An-Nisa: (94) "O you who have believed..."
"O you who have believed" — This marks the commencement of a warning against that which leads to remorse, specifically the killing of one who should not be killed.
"When you travel in the way of Allah" — meaning, when you set out for military expeditions, as indicated by the context and the preceding passage.
"Investigate" — meaning, seek clarification and verification in all that you initiate or abandon, and do not act upon such matters without due deliberation and consideration. Hamzah, Ali, and Khalaf recited it as fatabayyanu, meaning seek the confirmation of the matter and do not be hasty in it. The two meanings are closely related, and the taf'il form denotes a future sense. The fa (in fatabayyanu) is included because "when" (in idha) contains the meaning of a condition; it is as if it were said: "If you go on an expedition, then investigate."
"And do not say to someone who offers you the greeting of peace..." — meaning, greets you with the greeting of Islam, in contrast to the greeting of the Age of Ignorance, such as an'imu sabahan (may you have a pleasant morning) or hayyaka Allahu Ta'ala (may Allah the Exalted give you life). Hamzah, Khalaf, and the people of Ash-Sham recited as-salam without the alif. In some narrations from Asim, it is recited with a kasra on the sin and a fatha on the lam (as-silm). The meaning in both recitations is surrender and submission; some have interpreted as-salam (peace) in the famous recitation the same way. The lam (in laqakum), as As-Samin said, is for the purpose of transmission (tabligh), and the past tense is used with the meaning of the present.
"Min" (the one who) acts as a relative pronoun or a descriptor. The intent is to forbid that which is the consequence of abandoning what was commanded, and to specify an important category among those in which investigation and verification are mandatory. It is restricted to "travel" only because the failure to investigate occurred therein, not because it is not mandatory elsewhere. The meaning is: Do not say to one who displays to you what indicates his Islam, "You are not a believer," and that he only did so out of fear of being killed; rather, accept from him what he has displayed and deal with him according to its implications.
It is narrated from Ali—may Allah ennoble his face—and Muhammad ibn Ali al-Baqir—may Allah be pleased with them both—and Abu Ja'far al-Qari that they read mu'minan (a believer) with a fatha on the second mim, meaning: one who has been granted security by you.
"Seeking the fleeting goods of the worldly life" — meaning, you seek his wealth, which is but debris that is quick to vanish and imminent to pass away. The sentence is in the state of a circumstantial clause (hal) from the doer of "you say," indicating that which motivates the haste. The prohibition refers back to both the restricted action and the restriction itself.
His saying, the Exalted: "For with Allah are abundant spoils" — is a justification for the prohibition of the restriction, containing an implicit promise. It is as if it were said: Do not seek that small, vanishing good, for with Him, the Glorified, and in His power, there are abundant spoils that He will grant you, thereby making you independent of that [the victim's wealth].
And His saying, the Glorified: "Likewise were you before, then Allah conferred favor upon you" — is a justification for the prohibition of the restricted action, considering that the intent of the prohibition is to stop the rejection of the faith of the one who offered the greeting, due to their belief that a faith which protects [life] is only one where the signs of agreement between the inner and outer state are manifest, and they were not manifest in him. The demonstrative pronoun refers to the one described by what is contained in the relative clause. The fa in faminna is for conjunction with "were." The predicate is placed first for the sake of the exclusivity (hasr) that serves to emphasize the similarity; it is as if it were said: Do not reject the faith of one who greeted you with the greeting of Islam and say that it is not a faith that protects [life], and that one who is characterized by it is not considered a protected believer, due to your thought that agreement [between inner and outer] is a condition for protection, and mere greeting does not indicate it. For you, in the early days of your Islam, were like this person being greeted, in that nothing was manifest to the people from you other than what was manifest from him to you—the greeting and the like—and there did not appear from you what you deem to be a condition [of inner agreement]. Merely that entering Islam was not under the shadow of swords does not indicate that. Then Allah the Exalted conferred favor upon you by accepting that from you, not commanding an inspection of the agreement between your tongues and your hearts, and thus He protected your blood and your wealth. Since such is the case, "investigate" this matter, do not be hasty, and deliberate so that it may become clear to you that the manifest state is sufficient for the faith that protects, just as it sufficed for you before.
This justification was delayed—as has been said—because it contains a type of detail that might be disrupted if placed earlier, while also observing the correspondence between the previous justification and the one being justified. Alternatively, it may be because the precedence of the first provides an indication of the people's inclination toward those goods and that their joy in them was stronger; thus, its precedence facilitates their satisfaction, though it contains a type of reproach for them, may Allah elevate their rank and may the Master, the Exalted, be pleased with them. Or, it is because it is clearer in the latter justification and more immediate to the mind. Perhaps one justification was not conjoined to the other so as not to imply that they are both justifications for one thing, or that the sum of them is a single cause. It is also said that it aligns with the restriction and the restricted action, as they were not distinguished by a conjunction. It is also said that the reason for the lack of conjunction is that the first is a justification for the second prohibition by way of promising something of the Hereafter; the meaning being: Do not seek the goods of the worldly life because with Him, the Exalted, is a great reward in the Hereafter, prepared for those who do not seek such goods. He expressed the reward as "spoils" to suit the context. The second justification for the first prohibition is not like that.
Az-Zamakhshari and others mentioned in the interpretation of the verse that which the Shaykh al-Islam refuted with what is illuminated by the signs of verification. Some people said regarding it: The meaning is, just as this person whom you killed was concealing his religion among his people out of fear for his life, you yourselves were concealing your religion out of caution against your people. Then Allah the Exalted conferred favor upon you by manifesting His religion and honoring its people, until you manifested Islam after having hidden it from the people of Shirk. So, investigate the favor of Allah upon you, or investigate the state of the one you are killing. It is not hidden that this—even if some of it is narrated from Ibn Jubayr—is not sufficient for the intended purpose, especially since the claim that the addressees were concealing their religion out of caution against their people is open to challenge—unless it is said that the fact that some were concealing it is sufficient for the address.
It is said that His saying, the Exalted: "Then Allah conferred favor upon you" is disconnected from what precedes it; this is because when He prohibited the people from killing the one mentioned, He informed them afterward that He had conferred favor upon them by accepting their repentance for that abominable act. Then He repeated the command to investigate as an emphasis in warning, or He commanded them to clarify His favor—the Exalted—as a form of gratitude for that which He bestowed upon them, which is as you can see.
There is a disagreement regarding the occasion of the revelation of the verse. Ahmad, at-Tirmidhi (who classified it as hasan), and Ibn Humayd (who authenticated it) narrated from Ibn Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them both—who said: A man from Banu Sulaym passed by a group of the companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) while he was driving his sheep. He greeted them, and they said, "He did not greet us except to seek refuge from us." They set upon him and killed him, and brought his sheep to the Prophet (peace be upon him), and so this was revealed.
Ibn Jarir narrated from As-Suddi, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) sent a military detachment, led by Usamah ibn Zayd, to Banu Damrah. They encountered a man from among them named Mirdas ibn Nahik, who had a small flock of his and a red camel. He took refuge in a mountain cave, and Usamah followed him. When Mirdas reached the cave, he put his flock inside, then came toward them and said, "As-salamu 'alaykum, I bear witness that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." Usamah attacked him and killed him for the sake of his camel and his flock. When the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) sent Usamah, he liked to praise him and ask about his companions; but when they returned, he did not ask them about him. The people began telling the Prophet (peace be upon him), saying: "O Messenger of Allah, if you had only seen Usamah; a man met him and said, 'There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah,' but he attacked and killed him." He turned away from them. When they persisted, he raised his head toward Usamah and said: "How will you fare with 'There is no god but Allah'?" He said: "O Messenger of Allah, he only said it seeking refuge." He (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "Did you split his heart to see [what was in it]?" Then the verse was revealed.
He (Ibn Jarir) also narrated from Ibn Zayd that it was revealed concerning a man whom Abu ad-Darda killed, and he mentioned a story similar to that of Usamah. The limitation to mentioning the "greeting of Islam" here, despite it being accompanied by the word of testimony, is for the sake of emphasizing the prohibition and the censure, and to draw attention to the perfection of their error by showing that the greeting alone was sufficient to refrain from attacking the one who offered it, so how much more so when it is accompanied by that blessed word.
