يَسْـَٔلُونَكَ عَنِ ٱلشَّهْرِ ٱلْحَرَامِ قِتَالٍ فِيهِ قُلْ قِتَالٌ فِيهِ كَبِيرٌ وَصَدٌّ عَن سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ وَكُفْرٌۢ بِهِۦ وَٱلْمَسْجِدِ ٱلْحَرَامِ وَإِخْرَاجُ أَهْلِهِۦ مِنْهُ أَكْبَرُ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ وَٱلْفِتْنَةُ أَكْبَرُ مِنَ ٱلْقَتْلِ وَلَا يَزَالُونَ يُقَٰتِلُونَكُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَرُدُّوكُمْ عَن دِينِكُمْ إِنِ ٱسْتَطَٰعُوا۟ وَمَن يَرْتَدِدْ مِنكُمْ عَن دِينِهِۦ فَيَمُتْ وَهُوَ كَافِرٌ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ حَبِطَتْ أَعْمَٰلُهُمْ فِى ٱلدُّنْيَا وَٱلْءَاخِرَةِ وَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ أَصْحَٰبُ ٱلنَّارِ هُمْ فِيهَا خَٰلِدُونَ
<p>The injunction relating to fighting in the 'sacred' months:</p><p>The second of the three verses under comment here proves that fighting is forbidden in Rajab, Dhul-Qa'dah, Dhul-Hijjah and Muharram, the four 'sacred' months. In the same way, there are several verses of the Holy Qur'an where fighting has been very clearly forbid-den during the sacred months, for instance:' ذَٰلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ ۚ فَلَا تَظْلِمُوا فِيهِنَّ أَنفُسَكُمْ :'Four of them are sacred. That is the right religion' (9:36). Then there is the saying of the Holy Prophet ﷺ in the famous address of the Last Hajj: نھا اربعہ حُرم ثلات متوالیات و رجب مضر 'Four (months) from among them are sacred, out of which three are consecutive and the (fourth) is Rajab of Mudar'. These Qur'anic verses and hadith narrations prove that fighting is haram حرام prohibited in the four months mentioned and this forbiddance is good for ever.</p><p>In this connection, ` Ata ibn Abi Rabah, a leading early exponent of Qur'anic exegesis declared on oath that this injunction is there to stay forever. Several others among the respected Successors (Tabi'in) regard this injunction as provenly un-abrogated, but in accordance with the ruling of the majority of Muslim jurists as stated by al-Jassas, this injunction is one of the abrogated ones as maintained by a consensus of jurists and fighting is no more forbidden in any month.</p><p>Now comes the question as to which verse of the Holy Qur'an abrogates this injunction. Jurists have taken different positions in this respect. Some say the verse وَقَاتِلُوا الْمُشْرِ‌كِينَ كَافَّةً :'And fight the disbelievers, all of them' (9:36) abrogates it. Many others regard the verse فَاقْتُلُوا الْمُشْرِ‌كِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ :'Slay the disbelievers wherever you find them' (9:5) as its abrogator. They have taken the word: حَيْثُ here in the sense of 'anytime' meaning thereby that the disbelievers should be killed in whatever month or time they are found. Some have said that the abrogator of this injunction is the very conduct of the Holy Prophet ﷺ since he himself besieged the city of Ta'if during the 'sacred months' and it was during the 'sacred months' that he sent the noble Companion ` Amir al-Ash'ari ؓ on the military expedition of Awtas اوطاس . On these grounds, Jurists in general, regard this injunction as abrogated, al-Jassas calls it وھو قول فقھاء الأنصار : 'This is what the majority of the jurists says'.</p><p>Ruh al-Ma` ani, under comments on this verse, and al-Baydawi, under the explanation of the first section of Surah al-Bara'ah have reported a consensus of the community on the abrogation of the forbiddance of fighting during the 'sacred months' (Bayan al-Qur'an).</p><p>However, al-Tafsir al-Mazhari answers all these arguments by saying that the sanctity of the 'sacred months' is clearly present in the verse known as Ayah al-sayf or the Verse of the Sword, that is :</p><p>إِنَّ عِدَّةَ الشُّهُورِ‌ عِندَ اللَّـهِ اثْنَا عَشَرَ‌ شَهْرً‌ا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّـهِ يَوْمَ خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْ‌ضَ مِنْهَا أَرْ‌بَعَةٌ حُرُ‌مٌ'</p><p>The number of months, with God, is twelve (mentioned) in the book of Allah, the day that he created the heavens and the earth; four of them are sacred' (9:36).</p><p>Of the verse relating to fighting, this verse was the last one to be revealed and the Address of the Last Hajj which was delivered only 80 days before the Holy Prophet ﷺ passed away clearly indicates the sanctity of the 'sacred months'. For this reason, the verses quoted cannot be regarded as abrogative of this injunction. Moreover, the siege of Ta'if did not take place in the month of Dhul-Qa'dah. It was in Shawwal, therefore, this too cannot be regarded as its abrogator. But, it can certainly be conceded that the absolute forbiddance of fighting in the 'sacred months' which seems to reflect from the verse referred to holds an exception whereby it would become permissible for Muslims to defend themselves, or counter attack the aggressor if disbelievers themselves start the fighting during these months. This much, then, can be termed as abrogated, which finds a clarification in the verse الشَّهْرُ‌ الْحَرَ‌امُ بِالشَّهْرِ‌ الْحَرَ‌امِ : The holy month for the holy month' (2:194).