ROOT ش ط ن

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

9:64, 65.

Important Words:

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

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

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

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

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

Commentary:

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

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

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

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.

Important Words:

تتلوا (followed). See 2:114

شیاطین (rebellious men). See 2:15.

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

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

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

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

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

Commentary:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5:89; 8:70; 16:115.

2:209; 6:143; 24:22.

7:23; 12:6; 28:16; 35:7; 36:61.

Important Words:

حلال (lawful) is the noun-infinitive from حل which has several meanings. حل العقده means, he unloosened the tie. حل بالمکانmeans, he alighted at the house. حل علیه غضب الله means, God’s punishment came down on him or befell him. حل الشیء means, the thing became lawful. حل الیمین means, he absolved himself from the oath. حلال is, therefore, that the use of which has been permitted by God; a lawful thing. The word is the opposite of حرام which means, a forbidden or unlawful thing (Aqrab).

طیباً (good) is derived from طاب meaning, he or it became good. طاب الشیء means, the thing was good or pure or wholesome. Thus طیب would mean, good, pure, wholesome and agreeable (Aqrab).

خطوات (footsteps) is the plural of خطوة which is derived from خطا which means, he stepped or walked, خطوة means, the distance between the two feet of a person while walking. The clause لا تتبعوا خطوات الشیطان would also mean, do not follow the ways of Satan (Aqrab).

مبین (open) is derived from بان meaning: (1) it became clear and manifest; or (2) it became separated or disunited or cut off. ابان الشیء means (1) he or it made the thing clear; or (2) he or it cut the thing into pieces or made it disunited. ابان الشیءmeans, the thing became clear. Thus مبین would mean: (1) a being or thing which is clear and manifest; (2) a being or thing which makes other things clear; and (3) a being or thing which cuts another thing into pieces and makes it disunited (Aqrab).

Commentary:

Good actions must accompany true faith. So with this verse begins a discussion of the second part of Abraham’s prayer regarding the work of the Promised Prophet, i.e., the teaching of the laws of Shari‘ah and of the wisdom underlying them.

Henceforward ordinances about Prayer, Fasting, Pilgrimage and Zakah are given and so are the laws relating to social matters and as food plays an important part in the formation of a man’s character, regulations concerning it are mentioned first. According to Islam, all food should be: (1) حلال i.e. allowed by the Law; and (2) it should also be طیبi.e. good, pure, wholesome and agreeable. Under the second condition, sometimes even lawful things become forbidden. Thus, for instance, the eating of goat’s flesh is حلال or lawful; but if some flesh becomes rotten and putrefied, it will not be طیب and will consequently not be permissible. This distinction between حلال (lawful) and طیب (good and pure) food is not to be found in any teaching except that of Islam. So comprehensive is the Islamic teaching on this subject that not only are conditions laid down as to when lawful things become prohibited, as in this verse, but also as to when even unlawful food becomes permissible (2:174; 5:4; 6:120, 146; 16:116).

The prohibition against following Satan, coming immediately after the commandment with respect to food, alludes to the influence which physical actions exercise on the moral and spiritual conditions of man. The use of unlawful and unwholesome food tends to impair our moral and spiritual faculties, while lawful and wholesome food improves our morals and helps the development of our spiritual powers. This subject is also dealt with in 23:52.

As explained under Important Words above, the word مبین gives three different meanings. Thus عدو مبین would mean (1) that Satan is a manifest and open enemy of man; (2) that Satan is not only manifest himself but also makes his connections manifest—leaving a visible trace of wickedness wherever he treads; and (3) that he is always striving to create disunion among the Faithful and to cut asunder all such ties as God has ordered to be made firm. In this connection see also 2:28.

See 2:169.

Important Words:

السلم (submission) is derived from سلم meaning, he was or became safe from danger or disease or defect, etc. سالمه means, he made peace with him.

اسلم means, he submitted; he embraced Islam. السلم therefore, means (1) submission; (2) peace; (3) the religion of Islam (Aqrab).

