بِسمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحمٰنِ الرَّحيمِ

لا أُقسِمُ بِهٰذَا البَلَدِ

وَأَنتَ حِلٌّ بِهٰذَا البَلَدِ

I swear by this town,

as you reside in this town.

EXEGESIS

Lā uqsimu (I swear); the Quran sometimes begins an oath with lā, which is a particle of negation. In total, there are eight such instances in various verses (56:75, 69:38, 70:40, 75:1, 75:2, 81:15, 84:17, and verse 1 of this surah). The particle lā in this context can either be negatory (nāfiyah) or superfluous (zāʾidah). Based on the former, the verse would be read as God saying: I do not swear by this town; whilst the latter meaning would only add emphasis and thus the verse would read: I indeed swear by this town. Most commentators have taken lā to be superfluous in all the above instances. However, both interpretations come back to the same meaning, as ‘I do not swear by this town’ would suggest this town is too holy to be sworn by, which is an emphatic way of swearing.

Some commentators have accepted the lā to be one that is negatory, concluding that Mecca is not an object of oath in this verse. However, God does swear by Mecca in 95:3: By this secure town. For those who do not accept the current verse as an oath, they explain this difference between the two verses by stating that in chapter 95, God swears by Mecca because it is a place of safety and security (see 3:97), since whoever enters therein is jurisprudentially safe as no one is allowed to oppress any being therein, to the extent that hunting is also forbidden in it, and it is from this aspect that God swears by Mecca. However, they argue, in the verse under discussion, God refuses to swear by Mecca whilst the Holy Prophet does not have safety therein. The polytheists considered it permissible to inflict harm on the Prophet and from this aspect God does not wish to consider Mecca sacred any longer, and thus refuses to swear by it.^{‎[1]Furqan, 30/322.}

However, based on the style of the Quran in other similar instances, it is more likely that the particle lā is only being used to add emphasis to the oath.

Ḥillun (residing) is an active participle of the verb ḥalla. The meaning of the word ḥillun has been subject of considerable debate. According to Rāghib, the word ḥall originally meant to open or untie a knot (20:27) and then became divested from this connotation to mean descending or residing at a certain place (13:31).^{‎[2]Raghib, p. 128.} Perhaps this was because when one decides to stay somewhere, they untie the knots of their baggage.^{‎[3]Kawthar, 10/169; Tahqiq, 2/318.} Based on this, most commentators understood ḥillun to mean residing. Another meaning of ḥalla is to make something permissible or lawful. It will later be shown how each of these meanings can give different interpretations about the intended import of the verse.

Qarai translates balad as town but since it is referring to Mecca, it may be more appropriate to translate it as city.

EXPOSITION

The chapter begins with an oath by referring to a specific city. The exegetes are unanimous that the city being referred to is Mecca.^{‎[4]Qummi, 2/422.} In verse 2, the reasoning is given as to why God swears by this city – because of the presence of the Prophet therein. The verses indicate that it is the existence of the Prophet within this city that makes it such that God wants to swear by it.^{‎[5]Safi, 5/329.} As the Arab saying goes, ‘greatness of the place is due to the greatness of the dweller’ (sharaf al-makān bil-makīn).^{‎[6]Daqaiq, 14/281.}

Whenever there is an oath taken in the Quran, it shows two things. Firstly, it shows the greatness of the thing that is taken as an object of oath, for God does not swear by petty things. Secondly, it indicates a connection between that which is sworn by and that which is sworn about. In the current verses, perhaps the connection is that the greatest things that man is challenged by and strives for is related to his land and children.^{‎[7]Mudarrisi, 18/115.}

In the second verse, God expounds on why He is swearing by Mecca: because the Holy Prophet is ḥill therein. Different interpretations have been given for what ḥill means in this context. The most common interpretation is that ḥill means to reside. Hence, the surah is pointing out that the polytheists should not consider for a moment that God is swearing by their city as a means of giving them or their idols any respect. Rather, He is swearing by this city due to the presence of the Prophet therein.^{‎[8]Amthal, 20/206.}

Although most commentators consider ḥill to mean residing therein, Ibn Āshūr considers this meaning as attractive but lacking any supporting evidence, for the lexicons do not mention residing as a meaning of ḥill.^{‎[9]Ibn Ashur, 30/308.} Subḥānī also points to the words of Rāghib to show that it seems this word was not used to mean residing.^{‎[10]Munyah, 30/353.}

However, even though the usage of ḥill to mean residing is not mentioned by lexicographers, what makes us lean to such a view is that on the other meanings of ḥill we would have to consider the lā as negatory, and it seems more likely that God is taking an oath in this verse.

