Rather, it is a bounty from the Most Majestic Lord,
Granted to whomever He wills among His creation until the appointed term.
In sum, reviling the Messenger—may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him—is reviling the One who sent him, and it violates his right, which is the most binding of all human rights. His due is to be honoured, revered, and venerated. Indeed, Allah—Mighty and Majestic is He—made it among the purposes of the message, and among the wisdoms behind sending the Messenger, that we should believe in Allah and His Messenger, support him, and venerate him:
“Indeed, We have sent you as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and a warner, so that you may believe in Allah and His Messenger, support him, and venerate him.” [al-Fath: 8–9]
This is a pillar, a foundation, and one of the wisdoms behind sending the Messenger—may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him. There is no doubt that reviling the Prophet—may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him—besides being a disparagement of him and of the One who sent him, is also a disparagement of his law. Thus, when someone reviles a man, his reviling reflects upon the path that the man follows, and that very path becomes disparaged in people’s eyes, because he has reviled the one who adheres to it. Therefore, reviling the Messenger—may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him—involves three matters, each of which constitutes disbelief: reviling Allah, reviling the Messenger, and reviling his law.
His statement, “then he has disbelieved”: this clause is the apodosis of the conditional statement, “So whoever associates partners with Allah.” What is meant is disbelief that expels one from the fold of Islam. We do not say that it is lesser disbelief, for this chapter concerns the rulings pertaining to the apostate—that is, one whose disbelief is absolute.
The author then moved on to another category among the causes of apostasy: rejection. It falls under matters of belief, for if rejection is in the heart, then it pertains to belief; and if it is expressed by the tongue, then it is a matter of speech. The author therefore said: