شَيْـًٔا

2:124, 256; 19:88; 20:110; 21:29; 34:24; 39:45; 43:87; 53:27; 74:49.

Important Words:

تجزی (shall serve as a substitute) is derived from جزی which means, he or it sufficed; he rendered satisfaction; he paid; he requited or recompensed. The expression جزی ھذا من ھذا or جزی ھذا عن ھذا means, this stood in the place of that, or this served as a substitute for that (Lane & Aqrab).

شفاعة (intercession) is derived from شفع which means, he provided a thing, which was alone, with another, or he joined up a single thing with another, so as to make it one of a pair or couple. The Arabs say کان وترا فشفعته i.e. it was a single thing and I joined to it another and made it one of a couple. According to Ar-Raghib الشفع signifies the adjoining a thing to its like; thus the word has the significance of likeness or similarity also. Then the verb شفع has come to mean, he interceded, because the person who intercedes for another attaches, or, as it were, joins or links up the latter to himself and thus uses his influence in his favour. Thus شفع لفلان اوفی فلان الی الامیر means, he interceded for such a person with the prince; he requested or prayed the prince to help or show favour to such a person on the ground that he was attached to him as a relation or friend or follower, etc. شفاعة therefore means, interceding or praying for a person to the effect that he may be shown favour or that his sins may be passed over, on the ground that he is connected with the intercessor or is like or similar to him, it being also implied that the petitioner is a person of higher position than the one for whom he pleads and is also connected with him with whom he intercedes, (Aqrab, Mufradat, Lane & Lisan).

عدل (ransom) means: (1) equity or justice (2) equal compensation; (3) fair and equitable ransom (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The verse is important. God addresses the Israelites, who claimed to be the progeny of the Prophets, saying that though it was a fact that they were descended from holy personages and He had shown special favour to them inasmuch as He had exalted them above other peoples of the age, yet as they repeatedly broke His covenant and had begun to lead wicked lives and had finally rejected the Promised Prophet, who had made his appearance in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the Bible, they no longer deserved His blessings, but had, on the contrary, become the object of His wrath and must be prepared to render an account of their deeds. The verse under comment calls upon the Jews to prepare themselves for the Day of Retribution when they would stand alone before God and there would be none to intercede for them or help them in any other way. The fact that they were descendants of holy persons would be of no avail, nor would any substitute or ransom be accepted from them. It would indeed be a dreadful day for those who reject God’s Messengers; for on that day nothing but one’s own deeds would count.

As a criminal can count on four possible means of securing his release, God has mentioned all those means and has made it clear that none of them will avail him on the Day of Reckoning. The first idea that comes to the mind of a culprit is to prove that the offence alleged to have been committed by him was legally not committed by him at all. It was either committed by somebody else or, if it was in fact committed by him, it was committed at the instigation of another person, or another person undertook to shoulder his burden. Thus the culprit tries to secure his release by throwing the blame or the responsibility on somebody else. In view of this plea, the Quran says that (on the Day of Judgement) no soul shall serve as a substitute for another soul. If a person is really sinful, the blame will surely lie on his own head and will, by no means, be shifted to another person. Everyone will bear his own cross and there will be no atonement in the sense of one man serving as a substitute for another.

The second possible way of escape when a criminal fails to shift the responsibility to another person, is for him either to try to secure the intercession of an influential person in his favour or to enter a plea that he is related to some big personality and hence is entitled to special treatment. In reply to this, the Quran says, nor shall intercession be accepted for it. As explained above, the word شفاعة here has a twofold significance: (a) that no influential person shall be allowed to intercede for a culprit; and (b) that no culprit shall himself be allowed to put in the plea that he is related to an influential person.

The third possible means of release is for the culprit to try to secure his freedom by paying a ransom. With regard to this the Quran says, nor shall ransom be taken from it.

Finally, when a criminal sees that all other means of escape have failed, he thinks of using force and getting his release by violence. With regard to this, the Quran says: nor shall they be helped, i.e. they shall find no helpers against God.

The Quran mentions these things not by way of threat but to make the Jews realize that they should not entertain false hopes. The only way open to them was to accept the Holy Prophet whom God had raised for their own good.

Here arises a very important question. What is the teaching of Islam about شفاعة (intercession)? Does Islam hold it to be quite useless and unlawful, as would appear from the verse under comment, or does it hold certain forms of شفاعة to be useful and lawful and others to be useless and unlawful? From the teachings of the Quran and the Hadith it appears that the latter view is correct and we proceed to discuss it accordingly. It should be stated at once that the word "intercession" is a very imperfect rendering of the word شفاعة. It conveys only a part of the meaning of شفاعة and that too very imperfectly.

As explained under Important Words, the root meaning of the word شفاعة is to attach or connect or join a thing, or, for that matter, to connect or join oneself with another thing or person so as to form a pair or a couple on the basis of similarity. The Quran uses the different derivations of this word in no less than 29 different places and in all of them the root meaning of the word is retained in one form or another. The word is used in the sense of "intercession" because the person who intercedes for somebody must have a twofold connection:

Firstly, he must have a special connection with the being or person with whom he wishes to intercede, for without such connection none dare intercede nor can intercession be fruitful.

Secondly, he must also have a special connection with the person for whom he intercedes, because none can think of interceding for a person unless he is specially connected with the latter and is akin or similar to him.

In religious terminology شفاعة means intercession with God by a holy man for a sinful person. Here too the twofold connection referred to above is essential. The holy person who intercedes with God must have a special connection with Him, enjoying His special favour and being very near and dear to Him. On the other hand, he should also have real connection with the person on whose behalf he wishes to intercede; for without such connection he cannot be properly moved to intercede nor can his intercession carry much weight with God. In fact, the intercessor, on the essential basis of the aforementioned double connection, approaches God saying, as it were, "My God, I come to Thee with a special request, knowing that Thou art well pleased with me and that I enjoy Thy special favour. Here is an erring man who is sincerely connected with me but in moments of weakness he has stumbled and faltered. But as Thou art kind and good to me, O Lord, be Thou kind also to this sinful servant of Thine and pardon him his sins". This is what may be termed the essence of شفاعة as taught and, held lawful, by Islam.

From the above significance of the word it is apparent that true شفاعة is governed by the following conditions:

(1) He who intercedes must be very near and dear to God enjoying His special favour.

(2) The person for whom he wishes to intercede must have a true and real connection with him.

(3) The person in whose favour intercession is to be made must be a good person overall, only casually tempted to sin in moments of weakness; for it cannot be entertained for a moment that a habitually wicked one can enjoy a true connection with a holy person.

(4) Intercession must always be made with God’s permission; for it is God alone Who knows (a) whether a so-called holy person really stands near and dear to Him, and (b) whether the person for whom intercession is being made is truly and sincerely connected with the holy man making the intercession, for there is many a connection which looks sound and genuine from outside but is rotten from within.

(5) Each and every intercession is not necessarily lawful or fruitful. Only that intercession is lawful which fulfils all the requisite conditions.

The above view finds clear corroboration in the Islamic teachings. For instance, the Quran says: And fear the day when no soul shall serve as a substitute for another soul at all, nor shall any ransom be accepted from it, nor any شفاعة(intercession) avail it, nor shall they be helped (2:124). This verse is addressed to the Jews and signifies that, as they have rejected the Holy Prophet and thus failed to form the most important of spiritual connections, therefore no other connection or intercession will avail them on the Day of Judgement. This makes it clear that شفاعة can avail only those who accept the Messenger of the day. It cannot avail those who, by rejecting a Messenger of God, rebel against divine authority. As such people fail to form the connection that they are called upon to form, no question of شفاعة arises.

