Overview (Verse 43)

A Baffling Attitude Towards God’s Judgement
 
The fact that the Prophet was given this choice with regard to those Jews who came to him for judgement further supports our view that this was in the early period after the Prophet’s settlement in Madinah. Later on, judgement according to Islamic law was compulsory, because the land of Islam does not enforce any law other than that of God. All people living there must refer their disputes to this law. This, however, does not contradict the Islamic rule which applies to people of earlier revelations living side by side with the Muslim community in the land of Islam. This principle makes only such laws as are endorsed by their faith or that relate to the general social order applicable to them. Permissible to them is what their religions permit them, such as owning and eating pork, the possession and drinking of intoxicants, but without their selling these Muslims. But they are forbidden all usurious transactions because these are also forbidden in their religions. The punishments prescribed for adultery and theft are applicable to them, because they are stated in their Scriptures. Also enforceable are the punishments prescribed for rebellion against the legitimate authority, and for spreading corruption in the land. Such enforcement is necessary to guarantee the safety and security of the land of Islam and all its inhabitants, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Such punishments cannot be waived in respect of anyone of those living in the land of Islam.
 
During that period in which the Prophet had the choice whether to judge between them or to ignore them, they used to come with some of their disputes to God’s Messenger (peace be upon him). An example of this is reported by `Abdullāh ibn `Umar: “Some Jews came to God’s Messenger (peace be upon him) and told him that a Jewish man and a Jewish woman committed adultery. The Prophet asked them: ‘What does the Torah say about stoning adulterers?’ They said: ‘We publicise their crime and punish them by flogging.’ `Abdullāh ibn Sallām (a Jewish rabbi who had embraced Islam) said, ‘This is a lie. The Torah prescribes stoning.’ They brought the Torah and opened it up. One of them put his hand over the verse that mentioned stoning and read the preceding and the following verses. `Abdullāh ibn Sallām told him to lift his hand off. When he did, the relevant verse on the death punishment by stoning was there. They said, ‘He (meaning `Abdullāh ibn Sallām) has told the truth. It specifies death by stoning.’
 
The Prophet gave his orders for the two adulterers to be stoned to death. I saw the man bending over the woman to shelter her from the stones.” (Related by al-Bukhārī and Muslim.)
 
Another example is given in a ĥadīth related by Imām Ahmad on the authority of `Abdullāh ibn `Abbās, the Prophet’s learned cousin, who says: “These verses were revealed in connection with two groups of Jews, one of which had triumphed over the others in pre-Islamic days. They later worked out a reconciliation agreement which stated that every victim of the defeated tribe killed by the victorious one would be compensated with blood money equal to fifty measures of agricultural produce, while every victim of the victorious tribe killed by the defeated one would have one hundred measures of agricultural produce as blood money. They operated this system until the Prophet (peace be upon him) migrated to Madinah. It so happened then that the defeated tribe killed a man of the victorious one. The latter sent them a message to prepare the full amount of blood money agreed, which was one hundred measures of agricultural produce. The defeated tribe said: ‘How is it that two tribes belonging to the same faith, having the same ancestry and living in the same land, have two tariffs of blood money with one tariff being double the other? We had agreed to this measure of injustice you had imposed on us because we feared you. Now that Muĥammad has arrived in Madinah, we will not give you that.’ War was about to flare up between the two tribes, before they agreed to refer the matter to God’s Messenger for arbitration. The victorious tribe then reflected on this matter. Some of them said: ‘Muĥammad will never give you twice the blood money you are prepared to give them. They indeed have told the truth when they said that they agreed to this as a matter of injustice imposed by us on them. Let us, then, sound out Muĥammad, to determine whether he will give us a favourable judgement. If so, we will refer the matter to him. If not, we will have been forewarned.’ They sent to the Prophet some of their hypocrite friends to sound him out. God informed His Messenger of the whole affair and revealed to him the passage starting with “Messenger, be not grieved by those who plunge headlong into unbelief such as those who say with their mouths, ‘We believe’, while their hearts do not believe. Among the Jews are some who eagerly listen to falsehood, eagerly listen to other people who have not come to you. They tamper with words out of their context, and say, If such-and-such la precept] is given you, accept it; but if you are not given it, then be on your guard’“ (Verse 41) (Related by Abū Dāwūd) Another version of this report names the victorious tribe as the al-Nađīr and the defeated one as the Qurayżah. This again supports our view that these verses were revealed in the early days of the Madinah period before these Jewish tribes were evacuated.
 
Indeed, the attitude of the Jews in such matters has always been consistent. Hence, the Qur’ān asks this rhetorical question: “But how is it that they ask you for judgement when they have the Torah which contains God’s judgement, and they still turn away?” (Verse 43)
 
It is indeed a very grave and serious matter. They refer something to God’s Messenger for arbitration and he judges between them on the basis of God’s law. Moreover, they also have the Torah which contains God’s judgement. Both judgements are identical, because the Qur’ān has endorsed Divine judgements contained in the Torah. But t nevertheless, turn their backs on God’s judgement, either in their dissatisfaction or by not enforcing it. This rhetorical question is followed by an Islamic rule in such matters: “For certain, they are not true believers.” (Verse 43)
 
It is certainly not possible that a true believer will not submit to God’s law or would not accept its rulings. Those who claim to themselves or to others that they believe and still refuse to implement God’s law in their lives or who are not satisfied when it is enforced on them do indeed make false claims. Their attitude is described in this definitive statement: “For certain, they are not true believers.” It is not simply a question of rulers not implementing God’s law, but also a question of ordinary people not being satisfied with God’s law and judgement. Such dissatisfaction takes them out of the ranks of believers, no matter how emphatically they claim to believe.
 
This Qur’ānic statement confirms a similar one in the preceding sūrah, “Women”, which states: “But no, by your Lord! They do not really believe unless they make you judge in all disputes between them, and then find in their hearts no bar to an acceptance of your decisions and give themselves up in total submission.” (4: 65) Both statements speak about the ruled, not the rulers. Both classify as unbelievers those who do not accept God’s judgement as outlined by His Messenger and turn away from it.
 
As we have already said, the point at issue is that of acknowledging God’s authority as the only God and His Lordship of mankind and the universe. To accept God’s law and to be satisfied by its rules and judgements is the practical demonstration of accepting Him as the Supreme Godhead and the Lord of the universe. Rejecting the law and being dissatisfied with its judgement is a practical demonstration of disbelieving in God as such.