that David (peace be upon him) wept for forty nights until grass grew around him from his tears. Then he said: "O Lord, my forehead is sore, my tears have dried up, and my sin remains upon me as it is." He was then called: "O David, are you hungry so that you might be fed, or thirsty so that you might be given to drink, or oppressed so that you might be helped?" He gave a sob, and the vegetation that had grown there withered, and he was forgiven at that moment. In a narration by ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmad in the Zawa’id al-Zuhd on the authority of Mujahid, he fell prostrate for forty nights until vegetables grew from his tears and covered his head, then he said [the rest of the story]. It is also narrated that he never drank water without two-thirds of it being his tears, and he exhausted himself in his yearning for God Almighty to forgive him until he nearly perished. He was so occupied by this that he was distracted from his kingdom, to the point that a son of his named Isha rose up against his rule and called people to his own side, and the deviants of the Children of Israel gathered around him. When David was forgiven, he fought him and defeated him.

Ahmad narrated from Thabit that he (peace be upon him) prepared seven mattresses and stuffed them with ashes until they were soaked through with tears, and he drank no drink without mixing it with his tears. He also narrated from Wahb that he secluded himself from women until he trembled and his face was furrowed by tears, and his fear and anxiety (peace be upon him) did not cease even after the forgiveness. Ahmad, Al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi, and Ibn Jarir narrated from ‘Ata’ al-Khurasani that David engraved his sin on his palm so as not to forget it, and whenever he saw it, his hands would tremble.

Ahmad and others narrated from Thabit on the authority of Safwan, and ‘Abd ibn Humayd through various chains from ‘Ata’ ibn al-Sa’ib on the authority of Abu ‘Abdah al-Jadali, that he never again raised his head to the sky after the sin until he died.

"And indeed for him is nearness (Zulfa) with Us" (a position of proximity even after the forgiveness), "and a good place of return" (a good final resting place in Paradise). ‘Abd ibn Humayd narrated from ‘Ubayd ibn ‘Umayr that he said regarding this verse: "He draws so close to his Lord, the Almighty, that He places His hand upon him." If this is authentic, it belongs to the Mutashabih (allegorical) texts. Ahmad in Al-Zuhd, Al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi, Ibn al-Mundhir, and Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from Malik ibn Dinar that he said concerning this: "David (peace be upon him) will be made to stand on the Day of Resurrection near the leg of the Throne. Then the Lord, the Almighty, will say: 'O David, glorify Me today with that sweet, melodious voice with which you used to glorify Me in the world.' He will say: 'O Lord, how, when You have taken it away?' He will say: 'I am restoring it to you today.' Then he will launch into a voice that will encompass the delights of the people of Paradise."

As for the origin of his story upon which these consequences followed: It is said that he (peace be upon him) saw a man called Uriah among the believers of his people—in some accounts, he was his minister—and his heart inclined toward his wife. He asked him to divorce her, and Uriah was too ashamed to refuse, so he did, and David married her. She was the mother of Solomon. This was permissible in his religious law and was a common practice among his nation, not conflicting with chivalry; for one of them would ask another to relinquish his wife so he might marry her if he admired her. Indeed, in the early days of Islam after the Hijrah, if an Ansari man had two wives, he would leave one for his brother among the Muhajirin. However, due to his high status, elevated rank, and exalted standing, it was not befitting for him to engage in what common members of his nation engaged in—asking a man who had only one wife to relinquish her so he might marry her while he himself had many wives. Rather, he should have overcome his natural inclination, suppressed his soul, and shown patience regarding that with which he was tested.

It is also said that he harbored in his soul that if Uriah were killed, he would marry her; Ibn Hajar inclined toward this in his Tuhfah.

Others say Uriah had not married her but had merely proposed to her, and David then proposed to her, and her family preferred him (peace be upon him). His sin, then, was proposing to a woman whom his believing brother had already proposed to. In some accounts, he did so without knowing of his brother's proposal, and he was reproached for failing to ask whether anyone had already proposed to her.

It is also said that it was in his religious law that if a man died and left a wife, his guardians had the right to refrain from marrying her themselves. When Uriah was killed, David proposed to his wife, thinking that his guardians had refrained from her. When they heard, his awe and majesty prevented them from proposing.

It is further said that he was in worship when a man and a woman came to him for judgment. He looked at the woman to identify her—a permissible look—and his soul inclined naturally toward her, which distracted him from some of his optional prayers, for which he was reproached.

It is also said that he did not verify the case and oppressed the defendant before asking him, due to the shock he felt. The dispute was between the two litigants, and they were, in truth, humans—either as appears on the surface of the story, or by taking the "ewe" as a metaphor for the woman. This is reported from Abu Muslim. The acceptable view among these is that which is furthest from implying any deficiency in the office of prophethood. The storytellers have famous accounts that are hardly authentic because of how much they further disparage his office (peace be upon him).

Hence, ‘Ali (may God honor his face) said, as recorded in some books: "Whoever narrates the story of David (peace be upon him) as the storytellers do, I will lash him one hundred and sixty lashes." This is the punishment for slandering the prophets (may the blessings and peace of God be upon them all). This was his own ijtihad (legal reasoning), and the reason for doubling the standard punishment for free men is that they (the prophets) are the masters of masters. This is considered sound, although Al-Zayn al-‘Iraqi mentioned that the report itself is not authentic from the Prince (may God honor his face).

Abu Hayyan said: "The position we hold is that which the apparent meaning of the verse indicates: those who scaled the prayer niche were humans who entered upon him not through the entrance and at a time other than his time for sitting in judgment. He was startled by them, thinking they were assassins, as he was alone in his prayer niche worshiping his Lord, the Almighty. When it became clear to them that they had come for judgment and two of them emerged to litigate as God the Almighty narrated, and that David (peace be upon him) thought their entry at that time was a trial from God Almighty to assassinate him—which did not happen as he thought—he sought forgiveness for that thought, as his expectation did not occur. He fell prostrate and returned to God Almighty, and He (the Exalted) forgave him that thought, for He says: 'So We forgave him that,' and nothing preceded it except the words of God: 'And David thought that We had tried him.' We know with certainty that the prophets (peace be upon them) are infallible from sins; it is impossible for them to fall into any of them. By necessity, if we allowed for anything of that kind, laws would be invalidated, and there would be no trust in anything they mention as revelation from God. Therefore, what God narrated in His Book passes as God intended, and what the storytellers narrated that contains any deficiency for the office of messengership, we discard. We are as the poet said: 'We prefer the judgment of reason in every doubt, when the companions of the storytellers prefer narratives.'"

Similar to this is the view that a group intended to kill him (peace be upon him), so they scaled the prayer niche and found others with him, so they pretended to be litigating as God the Almighty narrated. He realized their intent, so he intended to take revenge on them, but then thought that this was a trial and a test from God to see if he would become angry for his own sake or not. So he sought his Lord’s forgiveness for what he had resolved regarding taking revenge on them and disciplining them for his own sake, due to his turning away from the forgiveness that was more befitting to him.

It is also said: The forgiveness was for those who intruded upon him, and God’s saying "We forgave him" means "We forgave on his behalf." This is forced, even if it occurs in some books of theology. In my view, rejecting all reports concerning this story is something a fair-minded person can hardly accept; yes, one does not accept from them what implies a deficiency in the office of prophethood, nor does one accept an interpretation that entails it. It is necessary to say that there was nothing from him (peace be upon him) except abandoning what was "more befitting" for his exalted status, and seeking forgiveness for that, which does not conflict with infallibility.