Again the Quran says: On the Day of Judgement شفاعة (intercession) shall not avail any person except him for whom God grants permission and with whose word (i.e. with whose expression of faith) He is pleased (20:110). This verse throws light on three very important points:

(a) That if, on the one hand, there are some whom شفاعة (intercession) will not avail, on the other hand, there are others whom it will certainly avail.

(b) But it will avail only those for whom God grants special permission.

(c) That such permission will be granted only in the case of those sinners whose faith at least is sound, i.e. their ایمان(faith) is true and well-founded; only in اعمال (practice) they sometimes show weakness.

At another place the Quran says: Who is he that will intercede with God except by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them; and they encompass nothing of His knowledge except what He pleases (2:256). This verse supplies the reason for the principle adduced in the verse quoted above. God’s permission is necessary because His knowledge alone is perfect and it is only He Who knows whether the twofold connection essential for شفاعةreally exists, i.e. (1) whether the holy person wishing to intercede really enjoys the special relation with God required for such intercession and, (2) whether the person for whom he wishes to intercede is truly and sincerely connected with him.

To illustrate the above point, we may well quote an incident in Noah’s life. At the time of the great Deluge, he saw that his son had been caught by the surging waves and was going to be drowned. Thereupon he turned to God, saying that the drowning boy was one of his family whom God had promised to save. Upon this God sharply reprimanded him, saying, He is surely not of thy family; he is indeed a man of unrighteous conduct. So ask not of Me that of which thou hast no knowledge. I advise thee lest thou become one of the ignorant (11:47). This verse beautifully illustrates the philosophy of شفاعة. In a moment of great uneasiness of mind Noah interceded for his son with God but forgot to ask for His permission, whereupon God reminded him that though the boy was his son in the physical sense, he was not one in the true spiritual sense and was therefore not entitled to شفاعة which has its basis in spiritual kinship.

Having briefly explained the nature and conditions of شفاعة, we now come to the question: How many forms of شفاعة are there? A study of the relevant Quranic verses and of the attendant facts reveals that شفاعة is of three kinds:

(1) Firstly, there is the verbal شفاعة which has been interpreted as "intercession". In this form of شفاعة a holy person actually prays to God on the basis of his special connection with Him that a sinful person who is truly connected with him may be granted forgiveness or that, for that matter, a person suffering from some disease or misfortune may be restored to health or saved from the attending misfortune. In this case "intercession" is really a form of prayer but it makes a stronger appeal and is much more efficacious. For, whereas a prayer is simply a request made to God, شفاعة(intercession) is a prayer reinforced by the twofold connection referred to above. The شفیع (intercessor) appeals to God in a special way because (a) he enjoys God’s special favour, and (b) the person for whom he intercedes is truly and sincerely connected with him. This twofold connection gives intercession a strength that is lacking in an ordinary prayer. The intercessor, so to speak, says to God "My God, if Thou holdest me dear, then be Thou kind also to this sufferer who is dear to me." Such a prayer, if offered with God’s permission, most forcefully moves the mercy of God and is sure of acceptance.

(2) Secondly, there is the form of شفاعة which, though verbal, yet is offered not in the form of a prayer but merely as a simple statement expressive of the relation between the intercessor and the person for whom he intercedes. Sometimes, it happens that through fear of God or through modesty the intercessor does not make an intercession in the form of a direct request or prayer but simply expresses the relation existing between him and the person for whom he wishes to intercede, leaving the conclusion to be drawn by God Himself. A case in point is that of Noah’s intercession for his son referred to above. Noah did not actually pray for his son but simply drew God’s attention to their relationship: My Lord, verily my son is of my family and surely Thy promise is true (11:46). These are Noah’s words. It is a clear case of شفاعةalthough the actual form of prayer is wanting.

