251. That is, it is not conceivable that a believer should intentionally kill another believer. Several incidents became the cause of revelation of this verse. It is said that when `Umar (ra) migrated to Madinah he was accompanied by `Ayyash ibn Abi Rabi`ah al-Makhzumi, who was the most beloved of his mother’s sons. Abu Jahl followed him in his tracks to Madinah (while the Prophet was still at Makkah), in the company of Harith b. Yezid and informed `Ayyash that his mother had vowed that she would lie in the sun until `Ayyash came to see her. They assured him that once his mother had broken her vow he could return. `Umar suspected a foul play and tried to dissuade him from returning. But when he found that `Ayyash had made up his mind he told him to take one of his own camels, a very fast one, and never to dismount come what may. If he suspected foul play at any point, all that he had to do was to turn her around and let her loose. So `Ayyash started back in their company. On the way Abu Jahl and Harith managed to bring him down from the camel, tied him up and rode back to Makkah. Harith even whipped `Ayyash. `Ayyash vowed to himself that he would kill him at the first opportunity. However, for the moment under guard, he stayed in Makkah until it fell to the Muslims eight years later. Then, as `Ayyash was returning to Madinah, he met Harith b. Yezid on the way and killed him without knowing that in the meanwhile Harith had become a Muslim. These verses were revealed (Ibn Jarir). Some details of the above narration are from Ibn Is-haq (Au.). Another of such accidental murders that took place during the Prophet’s time is recorded in Muslim and narrated by Usama b. Zayd. He says that once, out in a campaign, he came across a man who said la ilaha illa Allah, but he killed him all the same. When he reported to the Prophet he asked him: “Did you kill him after he had said la ilaha illa Allah?” Usama replied: “O Messenger of Allah, he had said that out of fear of the sword.” The Prophet said: “Why did you not open his chest to find out if he had said that out of fear?” (Qurtubi). The narration is as follows:

عَنْ أُسَامَةَ بْنِ زَيْدٍ وَهَذَا حَدِيثُ ابْنِ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ قَالَ بَعَثَنَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي سَرِيَّةٍ فَصَبَّحْنَا الْحُرَقَاتِ مِنْ جُهَيْنَةَ فَأَدْرَكْتُ رَجُلًا فَقَالَ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ فَطَعَنْتُهُ فَوَقَعَ فِي نَفْسِي مِنْ ذَلِكَ فَذَكَرْتُهُ لِلنَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَقَالَ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَقَتَلْتَهُ قَالَ قُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنَّمَا قَالَهَا خَوْفًا مِنْ السِّلَاحِ قَالَ أَفَلَا شَقَقْتَ عَنْ قَلْبِهِ حَتَّى تَعْلَمَ أَقَالَهَا أَمْ لَا فَمَا زَالَ يُكَرِّرُهَا عَلَيَّ حَتَّى تَمَنَّيْتُ أَنِّي أَسْلَمْتُ يَوْمَئِذٍ

According to other reports Abu al-Darda’ also happened to kill a man during a campaign. When he raised his sword the man cried out la ilaha illa Allah. But, despite that, Abu Darda’ killed him. When he returned and was asked about the affair, he said that it was nothing but fear that had led that man to utter those words. He enquired the Prophet: granted he had committed an error, what was his own position now? The Prophet answered: “And what about the words la ilaha illa Allah?” Abu al-Darda’ sought clearance for himself several times but the Prophet repeated the same words. Then these verses were revealed (Ibn Jarir). But other reports, such as one in Bukhari, have named the person as Khalid ibn al-Walid and not Abu Darda’. The story of Khalid ibn al-Walid himself is that he was leading in a campaign when they come across a people, who, when confronted, began to say: “Saba’na, saba’na” (i.e., we have abandoned our old religion and adopted a new one). But since that did not mean they had become Muslims, Khalid attacked them. Some were killed. When the incident was reported to the Prophet, he raised his hands in supplication and said: “O Allah, I disown what Khalid has done.” Subsequently he sent `Ali to pay them the blood-wit and compensate for any other loss they had suffered (Ibn Kathir).

252. Most of the early scholars have said that since the Qur’an often states the freeing of a slave as expiation, but in some instances makes it conditional that they be believing slaves, it is necessary, in such cases, to free only an adult, believing slave, who has begun to Pray and fast (Ibn Jarir). However, the majority opinion is that even a believing child-slave can be enfranchised as expiation (Ibn Kathir).

