Al-Anfal: (16) "And whoever turns his back to them on that day..."

(And whoever turns his back to them on that day)—that is, the day of the encounter and its moment—(except swerving to fight)—meaning, leaving his position to a position more advantageous for fighting than the first, or turning to fight another faction that is more important than these, or feinting while intending a counter-attack, as has been narrated from Ibn Jubayr—may Allah be pleased with him—and from their speech: "He retreats and then attacks," and "war is retreat and attack." This may even be among the ruses and stratagems of war, and it has been said: "War is a ruse." The root of taharruf (swerving), according to Majma' al-Bayan, is moving from a state of alignment toward a side or edge (harf). From this is ihtiraf (to earn), which is to head toward a direction of means while seeking one’s provision therein.

(Or maneuvering to join a company)—meaning, inclining toward another group of believers and joining them or attaching oneself to them in order to fight the enemy alongside them. A fi'ah (company) is a portion of people. It is said: "I fa'tu his head with the sword," if you sever it. How subtle the expression fi'ah is here! Some consider that the fi'ah must be near the one maneuvering so that he may seek their assistance; this seems to be based on common convention, while others consider the linguistic definition sufficient.

This is supported by what was recorded by Ahmad, Ibn Majah, Abu Dawood, and al-Tirmidhi (who classified it as hasan), and al-Bukhari in al-Adab al-Mufrad—with his own wording—from Ibn Umar—may Allah be pleased with them both—who said: "We were on an expedition, and the people scattered in a rout. We said: 'How shall we meet the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—after we have fled from the battlefield and returned bearing the wrath?' We came to the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—before the dawn prayer. He came out and said: 'Who are the people?' We replied: 'We are the farrun (the ones who fled).' He said: 'No, rather you are the akkarrun (the ones who return).' We kissed his hand, and he—upon him be peace and prayer—said: 'I am your fi'ah (company), and I am the fi'ah of the Muslims.' Then he recited: Except swerving to fight or maneuvering to join a company." The akkarrun are those who return to the war, and the attaffun are those who turn toward it.

It is also narrated that a man was defeated at the Battle of Qadisiyyah and came to Medina to Umar—may Allah be pleased with him—and said: "O Commander of the Faithful, I am ruined; I fled from the battlefield." Umar—may Allah be pleased with him—said: "I am your fi'ah." Some interpret his—upon him be peace—statement "You are the akkarrun" as a means of comforting them and gladdening their hearts, though interpreting the entire narrative in the two reports solely as such is far-fetched. Indeed, their apparent meaning requires that a person fleeing the battlefield should hardly exist.

The morphology of mutahayyiz is tafi'il, not tafa'ul; otherwise, it would have been mutahawwiz, because it comes from haza-yahuzu. Zamakhshari and his followers held this view, but it was countered by Imam al-Marzuqi, who mentioned that tadayyur is tafa'ul despite being wawi (from dara), observing the frequency of diyar. Based on this, it is permissible that tahayyuz is tafa'ul in view of the frequency of hayz with a ya. This is why tadur and tahawwuz did not occur. Ibn Jinni mentioned that what this Imam said is the truth, and that they often treat the substituted letter as if it were original, applying its rules. However, his claim denying tahawwuz is questionable, as the scholars of language have said: tahawwuz and tahayyuz, as evidenced by the Qamus. Ibn Qutaybah said: tahawwuz is tafa'ul and tahayyuz is tafi'il.

This root in their speech involves shifting from one direction to another, from hayz (with a fatha on the ha and a shadda on the ya—which some have mistaken)—and it means the courtyard of a house and its dependencies, then it was applied to every direction. One who is settled in his place, like a mountain, is not said to be mutahayyiz. Sometimes it is used by them for that which a hayz (space) surrounds. The theologians mean by it the more general concept: everything that is pointed to, thus the entire world is mutahayyiz.