(3) Thirdly, there is the شفاعة which is neither made in the form of a prayer nor expressed in words. It simply consists in the practical existence of the twofold relation necessary for شفاعة. In fact, in this case the relationship itself is spoken of as شفاعة. For instance, the Quran speaks of the Jews saying لا تنفعھا شفاعة i.e. on the Day of Judgement no شفاعة shall avail them (2:124). Here شفاعة is used simply in the sense of connection. God means to say that as the Jews have refused to connect themselves with the Holy Prophet of Islam, therefore no other connection will avail them. Their being counted among the followers of Abraham or Moses or David, etc., will be of no avail to them. In this sense a Prophet of God is a شفیع or intercessor for all his true followers without distinction. Everybody who establishes a true connection with him is saved while others perish. In this sense God also is a شفیع for those who connect themselves with Him are saved, while others who remain disconnected are ruined.

Now the question arises, Why has God instituted شفاعة at all? The answer is as follows:

Firstly, شفاعة in the sense of good association is the very essence of spirituality. All spiritual progress depends on a good spiritual contact. A soul not in contact with God is lost and, for that matter, a soul not in contact with the Prophet of the day, who represents God on earth, is also lost. The Quran says, he who forms a good connection will reap the benefit thereof and he who forms an evil connection will suffer the loss attached thereto (4:86). Thus the need and the usefulness of شفاعة in the sense of a good connection is self-evident and one need not say much about it. But when we come to شفاعة in the sense of intercession, an explanation seems called for. When all depends on true belief and right actions, why should the necessity of intercession arise at all? Even a cursory thought leads to the conviction that this question, which has misled many, arises from the misleading conception of the word "intercession" as ordinarily understood. Unprincipled men go about interceding for criminals with unprincipled judges, thus thwarting the very ends of justice. Islamic شفاعة is far from this. It is not a mere intercession but is an adjunct of the principle of true belief and right actions. According to Islam only that person is entitled to شفاعة who is sincerely connected with the Prophet of the day, is true in faith and earnestly tries to live a righteous life according to the teachings of Islam. But, being weak, he sometimes stumbles. There is nothing inherently wrong with his connection with the Prophet, which is pure and true; only an occasional stumbling in practice makes him fall short of the prescribed standard. God entitles such a one to شفاعة and that also by His special permission; and when the Knower of all things considers one to be deserving of forgiveness, who is there to object that the case is not deserving? The Islamic شفاعة is, in fact, only another form of repentance. For what is توبة (repentance) but reforming a broken connection or tightening up a loose one? But whereas the door of repentance is closed with death, the door of شفاعة remains open. Moreover, شفاعة is a means of the manifestation of God’s mercy and God says رحمتی سبقت غضبی i.e. "My mercy is stronger than My anger" (Bukhari). Thus شفاعة (intercession) is based on the manifestation of God’s mercy; and as God is not judge but مالك (Master), there is nothing to stop Him from ex­tending His mercy to whomsoever He pleases.

Yet another reason why شفاعة has been allowed by Islam is that by this means God honours His Prophets. It is indeed a great honour that He should allow a person to intercede with Him.

It has been objected by some Christian critics of Islam that the doctrine of شفاعة is likely to encourage people to commit sins. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The شفاعة as allowed by Islam should encourage people to strengthen their connection with the Prophet rather than weaken it. As sin is nothing but a product of weakness in the spiritual connection, شفاعة and sin really stand poles apart and it is sheer ignorance to suggest that the doctrine of شفاعة, whose very conception rests on the soundness of man’s connection with God and His Prophet, encourages one to sin. On the contrary, it is the Christian doctrine of Atonement which throws open the floodgates of sin; for, unlike Islamic شفاعة the doctrine of Atonement is based on the un­natural conception that one man can bear the sins of another. But of this, more will be explained later when we come to the relevant verses.