253. Those days blood-wit used to be a hundred adult camels of various ages, or a 1000 Dinars, due from the `Aqilah (male blood relatives, friends and supporters) of the murderer. (This is also the blood-wit for an embryo: Ibn Kathir). Further, Abu Bakr, `Uthman, Ibn Mas`ud, Ibrahim Nakha`i, Sha`bi, Zuhri, and many others maintained that the blood-wit amount for a Jew or a Christian is the same as that for a Muslim. But `Umar granted the Dhimmi only one half the blood-wit (Ibn Jarir).

254. So that, if one fasts for 40 consecutive days but does not on the 41st day, he will have to begin anew and fast 60 consecutive days.

255. An intentional murder in Islam (is not simply one that has been premeditated, rather: Au.), one in which a person uses a weapon, a rope, a large stone, a heavy stick, or anything that can kill. If these, and other circumstantial evidences are absent, then the slaying will be considered shibh `amd (quasi-deliberate intent), in which case the blood-wit is suitably adjusted [by the judge], (in addition, of course, to two month’s fasts: Au.). This is the opinion of the great majority. This has been derived from the judgment of the Prophet in a case involving a Jew who killed a woman by placing her head on a rock and dropping another on it (Ibn Jarir).

256. Abu Mijlaz and Abu Salih’s opinion is that the punishment deserved by the intentional killer of a believer is as stated in this verse, i.e., “His reward is Jahannum, abiding therein for ever. Allah is angry with him, His curse is upon him; and He has prepared a great chastisement for him.” But the final decision will be Allah’s. However, Ibn `Abbas’ opinion is well known that there is no repentance for such a man. He used to say: “This was the last thing Allah revealed on the subject. He did not reveal anything subsequently to abrogate it.” Kharijah b. Zayd and Dahhak were of the same opinion. Yet, Mujahid used to add: “unless he repented” (Ibn Jarir). As for the verses 68-70 of surah al-Furqan, Zayd bin Thabit’s opinion was that they were revealed six months before surah al-Nisa’. (According to another opinion, 8 years earlier. See al-Furqan, v. 68 in Ibn Jarir). And, the verses (68-70) of surah al-Furqan are:

وَالَّذِينَ لَا يَدْعُونَ مَعَ اللَّهِ إِلَهًا آخَرَ وَلَا يَقْتُلُونَ النَّفْسَ الَّتِي حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ إِلَّا بِالْحَقِّ وَلَا يَزْنُونَ وَمَنْ يَفْعَلْ ذَلِكَ يَلْقَ أَثَامًا (68) يُضَاعَفْ لَهُ الْعَذَابُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ وَيَخْلُدْ فِيهِ مُهَانًا (69) إِلَّا مَنْ تَابَ وَآمَنَ وَعَمِلَ عَمَلًا صَالِحًا فَأُولَئِكَ يُبَدِّلُ اللَّهُ سَيِّئَاتِهِمْ حَسَنَاتٍ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَحِيمًا [الفرقان : 68 - 70]

“And those who invoke not any other deity besides Allah, nor slay such souls as Allah has forbidden, except for a just cause, nor commit an illegal sexual intercourse - and whoever does that shall meet the price of sin; his punishment will be doubled on the Day of Judgment, and he shall abide there in disgrace; except for him who repented, and believed, and worked righteous deeds, Allah will change their evil deeds with good ones. Allah is Ever-forgiving, Ever-merciful.” (In other words, the statement of surah al-Nisa’ has not been abrogated by the verses of surah al-Furqan quoted herewith) - Ibn Jarir. Thus, Ibn Zayd’s information supports Ibn `Abbas’ opinion that the verses of surah al-Nisa’ were the last thing revealed on the subject (Au.). Ibn Kathir adds: Slaying of a believer, is a heinous crime. The Prophet has said, in a report of the Sahihayn:

أَوَّلُ مَا يُقْضَى بَيْنَ النَّاسِ فِي الدِّمَاءِ

“The first (of the disputes) to be settled on the day of Judgment would be that of the (crimes) of bloodshed.” Another hadith (of Ibn Majah: H. Ibrahim) says that,

لَزَوَالُ الدُّنْيَا أَهْوَنُ عَلَى اللَّهِ مِنْ قَتْلِ مُسْلِمٍ

“The destruction of the world is of less concern to Allah that the killing of a believer." Another hadith says that:

لَوِ اجْتَمَعَ أَهْلُ السَّمَاءِ وَأَهْلُ الأَرْضِ عَلَى قَتْلِ امْرِئٍ مُؤْمِنٍ لَعَذَّبَهُمُ اللَّهُ

“Were the people of the heaven and earth to unite over the killing of a Muslim, Allah would surely hurl them all into Fire.” (But the report is weak: Au.). Yet another report (of Ibn Majah: H. Ibrahim) says:

مَنْ أَعَانَ عَلَى قَتْلِ مُسْلِمٍ بِشَطْرِ كَلِمَةٍ لَقِىَ اللَّهَ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ مَكْتُوبٌ عَلَى جَبْهَتِهِ آيِسٌ مِنْ رَحْمَةِ اللَّهِ

“Whoever helped in the slaying of a Muslim, even if it be by a word, will appear on the Day of Judgment with the words: ‘Despaired of Allah’s mercy’ written on his forehead.” The report is very weak (Albani). Ibn `Abbas’ well-known opinion is in Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Da’ud, Nasa’i and Ahmad. It is reported about him in Nasa’i and Ibn Majah that a man came to him and asked him: “What do you have to say about a man who murdered a Muslim?” In reply Ibn `Abbas quoted this verse and said: “These were the last words on this subject that were revealed to the Prophet.” The man asked: “What have you to say if he repented, and led a good life there onward?” Ibn `Abbas said: “Where is repentance for him? I have heard the Prophet say:

يَجِيءُ الْقَاتِلُ وَالْمَقْتُولُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ مُتَعَلِّقٌ بِرَأْسِ صَاحِبِهِ يَقُولُ رَبِّ سَلْ هَذَا لِمَ قَتَلَنِي

“The murderer and the murdered will come on the day of Judgment, holding the (murderer) by his head, saying: “O Lord. Ask this man why he killed me?’" Ibn `Abbas is not alone in this opinion. Ibn Mas`ud, Abu Hurayrah, `Abdullah ibn `Amr, Mu`awiyyah, and many others were with him. However, all said, the opinion of the great majority of scholars, both classical as well as modern, is that the final say with regard to the murderer of a believer will be Allah’s. He might forgive if He will. As for the fact that nothing was revealed on the subject after the verses of surah al-Nisa’ in question, that should not be of a great concern, for the verses which promise forgiveness, even if revealed earlier, are general in their application. Further, we also have in a well-known tradition the story of an Israelite who had murdered a hundred souls, yet he was forgiven. In fact, Abu Hurayrah’s opinion itself is that the punishment of a believer’s murderer is as stated in these verses. But, it is not necessary that such a punishment be delivered to him. Again, so far as the demand of the murdered person that the murderer be asked why he murdered him, well, that is his right which he would be raising and which he will be compensated for. That in fact also applies to all such cases where other’s rights have been usurped, such as theft, deceit, etc. Quotation from Ibn Kathir ends here. Interestingly, some reports suggest that Ibn `Abbas admitted the possibility of repentance for an intentional murder. It is said that once a man came to him and asked him about an intentional murderer. Ibn `Abbas told him that there was no chance of him being forgiven. When the man was gone his companions and students asked him if he had not said earlier that an intentional murderer of a believer had a chance of forgiveness. He replied that although he had said that earlier, but in this present case he suspected that the man appeared to him as one meditating a murder and wanted to be sure that if he committed it, he would be forgiven. Accordingly, the people sent someone on the heels of the man to find out whether that was true, and found that the case was as Ibn `Abbas had suspected (Qurtubi). Alusi adds: It is reported of many scholars that they ordinarily ruled that there was no repentance for a killer, but when somebody actually came to them admitting the crime, they asked him to repent.

257. The previous verses spoke of the heinousness of the crime of a Muslim’s murder. The following verses tell us that for the rules of Islam to be applicable to a man, all that he has to meet by way of a condition is his verbal assertion that he is a Muslim. A detailed enquiry is not to be conducted to check the bona fides of a man’s claim (Thanwi).

258. Several stories have come down to us as those occasioning the revelation of these verses, but the most reliable one is in Tirmidhi, who declared it hasan sahih of status, as well as in Hakim, who has called it a trustworthy narration although Bukhari and Muslim have not recorded it. According to these reports a group of Companions went out in a campaign. They met a shepherd who greeted them in the Islamic way. But they thought he was doing that only to save his life. They killed him and seized his cattle. Allah revealed this verse (Ibn Kathir).

