Tafsir of An-Nisa' 4:148

His (exalted is He) lack of love for a thing is a metonymy for His anger. The particle ba is connected to al-jahr (speaking aloud/publicly), and the position of the prepositional phrase is either in the accusative or nominative. Min al-qawl is connected to a suppressed element that acts as a state (hal) for al-su’ (evil).

Al-jahr of a thing means announcing and manifesting it, as understood from al-Qamus. In al-Sihah, it states: "He jahara with the speech, meaning he raised his voice with it." Perhaps the intended meaning here is manifestation, even if it is not by raising one's voice. That is: Allah (exalted is He) does not like anyone to publicly declare evil, of whatever speech it may be.

﴿إِلا مَنْ ظُلِمَ﴾ Meaning, except the declaration of one who has been wronged, for he is not displeasing to Him (the Almighty). This is by praying against his oppressor, complaining about him, or mentioning him with the evil that he possesses. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) and Qatadah that it means praying against the one who wronged him. Mujahid held that the meaning is: Allah (exalted is He) does not like anyone to disparage or complain about another, except for one who has been wronged; thus, it is permissible for him to complain about his oppressor, make his affair public, and mention him with the evil of what he has committed. According to al-Hasan, al-Suddi, and as narrated from Abu Ja’far (may Allah be pleased with him), the meaning is: Allah does not like insult in the act of seeking redress, except for one who has been wronged, for there is no harm in him seeking redress against the one who wronged him through what is permitted in the religion. Al-Hasan permitted a man, if it is said to him, "O adulterer," to respond to the speaker with the same. Ibn Jarir narrated from Mujahid that a man stayed as a guest with some people who did not feed him, so he complained about them and was punished for it, and then this verse was revealed. You know that the consideration is for the generality of the wording, not the specificity of the cause.

It is narrated from Ibn Abbas, Ubayy, Ibn Jubayr, al-Dahhak, and ‘Ata’ that they recited: ﴿إِلا مَنْ ظُلِمَ﴾ in the active voice (dhulima). Thus, the exception is munqati’ (disjointed). The meaning would be: "But the oppressor, He loves him not," or "He does what Allah does not love, so he declares evil publicly." The relative pronoun (man) is in the accusative position.

Al-Zamakhshari permitted it to be in the nominative as a substitute (badal) for the subject of yuhibbu, as if it were said: "Allah does not like the declaration of evil except [from] the wrongdoer," according to the dialect of those who say: "Zayd did not come to me, except ‘Amr," meaning "No one came to me except ‘Amr." From this is: ﴿لا يَعْلَمُ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ الْغَيْبَ إِلا اللَّهُ﴾. This is a dialect of the Tamim tribe, and the poet says regarding it: "The spears do not avail in their place at evening, nor the arrows, except the sharpened Mashrafi (sword)." Sibawayh reported this dialect, though some denied it; the reporting of the "Master of the Craft" (Sibawayh) is sufficient as authority for those who affirm it. It is reported from Abu Hayyan that the line of poetry is not like the example, because a generality could be interpreted in the sense of "weaponry," whereas in "Zayd," no generality can be imagined, and it cannot be corrected except by assuming the original was: "Zayd did not come to me, nor anyone else," so the conjoined element was suppressed due to the indication of the exception. The same applies to the verse mentioned. This was refuted, as al-Shihab said, by noting that if it were as he described in the example, the exception would be muttasil (connected), whereas the assumption here is the contrary. The intended meaning, as al-Tibi understands it, is to place the substitute-from (mubdal minhu) in the position of something not mentioned, as if the exception were mufarragh (empty/exclusive) and the negation were general. However, He explicitly mentioned the negation of some individuals of the general category to increase the emphasis on the negation concerning them, or because they are suspected of potentially being affirmed. They say: "Zayd did not come to me, except ‘Amr," and the meaning is: "No one came to me except ‘Amr." So too here, the meaning is: "Allah does not like the declaration of evil, except [from] the wrongdoer." He inserted the name "Allah" to confirm the negation of His (exalted is He) love; meaning, He (sublime is He) is distinct in His lack of love; no one else has that.

