At-Tawbah: 111

"Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their wealth in exchange for [that] they will have Paradise..."

This is an encouragement for the believers to engage in Jihad by clarifying the state of those who hold back from it. There is no better or more eloquent encouragement for Jihad than what is found in this verse, because it is presented in the form of a contract whose contracting party is the Lord of Might, exalted be His Majesty. Its price is that which no eye has seen, no ear has heard, and has never crossed the heart of any human being. He did not make the object of the contract merely being killed, but also being killers [of the disbelievers] to elevate the word of Allah, the Exalted, and to grant victory to His religion. He caused this to be recorded in the Heavenly Scriptures—and that is sufficient as a deed of proof—and He made His promise truth, and no one is more fulfilling of his promise than He; thus, His deferred payment is more certain than the immediate payment of others. He pointed to the profit and the great triumph therein, which is an allegorical metaphor portraying the Jihad of the believers, their expenditure of wealth and souls therein, and the recompense of Allah, the Exalted, for them—which is Paradise—in terms of buying and selling.

He followed this with His saying, "They fight..." as an explanation of the place of delivery, which is the battlefield. To this, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) alluded by saying: "Paradise is under the shadows of swords." Then, the Almighty concluded it by saying, "And that is the great triumph." From this, the noble Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) realized the gravity of this verse. Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn Marduyah recorded from Jabir ibn Abdullah that he said: "This verse was revealed to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) while he was in the mosque: 'Indeed, Allah has purchased...' The people in the mosque multiplied, so a man from the Ansar came, throwing the edge of his garment over his shoulder, and said: 'O Messenger of Allah, has this verse been revealed?' He said: 'Yes.' The Ansari said: 'A profitable sale! We shall not withdraw, nor shall we allow withdrawal.'"

Some have established the aspect of hyperbole by noting that He, the Exalted, expressed His acceptance of the souls and wealth of the believers—which they sacrificed in His path—and His recompensing them with Paradise in exchange, using the method of metaphorical transaction (al-isti'arah al-taba'iyyah). He then made the commodity—which is the pillar and the object of the contract—the souls and wealth of the believers, and the price—which is the means of the deal—Paradise. He did not reverse it by saying "Allah sold Paradise to the believers for their souls and wealth," so as to indicate that the intended goal of the contract is Paradise, and what the believers sacrificed for it is a means toward it, out of complete care for them and their wealth. Furthermore, He did not say "with Paradise," but rather, "in exchange for [that] they will have Paradise," as an exaggeration in affirming the arrival of the price to them and its exclusivity to them, as if it were said: "with the Paradise firmly established for them and exclusive to them." Hence, it is known that this reading is more eloquent than the reading of al-A'mash—also attributed to Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him)—of "with Paradise" (bil-jannah), as it is more consistent with the occasion of revelation. Ibn Jarir recorded from Muhammad ibn Ka'b al-Qurazi and others that they said: Abdullah ibn Rawahah said to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "Stipulate for your Lord and for yourself whatever you wish." He said: "I stipulate for my Lord that you worship Him and associate nothing with Him, and I stipulate for myself that you protect me from what you protect yourselves and your wealth from." They asked: "What is for us?" He said: "Paradise." They replied: "A profitable sale! We shall not withdraw, nor shall we allow withdrawal." Thus, the verse "Indeed, Allah has purchased..." was revealed.

It is said that He expressed it in this way as a praise for the believers, for they sacrificed their souls and wealth merely on a promise, due to the perfection of their trust in the promise of the Exalted, even though the completion is dependent upon that. For if it were said "with Paradise," it might imply that the purchase was real, as it [Paradise] is fit to be an exchange, unlike a promise of it. This was objected to on the grounds that the basis of the indication of the noble expression toward the promise is not its being a circumstantial sentence starting with "with," for that is far from indicating the future; rather, it is Paradise, the existence of which is impossible in the world of the present life. Even if that were granted as the compensation being the promised Paradise, the promise itself is for its sake. As for the claim that the purchase might be literal if it were said "with Paradise," that is not without scrutiny, as it has been said: for the reality of a purchase is not valid from Him, for He is the Owner of all. A purchase can only occur from one who does not own [the object], and this is why the jurists say: "The demand for purchase invalidates a claim of ownership." Yes, it may not be invalidated in some cases, such as if a father buys a house for his child from himself, then the child grows up and does not know, then the father sells it and delivers it to the buyer, then the son demands to buy it from him, then he learns what his father did and claims the house; his claim is accepted and that demand does not invalidate it, as the statement of al-Astruwathi necessitates. However, this does not harm us in the matter at hand.

Some investigators have interpreted the indication of the noble text toward a promise by saying that it explicitly requires non-delivery, which is the very essence of a promise. For when you say, "I bought such from you for such," it allows for immediate payment, unlike when you say "that you shall have such," for that means "it is for you upon such, and it is a liability upon me." The lam (in lahum) here is not for ownership—for it is not fitting to purchase one's own property with one's own property, like the dowries of one of his servants—rather, it is for entitlement (istihqaq). There is an indication in it of non-possession. As for the completion of the metaphor being dependent on that, it also has a basis, as the intent of the metaphor is an allegorical one (isti'arah tamthiliyyah); for without it, it would be correct to treat the purchase as a trope for "substitution," for example, which is something that should be attended to, along with the accomplishment of the representation of rhetoric and subtleties, as is not hidden. However, you are aware that the speech, even then, is not without discussion. From what we have indicated regarding the virtue of the representation, the inferiority of the opinion of considering it a metaphor or a loose trope (majaz mursal) in "purchased" alone is known, as some have leaned toward.

