Al-Tawbah (The Repentance): (42) If it had been a near gain...

Know that when the Almighty magnified the encouragement for striving in the cause of Allah, and He had mentioned His saying: {O you who have believed, what is it with you that when you are told, "Go forth in the cause of Allah," you become heavy toward the earth?} (9:38), He returned to affirming their sluggishness. He clarified that some people, despite all the prior warnings and exhortations for Jihad, remained behind during the expedition of Tabuk. He then stated that {if it had been a near gain and an easy journey, they would have followed you}.

There are several issues in this verse:

The term ‘Aradan (عرض - gain/commodity): This refers to the worldly benefits that present themselves to you. It is said: "The world is a present commodity from which the righteous and the wicked eat."

Al-Zajjaj's view: He said there is an omission, and the meaning is: "If what they were called to was an easy journey, then..." He omitted the noun of kāna (was) because what preceded it indicated it.

The term Safarun Qāṣidun (سفراً قاصداً - an easy journey): Al-Zajjaj said this means an easy and near journey. It is called qāṣid (intending/moderate) because the middle path between excess (ifrāṭ) and deficiency (tafrīṭ) is called muqtaṣid (moderate), as in the verse: {So, of them are some who wrong themselves, and of them are some who are moderate} (35:32). The deeper meaning is that the path between abundance and scarcity is sought by everyone, so it is named qāṣid. The interpretation of qāṣid is "possessing intention/moderation," similar to saying "a son of dates and a son of trade and a son of profit."

The term Ba‘udat ‘Alayhim al-Shaqqah (بعدت عليهم الشقة - the arduous journey became distant for them): Al-Layth said al-Shaqqah means the distance of a journey to a far land. It is said: shaqqah shāqqah (a difficult distance). The meaning is: the difficult, far distance became distant for them. This name is given because traversing it is difficult (shaqqa) for a person. The author of Al-Kashshāf narrated from ‘Īsā ibn ‘Umar that he recited it as bu‘idat ‘alayhim al-shuqqah (with a kasra on the ayn and shīn).

This verse was revealed concerning the hypocrites who stayed behind from the expedition of Tabuk. The meaning is that if the benefits (spoils of war) were near and the journey short, they would have followed you, hoping to attain those benefits. But since the journey was long, they became despairing of attaining the spoils because they considered the campaign against the Romans too great a burden. This is why they stayed behind.

Then, Allah informed us that when the Prophet (PBUH) returned from Jihad, he would find them {swearing by Allah, "If only we had set out with you"} (9:42). This occurred either when they were reprimanded for staying behind, or spontaneously as a way of offering an excuse for their absence.

Allah then clarified that they destroy themselves because of this lying and hypocrisy. This indicates that false oaths lead to destruction. This is why the Prophet (PBUH) said: "The engulfing oath (al-yamīn al-ghumūs) leaves the homes desolate."

Then He said: {And Allah knows that they are indeed liars} (9:43) regarding their claim that they could not set out, for they were indeed capable of setting out.

The verse indicates that the command {Go forth, whether light or heavily armed} (9:46) applies only to those who are capable and able. The lack of ability is a valid excuse for staying behind.

Abu ‘Alī al-Jubbā’ī used this verse to refute the doctrine that ability (Istita‘ah) occurs simultaneously with the action (al-fi‘l). He argued: If ability occurred simultaneously with the action, then those who go out to fight would not be capable of fighting. If that were the case, they would be truthful in their statement: "We were not able to go out." Since Allah contradicted them in this statement, we know that ability precedes the action.

Al-Ka‘bī also used this argument. He questioned whether the meaning of "ability" here could be: "They had no provisions (zād) or mounts (rāḥilah)," and that the intent was not the inherent power itself.

The Mu‘tazilite Response (as presented by the author): If one without a mount is excused from setting out, then one without ability is even more deserving of excuse. Furthermore, the apparent meaning of ability is bodily strength, not the possession of wealth. If wealth is intended, it is only because it aids the action performed by bodily strength, so there is no reason to abandon the literal meaning without necessity.

The Ash‘arī Response (Our Companions): The Mu‘tazilites concede that the power to act does not precede the action except by a single moment. However, preceding the action by many moments is impossible. A person sitting in one place is not capable at this moment of performing an action in a distant place; rather, he is only capable of performing an action in the place adjacent to him. Since it is established among them that power precedes action only by a single moment, those who stayed behind from the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) were not capable according to the principles of the Mu‘tazilites (i.e., they lacked the immediate power to travel to Rome). Therefore, this verse necessitates the same conclusion for them as they attribute to us. At this point, it is incumbent upon both us and them to interpret Istita‘ah as referring to provisions and mounts (zād and rāḥilah). When this is established, their argument falls apart.

They said: The Prophet (PBUH) informed them that they would swear oaths. This is a report about the unseen future. Since the event occurred exactly as he reported, this was a miracle (a sign of prophecy). And Allah knows best.

9:42 (Continued)

{May Allah pardon you! Why did you permit them until it became clear to you who were truthful and you knew the liars?}