Аль-Худжурат 49:7–12

The Holy Prophet's ﷺ Decision is Better

According to the previous verse, Walid Ibn 'Uqbah ؓ reported that Banul-Mustaliq had turned apostate and refused to pay Zakah. At this, the blessed Companions were disturbed and infuriated. They expressed the view that jihad should be declared on them immediately, but the Holy Prophet ﷺ rejected his report on the basis of strong circumstantial evidence to the contrary. He sent Khalid Ibn Walid for investigation. In the foregoing verse, the Qur’ an enjoined that if there are strong reasons to doubt the report conveyed by any person, it is not lawful to act upon it before investigation. In this verse the noble Companions ؓ are given one more guideline: 'Although when you heard the news about Banul-Mustaliq's apostasy, you reacted the way you reacted, and that was on account of your religious zeal and enthusiasm, yet your view was not right and proper. The decision taken by the Holy Prophet ﷺ proved to be better (Mazhari). Thus in matters requiring consultation it is proper to express a view but it is not proper for you to exert efforts to get the Holy Prophet ﷺ to act upon your opinion. Although there is a rare possibility that an opinion expressed by the Holy Prophet ﷺ in some worldly matters comes to be against worldly expedience, and this is not contrary to the station of his prophethood, yet Allah has gifted him with such insight, perspicacity and discernment which you do not have. Therefore, if the Holy Prophet ﷺ were to follow your opinion, in many matters, you will suffer loss and fall into difficulties. If rarely ever your opinion is right or proper, it is still better to abandon your opinion and obey the Holy Prophet ﷺ . By doing so it is possible that you may suffer some worldly loss, but it would not be as harmful as his following your opinion. In this case, even if you suffer any worldly loss, the reward of obedience to the Holy Prophet ﷺ is a better compensation.

Lexically, the word is derived from and it connotes "to commit a sin or crime" and it also means "to suffer from hardship". In this context, both connotations appropriately fit (Qurtubi).

Linkage

In the foregoing verses the rights of the Prophet were set out. They also laid down the mannerism in which he should be treated. The verses prohibited any act that would annoy or hurt him. Now this set of verses [ 9-10] establishes the manners, mores, injunctions, and mutual rights and obligations to be observed in individual and social life. The common value of all these rules is to avoid causing any inconvenience to the members of the society.

Occasion of Revelation

The commentators have narrated several incidents as a background of the revelation of these verses. Among them is the clash that took place between two Muslim groups. It is not inconceivable that the totality of these incidents might have been the occasion of revelation. It is also possible that one of these incidents has been the cause of revelation and the other incidents, being similar, were also termed as the occasion of revelation.

Although the immediate addressees of this verse are rulers and those in authority who have the means to fight and wage war, [ as stated by Abu Hayyan in Al-Bahr and preferred by ` Alusi in Ruh-ul-Ma` ani ] all Muslims are addressed in this verse indirectly to assist those in authority in this matter. Where there is no leader, 'amir, king or president, the rule is that the two warring parties should be advised, as far as possible, to cease war. If this is not possible, common people are ordered to stay away from both warring groups: they should neither oppose nor aid any one of them. ] Bayan-ul-Qur’ an ].

'Related Issues and Injunctions

There are several forms of mutual fighting between two Muslim parties: [ 1] both parties are subjects of a Muslim government; [ 2] neither of the parties is the subject of a Muslim government; [ 3] one of the parties his the subject of a Muslim government, but not the other. In the first case, it is compulsory for common Muslims to bring about an understanding between them and try to stop the mutual fighting. If they do not cease fighting by negotiations, then it is imperative for the Muslim ruler to take measures against them. If both parties cease fighting by the intervention of the Islamic government, then the laws of retaliation, retribution and blood-wit will apply. If they do not cease, then both parties will be treated like rebels. If one of the parties withdrew and the other persisted in oppression and transgression, then the persistent group will be treated like a rebel group. The obedient group will be designated as 'Adil" (just). The detailed laws pertaining to rebels may be perused in books of Islamic law. Briefly, the law comprehends the following: Before fighting, their weapons must be seized and confiscated. Then they must be arrested and kept in prison until they repent. Neither in the course of fighting nor after fighting should their children be enslaved. Their wealth should not be treated like the spoils of war. In fact, their wealth will be held in trust until they repent. After repentance their belongings will be returned to them. In the above verses, we come across the following directive:

فَإِن فَاءَتْ فَأَصْلِحُوا بَيْنَهُمَا بِالْعَدْلِ وَأَقْسِطُوا

'...So if it comes back, seek reconciliation between them with fairness, and maintain justice.' [ 49:9]

It means that if the belligerent party ceases fighting, then do not only stop fighting but also think about eliminating the cause of war and mutual dissatisfaction, so that the heart-burnings may come to an end. All enmity and hostilities will thus cease and an atmosphere of brotherhood may prevail for all times to come. Since these people have fought against the Muslim ruler, it was possible that they would not be treated by him equitably. Therefore, the Qur'an lays stress on setting things right between them equitably and justly, so that the rights of no one are violated [ Adapted from Bayan-ul-Qur’ an with reference to Hidayah ].

Ruling

If a very powerful group of Muslims revolts against the Muslim ruler, then it is necessary for the ruler to first hear out their complaint or cause of their dissatisfaction. If a doubt or a misunderstanding has arisen in their mind about some matter, it should be removed. If they show such cause on the basis of which it is permissible in Shari’ ah to oppose a Muslim leader or ruler, like unjust behavior on the part of the government, it is essential for the general body of Muslims to assist the group, so that the leader or ruler may refrain from his tyranny, provided that his tyranny is proved beyond any shadow of doubt (Ibn-ul-Humam; Mazhari). If they cannot show any clearly legitimate reason for their dissatisfaction, revolt, disobedience, and waging war against the Muslim ruler, it is permitted for Muslims to wage war against the rebels. Imam Shafi` i (رح) held that the Muslims should not initiate fight against the rebels unless they first start the fight [ Mazhari ]. This law applies when it is positively and unquestionably clear that the group is rebellious. However, if it is difficult to determine which group is rebellious and which is just, because each party has a valid Shari argument to justify its course of action, then the pros and cons of both parties may be weighed to determine the party that is "just" on the principle of probability. If the juristic argument of one party seems to someone more convincing, it is permitted for him to assist such a group. If someone cannot prefer the standpoint of any one of them, he should remain neutral, as it happened in the civil wars of the Battle of Camel and the Battle of Siffin when many noble Companions ؓ remained aloof.

Conflicts of the Noble Companions ؓ

Imam Abu Bakr Ibn-ul-` Arabi says that this verse of battle between Muslims covers all cases. It includes the case where both parties prepare for war on grounds of a principle of Shari’ ah. Civil wars of the noble Companions ؓ were of this nature. Qurtubi, quoting this view of Ibn-ul-` Arabi, explains the actual situation of the Battle of Camel and the Battle of Siffin and gives guidelines for later generations of Muslims to follow in the light of the battles of the blessed Companions ؓ . This author has dealt with this subject in "Ahkam-ul-Qur'an" in Arabic and his Urdu book "Maqame-Sahabah".The summary of the discussion given in that book with reference to Qurtubi (V.16, P.322) is as follows:

It is not permitted to attribute categorically, and with certainty, to any of the Companions that he was absolutely wrong in his action, because each of them acted according to his own Ijtihad. Their objective was to seek the pleasure of Allah. The Companions ؓ are all our leaders, and it is enjoined upon us that we should hold back our tongue from talking about their mutual differences, and always speak the best things about them. Prophet's companionship is a highly honourable position which should not be violated. The Holy Prophet ﷺ has prohibited to revile them or talk bad about them, and informed us that they have been forgiven and that Allah is pleased with them. Besides, there is the Hadith regarding Sayyidna Talhah ؓ reaching us through several transmitting authorities that:

انّ طلحہ شھید یمشی علی وجہ الارض

"Talhah is a martyr walking on the face of the earth."

If Sayyidna Talhah ؓ was committing a clear sin by going out to wage war against Sayyidna ` Ali, ؓ he could not attain the high status of a martyr. In the same way, if his act might be regarded as a failure to perform his duty on the basis of a clearly wrong interpretation, he would still not attain the status of martyrdom. Martyrdom is attained only when a person is killed in obedience of Allah. Therefore, it is necessary to construe the matter of the Companions ؓ in terms of the principle mentioned above.

Another proof of this is available in authentic and well-established Ahaadith which are reported by Sayyidna ` Ali ؓ himself where the Holy Prophet ﷺ said: "The killer of Zubair is in Hell." Furthermore, Sayyidna ` Ali ؓ reports that the Prophet ﷺ said: "Give news to the killer of Sayyidah Safiyyah's ؓ عنہا son that he will be in Hell." In the light of this we need to believe that Sayyidna Zubair and Sayyidna Talhah ؓ were not sinners or disobedient to Allah in the position taken by them in the battle. Otherwise the Holy Prophet ﷺ would not have referred to Sayyidna Talhah ؓ as a martyr, nor would he predict about the killer of Zubair ؓ that he would be in Hell. Also, he is counted among the ten who were given the glad tidings of attaining Paradise. Traditions relating to this subject have almost reached the grade of continuity [ tawatur ] and the Traditions are referred to as ahadith mutawatir.

Likewise the noble Companions ؓ ، who did not participate in the battles on either side, cannot be regarded as defaulters because their behaviour, conduct and attitude in this matter was also based on their ijtihad, and Allah maintained them thus. Therefore, it is not proper in any sense of the word to curse them, to taunt them, to hold them as sinners, and to neglect their virtues, their struggles and their great religious stations. Some of the scholars were posed the question: what is your view regarding the blood that was shed in the battles that took place among the blessed Companions ؓ ? They simply recited the following verse of the Qur'an:

تِلْكَ أُمَّةٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ ۖ لَهَا مَا كَسَبَتْ وَلَكُم مَّا كَسَبْتُمْ ۖ وَلَا تُسْأَلُونَ عَمَّا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ ﴿134﴾

'Those are a people who have passed away. For them what they earned, and for you what you earned. And you shall not be questioned as to what they have been doing. [ 2:134] '

The same question was posed to another scholar. He replied: "Allah saved my hands from being soiled with that blood. Now I will not soil my tongue with it." He meant that he does not wish to make the mistake of categorically adjudging any one of the groups as the defaulter.

` Allamah Ibn-Fuwarrak (رح) says:

"Some of our colleagues feel that the example of the conflicts that took place between the noble Companions ؓ is like that of the episodes of conflict that occurred between Sayyidna Yusuf (علیہ السلام) and his brothers. They, despite their mutual differences, did not lose their status of wilayah and nubuwwah. The same principle applies to the matter of conflicts that occurred between the Companions."

Sayyidna Muhasibi (رح) says: "As far as this bloodshed is concerned, it is difficult for us to say anything because there was a difference of opinion in this regard among the noble Companions ؓ themselves."

When Hasan Al-Basri (رح) was asked the question concerning the wars between the noble Companions ؓ ، he replied:

"Those were fights in which the Companions were present and we were not. They knew all the circumstances and we do not know them. The matter in which the Companions are unanimous, we follow; and the matter in which there is difference of opinion, we observe silence."

Sayyidna Muhasibi (رح) says:

"We concur with Hasan Al-Basri (رح) . We know that when the noble Companions meddled in any matter, they knew fully well why they were doing it. Our task is merely to follow them where they are unanimous, and where they differ we observe silence. We should not on our own introduce new ideas. We are assured that they must have exercised ijtihad and sought the pleasure of Allah. Therefore, in matters of religion they are all beyond doubt."

(). It means that calling others with bad nicknames is a sinful act, and the real bad name for a person after embracing Faith is that he is known among people for sinful acts. Therefore, if a Muslim commits the sin of calling others with bad nicknames, and it is known among people, then the real bad name is earned by himself, and not by the person whom he has abused with that nickname. (Muhammad Taqi Usmani)

Prohibition of Ridiculing One Another

The beginning part of this chapter laid down the Prophet's ﷺ rights and the etiquettes to be observed when dealing with him. Then the Holy Qur'an has started mentioning the mutual rights and good manners for the general body of Muslims to be observed among themselves. The injunctions laid down in the preceding two verses related to the collective reformation of the society. Now the current verse mentions the rights and etiquettes to be observed between individuals. Thus the verse prohibits three social evils: [ 1] ridiculing one another; [ 2] finding fault with one another; and [ 3] reviling one another with nicknames.

According to Qurtubi, mocking or scoffing does not only connote mocking with the tongue, but it also implies mimicking someone, making pointed references to him, laughing at his words, his works, his appearance, his dress or calling people's attention to some of his defects, so that they may laugh at him. Mocking includes all of this. By the clear text of the Qur'an, poking fun at someone or ridiculing him is absolutely forbidden.

Stylistically, the Qur'an has, on this occasion, addressed men and women separately. Men are referred to as qawm, a word that is specifically reserved for male members of the human society, though by extension the word most often includes the female members of the human society as well. The Qur'an, however, generally employs the word qawm for both men and women, but here it is specifically used for men in contradistinction to the word nisa' which specifically refers to women. Here both men and women are reminded that mocking one another is a disdainful and evil act. They must refrain from it, because it is very likely that the man who is mocked at may be better than the mocking person and the woman who is mocked at may be better than the mocker. Here the Qur'an prohibits men from mocking other men, and women from mocking other women. This, however, does not mean that it is permitted for men to mock at women or for women to mock at men. The actual reason for making separate mention of the two sexes is that Islam does not allow free intermingling of the two sexes. Ridiculing each other generally occurs where there is such an intermingling. Therefore, in a Muslim society it is inconceivable that men would mock a woman or women would mock a man in an intermingling situation.

In short: no one dare make mockery of a person whose body, face, shape and stature are defective, imperfect, impaired or deformed, because he does not know that the other person, in the sight of Allah, might be better than him on account of his sincerity and purity of heart. When the righteous predecessors heard this verse, they adopted a conducive attitude: For example, Sayyidna ` Amr Ibn Shurahbil ؓ said that he would not laugh at a person when he sees him drink milk direct from the udders of a goat, lest he should become one like him. Sayyidna ` Abdullah Ibn Masud ؓ said: "I would not like to scoff at a dog, lest I be Metamorphosed into a dog (Qurtubi)."

It is recorded in Sahib of Muslim on the authority of Sayyidna Abu 'Hurairah ؓ that the Holy Prophet ﷺ said: "Allah does not look at your Faces and your wealth; He looks at your hearts and your works." Qurtubi derives a legal maxim from this tradition of the Holy Prophet ﷺ that in any matter it is not proper to pass a categorical judgment on the basis of overt evidence or circumstances, because it is possible that a person's overt actions might seem to be good but in the sight of Allah, on account of the insincerity and impurity of his heart, they could be bad, as He is fully aware of the inner state of people's hearts. On the contrary, a person's overt actions might seem to us bad, but in the sight of Allah, on account of the sincerity and purity of his heart, they could serve as an expiation of the bad actions, as He is fully aware of the inner state of people's heart.

The next thing that is prohibited in the verse is lamz which connotes to find fault with someone or to upbraid him. The verse says, وَلَا تَلْمِزُوا أَنفُسَكُمْ literally it means, "Do not find fault with your selves." But the intention is: "Do not find fault with one another-" [ 49:11] as is seen in the translation above. This expression is similar to the expression وَلَا تَقْتُلُوا أَنفُسَكُمْ '...And do not kill yourselves - [ 4:29] '. Although the verse commands "do not kill yourselves", it purports to say "do not kill one another". This expression indicates that, from one point of view, killing another person amounts to killing oneself. Often it happens that if one person kills another person, the victim's supporters kill the murderer. Even if this does not happen, a Muslim is the brother of another Muslim. Killing one's brother is like killing oneself and rendering oneself crippled, helpless and powerless. Similarly, the expression لَا تَلْمِزُوا أَنفُسَكُمْ 'and not find fault with yourselves' means when you find fault with others and upbraid them, others will find fault with you and upbraid you, because no man is normally free from any fault. Scholars have formulated the maxim: وفیک عیوب و للنّاس اعین "You have faults and people have eyes" with which they see them. Thus if someone seeks out the imperfections of some other person and broadcasts them, the latter will do the same in return. If, however, he exercises patience and evades retaliation to his verbal attacks, it comes down to the same thing: If one considers carefully, he will find that defaming and despising one's Muslim brother is actually casting aspersions on oneself.

Scholars have suggested that the satisfaction, well-being and happiness of man lies in examining his own faults and finding ways of mending them. This approach to life will give him no time to find fault with others and broadcast it. How well the last king of India Bahadur Shah Zafar has versified it!