259. It is said that the man who was slain used to conceal his Islamic identity from his people out of fear of persecution. Allah, therefore, reminded those who had slain him that once you were in the same state, concealing your faith from your own people out of fear of persecution at their hands (Ibn Jarir). Bukhari has a short report about Miqdad ibn al-Aswad that he killed someone who cried out la ilaha illa Allah when he advanced toward him, but, despite that, Miqdad killed him. The Prophet told him:

إذا كان رجل مؤمن يخفي إيمانه مع قوم كفار، فأظهر إيمانه فقتلتَه، فكذلك كنت أنت تخفي إيمانك بمكة من قبل

“If the believing man was concealing his faith from his unbelieving people; he disclosed his faith but you killed him, so were you aforetime, concealing your faith in Makkah” (Ibn Kathir). Sayyid Qutb writes: “Allah reminds the believers of the recent days of ignorance: of the rashness and frivolity that prevailed then. He reminds them of His grace by which He cleansed their hearts and guided them to loftier objectives, so that now they can not think of returning to battles and wars with the intention of loot and plunder as was their wont in the days of ignorance. He impresses upon them His favor in that He has set for them the limits and bounds, and has given them a new system (that organizes their affairs). So let not the final verdict be influenced by the first impulses (of anger), as it used to be during the days of jahiliyyah. The text also throws hints at the fact that they themselves were in the same state some time back: concealing their faith from their enemies, on account of fear and vulnerability, not making it known except when in peace with the Muslims. This man too, who was killed, used to conceal his faith from his people, and disclosed it to the Muslims by greeting them in the manner of Islamic greeting. Said Allah, ‘So were you aforetime, but Allah has been gracious to you.’” Legal Points • 1. While blood-wit is due from himself and the family (aqilah) of the murderer, fasts are to be observed by him alone (Ma`arif). • 2. Where there is no inheritor of the slain, the blood-wit will be returned to the public treasury (Ma`arif). • 3. According to the Hanafiyyah, blood-wit amount of a dhimmi is the same as that of a Muslim (Ma`arif). • 4. The blood-wit amount, in the case of a murder of a man belonging to a people with whom the Islamic state has a treaty, will depend on the clauses of the treaty (Mawdudi from Jassas).

260. The words “Be discriminating” imply that although a man becomes a Muslim by his very assertion to that effect, it is also necessary that he should “not” at least do what the unbelievers do. For instance, if he says he is a Muslim, but worships idols, then he has invalidated his own claim. In fact, Musaylimah the Liar, used to pray and order the adhan said in the Islamic manner, without any alteration. But he also claimed that he was a Prophet. That nullified his claim to Islam of the standard definition (Ma`arif).

261. It is said that when this verse was revealed `Abdullah ibn Umm Maktum, the blind, came to the Prophet and asked: “What about people like me, O Messenger of Allah?” The revelation then added: “unless they suffer a disability” (Ibn Jarir). Hence the Prophet once said to his Companions, according to reports in Bukhari and Abu Da’ud:

لَقَدْ تَرَكْتُمْ بِالْمَدِينَةِ أَقْوَامًا مَا سِرْتُمْ مَسِيرًا ، وَلا أَنْفَقْتُمْ مِنْ نَفَقَةٍ ، وَلا قَطَعْتُمْ مِنْ وَادٍ إِلاَّ وَهُمْ مَعَكُمْ فِيهِ ، قَالُوا : يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ، كَيْفَ يَكُونُونَ مَعَنَا وَهُمْ بِالْمَدِينَةِ ؟ قَالَ : حَبَسَهُمُ الْعُذْرُ

“You have left behind you some people in Madinah who are with you wherever you go, in whatever you spend, and whenever you cross through a valley." They asked: “How could that be, Messenger of Allah?” He said: “Nothing held them back but a reason beyond their control” (Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir). Alusi adds: It is reported of `Abdullah Ibn Maktum by Ibn al-Mundhir through Ibn Abi Layla, that he used to participate in jihad saying: “Give me the standard and place me in the middle, for, (being blind) I cannot run away.”

262. Qatadah has said: “It used to be said: ‘Islam is one rank; hijrah in Islam another rank; jihad in hijrah yet another rank. And, being killed in a jihad in hijrah, another rank’” (Ibn al-Qayyim and others).