Now we come to the last question in this connection, i.e. who will be شفیع (intercessor) on the Day of Judgement? This question has given rise to much controversy and consequently much misunderstanding. Let it be said up front that Islam does not confine شفاعة (intercession) to one person only; for, according to the Islamic conception of شفاعة every holy person whose connection can materially influence the spiritual condition of a man is virtually a شفیع for him. All Prophets are therefore شفیع but they are شفیع only in their own respective spheres. Abraham is a شفیع for those who followed him and Moses is a شفیع for those who followed him and so on. But with the advent of the Holy Prophet of Islam, all other connections have come to an end; for the message of the Holy Prophet is for all time and all mankind. Even the present-day followers of Moses or Jesus cannot turn to these Prophets for شفاعة, because spiritually they are now under the regime of the Holy Prophet of Islam, the regimes of the previous Prophets having come to an end. As a matter of fact, as explained by the Quran itself, the real شفیع is God alone. Says the Quran: There is no helper nor شفیع (intercessor) for you except Allah; will you not then ponder? (32:5) Now as God alone is the real شفیع i.e. He is the One connection with Whom really matters, the Prophets of God become شفیع in a secondary way only. Whosoever among the Prophets represents God on earth at a particular time and in a particular place becomes a شفیعfor the people of that time and that place. From this it follows that the Prophets of God who passed before Islam were شفیع for their own followers and in their own time only; with the advent of Islam the period of their شفاعة came to an end. Now the Prophet of Islam is the only شفیع for all times and all peoples. Being a perfect image of God he is (1) the perfect شفیع and, having a universal mission he is (2) the universal شفیع; and having cancelled all previous connections he is now (3) the only شفیع (peace and blessings of God be on him). For proof of the fact that the Holy Prophet has himself put forward the above claim, the reader is referred to a hadith where the aforesaid distinction of the Prophet on the Day of Judgement is most vividly set forth (Muslim ch. on Iman).

See 2:49.

See 2:49.

Commentary:

This verse appears to deal with the same subject which has already been dealt with in 2:49; but on comparing the two, an interesting point of difference emerges. In the former verse the word شفاعة (intercession) is put before the word عدل (ransom), whereas in the present one the order has been reversed. The reason for this change is that, in his endeavour to save himself, it is natural for man to adopt a course which is least expensive and entails minimum amount of hardship. Failing this, he tries to adopt other measures. In other words, man has recourse to offer a ransom only when he finds that he cannot gain his release without offering it. In verse 2:49 this natural order is maintained and intercession is put before ransom. But after that verse, many transgressions of the Israelites have been brought to light, especially their opposition to the Prophets, so now they could not rely much on intercession, and naturally felt constrained to think of offering a ransom first. Hence, the order observed in the former verse has been reversed in the latter. For a discussion of the subject of شفاعة etc. see note on 2:49 above.

5:105; 10:79; 21:53, 54; 31:22.

Commentary:

It is indeed strange, but nevertheless a hard fact, that in matters of religion which so deeply concern man, he is often content to follow blindly the footsteps of his forefathers and does not even care to satisfy himself that his forefathers were wise and well-guided people. On the other hand, in worldly matters where only the interests of this life are at stake, and that too partially, he often takes meticulous care to see that he adopts the right course and does not blindly follow others.

8:6.

Important Words:

کرہ (repugnant) is the noun-infinitive from کرہ i.e. he disliked. کرہ means, a thing which is disliked; a thing which one is required to do against his wish or liking (Aqrab).

Commentary:

In 2:215, God warned Muslims that in order to reach the promised goal they must pass through an ordeal of poverty, affliction and violent shaking. In conformity with the ordeal of poverty, verse 2:216 called upon them to be prepared to make great monetary sacrifices. Now in the verse under comment, God refers to the ordeal of affliction and violent shakings by drawing the attention of the Faithful to the menace of war surrounding them. As, however, Muslims were averse to war, the verse also enjoins them to put implicit trust in the guidance of Allah: for, it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you.

But the aversion of the Holy Prophet’s Companions from war was not due to cowardice. They did not dislike war because they thought that they were few in number or because they were not properly equipped. History gives the direct lie to all such insinuations. Muslims hated war, because they did not like to shed human blood; also because they thought that a peaceful atmosphere was more conducive to the propagation of Islam than a state of war, for the obvious reason that atmosphere of peace gave disbelievers more opportunities for dispassionate consideration of the noble teachings of Islam.