نہ تھی حال کی جب ہمیں اپنی خبر رہے دیکھتے لوگوں کے عیب و ہنر

پڑی اپنی برایٌوں پر جو نظر تو جہان میں کویٔی بُرا نہ رہا

As long as we were unaware of our own faults, we looked into the faults and failings of others;

But when we looked at our own faults there remained no one faulty in the world.

The third thing that is prohibited in the verse is reviling one another with nicknames which are offensive to them, e.g. calling a person lame, hands cropped, blind or one-eyed; or referring to him by other offensive nicknames. Sayyidna Abu Jabirah Ansari ؓ says, "This verse was revealed in connection with us. When we migrated to Madinah, most of us had two or three names. Some of them were popularised in order to denigrate, defame or belittle the bearer of the name. The Holy Prophet ﷺ was not aware of this situation; as a result he sometimes called them by one of these offensive names unwittingly. The noble Companions ؓ informed the Prophet ﷺ that the name offends the bearer of that name. This verse was revealed on that occasion." Sayyidna Ibn-Abbas ؓ says that prohibition of tanabuz bil-alqab means that if a person committed a sin or performed an evil deed from which he repented and mended his ways, it is unlawful for anyone to call him by denigrating names, such as thief, an adulterer, a drunkard or any such name. The Prophet ﷺ is reported to have said: "Anyone who denigrates a Muslim who has committed a sin of which he has repented, Allah takes it upon Himself that He will get the person to commit the very same sin and expose him to embarrassment and humiliation in this world and in the Hereafter [ Qurtubi ].

Exception to the Rule

There are some nicknames, which though apparently offensive, are not intended to defame or insult the bearer of that name, but they rather serve as a symbol of identification. That is why scholars have permitted to attach titles to the names of the traditionalists - like A'raj [ lame, cripple ] or ahdab [ humpbacked, hunchbacked ] provided they are not intended to insult or defame. The Holy Prophet ﷺ himself named a Companion dhul-yadain because his hands were relatively long. ` Abdullah Ibn Mubarak was posed the question: "In the asanid [ chains of authorities on which a tradition is based ] we come across names to which are attached titles like Hamid At-Tawil [ Hamid, the Tall ], Sulaiman al-A'mash [ Sulaiman the weak-eyed ] and Marwan al-Asfar [ Marwan, the Yellow ]: are these titles allowed?" He replied: “ If your intention is not to insult or defame, but rather to complete identification, it is permitted." [ Qurtubi ]

It is Sunnah to call people by Good Titles

The Holy Prophet ﷺ is reported to have said that it is the right of a believer to call his fellow-believers by good names and titles which they like the best. Therefore the use of kunniyyah [ agnomen/cognomen ] had become commonplace in Arabia. The Holy Prophet ﷺ also favoured this, and consequently he himself bestowed appropriate titles on some of the individual Companions, e.g. Abu Bakr Siddiq ؓ received the title of ` Atiq [ the noble ], Sayyidna ` Umar ؓ ، the title of Faruq [ he who distinguishes truth from falsehood ], Sayyidna Hamzah ؓ the title of Asadullah [ the lion of Allah ] and Khalid Ibn Walid, the title of Saifullah [ the sword of Allah ].

Analysis of the Verse

This verse too comprises injunctions relating to mutual rights and manners to be observed in social life. It prohibits three things: [ 1] ظن zann [ unfounded suspicion ], the details to follow: [ 2] تَجَسُّس tajassus [ spying, looking secretly into the faults of others ]; and [ 3] غِیبَہ ghibah [ backbiting, speaking in of a person behind his back which if he heard would hurt or injure his feelings ].

[ 1] Prohibition of Unfounded Suspicion

Zann primarily denotes assumption on probable evidence. In the first instance, the Qur'an sets down "Abstain from many of the suspicions.” and gives reason for that: "some suspicion are sins". This shows that not all types of suspicion are a sin. Thus it is incumbent on the readers to investigate which type is a sin, so that they may avoid it. If the uneasy feeling and the conviction that something is wrong, someone is guilty, or some danger is afoot is based on partial evidence, and not confirmed by out-and-out evidence, it is not permitted to act on it. Scholars and jurists have given a detailed account of it. Qurtubi says that in this context Zann connotes "accusation", that is, a charge of wrongdoing, as with guilt, crime, offense or blame without any strong evidence. Imam Abu Bakr Jassas (رح) in Ahkam-ul-Qur'an gives the following details. Zann is divisible into four categories. [ 1] prohibited; [ 2] imperative; [ 3] recommended, desirable; and [ 4] permissible. Distrust of Allah or suspecting His trust is prohibited. For instance, it is not permitted to think ill of Allah in that He will punish him or keep him in calamity all the time without forgiving him or showing mercy to him, thus despairing of His grace. Sayyidna Jabir ؓ reports that the Holy Prophet ﷺ " said:

