{لَوْ خَرَجُوا فِيكُمْ}

This is an explanation of God the Exalted’s dislike for their mobilization. Meaning: If they had gone forth, mixing with you, {مَا زَادُوكُمْ} any of those things {إِلَّا خَبَالًا}—that is, evil and corruption. Ibn Abbas (may God be pleased with both of them) said: "Weakness and cowardice." Ad-Dahhak said: "Treachery and plotting." The root of al-khabal, as Al-Khazin stated, is disturbance and a malady that affects the mind, like insanity. In Majma‘ al-Bayan, it is described as a disturbance in opinion. The exception is a mufarragh (vacuous) continuous exception, and that from which the exception is made is what you have already understood. It does not necessitate that they possess corruption such that even if they had gone forth, they would have increased it; rather, the increase is relative to the general of the general from which the exception was made.

Some said: Out of the assumption that what was mentioned is necessarily implied, it is a mufarragh disconnected exception. The estimation is: "They would not have increased you in strength or goodness, but rather in evil and corruption." This was objected to on the grounds that a disconnected exception cannot be mufarragh. There is debate here, for it is not prevented if the context points to it, such as if one says: "What is there for you in the desert?" and you reply: "I have nothing there but the wild oxen (Ya‘afir)," meaning: "I have no companion there but them." You know that there is room for argument regarding the presence of such contextual evidence here. Abu Hayyan said: There were hypocrites in that expedition who possessed corruption; if these others had gone forth as well and joined them, the corruption would have increased. Thus, there is no corruption in that consequence.

{وَلَأَوْضَعُوا خِلَالَكُمْ} Al-Iḍā‘ is the hastening of camels. It is said: "The she-camel auḍa‘at (hastened)" and "I auḍa‘tuhā (made her hasten)." Al-khilāl is the plural of khalal, which is an opening or a gap; it is used here as an adverbial denoting "between." The object of al-iḍā‘ is implied—that is, "slanderous tales" (an-namā’im)—due to the context. In the expression, there is an implied metaphor (isti‘ārah makniyyah), where slanderous tales are likened to mounts in their movement and transmission, and al-iḍā‘ is attributed to them by way of imagination. The meaning is: They would have scurried among you with slander and the corruption of mutual relations.

The scholar Al-Tayyibi said: It contains an isti‘ārah taba‘iyyah (dependent metaphor), where the speed of their corrupting mutual relations with slander is likened to the speed of a rider’s travel. Then al-iḍā‘, which specifically applies to camels, is borrowed for it. The original structure was: "They would have caused the mounts of their slanders to hasten among you." Then, the "slanders" were omitted, and the possessive noun (muḍāf ilayh) took their place, resulting in: "They would have caused their mounts to hasten." Al-Akhfash prohibited in his book al-Ghāyāt the usage of "causing the mounts to hasten" (auḍa‘tu ar-rakā’ib), claiming that waḍ‘ al-ba‘īr means to hasten, and that it is used without a restriction. Others permitted it, citing as evidence the line: "I saw not Sa‘dā after the day I met her, one morning when her camels were urged to hasten."

It was recited: {وَلَأَرْقَصُوا} from the verb raqaṣat an-nāqah (the she-camel hastened) and arqastuha (I made it hasten). From this is the saying: "O ‘Ām, if our spears could reach you... and the dancers (camels) toward Mina, then the ghabghab (throat)." It was also recited: {وَلَأَوْفَضُوا}, meaning they would have hurried. It is said: awfaḍa and istawfaḍa when one hastens and rushes; al-wafḍ is haste.

The word {لَأَوْضَعُوا} was written in the Imam (Uthmanic codex) with two alifs, the second of which is the vowel sign for the hamzah; the vowel is transcribed with an alif as Al-Dāni mentioned. In al-Kashshāf, it is stated that the vowel was written as an alif before the Arabic script was standardized, and the Arabic script was invented shortly before the revelation of the Quran. A trace of that alif remained in customs, so they wrote the form of the hamzah as an alif and its vowel as another alif. Similar to this is {أَوْ لَأَذْبَحَنَّهُ}.

{يَبْغُونَكُمُ الْفِتْنَةَ} Meaning: They seek to tempt you by casting discord among you, terrifying you with the enemy's strength, and casting fear into your hearts. This is what is narrated from Ad-Dahhak. From Al-Hasan, it is that al-fitnah means shirk (polytheism), meaning they desire for you to be polytheists. The sentence is in the position of a state (ḥāl) from the pronoun in {أَوْضَعُوا}, meaning: "while seeking corruption for you." It is also permissible for it to be an independent commencement.

{وَفِيكُمْ سَمَّاعُونَ لَهُمْ} Meaning: They have informants among you who listen to your conversation in order to convey it to them, as is narrated from Mujahid and Ibn Zayd. Or, there are weak people among the Muslims who listen to their speech and obey them, as is narrated from Qatadah, Ibn Ishaq, and a group. In the first interpretation, the lam is for causal reasoning; in the second, it is for intensification, as in the saying of God the Exalted: {فَعَّالٌ لِمَا يُرِيدُ}. The sentence is a state from the object of {يَبْغُونَكُمُ}, or from its subject, because it encompasses their pronoun, or it is an independent commencement.

Some researchers said: Perhaps these individuals were not of such quantity or quality of corruption that their absence among the believers would significantly undermine the matter of Jihad, nor was the corruption of their departure equal to its benefit. For this reason, wisdom did not necessitate preventing their departure, so they went out with the believers. But since the inclusion of the hypocrites who remained behind would have led to a total breakdown, God the Exalted disliked their mobilization, and thus their assembly did not materialize, and their corruption was averted. This requirement is more apparent in the first interpretation than the second, because the literal implication of the second is that the people were not hypocrites. The reproach for granting permission for their remaining behind, despite what God the Exalted related about them, is that if they had remained without the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) permission, their hypocrisy would have been exposed among the Muslims from the start. They would not have been able to mix with them, scurry among them with rumors, or enjoy life until their state was revealed by the crashing verses that were sent down.

{وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ بِالظَّالِمِينَ} With a knowledge that encompasses their outward states, their inner selves, their past actions, and their future ones, and He will recompense them for that. The noun (the oppressors) is placed in the position of the pronoun for the purpose of recording their oppression, intensifying the threat, and indicating that it (the punishment) follows from the oppression. It is also permissible that the "oppressors" refers to the category, and those mentioned enter into it as the primary examples; the intent behind them is either those who stayed behind, or both they and the informants.