أَيْدِيَ

2:247; 4:67.

14:45; 63:11.

9:38; 57:21.

See 4:50.

Commentary:

This verse refers to a class of men who show eagerness to fight when they are told not to fight, but when the actual time for fighting arrives, they refuse to fight or try to avoid it by various pretexts, thus showing that their former eagerness for fighting was either insincere or was only due to a temporary excitement.

The verse may also be regarded as referring to انصار (Helpers) of Medina who, before the advent of Islam to that city, were constantly at war among themselves. But when they accepted Islam, they were asked to cease fighting. When, however, they were called upon to take up arms to defend Islam, a section of them, who were always fighting among themselves before they embraced Islam, became afraid of fighting in the cause of God.

33:15.

9:5.

Important Words:

ارکسوا (fall headlong) is in the passive voice and the right translation of it would be, "are made to fall headlong", or "are overthrown" etc. but for the sake of clearness the word has been translated here in the active voice. ارکسوا is formed from رکس. They say رکس الشیء i.e. he turned the thing over or upside down. ارکس الشیء means, he turned the thing to its former state; he turned or threw it over upon its head; he reversed it or turned it back; he made the first part of it to be the last. أرکس الله عدوك means, may God turn thine enemy upon his head; or may He overthrow him or change or reverse his condition (Lane & Aqrab).

الفتنة (hostility) generally meaning, (1) persecution, (2) mischief, (3) discord and dissension, (4) civil war, etc., also means war, i.e. hostility (Lane). See also 2:192.

سلطان (authority) is the noun-infinitive from سلط which means, he or it overcame, prevailed or predominated; he became firm or established in superior power; he possessed power or dominion or sovereignty; he was or became sharp; it was or became hard or strong; he was or became chaste or perspicuous in speech, or eloquent and sharp in tongue. They say قد جعلت لك سلطانا علی اخذ حقی من فلان i.e. I have given you the power or authority to take my dues from such a one. سلطان means, strength, might, force or power; predominance; power or authority; the sovereign or ruling power; king or ruler; sharpness; hardness; proof or argument; evidence; plea (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The reference in this verse is to those people who had no alliance with Muslims or any tribe having an alliance with them. They were time-servers who awaited their opportunity. The difference between these people and those mentioned in the previous verse is that the latter had some sort of alliance with this or that party though they did not

possess the strength to assert themselves, while the former only sought security by deceitful means and hastened to make common cause with the enemies of Islam whenever invited to do so. Fighting was enjoined against this class of people, unless they entered into a treaty of peace with Muslims and loyally observed its terms.

2:186.

Important Words:

جنب (unclean) for which see 4:44.

Commentary:

After the questions of food and marriage comes the question of cleanliness on which Islam lays so much emphasis, specially on clean­liness necessary for the proper performance of worship. The feet are here mentioned after the head, not because they are intended, as alleged by the Shias, to be only wiped like the head, but because they come last in the process of ablution. This is apparent from the fact that the word ارجل (feet) has been put in the accusative case in the standard text, like the words وجوه (faces) and ایدی (hands), thus showing that, like the latter, the word "feet" is also governed in the accusative case by the verb اغسلوا (wash) and not by the particle با (over) which governs the word رؤس (heads) only. Hence the addition of the verb "wash" before it in the translation. It is true that a solitary reading gives the word ارجل(arjula) as ارجل (arjulin in the genitive case). But even this does not necessarily mean that the word is not governed by the verb اغسلوا (wash); for, according to the rules of Arabic grammar, nouns in the accusative case may sometimes be put in the genitive case owing to their proximity to a noun in the genitive case. According to this rule, ارجل (feet) would be taken to have been put in this reading in the genitive case owing to its proximity to the word رؤس (heads), but really it is governed not by the preposition با but by the verb اغسلوا. In fact, the word ارجل (feet) has been put after رؤس (heads) to point out the order which is to be observed in the performance of ablution. The authentic sayings of the Holy Prophet also make it clear that in performing an ablution the feet should be washed and not merely wiped. These sayings are also supported by the practice of the Holy Prophet.

