Surah At-Tawbah (9): 122

Issues in the Verse

It can be argued that this verse is either a continuation of the rulings on Jihad, or it is a new, independent statement.

Argument for Continuation (Related to Jihad): It is narrated from Ibn Abbas (RA) that when the Prophet (PBUH) went out for battle, only hypocrites or those with valid excuses remained behind. When Allah (SWT) severely exposed the flaws of the hypocrites during the expedition of Tabuk, the believers declared: "By Allah, we will not stay behind from any expedition with the Messenger (PBUH), nor from any detachment (sariyyah)."

When the Prophet (PBUH) returned to Medina and sent out detachments against the disbelievers, all the Muslims rushed out for battle, leaving him alone in Medina. This verse was then revealed.

The meaning is that it is not permissible for the believers to mobilize entirely for war and Jihad. Instead, they must divide into two groups:

1. A group remains to serve the Messenger (PBUH).
2. Another group sets out for battle.

This division was necessary because, at that time, Islam required both military action (conquering the disbelievers) and the continuous revelation of rulings and laws. There was a need for those present with the Prophet (PBUH) to learn these laws, memorize the rulings, and convey them to those absent. Thus, it was obligatory for the Companions to be divided into two sections: one fighting, and the other remaining present with the Prophet (PBUH). The departing group acts as a representative for the staying group in warfare, and the staying group acts as a representative for the departing group in religious understanding (tafaqquh). Through this arrangement, the affairs of the religion are perfected by these two groups.

Two Possibilities under this View:

1. The Staying Group are the Jurists: The group remaining behind are those who specialize in religious understanding (yatafaqqahuun). Since they remain in the service of the Prophet (PBUH) and witness the revelation, they learn and record every new ruling or law revealed. When the group returning from battle comes back, the staying group instructs them in what they have learned.
   • This interpretation requires an implied meaning: "If only a group from every division had set out, and another group remained behind, so that those remaining might gain deep understanding in religion and warn their people (i.e., those who went out to fight) when they return to them, so that they might beware of disobeying Allah upon learning."

2. The Departing Group are the Jurists (Al-Hasan's View): The deep understanding (tafaqquh) is a characteristic of the group setting out for battle. The meaning is: "If only a group from every division had set out, so that this departing group might become jurists in religion."
   • The understanding sought here is witnessing the Muslims' victory over the polytheists, realizing that a small number overcomes the vast numbers of disbelievers. This teaches them that the victory is due to Allah's special support and His desire to elevate the religion of Muhammad (PBUH) and strengthen His law. When they return to their people (the disbelievers), they warn them of what they witnessed—the signs of victory and triumph—so that they might take heed and abandon disbelief, doubt, and hypocrisy.
   • Critique by Al-Qadi: This type of observation (witnessing victory) is not considered tafaqquh (deep religious understanding).
   • Rebuttal: When they see a small group, lacking arms and provisions, overcoming a large enemy with superior arms and provisions, they realize this matter is from Allah, not from men. If it were human effort, the few would not overcome the many, nor would this religion continue to grow daily. Therefore, realizing these subtle points of understanding is undoubtedly tafaqquh.

Argument for Independence (Not Related to Jihad): This verse is an independent ruling. After discussing migration and Jihad (both requiring travel), Allah (SWT) also mentioned the act of seeking religious understanding (tafaqquh) in the presence of the Prophet (PBUH), which also involves travel.

He said: "It was not for the believers to go forth entirely [to battle]." Rather, this is not obligatory or permissible (to leave entirely). This situation is unlike Jihad, where everyone without an excuse must participate.

Then He said: "But why did not a group from every division among them set out..." meaning, from the settled populations, a group should travel to the presence of the Messenger (PBUH) to gain deep understanding in religion, learn what is lawful and unlawful, and then return to their homelands to warn and caution their people so they might turn away from their disbelief. Under this interpretation, the verse implies an obligation to travel to the presence of the Prophet (PBUH) for the purpose of tafaqquh and learning.