But it was too late. The leaders of the disbelievers had gone too far in their evil designs against Islam and were bent upon extirpating the New Faith. It was evidently a war of self-defence, and he who shirks a war of self-defence, commits an act of suicide (22:40, 41). Thus the verse constitutes an eloquent testimony to the love of peace of the Holy Prophet’sCompanions and a convincing repudiation of the mischievous accusation that it was for the sake of booty or for spreading their faith by force that the early Muslims resorted to arms.

The clause, it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you and it may be that you like a thing while it is bad for you, points to a very important principle, i.e. that errors of judgement mostly result from two causes: (1) abuse of the sentiment of love; and (2) abuse of the sentiment of dislike or hatred. One should, therefore, be particularly careful about one’s judgement when one is swayed by either of these two sentiments. They undermine dispassionate thinking as nothing else does. Elsewhere the Quran gives a still clearer warning to Muslims to beware of the abuse of the sentiment of love and hatred (64:15, 16 & 5:9).

See 2:228.

2:232; 4:130; 65:3.

Important Words:

امساك (retain) is derived from امسك which is again derived from مسك. They say امسك به i.e. he stuck to it. امسك is both transitive and intransitive. امسكه means, he got hold of it and stopped and retained it. امسك عن الکلام means, he abstained from talking. امساك means, (1) to hold or stop or prevent or retain; (2) to refrain or abstain (Aqrab).

تسریح (send away) is the noun-infinitive from سرح (sarraha) which is derived from سرح. They say سرح المواشی i.e. the cattle went forth for grazing. سرح السیل means, the flood moved on leisurely. سرحه means, he sent him away. سرح فلان زوجته means, he sent away or divorced his wife (Aqrab).

حدود (limits) is the plural of حد i.e. a limit. حده means, he put a limit to it. حد الشیء عن الشیء means, he distinguished one thing from the other. الحد means, (1) the limit or the line where two things meet; (2) last limit or extremity of a thing; (3) that by which a thing may be defined; (4) prescribed punishment for an offence. حدود الله means God’s religious commandments (Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks permanent and irrevocable separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate طھر i.e. period of purity, when the woman is clean and the man has not gone in unto her during that period of purity. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as the verse hints in the word مرتان (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time, and said: "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?"

After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘iddah, i.e. the period of waiting, with or without her consent; but after the period of waiting is over, he can take her back only with her consent and that after remarrying her. After the pronouncement of the third divorce, however, the husband forfeits this right and the couple are finally separated. A Companion of the Holy Prophet once asked him saying, "The Quran has here spoken of two divorces only, whence comes in the third!" The Prophet referred him to the Quranic words اوتسریح باحسان i.e. or send them away with kindness meaning thereby that after the pronouncement of the first two divorces the husband was free to retain his wife if he so desired but if he wanted irrevocable separation, he should "send her away", i.e. divorce her a third time (Jarir & Musnad). The point is further made clear in the succeeding verse. Thus the word تسریح here signifies طلاق i.e. divorce.

The present verse also makes it clear that when a person divorces his wife, he forfeits مھر i.e. the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower-money agreed on by the parties, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents as the clause it is not lawful for you that you take anything of what you have given them indicates.

If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as خلع (Khul‘a lit. the putting off of clothes etc., or the shedding of old leaves), she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the word خفتم (you fear), which has been put in the plural number, hints. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed on by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khul‘a by women. She demanded separation from her husband, Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different, she could not get on with him. She was granted Kkul‘a by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari). This right, however, is not to be exercised in a light-hearted manner. The Holy Prophet has condemned the action of a woman who demands separation from her husband without valid reason even as he has condemned the action of a man who divorces his wife without genuine cause. He is reported to have said, "A woman who seeks separation from her husband without a legitimate cause shall be deprived of the fragrance of heaven" (Dawud & Tirmidhi). This is what is hinted in the concluding words, these are the limits prescribed by Allah, so transgress them not, etc. The husband and the wife are both warned to fear God and refrain from transgressing the limits imposed by God for their own good.

96:5.

4:30.

Important Words:

ولیه (someone who can watch his interest). ولی means, friend; helper; guardian of one’s affairs; he who protects or watches one’s interests (Aqrab). See also 2:108.

Commentary:

As the preceding verses prohibit interest and enjoin that only the original sum taken as a loan be returned to the creditor, the Quran now fittingly turns to the subject of loans not carrying interest. The verse enjoins that all transactions regarding loans should be committed to writing. It is really amazing, and is indeed a wonderful testimony to its Divine origin, that the Quran, which was revealed about 1,350 years ago when the art of writing was yet in its infancy, should lay so much stress on writing down all transactions.

The verse should not be interpreted to signify that only such transactions should be committed to writing as have a fixed term for the paying back of a loan. The injunction is general and is meant to obviate or minimize disputes so as to leave no room for doubt as to whether any amount has really been lent and as to the amount of the money lent. The words, for a fixed period, have been added to emphasize the additional fact that whenever a loan is advanced, a term must be fixed.

The verse further enjoins that when a transaction is made on credit, the document drawn up should be written by a third person so that there may be little chance of fraud and neither of the parties may have a cause of complaint against the other, both standing on the same level.

The borrower, and not the lender, is to dictate because: (1) it is the borrower who incurs the liability, and justice demands that words defining the liability should not only be well known to, but also selected by him; (2) the document is to be deposited with the lender and not the borrower. So the borrower has been asked to dictate so that the fact of his having dictated may serve as a proof of the correctness of the amount and the condition about payment, and he may have no ground to deny it.The clause, he should not diminish anything therefrom, have been added because loans may be of different kinds. They may not always be in cash and may be for long terms and there may also be certain conditions attached to them. In such cases it sometimes happens that in drawing up documents, people resort to trickery and leave loopholes. So borrowers (who have to dictate) have been warned against such evil practices and have been enjoined to fear God and dictate with honesty and justice.

In the clause, and call two witnesses from among your men, the word "your" has been most wisely added to imply that the witnesses should not be strangers but should be known men residing in the same locality so that, if need arises, they may be easily summoned to give evidence. The words "such as you like", point to the fact that the witnesses, whether men or women, should be desirable persons and should enjoy the confidence of both parties.

The clause, and let no harm be done to the scribe or the witness, signifies that if the scribe is a professional man, he should be duly paid for his services; otherwise wrong would be done to him. Similarly, a person should not be compelled, so far as possible, to become a witness if it causes him loss of any kind. Again, the scribe or the witnesses should also be paid their travelling and other necessary expenses when they are summoned before a Qadi or judge. The words also hint that the witnesses and the scribe should not be forced or threatened or bribed or otherwise influenced to suppress the truth or tell a falsehood when called upon to give evidence.

3:117; 58:18; 92:12; 111:3.

Important Words:

لن تغنی (shall not avail) is derived from غنی i.e. he became free from want; or he was in a state of competence or sufficiency; or he became rich. اغناہ means, he made him free from want; or put him in a state of sufficiency or competence; or he made him rich. ما یغنی عنك ھذا means, this shall not suffice or satisfy thee; or shall not stand thee in good stead; or shall not avail or profit thee (Taj).

Commentary:

As these verses have particular reference to Christians, the word "disbelievers" occurring in this verse may apply to them. Thus the verse contains a great prophecy; for though at the time of its revelation Christians were not strong or numerous, yet the time was to come when they were destined to be so. Indeed, they became the wealthiest people in the whole world and their progeny has spread over entire continents. But that cannot protect them from God’s punishment. Their very wealth and number have become the cause of their destruction and, as predicted in the verse, they are now being punished with fire in the form of shots, shells and incendiary bombs. The verse may also refer to the Day of Judgement, spoken of in the preceding verse, when nothing shall avail the Christian nations against the punishment of God.

