طِين

2:77; 3:120; 5:62.

9:64, 65.

Important Words:

خلوا (they are alone) is derived from خلا i.e. he was alone. They say خلا الرجل i.e. the man was alone in a place. خلا المكانmeans, the house became empty and untenanted. خلا الشیء means, the thing passed away. خلا الیه or خلا به or خلا معه means, he was alone with him; he met him in private (Aqrab). خلا فلان means, he died (Lisan).

شیاطین (ringleaders) is the plural of شیطان (satan) which is either derived from (1) شطن or (2) شاط (Mufradat). شطن عنه means, he was or became distant or remote from him or it. شطن صاحبه means, he opposed his comrade and turned him from his intention or course (Aqrab). Derived from this root the word شیطان would mean, the being who is not only himself far from truth but also turns others away from it.

The other derivation is from شاط which means, he burnt: he perished. Derived from this root the word شیطان would mean, the being who burns with hate and anger and is lost.

In common usage the word شیطان means: (1) the wicked or Evil Spirit, i.e. Satan; (2) anybody who greatly transgresses the proper limits and is excessively proud and rebellious; (3) serpent (Aqrab); (4) any blamable power or faculty or propensity like anger, etc. (Mufradat); (5) any painful condition like excessive thirst, etc. (Lane). In its wider sense, the word has also come to be used about anything which is harmful and injurious and is likely to cause suffering.

مستهزءُون (mocking) is derived from استهزاء which again is derived from ھزأ, both having the same meaning. ھزء به and استهزأ به mean, he laughed at, or mocked or scoffed at, or derided him; he made light of him. ھزأ also means, he died suddenly; he put it (camel, etc.) in motion. ھزأ and ھزوا are infinitive nouns from ھزأ and mean: (1) mocking or scoffing or jesting, etc.; (2) object of mocking, etc. (Aqrab & Kashshaf).

Commentary:

The context of the verse makes it clear that by شیاطین here is meant not evil spirits but rebellious ringleaders among the disbelievers and the hypocrites who were proud and haughty and ready to transgress all limits. Reference to such leaders has been made in 33:68 where God says, And they (the people of Hell) will say, 'Our Lord, we obeyed our chiefs and our great ones and they led us astray from the way.' These were the men who egged on the hypocrites to mischief and who were ever burning with jealousy and hate at seeing the Muslims prosper and who had gone far astray from truth.

Some Christian writers have rendered the word شیاطین in this verse as "satans" or "devils", and then charged the Quran with reviling idolaters, Jews and Christians. The charge is groundless; for, as already explained, the word شیاطین does not here mean "satans" but simply proud and mischievous ringleaders. In fact, as shown above, the word شیطان has a very wide significance in Arabic. The Holy Prophet once said to his Companions, "A single rider is a shaitan, a pair of riders also is a pair of shaitans, but three riders are a body of riders" (Dawud). The meaning here is that one rider is exposed to mischief and danger and so are two riders, but three riders travelling together form a safe company. Christian critics, ever keen on finding fault with the Quran, forget the New Testament passages (Mark 8: 33; 8: 38 & Matt. 3:7; 23: 33) where Jesus calls a disciple satan and his opponents serpents and a generation of vipers, etc.

This meaning of the word شیاطین i.e. ringleaders from among disbelievers and hypocrites, is supported by eminent Muslim scholars like Ibn ‘Abbas, Qatadah, Mujahid, and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud (Jarir).

Important Words:

تتلوا (followed). See 2:114

شیاطین (rebellious men). See 2:15.

علی (during) gives the sense of فی i.e. "in" or "during" (Aqrab & Mughni). It is also used to denote a hostile sense meaning "against", as one says خرج علیه i.e. he rebelled against him, or he went out against him with an army intending to fight (Wright). In this sense the phrase علی ملك سلیمان would mean, against the government of Solomon, or conspiring against his government.

سحر (falsehood and deception). In verbal senses سحرہ means, he deceived him; he coaxed him and involved him in trouble and deprived him of his understanding; he enchanted him. سحرالفضة means, he coated a piece of silver so as to make it look like gold. The noun سحر means, anything the source of which is not quite visible; showing off falsehood in the form of truth; a crafty device; craftiness; mischief; enchantment (Aqrab). It also means, producing what is false in the form of truth; any event of which the cause is hidden and which is imagined to be different from what it really is; embellishment by falsification and deceit (Lane). Thus every falsehood, deceit or crafty device which is meant to hide the real object from public view is included in the meaning of سحر.

ملكین (two angels) is the dual number from ملك (angel) for which see 2:31. Figuratively ملك is sometimes used to denote a handsome or holy person, as the Quran says, He (Joseph) is but a gracious angel, i.e. a handsome and pious youth (12:32). As in the verse under comment, the two angels are described as teaching something to the people, therefore the word cannot be taken in its literal significance, because angels do not live among men and do not generally have free intercourse with them (17:95, 96; 21:8). Thus in the present verse ملکین would not mean "two angels" in the literal sense of the word but "two holy men".

ھاروت (Harut) and ماروت (Marut) are both descriptive names. ھاروت is derived from ھرت which means, he tore up (Aqrab); hence ھاروت means, one who tears; the tearer. ماروت is derived from مرت which means, he broke (Aqrab & Lane). Thus ماروت means, one who breaks; the breaker. These names signify that the object of the appearance of these holy men was to 'tear' asunder and 'break' the glory and power of certain people.

فتنة (trial) means, the trial or means whereby the condition of a man may be demonstrated in respect of good or evil (Lane). They say فتن الصائغ الذھب i.e. the goldsmith melted the gold in the crucible so that its purity or impurity might be ascertained (Aqrab).

Commentary:

Many a legend unwarranted by the Quran and the Hadith—and even running contrary to them—clusters round this verse. It would be quite unreasonable to interpret it on the basis of those myths. For their true interpretation no external evidence is needed, the words being self-explanatory. It is clear from the verse itself that Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet were bent upon the same mischief which characterized them in the days of Solomon and during the days of their captivity in Babylon. The verse further indicates that the mischief-mongers of Solomon’s time were those "rebellious men" who called him an unbeliever. God says that those wicked men themselves, and not Solomon, lacked belief. Again, the verse tells us that these men taught their associates such signs as conveyed to them meanings quite different from those generally accepted, for the purpose of deceiving other people and concealing their own activities. All this leads to the conclusion that this verse alludes to those secret plots which the enemies of Solomon made against him, and by which they wished to break his empire. It is pointed out that now, in the time of the Holy Prophet, these people are resorting to the selfsame tactics, but that they will fail.

As the verse refers to a number of historical events, it is advisable to relate them here at some length.

When Jews saw that the power of Islam was steadily expanding and that no opposition from the Arabs had been able to arrest the progress of Muslims, they began to excite outsiders against them. At that time there were two large empires in the neighbourhood of Arabia: (1) The Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire; and (2) The Persian Empire. As Jews were already at enmity with the Roman Government, because they were in constant trouble under it, so it was only the Persian Government to which they could look for support. Harassed by the oppression of Christian rulers, they had taken refuge in Persia, where they enjoyed a good deal of religious freedom, and their religious centre shifted from Judah and Jerusalem to Babylonia (Hutchinson’s History of the Nations, p.550). In the seventh century of the Christian era, i.e., during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet, Jews suffered exceptionally cruel persecution at the hands of the Christian Emperors of the Eastern Roman Empire. "Both Phocas and Heraclius", says the Historians’ History of the World (vol. 7, p. 175), "attempted to exterminate the Jewish religion, and if possible to put an end to their national existence. Heraclius not only practised every species of cruelty himself to effect this object within the bounds of his own dominions, but he even made the forced conversion or banishment of the Jews a prominent feature in his diplomacy." So, in the time of the Holy Prophet the only government to which the Jews could look for help was that of Persia, where their co-religionists enjoyed much influence, especially in the reign of Chosroes II (Jew. Enc., ix. 648).

Consequently, when the Jews saw that their efforts to check the progress of Islam had totally failed, they took to exciting the Persian Court against the Holy Prophet by various means; and as a result, Chosroes II issued orders to the Governor of Yemen to send to him the Arabian claimant as a captive. But when the envoys of the Governor came to the Holy Prophet, he asked them to see him the next day, when he told them that God had informed him that He had their king murdered. Thereupon they returned and related this incident to the Governor. A few days later, the Governor received a letter from Siroes, the son of Chosroes II, to the effect that he had killed his father on account of the latter’s tyranny and that the Governor should, on his behalf, renew the oath of allegiance from all the Chiefs of Yemen; and that the order of his father regarding an Arab should be considered as cancelled (Tabari, iii. 1573-1574).

