ROOT ك و ن

5:53; 9:125; 74:32.

Important Words:

مرض (disease) is derived from مرض i.e. he fell ill; he lost his health. Thus مرض means, anything whereby a man loses his health (physical, moral or spiritual); disease or hypocrisy; doubt or darkness or loss; omission of any kind (Aqrab); any disease or any physical or moral weakness or defect of faith, in fact, anything that hinders man’s physical, moral or spiritual progress (Mufradat).

یكذبون (they lie) is derived from كذب which means, he lied; he said what was untrue while he knew the truth; he gave a wrong account of something, whether intentionally or unintentionally; it (the heart or the eye) felt or perceived wrongly (Aqrab); he said what was true but said it insincerely, i.e. he himself believed the thing to be untrue (the Quran 63:2). كذب(kadhdhaba) is the causative or transitive form from كذب. They say كذبه i.e. he accused him of lying; he attributed falsehood to him in his claim or statement; he pronounced him a liar. كذب به means, he rejected and disbelieved it. كاذبmeans a liar, and كذاب means a great and habitual liar. كذب (kadhib) and كذاب (kidhdhab) mean, falsehood, lie, untruth; also the act of uttering a lie. كذاب also means the act of accusing one of lying (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

God speaks of two diseases of the heart: (1) كفر i.e. disbelief; and (2) نفاق i.e. hypocrisy. The former has already been referred to in verses 7 and 8. The present verse refers to the disease of hypocrisy and points out that those suffering from it do not act as normal healthy persons do.

The Holy Prophet has mentioned the following signs of hypocrisy. Says he: "When a hypocrite speaks, he lies; and when he makes a promise, he does not fulfil it; and when he is entrusted with anything, he acts dishonestly and when he makes a contract, he breaks it; and when he engages in a dispute, he uses foul words" (Bukhari).

In the verse under comment the increase of hypocrisy is attributed to God, not because God increases it but because the increase results from disregard of His commands; also because it is God who finally dispenses the good and evil consequences of human actions. The Quran has only been revealed for healing diseases. Says Allah: O mankind! There has come to you an exhortation from your Lord and a cure for whatever disease there is in the hearts (10:58).

The increasing of disease also means that the expanding power of Islam was naturally increasing the disease of the hypocrites who were all the more forced to remain, against their will, in outward friendliness with the Muslims.

In the case of disbelievers the punishment mentioned is عذاب عظیم (great punishment), whereas in the case of hypocrites it is عذاب الیم(grievous punishment). This is because disbelievers express their disbelief and enmity openly, while hypocrites keep their feelings of hatred and malice concealed in their hearts, thinking that they are thereby deriving twofold pleasure—one of enmity towards Islam and the other, of befooling the Muslims. So the ret­ribution in store for the hypocrites is characterized by special pain and anguish—a fit recompense for their false pleasure.

2:87, 176; 3:178; 14:4; 16:108.

Important Words:

اشتروا (have taken in exchange) is derived from اشتری which again is derived from شری both having the same meaning, i.e. he purchased a thing or became owner of a thing by purchase. The word also sometimes gives the meaning of باع i.e. he sold a thing. The word اشتری is also used of a person who gives up one thing and lays hold on another (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The expression, who have taken error in exchange for guidance, means (1) that they have given up guidance and taken error instead; or (2) that both guidance and error were offered to them but they preferred error and refused guidance. Both these meanings apply here. According to the first, the verse would mean that originally everybody is endowed with a pure nature and the best of capacities (30:31; 95:5), but, owing to wrong training or wrongdoing, the original nature and capacities become lost. In this case "guidance" would mean the nature or capacities with which every man is endowed by God, and "exchange" would mean that, through improper use, people lose the God-given guidance, landing themselves in error instead. According to the second meaning, the verse would signify that through His Messengers, God communicates to man only truth and guidance, whereas Satan presents to him his own evil teaching. Wrong choice by man results in hisacceptance of error instead of guidance.

This traffic, however, brings the hypocrites no gain. They believe that by preferring the promptings of Satan to the guidance of God, they would reap a good profit in this life. But, says God, they will reap no such profit. On the contrary, they will be the losers and will suffer humiliation through their own wrong choice.

The words, nor are they rightly guided, point to yet another consequence of the wrong choice of hypocrites. They will not only suffer loss and humiliation in this life, but will also suffer punishment in the life to come, for being deprived of guidance they will not reach the goal. Thus the words, their traffic has brought them no gain, refer to the benefits that accrue to one in this life, and the words, nor are they rightly guided, refer to the end they will meet in the life to come.

The verse teaches an important truth. Every action of man is attended by two kinds of results, one immediate and the other deferred. A person who is detected in theft suffers punishment and humiliation in this life. This is the immediate consequence of his action. The deferred consequence is that, by the same action, he reduces his ability to find and accept the truth and guidance. Similarly, when a person does a good deed, the immediate result is that he is pleased with himself and rises in the estimation of others. The deferred consequence is that he increases his power of finding and accepting truth and guidance. It is the deferred consequences that are referred to in the expression, nor are they rightly guided.

10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.

Important Words:

عبد (servant). For the root meaning of the word see note under 1:5. As explained there, the verb عبد means, he showed complete submissiveness and humility; or he received the imprint of a thing. So عبد would mean a person who, through complete submission and humility to God, has become, as it were, an image of God. The word has been used here about the Holy Prophet by way of endearment and is expressive of the exalted position he holds in the sight of God.

شھداء (helpers) is the plural of شھید which is derived from شھد i.e. he was present; or he gave witness, etc. Thus شھیدmeans, one who is present; one who sees or witnesses; one who gives testimony or evidence; one who possesses much knowledge; one from whose knowledge nothing is hidden (Aqrab & Lane); also a helper (Mufradat). Following the last mentioned signification the word may also refer here to the Jews who were friends of the disbelievers (5:81) and spoke of the idolaters as being better guided in religion than those who believe (4:52).

Commentary:

In the preceding two verses the Quran gave its first commandment to the people. Having been thus directly addressed by God, the polytheistic disbelievers felt a natural reaction to repudiate the monotheistic teaching of the Quran, because they felt that its acceptance meant that they should give up their long cherished beliefs.

In the present verse God says that if the Quran created doubts and disquietude in their minds and is not worthy of acceptance, the disbelievers should produce one like it. If they cannot, then this very fact would prove them to be wrong.

The subject of the incomparable excellence of the Quran, has been dealt with at five different places in the Quran, i.e. in 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89; & 52:34, 35, and disbelievers have been challenged, to produce its equal.