لا یموتنّ احدکم اِلَّا وھو یحسن الظنّ باللہ

"None of you should die without having favourable thoughts about Allah."

According to another hadtth, Allah Ta` ala says:

اَنَا عند ظنّ عبدی بی

"I treat my servants the way they think about me."

This shows that holding favourable thoughts about Allah is compulsory and thinking ill of Him is prohibited. Likewise it is prohibited to entertain suspicion, without rational grounds, about Muslims whose outer conditions show that they are good and noble.

Sayyidna Abu Hurairah ؓ reports that the Holy Prophet ﷺ said:

ایّاکم و الظّنّ فانّ الظّنّ الکذب الحدیث

"Avoid suspicion, for suspicion is the worst of false talks...".

In this context, Zann by common consent of scholars stands for thinking ill of a Muslim without any concrete proof. However, if there is a matter in which it is necessary to take a decision in either way, and there is no absolute and clear-cut proof based on the Qur'an and Sunnah for that particular situation, it is imperative to act on the strength of the best possible assessment, termed in Islamic jurisprudence as ''A -zann-ul-ghalib' This is the approved practice in cases that come to the law-courts for settlement. In a court of law, a judge has to deliver his decision on the basis of the principle of "the best possible assessment" relying on the testimony of people worthy of confidence, even though there is the possibility that one of the witnesses at that particular moment might have lied. The testimony of the witness is based on "best assessment" and not on "absolute certainty". The judge does not have direct knowledge of the facts of the matter, nor is there a transparent text of the Qur'an and Sunnah. In cases like these where one or the other decision has to be taken, and the absolute knowledge of the reality cannot possibly be attained, there is no way out but to formulate a judgment on the basis of best possible assessment.'

Likewise when the direction of qiblah is not known, nor is there a person that can show one the direction of qiblah, it is compulsory for him to determine it on the basis of "best possible assessment". If a person has destroyed a valuable thing of someone, and a compensation has been imposed on him, he is liable to pay the value of it on the basis of 'best possible assessment'.

The example of permissible Zann is like that of a person performing prayers and in the course of it suspects whether he has performed three rak'at or four, he is permitted to apply the 'best possible assessment' and complete the prayers accordingly. If, however, he does not wish to apply this principle, but wishes to act on the principle of 'certainty', thinking that he has certainly performed three rak'at, and thus completes the fourth one, that too is possible.

And desirable Zann refers to having favourable thoughts about every Muslim. That is rewardable [ condensed from Jassas ].

Qurtubi quotes the Qur’ anic verse

لَّوْلَا إِذْ سَمِعْتُمُوهُ ظَنَّ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتُ بِأَنفُسِهِمْ

'...why, when you (0 believers,) heard of it, did the believing men and women not think well on their own selves - [ 24:12] '.

This verse emphasizes to have good thoughts about the believers. The following aphorism apparently seems contrary to this rule:

انّ من الحزم سوء الظّنّ

"It is prudence to have ill thoughts about every person."

But this means to be as precautious when dealing with others as one would deal in suspicious cases: e.g. one should not hand over one's thing to anyone without strong reliance. It does not mean that he should regard anyone as a thief or run him down. In brief, one should take precautionary measures in the predicament one is placed in without labeling people as thieves or perfidious.

[ 2] Prohibition of Spying

The second social evil that is prohibited in the verse is tajassus, spying or prying secretly into the faults of others. An alternative reading of تَجَسُّس tajassus [ with "J"] is tahassus [ with "H"]. In a hadith recorded in Sahihain on the authority of Abu Hurairah ؓ the Holy Prophet ﷺ said:

لا تَجَسَّسُوا ولَا تَحَسَّسُوا

"...do not spy on one another; do not look for other's faults...".