The verse may also apply to the infidels of Mecca, all of whose efforts against the Holy Prophet came to naught, whose wealth fell into Muslim hands and whose children joined the fold of Islam in large numbers. In this case "fire" would mean either the fire of Hell or the fire of war which they themselves had kindled against Islam but which finally proved their own ruin.

9:31.

Important Words:

اربابا (Lords) is the plural of رب (Lord) for which see 1:2. رب means, lord, master or owner; a chief or ruler to whom obedience is rendered; one who fosters, brings up, or nourishes (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these faiths become united in the doctrine of the Oneness of God, the verse permits the sacrifice of other Islamic teachings as being of comparatively little importance. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The Quran, the Hadith and the facts of history are all united in belying this ridiculous assumption. It is simply unthinkable that compromise in matters of faith could be allowed by any religion worth the name, particularly with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer contest to invoke the curse of God upon those who lie in their beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in the Oneness of God could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save Heraclius from God’s punishment. Elsewhere the Quran emphatically declares that, Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam, (i.e. complete submission); and whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the losers (3:20 & 86). Can anything be clearer?

The truth is that this verse is intended to suggest an easy and simple method by which Jews and Christians can arrive at a right decision regarding the truth of Islam. Christians, in spite of claiming belief in the Unity of Godhead, felt satisfied in believing in the divinity of Jesus; and Jews, notwithstanding their claim to be monotheists, gave blind allegiance to their priests and divines, practically placing them in the position of God Himself. The verse exhorts both these communities to come back to their original belief in the Oneness of God and give up the worship of false deities who stand in the way of their accepting Islam. Thus, instead of seeking a compromise with these faiths, the verse virtually invites Christians and Jews to the faith of Islam, by drawing their attention to the doctrine of the Oneness of God which being, at least in its outer form, the common fundamental doctrine of all, could serve as a meeting ground for further approach.

It was exactly on these lines that Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, in his "Message of Peace", made an offer to the Hindus of India to enter into an agreement with the Muslims of his way of thinking to the effect that they (Hindus) would respect and honour the Holy Prophet of Islam and would look upon him as a true Messenger of God, even as he and his followers believed in Rama and Krishna as God’s Elect.

Special emphasis has been laid in the verse under comment on the Oneness of God—a doctrine on which in theory all revealed religions seem to agree, but regarding the details, of which no two Faiths are found to concur. Most religions claim to be monotheistic; but under the outer veneer of monotheism, polytheism very often lies hidden in most hideous forms. It is the simple faith of Islam alone which is really and truly monotheistic in all its aspects and which strongly condemns the association with God of anything or any being in His person, attributes, worship or works. It is most unfortunate, however, that in spite of Islam being such a strictly monotheistic faith, a section of present-day Muslims has drifted away into the quagmire of what cannot but be termed idol-worship in the wider sense of the word.

Incidentally, it may be noted that the letter mentioned by Bukhari and other Muslim traditionists as having been addressed by the Holy Prophet to Heraclius in the words of this verse inviting him to accept Islam has recently been discovered and found to contain the exact words quoted by Bukhari (R. Rel. vol. V. No. 8). This furnishes a strong proof of the essential authenticity of Bukhari and, for that matter, of other accepted works of Hadith.

3:11; 58:18.

Commentary:

If disbelievers employ their wealth and their children in opposition to God, this shall not serve as protection against Divine punishment which must overtake them. But if they employ their wealth and their children in order to win the pleasure of God, this is sure ultimately to lead to their guidance. A Companion of the Holy Prophet is reported to have once said to him that in the Days of Ignorance, i.e. before he accepted Islam, he had given a hundred camels in charity and asked him whether that charity would bring him any reward. The Holy Prophet promptly replied, "Your acceptance of Islam is a result of the very charity you practised" (Bukhari, ch. on Zakah).

9:50.

Commentary:

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

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