Ruku 134 ع
Section 134 of 556 • 9 Verses
أَوَلَمْ يَهْدِ لِلَّذِينَ يَرِثُونَ ٱلْأَرْضَ مِنۢ بَعْدِ أَهْلِهَآ أَن لَّوْ نَشَآءُ أَصَبْنَٰهُم بِذُنُوبِهِمْ ۚ وَنَطْبَعُ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ فَهُمْ لَا يَسْمَعُونَ
20:129; 32:27.
10:75; 16:109; 45:24.
Commentary:
The veiled threat in the preceding verse is openly made in the present one. The enemies of Islam should either take lesson from the sad end of those gone before them and give up offering opposition to it or be prepared for a similar doom. The word یسمعون (understand) here signifies not listening but understanding (Lane).
c
20:129; 32:27.
d
10:75; 16:109; 45:24.
a
20:129; 32:27.
b
10:75; 16:109; 45:24.
997
Commentary:
The veiled threat in the preceding verse is openly made in the present one. The enemies of Islam should either take lesson from the sad end of those gone before them and give up offering opposition to it or be prepared for a similar doom. The word یسمعون (understand) here signifies not listening but understanding (Lane).
c
20:129; 32:27.
d
10:75; 16:109; 45:24.
تِلْكَ ٱلْقُرَىٰ نَقُصُّ عَلَيْكَ مِنْ أَنۢبَآئِهَا ۚ وَلَقَدْ جَآءَتْهُمْ رُسُلُهُم بِٱلْبَيِّنَٰتِ فَمَا كَانُوا۟ لِيُؤْمِنُوا۟ بِمَا كَذَّبُوا۟ مِن قَبْلُ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ يَطْبَعُ ٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِ ٱلْكَٰفِرِينَ
3:185; 5:33.
3:185; 5:33.
The Qur’an does not give the entire history of bygone peoples but only the relevant parts of it. Nevertheless, no book of history contains more reliable information about the tribes of ‘Ad and Thamud than does the Qur’an, and students of history have admitted that what the Qur’an tells us is the only authentic and reliable information that we possess about these ancient peoples and all other stories current about them are so many myths.
The hearts of disbelievers are sealed up when they refuse to make use of their God-given power of reasoning and understanding.
3:185; 5:33.
Commentary:
The word القری (the towns) again refers here to ancient towns fallen into ruin. The Quran reverts to their mention in order to emphasize the seriousness of a Prophet’s rejection and to introduce the narration of yet another by-gone people, the rejecters of Moses.
By using the words, some of whose news, the verse makes it clear that the Quran has not given the entire history of by-gone peoples but only the relevant parts of it. Nevertheless, no book of history contains more reliable information about the peoples of ‘Ad and Thamud than does the Quran, and students of history have admitted that what the Quran tells us is the only authentic and reliable knowledge that we possess about these ancient peoples, and all other stories current about them may be only so many myths. As regards Lot, later Jewish writers have admitted that he was a Prophet of God, as the Quran represents him to be, though the Bible does not seem to accord him this rank.
The verse hints that as the Holy Prophet represents in his person all the Prophets that have gone before him, therefore his rejecters will be visited with all the various forms of punishment that befell the rejecters of former Prophets.
The opponents of God’s Prophets are in the habit of rejecting their claims on the basis of mere hearsay and make-believe. The result of such a hasty rejection is that the hearts of the rejecters become sealed and they become deprived of the power to understand the arguments and signs which God shows to establish the truth of His Messengers. The verse thus throws light on how the hearts or minds of disbelievers are sealed. They are sealed only when disbelievers refuse to make use of their God-given power of reasoning and understanding.
e
3:185; 5:33.
c
3:185; 5:33.
998
Commentary:
The word القری (the towns) again refers here to ancient towns fallen into ruin. The Quran reverts to their mention in order to emphasize the seriousness of a Prophet’s rejection and to introduce the narration of yet another by-gone people, the rejecters of Moses.
By using the words, some of whose news, the verse makes it clear that the Quran has not given the entire history of by-gone peoples but only the relevant parts of it. Nevertheless, no book of history contains more reliable information about the peoples of ‘Ad and Thamud than does the Quran, and students of history have admitted that what the Quran tells us is the only authentic and reliable knowledge that we possess about these ancient peoples, and all other stories current about them may be only so many myths. As regards Lot, later Jewish writers have admitted that he was a Prophet of God, as the Quran represents him to be, though the Bible does not seem to accord him this rank.
The verse hints that as the Holy Prophet represents in his person all the Prophets that have gone before him, therefore his rejecters will be visited with all the various forms of punishment that befell the rejecters of former Prophets.
The opponents of God’s Prophets are in the habit of rejecting their claims on the basis of mere hearsay and make-believe. The result of such a hasty rejection is that the hearts of the rejecters become sealed and they become deprived of the power to understand the arguments and signs which God shows to establish the truth of His Messengers. The verse thus throws light on how the hearts or minds of disbelievers are sealed. They are sealed only when disbelievers refuse to make use of their God-given power of reasoning and understanding.
a
3:185; 5:33.
1017
The Qur’an does not give the entire history of bygone peoples but only the relevant parts of it. Nevertheless, no book of history contains more reliable information about the tribes of ‘Ad and Thamud than does the Qur’an, and students of history have admitted that what the Qur’an tells us is the only authentic and reliable information that we possess about these ancient peoples and all other stories current about them are so many myths.
1018
The hearts of disbelievers are sealed up when they refuse to make use of their God-given power of reasoning and understanding.
وَمَا وَجَدْنَا لِأَكْثَرِهِم مِّنْ عَهْدٍ ۖ وَإِن وَجَدْنَآ أَكْثَرَهُمْ لَفَٰسِقِينَ
’’بلکہ‘‘ واؤ کا ترجمہ ہے جو عربی زبان کے لحاظ سے درست ہے (مغنی)
1
’’بلکہ‘‘ واؤ کا ترجمہ ہے جو عربی زبان کے لحاظ سے درست ہے (مغنی)
ثُمَّ بَعَثْنَا مِنۢ بَعْدِهِم مُّوسَىٰ بِـَٔايَٰتِنَآ إِلَىٰ فِرْعَوْنَ وَمَلَإِي۟هِۦ فَظَلَمُوا۟ بِهَا ۖ فَٱنظُرْ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَٰقِبَةُ ٱلْمُفْسِدِينَ
17:102; 28:37; 43:47.
The words "after them", contradict the popular view that Shu‘aib was a contemporary and father-in-law of Moses.
Zulm meaning to put a thing in the wrong place or to make a wrong use of it (Lane), the clause signifies that Pharaoh and his chiefs made wrong use of the Signs. The Signs were meant to engender fear of God in their hearts but instead they jeered and mocked at them.
17:102; 28:37; 43:47.
Commentary:
The clause, Then after them We sent Moses, does not mean that Moses appeared directly or immediately after the Prophets mentioned in the preceding verses. Other Messengers may have intervened between Moses and these Prophets, of whom Shu‘aib appears to be the nearest in time to Moses. In fact, the use of the words, Then after them, in the above clause only means that Moses appeared and lived sometime after them. The expression also contradicts the popular view that Shu‘aib was a contemporary and the father-in-law of Moses.
The words ظلموا بھا (they unjustly rejected them) literally meaning "they did wrong by means of the signs, or did them wrong", really signify that "they rejected the signs and treated them as lies, or they made them the means of doing wrong to men by ridiculing them and in this way deceiving the people."
The word ظلم also means, "to put a thing in the wrong place, or to make a wrong use of a thing" (Lane). Taking the word in this sense, the clause would mean, "they made a wrong use of the signs", i.e. though the signs were meant to engender fear of God in the hearts of men, the disbelievers, instead of profiting by them, jeered and mocked at them.
a
17:102; 28:37; 43:47.
511
ظُلْم (Zulm) 的意思是, 把一件东西放在错误的地方, 或错误地使用它。(Lane) 这一句意指法老和他的首长错误地使用了那些迹象。那些迹象原想在他们心中产生对安拉敬畏的心情, 但他们相反地却嘲笑那些迹象。
a
17:102; 28:37; 43:47.
999
Commentary:
The clause, Then after them We sent Moses, does not mean that Moses appeared directly or immediately after the Prophets mentioned in the preceding verses. Other Messengers may have intervened between Moses and these Prophets, of whom Shu‘aib appears to be the nearest in time to Moses. In fact, the use of the words, Then after them, in the above clause only means that Moses appeared and lived sometime after them. The expression also contradicts the popular view that Shu‘aib was a contemporary and the father-in-law of Moses.
The words ظلموا بھا (they unjustly rejected them) literally meaning "they did wrong by means of the signs, or did them wrong", really signify that "they rejected the signs and treated them as lies, or they made them the means of doing wrong to men by ridiculing them and in this way deceiving the people."
The word ظلم also means, "to put a thing in the wrong place, or to make a wrong use of a thing" (Lane). Taking the word in this sense, the clause would mean, "they made a wrong use of the signs", i.e. though the signs were meant to engender fear of God in the hearts of men, the disbelievers, instead of profiting by them, jeered and mocked at them.
b
17:102; 28:37; 43:47.
1019
The words "after them", contradict the popular view that Shu‘aib was a contemporary and father-in-law of Moses.
1020
Zulm meaning to put a thing in the wrong place or to make a wrong use of it (Lane), the clause signifies that Pharaoh and his chiefs made wrong use of the Signs. The Signs were meant to engender fear of God in their hearts but instead they jeered and mocked at them.
وَقَالَ مُوسَىٰ يَٰفِرْعَوْنُ إِنِّى رَسُولٌ مِّن رَّبِّ ٱلْعَٰلَمِينَ
26:17; 20:48; 43:47.
26:17; 20:48; 43:47.
26:17; 20:48; 43:47.
b
26:17; 20:48; 43:47.
a
26:17; 20:48; 43:47.
c
26:17; 20:48; 43:47.
حَقِيقٌ عَلَىٰٓ أَن لَّآ أَقُولَ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ إِلَّا ٱلْحَقَّ ۚ قَدْ جِئْتُكُم بِبَيِّنَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ فَأَرْسِلْ مَعِىَ بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ
20:48; 26:18.
20:48; 26:18.
Haqiq means, adapted, disposed, apt, meet, right, fit or worthy (Lane).
When Moses went to Pharaoh his object was not so much to preach his Message to him as to call upon him to let the Israelites go with him, though ordinarily he would have preached to him also. As a matter of fact the Message of Moses was meant primarily for the Israelites, but as long as the Israelites remained mixed up with the natives of Egypt, Moses had to preach to them both. When the Israelites left the land, he had no concern with the Egyptians and confined his attention to his own kith and kin to whom he was sent.
20:48; 26:18.
Important Words:
حقیق (it is meet) is derived from حق meaning, it was or became suitable to the requirements of wisdom, justice, truth and right; or it was or became just, proper, correct, valid, established or confirmed as a truth or fact; or it became necessary, unavoidable, obligatory or due. They say یحق علیك ان تفعل کذا i.e. it is incumbent upon thee, or it behoves thee, or it is meet for thee, that thou shouldst do such a thing. Thus حقیق means, adapted, disposed, apt, meet, fit or worthy. The expression حقیق علیان لااقول would thus mean, I am disposed not to say; or it is binding or obligatory or incumbent on me that I should not say; or, as some render the expression, I am vehemently desirous that I should not say (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Taking the word حقیق in the sense of "desirous", the opening sentence of the verse would mean, "I am desirous that I should speak of God nothing but the truth". These words are put in the mouth of Moses as a reply also to those who accused the Holy Prophet of lying. The Prophets of God are, as it were, represented as saying that, far from speaking a lie, they are but too anxious, and desire nothing but to speak pure and unadulterated truth. Other meanings of حقیق are also equally applicable here.
When Moses went to Pharaoh, his object was not so much the preaching of his message to him as to call upon him to let the Israelites go with him, though ordinarily he would preach to him also. As a matter of fact, the message of Moses was meant primarily for the Israelites, but as long as the Israelites remained mixed up with the natives of Egypt, Moses had to preach to them both. When the Israelites left the land, he had no concern with the Egyptians and confined his attention to his own kith and kin to whom he had been sent.
c
20:48; 26:18.
b
20:48; 26:18.
1000
Important Words:
حقیق (it is meet) is derived from حق meaning, it was or became suitable to the requirements of wisdom, justice, truth and right; or it was or became just, proper, correct, valid, established or confirmed as a truth or fact; or it became necessary, unavoidable, obligatory or due. They say یحق علیك ان تفعل کذا i.e. it is incumbent upon thee, or it behoves thee, or it is meet for thee, that thou shouldst do such a thing. Thus حقیق means, adapted, disposed, apt, meet, fit or worthy. The expression حقیق علیان لااقول would thus mean, I am disposed not to say; or it is binding or obligatory or incumbent on me that I should not say; or, as some render the expression, I am vehemently desirous that I should not say (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Taking the word حقیق in the sense of "desirous", the opening sentence of the verse would mean, "I am desirous that I should speak of God nothing but the truth". These words are put in the mouth of Moses as a reply also to those who accused the Holy Prophet of lying. The Prophets of God are, as it were, represented as saying that, far from speaking a lie, they are but too anxious, and desire nothing but to speak pure and unadulterated truth. Other meanings of حقیق are also equally applicable here.
When Moses went to Pharaoh, his object was not so much the preaching of his message to him as to call upon him to let the Israelites go with him, though ordinarily he would preach to him also. As a matter of fact, the message of Moses was meant primarily for the Israelites, but as long as the Israelites remained mixed up with the natives of Egypt, Moses had to preach to them both. When the Israelites left the land, he had no concern with the Egyptians and confined his attention to his own kith and kin to whom he had been sent.
a
20:48; 26:18.
1021
Haqiq means, adapted, disposed, apt, meet, right, fit or worthy (Lane).
1022
When Moses went to Pharaoh his object was not so much to preach his Message to him as to call upon him to let the Israelites go with him, though ordinarily he would have preached to him also. As a matter of fact the Message of Moses was meant primarily for the Israelites, but as long as the Israelites remained mixed up with the natives of Egypt, Moses had to preach to them both. When the Israelites left the land, he had no concern with the Egyptians and confined his attention to his own kith and kin to whom he was sent.
قَالَ إِن كُنتَ جِئْتَ بِـَٔايَةٍ فَأْتِ بِهَآ إِن كُنتَ مِنَ ٱلصَّٰدِقِينَ
26:32.
26:32.
26:32.
d
26:32.
a
26:32.
b
26:32.
فَأَلْقَىٰ عَصَاهُ فَإِذَا هِىَ ثُعْبَانٌ مُّبِينٌ
20:21; 26:33; 27:11; 28:32.
20:21; 26:33; 27:11; 28:32.
The Qur’an has used three different words to describe the turning of the rod of Moses into a serpent, viz. Hayyah as in 20:21, Jann as in 27:11 and 28:32 and Thu‘ban as in 26:33 and in the present verse. The first word is of general application and is used for serpents of all categories. The second word means a small serpent. The third word (Thu‘ban) means a bulky and long serpent. Thus the use of three different words at three different places in the Qur’an is significant and evidently is intended to serve a definite purpose. The word Jann has been used from the point of view of the serpent’s quick movements and Thu‘ban from the point of view of its large size. When the mere fact of the turning of the rod into a serpent is mentioned the word Hayyah is used, but when the rod is mentioned as turning into a serpent in the presence of Moses alone the word Jann (a small serpent) is used. But when the miracle of the rod turning into a serpent i
20:21; 26:33; 27:11; 28:32.
Important Words:
ثعبان (serpent) is derived from ثعب. They say ثعبه i.e. he gave vent to it; or he made it (water, etc.) to flow or run or stream. ثعبان means, a kind of long serpent; a great serpent, whether male or female, but particularly the male; or the serpent in general whether male or female, great or small; also applied to an enormous fabulous serpent (Lane).
Commentary:
The Quran has used three different words for describing the turning of the rod of Moses into a serpent; (1) ثعبان as in the verse under comment and in 26:33; (2) حیة as in 20:21, and (3) جان as in 28:32 and 27:11. The words ثعبان and حیة are applied both to a large or a small serpent, while the word جان signifies only a small serpent. Thus, there is no conflict or contradiction in using these three different words for the same thing, as all of them may be used to give the same meaning, i.e. a small serpent.
Moreover, on carefully pondering over the verses in which these words occur, we find that different words have been used to suit different occasions. The word جان has been used on the occasion when the rod is made to appear as a serpent to Moses alone (27:11) while the words ثعبان and حیة have been used in connection with the occasion when the miracle was wrought in public. This shows that to Moses the rod appeared as only a small serpent. While in the presence of Pharaoh and other men, it was made to appear like a big serpent. Thus the use of three different words for different occasions was not haphazard and casual, but deliberate and evidently intended to serve a definite purpose.
Moreover, in the verses in which the word جان is used, it is not said that the rod actually turned into a جان (small serpent) but that it moved as though it were a جان. This does not mean that the rod necessarily turned into a small serpent but that it only moved quickly like a small serpent, though it may have been a large serpent. So the different words used by the Quran do not conflict with each other, whether the rod be taken as turning into a small serpent or a large one.
It should also be noted here that this miracle did not really contradict any law of nature. If the existence of a thing is proved beyond doubt, it must be admitted, even if we are unable to explain it in the light of the laws of nature, as we know them. Our knowledge of the laws of nature is evidently very limited and so we cannot deny a fact on the basis of our limited and imperfect knowledge. Moreover, the said miracle did not take place in the manner in which it is popularly understood to have occurred. Indeed, miracles shown by God’s Prophets are not like the performance of jugglers. They are meant to serve some great moral or spiritual purpose. One of their primary objects is to bring about certainty of faith and engender feelings of piety and fear of God in the minds of those who witness them. If the rod had actually turned into a serpent, the whole performance must have looked more like the hand-tricks of a juggler than the miracle of a Prophet. In spite of what the Bible might say about this miracle, the Quran lends no support whatever to the view that the rod actually turned into a real and living serpent. No such thing ever took place. The rod only appeared like a moving serpent. It was a sort of a vision in which God either exercised special control over the sight of the onlookers in order to make them see the rod in the form of a serpent or the rod itself was made to appear like a serpent; and this vision was shared by Pharaoh and his courtiers and the enchanters along with Moses. The rod remained a rod, only it appeared to Moses and others as a serpent. It is a spiritual phenomenon of common occurrence that in a vision when man rises above the encumbrances of the flesh and becomes temporarily transported to a spiritual sphere, he can see things taking place which are beyond his ken and are quite invisible to his physical eyes. The miracle of the rod turning into a serpent was one such spiritual experience.
A similar spiritual phenomenon took place when in the time of the Holy Prophet the moon was seen as rent asunder not only by the Holy Prophet but by some of his followers and opponents as well (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). Such visions, which constitute a peculiar state between sleep and wakefulness, are a common spiritual experience of God’s Prophets and His Elect, but sometimes they are shared by ordinary men and by even disbelievers. Tradition tells us that Gabriel whom the Holy Prophet often saw in his visions, was also once seen by his Companions, who were sitting with him (Bukhari, ch. on Iman). Similarly, some angels were seen even by some of the disbelievers at the Battle of Badr (Jarir, vi.47). Another instance of this kind occurred when a Muslim army under the well-known Muslim general, Sariyah, was fighting the enemy in Iraq at a distance of hundreds of miles from Medina. ‘Umar, the Second Khalifah, while delivering his Friday sermon at Medina, saw in a vision that the Muslim army was being over-whelmed by the superior numbers of the enemy and that a disastrous defeat was imminent. Thereupon, ‘Umar suddenly discontinued his sermon and cried out from the pulpit, saying, "O Sariyah, take to the mountain, take to the mountain." Sariyah, hundreds of miles away and surrounded by the deafening noise of the battlefield, heard the voice of ‘Umar and obeyed it; and the Muslim army was saved from destruction (Khamis, ii. 270).
The miracle of Moses mentioned in the verse under comment possessed a special significance. It may be interpreted something like this. God told Moses to throw down his rod which then appeared to him like a serpent; and when subsequently on God’s bidding he took it up, lo! the rod was a mere piece of wood. Now a serpent, in the language of visions and dreams, is a symbol of the enemy, while a rod is emblematic of one’s community (Ta‘tirul-Anam). Thus, by means of this vision, God made Moses understand that if He cast away his people from him, they would become veritable serpents. But if he kept them under his care, they would grow into a strong and well-knit community of righteous and God-fearing men. Moses had in the beginning begged to be excused from being entrusted with the onerous task of reclaiming a morally depraved people, but God told him by means of this vision that the well-being of his people depended upon his taking them in his charge, failing which they would turn into veritable serpents.
Abu Jahl, the arch-enemy of Islam, was also once made to see a similar vision. It is reported that the Holy Prophetone day went to him and asked him to pay a certain sum of money which he owed to a poor man, a stranger in Mecca, but which he had so far declined to pay. On the Holy Prophet’s demand, Abu Jahl, in spite of his great enmity to the Prophet, made the payment at once, and when asked by his friends the reason for his doing so, he said he saw two enraged camels on both sides of Muhammad about to tear him to pieces if he refused to comply with his demand (Hisham). Arabia is a land of camels, so Abu Jahl was made to see camels, while Egypt being a land of magic serpents, Pharaoh was made to see a serpent.
e
20:21; 26:33; 27:11; 28:32.
b
20:21; 26:33; 27:11; 28:32.
1001
Important Words:
ثعبان (serpent) is derived from ثعب. They say ثعبه i.e. he gave vent to it; or he made it (water, etc.) to flow or run or stream. ثعبان means, a kind of long serpent; a great serpent, whether male or female, but particularly the male; or the serpent in general whether male or female, great or small; also applied to an enormous fabulous serpent (Lane).
Commentary:
The Quran has used three different words for describing the turning of the rod of Moses into a serpent; (1) ثعبان as in the verse under comment and in 26:33; (2) حیة as in 20:21, and (3) جان as in 28:32 and 27:11. The words ثعبان and حیة are applied both to a large or a small serpent, while the word جان signifies only a small serpent. Thus, there is no conflict or contradiction in using these three different words for the same thing, as all of them may be used to give the same meaning, i.e. a small serpent.
Moreover, on carefully pondering over the verses in which these words occur, we find that different words have been used to suit different occasions. The word جان has been used on the occasion when the rod is made to appear as a serpent to Moses alone (27:11) while the words ثعبان and حیة have been used in connection with the occasion when the miracle was wrought in public. This shows that to Moses the rod appeared as only a small serpent. While in the presence of Pharaoh and other men, it was made to appear like a big serpent. Thus the use of three different words for different occasions was not haphazard and casual, but deliberate and evidently intended to serve a definite purpose.
Moreover, in the verses in which the word جان is used, it is not said that the rod actually turned into a جان (small serpent) but that it moved as though it were a جان. This does not mean that the rod necessarily turned into a small serpent but that it only moved quickly like a small serpent, though it may have been a large serpent. So the different words used by the Quran do not conflict with each other, whether the rod be taken as turning into a small serpent or a large one.
It should also be noted here that this miracle did not really contradict any law of nature. If the existence of a thing is proved beyond doubt, it must be admitted, even if we are unable to explain it in the light of the laws of nature, as we know them. Our knowledge of the laws of nature is evidently very limited and so we cannot deny a fact on the basis of our limited and imperfect knowledge. Moreover, the said miracle did not take place in the manner in which it is popularly understood to have occurred. Indeed, miracles shown by God’s Prophets are not like the performance of jugglers. They are meant to serve some great moral or spiritual purpose. One of their primary objects is to bring about certainty of faith and engender feelings of piety and fear of God in the minds of those who witness them. If the rod had actually turned into a serpent, the whole performance must have looked more like the hand-tricks of a juggler than the miracle of a Prophet. In spite of what the Bible might say about this miracle, the Quran lends no support whatever to the view that the rod actually turned into a real and living serpent. No such thing ever took place. The rod only appeared like a moving serpent. It was a sort of a vision in which God either exercised special control over the sight of the onlookers in order to make them see the rod in the form of a serpent or the rod itself was made to appear like a serpent; and this vision was shared by Pharaoh and his courtiers and the enchanters along with Moses. The rod remained a rod, only it appeared to Moses and others as a serpent. It is a spiritual phenomenon of common occurrence that in a vision when man rises above the encumbrances of the flesh and becomes temporarily transported to a spiritual sphere, he can see things taking place which are beyond his ken and are quite invisible to his physical eyes. The miracle of the rod turning into a serpent was one such spiritual experience.
A similar spiritual phenomenon took place when in the time of the Holy Prophet the moon was seen as rent asunder not only by the Holy Prophet but by some of his followers and opponents as well (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). Such visions, which constitute a peculiar state between sleep and wakefulness, are a common spiritual experience of God’s Prophets and His Elect, but sometimes they are shared by ordinary men and by even disbelievers. Tradition tells us that Gabriel whom the Holy Prophet often saw in his visions, was also once seen by his Companions, who were sitting with him (Bukhari, ch. on Iman). Similarly, some angels were seen even by some of the disbelievers at the Battle of Badr (Jarir, vi.47). Another instance of this kind occurred when a Muslim army under the well-known Muslim general, Sariyah, was fighting the enemy in Iraq at a distance of hundreds of miles from Medina. ‘Umar, the Second Khalifah, while delivering his Friday sermon at Medina, saw in a vision that the Muslim army was being over-whelmed by the superior numbers of the enemy and that a disastrous defeat was imminent. Thereupon, ‘Umar suddenly discontinued his sermon and cried out from the pulpit, saying, "O Sariyah, take to the mountain, take to the mountain." Sariyah, hundreds of miles away and surrounded by the deafening noise of the battlefield, heard the voice of ‘Umar and obeyed it; and the Muslim army was saved from destruction (Khamis, ii. 270).
The miracle of Moses mentioned in the verse under comment possessed a special significance. It may be interpreted something like this. God told Moses to throw down his rod which then appeared to him like a serpent; and when subsequently on God’s bidding he took it up, lo! the rod was a mere piece of wood. Now a serpent, in the language of visions and dreams, is a symbol of the enemy, while a rod is emblematic of one’s community (Ta‘tirul-Anam). Thus, by means of this vision, God made Moses understand that if He cast away his people from him, they would become veritable serpents. But if he kept them under his care, they would grow into a strong and well-knit community of righteous and God-fearing men. Moses had in the beginning begged to be excused from being entrusted with the onerous task of reclaiming a morally depraved people, but God told him by means of this vision that the well-being of his people depended upon his taking them in his charge, failing which they would turn into veritable serpents.
Abu Jahl, the arch-enemy of Islam, was also once made to see a similar vision. It is reported that the Holy Prophetone day went to him and asked him to pay a certain sum of money which he owed to a poor man, a stranger in Mecca, but which he had so far declined to pay. On the Holy Prophet’s demand, Abu Jahl, in spite of his great enmity to the Prophet, made the payment at once, and when asked by his friends the reason for his doing so, he said he saw two enraged camels on both sides of Muhammad about to tear him to pieces if he refused to comply with his demand (Hisham). Arabia is a land of camels, so Abu Jahl was made to see camels, while Egypt being a land of magic serpents, Pharaoh was made to see a serpent.
c
20:21; 26:33; 27:11; 28:32.
1023
The Qur’an has used three different words to describe the turning of the rod of Moses into a serpent, viz. Hayyah as in 20:21, Jann as in 27:11 and 28:32 and Thu‘ban as in 26:33 and in the present verse. The first word is of general application and is used for serpents of all categories. The second word means a small serpent. The third word (Thu‘ban) means a bulky and long serpent. Thus the use of three different words at three different places in the Qur’an is significant and evidently is intended to serve a definite purpose. The word Jann has been used from the point of view of the serpent’s quick movements and Thu‘ban from the point of view of its large size. When the mere fact of the turning of the rod into a serpent is mentioned the word Hayyah is used, but when the rod is mentioned as turning into a serpent in the presence of Moses alone the word Jann (a small serpent) is used. But when the miracle of the rod turning into a serpent i
وَنَزَعَ يَدَهُۥ فَإِذَا هِىَ بَيْضَآءُ لِلنَّٰظِرِينَ
26:34; 27:13; 28:33.
大家知道, 精神高超的人们的身上, 根据他们精神发展性质或程度的不同, 会发出各种颜色的光芒。各个先知的身上放的是纯白色的光。同样地, 穆撒那只手上发出的光一定是那种颜色的。这样, 他们都看到了那些光芒, 他的手在观看者面前自然呈现着白光。在安拉派遣的其它先知的时代, 大家知道那些人也具有这样的精神经历。安拉对穆撒说, “把你的手插入怀中, 抽出时它将洁白无疵。” (28:33) 这是用象征性的语言清楚地意示穆撒, 如果他保持和他的门徒紧密地在一起并在他的养护之下, 他们自己也不仅会成为发光的人, 而且还会把光传给别人, 否则, 他们不仅会变成黑色, 而且在道德上会生病。这一奇迹因此不是一个巫师的表现, 而是一种充满深刻精神意义的迹象。
26:34; 27:13; 28:33.
The bodies of highly spiritual men are known to emit rays of various colours according to the degree or nature of their spiritual development. The rays that are emitted by the bodies of Prophets are of pure white colour. Similarly, rays that issued from the hand of Moses must have been of that colour and, when they were made visible, his hand naturally appeared white to the beholders. Men are known to have had such spiritual experiences in the times of other Prophets of God as well. God said to Moses: Thrust thy hand into thy bosom; it will come forth white without disease (28:33). This constituted, in symbolic language, a clear hint to Moses that if he kept his followers close to him and under his fostering care, they would not only become men of light themselves but would also impart light to others, otherwise they would become not only black but also morally diseased. The miracle was not, therefore, the performance of a sorcerer but a Sign full of deep spiritual significance.
26:34; 27:13; 28:33.
Commentary:
The miracle of the white hand has also been mentioned in the Bible (Exod. 4:6), with the difference that whereas in the Bible the hand is represented as "leprous", the Quran represents it as being "without disease" (28:33). Another difference between the two accounts is that the Quran represents Moses as having shown both signs to Pharaoh, while according to the Bible, although Moses is bidden to show this sign to Pharaoh (Exod. 4:8), it does not mention that Moses did actually show the latter sign to him. The Quranic version clearly seems to be the more correct, not only because Moses could not omit to show the sign of the white hand to Pharaoh as he was commanded by God, as admitted by the Bible itself, but also because Pharaoh having failed to profit by the first sign, Moses must have shown him the second Sign also, after the rejection of the first.
The bodies of highly spiritual men are known to emit invisible rays of various colours according to the degree or nature of their spiritual development. The rays that emerge from the bodies of perfectly holy men, such as Prophets, are of pure white colour. So the rays that issued from the hand of Moses must have been of that colour, and when these rays were made visible, his hand naturally appeared white to the beholders. Men are known to have had such spiritual experience in the times of other Prophets of God as well. For instance, authentic instances of such spiritual experiences having been felt by certain individuals in the time of Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, are on record (Al-Fadl, vol. 32, No. 217).
Elsewhere the Quran says, God said to Moses Thrust thy hand into thy bosom; it will come forth white without disease (28:33). This constituted, in symbolic language, a clear hint to Moses that if he kept his followers close to him and under his fostering care, they would not only become men of light themselves, but would also impart light to others, otherwise they would become not only black but also diseased. The miracle was not, therefore, the performance of a magician but a sign full of deep spiritual significance.
f
26:34; 27:13; 28:33.
512
大家知道, 精神高超的人们的身上, 根据他们精神发展性质或程度的不同, 会发出各种颜色的光芒。各个先知的身上放的是纯白色的光。同样地, 穆撒那只手上发出的光一定是那种颜色的。这样, 他们都看到了那些光芒, 他的手在观看者面前自然呈现着白光。在安拉派遣的其它先知的时代, 大家知道那些人也具有这样的精神经历。安拉对穆撒说, “把你的手插入怀中, 抽出时它将洁白无疵。” (28:33) 这是用象征性的语言清楚地意示穆撒, 如果他保持和他的门徒紧密地在一起并在他的养护之下, 他们自己也不仅会成为发光的人, 而且还会把光传给别人, 否则, 他们不仅会变成黑色, 而且在道德上会生病。这一奇迹因此不是一个巫师的表现, 而是一种充满深刻精神意义的迹象。
a
26:34; 27:13; 28:33.
1002
Commentary:
The miracle of the white hand has also been mentioned in the Bible (Exod. 4:6), with the difference that whereas in the Bible the hand is represented as "leprous", the Quran represents it as being "without disease" (28:33). Another difference between the two accounts is that the Quran represents Moses as having shown both signs to Pharaoh, while according to the Bible, although Moses is bidden to show this sign to Pharaoh (Exod. 4:8), it does not mention that Moses did actually show the latter sign to him. The Quranic version clearly seems to be the more correct, not only because Moses could not omit to show the sign of the white hand to Pharaoh as he was commanded by God, as admitted by the Bible itself, but also because Pharaoh having failed to profit by the first sign, Moses must have shown him the second Sign also, after the rejection of the first.
The bodies of highly spiritual men are known to emit invisible rays of various colours according to the degree or nature of their spiritual development. The rays that emerge from the bodies of perfectly holy men, such as Prophets, are of pure white colour. So the rays that issued from the hand of Moses must have been of that colour, and when these rays were made visible, his hand naturally appeared white to the beholders. Men are known to have had such spiritual experience in the times of other Prophets of God as well. For instance, authentic instances of such spiritual experiences having been felt by certain individuals in the time of Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, are on record (Al-Fadl, vol. 32, No. 217).
Elsewhere the Quran says, God said to Moses Thrust thy hand into thy bosom; it will come forth white without disease (28:33). This constituted, in symbolic language, a clear hint to Moses that if he kept his followers close to him and under his fostering care, they would not only become men of light themselves, but would also impart light to others, otherwise they would become not only black but also diseased. The miracle was not, therefore, the performance of a magician but a sign full of deep spiritual significance.
a
26:34; 27:13; 28:33.
1024
The bodies of highly spiritual men are known to emit rays of various colours according to the degree or nature of their spiritual development. The rays that are emitted by the bodies of Prophets are of pure white colour. Similarly, rays that issued from the hand of Moses must have been of that colour and, when they were made visible, his hand naturally appeared white to the beholders. Men are known to have had such spiritual experiences in the times of other Prophets of God as well. God said to Moses: Thrust thy hand into thy bosom; it will come forth white without disease (28:33). This constituted, in symbolic language, a clear hint to Moses that if he kept his followers close to him and under his fostering care, they would not only become men of light themselves but would also impart light to others, otherwise they would become not only black but also morally diseased. The miracle was not, therefore, the performance of a sorcerer but a Sign full of deep spiritual significance.