Surah Muhammad (peace be upon him)

(Thirty-nine verses, Meccan)

Muhammad: (1) Those who disbelieved and barred...

The beginning of this Surah corresponds to the end of the preceding Surah, which concluded with:

{But none will be destroyed except the defiantly disobedient people.} (Al-Ahqaf: 35)

If someone asks: How can the defiantly disobedient person be destroyed when he has good deeds, such as feeding the hungry, maintaining kinship ties, and other acts that a person does throughout their life? Destroying him would mean nullifying his deeds, especially since Allah Almighty says:

{So whoever does an atom's weight of good, he will see it.} (Al-Zalzalah: 7)

Allah says here: {Those who disbelieved and barred others from the way of Allah, He has made their deeds vain.} This means their deeds do not remain or exist, so destruction is not precluded. We will explain how deeds are invalidated while affirming the truth of the statement, and Allah is exalted above injustice.

In the exegesis of this verse, there are several issues:

Issue 1: Who is meant by {Those who disbelieved}?

There are several views:

1. They are those who fed the army on the Day of Badr, such as Abu Jahl, Al-Harith son of Hisham, Utbah, and Shaybah, sons of Rabi'ah, and others.
2. The disbelievers of Quraysh.
3. The People of the Book.
4. It is general, encompassing every disbeliever.

Issue 2: Regarding "barring" (صدّ)

There are two interpretations:

1. They barred themselves: Meaning they prevented themselves from the path and stopped their intellects from following the proof.
2. They barred others: Meaning they prevented others, as Allah says about the oppressed:

{Those who were oppressed will say to those who were arrogant, "If not for you, we would have been believers."} (Saba: 31)

There is a discussion regarding this: Nullification of deeds is contingent upon disbelief and barring. The oppressed did not bar others, so their deeds should not be nullified. We reply that specifying something in mention does not negate what is not mentioned, especially if what is mentioned is more deserving of mention. Here, the disbeliever who bars others is deeper in corruption, making him more worthy of mention.

Alternatively, we say every disbeliever bars others. As for the arrogant, this is apparent. As for the oppressed, their following the arrogant establishes what prevents them from following the Messenger. Once they become leaders, it becomes difficult for them to become followers. Furthermore, every disbeliever bars those who come after him because the custom of disbelievers is to follow their predecessors, as stated:

{But rather, they say, "Indeed, we found our fathers upon a religion, and indeed we are, in their footsteps, following."} (Az-Zukhruf: 22)

If it is argued that every disbeliever bars others, then what is the benefit of mentioning "barring" after "disbelief"? We reply that it is like mentioning the cause followed by its effect, such as saying, "I ate a lot, and I became full." Disbelief is the cause of barring. If we hold that they barred themselves, it implies that the innate disposition (fitra) within them was calling them to faith, and the barrier was their self-prevention.

Issue 3: Regarding what they were barred from (المصدود عنه)

There are several views:

1. Barring from spending on Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his companions.
2. Barring from Jihad.
3. Barring from faith.
4. Barring from everything that involves obedience to Allah, which is following Muhammad (peace be upon him). This is because the Prophet (PBUH) is on the Straight Path, guiding to the path of Allah:

{And indeed, you guide to a straight path, * The path of Allah.} (Ash-Shura: 52-53) Therefore, whoever prevents [others] from following Muhammad (PBUH) has barred [them] from the way of Allah.

Issue 4: Regarding the nullification (الإضلال)

There are several interpretations:

First Interpretation: Nullification (إبطال) The meaning is that Allah made their deeds vanish so that they cannot find them. A seeker looks for something that exists; what does not exist in reality is non-existent. If it is asked: How does Allah nullify a good deed He created? We reply that nullification occurs in several ways:

1. Balancing: The good deeds they performed are weighed against their evil deeds, and they are canceled out by this balancing, leaving them with only sins. This is because disbelief outweighs good deeds done outside of faith, while faith outweighs evil deeds done outside of disbelief.
2. Invalidation due to lack of a condition: The deeds are nullified because they lack the condition for their establishment and acceptance, which is faith. Faith is the condition for the acceptance of deeds, as Allah says:

{Whoever does righteousness, whether male or female, while he is a believer - We will surely cause him to live a good life.} (Ghafir: 40) If Allah does not accept the deed, it has no existence. In reality, the deed ceases to exist immediately after it occurs. However, Allah, out of His grace, records that so-and-so performed a good deed and that its reward is with Him, so it remains as a ruling (حكما). This remaining as a ruling is better than the physical existence of the bodies where the deeds actually occurred, as bodies eventually perish, whereas the good deed remains eternally with Allah. Once this is established, it becomes clear that Allah's acceptance is a favor. He informed us that He only accepts from a believer. Thus, whoever labors without prior faith is the one wasting his effort, not Allah. 3. Lack of sincere intention for Allah: The disbeliever did not perform his deed for the sake of Allah, so he did not bring forth good. This does not contradict the verse: {So whoever does an atom's weight of good, he will see it.} The distinction of a deed as good is based on the one for whom it is done, not on the doer or the deed itself. For example, if a person intends to kill someone but fails, and then intends to honor someone but fails, the two intentions are distinguished not by the act of intending (which is one), nor by the person intending (who is one), but by the purpose of the intention. Similarly, if one intends by his action to honor a king, and another intends by his action to honor a commoner, the two actions are distinguished by their purpose. The status of Allah before idols is like the status of kings before commoners. Therefore, deeds done for idols are not good. Furthermore, if someone intends his action for the sake of Allah while simultaneously worshipping idols, his action is not good because the good he intended for Allah is mixed with the veneration of the carved idol.

Second Interpretation: Making it Consumed (جعله مستهلكاً) This means that when he disbelieves and performs bowing and prostration to stones and wood, he forfeits his own honor, and his actions are not considered valid due to his disbelief. This is like a servant working for a guard or a stable master; if the servant stands up, the Sultan does not consider his standing as an act of veneration because of the servant's lowliness. However, for the believer, the more he shows arrogance towards others for the sake of Allah, the more his veneration of Allah becomes apparent—like a king who submits to no one; when he submits to another king at a specific time, his own greatness is revealed through that submission.

Third Interpretation: He abandoned it ({أضله}) This means He neglected it and left it, as one says, "He let his camel wander astray" (أضل بعيره) if he left it unattended, causing it to be lost.

Then, after explaining the state of the disbelievers, Allah Almighty explained the state of the believers: