ROOT م س س

3:25; 5:19.

54:44.

Important Words:

النار (the Fire) means fire both as a source of light and of heat, the latter aspect being more dominant. Another word derived from the same root is نور meaning light, which is used without reference to the element of heat. The word النار (the Fire) has come to be used about "Hell", the punishment of which will consist of fire (Aqrab). It is significant that whereas the blessings of Heaven have been metaphorically spoken of as "streams of water", the punishment of Hell has been called "fire".

Commentary:

After recounting some malpractices of the Jews, the Quran proceeds to explain the root cause of their arrogance and hard-heartedness. These evil practices of the Jews, the Quran points out, are due to the wrong notion that they were immune from punishment (Jew. Enc. under Gehenna), or if they will at all be punished, the punishment will be very slight. It is recorded that at the time of the Holy Prophet, a section of the Jews thought that the punishment of the Jews would not last more than forty days (Jarir, under 2:81). Others regarded even this as too long, and reduced it to seven days (Jarir, ibid). As for modern Jews, Sale says: "It is a received opinion among the Jews at present, that no person (from among the Jews), be he ever so wicked, or of whatever sect, shall remain in Hell above eleven months or at most a year, except Dathan and Abiram and atheists (from among the Jews) who will be tormented there to all eternity" (Wherry, i. 318).

The concluding portion of the verse, i.e. have you taken a promise from Allah…? has been added to point out that the matter of salvation does not rest on the wish of a person or people but only on the grace and mercy of Allah Who has prescribed a law for it. This law the Quran proceeds to explain in the following two verses.

2:81; 5:19.

Commentary:

Both Jews and Christians persuaded themselves to believe that they would be safe against the punishment of the Hereafter, the Jews thinking themselves immune owing to their being the favoured ones of God on account of their being the descendants of His Prophets, and the Christians deluding themselves with the idea that Jesus, "the son of God", had washed away their sins with his supposed death on the cross. The false notion of each proved their ruin.

19:21.

See 2:118.

Commentary:

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

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

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

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

9:50.

Commentary:

The enemies of Islam, both open and secret, are grieved to see the success of believers and try to minimize it. But when Muslims meet with some failure, they rejoice and try to exaggerate it. Their object is to dishearten and discourage believers.

The words, Allah encompasses their deeds, signify that God will bring to nought all their doings and destroy them. Muslims should not, therefore, fear them. All machinations of the enemies of Islam are known to God, Who will frustrate them.

4:105.

Important Words:

یعلم (distinguish) is derived from علم which ordinarily means, he knew, but is also used in the sense of distinguishing. Ibn Jarir says under this verse that the expression لا علم عبد الله من عمر means, لاعرف ھذا من ھذا i.e. that I may distinguish ‘Abdullah from ‘Umar. The word is used in this sense in 2:144 and 2:221 also. In fact, God, being Omniscient, does not stand in need of knowing a thing, for everything is ever known to Him. It is only distinguishing between two things that is meant. Even, however, if علم is taken here in the sense of knowing, the expression may be explained by the fact that knowledge is of two kinds. One kind of knowledge consists of knowing a thing before it comes into existence; and the other kind consists of knowing it when, and as, it actually comes into existence. Here it is the latter kind of knowledge that is meant.

Commentary:

Elsewhere (in 3:166 below) it is said that Muslims inflicted upon disbelievers an injury double of what they themselves suffered. This refers to the Battle of Badr, when seventy Meccans were killed and seventy were taken prisoner, thus making a total of 140. In the Battle of Uhud, on the other hand, seventy Muslims were killed, but none of them were taken prisoner. Thus Muslims had inflicted on the disbelievers a double injury in the Battle of Badr compared with what they themselves suffered in the Battle of Uhud. Counting, however, only those killed in the two battles, the loss to Muslims and disbelievers has been spoken of in the present verse as similar. Or the verse might be taken to refer to the nature or quality of the misfortune, which was alike in both cases. In that case, verse 166 below might be taken to refer to quantity and the present verse to quality.

The word "days" is used both for the "days of success" and the "days of misfortune". Here either of these may be taken, but preferably the latter.

