What is the reason for the narration of the hadith: "There is no usury between a Muslim and a disbeliever in the lands of disbelief," and what were its occasion, place, and intended audience?

The reason for the occurrence of the mursal hadith, "There is no usury between a Muslim and a combatant in the land of war," is not mentioned. Scholars have differed on its application and meaning. Al-Nawawi and Ibn Qudamah interpreted it—if it were authentic—as a prohibition of usury. The majority of jurists hold that usury is forbidden in the land of war just as it is forbidden in the land of Islam, relying on the generality of the texts prohibiting usury. This is the madhhab of the Shafi'is, Malikis, Hanbalis, and Abu Yusuf from the Hanafis. Whereas Abu Hanifa and Muhammad said: Usury is not forbidden in the land of war between a Muslim and the people of war, or between Muslims who have not emigrated, arguing with the aforementioned hadith. Their view is that the wealth of combatants is permissible, and that security (aman) is what prohibits it in the land of Islam. The preponderant opinion is that of the majority, prohibiting usury absolutely due to the generality of the legal evidences.