In two of these five verses (2:24 & 10:39) the challenge is identical, while in the remaining three verses three separate and different demands have been made from disbelievers. Thus, to begin with the largest demand in 17:89, disbelievers are challenged to produce the like of the whole Quran, and they have been told that even if all jinn and men should join together, they would not be able to produce it. In 11:14 the challenge is limited to the production of ten chapters. In 2:24 and 10:39, however, it has been confined to one Surah only; while in 52:34-35, the condition of even one Surahhas been omitted and disbelievers have been given the option of producing even a single narration similar to any one narration (i.e. announcement) of the Quran. On the face of it, this difference in the form of the challenge at different places seems to be incongruent and to spring from a lack of harmony in the Quran. Some commentators have endeavoured to explain away this seeming incongruity by saying that it was due to the challenge having been made at different times. At first disbelievers were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran. When they failed to do so, the challenge was whittled down to the production of the like of any ten chapters. When, however, they were unable to produce even ten chapters, the challenge was further reduced to the production of a single chapter; and, lastly, disbelievers were asked to produce even a single narration like any narration of the Quran. This explanation, however, does not seem to be satisfactory. The different Surahs containing these different challenges were revealed, in the following order: (1) 52:34, 35; (2) 17:89; (3) 11:14; (4) 10:39; (5) 2:24 (Rodwell). Now in Surah 52, the first to be revealed, the challenge is not qualified by any condition as regards size, disbelievers having been given the choice of producing even one single narration similar to any narration of the Quran. It is very strange that, whereas at first the challenge was unqualified and disbelievers were called upon to produce something comparable to any narration of the Quran, later it began to be hedged round by conditions and stipulations, first requiring disbelievers to produce the like of the whole book, then reducing the challenge to ten Surahs, and last of all reducing it to a single chapter. The order is most unnatural.

Moreover, some of the Surahs which contain this challenge were revealed on occasions so close to one another that some commentators have found it difficult to fix their order of priority with certainty. Hence it is unwise to settle this question on the basis of the chronological order of the Surahs containing this challenge.

Another point worth considering in this connection is that the verses in question do not mention any historical event but contain only a general challenge which stands for all time. Now the question is, in what form should the challenge be delivered to the world? Should disbelievers be called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran, or to produce ten Surahs like any ten Surahs of the Quran, or should they be called upon to bring forward the like of one Surah only or the like of any single piece of the Quran? If it is enough to make a demand for the like of a single piece of the Quran, why should a demand for the like of a Surah be made, and if it is enough to make a demand for the like of one Surah, the demand for the production of ten Surahs or, for that matter, for the whole of the Quran seems extravagant.

The fact is that these verses contain certain demands which stand for all time, and there is no need to enter into the question of their chronological order. The challenge can be made even today in all the different forms mentioned in the Quran as it was made at the time of the Holy Prophet.

Before explaining the various forms of these challenges it is worth noting that mention of them in the Quran is invariably accompanied by a reference to wealth and power, except in 2:24, which, as already stated, does not contain a new challenge but only repeats the challenge made in 10:39. From this it may be concluded that there exists a close connection between the question of wealth and power and the challenge for the production of the like of the Quran or a part thereof. This connection lies in the fact that the Quran has been held out to disbelievers as a priceless treasure. When disbelievers demanded material treasures from the Holy Prophet and asked, Wherefore has not a treasure been sent down to him (11:13), they were told in reply that he possessed a matchless treasure in the Quran. The same reply was repeated when disbelievers asked, Wherefore has not an angel come with him? (11:13). They were told in reply that angels did descend upon him; for their function was to bring the word of God, and the Divine Word had already been vouchsafed to him. Thus both the demand for a treasure and the demand for the descent of angels have been jointly met by offering the Quran as a matchless treasure brought down by angels, and the challenge to produce the like of the Quran has been put forward as a proof of its peerless quality.

Let us now take the different verses containing this challenge separately. The greatest demand is that made in 17:89, where disbelievers are required to bring a book like the whole of the Quran in all its manifold qualities. In this verse disbelievers are not required to represent their composition as the word of God. They may bring it forward as their own composition and declare it to be the equal of or, for that matter, better than the Quran. As, however, it was necessary to define in what respect the work to be produced was to resemble the Quran, the Quran says in the next verse, And of a truth We have (herein) set forth for mankind in various ways, all kinds of similitudes, but most of men would reject everything but disbelief (17:90), hinting thereby that if disbelievers reject the Divine origin of the Quran and believe it to be the work of the Prophet himself, then let them produce a book which, like the Quran, should possess the following excellences: (a) it should throw light on every essential subject pertaining to religion; (b) its discussion of these subjects should be exhaustive, offering detailed guidance on every question; (c) it should be free from all harm and contain nothing but good; and (d) it should aim not at the good of any particular people or community but at the well-being of all mankind, containing guidance for all temperaments and dispositions as well as for all circumstances and conditions. But as at the time when this challenge was made the whole of the Quran had not yet been revealed, disbelievers were not required to produce the like of the Quran there and then; and the challenge thus implied a prophecy that they would not be able to produce the like of it, neither in the form in which it then was nor when it became complete. Again, the challenge was not confined to the disbelievers of the Prophet’s time alone, but extended to doubters and critics of all times.

The second verse which contains a challenge is 11:14. In this verse the disbelievers’ objection that the Prophet had not come with a treasure, nor had an angel come to him, has been met by calling upon them to bring similar Surahswhich they should represent as the word of God. The latter demand, i.e. that pertaining to the representation of the required production as the word of God, has a reference to the objection of the disbelievers that no angel has come down to the Prophet. They are told that if no angel has really come to him and his claim to receive divine revelation through the medium of angels is false, then let them also produce ten Surahs, claiming, like him, that they have been brought down to them by angels, and then see what their end would be. If they had not the courage to forge a lie against God, how could they think that the Prophet could be guilty of such fabrication or, if he had dared to commit this forgery, why had he remained secure from God’s punishment?

The reason why the disbelievers in this verse have been called upon to produce ten Surahs and not the whole Quran is that the question here did not relate to the perfection of the Quran in all respects, but to that of only a portion of it. The disbelievers had objected to some parts of it being defective, as is evident from the words: They imagine that thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee (11:13). Hence, they have not been required here to bring a complete book like the whole Quran, but only ten Surahs in place of those parts of the Quran which they deem to be defective, in order that the truth of their assertion may be tested.

As for the selection of the specific number 10 for this purpose, it should be noted that in Arabic 10 represents a complete number. As the object was to refute the assertion of the disbelievers that certain portions of the Quran were defective, therefore the disbelievers were given the option of making as many as ten efforts to substantiate their claim. They were thus asked to produce ten Surahs not because they could produce less than that number but because the best way to refute their objection was to afford them several opportunities to substantiate the truth of their assertion. In short, since in 17:89 the whole Quran was claimed to be a perfect Book, its opponents were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran; but since in 11:14 the point was that certain portions of it were objected to, so they were asked to choose ten such portions as appeared to them to be most defective and then, produce a composition even like those portions.

