حَبِطَتۡ

2:192.

3:84, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.

3:23; 7:148; 18:106.

Important Words:

کبیر (great transgression) really stands for ذنب کبیر i.e. a great sin or great transgression or great offence. اکبر is in the comparative degree and means, a greater sin, etc.

صد (to hinder) is the infinitive from صد. They say صدہ i.e. he prevented him; he turned him back. صد عنه اومنه means, he kept back from it. Thus the word is both transitive and intransitive. صد, therefore, means: (1) to hinder or to prevent; (2) a hindrance or a barrier; (3) a mountain or a wall, etc., because it serves as a barrier (Aqrab).

یردوکم (turn you back) and یرتدد (turns back) are both derived from رد. They say ردہ i.e. he turned him back; and ارتد i.e.he himself turned back. ارتد عن الاسلام means, he turned back from Islam and reverted to a state of disbelief. مرتد means, one who turns back from his religion, particularly from Islam; one who apostatizes (Taj).

حبطت (shall be in vain). حبط البعیر means, the stomach of the camel became inflated and his belly became bound by eating unwholesome food. حبط عمله means: (1) his work or deed became null and void and went for nothing; (2) his work or deed became evil and corrupt. حبط دمه means, his blood went unavenged. حبط ماء البئر means, the water of the well receded and went down never to return to its original level (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The words translated as "to be ungrateful to Him and the Sacred Mosque" may also be rendered as "to be ungrateful to Him and to hinder men from the Sacred Mosque".

The Quran has already explained that if disbelievers violate the sanctity of a sacred month, Muslims may also retaliate in a sacred month; for thus only can the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195).

The present verse provides a further reason for defending Islam, if need be, in a sacred month. Disbelievers, particularly those of Mecca, had violated the sanctity of things far more sacred than a "sacred month"––they were trying forcibly to turn men form the way of God; they were preventing people from approaching the Sacred Mosque and they had forced the Muslim dwellers of Mecca to flee from it. This was a form of persecution which was certainly much more heinous than fighting in a Sacred Month.

Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to the effect, that once the Holy Prophet sent one of his Companions, named ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh, to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his comrades reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party proceeding to Mecca. Guided by his own judgement and without any instruction to that effect from the Prophet, ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date was doubtful, some considering it to be as one of the Sacred Month and others as not. When the news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt as regards date and clamoured that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion (Tabari, Hisham & Zurqani).

The verse acknowledges the sanctity of the Sacred Months and considers it an act of sin and transgression knowingly to fight in a sacred month, but forcefully points out that the sanctities which disbelievers were violating were far more worthy of safeguarding. Disbelievers were forcibly preventing people from accepting Islam. They did not allow Muslims to approach the Sacred Mosque and they had mercilessly turned the Prophet and his followers out of their homes.

The verse should not be understood to imply that Muslims did start a fight in a sacred month, it only purports to bring home to disbelievers the fact that in view of their persistent violation of highly sacred thing, it does not lie in their mouth to accuse Muslim of violating the sanctity of a sacred month.

The clause it is they whose works shall be vain in this world and the next does not mean that everything that a renegade from Islam, or, for that matter, everything that a disbeliever, does will go for nothing and produce no result. The clause only means that such actions of the renegades as they might do to weaken the cause of Islam in this world as well as those of their actions which they might perform in opposition to the teaching of Islam in order to win the pleasure of God in the world to come, will all be in vain. Thus the clause does not refer to such good actions as a person may perform in the state o unbelief; for, as the Quran expressly states, these must have their reward (99:8) which may either take the form of the acceptance of Islam or that of the lightening of punishment. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said about his uncle Abu Talib that on account of the good treatment the latter extended to him, he is likely to be only lightly punished for his non-acceptance of Islam (Bukhari). On another occasion when Hakim bin Hizam, a nephew of his wife Khadijah, asked the Prophet whether he would get any reward for the good deeds he did before he accepted Islam, the Holy Prophet said, "your very acceptance of Islam is a reward thereof" (Bukhari).

The clause, their works shall be vain in this world and the next, also signifies that if such men as apostatize from Islam had not done so, their deeds would have brought them the great reward promised to Muslims both in this world and the next, but by apostatizing from Islam they had totally deprived themselves of this twofold reward.

Finally, the clause, and they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can, throws a flood of light on the attitude of disbelievers towards Muslim. They were not only the first to begin hostilities, but had also vowed not to cease fighting until Islam had been totally wiped out from Arabia and not a soul remained to call himself a Muslim. This clear testimony of the Quran should be an eye-opener for those who accuse Muslims of being aggressors in their early struggle against disbelievers. The words, if they can, are highly eulogistic of the Companions of the Holy Prophet. Do what they could, disbelievers would never be able to turn back Muslims from their faith. Their love for Islam was too deep to be extirpated by persecution however severe and bitter it might be.

2:218; 7:148; 18:106.

Commentary:

Disbelievers have no faith in the retribution of the life to come; so as a proof of the fact that their deeds will not avail them at all on the Day of Resurrection, they are told that in the present life also their efforts to destroy Islam will prove futile and this will be evidence of the fact that in the life to come their works will be of no use to them. Two facts have been foretold, one relating to this life and the other to the life to come. When the former turns out to be true, the latter will also have to be regarded as true. It must not, however, be thought that all the works of disbelievers will come to naught; for, elsewhere the Quran says, Whosoever does a little of good will have its reward (99:8). This shows that the present verse refers to such works only as are done to destroy or weaken Islam or such works as are opposed to the teachings of Islam.

3:12; 5:11; 7:37; 21:78.

Commentary:

The verse serves as a great warning for all men. One should not live on pious hopes. Only good works count when rewards are meted out.

18:106.

Important Words:

The word الذی in the clauseکالذی خاضوا (as they indulged in idle talk) has been variously explained. Either (1) it is in the sense of منor ما . being used as a plural and giving the sense of الذین; or (2) it has the wordخوض understood before it, the full clause being کخوض الذی خاضوہ i.e. like the idle talk in which they indulged; or (3) it has the word فوج or some similar word understood before it, the full clause in this case being کالفوج الذی خاضوا i.e. like the party which indulged in idle talk, etc. (Kashshaf & Shaukani).

Commentary:

The reference in the pronoun "you" in the words, before you, may be either to the hypocrites in general or to ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy (the leader of the hypocrites) and his close associates in particular. The words, those before you, are explained in the following verse.

Commentary:

This verse relates to idolatrous pilgrims and serves as an introduction to the announcement contained in 9:28 below. No idolater was henceforth to be allowed to approach the Ka‘bah, as announced by ‘Ali to the pilgrims assembled at Mecca on the occasion of the Greater Pilgrimage of the year 9 AH (see note on 9:3 above). The verse under comment gives the reason for that prohibition. The Ka‘bah being a temple dedicated to the worship of the One God, idolaters had nothing to do with it. They were declared enemies of God’s Unity who bore witness to their own idolatrous beliefs and thus stood condemned by their own confession. Moreover, while performing the Pilgrimage, idolaters, instead of declaring God’s Oneness, attributed co-partners to Him, for it is on record that, while reciting the prescribed formula: "Here I am, O my Lord, here I am; Thou hast no co-partner" they used to add the words "except him whom Thou hast Thyself made Thy co-partner." The words, while they bear witness against themselves to disbelief, beside being general in their significance, may also refer to this practice of idolaters.