عَال

62:7, 8.

Important Words:

نبتھل (let us pray fervently) is derived from بھل. They say بھله i.e. he left him to his own will; or he left him to himself; he cursed him. ابتھل means, he prayed or supplicated humbly and earnestly and fervently, with energy and effort. باھلهmeans, he cursed him, being also cursed by the latter. مباھلة means, the act of invoking God’s curse on each other, i.e. on whichever party is the wrongdoer (Aqrab & Lane).

انفسنا و انفسکم (our people and your people). The words are the plural of نفس and mean: (1) our souls and your souls; (2) ourselves and yourselves; (3) our people and your people; (4) our co-religionists and your co-religionists (Lane). See also 2:55 and 3:29. Here, as the context shows, the words give the last-mentioned meaning.

Commentary:

The present discussion on Christian doctrines with which this Surah began has been brought to a close in this verse. The reference, as mentioned above, is to the Christian deputation from Najran which consisted of sixty persons and was headed by their chief, ‘Abdul-Masih, known as Al-‘Aqib. They met the Holy Prophet in his Mosque and the discussion on the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus continued at some length. When the question had been fully discussed and the members of the deputation were found to be still insisting on their false doctrine, the Holy Prophet, in obedience to the Divine command contained in the present verse, invited them as a last resort to join him in a sort of prayer contest technically known as مباھلة i.e. invoking the curse of God on the holders of false beliefs. As, however, the Christians did not appear to be sure of their ground, they declined to accept the challenge, thus indirectly admitting the falsity of their doctrine (Zurqani, Khamis & Bayan under 3:3). On this occasion, the Holy Prophet brought out ‘Ali, Fatimah, Hasan and Husain (Khamis & Zurqani) as well as Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and others (‘Asakir) in the field and is reported to have said: "If the Christians had accepted the challenge of مباھلة and agreed to pray to God to send His punishment on the lying party, God would have surely destroyed the liars before a year had passed" (Bukhari, Muslim & Tirmidhi).

It may be noted that the prayer contest known as مباھلة is in the nature of seeking God’s arbitration in fundamental religious differences. When other methods of settlement fail, the parties approach Almighty God to decide between them according to His eternal scheme of helping the righteous and destroying the wicked. The act of cursing is thus not in the form of abusing but an earnest supplication to God to uphold the truth and destroy falsehood—to amputate the diseased limb in order to save the healthy one. Thus مباھلةis a very serious affair and should be resorted to in very rare cases, subject to the following conditions, which are deducible from the present verse as well as from the relevant sayings of the Holy Prophet; (1) the point in dispute should be a matter of supreme and fundamental religious importance and should be based on clear scriptural authority; (2) the matter should first be fully argued and discussed between the parties; (3) the مباھلة should take place only if and when after the aforesaid discussion each party still continues to adhere to its views, definitely holding the other party to be in the wrong; (4) for the actual contest the parties should assemble in a suitable place together with the members of their families and a suitable number of others holding similar views, and there solemnly invoke the curse of God on the party sticking to falsehood.

As to the form or time of punishment which, as a result of مباھلة must overtake the offending party, the verse sheds no light. The matter rests entirely with God. From the above-quoted tradition, however, it may be deduced that if any period at all is to be fixed, it should be not less than a year. But the form of punishment must still rest on Divine will. The Judge in heaven reserves the right of deciding each individual case as He thinks fit. The result is left to speak for itself.

It may be noted here incidentally that during the discussions with the Christian deputation from Najran, the Holy Prophet allowed them to pray in his Mosque in their own way, which they did facing the east—an act of religious toleration unparalleled in the history of all religion (Zurqani).

9:31.

Important Words:

اربابا (Lords) is the plural of رب (Lord) for which see 1:2. رب means, lord, master or owner; a chief or ruler to whom obedience is rendered; one who fosters, brings up, or nourishes (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these faiths become united in the doctrine of the Oneness of God, the verse permits the sacrifice of other Islamic teachings as being of comparatively little importance. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The Quran, the Hadith and the facts of history are all united in belying this ridiculous assumption. It is simply unthinkable that compromise in matters of faith could be allowed by any religion worth the name, particularly with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer contest to invoke the curse of God upon those who lie in their beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in the Oneness of God could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save Heraclius from God’s punishment. Elsewhere the Quran emphatically declares that, Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam, (i.e. complete submission); and whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the losers (3:20 & 86). Can anything be clearer?

The truth is that this verse is intended to suggest an easy and simple method by which Jews and Christians can arrive at a right decision regarding the truth of Islam. Christians, in spite of claiming belief in the Unity of Godhead, felt satisfied in believing in the divinity of Jesus; and Jews, notwithstanding their claim to be monotheists, gave blind allegiance to their priests and divines, practically placing them in the position of God Himself. The verse exhorts both these communities to come back to their original belief in the Oneness of God and give up the worship of false deities who stand in the way of their accepting Islam. Thus, instead of seeking a compromise with these faiths, the verse virtually invites Christians and Jews to the faith of Islam, by drawing their attention to the doctrine of the Oneness of God which being, at least in its outer form, the common fundamental doctrine of all, could serve as a meeting ground for further approach.

It was exactly on these lines that Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, in his "Message of Peace", made an offer to the Hindus of India to enter into an agreement with the Muslims of his way of thinking to the effect that they (Hindus) would respect and honour the Holy Prophet of Islam and would look upon him as a true Messenger of God, even as he and his followers believed in Rama and Krishna as God’s Elect.

Special emphasis has been laid in the verse under comment on the Oneness of God—a doctrine on which in theory all revealed religions seem to agree, but regarding the details, of which no two Faiths are found to concur. Most religions claim to be monotheistic; but under the outer veneer of monotheism, polytheism very often lies hidden in most hideous forms. It is the simple faith of Islam alone which is really and truly monotheistic in all its aspects and which strongly condemns the association with God of anything or any being in His person, attributes, worship or works. It is most unfortunate, however, that in spite of Islam being such a strictly monotheistic faith, a section of present-day Muslims has drifted away into the quagmire of what cannot but be termed idol-worship in the wider sense of the word.

Incidentally, it may be noted that the letter mentioned by Bukhari and other Muslim traditionists as having been addressed by the Holy Prophet to Heraclius in the words of this verse inviting him to accept Islam has recently been discovered and found to contain the exact words quoted by Bukhari (R. Rel. vol. V. No. 8). This furnishes a strong proof of the essential authenticity of Bukhari and, for that matter, of other accepted works of Hadith.

48:12.

Commentary:

Trials come to bring about a distinction between true believers and those weak of faith or insincere. In this way, the sufferings of the Muslims at Uhud proved a blessing in disguise. They served to distinguish the true believers from the hypocrites who had so far remained intermixed with the true believers. While professing to be true Muslims, they were, at heart, enemies of Islam; and their passing for Muslims was injurious to the Muslim community. The believers, taking them for true Muslims, remained unaware of the secret machinations by which they sought to injure the cause of Islam. So it was in the interests of Islam that their hypocrisy became unmasked and the Muslims became on their guard against them. On the other hand, just as the exposure of the hypocrites proved beneficial to the believers, similarly the coming to light of their own sincerity and devotion served a most useful purpose. It served not only to disappoint the enemies of Islam who came to realize that with such devoted followers they could make no headway against Islam, but it also opened their eyes to its truth; for it became clear to them that a religion which could inspire its votaries with such selfless zeal and steadfast devotion could not but be true.

The particle او rendered as "and" in the clause, fight in the cause of Allah and repel the attack of the enemy, literally means "or" and is equivalent to "in other words", or "what is the same thing," etc. It is used here: (1) to explain the meaning of the preceding clause, i.e. fight in the cause of Allah. So the whole sentence would read something like this: "It was said to them (the hypocrites): Come ye, fight in the cause of Allah, which was the same thing as repelling the attack of the enemy." This rendering would go to prove that the Companions of the Holy Prophet waged no aggressive war and all their fighting was undertaken in self-defence. (2) Or the word او (and) is used here in the sense of "at least". According to this rendering, the sentence would mean: "Fight in the cause of Allah; and if you cannot fight in the cause of Allah, at least fight in defence of your own homes and hearths," i.e. your own interests require that you should defend Medina against the attack of the enemy. (3) Or as rendered in the text the word is used in the sense of "and". With this meaning of او, the whole sentence would mean, "fight in the cause of Allah and repel the attack of the enemy."

The expression لو نعلم قتالا translated in the text as, If we knew how to fight, may have three meanings: (1) If we knew that there would be fighting, i.e. we thought there would be no fighting. By using this expression the hypocrites meant that seeing the strength of the enemy, the Muslims would at once run away and there will be no fighting. (2) If we knew it to be a fight, i.e. it was no fight in which the Muslims were going to be engaged, but certain destruction in view of the appalling difference between the numbers and equipment of the opposing forces. (3) Or, as rendered in the text, the expression may mean, if we knew how to fight. In this case, it must be taken to have been used ironically, signifying: "We are unaware of the art of war; if we had been acquainted with it, we would have fought along with you."

The allusion in the verse is obviously to the defection at Uhud of a party of 300 hypocrites under their leader ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy, who, at a crucial moment, deserted the Muslims and went back to Medina, saying, "He (the Prophet) has disregarded my advice and has followed the advice of mere lads". Seeing this, ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr, father of Jabir, approached him and asked him not to desert the Prophet in that manner, upon which ‘Abdullah replied in the very words quoted by the Quran, i.e. لو نعلم قتالا لا تبعنا کم meaning, "If we knew there would be fighting, we would have surely followed you." At this ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr exclaimed, saying: "God’s curse be upon you. Surely, He Himself will help His Messenger" (Jarir, iii. 104).

63:6.

2:171; 31:22.

Commentary:

It is indeed strange that when science and knowledge advance and new discoveries and new inventions are made, people are quick to throw overboard worn out ideas and theories tenaciously held by their forefathers and hasten to accept and benefit by the new inventions and discoveries; but when a Prophet brings to them a new guidance from God, they refuse to accept it on the ground that it does not agree with the beliefs and ideas held by their ancestors and with their own time-honoured notions and theories. How foolish is this attitude and how lame and absurd the excuse for the rejection of divine truths! This is how the Quran exposes the untenability of the position of the rejecters of truth.

4:37; 17:24.

17:32.

6:121; 7:34.

Important Words:

املاق (poverty) is derived from ملق. They say ملق الشیء i.e. he erased the thing. ملقه بالعصا means, he beat him with a stick. ملق الولد امه means, the child sucked from the breasts of his mother. املق الرجل means, the man spent all his money and became poor. املاق means, poverty or destitution (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The Quran has already given the commandments and prohibitions of the Islamic Law with regard to the fruits of the earth and the flesh of animals, in opposition to the laws devised by men. Now it gives general commandments and prohibitions.

It should be noted that the injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God requires us to do, and not what He forbids us to do. Thus, it is the contrary of the injunctions given in the verse that is forbidden. The injunctions have been expressly mentioned and the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse, and the attention of the reader has been drawn to both.

The verse may also be construed in another way. The first sentence should be taken as having finished with the words ما حرم ربکم i.e. what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence should be taken as beginning with the words علیکمwhich would in this case mean, "it is enjoined upon you or it is incumbent on you." The verse will then read as follows:"Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is incumbent on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him…"

The order in which the injunctions are given in this verse is noteworthy. The injunctions begin with the words, Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. The Arabic word for "Lord" is رب which means "Creator, Sustainer, and Nourisher" (see 1:2), and it is the very idea of "sustaining and nourishing" that governs the order of the injunctions here given. The first injunction, i.e. associate not anything as partner with Him, pertains to the Great Nourisher, Allah. The second injunction pertains to the lesser nourishers, viz. parents. The word احسان (doing good) expresses the idea that the service of the parents enjoined in the words, do good to parents, is to be performed in the best way possible, for احسان literally signifies "doing a thing very well." Next come those who are nourished and sustained by the "lesser nourishers", viz. children. Parents are bidden to nourish and bring up their children well, as implied in the words, kill not your children for fear of poverty. Indeed, he who neglects to bring up his children properly for fear of poverty virtually "kills" them. If it is the duty of the children to serve their parents well, it is equally the duty of the parents to bring up their children well.

The pronoun "you" in the clause, it is We Who provide for you and for them, refers to parents and the pronoun "them" refers to children, the former being put before the latter in order to draw our attention to the fact that God’s providing for the parents is a proof of the fact that He will also provide for the children.

The next injunction is contained in the words, approach not foul deeds. The word فواحش (foul deeds) is the plural of فاحشه one meaning of which is "fornication or adultery" (see 4:16), which is another form of killing one’s children; for the man who forms immoral connection with a woman other than his wife, not only destroys his seed but also neglects his own wife, which cannot but affect his begetting children in lawful wedlock. Similarly, illegitimate children born of a woman other than one’s wife are not one’s own children, nor are they properly looked after.

The words, whether open or secret, used in connection with فواحش (foul deeds) refer respectively to openly going in to prostitutes and to forming secret connections with women other than one’s wife.