Some historians, including Tabari himself, hold that it was the letter of the Holy Prophet to the king of Persia inviting him to Islam that was the occasion of his orders for the apprehension of the Holy Prophet. But on comparison of the dates of the above-mentioned events, this turns out to be a mistaken view. For, as we read in Zurqani (ii. 211-212), the letter in question was despatched from Medina on the first of Muharram, 7 A.H.–a date corresponding to 12th April, 628 A.D. (Lane under ھجرة); whereas Chosroes II, who sent orders for the arrest of the Holy Prophet, had been assassinated on the 29th of February, 628 A.D. (Historians’ History of the World, viii. 95). Thus the view that the letter of the Holy Prophet was the cause of Chosroes’ orders is quite untenable; and the only possible cause of Chosroes’ ignominious orders was that his ears had been poisoned by malicious reports, a fact admitted by Sir William Muir (The Life of Mahomet, p. 370). It is to these efforts of the Jews that the Quran alludes in the verse under comment.

The verse also points out that it was foolish on the part of the Jews to suppose that they would succeed in that way. Their attention is invited to the fact that they had already been responsible for two secret plots. The first was against Solomon, when some members of their community turned rebels, hatched plots and stirred up bitter feeling against him by calling him an infidel; whereas the infidels were those who opposed him, hurled imputations at him, and set up against him secret societies in which secret signs and symbols were taught. The Jews, however, themselves reaped the ill-reward of their sinister schemes: their power, as a consequence, fell into decay, and at last they became so powerless that they were driven into exile towards Babylon. This account of Jewish secret societies and conspiracies and treacherous signs and symbols, as alluded to in this verse, finds corroboration in the Bible (1 Kings 11:1-6), where we read that the charge of idol-worship was spread against Solomon. An account of his enemies is found in I Kings 11:14, 23, 26, and a reference to secret plots is met with in II Chron. 10: 2-4 where we learn that the Jews had sent for Jeroboam, a bitter enemy of Solomon, immediately after his death and had attempted to make Solomon’s son agree to some demands of theirs, involving certain imputations against Solomon, before his accession to the throne. We learn about the secret signs from I Kings 11:29-32, in which the ten tribes of the Israelites are likened to ten pieces of a garment, and Jeroboam is told that these ten tribes were on his side against Solomon; and so it proved to be, for on the death of Solomon, these ten tribes made Jeroboam their king (I Kings 12:20). Again, the reference of the Quran to the infidelity of Solomon’s enemies finds corroboration in II Chron. 11:15, from which we learn that his enemies, who falsely charged him with unbelief, themselves fell into idol-worship when they rose to power.

Besides the testimony of the Bible, there is other evidence to show that in the days of Solomon a secret society was at work against him. An old tradition, current among medieval Freemasons, indicates that Solomon was envious of the superior intelligence of Hiram, the chief architect who built the Temple at Jerusalem. He is said to have attempted to kill the great Mason by having him thrown into a tank of molten brass, but he was saved by the spirit of his ancestor, Cain, who prophesied that at last his people would get the better of their enemy. Solomon, however, as the tradition goes, had him afterwards put to death. It is said of him that he had fixed certain secret signs which were a sort of mystery known only to him and his associates (Secret Societies of the World, Volume II, pp. 1-8; as the original book could not be obtained, the reference is to an Urdu translation). We further learn from this book that before the period of the Accepted Masons, the same signs used in all the Lodges were current among the Masons of Solomon’s time (p. 11) and that at the time of initiation, the Hiram incident was related to the new member (pp. 29, 30). However incredible the story as a whole may be, it points at least to the conclusion that in one way or other, secret societies were associated with Solomon’s reign and were much in vogue in his time.