The verse and its context have been used as evidence for the validity of the faith of the coerced, that a mujtahid (scholar) may err, and that his error is forgiven. The argument for the first is that despite the killers thinking that the Islam of the aforementioned man was out of fear of death—which is coercion—He [Allah] denounced them for killing him; had his Islam not been valid, He would not have denounced it. The argument for the second is that it commanded investigation, indicating that haste is an error. The argument for the third is taken from the context and the lack of a threat of punishment for failing to investigate.
Some were of the view that there is no excuse for failing to verify in such matters, and that the one who errs is sinful. They argued using what Ibn Abi Hatim and al-Bayhaqi narrated from al-Hasan: A group of the companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) went out patrolling and encountered a group of the enemy. They attacked them and defeated them. A man from among them set out, and a man followed him, wanting his belongings. When he reached him with his spear, the man said: "I am a Muslim, I am a Muslim." He thrust his spear into him, killed him, and took his belongings. This was brought to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and he said to the killer: "Did you kill him after he said, 'I am a Muslim'?" He said: "O Messenger of Allah, he only said it to seek refuge." He said: "Did you not split his heart?" He said: "Why, O Messenger of Allah?" He said: "To know if he was truthful or lying." He said: "Was I to know that, O Messenger of Allah?" He (peace be upon him) said: "His tongue was making it clear, his tongue was expressing it." He said: The killer did not wait long before he died. His companions dug for him, but in the morning, the earth had cast him out. They went back and dug for him, but in the morning, the earth had cast him out beside his grave. Al-Hasan said: I do not know how many times the companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: We buried him twice or three times, and each time the earth would not accept him. When we saw that the earth would not accept him, we took him by his feet and threw him into one of those mountain passes. Then Allah the Exalted revealed His saying: "O you who have believed..." And in a narration by 'Abd ar-Razzaq from Qatadah, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "The earth refused to accept him, so throw him into a cave among the caves." The evidence for sinfulness in this is manifest.
It was answered that perhaps this killer did not do so because he considered the killed to be unacceptable in Islam, but for another reason, and he offered an excuse that was false before the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). This is supported by what Ahmad, Ibn al-Mundhir, at-Tabarani, and others narrated from 'Abdullah ibn Abi Hadrad al-Aslami, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) sent us to Idam. I went out with a group of Muslims, among them Abu Qatadah al-Harith ibn Rib'i and Muhallam ibn Juththamah ibn Qays al-Laythi. We went until, when we were in the valley of Idam, 'Amir ibn al-Adbat al-Ashja'i passed by us on a mount, with belongings of his and a skin of milk. When he passed by us, he greeted us with the greeting of Islam. We held back, but Muhallam ibn Juththamah attacked him because of a matter that had been between them, and killed him and took his belongings. When we came to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and told him the news, the Quran was revealed concerning us: "O you who have believed..."
It is apparent that the unidentified man in the report of al-Hasan is the same man explicitly named in this report, and it indicates that the killing was for a reason rooted in old grudges in the heart. We say this is the apparent meaning because, in the report of Ibn 'Umar, when Muhallam ibn Juththamah returned, he came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) wearing two cloaks and sat before him (peace be upon him) so that he might ask for forgiveness for him, but he said: "May Allah the Exalted not forgive you." He stood up, catching his tears with his cloaks, and not an hour passed before he died. They buried him, but the earth cast him out. They came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and mentioned that to him, and he said: "The earth accepts those who are worse than your companion, but Allah the Exalted intended to admonish you." Then they cast him between two mountain sides and threw stones over him. That which the heart leans toward is that the story is one and the same.
The argument for the [possibility of] acceptance [of faith] being based on the lack of a threat was challenged by the fact that His saying, the Exalted: "Indeed, Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted" implies a threat. Meaning: He, the Exalted, has always been, and will continue to be, fully aware of all the deeds, manifest and hidden, that you perform and the manner in which you do them. This includes the act of verification and the failure to do so, as a primary inclusion, and He will reward you accordingly: if good, then good; and if evil, then evil. The sentence is a justification by way of an isti'naf (resumption/new starting point). It is also recited with a fatha on the an (anna), as being governed by "investigate" or due to the omission of the lam of justification.