Next to the relations between parents and children come brotherly and friendly relations which are referred to in the words, kill not the life which Allah has made sacred. This injunction requires us to treat our brethren and friends as well as members of our society with fairness and justice. The word "killing," it will be noted, pertains not only to actually killing but to an attempt at killing as well as causing serious injury and boycotting etc. (see meaning of قتل i.e. killing under 2:62; 3:155 & 4:158). The expression, save by right, used with regard to "killing" means "except when a man has made himself deserving of the treatment to be meted out to him." For instance, in case of murder a person will be put to death only by order of proper authority. Similarly, in case of "boycotting" a person will be boycotted only under the orders of the person or the body that possesses that power. It will not be right for any man to take the law in his own hands.

28:5.

Commentary:

It appears from this verse that all the Israelites had not believed in Moses. Only a part of them had really believed in him. The rest followed him from only political or national considerations. The pronoun "his" in the clause, from among his people, may also refer to Pharaoh. In that case the clause would mean that some youths of the people of Pharaoh also believed in Moses. But the former interpretation seems to be more correct and is therefore preferable.

This verse also brings to light the fact that not unoften an appreciable number of the people to whom a Prophet of God preaches his Message become convinced of his truth, but they dare not profess their faith openly for fear of their leaders and chiefs. The pronoun "their" in the words "their chiefs" may refer either to the Israelites or to the people of Pharaoh. Preferably it refers to the people of Pharaoh. The chiefs of the people of Pharaoh have been called the chiefs of the Israelites because the latter were a subject people. But the pronoun need not necessarily be taken as referring to any particular people. The great men of a country are regarded as chiefs not merely because they belong to any particular community but also because, being members of the government, they possess influence and authority. Hence the high officials of the State, whether they belonged to the people of Pharaoh or the Israelites might rightly be called the chiefs of the Israelites and it was through both that Pharaoh tyrannized over the Israelites.

The words, Pharaoh was a tyrant in the land, show that Pharaoh was not a wise and sagacious monarch. He had embarked upon a policy of open repression and persecution which was calculated to incite the people to rebellion. This policy eventually led to the downfall of the dynasty.

6:74; 9:94; 59:23; 64:19.

Important Words:

الکبیر (the Incomparably Great). See 11:4. The difference between الکبیر (the Incomparably Great) and المتعال (the Most High) is that whereas the former word expresses the greatness of God in relation to human beings, the latter expresses His absolute eminence independently of any relationship with human beings.

Commentary:

The verse implies the hint that in order to checkmate and frustrate the plans of the enemy and to achieve success against him it is necessary to know his plans, both open and secret. The adversaries of the Holy Prophet are warned that they have to deal with a Being Who has full knowledge of their plans and Who, being Great, can easily foil and frustrate them. But being also High, His plans to bring about their ruin are hidden from them. How can they then hope to succeed against His Prophet and Messenger?

Commentary:

As a result of the Battle of the Ditch and of the subsequent banishment of the Banu Quraizah, large booty fell into the hands of Muslims. They were also promised more conquests and wealth (see v. 28 above). From a persecuted and economically very poor minority they had grown into a rich, powerful and prosperous community. Material wealth, however, brings in its train worldly-mindedness, and a desire for ease and comfort and a disinclination to render acts of service and sacrifice. This is a state of affairs which a Reformer has especially to guard against. As love of ease and comfort, generally makes its appearance first in the domestic circle, and as the members of the Holy Prophet’s household were to serve as a model in social behaviour, it was in the fitness of things that they should have been required to set an example in self-denial. Not that the use of money was altogether taboo or that amenities of life were completely forbidden to them, but they were, no doubt, expected to set a very high standard of self-abnegation. It is to this high standard of the sacrifice of material benefits and of an affluent and easy living, to which the present and the following few verses refer. The companionship of the Holy Prophet demanded this sacrifice, and his wives were told to make a choice between comfortable life and his companionship, and it should be said to their credit that they chose the latter alternative and that even when, afterwards, in the time of the Caliphate of ‘Umar and ‘Uthman, very high stipends were paid to them, they lived extremely simple lives and spent most of the money in charity.

The words, "I will provide for you and send you away in a handsome manner" imply that the Holy Prophet’s wives were allowed a free choice and if anyone of them had elected to part company with him, it would have entailed no displeasure of God, on the contrary she would have been handsomely provided.

It may also be noted that just as the Holy Prophet was a perfect exemplar for all sections of humanity, his wives were expected to serve as model for women in their special sphere. This is why they have been called "the Mothers of the Faithful." Naturally, a very strict and high standard of self-discipline and self-denial is demanded of them in this and the next few verses.