The second occasion when, according to the Quran, the Israelites had resort to secret societies was during their captivity in Babylon. But this time they were not acting against any Prophet but were, on the other hand, working under the leadership of two inspired personages, who were, in obedience to divine command, trying to bring about the deliverance of the Israelites. Their mission was to "tear asunder" and "break down" the empire of the enemies of the Israelites. These holy men told new members, at the time of initiation, that they were a sort of trial from God, serving to differentiate between the good and the bad, and that the Israelites should not therefore refuse to believe what they said, because this would lead them to infidelity. In their teachings they drew a distinction between males and females, confining membership to males only (this is an old practice found among most secret societies). It is also stated that the disciples of these holy men directed their activities against only those for whose chastisement they were commissioned by God.

In this narration, the Quran refers to the days when King Nebuchadnezzar brought the Jews as captives into Babylon and kept them there for a long time. The holy men referred to in the verse under comment were Haggai, the Prophet, and Zechariah, the son of Iddo (Ezra 5:1). When Cyrus, King of Media and Persia, rose to power, the Israelites entered into a secret agreement with him and greatly facilitated his conquest of Babylon. In return for this service, he not only allowed them to return to their own country but also helped in the rebuilding of the Temple (Historians’ History of the World, ii. 126).

After stating that the Jews of the Holy Prophet’s time were following the same course which was adopted by the rebels of Solomon’s days and which was later adopted by the Jews under two holy men in Babylon, it was necessary here to state the ultimate upshot of their efforts against the Holy Prophet, because on the two previous occasion’s their efforts had met with different results. On the first occasion the conspiracy of the Israelites, being directed against a Prophet of God, had ended in the total loss of their prestige and finally in their banishment to Babylon. On the second occasion, they took a similar course under two inspired personages and were successful. Hence, in order to indicate whether the efforts of the Jews against the Holy Prophet would meet with failure, as they did in the days of Solomon, or with success as in Babylon, the Quran says: these people are learning that which would harm them and do them no good; hinting that they will not be successful as in Babylon. Accordingly, the consequence of their hostile efforts against the Holy Prophet was that Chosroes, their only supporter, met his death at the hands of his son, and they themselves were exiled from Arabia in the time of ‘Umar. In the concluding portion of the verse, God adds: And they have certainly known that he who trafficks therein has no share of good in the Hereafter, meaning that a mischievous plotter never succeeds ultimately. The last clause, had they but known, throws a flood of light on how intensely God desires that His creatures should always take the right course and not be misled by mischievous people.

25:32.

Important Words:

زخرف (gilded). They say زخرف البیت i.e. he adorned, decorated or embellished the house. زخرف الکلام means, he arranged or put into a right state the speech or language; he embellished it with lies, etc. زخرف means, gold; any ornament or decoration or embellishment; also anything adorned, decorated or embellished; anything embellished with false colouring or with lies (Aqrab).

For غرورا (in order to deceive) see 4:121.

Commentary:

The words, men and jinn, which occur in many verses of the Quran do not refer to two different species of God’s creatures, but only to two classes of human beings, i.e. "men" denoting the masses or the common folk, and jinn standing for the big people who often remain aloof from the common people and do not mix with them, practically remaining concealed from public gaze. See also 6:101.

Those of the common people and the big people who lead the opposition to the Prophets of God have been styled Shayatin (evil ones), for an explanation of which see note on 2:15. This word shows that those who lead lives of sin before the advent of a Prophet generally increase in sinfulness as a punishment for their evil deeds, so that when a Prophet makes his appearance, they assume the role of arch-enemies to him and become leaders of opposition. It is a law of God, in both the physical and spiritual worlds, that the powers of man develop in the direction in which they are exercised. So, as such men employ their powers in the wrong way, the result is that at the advent of a Prophet they become still greater sinners and become leaders of men in opposing the truth. Again, in order to augment their mischief, these leaders suggest, as hinted in the words, gilded speech, such arguments to one another as appear to be sound and true but are really false and hollow, and their object in suggesting such things is to deceive the weak-minded.

5:63, 64.

Important Words:

السحت (things forbidden) is the noun-infinitive from سحت. They say سحته i.e. he extirpated or destroyed it utterly. سحت شعرهmeans, he removed his hair utterly (in shaving and cutting). سحت فی تجارته means, he earned foul or unlawful gain in his trade. An Arab would say ماله سحت i.e. his property may be destroyed with impunity. سحت therefore means, a thing which is forbidden or unlawful; that which is foul and of bad repute; a bribe that is given to a judge or the like; anything little or small in quantity or number; or anything paltry, mean and inconsiderable (Lane).