• Question: Does the verse indicate that traveling for tafaqquh is obligatory at all times?
• Answer: Travel is obligatory only when one is incapable of gaining understanding except through travel. During the Prophet's time, this was the case because the Law was not yet established; new rulings and laws emerged daily. In our time, the Law is established. If one can acquire knowledge in their homeland, travel is not obligatory. However, since the wording of the verse points to travel, we observe that beneficial, blessed knowledge is often only attained through travel.

The word Lawlā (لولا): When lawlā is prefixed to a verb, it means exhortation, similar to Halā (هلا). Halā is permissible to mean exhortation because Halā is composed of two parts: Hal (هل), which is an interrogative and a presentation (when you ask someone, "Will you eat?" or "Will you enter?"), you are presenting the option to them; and Lā (لا), which is negation. Thus, Halā combines presentation and negation. When you say, "Halā do such-and-such," it is as if you say, "Did you do it?" and then add, "No, you did not do it," which implies an obligation to act and a notification that this obligation was neglected.

The same applies to Lawlā. When you say, "Lawlā you visited me," or "Lawlā you ate at my place," it means presentation and expressing pleasure if the action had occurred. The same applies to Lawmā (لوما). This is similar to His saying: {Why do you not bring the angels...} (Al-Hijr: 7). Thus, Lawlā, Halā, and Lawmā are closely related terms, all intended for encouragement and exhortation. Therefore, {But why did not a group from every division among them set out...} means: "Why did they not do that?"

This verse is strong evidence for those who hold that the report of a single trustworthy individual (khabar al-wāḥid) is legally binding (ḥujjah).

The Argument:

1. Allah obligated that a ṭā’ifah (group/party) must set out from every firqah (division).
2. We define a firqah as three or more individuals.
3. If a ṭā’ifah sets out from every firqah (of three or more), the departing ṭā’ifah must consist of either two or one person.
4. Allah then obligated acting upon their reports, as His statement {and warn their people} refers to their reports.
5. His statement {so that they may beware} implies an obligation upon their people to learn from their reports. This necessitates that the report of one or two individuals must be legally binding in the Sharia.

The Objection by Al-Qadi (Al-Razi addresses the Mu'tazilite view):

1. This verse does not prove the obligation to act on the report of a single person, because the ṭā’ifah might be a group whose report yields certainty (‘ilm).
2. The statement {and warn their people} is valid even if acceptance is not obligatory, just as a single witness is required to testify, even if their testimony is not necessarily accepted.
3. Warning (indhār) implies instilling fear, and this alone does not necessitate acting upon the warning.

The Rebuttal:

1. Regarding the Ṭā’ifah being a group: We established that a firqah is three or more. If Allah obligated a ṭā’ifah to depart from every firqah, it necessitates that the ṭā’ifah is either two or one, which invalidates the idea that the ṭā’ifah must be a group large enough to produce certainty through their report.
2. If they argue that Allah obligated acting upon their words, and perhaps they reached a number that produces certainty: We reply that Allah obligated every ṭā’ifah to return to their specific people. This implies that each ṭā’ifah returns to a specific community. Then, Allah obligated knowledge based on that ṭā’ifah's report, which achieves the desired outcome (knowledge transmission).
3. Regarding {and warn their people} not necessitating acceptance: We do not rely on {and warn their people} to establish the obligation of acting on a single report. Rather, we rely on {so that they may beware}. This is an encouragement from Allah for caution, based on the premise that this warning necessitates acting in accordance with that warning. This answers the third objection: that warning only implies fear and does not necessitate action.

This verse indicates that the ultimate goal of deep religious understanding and learning must be inviting creation to the Truth and guiding them to the straight path (al-ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm).

The verse shows that Allah commanded them to gain deep understanding in religion so that when they return to their people, they warn them of the true religion, and those people, in turn, avoid ignorance and sin and are inclined to accept the religion.

Whoever seeks understanding and learning for this purpose is upon the correct methodology and the straight path. Whoever deviates from this and seeks worldly gain through religion is among the greatest losers whose efforts have gone astray in this worldly life, while they imagine they are doing good.