Tafsir of At-Tawbah 9:36

(Indeed, the number of months) i.e., the sum of the count of the months of the year according to Allah—meaning in His decree—(is twelve months), which are the known lunar months, as the orbit of religious rulings revolves around them. (In the Book of Allah) i.e., in the Preserved Tablet (al-Lawh al-Mahfuz). It is also said: It refers to what He established and obligated His servants to adopt. It is also said: The Qur’an, because it contains verses indicating the calculation and stations of the moon, though this is of no substance.

(The day He created the heavens and the earth) i.e., at the beginning of the creation of this world. This adverbial phrase relates to what is implied by "the Book of Allah" regarding the meaning of established recording, whether through its explicit wording, its related object, or the Book if it is an infinitive meaning "writing." The intent is that at the beginning of that [creation], their number was as mentioned, and they remain now as they were then.

(In the Book of Allah) is an adjective for (twelve), and [twelve] is the predicate of (Indeed/Inna). (At/Inda) is governed by (number/’iddah) because it is an infinitive, like "partnership" (shirka). (Month/Shahran) is a clarifying accusative of specification (tamyiz), as in your saying, "I have twenty of the currency, dinars." It is said that this is to remove ambiguity, for if it were said, "The number of months at Allah is twelve," it would be a sound statement. [However, the counter-argument is] it is not sound according to what has been said, and the proponent of this view argued that the speaker’s intent is that it is possible for those months at the beginning of the world to be [years] as well, similar to His saying—Exalted is He: (And indeed, a day with your Lord is like a thousand years) and the like. There is no obstacle to this, and it is better than pure superfluity.

They did not permit relating (in the Book) to (number) because when the predicate is mentioned after an infinitive, it does not act upon what comes after the predicate. Some permitted making (twelve) the subject and (at/inda) the fronted predicate, with the sentence being the predicate of Inna; or that the adverbial phrase, due to its reliance, performs the role of the nominative in (twelve).

Regarding His saying—Exalted is He—(of which four are sacred): It is permissible for this to be an adjective for "twelve," a state (hal) from the pronoun in the adverbial phrase, or an independent sentence. The pronoun in (of which/minha) refers, in any case, to the "twelve." These four are Dhu al-Qi'dah, Dhu al-Hijjah, al-Muharram, and Rajab of Mudar.

There is disagreement regarding their order. It is said: The first of them is al-Muharram and the last is Dhu al-Hijjah; thus, they are from the months of one year. The outward meaning of what Sa'id ibn Mansur and Ibn Mardawayh recorded from Ibn 'Abbas supports this.

It is also said: The first of them is Rajab; thus, they are from two years. Evidence for this is what Ibn Jarir and others recorded from Ibn 'Umar, who said: "The Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—addressed us during the Farewell Pilgrimage at Mina in the middle of the days of Tashriq and said: 'O people, time has rotated [back] to its state on the day Allah created the heavens and the earth. Indeed, the number of months at Allah is twelve months; four of them are sacred: the first of them is Rajab of Mudar, between Jumada and Sha'ban, and [then] Dhu al-Qi'dah, Dhu al-Hijjah, and al-Muharram.'"

It is also said: The first of them is Dhu al-Qi'dah. An-Nawawi deemed this sound due to their consecutive order. The two Shaykhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim) recorded: "Beware, time has rotated [back] to its state on the day Allah created the heavens and the earth. The year is twelve months, four of which are sacred: three consecutive, and Rajab of Mudar..." The Hadith. Rajab was attributed to them (Mudar) because the Rabi'ah [tribe] used to consider Ramadan sacred and call it Rajab; for this reason, the Hadith clarified it as it did.

It is said that the mention that they follow the first order [part of one year] or the second [part of two years] is something that holds true if the beginning of the year is al-Muharram. However, that only originated in the time of 'Umar—may Allah be pleased with him. Before that, they dated by the Year of the Elephant, and likewise by the death of Hisham ibn al-Mughirah, then in the early days of Islam by Rabi' al-Awwal. According to this dating, the matter is the opposite of what was mentioned. This speaker did not clarify what the first month of the year was for the Arabs before the Elephant.