Commentary:

The words اکالون للسحت mean: (1) that the Jews devour things that are forbidden and unlawful; or (2) they devour things the result of which is spiritual ruin and national des­truction; or (3) they do not hesitate to take paltry and mean things unlawfully; or (4) they accept bribes. For an explanation of the words سماعون للکذب see the previous verse.

15:27; 23:13; 32:8; 37:12; 38:72.

71:5.

Commentary:

The creation of man referred to in the words, Who created you, is meant as an illustration of the light mentioned in the previous verse, while the decreeing of a term, i.e. the ordaining of death, is meant as an illustration of "darkness". The verse ascribes both these acts to God as acts of mercy, thus refuting those who believe in two separate Gods, one of evil and the other of good.

The words, there is another term fixed with Him, refer to the Day of Judgement or of Resurrection when men, after passing through the gate of death, will receive their rewards from their Lord.

21:67; 22:74.

Important Words:

استھوته (entice away) is derived from ھوی. They say ھوی الشیء i.e. the thing fell down or came down (from a higher to a lower place). Conversely ھوی الرجل الجبل means, the man climbed the hill. ھوت الریح means, the wind blew.ھویة means, he loved and desired it. الـھوی means, love of good or evil; desire; inclination; evil inclination or desire. استھواء means, he took away all his desire and reason leaving him confounded; he made his evil desires look fair in his eyes (Aqrab). الـھوی also means, inclination of the soul or the mind to a thing; an object of love; the inclination of the soul to that in which the animal appetites take delight, without any lawful invitation thereto; opinion swerving from the right way or from the truth (Lane).

حیران (bewildered) is derived from حار which means, he was or became dazzled by a thing at which he looked, so that he turned away his eyes from it; he was or became confounded or perplexed and unable to see his right course; he erred or lost his way. حیران means, in a state of confusion or perplexity, being unable to see his right course; erring; having lost his way (Lane).

Commentary:

The opening clause of the verse teaches by means of an example how to preach the truth. It points out that the best way to preach is to begin by exposing the errors of the opposing party as hinted in the words, neither profit us nor harm us, and then to proceed to point out the truth as hinted in the words, after Allah has guided us.

The verse then gives an apt illustration to expose the futility of شرك i.e. attributing co-partners to God. It compares the case of an idol-worshipper to that of a distracted person who has no fixed course to pursue. Such a person first goes to one idol or to the tomb of one saint and then to another and has no certainty or conviction. But a true believer has a fixed purpose and a fixed goal. He always prays to the One God with a deep-rooted conviction and does not wander about distracted like an idolater.

The reader will note that, true to its own principle, the verse first exposes the error of idolaters and then enunciates the teachings of Islam.

5:4; 6:146.

Commentary:

The verse points out that if believers eat of the flesh of those animals on which the name of God has not been pronounced, it will be an act of disobedience and transgression.

One sin leads to another. If a believer fails to pronounce the name of God on his food, his heart becomes devoid of reverence for Him and this gradually leads to شرك i.e. associating partners with God.

15:33-34; 38:76-77.

Commentary:

What is represented in the present verse as a dialogue between God and Iblis does not necessarily show that an exchange of words actually took place between the two. The words may only depict a state of things, a picture of the conditions that came into existence as a result of the refusal of Iblis to submit to Adam. The verb قال (said) as shown under 2:31 and 2:34 does not always signify the actual uttering of words, being sometimes used to represent only a state of affairs.

For an explanation of the words "fire" and "clay" see 2:81 and 3:50.

2:258; 3:176; 16:101.

Commentary:

The Evil One called شیطان (Shaitan) and those of his kind, are generally invisible to the human eye. They exercise their influence imperceptibly and search for the hidden weaknesses of man in order to expose him and confirm him in his evil ways. Shaitan is a descriptive name, meaning "one who has become removed from God." It is only by being removed away from God that one perishes. For a detailed explanation of the word see 2:37.

The expression, We have made satans friends for those who believe not, shows that Satan and his associates exercise their pernicious influence only on those who are already evilly disposed.

16:37; 22:19.