بَشَر

19:21.

See 2:118.

Commentary:

The news of a son, however happy in ordinary circumstances, greatly perplexed Mary who was not only as yet unmarried but was also meant to remain so for life. The verse reflects her justified perplexity. It also shows that Jesus had no father, as hinted in Mary’s words, no man has touched me. Having been dedicated to the service of the Temple, Mary could not, consistently with her vow of celibacy, marry. If she was to marry and have children in due course there was no occasion for her to be surprised when the birth of a child was announced to her by the angel in a vision. No normal girl would be surprised if she were told in a vision that a son would be born to her; for she would naturally infer that the promised child would be born to her after marriage. In the Gospel of Mary, the vow of celibacy is clearly referred to. In chapter 5 of the said Gospel we read that when the high priest made a public order that all the virgins living in the temple who had reached their fourteenth year should return home, all the other virgins yielded obed-ience to this command, but "Mary the virgin of the Lord" alone answered that she could not comply with it; and for this refusal of hers she assigned the reason that both she and her parents had devoted her to the service of the Lord, and that she had vowed virginity to the Lord, which vow she was resolved never to break (Gospel of Mary, 5: 4, 5, 6).

Mary’s subsequent marriage with Joseph was thus contrary to the vow and against her own wish. She was, however, compelled by circumstances to marry when found with child. The priests had to arrange her marriage with Joseph in order to avoid scandal. It does not, however, appear from the Gospels how Joseph was prevailed upon to consent, for he was obviously in the dark about her being pregnant at the time of marriage (Matt. 1:18, 19). Presumably some plausible excuse was found to justify the breaking of the vow.

Christians and Jews are both agreed that the birth of Jesus was something out of the ordinary–the Christians holding it as supernatural and the Jews as illegitimate (Jew. Enc.). Even in the family birth register, Jesus’ birth was recorded as such (Talmud). This fact alone should constitute a sufficient proof of Jesus’ birth being out of the ordinary. But it was neither supernatural nor illegitimate. To quote only one medical authority: "Medical men have not ruled out altogether the possibility of natural parthenogenesis of the production of a child by a female, without any relation to a male. Such a statement off-hand appears ridiculous, yet its possibility, from a purely biological standpoint, under certain conditions cannot be disregarded. Dr. Timme calls attention to this possibility as the result of a certain type of tumours, known as arrhenoblastoma (from the Greek words for "male" and "germ") which are occasionally found in the female pelvis or lower body. These tumours are capable of generating male sperm cells. Naturally, if these male sperm cells were alive and active and came in contact with the female’s own egg cell or ovum, conception might occur. There is nothing illogical in this process of reasoning…Dr. Timme states that there are twenty authentic cases reported in Europe in which an arrhenoblastoma had been found to develop male sperm cells…The arrhenoblastoma is a tumour that contains blastodermic cells...These cells are creative structures and are capable of development at any time and the fact, therefore, that arrhenoblas-tomacontaining these "embryonic cells" might create testicular tissue, capable of producing male sperm cells seems scientifically not impossible. If living male sperm cells are produced in a female body by arrhenoblastoma, the possibility of self-fertilization of a woman, even though a virgin, cannot be denied. That is to say, her own body would produce the same result as though sperm cells from a man’s body had been transferred to hers in the more usual way, or by a physician’s aid" (American Medical Journal).

There are cases on record of children having been born without fathers: "A young girl of great moral purity became pregnant without the slightest knowledge of the source… There is a case of pregnancy in an unmarried woman, who successfully resisted an attempt at criminal connection and yet became impreg-nated and gave birth to a perfectly formed female child" (Anomalies and Curiosities of Medicine by George M. Gould, A.M., M.D., and Walter L. Payle, A.M., M.D., published by W. B. Saunders & Co., London).

5:117, 118.

Important Words:

ربانیین (solely devoted to the Lord) is the plural of ربانی which is a relative noun derived from رب (Lord) just as لحیانی (long-bearded) and شعرانی (having long hair) are derived from لحیة (beard) and شعر (hair) respectively. Keeping in view the different meanings of رب (see 1:2 and 3:65) the word ربانی would mean, one who devotes himself to religious service, or applies himself to acts of devotion; one who possesses knowledge of God; one who is learned in religious matters; a good or righteous man; a worshipper of the Lord; a teacher of others who begins to nourish people with the small matters of knowledge or science before taking the great ones; a learned man who not only practises what he knows but also instructs others; one of high rank in knowledge; a lord or master; a leader; a reformer (Lane, Sibawaih & Mubarrad).

The expression ماکان له (it is not possible for him) is, according to Arabic idiom, used in three senses: (1) it does not become him; as in the hadith ماکان لا بن ابی قحافة ان یصلی بین یدی رسول الله صلعم i.e. it does not become the son of Abu Quhafah, (i.e. AbuBakr) to lead the Faithful in Prayers in the presence of the Prophet of God (Bukhari); (2) it is rationally impossible for him to do so; or, it does not stand to reason that he should have done so; (3) he cannot possibly do so, i.e. it is physically impossible for him to do so. It is in the second sense that the expression has been used in this verse. See also 2:35.

Commentary:

It is quite inconceivable that a man whom God has raised as a Prophet and to whom He has given a revealed Book for the guidance of men should teach them to take him as God beside Allah. Such a supposition would imply a serious reflection on God Himself Who chose for His Messenger a man who undid the very work which he had been commissioned to do, and who, instead of calling upon men to worship God, set himself up as God and called upon them to adore him. Such a thing can never occur. A Prophet would always exhort men to become the devotees of God only.

The words, because you teach the Book and because you study it, show that it is the duty of all those who succeed in acquiring spiritual knowledge to impart it to others and not to let men grope in the darkness of ignorance.

62:7.

2:285; 3:130; 5:41.

Commentary:

The claim of Jews and Christians to be "the sons of God and His beloved ones" is found in 2:81, 112; 3:25; 62:7.

The clause, Why then does He punish you for your sins, contains a double argument against the preposterous claim of the People of the Book. If they are truly the sons of God and His beloved ones, why do they commit sins which is a sign of filth and uncleanness? One springing from God and beloved of Him must certainly be above this, for God loves not those who are filthy and commit sins. Again, if they are really the sons of God and His beloved ones, why do they suffer torment and punishment while a divine being must be above such weakness?

22:75; 39:68.

36:16; 67:10.

Commentary:

In this verse, the Quran gives the reason why there are differences in religion. Differences spring from ignorance, from a lack of true estimation or true understanding, as indicated by the words, they do not make a just estimate of Allah. Indeed, those who say that Allah has not revealed anything to any man make a very poor estimate of His attributes. To hold such a view about God is highly derogatory to His glory and most inconsistent with His attributes.

As regards religious beliefs, there were two classes of men in the days of the Holy Prophet. Firstly, there were those who denied revelation in toto. According to them, there had never been any revelation in any age. Secondly, there were those who believed that there had been revelation in the past, but that God had sent no revelation in their own age. To the first-mentioned class belonged the مشرکون (Idolaters), i.e. those who ascribed co-partners to God and worshipped idols. To the second class belonged the People of the Book. As the words, Allah has not revealed anything to any man, may mean: (1) that God has never revealed anything to any man; or (2) that He has not revealed anything to any man in the present age, so they may be ascribed to both idol-worshippers and the People of the Book. In the foregoing verses only the former were addressed, but now the latter have also been included in the address.

As regards the People of the Book, the Quran specifically states: Say, Who revealed the Book which Moses brought, a light and guidance for the people, though you treat it as scraps of paper which you show while you conceal much, i.e. you have split up the Book of Moses into parts, disclosing one part and concealing the other which contains prophecies and signs of the advent of the Holy Prophet. You deny the Quranic revelation, but your own Book contains evidence of its truth which you suppress.

The above reply, however, could not satisfy the idol-worshippers who did not believe in the Book of Moses or, for that matter, in any revealed Book. The Quran, therefore, gives them a rational answer. It says, And you have been taught that which neither you nor your fathers knew. This is an argument which is meant to prove the Divine origin of the Quran rationally and is meant not merely for the People of the Book but also for idol-worshippers. The argument may be put thus: "If this Book (the Quran) has not been revealed by God, then who embodied in it such wise and comprehensive teachings as were known neither to you nor to your forefathers—teachings which it was beyond your power to produce ? Such teachings could not proceed from a man. Only God could give such teachings."

The last words of the verse, i.e. leave them to amuse themselves with their vain discourse, do not mean that you should abandon preaching to disbelievers. The meaning is, "Tell them and make clear to them that the Quran is the Word of God, for it is superhuman and full of wisdom; but if they still persist in ridiculing it, then leave them alone while they thus amuse themselves." This injunction is similar to the one given in 6:69 above.

23:25.

26:112.

Important Words:

بادی الرأی (to all outward appearance) is made up of two Arabic words بادی and الرأی. The word بادی has two possible derivations. It may be derived from بدأ (bad’a) which means, he or it began or he or it came into existence. بدأ به means, he began with it; he made it to be the first. Or the word بادی may be derived from بدأ (of which the aorist is یبدو) which means, it appeared or it showed itself. According to these two different roots the word بادی would mean: (1) that which or he who is first or that which or he who begins; (2) that which or he who appears. And the word الرأی means sight or perception or opinion. So the compound expression بادی الرأی would mean: (1) at first thought or on the first opinion; (2) at the appearance of opinion or according to the appearance of opinion, which may mean either inconsiderately or insincerely (Lane, under بدا & بدأ).

Commentary:

The Arabic expression بادی الرأی (to all outward appearance) is capable of three interpretations according to the rules of Arabic grammar. First, it may be taken as referring to the words ونراك (and we see). In this case, the verse would mean that the followers of Noah appear to us to be the meanest of us at first thought or on the first opinion, i.e. so far as our opinion is concerned we consider them to be mean. If, however, there is any hidden good in them, it may be known to Noah only.

Secondly, the expression بادی الرأی may be taken to refer to the words اراذلنا (the meanest of us). In this case the verse would mean that the followers of Noah were apparently low and mean.

Thirdly, the expression بادی الرأی may be taken as qualifying the words اتبعك (have followed thee). In this case the verse would mean that those who have accepted Noah have done so only outwardly or without proper thinking i.e. their faith was either insincere or inconsiderate, being based on mere cursory thinking.

To sum up, the words اراذلنا بادی الرأی mean: (1) the followers of Noah are mean to all outward appearance; or (2) their faith in Noah is insincere; or (3) their faith is the result of only superficial thinking.

The words, We see in thee nothing but a man like ourselves, mean, "There is nothing extraordinary in your outward appearance to distinguish you from us. You are just a human being like any other mortal. When therefore, there is nothing extraordinary in your outward appearance, how should we know that inwardly you have been endowed with exceptional powers which have helped you to gain access to Divine presence, while we cannot ?"

This is the common objection raised by the opponents of the Prophets. The enemies of Noah purported to say that if he possessed some special inward power from God, that ought to have caused some difference in his outward appearance and as a result of it he should have acquired knowledge of some worldly sciences also, but they saw no evidence of this. How could they then believe that his internal powers were different from, and superior to, theirs. In support of this argument the opponents of Noah might possibly have shown to him pictures of their holy men having extraordinary exteriors, such as the Hindu saints are believed to possess, for instance, a number of heads and several hands. In olden days, men could not conceive that a Prophet was like ordinary mortals in appearance. So the enemies of Noah, arguing that the outward must correspond with the inward and that there must be harmony between the two, raised against him the objection that if he was really a true Prophet, his outward appearance must have been different from theirs. Silly though the argument is, it must have won endorsement from the contemporaries of Noah.

The enemies of Noah further reinforce their argument by saying that while he himself possessed no special powers, and was a mortal like themselves, his followers were even worse than him. What success could he achieve, they asked, with adher-ents who, to all outward appearance, were the meanest of the society? The enemies of Noah thus argued that neither his own personal qualities nor those of his followers gave him the appearance of "superiority" over them.

The words, we believe you to be liars, embody the result of the arguments brought forward by Noah’s opponents, which is that he was a liar, for he had asserted his truth and superiority without any basis or proof.