What is understood from the words of some is that the first month was al-Muharram for them even before that, except that they had many calendars in Yemen and the Hijaz, known from predecessor to successor. Perhaps these were based on events that occurred in bygone days. When the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—migrated, the Muslims took his migration as the beginning of their calendar and forgot what came before it. They named every year that passed over them by an event that occurred in it, such as the Year of the Permission, the Year of the Command, and the Year of the Trial. Things continued on this path until the caliphate of 'Umar—may Allah be pleased with him. Some of the Companions asked him about that, saying: "This will become long, and perhaps there will be confusion and error in some years." So he—may Allah be pleased with him—chose the year of the migration as the beginning, without naming the years after what occurred in them. The Companions approved of his opinion in that.

In some commentaries on al-Bukhari, it is mentioned that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari wrote to him: "Letters reach us from the Commander of the Faithful, and we do not know which one to act upon. We read a document dated 'Sha'ban,' but we did not know which of the two Sha'bans—the past or the coming one?" It is also said that when a document was presented to 'Umar—may Allah be pleased with him—dated "Sha'ban," he asked, "Which Sha'ban is this?" Then he said, "Wealth has become abundant among us, and what we distribute is not timed. How can we reach a way to regulate it?" The King of Ahwaz, who had been captured and converted at his hand, said to him: "The Persians have a calculation they call 'Mahruz,' which they attribute to the kings who dominated." He explained it to him and described its nature. 'Umar—may Allah be pleased with him—said: "Establish for the people a calendar they can use to regulate their times." They mentioned the Jewish calendar to him, but he did not approve of it; then the Persian, but he did not approve of it. They deemed the Migration a good calendar. This is the end of the account.

What was mentioned—that they used to date in the early days of Islam by Rabi' al-Awwal—contains ambiguity. The intent is clarified by what is in al-Nibras: that they used to date during the time of the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—by the year of the arrival and by the first month of it, which is Rabi' al-Awwal, according to the more correct view. Let this be understood.

A month among them is divided into religious, real, and conventional. The religious month is considered by the sighting of the crescent under the conditions well-known in jurisprudence. The first crescent of al-Muharram in the Hijri calendar was on Thursday night, as relied upon by Yunus al-Hakimi al-Misri, who mentioned that this was according to calculation. As for sighting, Ibn al-Shatir established that its crescent was sighted in Mecca on Friday night. The real [lunar] month is considered from the conjunction of the moon with the sun at a point and its return after separation, and so on. Exiting from under the solar rays has no role except in the possibility of sighting according to common custom.

It is said the duration of what was mentioned is 29 days and 191 parts out of 360 parts of a day and its night. The lunar year is 354 days and one-fifth and one-sixth of a day, and one second, which is 11 parts out of 30 parts of a day and its night. When these parts accumulate to more than half, they count it as a full day and add it to the days. That year is then a leap year, and its days are 355. Since the aforementioned parts were more than half, they compensated for them with a full day and agreed by convention to make the months one full and one deficient. This is the conventional month. So, al-Muharram in their convention is 30 days, Safar 29, and so on to the end of the lunar year. The odd ones are 30, starting with al-Muharram, and the even ones are 29, starting with Safar, except for Dhu al-Hijjah in a leap year, for it is 30 days, as they agreed to put what they added to the days of the leap year into Dhu al-Hijjah, the end of the year.

Since the religious month revolves around sighting, the months differ; some are 30 and some are 29. No specific month is set for completion or deficiency; rather, a month might be 30 in some years and 29 in others. What the two Shaykhs and others recorded from Abu Bakrah, who said the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—said, "Two months of Eid do not decrease: Ramadan and Dhu al-Hijjah," is interpreted as meaning their reward and the merit ordained for them do not decrease, even if their count decreases. It is also said: Its meaning is that they do not both decrease in the same year, generally. It is also said: The reward of Dhu al-Hijjah does not decrease from the reward of Ramadan; this was narrated by al-Khattabi, but it is weak. The first, as An-Nawawi said, is the correct and relied-upon view.