The third verse where the Quran has been declared to be matchless is 10:39. Here disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of only one Surah of the Quran. This is so because, unlike the above-mentioned two verses, the challenge made in this verse is in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. In the verses preceding 10:39, it was claimed that God possessed full authority over all things (see 10:32-36), and as a proof of this, in 10:38 the Quran was put forward as possessing the following excellences: (a) it contains teachings which could not be devised by man; (b) it has come in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the previous Scriptures; (c) in it the imperfect teachings of the previous Scriptures have been perfected; (d) the word of God embodied in it has been made secure from being interpolated or tampered with by man; and (e) its teachings are meant for all men and all time. In support of this claim, verse 10:39 throws out a challenge to those who deny or doubt it to produce a single chapter containing these excellences in the same perfect form in which they are contained in this chapter, i.e. ch.10.

The verses 52:34, 35 contain the smallest of all demands. In these verses disbelievers are challenged to produce a single piece or a single announcement like any piece or announcement of the Quran. This demand also has been made in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. Hence the smallness of the demand. The claim in question is made in the opening verses of chapter 52, i.e. Surah At-Tur, to the effect that the Quranic revelation which was promised to mankind through Moses on Mount Sinai, will continue to be written, read and published throughout the world and that its followers will continue to multiply and will comprise not only common men but persons of great spiritual and temporal eminence, and that the fountain of the new faith will continue to provide the water of eternal life to all the countries of the world so that the fulfilment of these prophecies will constitute a proof of the fact that there is a Day of Judgement. Thereafter the Quran proceeds in 52:34, 35 to challenge disbelievers that, if they look upon the revelation of the Quran to be a fabrication, then they should come forward and make a prophecy like the one made above. This challenge is unconditional and without qualification. Disbelievers are not required to represent what they produce as the word of God, nor is it laid down as a condition that their prophecy should be of their own devising. They may as they like either make a prophecy of their own devising or borrow it from any other Scripture. Again, disbelievers are not asked to bring forward as many prophecies as there are in the Quran—and these are legion—but to bring forward only one single prophecy similar to any one of the prophecies made in the beginning of the Surah. They are told that they will not be able to fulfil this demand, for such a prophecy could be made only by the Being Who is the Creator and Owner of the heavens and the earth, along with their treasures, and Who not only knows, but possesses mastery of, the unseen. This challenge also stands for all time.

The fifth challenge to produce a like of the Quran is contained in the verse under comment (2:24) and here also, as in 10:39, disbelievers have been called upon to bring a Surah like that of the Quran, not in refutation of any of their objections, but in support of a claim made by the Quran itself. In the case of the verse under comment this claim is stated in the beginning of the Surah in 2:3 which says: This is a perfect Book; there is no doubt in it; it is a guidance for the righteous. Similarly, 10:39 is also preceded with the words: there is no doubt about it (10:38). This shows that the challenge to produce a chapter like one of the Quran has special reference to the peculiarity which is described by the words, there is no doubt about it. The challenge given in the present Surah is preceded by the claim that the Quran is a guidance for those who fear God (2:3), which means that it guides the righteous to the highest stages of spiritual progress. Hence in the above challenge it has been declared that if disbelievers are in doubt as to the Divine origin of the Quran, then they should bring forward a Surah that may be com­parable to the Quran in the spiritual influence it exercises over its followers.

One of the characteristics of the Quran is that, whatever chapter of it we may read, it casts a subtle and sublime spiritual influence over our minds. Thus, instead of creating doubts it dispels them and takes men to a stage where no doubt can possibly survive, which is the stage of communion with God. This stage can be attained only by the study of the Quran; no other Book can compare with it in this respect.

The above explanation will show that all these challenges calling upon disbelievers to produce the like of the Quran are quite distinct and separate one from another, and all of them stand for all time, none of them superseding or cancelling any other. The misconception that these challenges are one and the same seems to have arisen from the wrong notion that in all of them it is the elegance of the Quranic style and diction that has been held out as unique and incomparable and that it is such elegance of Arabic diction that disbelievers have been called upon to produce. But this is not the case. The challenges made in the five Surahs referred to above are not one or identical nor do they make the same demand; each has a distinct and separate demand of its own and it is in keeping with the nature of these demands that disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran or a part of it.

The question now remains whether these demands also include a challenge to produce a work comparable to the Quran in elegance of style and diction. The answer is that they certainly do so, but only in an indirect way and not as a direct and fundamental demand, for sublime ideas can only be expressed in sublime language. As the Quran comprises sublime and lofty ideas, it was inevitable that the most beautiful diction and the most chaste style should have been employed as the vehicle for the expression of those ideas; otherwise, the subject matter was liable to remain obscure and doubtful and the perfect beauty of the Quran would have become marred. Thus, in whatever form and in whatever respect disbelievers have been challenged to produce a composition like the Quran, the demand for beauty of style and elegance of diction comparable to those of the Quran also forms a part of the challenge.

19:34; 22:67; 30:41; 40:12; 45:27.

Important Words:

اموات (without life) is the plural of میت which means: (1) a thing dead, or (2) a thing without life. Thus the word میت is used both for a thing which so far has had no life and for a thing which had had life but is now dead. The word میت is also used about one who is dying or is nearing death but has not yet died (Lane). See also 2:20.

احیا (he gave life) is derived from حیی which means, he lived or he had life. The transitive form احیا means, he gave life, he brought to life, he saved the life of (Aqrab & Lane).

حیاة (life) which is the opposite of موت (death) signifies: (1) the faculty of growth, as in an animal or a plant; (2) the faculty of sensation; (3) the faculty of intellect; (4) freedom from grief or sorrow; (5) everlasting life in the world to come; (6) advantage or profit or a means thereof; (7) state of activity and power (Lane).

تکفرون (you disbelieve) is derived from کفر (he disbelieved) already explained under 2:7. The infinitive form is کفر(disbelief). کفربالله (disbelief in Allah) means not only disbelieving in the existence of God but also denying His attributes and refusing to obey His commandments.

Commentary:

This verse reverts to the original subject of revelation. The question of the reward of believers and the punishment of disbelievers was only incidental. The real subject is that of revelation. In this verse the Quran explains why spiritual life would be impossible without revelation. Nobody can know anything about the next life without the help and guidance of God Who alone knows everything. The verse points out that when God provides for our physical needs, there is no reason why He should not provide for our spiritual needs, which are much more important.

God is Wise. If human life had no purpose, God would not have created it; having created it, He would not have made it subject to death, unless there had been an afterlife. If death were the end of all life, the creation of man would turn out to be mere sport. The fact that God does all this shows that He has created man not to return to dust after a life of 60 or 70 years but for a better, fuller and everlasting life, which he must live after death.

The word "then" in the clause, then to Him shall you be made to return, hints that after death the human soul does not at once go to Heaven or Hell. There is an interim period in which the soul is made to taste some of the good or bad results of its deeds. The resurrection which will herald a full and complete requital will take place later.

The mentioning of life twice (in the words احیا and یحیی) may also refer to the rise of Islam in this world, for Islam is the means of spiritual life. Islam had its first life in the time of the Holy Prophet; the second life was to come in the Latter Days. This is referred to in 62: 4, where it is said that the Holy Prophet of Islam will make, as it were, a second appearance in the world. The promise has been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement.

7:181; 17:111; 20:9; 59:24, 25.

Important Words:

اسماء (names) is the plural of اسم for which see note on 1:1. اسم means, (1) the name of a thing, i.e. a word fixed for a thing or attribute for the purpose of distinction; (2) a mark or sign of a thing (Aqrab); (3) fame or reputation of a person or thing (Lane); (4) a word, its meanings and combinations (Mufradat).

صادقین (right) is the plural of صادق which is derived from صدق. They say صدق فی ظنه i.e. he was or is correct in his opinion (Lane). صدق فی الحدیث means, he spoke the truth. صدقه means, he was sincere to him or he was his well-wisher (Aqrab). صدقتmeans: (1) you are speaking the truth, not a lie (2) what you say is right, not wrong. It is in the latter sense that the word has been used in the present verse.

Commentary:

Commentators differ as to what is here meant by the word اسماء (names). Some think that God taught Adam the names of different things and objects, i.e. He taught him language. Others hold that God taught him the names of his offspring.

There is no doubt that man needed language in order to become civilized and God must have taught Adam a language, but the Quran indicates that there are اسماء (names or attributes) which man must learn for the perfection of his religion and morals. They are referred to in the verse: And to Allah alone belong all perfect attributes; so call on Him by these and leave alone those who deviate from the right way with respect to His attributes. They shall be requited with what they do (7:181). This verse shows that man cannot attain to divine knowledge without a correct conception of God’s اسماء or attributes and that this can be taught only by God. So it was necessary that God should have, in the very beginning, given Adam knowledge of His attributes so that man should know and recognize Him and attain His nearness, and should not drift away from Him.

The verse quoted above (7:181) shows that the word اسماء (names) is used to signify the attributes of God and that a Muslim must be familiar with those attributes, so that he may pray to Him, invoking attributes most suited to the nature of the prayer. For example, if one prays for forgiveness and mercy, one should invoke the attributes of forgiveness and mercy; and if the prayer be for the attainment of righteousness, God should be invoked by names which pertain to that quality. The above verse also indicates that man must not of himself devise the attributes of God, because it is only God who can describe His attributes; man, being himself the creation of God, cannot do so. In fact, those who try to devise God’s attributes have been threatened with divine punishment.

In short, we learn from this verse that a Muslim must know God’s اسماء (names) which can be taught by Him alone, and which man has no right to devise out of his own fancy. There is strong evidence that God gave Adam a knowledge of His attributes. The view gains further strength when we take into consideration the difference between man and angel. According to the Quran, man differs from angels in that, whereas the former can be an image or reflex of الاسماءالحسنی i.e. all the divine attributes, the latter represent only a few of them. The Quran says: They (the angels) do what they are bidden to do (66:7) which implies that the angels cannot act of their own free will. They have no will of their own, but passively perform the functions allotted to them by Providence. On the other hand, man, endowed with volition and free choice, differs from angels in that he has capabilities which make him a perfect manifestation of all divine attributes. A saying of the Holy Prophet—"the best morals in man are those which are in conformity with the great attributes of God" (‘Ummal, ii. 2)—also points to this. As God is Merciful, we should also show mercy to men; as He is Forgiving, so we must also be ready to forgive our fellow beings; as He connives at faults, so we must try to imitate Him in this particular; and as He protects the weak, so we must be ready to protect the weak, and so on. This injunction of the Holy Prophet justifies the inference that man has the capability to manifest in himself all the attributes of God. Thus, both the Quran and the Holy Prophet’s sayings are agreed that man and angel differ in the manifestation of divine attributes, and the "names" in the clause, He taught Adam all the names, refer to the attributes of God.

The verse means that God first implanted in Adam free will and the needful capacity for the comprehension of the various divine attributes, and then gave him the knowledge of those attributes, which was impossible without the power of assimilation. The verse that follows corroborates this meaning; for therein it is stated that the اسماء (attributes) were such as were not wholly known to the angels and it is evident that such اسماء are only the divine attributes. The word اسماء may also mean the qualities of different things in nature. As man was to make use of the forces of nature, God gave Adam the capacity of knowing their qualities and properties. The word كل (all) used here does not imply absolute totality. It simply means all that was necessary. The Quran uses this word in this sense elsewhere also (see 6:45; 27:7, 24; 28:58). The pronoun in the words عرضھم (He put the objects of these names) shows that the objects referred to here are not inanimate things; for in Arabic this form of pronoun is used only for rational beings. The meaning of the expression, therefore, would be that God showed Adam in a kashf (vision) certain human beings from among his progeny who were to be the mani­festations of divine attributes in the future. Such beings were the Prophets or other holy persons who were to enjoy such nearness to God as to become His image and through whom God was to reform mankind. The angels were then asked whether they could manifest the divine attributes like them. This is what is meant by the words, Tell Me the names of these, occurring in the present verse.

Important Words:

تکتمون (you conceal) is derived from کتم meaning, he concealed. They say کتم الشیء i.e. he concealed or suppressed the thing. The Arabs use the expression; کتم الربوة (he suppressed his breath) of a horse who, after running some distance, begins to pant, but having small nostrils, his breath remains, as it were, suppressed or concealed within him (Lane under کتم and عور). So کتمان (the act of concealing or suppressing) need not be deliberate or the result of a desire or attempt to conceal. It may merely be the result of circumstances or only the outcome of nature without an attempt or desire to that effect.

Commentary:

When the angels confessed their inability to manifest in themselves all the attributes that Adam could manifest, the latter, in obedience to the Divine will, manifested the different capabilities ingrained in him and showed to the angels the extensiveness of his natural capacities. Thus man proved the necessity of a being who might secure from God the faculty of volition or the power of will by means of which he might voluntarily take to righteousness, (or, for that matter, to sinning) and might thereby reveal to the world the glory and the greatness of God.

The words, and I know what you reveal and what you conceal, mean that God knew which divine attributes the angels manifested in themselves and which they were incapable of manifesting.

The words, what you conceal, do not mean that the angels had a desire for, or that they made an attempt at concealment; for, as explained under Important Words, the word کتمان (concealing) is also used to denote a state of affairs without there being any attempt or desire on one’s part to conceal or suppress anything. The words, what you conceal, therefore, refer to such attributes of God as the angels are unable to reflect in their own being on account of their natural inaptitude. It is a gross error to take the words, what you reveal and what you conceal, as signifying that the angels were not telling the whole truth before God.

As already pointed out under 2:31, the conversation between God and angels and Adam, as mentioned in the verse, need not necessarily be taken in a literal sense. Sometimes the word قال (he said) is used to describe the practical upshot of events without there being any actual speech or dialogue, the purpose of such narration being only to show the existing condition of things in a vivid and graphic form and nothing more. A poet says: قالت له العینان سمعاً وطاعة i.e. "Both of his eyes said, 'We will listen and obey'," whereas the eyes have no speech. Thus, the conversation embodying the story of Adam may also be nothing more than a portrayal in words.

7:12, 13; 15:29-33; 17:62; 18:51; 20:117; 38:72-77.

Important Words:

اسجدوا (submit) is derived from سجد which means (1) he humbled or submitted himself; (2) he bowed; (3) he prostrated himself. They say سجدت السفینة للریاح which means, the boat bowed before the wind, i.e. it followed the direction of the wind (Aqrab); (4) the word also means, he obeyed and worshipped (Mufradat).

الا (but) is used to signify the sense of exception. In Arabic استثناء (exception) is of two kinds: (1) استثناء متصل i.e. an exception in which the thing excepted belongs to the same class or species to which the things from which an exception is sought to be made, belong, as we say جاء القوم الازیدا i.e. all the people came except Zaid. Here Zaid belongs to the same class to which the people belong. (2) استثناء منقطع i.e. an exception in which the excepted thing belongs to a different class or species, as they say جاء القوم الاحمارا i.e. all the people came except the donkey. Here the donkey does not belong to the class or species from which exception is sought to be made. In the verse under comment the word الا denotes the latter kind of exception, Iblis not being one of the angels.

ابلیس (Iblis) is derived from ابلس which means: (1) his good or virtue became less or decreased; (2) he gave up hope or he despaired of the mercy of God; (3) he became broken in spirit and mournful; (4) he was perplexed and was unable to see his way; (5) he was or became silent on account of grief or despair; (6) he was cut short or silenced in argument; (7) he became unable to prosecute his journey; (8) he was prevented from attaining his wish. ابلیس (Iblis) is generally considered to be a name of Satan (Lane). Based on the root meaning of the word, ابلیس is a being who contains little of good and much of evil and who, on account of his having despaired of God’s mercy, owing to His disobedience, is left perplexed and confounded and unable to see his way. Iblis is often considered identical with Satan, but is in some cases different from him, as will appear from the following commentary.

کان (was) is a very common word of the Arabic language giving a vast variety of meanings some of which are: (1) he or it was; (2) he or it is; (3) he or it shall be; (4) he or it came into being; (5) he or it became; etc. The word is also used to express a permanent attribute or quality, as the Quran says: کان الله علیما حکیما i.e. Allah is All-Knowing, Wise. The expression ماکان لنبی ان یکون له اسری means, it does not behove a Prophet, or it does not become a Prophet, or it is not right or proper for a Prophet that captives be taken for him (8:68). The clause ماکان لنبی ان یغل means, it is impossible for a Prophet to act dishonestly, or a Prophet cannot act dishonestly (3:162) (Aqrab, Mufradat, Taj & Kashshaf).

Commentary:

When Adam became an image of the attributes of God, and attained the rank of a Prophet, God ordered the angels to serve him. The words اسجدوالآدم do not mean, "Fall prostrate before Adam." The Quran definitely says: Prostrate not yourselves before the sun, nor before the moon, but prostrate yourselves before Allah, Who created them (41:38). Thus prostration before Adam by way of worship is opposed to the teachings of the Quran, and a command to that effect could never proceed from God. The word سجدة has been used here in the sense of "obedience", and "submission". Thus the verse means that God bade the angels to serve Adam, that is, assist him in his mission. In this way, the angels are ordered to serve all the Prophets of God, their chief duty being to help the cause of a Prophet and to draw the hearts of men towards him.

ابلیس (Iblis), it must be clearly understood, was not one of the angels, because, whereas Iblis has been here described as disobeying God, the angels have been described as ever 'submissive' and 'obedient'. Says the Quran: They disobey not Allah in what He commands them, and do what they are commanded (66:7). Hence ابلیس could not be an angel. The objection, why was God angry with Iblis whereas the commandment stated in this verse was meant for the angels and not for him, is baseless, for elsewhere the Quran makes it clear that Iblis was also commanded to serve Adam. God says: What prevented thee (O Iblis,) from submitting (to Adam) when I commanded thee? (7:13). This shows that Iblis, though not an angel, was also ordered to make submission to Adam. Moreover, even if there were no separate commandment for Iblis, the one for angels must be taken to extend to all others, because angels being the custodians or guardians of different parts of the universe, the commandment given to them automatically extends to all.

As to the identity of Iblis it may be briefly stated that, as described under Important Words, Iblis is really an attributive name given, on the basis of the root meaning of the word, to the Evil Spirit opposed to the angels. Iblis has been so named because he possesses the attributes enumerated under Important Words above, particularly the quality of being deprived of good and of being left bewildered in the way, and of despairing of God’s mercy.

That Iblis was not the satan spoken of in 2:37 below is apparent from the fact that the Quran mentions the two names side by side, wherever the story of Adam is given, but everywhere a careful distinction is observed between the two, i.e. wherever the Quran speaks of the being who, unlike the angels, refused to serve Adam, it invariably mentions the name Iblis, and wherever it speaks of the being who beguiled Adam and became the means of his being turned out of جنة(garden), it invariably mentions the name 'satan'. This distinction, which is most significant and has been maintained throughout the Quran, i.e. in at least ten places (see 2:35, 37; 7:12, 21; 15:32; 17:62; 18:51; 20:117, 121; 38:75), clearly proves that Iblis, who is mentioned side by side with the angels, is different from the 'satan' who beguiled Adam and was one of Adam’s own people to whom Adam was sent as a Reformer.

Thus, Iblis was not one of the angels. This is apparent from the fact that, whereas the angels have been described as being always obedient to God and incapable of disobedience (16:51; 66:7), Iblis has been spoken of as having arrogantly disobeyed a clear commandment of God (7:12, 13). Elsewhere, the Quran speaks of Iblis, saying: He (Iblis) was one of the jinn (a secret creation); then he chose to disobey God’s order (18:51). From the above it is clear that, though not one of the angels, Iblis belonged to a secret creation of God who, unlike the angels, was capable of obeying or disobeying the Lord, as he liked. The Quran further makes it clear that when Iblis insolently disobeyed God, He turned him away and cursed him for his rebellious attitude, whereupon Iblis took the vow that he would thenceforward take to misleading men and hindering them from following the right way (7:17, 18; 15:35, 36, 40; 17:63). Elsewhere the Quran says: "Then said We to the angels, 'Submit to Adam;' and they all submitted. But Iblis did not; he would not be of those who submit. God said, 'What prevented thee from submitting when I commanded thee'? He said, 'I am better than he. Thou hast created me of fire while him hast Thou created of clay.' God said, 'Then go down hence; it is not for thee to be arrogant here. Get out; thou art certainly of those who are abased.' He said, 'Grant me respite till the day when they will be raised up.' God said, 'Thou shalt be of those who are given respite.' He said. 'Now since Thou hast adjudged me as lost, I will assuredly lie in wait for them on Thy straight path. Then will I surely come upon them from before them and from behind them and from their right and from their left, and Thou wilt not find most of them to be grateful.' God said, 'Get out hence, despised and banished. Whosoever of them shall follow thee, I will surely fill Hell with you all." (7:12-19). Elsewhere God says to Iblis: Surely, thou shalt have no power over My servants except such of the erring ones as choose to follow thee (15:43). At yet another place, God says that Iblis was one of the jinn, i.e. a secret creation (18:51). And about the jinn God says: I have created the jinn and men only that they may serve Me. (51:57)

As to the presence of good and evil in the world, it may be said that out of His infinite wisdom God has made man a free agent, giving him the power either to take the right path or be led into the wrong one as he likes. This system in which angels and Iblis both take part is quite in the fitness of things and is for man’s own good; for without being a free agent man cannot deserve praise or be entitled to reward for his good actions; and if man is to become entitled to reward for good actions, he needs must also be responsible for his sins and shortcomings, because his being a free agent must function both ways.

God has done more. He gives every man a good start in life by giving him a good and virtuous nature, and it is man himself who afterwards spoils the goodness of his nature and takes an evil course. Says the Holy Prophet: "Every child is born with a good nature (i.e. the nature of Islam); it is his parents who later make him a Jew or a Christian or a Magian" (Bukhari). God further raises Prophets and sends down His revelation for the reformation of mankind so that, if through their own free choice or under the influence of some evil spirits or bad associates, men should go astray, they may thereby be called back to truth. See also note on 'Satan' under 2:37.

7:20, 23; 20:117, 118.

Important Words:

شجرة (tree) is the singular of شجر (trees). It is derived from the verb شجر. The Arabs say شجرالامربینھم i.e. the affair or case became complicated and confused so as to be a subject of disagreement and difference between them. شجرة means, a tree, because of the intermixing or confusion of its branches. شجرة also signifies, the stock or origin of a man. They say, ھومن شجرة طیبة i.e. he is of a good stock or origin (Lane).

ظالمین (wrongdoers) is the plural of ظالم being derived from ظلم which means: (1) he put a thing in the wrong place or in a place not its own; (2) he made one suffer loss; (3) he transgressed or committed a wrong. A ظالم is thus one who does an inappropriate or improper thing; or one who commits a wrong; or one who makes someone suffer a loss (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The word جنة (garden) occurring in this verse does not refer to Heaven or Paradise but simply to the garden-like place where Adam was first made to live. It cannot refer to Heaven: firstly, because it was on the earth that Adam was made to live, as the words, I am about to place a vicegerent in the earth, occurring in 2:31 clearly indicate.

Secondly, Heaven is a place from which no one who once enters it will ever be expelled (15:49), whereas Adam was made to quit the جنة (garden) spoken of in this verse. This shows that the جنة or garden in which Adam first dwelt was a place on this very earth which was given this name on account of the fertility of its soil and the abundance of its verdure. Recent researches go to show that the place where Adam was made to dwell was the garden of Eden which lay near Babylon in Iraq or Assyria.

According to the Bible, the forbidden شجرة (tree) was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:17). But we learn from the Quran that after having eaten of the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve became naked which means that, unlike knowledge which is a source of goodness, the tree was a source of evil, making Adam exhibit a weakness. The Quranic view is evidently correct, because to deprive man of knowledge was to defeat the very purpose for which he had been brought into being. The Quran and the Bible seem, however, to agree on the point that the tree was not a real one, but only a symbol, because no tree with either of the above characteristics, i.e. making a man naked or giving him knowledge of good or evil, exists on the face of the globe. So the tree must represent something else.

As explained above, the word شجرة also means a quarrel. Says the Quran: But no, by thy Lord, they are not believers until they make thee judge in all that is in dispute between them (4:66).

Elsewhere, the Quran makes mention of two kinds of شجرة (1) شجرة طیبة (good tree) and (2) شجرة خبیثة (evil tree) for which see 14:25 & 27. Pure things and pure teachings are likened to the former, and impure things and impure thoughts are likened to the latter. In the light of these explanations, the verse would mean: (1) that Adam was enjoined to avoid quarrels; (2) that he was warned against evil things, because although the verse does not specify evil or good, yet the prohibition cannot but refer to impure and evil things.

The expression, eat therefrom plentifully wherever you will, indicates that the place where Adam lived had not yet come under the jurisdiction of anybody and was what may be termed "God’s land" which was given to Adam who was thus made lord of all he surveyed.

The concluding clause, lest you be of ظالمین or wrongdoers, means that the result of approaching the prohibited شجرة would be that Adam would become one of those who do not observe propriety in their actions for, as explained under Important Words, ظلم means, putting a thing at a wrong place.

7:21, 28; 20:121.

2:62; 7:25; 20:124.

7:25, 26; 20:56; 77:26, 27.

Important Words:

ازلھما (caused them both to slip). ازل derived from زل i.e. he slipped. ازل means: (1) he caused him to slip; (2) he turned him from the truth or from the right path (Aqrab). The word زل is sometimes used of slipping without intention (Mufradat).

اھبطوا (go forth) is derived from ھبط meaning, he descended or alighted or went down. But when the word is followed by the preposition من it generally means, he went forth or he departed. Thus ھبط من الوادی means, he went forth from the valley (Baqa). Arabic grammar, however, permits of the preposition being omitted. Thus the word اھبطوا in the present verse would mean, go forth or depart. Further on (in 2:39) we read اھبطوامنھا which means, go out of it or go forth from it.

مستقر (abode) is derived from استقر which again is derived from قر. They say قر فی المکان or استقر بالمکان i.e. he stayed or became established in the place; he adopted the place as his residence. So مستقر means, a place where one resides or abides for some length of time (Aqrab).

متاع (provision) is derived from متع. They say متعه الله بکذا. i.e. God made him profit by it for some length of time. So متاعmeans: (1) any of the necessaries of life like food, clothes and furniture; (2) goods of the world; (3) any short-lived profit that does not last for long (Aqrab). The word also means, deriving benefit from a thing for some length of time (Mufradat).

Commentary:

The pronoun "it" in, caused them both to slip by means of it, evidently refers to the شجرة or tree. The first two clauses of the verse mean that a satanic being enticed Adam and his spouse from the place where they were and thereby deprived them of the comforts they enjoyed. As explained in 2:35 above, it will be noted that he who beguiled and brought trouble on Adam was Shaitan and not Iblis who is spoken of as refusing to serve Adam. This distinction is to be found not only in the verse under comment but throughout the Quran which invariably speaks of Iblis while mentioning the incident of refusal to bow down through pride, and of Shaitan wherever mention is made of Adam being instigated to eat of the prohibited شجرة (tree). The distinction points to the conclusion that the word Shaitan does not here refer to Iblis, but to someone from among the fellow beings of Adam who was hostile to him. The inference is further supported by the verse: As to My servants, thou (O Iblis) shalt certainly have no power over them (17: 66). As Adam was a vicegerent of God, Iblis could have no power over him, and the being who beguiled him was someone else. Hence, in order to bring out this fact, the word Shaitan, which has a much wider significance than Iblis, has been used here.

The concluding words of the verse, i.e. for you there is an abode in the earth, also prove that the Quran lends no support to the idea of anybody ascending to the heavens alive, for the verse clearly fixes the earth as the lifelong abode of man. Thus the Quran rejects the idea that Jesus or, for that matter, anybody else ever went up to the heavens alive.

A short note here on the word 'satan' will not be out of place. As will be readily seen, the word 'satan' is of much wider significance than Iblis, for whereas Iblis is the name given to the Evil Spirit who belonged to the jinn and refused to serve Adam, thereafter becoming the leader of the forces of evil in the universe, the word 'satan' is used about any evil or harmful being or thing, whether a spirit or a human being or an animal or a disease or any other thing. Thus Iblis is a 'satan'; his comrades and associates are 'satans'; enemies of truth are 'satans'; mischievous men are 'satans', injurious animals are 'satans' and harmful diseases are 'satans'. The Quran, the Hadith and the Arabic literature are full of instances in which the word 'satan' has been freely used about one or all of these things. Thus the Quran says that there are 'satans' both among men and the jinn (6:113). Again, mischievous enemies of truth are also called 'satans' in the Quran (2:15). The Holy Prophet once used the name 'satan' about a thief who had repeatedly robbed Abu Hurairah (Bukhari). Similarly the Holy Prophet once said that a black street dog was a 'satan' (Majah). Again he once ordered his Companions to cover up their utensils containing food and drink lest 'satan' should find its way into them, evidently meaning harmful insects and germs (Majah). At another place the Holy Prophet exhorts his followers to clean their nostrils when they rise from sleep in the morning as 'satan' rests in them, hinting that harmful matter accumulates in the nostrils which, if not removed, may injure health (Muslim).

From the above instances it is clear that 'satan' is a very general term and is freely used about all evil or harmful beings or things. For the meaning of the word 'satan' see note on 2:15.

2:90, 98, 102; 3:4, 82; 4:48; 5:49.

7:102; 10:75.

2:80, 175; 3:200; 5:45; 9:9; 16:96.

Important Words:

مصدقا (fulfilling) is derived from صدق meaning, he told the truth or he was true. صدقه (saddaqahu) means, he held or declared him or it to be true. صدق زید خالدا means, Zaid said or held that what Khalid had said was true (Aqrab & Lane). The word تصدیق when used about previous Prophets or previous Scriptures can possibly signify three things: (1) that the claim of the previous Prophets and the previous Books about their divine mission or Divine origin is true; (2) that the teachings which they gave were true; and (3) that the prophecies which they made about the coming of some future Prophet or future revelation, etc., were true. Now the Quran and the Holy Prophet were مصدق of the previous Books and the previous Prophets in all these three senses: (1) Islam declares that all previous Prophets and all previous Books that claimed divine mission or Divine origin and were believed in as such by a large number of people, were indeed from God (2:5; 2:286); (2) it admits that the teachings of the previous Prophets and the previous Books were true, not necessarily in the form in which they existed at the time of its advent but in the form in which they were originally given (98:4); (3) it claims that the prophecies made by previous Books and the previous Prophets about the coming of a Prophet and the coming of a Book of divine law were true and have been fulfilled in the Quran and the Holy Prophet of Islam. In the verse under comment the word مصدق is used in the last-mentioned sense, i.e. fulfilling the prophecies of the previous Scriptures.

Moreover, the word مصدق is here followed by the preposition لام and not با and there is a difference between simple مصدقand مصدق به and مصدق له. When the word is used in the sense of holding a thing to be true, it is either followed by no preposition or is followed by the preposition با. When, however, the Quran uses the word in the sense of fulfilling, it is followed by the preposition لام. Even in common parlance we say جئت تصدیقا لقول فلان i.e. I have come in accordance with, or to fulfil, the word of such a person.

The use of the word مصدق له in the Quran practically bears out this distinction. For instance, in 2:92 the Quran says: And when it is said to them, 'Believe in what Allah has sent down,' they say, 'We believe in what has been sent down to us'; and they disbelieve in what has been sent down after that, yet it is the truth, fulfilling that which is with them. This verse makes it absolutely clear what the word مصدق means when followed by the preposition لام. It undoubtedly means "fulfilling" and not "confirming" or "declaring to be true". The expression in the verse quoted above has been used as a proof of the truth of the Quran and this clearly proves that this expression (i.e. مصدق له) conveys the sense of "fulfilling", not that of "confirming"; for if a book declares the Bible to be true, that is no proof of the book being itself a revealed word of God; even an impostor can declare the previous Scriptures to be true. It is only the fulfilling of the prophecies contained in the Bible that can serve as an evidence of the truth of the Quran. Thus it is clear that when the Quran speaks of its being مصدق (used with the preposition لام) of the Christian and the Jewish scriptures, it uses the word in the sense of "fulfilling" and not in the sense of "declaring to be true".

Again in 35:32 we find the same expression definitely used in the sense of 'fulfilling'. The verse runs thus: And the Book which We have revealed to thee is the truth itself, fulfilling (مصدقا) that which is before it, i.e. fulfilling the Scriptures that have gone before it. Now in this verse مصدق cannot mean 'declaring to be true'; for in that case we shall have to admit that the Quran declares all the teachings contained in previous Scriptures to be true, whereas many of these Scriptures are contradictory of one another and all of them contain at least some teachings that are opposed to the teachings of the Quran. So if the expression مصدقا له means "declaring to be true", it would signify that the Quran declares not only all the mutually contradictory Scriptures to be true, but also such teachings as are opposed to its own teaching. From this it is clear that the expression مصد قاله can only signify that the Quran fulfils the prophecies that were contained in the previous Scriptures regarding the advent of a Law-giving Prophet and a universal Dispensation.

لا تشتروا (barter not). For the meaning of the word اشتری see note under 2:17.

Commentary:

The verse under comment is a fitting complement of what has been said in the previous verse. God, the Almighty, calls upon the Israelites to accept the Holy Prophet of Islam in whom the prophecies contained in their Scriptures have been fulfilled. In fact, all the previous Scriptures had prophesied about the advent of a great Prophet. The Quran itself refers to this fact where it says: And remember the time when Allah took a covenant from the people through the Prophets, saying, 'Whatever I give you of the Book and Wisdom, and then there comes to you a Messenger fulfilling what is with you, you shall believe in him, and help him'. And He said, 'Do you agree and do you accept the responsibility which I lay upon you in this matter?' They said, 'We agree;' He said, 'Then bear witness, and I am with you among the witnesses' (3:82). In this verse we have been told that every previous Prophet informed his people of the advent of a great Prophet and enjoined them to accept him when he made his appearance. As, before Islam, different Prophets were sent to different peoples, and it was only with the advent of Islam that there was to come a Prophet for all mankind, it was necessary that a covenant should have been taken from all the different peoples binding them to accept the World-Prophet when he appeared.

The advent of such a Prophet who was to gather together all nations was announced in Isaiah 42:1-4 in the following words:

"Behold my servant, whom I uphold; my chosen, in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my spirit upon him; he shall bring forth judgement to the nations. He shall not cry nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgement in truth. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgement in the earth; and the isles shall wait for his law. Thus saith God the Lord, He that created the heavens, and stretched them forth" (Revised Version). Again, in Isaiah 55:4 we read: "Behold, I have given him for witness to the peoples, a leader and commander to the peoples" (Revised Version). Compare this with the Quran where God addresses the Holy Prophet, saying: And how will it fare with them when We shall bring a witness from every people, and shall bring thee as a witness against these (4:42). The above quoted prophecy mentioned in Isaiah cannot be supposed to refer to Jesus, for he did not claim to have been sent to all peoples. Says Jesus, "I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. 15: 24).

In Isaiah 60:5-7, we read:

"Then thou shalt see and be lightened, and thine heart shall tremble and be enlarged, because the abundance of the sea shall be turned unto thee, the wealth of the nations shall come unto thee. The multitude of camels shall cover thee, the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah; they all shalt come from Sheba: They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall proclaim the praises of the Lord. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee: they shall come up with acceptance on My altar, and I will glorify the house of My glory" (Revised Version). On this point the Quran says regarding Pilgrimage to Mecca: And proclaim unto mankind the Pilgrimage; they shall come to thee on foot, and on every lean camel emaciated on account of coming through every deep and distant track(22:28).

Now is there any House, except the one at Mecca, to which people repair riding on camels and where they offer sacrifices?

Add to the above prophecies those already given under the previous verse e.g. the prophecy relating to the coming of a Prophet from among the "brethren" of the Israelites, etc., and the reader will at once realize that the Bible did contain prophecies about the advent of a great Prophet who was to gather together all nations, and that these prophecies have been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Prophet of Islam.

The words, and be not the first to disbelieve therein, occurring in the verse under comment call upon the Israelites to ponder over the claim of the Holy Prophet and not to be hasty in rejecting it. They have been cautioned against being hasty in rejecting the truth, for once a man rejects the truth without giving it calm and dispassionate consideration, it becomes very difficult for him to accept it afterwards. He becomes prejudiced against it. It is to this fact that the Quran refers when it says: And We shall confound their hearts and their eyes, as they believed not therein at the first time and We shall leave them in their transgression to wander in distraction (6:111).

These words also hint at the fact that the People of the Book, being in possession of divine prophecies bearing on the advent of a great Prophet from among the descendants of Ishmael, are better fitted than others to judge of the truth of the Holy Prophet of Islam and should therefore be the first to accept him; at least they should not go to the other extreme and be the first to reject him.

The words, and barter not My Signs for a paltry price, are explained in the Quran in 4:78: Say, The benefit of this world is little. Interpreted in this light the verse would mean "Do not forsake the truth for worldly gains," for worldly gains, however big, are but a small and passing thing when compared with the gains of the Hereafter. These words may also be interpreted to signify that people who reject the truth may secure only temporary gains, but eventually, even in this life, the tide very often turns, bringing the righteous ones in ascendance.

The concluding words, and take protection in Me alone, are similar in construction to those placed at the end of the preceding verse, the only difference being that here the word ترھبون has been replaced by the word تتقون which gives a much wider significance than the former. For an explanation of the word تقوی see under 2:3 above.

Before we pass on to the next verse, it is necessary to remove one possible misunderstanding. The Quran declares itself to be مصدق له of the Jewish scriptures and we have explained this expression as meaning that the Quran came in fulfilment of what was prophesied in the previous Scriptures—not that the Quran holds the previous Scriptures to be true. This should not give rise to the misunderstanding that the Quran does not accept the Divine origin of the previous Scriptures. As a matter of fact, the Quran itself says that God’s Messengers have appeared among all the different peoples of the world (35:25). It also calls upon its followers to believe in all the previous revelations but this belief should be through the Holy Prophet and not independently of him (2:5). At the same time, the Quran criticizes and denies several teachings ascribed to the previous Scriptures and claims that these teachings have been tampered with (19:89-92; 9:30; 4:47). Thus the position may be summed up as follows:

(1) Wherever the Quran speaks of itself as being مصدق له of the previous Scriptures, it does not mean that it confirms their teachings but that it claims to have come in fulfilment of their prophecies.

(2) Nevertheless the Quran accepts the Divine origin of all the revealed Books that were sent by God before Islam.

(3) But it does not look upon all their present teachings to be true; for much has been tampered with and much that was meant for a specific period has now become obsolete.