Tafsir of An-Nisa' 4:97-99

"Indeed, those whom the angels take in death..."

[توفاهم] (Take them in death): It may be read as a past tense verb, similar to the reading of those who recited tawaffathum (she/it took them). It may also be read as a present tense verb (tatawaffahum), or as the reading of those who recited tuwaffihim—a present tense derived from waffaytu, meaning that Allah causes the angels to be "paid in full" (given authority over) the souls, so they take them. That is, He enables them to collect them, so they collect them.

[ظالمي أنفسهم] (Wronging themselves): Meaning: while they were in a state of wronging themselves.

[قالوا] (They will say): The angels will say to those being taken in death:

[فيم كنتم] (In what [state] were you?): Meaning: In what state were you regarding the affairs of your religion? These were people from the inhabitants of Mecca who accepted Islam but did not migrate when migration was an obligation.

If you ask: How can their response, [كنا مستضعفين في الأرض] (We were oppressed in the land), be a valid answer to the question [فيم كنتم]? The proper answer should have been to state their condition or to say they were in no state at all.

I say: The meaning of [فيم كنتم] is a rebuke, implying they were not in any state of religion, as they were capable of migrating but did not. They replied, "We were oppressed," as an excuse for what they were rebuked for, pleading weakness and claiming they were unable to migrate. The angels then silenced them with the words: [ألم تكن أرض الله واسعة فتهاجروا فيها] (Was not the earth of Allah spacious enough for you to migrate therein?).

They meant: You were capable of leaving Mecca for lands where you would not be prevented from manifesting your religion, and of migrating to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), just as those who migrated to the land of Abyssinia did. This is evidence that if a man is in a land where he cannot establish the affairs of his religion as required—due to various obstacles—or if he knows that in another land he would be more upright in the rights of Allah and more constant in worship, then migration becomes incumbent upon him.

It is narrated from the Prophet (ﷺ): "Whoever flees with his religion from one land to another, even if it be only a span of earth, Paradise becomes his due, and he shall be a companion of his father Abraham and his Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon them both)." (Very weak).

O Allah, if You know that my migration to You was only to flee with my religion, then make it a cause for a good ending, the attainment of the hoped-for grace, and the pursuit of Your mercy. Join my proximity to You with my devotion at Your House, in the neighborhood of Your abode of honor, O You of vast forgiveness.

Then, He excepted from the threatened ones the oppressed who could not devise a plan to leave due to their poverty, helplessness, or lack of knowledge of the paths.

It is narrated that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sent this verse to the Muslims of Mecca. Jundub ibn Damra (or Damra ibn Jundub) said to his sons, "Carry me, for I am not among the oppressed, and I know the way. By Allah, I will not spend the night in Mecca." They carried him on a litter heading toward Medina, but he was an old man and died at al-Tan'im. (Weak).

If you ask: How are the children (wildan) included among the excepted ones, as if they would have deserved the threat along with the men and women had they been able to devise a plan or find a way?

I say: Men and women may be capable and knowledgeable, or they may not be. As for children, they are inherently incapable of such things. Therefore, no threat is directed at them, because the reason for excluding men and women from the threatened group is their incapacity. Since incapacity is inherent in children and they are never free from it, they are necessarily excluded from that group. This is if "children" refers to minors. It is also possible that it refers to adolescents who have attained the same understanding as men and women, thus being included in the obligation. If it refers to adult slaves (male and female), then there is no question.

If you ask: What is the grammatical position of the clause [لا يستطيعون] (They are unable)?

I say: It is an adjective for "the oppressed," or for "the men, women, and children." It is permissible for this to be an adjective even though the described nouns have the definite article (al-), because it does not refer to a specific, known individual, similar to the verse: "And I pass by the base man who insults me..."

If you ask: Why was [عسى الله أن يعفو عنهم] (It is expected that Allah will pardon them) used, employing a word of "hope" (tam'i)?

I say: To indicate that abandoning migration is a grave matter with no room for leniency. Even for the one who is clearly and obviously compelled, it is appropriate for him to say, "It is expected that Allah will pardon me," so how much more so for others?