Surah Al-Hujuraat (49): Read Online and Download - English Translation

Background of Revelation

According to Ibn Kathir, it is reported in Musnad of Ahmad that Harith Ibn Dirar Ibn Abi Dirar, the leader of the tribe of Banul-Mustaliq, whose daughter Sayyidah Juwairiyah ؓ was one of the blessed wives of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، came up to the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and he called him towards Islam and asked him to pay his Zakah. He says, "I embraced Islam and pledged to pay Zakah, and said to the Holy Prophet ﷺ that I would go to my people, call them towards Islam and ask them to pay Zakah. Those who would accept my invitation and pay the compulsory alms, I would collect their alms. I requested that on a designated date of a designated month, a collector be sent to me, so that the alms might be handed over to him." Accordingly, when Harith had collected the alms of the believers and the alms collector did not arrive on the designated date or even long after that, he feared that may be the Holy Prophet ﷺ is displeased with them for some reason or the other. Otherwise it was unlikely for the Holy Prophet ﷺ not to keep his promise. Harith ؓ expressed his apprehension to the leaders of the new Muslims, and wanted them to go to the Holy Prophet ﷺ . On the other hand, the Holy Prophet ﷺ had sent Walid Ibn 'Uqbah to collect the Zakah from them. However, on his way he thought that the members of that tribe are his old enemies and feared that they might kill him. With this fear he returned to Madinah, and said to the Holy Prophet ﷺ that they refused to pay Zakah, and wanted to kill him. On hearing this, the Holy Prophet ﷺ became very angry, and under the command of Khalid Ibn Walid he dispatched a force of fighters in the way of Allah. On the one hand, this contingent was dispatched, and on the other hand Harith Ibn Dirar with his people was on his way to meet the Holy Prophet ﷺ . The two groups met near Madinah. Harith inquired: "To whom have you been sent?" They replied: "We are sent to you". Harith inquired: "for what purpose?" They narrated the mission of Walid Ibn 'Uqbah who reported to the Holy Prophet ﷺ that the tribe of Banul-Mustaliq refused to pay Zakah and planned to kill him. Harith said on oath, "I swear by Allah who sent Muhammad as His true Messenger, Walid did not arrive in the location, nor did I see him. Since no envoy had come to us at the appointed location, I apprehended that you are annoyed with me due to some shortcoming on my part. Therefore, I have come here. Harith says that the present verse of Surah Al-Hujurat was revealed on this occasion (Ibn Kathir).

Other versions have it that Walid Ibn 'Uqbah did go to the tribe of Banul-Mustaliq. As the tribe was expecting the Holy Prophet ﷺ envoy to arrive on a designated date, they came out of their settlement as a mark of respect to welcome him. Walid Ibn 'Uqbah ؓ suspected that they might have come out to kill him on account of their old hostility. Therefore he returned instantly from there, and went up to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and reported to him, according to his suspicion, that they were not willing to pay the alms and wanted to kill him. On hearing this report, the Holy Prophet ﷺ dispatched Sayyidna Khalid Ibn Walid ؓ to make a thorough investigation, so that appropriate measures could be taken.

Sayyidna Khalid Ibn Walid ؓ arrived near the settlement at night and encamped there. He selected a few of his men and sent them furtively as spies into the location to investigate. They returned and reported that the members of the tribe were Muslims and believers; they were regular with their prayers and in paying their alms; and they did not find the tribe doing anything contrary to Islam. Sayyidna Khalid Ibn Walid ؓ came back, and reported the whole story to the Holy Prophet ﷺ . This verse was revealed on that occasion (Ibn-Kathir - summary of several reports).

Ruling

On the basis of this verse, it may be ruled that if a mischief-monger, sinner, wicked or corrupt person complains about any person or nation, or accuses them of any wrong-doing, it is not lawful to act upon the sole information or evidence of such a person without making a thorough investigation.

Injunctions and Rulings Related to Verse [ 6]

Imam Jassas (رح) in Ahkam-ul-Qur'an says that this verse indicates that it is not lawful to accept any information conveyed by a sinful person and act upon it unless it is investigated by other sources and confirmed. This verse contains the injunction fatabayyanu (verify its correctness). In another reading the word 'tathabbatu' conveys the same meaning. The sense is: "Do not rush into taking actions or measures; be stable, and stand firmly in your place; and do not be easily moved or shaken. Wait until the news or information is confirmed by other independent sources. Since it is not lawful to accept the information or report of an ungodly sinful person, then the testimony of such a person would not be acceptable with greater force, because every testimony is a statement which is confirmed by a kind of oath.

Therefore, according to majority of scholars a statement or evidence of an ungodly person, in terms of Shari'ah, is not acceptable. However, all scholars agree that as far as the common worldly affairs are concerned, it is not necessary to ascertain the accuracy or truth of every news and the reliability of every informer. The jurists are clear that this rule of law does not apply in the case of ordinary matters, because the rule is governed by an effective cause which is laid down in the explicit text of this verse: أَن تُصِيبُوا قَوْمًا بِجَهَالَةٍ (lest you harm a people out of ignorance - 49:6). Thus matters which are not governed by the effective cause will be an exception to, and excluded from, the rule of this verse. For instance, if a wicked person, or for that matter even an unbeliever, delivers a gift to someone, stating that this gift has been sent by a certain person, it would be lawful to accept the gift and the statement. Details may be found in books of Fiqh, such as in mu` in-ul-hukkam and others. I have given the details in part six of Ahkam-ul-Qur'an [ Arabic version ]. Learned scholars may peruse them there.

