Tafsir of At-Tawbah 9:3

(And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger), meaning a notification. It is an fa'āl form carrying the meaning of if'āl (causation), meaning īdhān (announcement), similar to al-amān (security) and al-'atā' (giving). Al-Tabarsi narrated that its origin is from the call which is heard by the ear, meaning "I made him hear it" or "I caused it to reach his ear." It is in the nominative case like Barā'ah. The clause is conjoined to its like.

Al-Zajjaj claimed that it is conjoined to Barā'ah [the first word of the Surah]. This was countered by the observation that there is no basis for such a claim; one does not say, "Zayd is standing and 'Amr is sitting," where "'Amr" is conjoined to "Zayd" [if the predicates are distinct]. The scholar al-Tibi stated that one might ask: Why is it not permissible to conjoin it to Barā'ah as a conjunction of a predicate to a predicate? It is as if it were said: "This Surah is a disavowal (Barā'ah) from Allah and His Messenger to those whom you have made a treaty with, specifically, and an announcement (Adhān) from Allah and His Messenger to the people, generally."

Indeed, it is more appropriate that it be a conjunction of clauses so that no extraneous clauses intervene between the two predicates, and so that correspondence in gender between the subject and the predicate is not lost. Some have considered this, noting that scholars permit [the construction] "In the house is Zayd, and in the room is 'Amr," counting it as a conjunction upon two governed objects of two governors, and they explicitly stated that constructions like "Zayd is standing and 'Amr" allow both possibilities. The response to this is that the intent here is to conjoin Adhān alone to Barā'ah without involving the conjunction of the predicate to the predicate, as in "I want Zayd to strike 'Amr and Bakr to insult Khālid." Thus, the conjunction is only between the two verbs, not their objects. This is what was forbidden by those who forbade it.

The intended generalization in "the people" is the view held by the majority, because this announcement is not like the Barā'ah which is specific to the covenant-breakers; rather, it is inclusive of the disbelievers and all the believers as well. Some said: The intent by them is the people of the covenant.

His saying, the Exalted: (On the day of the Greatest Hajj) is in the accusative case due to what "(to the people)" is attached to—not to Adhān—because a described verbal noun does not govern [the accusative] according to the famous opinion. The intent is the day of the Festival ('Īd), because the completion of the Hajj and the majority of its rites take place on it, and because the proclamation was made on that day.

When Al-Bukhari reported—as a ta'liq—and Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, and a group [of scholars] from Ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with both of them) that the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) stood on the Day of Sacrifice between the jamarat during the Hajj he performed, and said, "What day is this?" They said, "The Day of Sacrifice." He said, "This is the day of the Greatest Hajj." This was also narrated from 'Ali (may Allah honor his face), Ibn 'Abbas, Ibn Jubayr, Ibn Zayd, Mujahid, and others.

It is also said: It is the day of 'Arafah, because of his saying (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), "The Hajj is 'Arafah," which is also attributed to Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with both of them). Ibn Abi Hatim recorded it from al-Miswar from the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). Ibn Jarir recorded from Abu al-Sahba' that he asked 'Ali (may Allah honor his face) about this day, and he said: "It is the day of 'Arafah." From Mujahid and Sufyan, it is said that it refers to all the days of Hajj, just as one says "the Day of the Camel" and "the Day of Siffin," with "day" meaning time and duration.

The first [opinion] is stronger in terms of narration and deduction. It is described as the "Greatest" Hajj because the 'Umrah is called the "Lesser Hajj," or because what is meant by Hajj is the rites that occurred on that day, as it is greater than the other rites; thus, the preference is relative and not specific to the Hajj of that year. From al-Hasan, it is described as such because the Muslims and the polytheists gathered on it, and its festival coincided with the festivals of the People of the Scripture. Others said: Because the might of the Muslims and the humiliation of the polytheists appeared on it. Its mention previously was due to its importance, because of its frequent occurrence among the charitable and the difficulty of their remembering it. The preference is specific to that year. As for calling the Hajj that coincides with Friday on the day of 'Arafah as the "Greatest," they did not mention it, even if the reward of that Hajj is greater than others, as al-Jalal al-Suyuti mentioned in some of his treatises.

(That Allah is free from the polytheists), meaning from their covenants. Al-Hasan and al-A'raj read inna with a kasra (i.e., inna-llāha) because Adhān carries the meaning of speech; it is said that a verb of speaking is implied. With the reading of the fatha (i.e., anna-llāha), it is in the position of a prepositional phrase, which is standard for both inna and anna. As for the prepositional phrase min al-mushrikīn, it is permissible for it to be the predicate of Adhān, or attached to it, or attached to an omitted element that functions as an adjective for it.