It is a pity that men test the claims of a heavenly Messenger by their self-devised standards and, when he does not satisfy those standards, they deceive themselves with the idea that they had weighed up his claims dispassionately and with an open mind and had found them to be false. Even in the present age when man has made great progress in knowledge, science and culture and has known many Prophets, he presumes to test the claims of God’s Messengers’ not by criteria laid down by Him but by his own false standards.

12:51.

12:52.

Important Words:

متکا (repast) is derived from وکأ. They say, واکأعلی یدیه i.e. he leaned upon his hands or arms. اوکأه means, he set up for him a thing upon which to recline. اتکأ means, he sat leaning upon one of his sides; he leaned or rested his back or his side against a thing; he leaned or reclined upon a thing; he reclined upon a cushion. They say اتکأنا عند فلان i.e. we ate a repast with such a one. متکأ means, a place in which one reclines: a chamber or sitting room; that upon which one leans or reclines in eating, drinking or talking; food or repast, so called because high people used to recline when they sat to eat (Lane & Aqrab).

حاش لله (Allah be glorified). حاش is derived from حشی which means, he breathed short or he panted for breath or was out of breath. حاشاه منھم means, he set him aside as excluded from the description of the company or party; he excluded him from them, i.e. made an exception in regard to him. حاش لك means, far art thou from being included among those of whom I speak. حاش لله means, I ascribe unto God remoteness from every imperfection or freedom therefrom; generally implying wonder or admiration. The expression may be rendered as "How far or how free is God from every imperfection!" It is also used in the sense of معاذ الله i.e. I seek protection by God (Lane).

Commentary:

The verse purports to say that when Potiphar’s wife heard of what the women in the city were saying about her infatuation for Joseph, she thought they really believed her to be guilty though outwardly they talked in such a manner as to show that they sought to exculpate her. So in order to remove their suspicions, she invited them to a feast. Tables were laid and a knife was provided for each of them. When all the guests were assembled, she asked Joseph to come out and serve them, but hardly had they cast a glance over his face when his innocent look and angelic appearance made them convinced of the purity of his conduct and all their suspicions so far as Joseph was concerned were dissipated.

The expression, cut their hands, may mean that when the women looked at Joseph, they were so struck with his saintly appearance that in a state of forgetfulness some of them happened to cut their hands with the knives they had. Or the sentence may be taken as figuratively expressing their wonder and amazement. The Arabic expression عض الانامل (biting the finger ends) is also used to express surprise, and, as sometimes the whole is used for a part, therefore the word "hands" may be said to have been here used for "finger-ends." According to the Talmud, oranges were served to the guests and the women inadvertently cut their hands owing to their being engrossed in looking at Joseph (Jew. Enc. & Talmud).

Incidentally, the verse shows that the word "angel" can also be used for a righteous and holy man. The verse also throws interesting light on the social customs of those days—the laying of cushioned seats and the use of knives, etc.

6:15; 12:102; 35:2; 39:47.

11:28; 23:25.

Important Words:

فاطر (Maker) is the active participle from فطر. They say فطرہ i.e. he clove, split, rent or cracked it; He (God) created it, or produced it or brought it into existence, namely, for the first time, it not having existed before; originated it; commenced or began it. فاطرالسموات means, the Originator or Creator of the heavens. Ibn ‘Abbas says, "I did not know what was the meaning of فاطرالسموات until two Arabs of the desert came to me, disputing together respecting a well, and one of them said, انا افطرتھا i.e. 'It was I who originated or began it.' " فطرالعجین; means, he made the dough into bread, or baked it, without leavening it, he kneaded the dough and made it into bread or baked it immediately (Lane & Aqrab). From the Quran it appears that there are four stages of creation: (a) the stage when nothing existed and the process of creation began for thefirst time, nothing having existed before; (b) the stage when matter had come into existence but had not yet taken a definite material form; (c) the stage when, as the result of combination, matter began to acquire diverse properties, the consummation of this process being known by the name of the law of nature; and (d) the last stage when, in accordance with the law of nature, the process of procreation or repetition in creation began, viz. man was born out of man and grain out of grain, etc. The attribute of فاطر (Maker) points to the second stage.