There are, however, cases when the feet are not to be washed but simply "wiped" like the heads, e.g., when one is wearing socks or stockings. So it may be that the common reading arjula (in the accusative case) applies to the general rule of "washing" the feet when performing وضوء (ablution), while the exceptional reading arjuli (in the genitive case) applies to the exceptional cases when the feet are to be "wiped" like the head.

The words, you have touched women, embody a chaste and graceful expression and mean "you have had sexual intercourse with them".

The sense of the verse may be summed up as follows: (1) Before offering his Prayers, a Muslim should perform the prescribed ablution, i.e.washing of the face and the hands, wiping of the head, and washing of the feet. (2) If a man is جنب (unclean), i.e. he has had sexual intercourse with his wife or, for that matter, has had a nocturnal discharge, he should have a complete bath in order to purify himself for Prayers. (3) If, however, a man is sick and the process of ablution or bathing is likely to do him harm, or if he is on a journey and cannot find water, then even after answering the call of nature or becoming "unclean" by having sexual intercourse with his wife, he is allowed to forego the process of ablution or bathing and to perform instead the تیمم with pure dust. See also 4:44.

5:111.

Commentary:

The verse is considered by some commentators to refer to an incident which took place when the Holy Prophet was returning from Tabuk. It is said that on this occasion six hypocrites lay in ambush to kill him, but God saved him by disclosing the plot to him. The verse may, however, not necessarily be applied to any particular incident. It may be taken to refer generally to the protection which God vouchsafed to Muslims from the aggressive attacks of their enemies. By "a people" is here primarily meant the disbelievers of Mecca, who spared no pains to extirpate Islam and the Muslims, but the word is also general in its application.

Commentary:

In this verse the words, the man who steals, have been put before the words, the woman who steals, because stealing is more common among men than among women, while in 24:3 the word fornicatress precedes the word fornicator because the guilt of fornication is generally more easily proved against women than against men. This arrangement of words shows that there exists not only an intelligent order in the verses of the Quran, as shown elsewhere, but also an intelligent order in its words as well.

The punishment prescribed for a thief in this verse may appear to be too severe in the sight of those who are swayed by false sentiments. But the experience of the world shows that punishment, if it is to be deterrent, should be severe and exemplary. It is better to be severe to one and save a thousand than to be indulgent to all and ruin many. The God of Islam would not make Muslims spoilt children. When Islam was in power, there were very few cases of the cutting-off of the hands of thieves for the obvious reason that in view of the deterrent punishment prescribed by Islam there were very few cases of theft. Nowadays, however, when false sentiment prevails, thieves are given a light punishment, with the result that cases of theft are appallingly on the increase. He is certainly not a good surgeon who hesitates to amputate a rotten limb and thereby destroys the whole body.

As for the definition of the word ید (hand) ‘Ali, Son-in-law and Fourth Successor of the Holy Prophet, holds that only the fingers of a thief are to be cut off (Ma‘ani, vol. ii, p. 304); while most scholars are of the view that the hand is to be cut off at the wrist.

Theologians differ as to the least amount of money or property stolen for which the prescribed punishment is to be inflicted. Imam Abu Hanifah held it to be ten dirhams, while Imam Malik and Imam Shafi‘i considered three dirhams or a quarter of a dinar to be the least amount, dirham and dinar being old silver and gold coins respectively. Both the above views are based on different interpretations of the sayings of the Holy Prophet.

A dirham or a drachm (dram) is believed to be one-sixteenth part of an oz. in avoirdupois weight or one-eighth part of an ounce in apothecaries weight, while a dinar is equal to 71 and a half barley-corns (Lane and New Standard Dictionary).

59:20.