</p><p>The gist of the discussion is that initiating a fight during these months is forbidden forever, but in the event that disbelievers mount an attack on Muslims, then Muslims are permitted to fight back in their defence. A1-Jassas has reported the narration of the blessed Companion Jabir ibn ` Abdullah ؓ who said that the Holy Prophet ﷺ did not fight in any of the 'sacred months' until such time that the initial fighting was started by the disbelievers.</p><p>The evil consequences of Apostasy</p><p>Towards the end of the verse (217), it has been said that the act of turning into an apostate after having become a Muslim shall be dealt with under the injunction: حَبِطَتْ أَعْمَالُهُمْ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَ‌ةِ that is, they shall be those whose deeds have gone waste in this world and in the Hereafter.</p><p>Here are some injunctions relating to the apostates:</p><p>1.	Some examples of 'deeds going waste in this world' are that the wife of an apostate goes out of the bond of marriage; if a relative of an apostate dies as Muslim, he gets no share in the inheritance; all obligations such as prayers and fasting fulfilled in one's state of Islam are reduced to nothing; for such a person funeral prayers are not offered and he or she is not buried in the graveyard meant for Muslims. 'Deeds going waste in the Hereafter' means that one gets no reward for acts of worship and enters the Hell to stay there forever.</p><p>2.	Should an apostate become a Muslim once again, at least this much is certain that he could hope to salvage himself away from Hell in the Hereafter, while during the remaining tenure of his life in the mortal world, the injunctions of Islam will be operative for him. But, there is a difference of opinion among jurists about what would happen to a person who has already done his Hajj - would it be obligatory on him, given the capability, to do it all over again, or would it not? Similarly, in the Hereafter, would the reward for his previous religious performances, such as prayers and fasting, revert back to him, or would they not? Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) says that it is obligatory on him to do his Hajj again and he does not subscribe to the opinion that he will be rewarded for his previous prayers and fasting while Imam Shafi` I شافعی (رح) differs on both issues.</p><p>3.	For one who is basically a disbeliever, the position is that the reward for his good deeds in a state of disbelief is held in abeyance. If there comes the time when he embraces Islam, he gets a matching reward for all such deeds, but in the event that he dies an infidel, everything goes waste. The Hadith statement: اسلمت علی ما اسلفت من خیر : 'You have embraced Islam with all the good deeds which you have performed earlier' means just this.</p><p>4.	In short, the fate of an apostate is worse than that of an original disbeliever. This is why Jizyah جزیہ can be accepted from an original disbeliever while a male apostate who does not return to Islam is killed. If the apostate is a woman, she is imprisoned for life. The reason is that their conduct insults Islam and the insult of such a binding authority deserves no less a punishment.</p>
The injunction relating to fighting in the 'sacred' months:The second of the three verses under comment here proves that fighting is forbidden in Rajab, Dhul-Qa'dah, Dhul-Hijjah and Muharram, the four 'sacred' months. In the same way, there are several verses of the Holy Qur'an where fighting has been very clearly forbid-den during the sacred months, for instance:' ذَٰلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ ۚ فَلَا تَظْلِمُوا فِيهِنَّ أَنفُسَكُمْ :'Four of them are sacred. That is the right religion' (9:36). Then there is the saying of the Holy Prophet ﷺ in the famous address of the Last Hajj: نھا اربعہ حُرم ثلات متوالیات و رجب مضر 'Four (months) from among them are sacred, out of which three are consecutive and the (fourth) is Rajab of Mudar'. These Qur'anic verses and hadith narrations prove that fighting is haram حرام prohibited in the four months mentioned and this forbiddance is good for ever.In this connection, ` Ata ibn Abi Rabah, a leading early exponent of Qur'anic exegesis declared on oath that this injunction is there to stay forever. Several others among the respected Successors (Tabi'in) regard this injunction as provenly un-abrogated, but in accordance with the ruling of the majority of Muslim jurists as stated by al-Jassas, this injunction is one of the abrogated ones as maintained by a consensus of jurists and fighting is no more forbidden in any month.Now comes the question as to which verse of the Holy Qur'an abrogates this injunction. Jurists have taken different positions in this respect. Some say the verse وَقَاتِلُوا الْمُشْرِ‌كِينَ كَافَّةً :'And fight the disbelievers, all of them' (9:36) abrogates it. Many others regard the verse فَاقْتُلُوا الْمُشْرِ‌كِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ :'Slay the disbelievers wherever you find them' (9:5) as its abrogator. They have taken the word: حَيْثُ here in the sense of 'anytime' meaning thereby that the disbelievers should be killed in whatever month or time they are found. Some have said that the abrogator of this injunction is the very conduct of the Holy Prophet ﷺ since he himself besieged the city of Ta'if during the 'sacred months' and it was during the 'sacred months' that