INSIGHTS FROM HADITH

1. It has been reported that Imam al-Ṣādiq (a) was asked about verses 1-2 and he said: ‘The Quraysh would revere the sanctuary (ḥaram) and would cut [and take with them] barks of the trees [of the sanctuary] when they would be leaving the sanctuary. [And yet] they considered it permissible to insult and belie the Prophet (s), so He said: I do not swear by this city! Whilst you are permitted in this city [verses 1-2]. They considered the town as great, and they made permissible what Allah made sacred.’^{‎[11]Furat, p. 557.}
2. It has been reported by Masʿadah ibn Ṣadaqah, from Imam al-Ṣādiq (a), regarding the verse, So I do not swear by the locations of the stars! (56:75): ‘It was the people of ignorance who used to swear by it. God said, So I do not swear by the locations of the stars! It is a grievous matter the one who swears by it [56:75-76] … The [people of the] pre-Islamic period used to revere Muharram and were not swearing by it, nor by the month of Rajab, nor were they violating the one who was in these two, going or coming, even if he had killed his father. Nor would they violate any animal exiting from the sanctuary (ḥaram), be it a sheep, or camel, or other than that. So Allah said to His Prophet: I do not swear by this city! Whilst you are permitted in this city [verses 1-2] … So their ignorance reached the extent that they permitted the killing of the Prophet, whilst revering the days of the month as they would swear by it and would then fulfil it [the vows].’^{‎[12]Kafi, 7/14, h. 4, and similarly 7/14, h. 5.}

REVIEW OF TAFSĪR LITERATURE

One understanding takes ḥill to mean ‘to make permissible’ and thus the verse is telling the Prophet that he has been granted permissibility in this city. According to Ibn Abbas and some other early commentators, permissibility is in reference to warfare and shedding the blood of disbelievers.^{‎[13]Tibyan, 10/350.} The meaning would thus be: it is permissible for you in this town to kill the disbelievers; this would be in reference to the conquest of Mecca, whereby the Prophet was given special permission by God to engage in fighting in the sanctuary.

However, this meaning is against historical reality. The Prophet never violated the sanctity of Mecca. Even in the event of the conquest of Mecca, he entered the city peacefully, without bloodshed. He is reported to have said about Mecca: ‘It has not been made permissible for anyone before me nor has it been made permissible for anyone after me, and it has not been made permissible for me, except for one hour during the day.’^{‎[14]Kafi, 4/226, h. 4.}

For Subḥānī, what weakens such an interpretation is that the apparent meaning of the verse seems to indicate that the present is intended, and there is no indicator to signify that the future is intended. In other verses, we have indicators that signify that it is not the present tense that is intended.^{‎[15]Munyah, 30/357.}

In line with taking ḥill to mean permissibility, a view that is attributed to Abū Muslim and can be linked to a narration from Imam al-Ṣādiq (a), is that verse 2 is referring to how the polytheists considered it permissible to torment the Prophet and did not offer him due immunity.

It has been mentioned in several narrations that the Quraysh would highly revere Mecca and they would not oppress anyone therein, including stray animals, yet their ignorance reached such a level that they considered it permissible to oppress the Prophet therein.

On this reasoning, God is actually not swearing in this verse, and verse 2 gives the reason for why He is not swearing. The verses would thus read: I do not swear by this city, whilst they have made your disrespect permissible, and since the Quraysh do not respect you in this city and do not offer you the same respect that they offer others, this city does not hold any more sacredness.^{‎[16]Tabrisi, 10/747.}

The problem with saying ḥill means that the polytheists consider the Prophet as permissible to oppress is that the apparent meaning of the verse is that God is saying ‘you are actually ḥill (permissible)’, and not merely according to the opinion of the polytheists. Furthermore, we would have to consider lā as negatory which seems contrary to the apparent meaning.

Whilst this view is supported by the narration of Imam al-Ṣādiq (a), Subḥānī says that narration cannot be relied upon due to the presence of Masʿadah ibn Ṣadaqah in its chain, for whom there is no explicit statement of reliability.^{‎[17]Munyah, 30/356-357.}

It has been attributed to al-Wāsiṭī that the city being referred to in these verses is Medina.^{‎[18]Qurtubi, 20/60.} However, the context of the verses indicates the chapter is Meccan, and so it seems farfetched to think an oath is being taken of Medina.

[1] Furqan, 30/322.
[2] Raghib, p. 128.
[3] Kawthar, 10/169; Tahqiq, 2/318.
[4] Qummi, 2/422.
[5] Safi, 5/329.
[6] Daqaiq, 14/281.
[7] Mudarrisi, 18/115.
[8] Amthal, 20/206.
[9] Ibn Ashur, 30/308.
[10] Munyah, 30/353.
[11] Furat, p. 557.
[12] Kafi, 7/14, h. 4, and similarly 7/14, h. 5.
[13] Tibyan, 10/350.
[14] Kafi, 4/226, h. 4.
[15] Munyah, 30/357.
[16] Tabrisi, 10/747.
[17] Munyah, 30/356-357.
[18] Qurtubi, 20/60.