The two words in Arabic are near-synonyms. Akhfash draws attention to the nuances or subtle differences in their meaning: tajassus connotes looking into the affairs of people which they have kept hidden, whilst tahassus connotes searching in general as in the following verse of the Holy Qur'an.

تَحَسَّسُوا مِن يُوسُفَ وَأَخِيهِ

'...search for Yusuf and his brother' - [ 12:87]

However, the term tahassus [ searching ], like tajassus [ spying ], could have an evil connotation in which case the Holy Prophet ﷺ has prohibited it. The verse signifies that one may take into account what is presented in evidence, but it is not permitted to search for faults that are not overt. The Holy Prophet ﷺ says:

لا تغتابوا المسلمین ولا تتّبعوا عوراتھم فان من اتبّع عوراتھم یتبع اللہ عورتۃ و من یتّبع اللہ عورتۃ یفضحہ فی بیتہ (قرطبی)

"Do not speak ill of Muslims behind their backs, and do not search out their faults, for he who searches out their faults will have his faults searched out by Allah, and he whose faults are searched out by Allah will be exposed by Him, even though he should be in the interior of his house" [ Qurtubi ].

Bayan-ul-Qur'an interprets that tajassus [ spying ] and tahassus [ searching ] include the sense of listening to people without their permission when they are talking, or eavesdropping at their doors. However, if there is an apprehension that some member of the Muslim community may be harmed by some mischief-makers, it is permitted for others to spy to protect the innocent and peaceful people, and search furtively for the intentions and conspiracies of such people who are a danger to the society.

[ 3] Prohibition of Backbiting

The third social evil this verse prohibits is ghibah [ backbiting ]. This connotes speaking ill of a person behind his back which if he heard would hurt or injure his feelings, even if what was said about him was the truth; if what was said about him was untruth, it is slander or false accusation. The prohibition of slander is prohibited elsewhere in the Qur'an. In the definition of backbiting the phrase "behind his back / in his absence" appears. This does not mean that it is permissible to say hurtful things in the presence of somebody. This may not be backbiting, but it certainly falls under lamz which is prohibited in the preceding verse.

أَيُحِبُّ أَحَدُكُمْ أَن يَأْكُلَ لَحْمَ أَخِيهِ مَيْتًا

(Does one of you like that he eats the flesh of his dead brother? - 49:12)

This verse sternly warns against disgracing a Muslim and compares it to eating the flesh of a human being. If the victim of disgrace is present before the offender, it is like eating the flesh of a living person, and the Holy Qur'an has termed it as 'lamz' which is prohibited in verse 11, as well as in another Surah by saying,

وَيْلٌ لِّكُلِّ هُمَزَةٍ لُّمَزَةٍ

'Woe to every backbiter, derider [ 104:1] '

And if the victim is not present, and someone speaks ill of him in a way that he is insulted, then it is like eating the flesh of a dead human being. Just as it does not cause any physical torture to a dead body, backbiting does not hurt the victim when he is not aware of it, but just as eating the flesh of a dead body is an extremely inhuman act, so is the backbiting. Both are prohibited. Otherwise also, speaking ill of someone in his absence is an unkind, mean and malicious act; it is not an act of valour and bravery.

This verse prohibits three social evils: unfounded suspicion, unjustifiable search for faults and backbiting. However, backbiting is most severely and harshly condemned. It is compared to eating the flesh of a dead Muslim, thus bringing out the gravity of its prohibition, unkindness and meanness. The wisdom of it lies in the fact that saying hurtful things to the face of someone is prohibited, but the man, being present, will be able to defend himself. Further, for fear of defense not everybody will have the courage to utter hurtful things to the face of someone, and usually it does not last long. It is unlike backbiting where there is no one to defend it, and thus the most mean person would pluck the courage to backbite the greatest of men. Because it is not defended, generally the ball keeps rolling, and more and more people get involved. Therefore, backbiting is prohibited most severely and harshly. It is necessary for the general body of Muslims to defend their brother, if possible, when people speak ill of him in his absence. If that is not possible, they should at least abstain from listening to it, because listening to it willfully and intentionally is like backbiting itself.