(That): i.e., the prohibition of the four months, with the "that" (dhalika) containing the meaning of distance to magnify what is being referred to. It is also said that it is a reference to the number being as such; the Imam favored this, stating that their being four sacred months is accepted by the disbelievers, and the intent is to refute them regarding the Nasi’ (postponement) and the addition to the number. The first view was favored by saying that the following derivation (tafri’) requires it. It is not far-fetched for the reference to be to the totality of what the preceding speech indicated, and the derivation does not reject that.

(The upright religion): i.e., the straight religion of Ibrahim and Isma'il—peace be upon them both. The Arabs had held onto it as an inheritance from them. They used to venerate the sacred months to the point that a man might meet the killer of his father or brother during them and would not provoke him. They called Rajab "the Deaf" and "the stripper of arrowheads" until they introduced the Nasi’ and changed it. It is also said that "religion" here means judgment and decree, and "upright" means eternal, which does not vanish—meaning that decree which is not altered or changed. This is attributed to al-Kalbi. It is also said that "religion" here means calculation, from which is his saying—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—"The wise one is he who brings his soul to account (dana nafsahu) and works for what is after death," meaning that upright calculation and the correct, balanced count, not what the Arabs do of Nasi’. Al-Tabarsi chose this, and upon it, the reference is to what the Imam favored.

(So do not wrong yourselves during them) by violating their sanctity and committing what is prohibited in them. The pronoun refers to the "sacred months," which is what is narrated from Qatadah; Al-Farra’ and most commentators favored this. It is also said that it refers to all months, i.e., do not wrong yourselves in all the months of the year by doing acts of disobedience and abandoning acts of obedience, or do not make their lawful things unlawful and their unlawful things lawful, as the people of polytheism did. This view is attributed to Ibn 'Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them both. Turning from "in them" (fiha)—which is more consistent with "of which" (minha)—to "in them [feminine]" (fihinna) supports the view of the majority.

The majority agree that the sanctity of fighting during them has been abrogated, and that "wronging" is interpreted as committing acts of disobedience. Specifying them with the prohibition against committing such acts within them—even though commission is forbidden absolutely—is for the sake of magnifying them. Allah—may He be glorified—may distinguish some times over others, so committing an act of disobedience during them is a greater burden of sin, just as committing it within the Sacred Precinct (Haram) or in the state of Ihram [is]. From 'Ata’ ibn Abi Rabah it is reported that it is not lawful for people to wage war in the Sacred Precinct or the sacred months, except if they are fought; he excluded this because it is for defense, so it is not prevented by consensus, or because the violation of sanctity in that case does not originate from them, but from the aggressor. The view of abrogation is supported by the fact that the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—besieged Ta'if and fought the Hawazin at Hunayn in Shawwal and Dhu al-Qi'dah of the eighth year.

(And fight the polytheists collectively just as they fight you collectively): i.e., all together. It became famous that it must be indefinite and in the accusative as a state (hal), and that the one in the state (dhu al-hal) must be of the rational beings. They faulted Az-Zamakhshari for his saying in the introduction to al-Mufassal: "encompassing all chapters." He who faults him is the one at fault, because if we know the placement of a word for a general meaning through transmission from the predecessors and by tracing the instances of its use in the speech of those whose usage is relied upon, and we see them using it in a specific state of declension, definiteness, indefiniteness, and so on, it is permissible for us—according to what is apparent—to take it out of that state. For if we were to limit words to only what the ancient Arabs and Arabized people used, we would have restricted the expansive [nature of the language] and made speaking Arabic difficult for those who came after them. Since it does not leave its established meaning by doing so, it is literal. Kaffatan, even if the Arabs used it indefinitely and in the accusative regarding people specifically, it is permissible to use it as definite or indefinite with all forms of declension regarding people and others. In all of that, it is literal, as it has not exited its meaning for which they established it, which is the meaning of "everyone." The requirement of the establishment is that it is not bound by what was mentioned, and this is denied only by the ignorant or the obstinate. Moreover, it has appeared in the speech of the eloquent according to what they claimed. In the letter of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab—may Allah be pleased with him—to the family of Bani Kakalah: "I have granted the family of Bani Kakalah upon the collective (kaffat) treasury of the Muslims every year two hundred mithqals in pure gold." This is, as in Sharh al-Maqasid, among the authentic [texts]. The writing was present in [the possession of] the family of Bani Kakalah until close to this time in the lands of Iraq. When the caliphate came to the Commander of the Faithful 'Ali—may Allah honor his countenance—it was presented to him, and he carried out what was in it for them and wrote on it in his own hand: "To Allah belongs the command before and after, and that day the believers will rejoice. I am the first to follow the command of Islam... and supported the religion and the rulings [as did] 'Umar ibn al-Khattab." He decreed the same as what was decreed for the family of Bani Kakalah every year: two hundred mithqals in pure gold, followed his path, and granted them the same as what 'Umar had decreed, since he [also] obligated himself and all Muslims to follow that. 'Ali ibn Abi Talib wrote it. So look at how 'Umar ibn al-Khattab used it as a definite noun, not in the accusative, for non-rational beings, and he is who he is in eloquence, and someone like 'Ali—may Allah honor his countenance—heard it and did not deny it. He is a unique individual; so what denial or disapproval can be accepted after this?

