Tafsir of Al-Jathiyah 45:14

It is said that the verse was revealed before the verse of fighting (qital) and was then abrogated by it. Others have said: There is no abrogation, because the intended meaning here is to abandon conflict over trivialities and to overlook some of what causes harm or distress. Al-Nahhas and Al-Mahdawi narrated from Ibn Abbas that it was revealed regarding Umar, may Allah be pleased with him; a polytheist in Mecca insulted him before the Hijrah, and he intended to strike him, so the verse was revealed. This is also narrated from Muqatil, and it is apparent that it is Meccan like its sister-verses. The suggestion that he intended to strike him after the Hijrah—because the Muslims in Mecca before it were incapable, oppressed, and could not seek victory over the polytheists, and the incapable person is not commanded to pardon and forgive—is not evident and requires documentation. The claim of the perpetual incapacity of all Muslims is not known; rather, whoever stands upon the states of Abu Hafs, may Allah be pleased with him, would not hesitate in believing he was capable of what he intended and did not care about what would follow from it.

This is more appropriate as an answer than saying: "The command to do so is between him and Allah, in his heart, so that he may be rewarded for it." Indeed, it is said that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and his companions stopped during the expedition of Banu al-Mustaliq at a well called Al-Murayzi'. Ibn Ubayy sent his servant to fetch water, but he was slow. When he came, he said: "What delayed you?" He replied: "A boy sat on the edge of the well and would not let anyone fetch water until I grew weary." The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) approached, as did Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him). Ibn Ubayy said: "Our example and the example of these is as it is said: 'Fatten your dog, and it will eat you.'" This reached Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), so he drew his sword, intending to go to him, whereupon Allah, the Exalted, revealed the verse. The Imam narrated this from Ibn Abbas, and it indicates that it is Medinan. Likewise is what is narrated from Maymun ibn Mihran: "Finhas the Jew said, when Allah, the Exalted, revealed: 'Who is it that would loan Allah a goodly loan?'—'Muhammad's Lord has become poor.' Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) heard this, drew his sword, and went out. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) sent someone in search of him until he returned him, and the verse (14) was revealed: 'That He may recompense a people for what they used to earn.'"

In this indefiniteness, there is a hint—as in the definite form—that they are not concealed, whether they are indefinite or definite, with the knowledge that the one who is recompensed is none other than the one who acts; and here, that is the one who forgives. That is, they were commanded with that so that Allah, the Exalted, may recompense on the Day of Resurrection a people—any people, specifically these people—for what they earned in the world of good deeds, among which is patience against the harm of the disbelievers and overlooking them by suppressing anger and bearing what is unpleasant, with a great reward that is beyond the scope of expression. Some specify what they earned as forgiveness and patience against harm. The word "what" (ma) in both aspects is a relative pronoun (maw-sul); it is also permitted that it be an infinitive particle (masdariyyah), and the "b" in bima is for causation, or for compensation, or connected to the verb yajzi (recompense).

It is also permitted that the "people" refers to the disbelievers, and "what they earned" refers to their evil deeds, among which is their harming the believers; and the indefinite form here is for disparagement. This is countered by the argument that general recompense does not serve as a justification for the command to forgive, because it is realized whether forgiveness occurs or not. Therefore, it must be specified by the whole, such that some of it is not realized in the world, or by what originates from Him, the Exalted, by essence—and there is an obvious affectation in this. Or that it refers to both groups, and the indefinite is for generalization; this is also countered by it being more affected and more far-fetched. What witnesses to the previous view is what is narrated from Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab: "We were in the presence of Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) and a reciter read this verse, so he said: 'May Umar be recompensed for what he did.'"

Zayd ibn Ali, Abu Abd al-Rahman, Al-A'mash, Abu Khulayd, Ibn Amir, Hamzah, and Al-Kisa'i recited linajziya (that We may recompense) with the nun of majesty. It was also read liyujza with the ya and passive construction, with qawmun in the nominative case as the deputy of the subject (na'ib al-fa'il). Shaybah and Abu Ja'far read similarly, except that they put qawman in the accusative case, and this is also narrated from Asim. Those who permit the prepositional phrase to act as a deputy of the subject, even with the presence of a direct object, argue by it, saying: "He was struck with a whip [as an action upon] Zayd" (duriba bi-sawtin zaydan). Thus, bima kasabu is the deputy of the subject here. The majority do not permit this. This reading is explained by the fact that what stands in the place of the subject is the pronoun of the verbal noun—that is, "that recompense it may be done." This is rejected on the basis that it is not placed in its stead when the direct object is also present, according to the correct view. The Kufans permitted it—with disagreement regarding the generalization and desirability—or that it is the pronoun of the second object, which is the "recompense" in the sense of the recompensed thing, as in His saying: "Their recompense with their Lord is Gardens of Eden." It is suppressed due to the context, as in His saying: "And to his parents." The second object in the verb "to give" stands in place of the subject without dispute, and this is of that nature. Abu al-Baqa' considered "the good" as a substitute for the mentioned "recompense," or that qawman is in the accusative because of an implied "I mean" (a'ni) or "he recompensed" (jaza)—implied due to the passive form indicating there is a recompenser. Abu Hayyan chose this, and liyujza is then of the category of "he gives and prevents." The meaning is: "That He may execute the recompense," and there would then be two sentences.