The two descriptions are in the accusative case as a state (hal), and illa is not operative as an agent nor a mediator in the operation; this is the meaning of their saying that it is "redundant" (laghw). It was so because it is an exclusionary statement (istithna' mufragh) from the most general of states. If not for the tafrigh (emptying), it would have been an agent or a mediator in the operation, according to the well-known disagreement. The condition for the istithna' mufragh is that it must be in the context of negation or the validity of the generality of the excluded entity, such as: "I did not read except on such-and-such a day," and our case is of this nature. It is also valid for it to be from the first, considering that yulihim (turns his back to them) means "he does not face the fighting." The analogy for this is what they said regarding his—upon him be peace—statement: "The world is destroyed except the scholars," and so on.

It is permissible for it to be an exclusion from the "turners" (al-muwallin), meaning: "Whoever turns his back to them, except a man among them who is swerving to fight or maneuvering to join a company, then he has returned with wrath." Baa means he returned with a great wrath, the extent of which cannot be estimated. The summary is: those who turn their back, except the swervers and those maneuvering, have what has been mentioned. Min Allah (from Allah) is an attribute of the wrath, confirming its gravity; meaning, with a wrath originating from Him—His majesty be exalted. Wa ma'wahu jahannam (and his abode is Hell), meaning: instead of the shelter he wanted to reach by his flight to save himself from killing—and how wretched is the destination.

The placement of ba'a (returning) in the position of the response to the condition—which is "turning the back"—coupled with the mention of the abode and the destination, contains an eloquence that cannot be surpassed. The verse indicates the prohibition of fleeing from the battlefield except for the swerver or the maneuverer. The Two Shaykhs and others recorded from Abu Hurayrah—may Allah be pleased with him—from the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—that he said: "Avoid the seven destructive things." They said: "O Messenger of Allah, what are they?" He said: "Shirk with Allah, sorcery, killing the soul that Allah has forbidden except by right, consuming usury, consuming the wealth of the orphan, and turning the back on the day of battle." It has been counted among the major sins in more than one hadith.

They said: "This is when the enemy is not more than double, because of the Almighty's saying: 'Now Allah has lightened [the burden] for you...' (to the end of the verse). As for if they are more, then fleeing is permissible. Therefore, the verse does not remain on its general implication." This is the view of the majority of scholars. Al-Shafi'i and Ibn Abi Shaybah recorded from Ibn Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them—that he said: "Whoever flees from three does not flee [in a prohibited manner], and whoever flees from two has fled." He called this specification an "abrogation," and this is what is narrated from Abu Rabah. From Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, it is said that if the Muslims are twelve thousand, fleeing is not permitted. The apparent meaning is that it is not permitted at all because they cannot be overcome due to fewness, as in the hadith. It is narrated from Umar, Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, Abu Nadrah, and al-Hasan—may Allah be pleased with them—and it is a narration from the Hibr (Ibn Abbas) as well, that the ruling is specific to the people of Badr. Others said that it is specific to what was mentioned and to an army in which the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—is present, and they argued that the battle of Badr was the first jihad in Islam; therefore, they feared it, and if they had not remained firm in it, great corruption would have ensued. The fact that they did not have a company to join does not contradict this, because the structure of the verse does not necessitate its presence. As for the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—being with them, it is because Allah—the Almighty—was his supporter. You know that there were many people in Medina from the Ansar who did not come out because they did not know of the call to arms, thinking it was only the caravan, and that the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—since Allah was his supporter, was a fi'ah (company) for them.

Some said that the reference in "on that day" to the day of Badr is hardly correct because it is in the context of a condition, and a condition is future-oriented. So, even if the verse was revealed on the day of Badr before the fighting ended, that day is an individual instance of "the day of encounter," and thus it is general for it, not specific to it. If it was revealed after it, then the day of Badr is not included in it; rather, it is a commencement of a ruling thereafter. "On that day" is a reference to the day of encounter. This was refuted by stating that the intent of those who said it was revealed on the day of Badr is that evidence has been established for its specification, and there is no improbability in that.

In my view, the Surah was revealed only after the fighting was completed, and there is no evidence for the revelation of this verse before it. The mentioned specification is something for which no evidence stands on the context, and "the hand of Allah is with the congregation," and Allah—the Exalted—knows best.