His statement in al-Mughni that kaffatan is specific to those who have reason is [incorrect], and Az-Zamakhshari was mistaken in interpreting His saying—Exalted is He: (And We have not sent you except collectively to the people), because he estimated kaffatan as an adjective for an elided infinitive, i.e., "a collective message." Since he added the condition of usage for what does not possess reason, taking it out of what he committed to in the state [of hal], like his mistake in the introduction to al-Mufassal, [that] is not to be paid attention to. If it is permissible to make it definite by the genitive construction, it is permissible by the definite article al- as well. There is no weight to those who faulted it, like the author of al-Qamus or Ibn al-Khashab. According to al-Azhari, it is an infinitive on the pattern of fa'ilah like al-'afiyah (health/safety) and al-'aqibah (the end). It is not dualized or pluralized. It is said: It is an active participle, and the ta in it is for exaggeration, like the ta in rawiyah (very learned) and علامة (very knowledgeable). Al-Raghib went to this view and reported that the meaning here is "fight them while you are enough for them, just as they fight you while they are enough for you." It is also said that its meaning is "a group," and the group is called al-kaffah just as they are called al-waza'ah (guards/those who restrain) because of their strength by their gathering, and its ta is like the ta in jama'ah (group). The conclusion is that they—by report and by study—did not hit the mark in what they committed to regarding its indefiniteness and accusative state, and its restriction to rational beings. They disagreed on its root: is it an infinitive or an active participle from al-kaff (to restrain)? And is its ta for exaggeration or femininity? Then they treated it loosely and used it for generalization meaning "all together," and on this, the majority interpreted what is in the verse. They said: It is an infinitive of kaffa 'an al-shay' (to restrain from something), and its application to "all" is in the sense that one is restrained from addition, or in the sense that one restrains [himself] from exposing [himself] to it or lagging behind. It is a state (hal), either from the subject or the object. So the meaning of "fight the polytheists collectively" is: let no one among you lag behind in fighting them, or do not leave fighting any one of them. The same applies to the side of that which is compared to. The verse was used as evidence for the first possibility that fighting is an individual obligation. It is said that it was so in the early days of Islam then abrogated, but Ibn 'Atiyyah denied this.

(And know that Allah is with the righteous) by aid and victory. So be righteous that you may win His aid and victory, Exalted is He; for it is guidance for them to what benefits them in their fighting after having commanded them to it. It is said that the intent is that Allah is with you with victory and reinforcement in what you embark upon of fighting, and the explicit noun was placed in place of the pronoun to praise them for righteousness and to urge those who are falling short toward that, and to signal that it is the pivot of victory. It is also said that it is a glad tiding and a guarantee for them of victory because of their righteousness, as the connection to the derivative noun (al-muttaqin) indicates. What we have mentioned is not without beauty, except that the command for righteousness in it is more general than [just] the events and their continuity; there is much of this in [Arabic] speech.