263. The Sahihayn have preserved the Prophet’s words:

إِنَّ فِى الْجَنَّةِ مِائَةَ دَرَجَةٍ أَعَدَّهَا لِلْمُجَاهِدِينَ فِى سَبِيلِهِ مَا بَيْنَ كُلِّ دَرَجَتَيْنِ كَمَا بَيْنَ السَّمَاءِ وَالأَرْضِ

“There are a hundred levels in Paradise that Allah has prepared for the mujahidin. Between each level is the distance as there is between the heaven and the earth” (Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir). Bukhari has the following words in addition:

فَإِذَا سَأَلْتُمُ اللَّهَ فَسَلُوهُ الْفِرْدَوْسَ فَإِنَّهُ أَوْسَطُ الْجَنَّةِ وَأَعْلَى الْجَنَّةِ وَفَوْقَهُ عَرْشُ اللَّهِ وَمِنْهُ تَفَجَّرُ أَنْهَارُ الْجَنَّةِ

“Therefore, when you ask Allah, ask for Firdaws for it is in the center of Paradise and the best part of it. Above it is the `Arsh of the Rahman and from there spring out the rivers of Paradise (Shawkani). Jihad At this point, Sayyid Qutb has the following to write on the subject of jihad: “Jihad is not one of the several passing phenomenon of the early Islam. It is a necessary outfit that accompanies the caravan and the mission. The point is not - as some well-wishing Muslims feel - that Islam grew in an age that was dominated by Imperial Powers. Therefore, the concept, as if to say, was thrust upon the value system of its followers, by the surrounding milieu. That is, there was no alternative to a dominating force for the maintenance of a just balance. The least that these sacerdotal ideas and wild guesses do is to speak of the poor understanding of the true nature of Islam. Had jihad been a passing phenomenon in the lives of the believers, the Qur’an would not have devoted so much space, in its best parts, and in the style that it reserves, for it. Nor would the Sunnah of the Prophet have granted it so much space, and reserved for it such a style. Had jihad been a passing phenomenon the Prophet would not have addressed every believer who will follow him until the Last day in words:

مَنْ مَاتَ وَلَمْ يَغْزُ وَلَمْ يُحَدِّثْ نَفْسَهُ بِغَزْوٍ مَاتَ عَلَى شُعْبَةِ نِفَاقٍ

“Whoever died without fighting and without intending to fight, died on a branch of hypocrisy.” Yes, the Prophet turned away a few individual mujahidin, because of their special circumstances - as it is reported in the Sahih books that a man sought the Prophet’s permission to fight. The Prophet asked him: “Do you have parents?” He replied, “Yes.” The Prophet ordered him: “Serve them.” But if incidents of this sort have been reported, they were concerning specific persons who were spared jihad for specific reasons. They do not lay down the general rule for all. Obviously, the absence of an individual does not affect a whole body of mujahidin. It is quite possible that the Prophet - as was his wont - knew the conditions of every one of his follower. Perhaps he knew the conditions of this particular person’s parents, and therefore, advised him to stay back. But nobody can say, basing his argument on it, that jihad was a passing phenomenon because of the peculiar situations; and that the situation has now changed. That is not so. And if it is not so, it is not because Islam desires its adherents to saunter in the streets and highways with a naked sword chopping off heads. Rather, it is because the realities of life and the nature of this mission require that it hold the sword and be on its guard every moment. Allah was aware that this mission will be disapproved of by the kings and rulers of the lands, and that it is natural that those in power should oppose it, for its ways are not the ways of the rulers. Its framework is not the framework of the kings: not only yesterday, but even today and tomorrow - in every place and in every epoch. Allah knew that evil is a braggart; that it will never be fair; that it will never allow virtue to flourish, however safe and non-conflicting a path it might choose for itself, for the very growth of virtue is a thing of danger to evil; and the very existence of truth is a threat to falsehood. Therefore, there is no option for evil but a resort to oppression, and there is no option for falsehood but to attempt to exterminate truth and destroy it with brute force. This is the nature of things, and not a passing phenomenon. This is the instinctive tendency and not a temporary phase. Therefore, there is no option to jihad - no choice for Islam but to sanction it - in all its forms. It is incumbent, however, that it should begin in the world of conscience (within the self); then it should grow strong and appear in full light of life and action. There is no alternative but for the evil in arms to be faced up by virtue, also in arms. There is no choice but for armed truth to confront the evil goaded on by its swollen numbers. If that does not happen, then the affair is no more than suicide; or a horseplay that does not deserve the attention of the believers."