Important Words:

المنافقون (the hypocrites) is derived from نافق which is derived from نفق. They say نفق الشیء i.e. the thing became diminished; or it became spent up and perished. نفقت السلعة means, the merchandise was in much demand. نفقت السوق means, the market became brisk, its goods selling quickly. نفق الرجل means, the man expired. نفق الیربوع means, the rat came out of its hole in the earth. انفق ماله mean, he spent freely and constantly so as to reduce or exhaust his wealth. نافق فی المحبة means, he acted hypocritically in respect of love. نافق الرجل فی الدین means, the man concealed disbelief in the heart and expressed belief with his tongue. نافق الیربوع means, the rat known as yarbu‘ betook itself to its hole. النافقاء means, a hole in the earth having two open ends which the rat enters concealing one end and leaving the other exposed, so that in time of danger it may avail itself of the concealed end and escape through it. النفق means, a hole or passage through earth leading up to some place through an opening at the other end. النفاق means, entering faith through one door and leaving it through another; acting hypocritically. المنافق means, one who conceals disbelief in his heart and expresses belief with his tongue; a hypocrite (Aqrab, Taj & Mufradat). Though hypocrites have been mentioned in the Quran as early as in 2:9, the word منافق(hypocrite) has been first used in 4:62.

نسیھم (He has neglected them). نسیان generally meaning "forgetfulness", does not always signify the act of forgetting. Truly speaking, نسیان means, one’s ceasing to think of a person or a thing either owing to loss of memory or owing to negligence. The Quran says لا تنسوا الفضل بینکم i.e. do not cease (lit. do not forget) to do good to one another. In fact, when the word نسیان is used about God, it never means "forgetting" but simply cutting off connection by way of punishment or ceasing to think of a person with feelings of love and affection (Mufradat).

Commentary:

This verse mentions some of the signs by which hypocrites can be distinguished from true believers. These signs are: (1) that the hypocrites form a sort of inner society among themselves, shunning true believers and being inter-connected with one another; (2) that they enjoin evil; (3) that they forbid good; (4) that they do not spend in the cause of God, keeping their hands closed; (5) that they neglect Allah and His commandments; (6) that, as a consequence, God too neglects them and they do not enjoy Divine help in their works; and (7) that they are disobedient to God, always seeking to evade His behests.

20:72; 26:50.

Commentary:

Although crucifixion meant painful death, the punishment of cutting off the hands and feet was added to make the infliction all the more exemplary and death all the more painful. Incidentally, the verse shows that even as early as the time of Moses the punishment of death by crucifixion was in vogue.

51:28-29.

Important Words:

لوط (Lot) may etymologically be taken to have been derived from لاط. They sayلاط الشیء i.e. he concealed the thing. لاط بهmeans, it (the thing) stuck or adhered to it. لوطه بالطیب (lawwata-hu) means, he smeared him or it with much perfume. The Prophet Lot, who was the contemporary of Prophet Abraham, was the ancestor of the Palestinian peoples, Moab and Ammon. As the son of Haran and the grandson of Terah, he was Abraham’s nephew. He joined Abraham in the land of Canaan and in the time of famine went with him to Egypt. He preached to the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah but they refused to listen to him and ridiculed and persecuted him; and though Abraham, to whom Lot was a junior and subordinate Prophet prayed for these wicked people and interceded with God on their behalf, they were destroyed on account of their iniquities and transgression (Lane, Enc. Bri. & Jew. Enc.).

Commentary:

Abraham at first took the "messengers" to be ordinary way-farers, but when they refrained from eating of the roasted calf he had placed before them (see the preceding verse), he realized that they were on some special mission which he had failed to understand. He knew that as ordinary wayfarers they could not refuse his hospitality, for wayfarers in that arid land entirely depended on the hospitality of the inhabitants for their food.

The words, conceived a fear of them, do not mean that Abraham was afraid of the strangers but that, when they did not partake of the food, he feared that he might have done something against the etiquette of hospitality and thus had displeased them. He did not, however, express his fear, for such an expression would have implied that he perhaps took them to be mean and greedy. The guests, it appears, read Abraham’s perturbed state of mind from the uneasy expression of his face, so they at once removed his anxiety by telling him that they were in no way displeased and that the reason why they did not partake of food was that their dreadful mission had made them disinclined to eat.

This answer of the visitors also shows that they were not angels; for had they been angels, they would have said that being not human they could not partake of the food.

12:51.

12:52.

Important Words:

متکا (repast) is derived from وکأ. They say, واکأعلی یدیه i.e. he leaned upon his hands or arms. اوکأه means, he set up for him a thing upon which to recline. اتکأ means, he sat leaning upon one of his sides; he leaned or rested his back or his side against a thing; he leaned or reclined upon a thing; he reclined upon a cushion. They say اتکأنا عند فلان i.e. we ate a repast with such a one. متکأ means, a place in which one reclines: a chamber or sitting room; that upon which one leans or reclines in eating, drinking or talking; food or repast, so called because high people used to recline when they sat to eat (Lane & Aqrab).

حاش لله (Allah be glorified). حاش is derived from حشی which means, he breathed short or he panted for breath or was out of breath. حاشاه منھم means, he set him aside as excluded from the description of the company or party; he excluded him from them, i.e. made an exception in regard to him. حاش لك means, far art thou from being included among those of whom I speak. حاش لله means, I ascribe unto God remoteness from every imperfection or freedom therefrom; generally implying wonder or admiration. The expression may be rendered as "How far or how free is God from every imperfection!" It is also used in the sense of معاذ الله i.e. I seek protection by God (Lane).

Commentary:

The verse purports to say that when Potiphar’s wife heard of what the women in the city were saying about her infatuation for Joseph, she thought they really believed her to be guilty though outwardly they talked in such a manner as to show that they sought to exculpate her. So in order to remove their suspicions, she invited them to a feast. Tables were laid and a knife was provided for each of them. When all the guests were assembled, she asked Joseph to come out and serve them, but hardly had they cast a glance over his face when his innocent look and angelic appearance made them convinced of the purity of his conduct and all their suspicions so far as Joseph was concerned were dissipated.

The expression, cut their hands, may mean that when the women looked at Joseph, they were so struck with his saintly appearance that in a state of forgetfulness some of them happened to cut their hands with the knives they had. Or the sentence may be taken as figuratively expressing their wonder and amazement. The Arabic expression عض الانامل (biting the finger ends) is also used to express surprise, and, as sometimes the whole is used for a part, therefore the word "hands" may be said to have been here used for "finger-ends." According to the Talmud, oranges were served to the guests and the women inadvertently cut their hands owing to their being engrossed in looking at Joseph (Jew. Enc. & Talmud).

Incidentally, the verse shows that the word "angel" can also be used for a righteous and holy man. The verse also throws interesting light on the social customs of those days—the laying of cushioned seats and the use of knives, etc.

12:32.

Commentary:

When the King saw that the wise men of his court had failed to interpret his dream and that Joseph had not only interpreted it rightly but had also suggested a remedy for the impending affliction, and when he learnt from his butler that Joseph’s previous interpretation of two dreams had also turned out to be true, he realized that Joseph was no ordinary man and desired to release him from the prison forthwith. But Joseph refused to be released until a full inquiry was made into his case and he was proved to be innocent of the charge laid against him. His object in demanding an inquiry seems to be twofold: firstly, that the King might know that he was innocent so that on no future occasion might his mind be poisoned against him by evilly-disposed persons on the basis of the alleged cause of his imprisonment; secondly, that Potiphar, his benefactor, might not remain under the impression that he had proved faithless to him.

The Holy Prophet is reported to have once said that if he had remained in prison for so long a time as Joseph did and, like Joseph, had received the orders of his release, he would at once have left the prison (Bukhari & Muslim). This readiness of the Holy Prophet to leave the prison in contrast to the hesitancy of Joseph to do so shows the former to be spiritually superior to the latter. It is true that the vindication of one’s honour is an act of virtue, but to welcome the opportunity for discharging one’s duties as a Prophet of God, as the Holy Prophet’s reported readiness implied, leaving one’s honour to take care of itself, is certainly an act of much higher spiritual eminence.

The words, how fare the women who cut their hands, spoken by Joseph show that the incident of the cutting by the women of their hands did actually take place; otherwise Joseph could not have referred to it in these words. Either the women, while absorbed in conversation, had inadvertently cut their hands, or they might have declared that, by bringing a false accusation against Joseph, they had cut their own hands i.e. had landed themselves in a false position. If these words had only expressed the women’s state of mind and nothing actual had happened, Joseph could not have referred to "the cutting of the hands."