Thus al-Siddīq rebuked those who thought that the verse dispensed with enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong. Rather, this remains obligatory according to one’s ability. Abū ‘Ubayd said: “Al-Siddīq, may Allah be pleased with him, feared that people would interpret the verse incorrectly and consequently abandon enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong. He therefore explained to them that this was not its meaning.”

Ibn Mas‘ūd and those others explained that, in their time, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong verbally was possible because people’s hearts were united and there were others to support them in doing so. They also addressed circumstances of division and disagreement, when a person is unable to oppose wrongdoing either by hand or by word. The point is that they called the very thing intended by the verse its fulfillment. Rather, refraining from opposing wrongdoing that one is unable to oppose is part of the fulfillment of the Prophet’s words, may Allah bless him and grant him peace: “Attend to yourself; those who go astray cannot harm you if you are rightly guided.”

As for explaining the verse and understanding its meaning, this was already possible in their time. This kind of interpretation is not beyond the ability