کافة (wholly) is derived from کف. They say کف الاناء meaning, he filled the vessel to the full. کف الشیء means, he collected the thing all in one place. کفه عن الامر فکف means, he turned him away from it and consequently he (the latter) kept back; he prevented or restrained him from the affair, so that, as a result thereof, he (the latter) desisted from it. Thus کف is both transitive and intransitive. کافة is the feminine from کاف and means: (1) all together with none standing aside (Aqrab); (2) wholly or completely, not partially or half-heartedly (Lane); (3) preventing the enemy and turning him back; and (4) restraining oneself, or restraining the people from sin and digression (Mufradat).

Commentary:

Having completed the description of the two classes of men along with their sub-divisions in the previous verses, the Quran now fittingly addresses believers generally and those weak in faith particularly, calling upon them to try to be reckoned among the best and noblest type of men. To attain this end they should do two things, one positive and the other negative: (1) Individually they should come into submission or, in other words, they should enter Islam, wholly. Partial submission and half-hearted obedience will not do; and collectively they should try to offer submission all together, allowing no member to stand aside and remain outside the circle. (2) They should eschew the ways of Satan, who is an open enemy of Islam and is out to cut all holy ties asunder (2:169).

Besides the above two meanings, the clause ادخلوا فی السلم کافة (come into submission wholly) is capable of yet another meaning. As کافة also means, restraining or turning one back, the clause may be translated as, "come into submission wholly, shutting all such doors through which sin may enter". This is indeed a most comprehensive advice and can save many a soul, if people only care to act up to it.

The word خطوات (footsteps) in the clause, follow not the footsteps of Satan, apparently seems to be superfluous, for, "following Satan" seems to give the same meaning as "following in his footsteps", but it is not so really. The word خطوات (footsteps) has been very wisely added to hint that those who follow Satan do so slavishly and blindly. Just as a blind man who cannot see his way, finds it convenient to place his hand on the shoulder of any passer-by and then blindly tread on in his footsteps, so do they.

See 2:170; 24:22.

Important Words:

فقر (poverty). The verb فقر (faqara) means, he dug into the ground; he bored a hole into a pearl, etc.; he cut into and penetrated a thing. فقر (faqura) means, he became poor and needy. فقر (faqira) means, he had a complaint of his vertebrae. الفقر signifies, poverty; want or need; care and anxiety or disquietude of mind. فقیر of which the plural is فقراء is one who is poor and needy; also one having a complaint of the vertebrae, arising from fracture or disease (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The most handy weapon for Satan is to suggest to the people that if they spend their wealth in charity, they will become poor. But this is a most foolish suggestion; for, if people obey Satan, the result will be فقر i.e. national interests will suffer and the country will definitely decline in prosperity; and if the country declines, individuals cannot remain unaffected. Again, if we do not help our less fortunate countrymen, they will be tempted to resort to فحشاء i.e. foul and unfair means, and the community will become degraded in the eyes of others.

Two pairs of words occur in this verse and their order deserves notice. According to their significance, فضل (bounty) corresponds to فقر (poverty) and مغفرة (forgiveness or the covering of shortcomings) corresponds to فحشاء (foul or infamous conduct). Now, following the above significance of the words, the word فضل ought to have preceded the word مغفرة. But this order has not been observed in the verse, the reason being that whereas the first result of accepting Satan’s suggestion, as mentioned in the present verse, is فقر and then comes فحشاء, the first and immediate consequence of one’s spending one’s wealth in charity is مغفرة and فضل comes afterwards.

Another reason for this order is that Satan cares more for wealth than good name; hence in his case فقر precedes فحشاء. But the righteous care more for God’s forgiveness than for worldly prosperity, hence in their case the precedence of the former to the latter.

Forgiveness from Allah as promised here, signifies that not only will men deal kindly and magnanimously with those who spend their wealth in charity, but God also will deal kindly with them. If a man helps the poor, people generally connive at his faults. Similarly, God will pardon his sins and forgive his shortcomings. Nay, He will do more. He will bestow grace and bounty on him, i.e. He will make him prosper and thrive as a result of his charity. The verse also hints that if, in spite of the evil suggestions of Satan, we spend our wealth for the good of humanity, not only shall we prosper individually but also rise as a nation.

