ʿAbd ibn Suwaʾ ibn Quraym ibn Ṣāhik al-Hudhalī, from the tribe of Hudhayl.
– lā yujhaz: from ajhaza ʿalā al-jarīḥ wa-jahaza, i.e., to hasten in killing a wounded man and finish him off.
– hāribuhā (its fugitive): the one who flees from the battlefield.
– fayʾuhā (their fayʾ): originally the verbal noun of fāʾa yafīʾu, “to return.” It then came to denote wealth taken from unbelievers on account of their unbelief without actual fighting—such as jizya, kharāj, a ten-percent levy on the trade goods of a non-Muslim from enemy territory, property they abandon out of fear of the Muslims, and the estate of an apostate who dies upon his apostasy. All of this is to be spent for the welfare of the Muslims.

What is derived from the ḥadith:

1. It was explained earlier that those who rise up against the ruler on the basis of a defensible interpretation are not unbelievers; rather, they are rebels (bughāt). The ruler must correspond with them, remove whatever grievance they allege, and clarify any confusion that has befallen them. Should they persist in defiance, the ruler fights them, and his subjects are obliged to assist him until they yield and return to obedience and adherence to the community.
2. The proof for this lies in the ruling legislated by the Messenger of Allah ﷺ regarding combat with them: their wounded are not to be finished off, their captives are not to be executed, their fugitives are not to be pursued, and their fayʾ is not to be divided. Thus they are not treated like unbelievers in warfare, whose wounded may be dispatched, whose prisoners may be killed when an interest so dictates, and whose property may be seized as booty or fayʾ for the Muslims.
3. The ḥadith therefore shows that rebels do not, by their rebellion and uprising against the ruler, leave the fold of Islam. Fighting them is purely disciplinary, intended to bring them back to obedience and communal unity; once they return, or their harm is repelled, hostilities toward them must cease.
4. It says in al-Muntahā and its commentary: “If two factions fight one another out of sin or in pursuit of leadership, both are wrongful; each side is liable for what it has destroyed of the other’s.” The Shaykh added: “Liability rests upon the faction as a whole, even if the specific individual who caused the damage is not known.”