His saying, the Exalted: (and His Messenger) is conjoined to the hidden pronoun in barī'un (free). It is also permissible for it to be an independent subject whose predicate is omitted, or a conjunction to the status of the name of inna. However, this is only with the reading of the kasra, because since the kasra does not change the meaning, it can be treated as if it were non-existent, and thus it is conjoined to the status of what it governed—meaning the status it held before its entry, for at that time it was a subject. It has occurred in their speech to refer to the status of anna along with its noun, and the matter therein is minor. They did not permit this according to the famous view with the fatha, because it [the anna] has a place other than the nominative position of the subject.

Ibn al-Hajib permitted here the conjunction to the status [of the noun] in the reading of the majority as well, based on what was mentioned: that anna (with the fatha) is of two types: what allows conjunction to the status, and what does not. If it holds the meaning of inna (with the kasra), such as that which comes after verbs of the heart—like "I knew that Zayd is standing and 'Amr"—then conjunction is permissible, because due to its exclusivity to clauses, the meaning with it becomes: "That Zayd is standing and 'Amr [is standing] is in my knowledge." Hence the necessity of the kasra in "I knew that Zayd is indeed standing." If it is not like that, it is not permissible, such as "It pleased me that Zayd is generous and 'Amr," where the accusative is mandatory because it is neither with a kasra nor in the position of it. The justification for permissibility based on this is that Adhān holds the meaning of "knowledge," so it enters upon clauses just as "knowledge" does.

Ya'qub read, in the transmission of Rawh and Zayd, (wa rasūlahu) with the nasb (accusative). This is the reading of al-Hasan, Ibn Abi Ishaq, 'Isa ibn 'Amr, and according to it, it is a conjunction to the name of anna, which is the apparent case. It is also permissible that the waw (and) be in the meaning of "with," and rasūlahu is in the accusative because it is an object accompanied by it (maf'ūl ma'ahu), meaning: "He is free, along with His Messenger, from them."

From al-Hasan, it is narrated that he read it with the jer (genitive), such that the waw is for an oath, similar to the oath by his life (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) in His saying, the Exalted: (By your life). It is said that the jer is allowed by proximity (jiwār), but this is nothing. This reading, for my life, is very misleading and is in the utmost extremity of anomaly; it appears it is not authentic. It is recounted that a Bedouin heard a man reading it that way, so he said, "If Allah is free from His Messenger, then I am free from Him." The man grabbed him and took him to 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), and the Bedouin recounted his reading. Thereupon, 'Umar ordered the teaching of Arabic. It is reported that Abu al-Aswad al-Du'ali heard this, so he referred the matter to 'Ali (may Allah honor his face), and that was the reason for the establishment of [the science of] Grammar. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

Al-Zamakhshari differentiated between the meaning of the first clause and this clause, in that the former is an announcement of the establishment of the disavowal, while this is an announcement of the obligation to notify [others] of what has been established. In al-Kashshaf, it states that this is clear based on the assumption that both are in the nominative case by virtue of being predicates, although in his saying "an announcement of the obligation to notify," there is a metaphor. He intended to clarify that the purpose is not the reporting of the notification, but that He (the Exalted) announced that He is free so that they may notify the people of it. According to the second view, it is explained that the meaning in the first clause is: "The disavowal from Allah the Exalted is realized and has reached the covenant-bound polytheists," so it is a report of the existence of the disavowal, as you would say, for example, "Zayd exists," which is a report of the existence of Zayd. In the second, "The notification of the addressees, which comes from Allah the Exalted, concerning that disavowal, is established and reaching the people," so it is a report of the existence of a specific notification explicitly, and the obligation that the addressees notify the people implicitly. Because the intent is the implied meaning, he mentioned that it is a report of the obligation to notify. Some claimed, to avoid repetition, that the first disavowal is for the breaking of the covenant, and the second is for the severing of alliance and benevolence, but that is not so.

If you repent from disbelief and treachery by breaking the covenant, then it—that is, the repentance—is better for you in both abodes. The shift from the third-person pronoun to the second-person address is to increase the threat and severity. The first fa' (the "then") is for the ordering of the antecedent of the conditional clause upon the announcement which is concluded with a severe threat, signaling the softening of their stance and the breaking of their intense stubbornness.

(And if you turn away) from repentance, or persist in turning away from Islam and fulfillment, (then know that you will not escape Allah)—that is, you will not outrun Him (the Exalted), nor will you escape Him. (And give glad tidings to those who disbelieve of a painful punishment)—that is, in the Hereafter, as is the apparent meaning. From here, some limited you will not escape Allah by saying, "in this world." The expression of "glad tidings" is for sarcasm, shifting the address from them to the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). It is said [it is for the Messenger] because glad tidings are only appropriate for one who is aware of Divine secrets. It may be said that it is not unlikely that the address is to everyone who has a share in it, and it contains a level of hyperbole that is not hidden.