His saying, "They fight in the way of Allah," is said to be an explanation of the place of delivery, as pointed out earlier, because the sale is the delivery, as al-Tayyibi and others have said. It is also said to be an explanation of what the purchase is for, as if it were said: "Why did He do that?" and it was answered: "So that they may fight in His path, the Exalted." It is also said to be an explanation of the sale that the aforementioned purchase requires, as if it were said: "How do they sell their souls and wealth for Paradise?" and it was answered: "They fight in the path of His Majesty." This is their sacrificing of their souls and wealth toward His side, and exposing them to destruction. It is also said to be an explanation of the purchase itself, or a mention of some of what the previous speech included to emphasize it. This means that He, the Exalted, purchased from the believers their souls by spending them in righteous deeds, and their wealth by spending it in what pleases Him. In all these, it is a report in wording and meaning, and it has no place in grammatical inflection (la mahalla lahu min al-i'rab).

Some say it is in the sense of a command, as in His saying: "You fight with your wealth and your souls." This is justified by the fact that He brought the imperfect tense (mudari') after the perfect tense (madi) to signify continuity, as if it were said: "I bought your souls from you in eternity, and you were given the price of Paradise, so deliver the commodity and persist in fighting." It is not hidden that some of these sayings are open to question. Consider whether there is any obstacle to placing the sentence in the state of being a circumstantial clause (hal), as if it were said: "He purchased that from them while they were fighting in His path." I have not come across anyone who explicitly stated this, although it is the most consistent of opinions with the allegorical metaphor. Ponder this.

His saying, "They kill and are killed," is an explanation that fighting in the path of Allah, the Exalted, is a sacrifice of the soul, and that the fighter in His path is one who has sacrificed it, even if he remains safe and enriched. For the attribution in the two verbs is not by way of requiring the combination of the two, nor the requirement of being described by either of them at all, but by way of describing the whole by the state of some. For fighting is realized by the whole, whether both actions occur, or only one of them from them, or from some of them. Indeed, it is realized even if neither of them results from them, such as when combat occurs but killing does not occur from either side. The speech of some implies that Jihad is realized by mere determination, mobilization, and increasing the numbers, even if no combat occurs. This is not far-fetched, as there is also an exposing of the soul to destruction in that.

It is apparent that the rewards of the Mujahideen differ in scarcity and abundance, even if there is a common degree among them. In Sahih Muslim, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "There is no raiding party that raids in the path of Allah and obtains spoils but that they have taken two-thirds of their reward in advance in the hereafter, and one-third remains for them. And if they do not obtain spoils, their reward is completed for them." In another narration: "There is no raiding party or detachment that raids and is safe but that they have taken two-thirds of their rewards in advance, and there is no raiding party or detachment that is struck and afflicted but that their rewards are completed." Some have claimed that they are equal in reward and that their reward is not decreased by spoils, and they reasoned this based on what is in the two Sahihs (Bukhari and Muslim) that the Mujahid returns with what he has gained of reward and spoils, and that the people of Badr obtained spoils, yet they are who they are. The response to this is that the report in the two Sahihs is absolute, while the report of Muslim is restricted, and it is mandatory to interpret the former in light of the latter. Also, no text has come regarding the people of Badr that if they had not obtained spoils, their reward would have been equal to their reward having obtained them. The fact that they are "who they are" does not necessitate that there is no other rank behind their rank that is better than it. The saying that in the chain of transmission there is Abu Hani', and he is unknown, so his report cannot be relied upon, is a grave error; for he is a trustworthy, famous narrator, narrated from by al-Layth ibn Sa'd, Haywah, Ibn Wahb, and a multitude of Imams. It is sufficient for his trustworthiness that Muslim used him as proof in his Sahih.

Similar to this is what the Qadi narrated from some that the advancement of two-thirds of the reward only applies to spoils taken unlawfully, for if it were otherwise, there would not be a third of the reward. Similarly, what was said: that the hadith is interpreted for one who went out with the intention of both raiding and spoils, for that inevitably decreases his reward. Thus, the truth is that the reward of one who does not obtain spoils is greater than the reward of one who does, due to the explicit nature of what we mentioned, which conforms to the explicit authentic hadiths famous from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them). From this, it is known that the reward of one who is killed is greater than the reward of one who kills, because the first is among the martyrs, unlike the second. The apparent meaning of what Muslim recorded from the narration of Abu Hurayrah—"Whoever is killed in the path of Allah is a martyr, and whoever dies in the path of Allah is a martyr"—is that killing in the path of Allah and dying therein are equal in reward. This is in accordance with the meaning of His saying: "And whoever leaves his home as an emigrant to Allah and His Messenger and then death overtakes him, his reward has already become incumbent upon Allah." Some scholars also reasoned for this with other things that have no indication for it, as al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) stated.

The precedence of the state of "being a killer" in the verse over the state of "being killed" is to signal that there is no difference between them in being instances of fighting being a sacrifice of the soul. Hamzah and al-Kisa'i read it with the passive voice [being killed] before the active voice [killing], in observance of the fact that martyrdom is deeply rooted in this chapter, signaling their indifference to death in the path of Allah; rather, it is more beloved to them than safety, as Ka'b ibn Zuhayr said regarding them: "They do not rejoice when their spears reach a people, and they are not terrified when they are reached. The thrusting does not fall except upon their chests, and they have no turning back from the basins of death." In this, according to what has been said, is an indication of their boldness, for they are not broken by the killing of some of them. Some have defended the questioning of the lack of adherence to order in this reading by saying that the conjunction "and" does not necessitate order. This was followed up by saying that it does not avail, because presenting what should be delayed in the most eloquent speech is not done with the safety of the master [or authority], as is not hidden.

"A promise binding upon Him" is a verbal noun confirming the content of the sentence, because the meaning of "purchased" is that "they will have Paradise" is a promise to them for Jihad in His path, the Exalted. His saying, "truly," is an adjective for it, and "upon Him" is in the position of a state (hal) from "truly," because it precedes it. His saying, "in the Torah and the Gospel and the Quran," is connected to an implied word that acts as an adjective for "promise" as well, meaning: "a promise confirmed in the Torah and the Gospel just as it is confirmed in the Quran." Thus, the intent is the inclusion of what is not known with what is known, for it is known that this ruling is established in the Quran. Furthermore, what is in the two books is either that the nation of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had their souls and wealth purchased from them by Allah, the Exalted, with that, or that whoever strives with his soul and wealth has that. In both cases, there is an establishment in agreement with what is in the Quran. It is also permitted that the prepositional phrase be connected to "purchased," "promise," and "truly."

"And who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah?" is an objection confirming the content of what preceded it regarding the reality of the promise. The intent of such a structure, by convention, is the negation of equality; that is, no one is like Him, the Exalted, in fulfilling His covenant. This is like saying, "There is no one in the city more learned than so-and-so," for it conventionally implies that he is the most learned of its people. It is not hidden what the making of the promise a "covenant" and "oath" entails of concern for its affair.

"So rejoice" is a shift toward addressing them for an increase in honor. "Rejoicing" (istibshar) is the manifestation of their happiness. The sin in it is not for requesting; the fa is for the sequence or the sequence of the command for it upon what preceded it, meaning: "If such is the case, then show happiness for what you have attained of Paradise." He, the Exalted, said, "in your sale," even though the joy is regarding it in view of its leading to Paradise, because the intent is to encourage them toward the Jihad which was expressed as "the sale." The contract was not mentioned under the title of "purchase" because that is from His side, the Exalted, not from their side, and encouragement—as has been said—is only completed in what is from their side. His saying, "that you have contracted," is for a further affirmation of their sale and to signal its distinction from others, for it is the sale of the ephemeral for the eternal, and because both of the exchanges belong to Him, the Exalted. From here, al-Hasan, when he recited the verse, would say: "Souls He created, and wealth He provided."

"And that"—meaning the sale you were commanded to do—"is the great triumph," than which there is no greater triumph. The distance in "that" is a reference to the remoteness of the status of that which is pointed to and the loftiness of its rank in perfection. The sentence is an elaboration confirming the content of the previous command. It is also permissible that it be an elaboration for the noble verse, and the reference is to the Paradise which was made a price in exchange for what they sacrificed of their souls and wealth; in that is the glorification of the price. From it, one knows the state of the commodity. It was narrated from al-Asma'i that he recited for al-Sadiq (may Allah be pleased with him): "Does one bargain with the precious soul for its Lord? It has no price among all creation. I purchased the Gardens with it, if I sold it for anything other than them, that would be a loss. When my soul departs with a worldly gain I attained, it has gone from me, and the price is gone." It is famous from him (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: "Your bodies have no price but Paradise, so do not sell them except for it." This is apparent in that the commodity is the bodies. Some scholars have explicitly stated this in their marginalia on the Tafsir of al-Baydawi, where he said: "Indeed, Allah, the Exalted, purchased from the believer—who is an expression of the enduring essence—his body, which is his vessel and instrument." The apparent meaning is that he intended by the "enduring essence" the specific abstract essence, which is the speaking soul (al-nafs al-natiqah). It is not hidden that the majority of the theologians deny abstractions and reject the speaking soul, believing that the human is this tangible structure. Based on this, some of the eminent later scholars of the contemporaries invalidated the saying regarding the creation of actions due to what it necessitates of the doer and the receiver being one, and they have said it is impossible for them to be unified. The fairness is to prove something different from the body and the tangible structure in the human. The commodity is either that, and the meaning of its sale is exposing it to perils and exiting the special attachment to the body, or it is the body, and the meaning of its sale is apparent, except that perhaps it is claimed that what is clearly understood from "the soul" is other than that, as is not hidden to those of pure souls.