he sent the noble Companion ` Amir al-Ash'ari ؓ on the military expedition of Awtas اوطاس . On these grounds, Jurists in general, regard this injunction as abrogated, al-Jassas calls it وھو قول فقھاء الأنصار : 'This is what the majority of the jurists says'.Ruh al-Ma` ani, under comments on this verse, and al-Baydawi, under the explanation of the first section of Surah al-Bara'ah have reported a consensus of the community on the abrogation of the forbiddance of fighting during the 'sacred months' (Bayan al-Qur'an).However, al-Tafsir al-Mazhari answers all these arguments by saying that the sanctity of the 'sacred months' is clearly present in the verse known as Ayah al-sayf or the Verse of the Sword, that is :إِنَّ عِدَّةَ الشُّهُورِ‌ عِندَ اللَّـهِ اثْنَا عَشَرَ‌ شَهْرً‌ا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّـهِ يَوْمَ خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْ‌ضَ مِنْهَا أَرْ‌بَعَةٌ حُرُ‌مٌ'The number of months, with God, is twelve (mentioned) in the book of Allah, the day that he created the heavens and the earth; four of them are sacred' (9:36).Of the verse relating to fighting, this verse was the last one to be revealed and the Address of the Last Hajj which was delivered only 80 days before the Holy Prophet ﷺ passed away clearly indicates the sanctity of the 'sacred months'. For this reason, the verses quoted cannot be regarded as abrogative of this injunction. Moreover, the siege of Ta'if did not take place in the month of Dhul-Qa'dah. It was in Shawwal, therefore, this too cannot be regarded as its abrogator. But, it can certainly be conceded that the absolute forbiddance of fighting in the 'sacred months' which seems to reflect from the verse referred to holds an exception whereby it would become permissible for Muslims to defend themselves, or counter attack the aggressor if disbelievers themselves start the fighting during these months. This much, then, can be termed as abrogated, which finds a clarification in the verse الشَّهْرُ‌ الْحَرَ‌امُ بِالشَّهْرِ‌ الْحَرَ‌امِ : The holy month for the holy month' (2:194).The gist of the discussion is that initiating a fight during these months is forbidden forever, but in the event that disbelievers mount an attack on Muslims, then Muslims are permitted to fight back in their defence. A1-Jassas has reported the narration of the blessed Companion Jabir ibn ` Abdullah ؓ who said that the Holy Prophet ﷺ did not fight in any of the 'sacred months' until such time that the initial fighting was started by the disbelievers.The evil consequences of ApostasyTowards the end of the verse (217), it has been said that the act of turning into an apostate after having become a Muslim shall be dealt with under the injunction: حَبِطَتْ أَعْمَالُهُمْ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَ‌ةِ that is, they shall be those whose deeds have gone waste in this world and in the Hereafter.Here are some injunctions relating to the apostates:1.	Some examples of 'deeds going waste in this world' are that the wife of an apostate goes out of the bond of marriage; if a relative of an apostate dies as Muslim, he gets no share in the inheritance; all obligations such as prayers and fasting fulfilled in one's state of Islam are reduced to nothing; for such a person funeral prayers are not offered and he or she is not buried in the graveyard meant for Muslims. 'Deeds going waste in the Hereafter' means that one gets no reward for acts of worship and enters the Hell to stay there forever.2.	Should an apostate become a Muslim once again, at least this much is certain that he could hope to salvage himself away from Hell in the Hereafter, while during the remaining tenure of his life in the mortal world, the injunctions of Islam will be operative for him. But, there is a difference of opinion among jurists about what would happen to a person who has already done his Hajj - would it be obligatory on him, given the capability, to do it all over again, or would it not? Similarly, in the Hereafter, would the reward for his previous religious performances, such as prayers and fasting, revert back to him, or would they not? Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) says that it is obligatory on him to do his Hajj again and he does not subscribe to the opinion that he will be rewarded for his previous prayers and fasting while Imam Shafi` I شافعی (رح) differs on both issues.3.	For one who is basically a disbeliever, the position is that the reward for his good deeds in a state of disbelief is held in abeyance. If there comes the time when he embraces Islam, he gets a matching reward for all such deeds, but in the event that he dies an infidel, everything goes waste. The Hadith statement: اسلمت علی ما اسلفت من خیر : 'You have embraced Islam with all the good deeds which you have performed earlier' means just this.4.	In short, the fate of an apostate is worse than that of an original disbeliever. This is why Jizyah جزیہ can be accepted from an original disbeliever while a male apostate who does not return to Islam is killed. If the apostate is a woman, she is imprisoned for life. The reason is that their conduct insults Islam and the insult of such a binding authority deserves no less a punishment.