Al-Anfal: (20–23) O you who believe...

Know that after the Almighty addressed the believers saying:

{If you desist, it is better for you; but if you return, We will return, and never will your company avail you at all, even if it should be numerous} (Al-Anfal: 19),

He followed it by admonishing them, saying:

{O you who have believed, obey Allah and the Messenger when he calls you to that which gives you life} (Al-Anfal: 20).

He did not specify what they were hearing, except that since the discourse from the beginning of the Sura up to this point concerned Jihad (striving/fighting), it is understood that what they were hearing was the call to Jihad.

Furthermore, Jihad comprised two matters:

1. Risking one's life.
2. Gaining wealth (spoils of war).

Since risking one's life is extremely difficult for everyone, and abandoning wealth after being able to acquire it is also extremely difficult, Allah the Almighty intensified the admonition in this regard, saying:

{Obey Allah and the Messenger}

This obedience applies both in responding to the call for Jihad and in obeying the command to leave the wealth if Allah commands them to leave it. The purpose here is to affirm what we previously mentioned in the exegesis of His saying:

{Say, "The spoils are for Allah and the Messenger"} (Al-Anfal: 1).

If one asks: Why did He say, "and do not turn away from Him" (ولا تولوا عنه), using a single pronoun when both Allah and the Messenger were previously mentioned?

We reply: Allah commanded obedience to Allah and obedience to His Messenger. Then He said, "and do not turn away," because turning away is only valid concerning the Messenger, by turning away from accepting his word or from supporting him in Jihad.

Then, He emphasized this by saying:

{and be not like those who said, "We heard," while they did not hear} (Al-Anfal: 22).

The meaning is that a person cannot accept a command and commit to it unless they have heard it. Thus, hearing is used as a metaphor for acceptance. This is similar to the saying, “Sami’a Allahu liman hamidah” (May Allah hear the one who praises Him), meaning: Do not be like those who say with their tongues, "We have accepted the commands of Allah Almighty," yet in their hearts, they do not accept them. This is a characteristic of the hypocrites, as Allah informed us about them when He said:

{And when they meet those who believe, they say, "We believe," but when they are alone with their devils, they say, "Indeed, we are with you"} (Al-Baqarah: 14).

Then the Almighty said:

{Indeed, the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are the deaf and the dumb who do not use reason} (Al-Anfal: 23).

There is a difference of opinion regarding the term ad-Dawab (beasts/creatures that crawl).

1. It is said: They are likened to beasts because of their ignorance and their turning away from benefiting from what they hear. This is why they are described as deaf, dumb, and not using reason.
2. It is said: Rather, they are beasts (Dawab), as it is a name for anything that moves upon the earth. It is not mentioned here as a simile, but rather as a description fitting them in a manner of censure, just as one might call someone who does not understand speech a mere phantom, a body, or debris, as a form of blame.

Then He said:

{And if Allah had known any good in them, He would have made them hear; and if He had made them hear, they would have turned away while they were turning aside} (Al-Anfal: 23).

The meaning is that everything that exists must be known by Allah. Therefore, Allah's lack of knowledge of its existence implies its non-existence. Hence, it is appropriate to express its non-existence in itself by stating Allah’s lack of knowledge of its existence.

The structure of the statement is: If there were good in them, Allah would have made them hear the arguments and admonitions with the hearing of teaching and comprehension. But if He had made them hear, knowing there was no good in them, they would not have benefited, and they would have turned away while remaining averse.

It is narrated that the disbelievers asked the Prophet (peace be upon him) to resurrect Qusayy ibn Kilab and others of their dead to inform them of the truth of his prophethood. The Almighty clarified that if He had known any good in them—meaning, their benefiting from the words of these dead people—He would have resurrected them so they could hear their speech. However, Allah knew that they would only ask this out of obstinacy and contention, and that if Allah had made them hear their speech, they would have turned away from accepting the truth and would have remained averse to it.

In this verse, there are several issues:

The Almighty has judged them as turning away from the proofs and turning aside from the truth, meaning they will absolutely not accept it, nor benefit from it at all.

We say: The occurrence of faith (Iman) from them must be impossible. Because if faith were to occur, that faith would either exist while the previous statement (that they would turn away) remains true, or while it turns false.

1. The first case is impossible, because the existence of faith while the report states the absence of faith is a conjunction of two contradictories, which is impossible.
2. The second case is also impossible, because the transformation of Allah's true statement into a lie is impossible, especially concerning a past, elapsed time. The same applies to the transformation of Allah's knowledge into ignorance, a principle established previously.

The grammarians say that the word law (if) is used to indicate the negation of one thing due to the negation of another. If you say, "If you had come to me, I would have honored you," it implies that the coming did not happen, and the honoring did not happen.

Some jurists say that it only implies necessary consequence (implication/entailment); it does not imply the negation of one thing due to the negation of another. The evidence for this is the verse in question and a Prophetic tradition.

Regarding the verse: If the word law implied what the grammarians claim, then His saying:

{And if Allah had known any good in them, He would have made them hear}

would imply that Allah did not know any good in them, and He did not make them hear. Then, His saying:

{and if He had made them hear, they would have turned away}

would mean that He did not make them hear, and they did not turn away. However, the absence of turning away is better than the absence of good, which leads to a contradiction: the first part implies the negation of good, while the latter implies the realization of good. Thus, the assertion that law implies the negation of one thing due to the negation of another must be rejected.

Regarding the tradition: The saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him): "What an excellent man is Suhayb, if he had not feared Allah, he would not have disobeyed Him." If law implied what the grammarians claim, the meaning would be that he did fear Allah and did disobey Him, which is a contradiction. Therefore, the word law does not imply the negation of one thing due to the negation of another; it only implies mere entailment.

Know that this argument is stronger, although it contradicts the view of the majority of literary scholars.

The things known by Allah Almighty are divided into four categories:

1. The totality of existing things (the actual).
2. The totality of non-existent things (the potential/non-actual).
3. How a specific existing thing would be if it were non-existent.
4. How a specific non-existent thing would be if it were existent.

The first two categories are knowledge of the actual occurrences (al-Waqi'at). The last two categories are knowledge of the potential/contingent (al-Muqaddarat) which are not actualized.

His saying:

{And if Allah had known any good in them, He would have made them hear}

belongs to the second category: knowledge of the contingent (what could have been), not knowledge of the actual occurrences.

A similar example is what Allah narrated about the hypocrites:

{If they were to go forth, We would not go forth with them, and never would we obey anyone against you} (Al-Tawbah: 83).

And:

{If they were driven out, they would not go out with them, and if they were fought, they would not support them; and if they did support them, they would surely turn their backs} (Al-Hashr: 11-12).

Thus, Allah knew what the contingent state would be if they were present. Also, His saying:

{And even if they were returned, they would return to that which they were forbidden} (Al-An'am: 28),

informs us about how a non-existent thing would be if it were existent.