Finally God is واسع (Bountiful), hence His bounty will have no limit. He is also علیم (All-Knowing), hence He will help righteous men in ways beyond their wildest imagination.

3:131; 30:40.

Important Words:

ربوا (interest) is derived from ربا. They say رباالمال i.e. the money or property increased and became augmented. ربواmeans, an excess and an addition; an addition over and above the principal sum; interest. The hadith defines ربوا as کل قرض جرمنفعة فھوربا i.e. every loan advanced to draw profit comes under the definition of interest (Saghir).

یتخبطه (has smitten) is derived from خبطه i.e. he struck or beat him violently; he trod him under his feet vehemently. خبط اللیل means, he walked about in the darkness of the night without finding the true way. تخبطه means, he struck or beat him violently. تخبطه الشیطان means, Satan struck him and afflicted him with hurt or injury; Satan prostrated him (Aqrab).

المس (insanity) is derived from مس. They say مسه i.e. he touched it; or he touched it with his hand. من المرض اوالکبر فلانا means, disease or old age touched him, i.e. came on him. مسه الشیطان بنصب وعذاب means, Satan brought pain and trouble on him. المسmeans, any pain or trouble, etc. that comes to a man by coming in contact with someone or something; it also signifies madness or insanity (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The prohibition against lending money on interest is preceded by a long exhortation to exercise charity. When a person becomes accustomed to spending his wealth in charity and alms, it becomes easier for him to lend money free of interest.

The Quran prohibits all kinds of interest. In modern times, however, business has become so inseparably mixed up with interest that it appears impossible to avoid interest altogether. But if a change of system as well as of surroundings and circumstances were brought about, business without interest would establish itself in the world as was the case in the days when Islam was in ascendancy.

The clause, those who devour interest do not rise except as rises one whom Satan has smitten with insanity, means that just as a madman does not see the consequences of his actions, similarly those who lend money at interest become careless of consequences. They keep in view only their own immediate interests and do not care, and in fact generally become incapable of caring, for the great harm which they do to society and the world at large. Interest also encourages a person or a government to incur debt beyond his or its capacity and in this way also blinds them to consequences. Another way in which interest causes a touch of insanity is to weaken the sense of goodness and beneficence in man by making him over-engrossed in money-making. Interest also leads to war. Money-lenders are always creating circumstances which may cause conflict between one nation and another so that war may break out and the belligerent nations may be compelled to borrow money from them. Interest also helps to prolong war by encouraging belligerent nations to borrow money beyond their capacity. Again, interest helps the accumulation of wealth in a few hands and thereby most injuriously affects the distribution of wealth and the balance of society. Yet another manifestation of madness caused by interest is that those who pay interest have their sense of dignity lowered and they contract the habit of carelessness and hastiness, thus acquiring a resemblance to one stricken by madness. See also 2:280 below.

The words, trade also is like interest, represent the pet argument of the supporters of interest. They say interest is nothing but a form of trade. Just as in trade one invests money with a view to increasing and multiplying it, so does one in lending money at interest. But deeper thinking would reveal that there is a world of difference between the two. While interest is attended by all the evil consequences briefly referred to above, trade is not.

The words, then will that which he received in the past be his, mean that if one accepts guidance from God and desists from charging interest in future, the past will be forgiven him and God will make good the loss he may thus suffer by other means.

It should be remembered that any sum stipulated to be received or given over and above what one advances or receives as a loan is interest, whether the dealing is with an individual or a bank or a society or a post office or any other organisation. Interest is not confined to money. It extends to any commodity which is given as a loan with the condition that it will be returned with an agreed excess.

Finally, it may be noted that in view of the peculiar conditions of the present times, when there is a vicious network of the interest system surrounding us and Islam is in a greatly weakened condition, the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement has declared that if a person is forced to accept interest, he may do so and then spend the money thus received on (a) the propagation of Islam, and (b) paying off any interest that he may similarly be forced to pay. He should, however, scrupulously avoid spending such money on himself or his family or using it in any other way (Fatawa & Al-Fadl).

Important Words:

مریم (Mary) was the mother of Jesus. She was probably named after the sister of Moses and Aaron, known as Mariam (later pronunciation Miriam). The word, which is probably a compound one consisting of مر and یم it possesses, in Hebrew, a variety of interpretations, some of them being "bitter sea"; "drop of the sea"; "star of the sea"; "bitterness"; "mistress" or "lady". From two alternative roots Mariam might also mean, "the rebellious", or "the corpulent" (Enc. Bib. under Mary). It also means "exalted" (Cruden’s Concordance). Muslim traditionists ascribe to the word the meaning of "pious worshipper" (Kashshaf).

الرجیم (the rejected) is passive participle from رجم. They say رجمه i.e. he pelted him with stones; he smote and killed him; he drove him away; he cursed him; he boycotted or forsook him; he reviled or abused him. رجم الرجل means, the man said a thing on conjecture. رجم القبر means, he put up a stone at the tomb to serve as a sign. الرجیم means: (1) one whom God has driven away from His presence and mercy, i.e. the one rejected; (2) one whom God has cursed; (3) one who has been forsaken and abandoned; and (4) one who has been pelted with stones (Aqrab & Lane). It also means, one driven away or deprived of all goodness and virtue (Mufradat).

Commentary:

Mary’s mother had made the vow in the hope that she would be blessed with a son whom she would dedicate to the service of God. Instead a daughter was born to her. So she was naturally perplexed.

The words, Allah knew best what she had brought forth, form a parenthetical clause spoken by God whereas the following words, the male was not like the female, may be taken to have been either spoken by God or by Mary’s mother. Most probably they are God’s words and mean as rendered in the text, that the female child she had brought forth was superior to the male child she desired to have. If taken to have been spoken by Mary’s mother, they would mean that the female child she had given birth to could not be like the male child she desired, inasmuch as only a boy was fit to do the special service to which she desired to dedicate him.

The clause, I have named her Mary, contains an implied prayer to God to make the girl as exalted and as good and virtuous as the name Mary, meaning exalted or a pious worshipper, signified.

The words, I commit her and her offspring to Thy protection from Satan, the rejected, offer some difficulty. If Mary’s mother intended her child to be dedicated to the service of God, she must have known that the child would remain unmarried for life. What is, then, the sense in offering prayer for the child’s offspring? The most probable explanation is that God had told her in a vision that her daughter would grow up to womanhood and would have a child, whereupon she prayed that Mary and her child might both be granted God’s protection from Satan, the rejected. In spite of this, however, she appears to have left the future of Mary in God’s hand and dedicated her, as she had originally intended, to the service of God (3:38; 3:45; also Gospel of the Birth of Mary). This must have been an exceptional case, for ordinarily only males were eligible for such dedication. The assumption that Mary’s mother had a vision that her daughter would have a son is not unfounded. It finds mention in the Gospel of Mary (3:5) though perhaps in a somewhat different form.

There was nothing unusual about the prayer of Hanna, Mary’s mother, that Mary and her offspring might be protected from satanic influences. All pious parents are actuated by such a desire for their children and pray that they should grow up to lead good and virtuous lives. But unfortunately this simple and natural prayer of Mary’s mother, coupled with a saying of the Holy Prophet to the effect that Mary and her son Jesus were free from the touch of Satan, has given rise to widespread misunderstanding and has been made the basis of an entirely erroneous and misleading belief among a section of Muslims, besides affording to Christians a welcome excuse for attacking Islam. A section among the latter-day Muslims has come to believe that of all men and women, Jesus and his mother, Mary, alone were immune from the evil influences of Satan.

As hinted above, this doctrine is based on a tradition of the Holy Prophet which says: "No child is born but Satan touches it at the time of its birth and makes it cry, except Jesus and his mother Mary" (Bukhari). Unfortunately, this saying of the Holy Prophet has been shorn of its true setting and utterly misunderstood. These words of the Prophet, besides being not strictly relevant as they refer only to the touch of Satan at the time of the birth of a child and not absolutely, were necessitated by the fact that the Jews, out of their enmity towards Jesus, charged him and his mother with the infamous accusation that, God forbid, Mary led an immoral life, and conceived out of legal wedlock, and that consequently Jesus, her son, had an illegal birth. It was to refute this filthy charge that the Holy Prophet uttered the above-quoted words. So this saying of the Prophet is not intended to be general but has only a particular significance with a specific setting. In fact this hadith mentions the names of Jesus and his mother Mary only by way of citing an instance and what is meant is that all mortals born of a woman are likely to come under the influence of Satan except such as possess moral and spiritual qualities like unto those possessed by Mary and her son. The Arabic language is not wanting in instances where a person is named not in his individual capacity, but as representing a class of people (Kashshaf & Manawi). The names of Jesus and Mary have been specifically chosen because of the aspersion upon them by the wicked Jews. Another equally good interpretation is that the words "no child is born" occurring in this hadith are, as hinted above not general but have been used in a restricted sense, signifying not all children absolutely but only such children as were born out of wedlock in the days of Jesus, and the name of Mary has been added because it was her abnormal conception that occasioned such birth of Jesus. Another saying of the Holy Prophet supports this interpretation. Says he, "every child is born in the likeness of Islam; it is only his parents that make him a Christian, a Jew or a Fire-Worshipper" (Bukhari). So the "touch" of Satan referred to in the foregoing hadith cannot be general; it must be taken in a restricted sense.

That Jesus and his mother are not alone in being free from the touch of Satan is clear from a number of Quranic verses and several sayings of the Holy Prophet. To quote only one instance from each, the Quran says: (O Satan,) surely thou shalt have no power over My servants, except such of the erring ones as choose to follow thee (15:43). And the Holy Prophet says: "If a person goes in unto his wife praying, 'O my Lord, keep me away from Satan and so too, keep away the child you grant me', and the wife conceives on such an occasion, the child born will be free from the touch of Satan" (Bukhari).

As for himself personally the Holy Prophet says, "Every one of you has a satan attached to him (who tries to lead him astray) but God has helped me against my satan who has turned Muslim, i.e. obedient and submissive" (Musnad). This means that so far as the Holy Prophet was concerned, Satan had become virtually non-existent. This is certainly a much more exalted position than mere protection against the attack of Satan. Truly has the Prophet remarked, "If Moses and Jesus had been alive, they would have found themselves forced to follow me" (Kathir).

Finally, it may be noted that though Islam declares all Prophets of God to be virtually safe from the influence of Satan, the Bible does not ascribe this protection to Jesus for the New Testament clearly states at a number of places that he was tempted by the Devil for no less than forty days (e.g. Mark 1:12, 13).

Commentary:

The "slipping" spoken of in the verse refers to the disobeying of the order given to the party stationed on the hill at the back of the main body of the Faithful. It may also refer to the running away of some Muslims from the battlefield. But God, out of His great mercy, and considering all the attending circumstances, pardoned them all.

The words, because of certain doings of theirs, contain an implied praise. These men were truly righteous people. It was only "some" of their misdeeds that brought them this temporary disgrace. All their doings were not bad; only some were bad. The words also embody a warning that a true believer should not rest satisfied even if most of his deeds are righteous. He is never quite out of danger unless all of his deeds are good. He can, however, hope for forgiveness, if he manages to make the majority of his deeds good.

7:28; 16:101; 35:7.

Commentary:

The expression یخوف اولیاءہ rendered in the text as, Satan only frightens his friends, may mean: (1) Satan tries to make believers fear disbelievers, who are his friends; (2) he frightens disbelievers themselves, i.e. he becomes the cause of their fear, for the friends of Satan can never be brave. In the latter case the pronoun "them" in, so fear them not, would refer to the noun الناس (people) in 3:174 above.