The words, And such days We cause to alternate, mean that even believers sometimes suffer reverses. If it were not so, then there would be little credit in being a believer. No effort is required to find or see the sun, and so one deserves no reward for it. In matters of faith, therefore, there is always present an element of secrecy, and only those who are seriously and earnestly desirous of knowing the truth discern and accept it. Hence, they become deserving of reward in the sight of God. The words also implied a prophecy that the reverse at Uhud was to be followed by victory for the Muslims; and so it actually came to pass.

The words, Allah may distinguish those who believe, signify that misfortunes are also intended to make the faith of true believers evident to all. When believers endure trials with patience and steadfastness and do not swerve from the path of faith, their sincerity becomes evident. Trials also serve to distinguish true believers from hypocrites. If there had been no trials, the hypocrisy of men like ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy and his associates would have remained undetected and unknown.

The word شھداء (witnesses) does not here mean martyrs, for a true Muslim is always a martyr if killed in the cause of God. Moreover, there is no sense in saying that the reverse at Uhud was meant to take martyrs from among Muslims. Here, therefore, the word means witnesses. The Faithful bear witness to the truth of Islam by their steadfastness and by the noble example they set in times of misfortune. They are eloquent witnesses to the truth of Islam.

The word unjust at the end of the verse signifies that in view of the facts stated above, it is unjust to find fault with Islam on the basis of such reverses.

2:208, 266; 3:16, 163; 5:3, 17; 9:72; 57:21, 28.

Commentary:

As stated above, the Muslims returned from Badras-Sughra after having made great profit by trading at the annual fair held there. This is hinted in the word "bounty". The words, no evil had touched them, mean that there was no fighting, the Meccans having failed to appear.

4:172.

Commentary:

The reference in this verse is to the doctrine of Trinity, that mysterious and abstruse dogma of the three persons of Godhead—Father, Son and Holy Ghost—co-existing and co-equal in all respects, combining to make one God and yet remaining three. It was the Nicene Council and especially the Athenasian Creed that first gave the dogma its definite shape. The doctrine forms the basic Article of the Christian Faith. What a fall for the enlightened West!

10:108.

Commentary:

It is his own actions that are the cause of all harm that befalls a man. The words, if Allah touch thee with affliction, therefore, do not mean that God is the cause of affliction. They are meant to convey the idea that God being the first cause of all things, everything that happens in the universe is in a way attributable to Him. The expression is also intended to hint that it is God alone Who can remove man’s afflictions.

Happiness indeed comes from God, Who is the real source of all good. This is why, when speaking of happiness coming to man, the Quran uses the expression, He has power to do all that He wills.

3:12; 5:11; 7:37, 73; 10:74; 22:58.

11:62; 27:46.

7:78; 11:65; 17:60; 26:156; 54:28; 91:14.

Important Words:

ثمود (Thamud) was the name of a tribe that lived after ‘Ad. The name may have been derived from the Arabic root ثمد. They say ثمدہ i.e. he dug out a hole in the earth so that water might collect in it (Aqrab). The tribe Thamud lived in the western part of Arabia, having spread from Aden northward to Syria. They lived shortly before the time of Ishmael. Their territory was adjacent to that of ‘Ad, but they lived mostly in the hills. For a fuller note on the subject see 11:62.

صالح (Salih) is an Arabic word being derived from صلح i.e. he was or became good or righteous. صالح means, a righteous person. See 2:12, 161. The Prophet Salih lived after Hud and was probably a contemporary of Abraham.

Commentary:

The camel formed the chief means of conveyance in Arabia, and it was on his she-camel that the Prophet Salih used to travel from place to place to preach his message. So he told his people that placing obstruction in the way of the free movements of the she-camel or doing harm to it would be tantamount to obstructing the work with which God had entrusted him, and that if they did not stand out of her way, God’s punishment would surely descend upon them. Thus it was that the she-camel was meant as a sign for the tribe of Thamud. There was nothing unusual about the camel itself. It was an ordinary animal. The sanctity that attached to it was that God had declared it to be a sign and a symbol of the sanctity and inviolability of the person of the Prophet Salih and doing an injury to it was declared to be tantamount to doing an injury to Salih himself and to hampering his work.

The words, leave her that she may feed in Allah’s earth, do not mean that she was to be allowed to graze in any field she pleased. What is meant is only that no obstruction was to be put in her way, and that she was to be permitted to proceed to any place to which Salih might choose to go. The declaration by Salih about the free movement of his she-camel was also in harmony with a time-honoured Arab custom.