Commentary:

The verse gives the creation of the heavens and the earth as an argument to prove the Divine origin of the teaching given to the Prophets. The Prophets are here represented as saying to their opponents: "It is by the command of Allah that we preach. We say nothing of our own accord. How can you entertain doubt about the fact that God can send down revealed guidance? He is the Creator of heaven and earth, and it is unreasonable to think that, after having created man, He should have left him without guidance. Equally, it is inconsistent with reason to think that, whereas God has made ample provision for the material welfare and advancement of man by creating heaven and earth, He should have neglected to provide for his spiritual welfare."

The words, He calls you that He may forgive you your sins, and grant you respite till an appointed term, refute an objection of disbelievers that God was too dignified and exalted to invite humble beings like themselves to Him. They are told that it is indeed inconsistent with the dignity of God to call humble beings to His aid, but it is not at all below His dignity to come to their help. Nay, such an act is quite in keeping with His supreme dignity. God had therefore sent His Messengers that, through them, He might satisfy the moral and spiritual needs of man and grant him a new and higher life.

The expression, you are but men like ourselves;…Bring us then some clear proof, contains another objection of disbelievers that, if God at all was to have raised Messengers, they should have been beings befitting His dignity and not weak and humble men like themselves. The answer is given in the succeeding verse.

18:111; 41:7.

3:165; 6:125.

Commentary:

This verse constitutes a reply to the objections of disbelievers mentioned in the preceding verse.

The reply is to the effect that a Messenger of God who is sent for the guidance of men and to serve as a model or exemplar for them must be a man like themselves; for, without being a human being like themselves, he could not be a model for them. If he were a "co-partner" of God or a so-called "son" or an angel or any other superhuman being, he could not be a model for men. So God chooses of His servants whom He pleases. There is none to set limits to His powers and choice.

The words, And it is not for us to bring you a proof except by the command of Allah, do not mean that the Messengers of God could not adduce a proof in support of their claim. They are meant only to answer the demand of disbelievers that the Prophets should prove their power and superiority over them. They are told by the Messengers that power and victory all come from God and that, as human beings, they (the Messengers) possess no superiority over them.

7:13; 38:77; 55:15.

Commentary:

In this verse by the word "angels" is meant the whole of creation, because angels constitute the first link of all creation and, as such, a command given to them really applies to the whole of creation. The verse purports to say that man has been given a sort of sovereignty or power over creation as a whole which has been made subservient to him; and angels have been bidden to bring about the results of human actions according as they are good or evil. In this respect the command is general. But when the command pertains to the time of a particular Prophet of God when a special Divine decree comes into operation, angels are bidden to help the Prophet of the day who, as it were, becomes the spiritual Adam of his time. Angels then help the Prophet against his opponents and render null all their schemes and machinations against him. In this connection it is significant that, whereas elsewhere the Quran speaks of the command of God to the angels to submit to "Adam," in the present and the following verses the word used is "man." For an explanation of the words, from dry ringing clay, from black mud wrought into shape, see v. 27.

7:13; 17:62; 18:51.

Commentary:

The verse may be understood to mean that the arch-enemy of truth who opposed Adam spoke of the latter as if saying: "Here is a poor and humble fellow who justifies, and indeed glories in, the submission of all others to him. He and his comrades are a party of mental slaves who take pride in imitating others. But my nature rests high on the firm rock of freedom and independence. How then can I, his superior, bring myself so low as to obey his orders and carry out his wishes?" This dialogue, however, is no real talk between God and Iblis but only an allegory, the sense being that the new order which was to be inaugurated by Adam was regarded by his chief opponent and those of his way of thinking as contrary to their sense of pride and their conception of freedom and, consequently, a source of humiliation for them. Satan, therefore, refused to give it his allegiance considering the old order to be better than that introduced by Adam. It is this sense of the comparative values of the two orders that is meant to be expressed in the terms طین (clay) and نار (fire) expressed in 38:77. For an explanation of dry ringing clay, from black mud wrought into shape, see under v. 27.