(Except those who join a people between whom and you is a covenant): This is an exception to the pronoun in His saying, the Exalted: "Seize them and kill them." That is, except those who join and arrive at a people with whom you have a treaty, and who have not fought you—and they were the tribe of Banu Mudlij.
Ibn Abi Shaybah and others narrated from al-Hasan that Suraqah ibn Malik al-Mudliji recounted: When the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) was victorious over the people of Badr and Uhud, and those around them had embraced Islam, Suraqah said: "It reached me that the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) intended to send Khalid ibn al-Walid to my people, the Banu Mudlij. I went to him and said: 'I appeal to you by the favor (of our kinship/neighborliness).' The people said: 'Be quiet!' He said: 'Leave him, what do you want?' I said: 'It reached me that you intend to send forces to my people, and I wish to propose a treaty with them. If your people accept Islam, they will accept Islam and enter the religion; and if they do not accept Islam, you will not fear for your people because of them.' The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) took Khalid’s hand and said: 'Go with him and do what he wishes.' Khalid made peace with them on the condition that they would not aid anyone against the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), that if the Quraysh embraced Islam they would join them, and that anyone who reached them among the people would be under the same covenant." Then Allah the Exalted revealed: "They wish..." until He reached, "Except those who join..." Thus, those who reached them remained with them under their covenant.
Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from the path of ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that the verse was revealed concerning Hilal ibn ‘Uwaymir al-Aslami, Suraqah ibn Malik al-Mudliji, and the tribe of Banu Judhaymah ibn ‘Amir. It is not permissible for this to be an exception to the pronoun in "Do not take," even though it is closer, because taking a protector from them is absolutely forbidden.
(Or who come to you): This is a conjunction to the relative clause (al-silah). That is, "and those who come to you," refraining from fighting you or fighting their own people. Thus, two groups are excepted from those who were commanded to be seized and killed: those who left the belligerents and joined the covenanted, and those who came to the believers and refrained from fighting either group. Or, it is a conjunction to the description of the people; as if it were said: "Except those who join a covenanted people, or who come to you refraining from fighting you or against you." The first [interpretation] is superior in terms of transmission and scholarship, for according to it, there are two causes for prohibiting fighting: connection to the covenanted and connection to those who refrain [from fighting]. According to the second, the two causes are connection to the covenanted and the act of refraining [from fighting]. However, His saying, the Exalted, later on: "So if they withdraw from you...", confirms that one of the two causes is refraining from fighting, because the consequence is caused by the condition. Thus, it necessitates that it be a conjunction to the relative clause; for if it were a conjunction to the description, one of the two causes would be the "connection to those who refrain," not the "act of refraining from fighting."
If it is said: "If it were a conjunction to the description, the coherence would also be realized, because the reason for preventing aggression in that case would be the connection to the covenanted and the connection to those who refrain, and being connected to these and those is a cause for entering into their ruling, while His saying, the Exalted: 'So if they withdraw from you' explains the ruling of those who refrain, following the ruling of those connected to them." The answer is that this is permissible, but the first is clearer and more consistent with the style of Arab speech; for when they make an exception, they clarify the ruling of the excepted party by way of confirmation and emphasis. The Imam said: "Making the refraining from fighting the cause for the prohibition of aggression is better than making the 'connection to one who refrains from fighting' the cause, because it is a remote cause. Furthermore, those connected to the covenanted are not themselves covenanted, but they share their ruling, unlike those connected to the 'refrainers,' for if they refrain, then they are as described, otherwise it has no effect."
Ubayy recited "They came to you" (ja'ukum) without "or" (aw), as an opening that serves as an answer to a question, as if it were said: "How was the covenant between you and them?" It was then said: "They came to you..." This assumes the question: "How did they join the covenanted, and from where was that known?" But this is of no account. Alternatively, it is an attribute after an attribute for "a people," or an explanation for "they join," or a substitute for it. Abu Hayyan considered the "explanation" to be weak, as it does not occur with verbs, and the "substitute" to be weak because it is neither the same, nor a part, nor inclusive of it. It was answered that arriving at the covenanted and connecting with them results in refraining from fighting; thus, it is valid for their coming to the Muslims with this quality and this resolve to be an explanation of their connection to the covenanted, or a substitute for it—whether as a whole, a part, or inclusiveness. The claim that this does not apply to verbs is not upheld by the masters of meaning.
It is said: It is a conjunction with the conjunction omitted. His saying, the Exalted: (Their breasts are tightened) is a state (hal) with an implied "has" (qad). Supported by this is the reading of al-Hasan, hasratan suduruhum, and likewise the readings hasratin and hasiratun. The possibility of it being an adjectival description serving as a cause for "a people" is remote, because the accusative and genitive cases are equivalent.
It is said: It is an attribute for a deleted described noun, acting as a state from the agent of "they came," meaning: they came to you as a people whose breasts are tightened. In that case, there is no need to imply "has." What was said—that the intention of the state is description because it is an introductory state (hal muwatti'ah), and therefore it requires "has," especially when the described noun is deleted—is not accepted; the obligation of extra implication without necessity is not granted. It is also said: It is an explanation of "they came to you," similar to how al-Tayyibi argued, because their coming as non-combatants and "their breasts being tightened" that they fight you have the same meaning. The second eminent scholar said: This is because the intended meaning of "coming" is connection and the abandonment of hostility and fighting, not the literal arrival; or because it explains the manner of the arrival. It is also said: It indicates inclusion for those who "came to you," because the arrival is inclusive of the tightening [of the chest] and other things. It is said: It is an invocatory sentence, but this was rejected because there is no meaning in invoking against the disbelievers that they should not fight their people, but rather that disagreement and killing should occur between them. Al-hasr (with two fathas) is tightness and constriction.
(From fighting you or fighting their own people): That is, from fighting you, or because of, or due to an aversion to fighting. (And if Allah had willed, He could have given them power over you), by strengthening their hearts, expanding their breasts, and removing terror from them, (then they would have fought you) immediately thereafter and would not have refrained from you. The lam is for the response, because it is conjoined to the response (of the conditional). There is no need to imply "if" (law); Makki and Abu al-Baqa’ called it the "lam of reward" and "coupling," which is a strange terminology. The repetition indicates that it is an independent response, and the purpose of this is to bestow a favor upon the believers. It was read as fa-la-qatalukum with both reduction and intensification.
(So if they withdraw from you) and do not oppose you, (and do not fight you), despite what you know of their ability to do so by the will of Allah the Exalted, (and offer you peace)—al-silm means reconciliation, so they comply and surrender. Offering peace is a metaphor, because whoever hands over something casts it away and throws it before the one to whom it is given. It was also read with the lam having a sukun (while the sin is read with fatha or kasra). (Then Allah has not made for you a way against them)—that is, He has not permitted you to seize or kill them. The negation of making a "way" is an exaggeration in the non-aggression toward them, for how can one who does not pass by a thing commit aggression against it? These verses are abrogated in ruling by the verse of Bara'ah: "Then when the sacred months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them." This has been narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) and others.