If one says: "The few words after illa would not then be the subject, which is apparent, and designating it as a substitute is an error," it is answered that it would only be an error if this specific case were not in the position of a general one, and if the meaning were not "No one except ‘Amr came to me." If it is said, "Then the word 'Allah' becomes a metaphor for 'anyone,' and there is no way to reach that," it is answered that la yuhibbu Allah is interpreted as "no one loves" in its place, without metaphor in the name "Allah." Thus it is said. Al-Shihab commented on this that if the exception-from (mustathna minhu) is general, it is either by assuming a word, as Abu Hayyan mentioned, or by metaphor in the proper noun, and both have their problems, and there is no other way for the generality. Therefore, the way the responder mentioned must be explained. Unless it is said: The exception from the Proper Name requires that its possessor be more entitled to the ruling, such that if it is negated from Him, it is known to be negated from others by priority, without assumption or metaphor. So it is said here, for example: "If Allah does not like the declaration of evil—and He is independent of all things—then others certainly do not like it by way of priority." You know that this does not quench the thirst, because the mentioned requirement has no proof, and the claim that the negation of love for declaring evil from Him (exalted is He) implies its negation from others by priority is extremely subtle. Thus, it is better to say what was mentioned, after stating that the text implies the mentioned meaning, even if it counts the exception as munqati’ according to what is immediately apparent and looking at the outward meaning.

On the recitation of dhulima (passive), it is permitted for it to be connected to al-su’, meaning: "except the evil of one who is wronged," so the declaration of it is required and accepted. It is also said that it is connected to His (exalted is He) saying: ﴿مَا يَفْعَلُ اللَّهُ بِعَذَابِكُمْ إِنْ شَكَرْتُمْ وَآمَنْتُمْ﴾. It is reported from al-Dahhak bin Muzahim that he used to say this with precedence and postponement, meaning: "What would Allah do with your punishment if you were grateful and believed, except for one who has been wronged?" and he used to recite it as such. This is hardly acceptable in interpreting the speech of Allah, the Mighty.

﴿وَكَانَ اللَّهُ سَمِيعًا﴾ To all that is audible; thus, the speech of the wronged and the wrongdoer is included therein. ﴿عَلِيمًا﴾ To all that is knowable, among which is the state of the wronged and the wrongdoer. This sentence is a tadhil (supplementary clause) that confirms what the exception conveys. The generalization is not denied by that, as imagined.

The way to connect this verse to the preceding one, as al-Allamah al-Tibi said, is that when He (sublime is He) finished describing the bestowal of His mercy and the confirmation of showing His compassion, He followed it with His saying: ﴿لا يُحِبُّ اللَّهُ الْجَهْرَ بِالسُّوءِ﴾ to complete that and to teach the servants to adopt the character of Him (whose majesty is glorified). There is in this what has no basis, nor does the connection complete with it. His claim that the first verse also contains an indication of teaching the adoption of sublime character, as Isam al-Millah established, and his hope that it would be from among the inspired, is of no substance, as is clear. Similar to this is what Ali bin Isa mentioned regarding the way of connection, which is that when He (His majesty is glorified) mentioned the people of hypocrisy—which is showing the opposite of what one conceals—He (sublime is He) clarified that what is in the soul includes what is permissible to conceal and what is permissible to manifest.

Shihab al-Din said: The apparent meaning is that when He mentioned gratitude in a way from which His (sublime is He) pleasure with it and the love of manifesting it were known, He (Almighty and Majestic is He) completed it by mentioning its opposite. It is as if it were said: "He loves gratitude and its manifestation, and He dislikes evil and its manifestation." In this is a wondrous ihtibak (ellipsis/balancing).