وَمَا كَانَ لِنَبِىٍّ أَن يَغُلَّ ۚ وَمَن يَغْلُلْ يَأْتِ بِمَا غَلَّ يَوْمَ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ ۚ ثُمَّ تُوَفَّىٰ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ مَّا كَسَبَتْ وَهُمْ لَا يُظْلَمُونَ
3:26; 14:52; 40:18.
Commentary:
The verse can be interpreted in two ways. The archers stationed by the Holy Prophet at the mount of Uhud to protect the rear of the Muslim army left their post when they saw the Meccan army in full flight. They thought that by leaving the mount at that stage they would not be contravening the spirit of the Prophet’s orders, which were to the effect that they were not to leave their post in any circumstances. They further thought that as, according to Arab custom, a soldier was entitled to the possession of the booty he laid his hand on during the fight, they might be deprived of their share of the spoils of war if they stuck to their post. This precipitate action of the archers implied an apprehension on their part that the Prophet might ignore their right to the booty and might thus prove faithless to them. It is this apprehension that the verse condemns in the words, And it is not possible for a Prophet to act dishonestly. But no imputation of actual faithlessness to the Holy Prophet is implied. The verse simply purports to say that it was far from the Prophet to ignore the rights to the booty of those whom he himself had stationed at a certain place.
The verse may also be taken as a rebuke to the hypocrites who deserted the Holy Prophet in the Battle of Uhud. In this case, the implication would be that while the hypocrites had proved faithless to the Prophet by leaving him in the lurch, the Prophet would not prove faithless to God by refusing to fight in His cause even when weak and deserted. This meaning is also supported by the context.
3:26; 14:52; 40:18.
The archers stationed by the Holy Prophet at the hill of Uhud to protect the rear of the Muslim army left their posts (not all of them) when they saw the Meccan army in full flight. They thought that by leaving the hill at that stage they were not contravening the spirit of the Prophet’s orders, which were to the effect that they were not to leave their posts in any circumstances. They further thought that as, according to Arab custom a soldier was entitled to the possession of the booty he laid his hand on during the fight they might be deprived of their share of the spoils of war if they stuck to their posts. This precipitate action of the archers implied an apprehension on their part that the Holy Prophet might ignore their right to the booty. It is this apprehension that is condemned here. But no imputation of actual faithlessness to the Holy Prophet is implied. The verse simply purports to say that it was far from the Holy Prophet to ignore the rights to the booty of those whom he himself had statio