Some Issues Related to Backbiting

Sayyidna Maimun ؓ says that once he saw in a dream that there is a dead body of a Negro. A caller addressed him and said: "Eat this." Sayyidna Maimun ؓ says: "I said: '0 servant of God! Why should I eat this?" The caller replied: "Because you have been backbiting a certain person's Negro slave." Sayyidna Maimun ؓ said: "By God, I did not do that." The caller replied: "Yes, you did: you listened to people backbiting him and remained silent as if you were in agreement with them." After this dream, Sayyidna Maimun ؓ composed himself and he himself stopped backbiting and he did not allow anyone else in his presence to backbite.

In a narration of Sayyidna Anas Ibn Malik ؓ relating to Holy Prophet’ s ﷺ experience of Mi` raj, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "When I was taken up to the heaven, I passed by people who had fingernails of copper and were scratching their faces and breasts violently. I asked Jibra'il: 'Who are these people?' He replied: 'They are those people who were given to backbiting their brothers and who aspersed their honour.' [ transmitted by al-Baghawi as cited in Mazhari ]. Sayyidna Abu Said and Jabir ؓ report that the Holy Prophet ﷺ has said:

"Backbiting is worse than adultery. The noble Companions ؓ inquired: 'How so, Messenger of Allah?' He replied: 'A person may commit fornication, repent of it and his sin is forgiven. But the sin of backbiting is not forgiven unless the injured party forgives." [ Transmitted by Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud, as cited in Mazhari ].

This hadith indicates that backbiting is not only a violation of the Divine right, but also a violation of human right. Therefore, it is necessary to seek the forgiveness of the injured party. Some of the scholars express the view that backbiting does not become a human right unless the injured party comes to know about it. Therefore, seeking his pardon is not necessary [ Quoted in Ruh-ul-Ma’ ani from Hasan, Al-Khayyati, Ibn-us-sabbagh, An-Nawawi, Ibn-us-Salah, Az-Zarakshi, Ibn ` Abd-ul-Barr from Ibn-ul-Mubarak ]. This is quoted in Bayan-ul-Qur'an and explained as follows: If the victim of backbiting is not aware that someone has spoken ill of him, it might not be necessary for the backbiter to beg pardon of the victim, but it is necessary that he falsifies himself before the person whom he addressed when backbiting, or at least confesses his guilt before him. If the victim is dead or has disappeared, the atonement is recorded in a narration of Sayyidna Anas ؓ where the Holy Prophet ﷺ has said:

ان من کفَّارۃ الغیبۃ ان یستغفر لمن اغتابہ تقول اللَّھمّ اغفرلنا ولہ

"The atonement of backbiting is to invoke forgiveness of Allah for the victim in the following words: 0 Allah, forgive our sins and his sins". [ Transmitted by Baihaqi and cited in Mazhari ].

Ruling [ 1]

It is prohibited to backbite children, insane and non-Muslim citizens of an Islamic state, because hurting them is prohibited. Hurting harbi infidels who are the inhabitants of Dar-ul-Harb [ hostile country ] is not prohibited. However, backbiting them, on account of wastage of time, is makruh, and reprehensible.

Ruling [ 2]

Backbiting does not only connote speaking ill of a person behind his back, but it also connotes an action or pointed reference to him, as for instance if someone imitates the limp or uneven walking of a lame person to make fun of him, it is not permitted.

Ruling [ 3]

Some narrations show that the general prohibition of backbiting in the verse is subject to exceptions in special cases and specific circumstances. It is permitted if the need for backbiting is real and genuine from the Shari` ah point of view. Examples are as follows:

[ a ] Complaining against a tyrant before a person who can relieve him from the tyranny and injustice.

[ b ] Complaining about the wife and children to the father and husband who can put them right.

[ c ] Giving a full account of the case in order to obtain a fatwa (ruling of Shari’ ah)

[ d ] Warning the Muslims of the mischief of a mischief-monger so that they may ward off the evil.

[ e ] When someone consults another person in any matter, it is obligatory for him to apprise him of all aspects, including weaknesses, so that he is not deceived because of ignorance.

[ f ] If a person commits sins openly and publishes his ungodly behaviour himself, it is not prohibited to make mention of his bad deeds. However, it is abominable and reprehensible to indulge in it on account of wastage of time [ Bayan-ul-Qur'an with reference to Ruh-ul-Ma’ ani ].

But the necessary condition for invoking these exceptions is that speaking ill of someone is not with the intention of insulting or disgracing him, but only to fulfill a genuine need.