An Important Question and Answer Regarding the Truthfulness of the Companions

Authentic Ahaadith verify that this verse was revealed in connection with Walid Ibn 'Uqbah, and in the verse he is referred to as fasiq (sinner). Apparently, it goes to show that a sahabi (Companion) can be a fasiq. This is in conflict with the universally established maxim الصّحابۃ کلّھُم عدول (the Companions are all truthful and reliable). None of their statements, reports or testimony can be doubted. ` Allamah ` Alusi in Ruh-ul-Ma` ani says that the truth of the matter is according to the majority of the scholars, the blessed Companions ؓ are not infallible; it is possible for them to commit sins - major sins which is fisq; at the time of committing the sin they will be dealt with in the appropriate manner in terms of the punishment prescribed for that act; and if any of them is found guilty of lying, his news, information, report or testimony will be rejected. However, on the basis of the express texts of the Qur'an and Sunnah, Ahl-us-suunah wal-Jama'ah believe that Companion can, though, commit sins, they do not persist in it. There is no companion of the Holy Prophet ﷺ who has not repented and purified himself after committing a sin. The Qur’ an, referring to the general class of the Companions, announces in general terms رَّ‌ضِيَ اللَّـهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَ‌ضُوا عَنْهُ (...Allah is well-pleased with them and they are well-pleased with Him - 98:8). The pleasure of Allah is not possible without forgiveness of sins. Qadi Abu Ya'la says that Allah's pleasure is one of His eternal attributes. He expresses His pleasure only for those about whom He knows they will die whilst seeking His pleasure (Ibn-Taimiyyah in As-scrim-ul-Maslul).

In sum: From amongst the magnificent group of the noble Companions, it is possible for a handful of them to commit a sin sometime or the other, but Divine aid comes to their rescue and they immediately repent. Through the blessing of the Holy Prophet’ s ﷺ company, Allah had made Shari` ah their nature. As result, it was very rare for them to do anything contrary to Shari’ ah and very unlikely to commit sins. It was natural for them to dedicate themselves to performing righteous deeds in conformity with the Holy Prophet’ s ﷺ paradigm and the principles established by Islam. They exerted such efforts in obeying Allah and His Holy Prophet ﷺ in all matters of life, the example of which is never found in any of the previous religious communities. In comparison to the uncountable good works, merits and excellence to their credit, even if they commit a sin once in a life-time, it would be quashed or would be counted as non-existent. Furthermore, hadith collections record a number of incidents where the noble Companions ؓ expressed their supreme love and devotion for Allah and His Holy Prophet ﷺ . They expressed their highest degree of fear for Allah at the time of committing the most minor sins and repented forthwith. We have on record that some of the Companions presented themselves for punishment when they did something wrong and others tied themselves up to the column of the mosque; and so on. A hadith informs us that "He who repents on a sin is like him who has not committed any sin". The Qur'an says:

إِنَّ الْحَسَنَاتِ يُذْهِبْنَ السَّيِّئَاتِ

Surely, good deeds erase bad deeds. [ Surah Hud: 114]

This rule applies to them with greater force, since their good deeds are not like the good deeds of the general class of people. In fact, the status of their good deeds has been described in the collections of Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi on the authority of Said Ibn Zaid:

واللہ لمشھد رجل منھم مع النّبیّ ﷺ یغبّر فیہ وجھہ خیر من عمل احدکم ولو عمر عمر نوح

"By Allah, anyone of them who participated in a jihad with the Holy Prophet ﷺ and his face got covered with dust is better than your life-long obedience and worship, even if you attained the age of Nuh (علیہ السلام) ."

Therefore, they will receive the same punishment that is prescribed for a sin or crime which they might have committed. However, despite this it is not lawful for any of us to regard any of them as fasiq. Consequently, if any Companion during the time of the Holy Prophet ﷺ committed a sin or crime which could be the cause of producing in him the effect of fisq, as a result of which he might have been referred to as a fasiq on that account, it does not become possible for that fisq to be regarded as his permanent characteristic to call him, God forbid!, as a fasiq for all times to Come (Ruh-ul-Ma’ ani).

Nevertheless, it is not at all necessary that in the current verse, Walid Ibn 'Uqbah ؓ is categorically referred to as fasiq. Despite the fact that the verse is supposed to have been revealed in his incident, it does not mean that the word 'fasiq' is used for him, because before this incident, Walid Ibn 'Uqbah had not done any such thing on account of which he could be referred to as fasiq. An analysis of the incident of Banul-Mustaliq indicates that he conveyed an incorrect information about that tribe which, acting in good faith, he thought was true whereas in reality it was not. Therefore, the plain import of the current verse would be that it simply establishes the general rule that the news conveyed by a fasiq would be unacceptable. However, it may be emphasized that Walid Ibn 'Uqbah was not a fasiq, but his information, because of strong external context, did not seem acceptable. As a result, the Holy Prophet ﷺ refrained from taking any measures merely on his information, and sent Khalid Ibn Walid for proper investigation. If this is the case of the news conveyed by a bona fide reliable and righteous person, then with the stronger reason a fasiq's news should be rejected and should not be acted upon. The truthfulness of the Companions ؓ is discussed fully by this author in his book "The Status of the Companions" which is already published in Urdu. It will partly be discussed under forthcoming verses 9-10.

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 ].