مِّ

2:158; 31:6.

23:2; 28:68; 87:15; 91:10.

Important Words:

المفلحون (those who shall prosper) is derived from افلح i.e. he was successful and attained what he desired or sought. When we say افلح زید we mean, Zaid reaped the fruits of his labour and his endeavours proved successful (Aqrab). Thus مفلح is one who is successful and attains what he desires and reaps the fruits of his labour. The word is also used about one who acquires any substantial good, be it material or spiritual, the word فلاح being used for such success or gain as others may envy (Taj).

The word علی in the clause اولئك علی ھدی is significant. If the idea had been of simple guidance, the Quran could easily have used the words اولئك ھم المھتدون. But it leaves the common construction and uses the words علی ھدی which literally mean, they are on guidance or, in other words, they are mounted on guidance. Guidance becomes, as it were, a riding animal for them which they conveniently use in their march towards God. The construction is not peculiar to the Quran. The Arabs say of a person steeped in ignorance جعل الغوایة مركبا i.e. such a one has made error and ignorance a riding beast for himself (Kashshaf).

Commentary:

The verse explains that when a man has fulfilled all the conditions of تقوی (righteousness) in respect of both belief and actions, then he may be sure not only of being rightly guided but also of being a master of guidance whose success in this life as well as in the life to come is assured. The words علی ھدی (lit. on guidance) also hint that as the believer prayed for guidance in the opening chapter of the Quran, so guidance of the highest order has been provided for him—a guidance on which he can ride comfortably and speed on happily towards his Lord and Master.

6:40, 123; 24:41.

13:13; 24:44; 30:25.

Important Words:

او (or) is a conjunction signifying several meanings. Here it is used in the sense of "or". It does not, however, denote doubt but simply indicates the presentation of an alternative similitude.

صیب (heavy rain) is derived from صاب which means, it came down; it descended; or it poured forth. The word صیبmeans, clouds pouring down heavy rain; or heavy rain itself (Lane).

السماء (the clouds) is derived from سما i.e. he or it became high or towering. Thus السماء means, anything that hangs high over your head and covers you in its shade; the sky; any canopy, ceiling or roof; a cloud (Aqrab).

رعد (thunder). رعدالسحاب means, the cloud thundered. رعد لی فلان means, he threatened me. رعد therefore means, thunder of clouds; or thunder of war, etc. In the present verse it is used figuratively, meaning, weighty commands; or prophecies relating to coming disasters; or injunctions relating to war, etc.

البرق (lightning) is derived from برق i.e. it shone or gave out light. برق السماء means, the sky shone with lightning. برق الشیءmeans, the thing shone with light. البرق therefore means, lightning or gleaming in the clouds (Aqrab). In this verse it is used figuratively, meaning, victories in wars; or spoils of war; or clear signs of truth, etc.

الصواعق (thunderclaps) is the plural of الصاعقة (a thunderclap) which is derived from صعق (sa‘iqa) or صعق (sa‘aqa). They say صعقت السماء القوم i.e. the sky hit the people with lightning. صعق الرعد means, the thunder grew louder. صعق الرجل means, the man fell down in a swoon; he died; he lost the power of thinking owing to some great and sudden noise accompanying a calamity. الصاعقة means: (1) lightning that descends from the thundering clouds and burns what it smites; (2) any destructive calamity or punishment; (3) death and destruction; (4) noise or report accompanying a divine punishment like an earthquake, etc.; (5) swoon and unconsciousness (Aqrab & Lane).

الموت (death) is from مات i.e. he died (in various senses); he became as if dead; he slept. موت is the opposite of حیاة (life) and means death or lifelessness. Like life, death is also of several kinds: (1) Stoppage of the power of growth (50:12). (2) Deprivation of sensation or consciousness (19:24). (3) Depri-vation of the faculty of intellect and understanding (6:123). (4) To be, as though, dead with grief or sorrow or fear (14:18). (5) Spiritual death (3:170). (6) Sleep, which the Arabs call a light sort of death (Mufradat). (7) Stillness or motionlessness. (8) Being reduced to poverty. (9) Becoming worn out. (10) Becoming base, abject, vile and despicable. (11) Becoming destitute of cultivation or of inhabitants (Lane). According to Lisan موت (death) also signifies any painful condition such as poverty, humiliation, dotage, sinfulness, etc.

Commentary:

This verse refers to the second class of hypocrites, viz. those who, though not quite insincere in their belief, were yet weak in their faith and practice and became upset whenever there was a threat of attack by the enemy or whenever a situation arose demanding some sacrifice. These people feared the oppression of men more than the punishment of God, and tried to maintain good relations with disbelievers by secret correspondence and by supplying information about the believers. They consoled themselves with the thought that as Islam was a true religion from God, its victory was assured in spite of anything they might do, and hence it was not proper for them to expose themselves to unnecessary danger.

Islam has no place for such weaklings. It is a religion of action and sacrifice. That is why, in the very beginning of the Quran, such people have been plainly told that God reckons them among the hypocrites and will deal with them accordingly. Islam teaches us not to spare any sacrifice to win the pleasure of God and one who is not prepared for such a complete sacrifice will not deserve the reward promised to Islam and Muslims.

This and the preceding verses refer to two classes of hypocrites: (1) disbelievers who posed as Muslims, and (2) believers bad in faith and worse in works––with leanings towards disbelievers. This is proved by the following considerations: (a) In verse 18 it is said that the hypocrites kindled a fire, but in the present verse there is no mention of the hypocrites kindling a fire. On the contrary, mention is made of signs or trials coming from heaven; (b) In the first simile it was said that when the fire illuminated its surroundings, the hypocrites were bereft of their sight. In the second simile embodied in vv. 20 & 21 it is said that when there is light, the people take advantage of it and begin to move;(c) In the first simile it was said that the people referred to were not believers. They were deaf, dumb and blind. But in the second simile it is only said that if God willed He would make these people deaf and blind, implying that they were not so already but would become so, if they continued to pursue the course they had adopted; and (d) The men in the first simile were said to be plotting against Islam and Muslims, whereas those in the second simile are not spoken of as plotting against Muslims, but simply as leaving them alone in times of danger. All these facts indicate that these verses refer to two separate classes of hypocrites and this is why the word او (or) has been placed between the two verses. They are two separate classes and not the same class.

The purport of the present verse is that the condition of the latter class of hypocrites is like that of those timorous people who, at a mere shower of rain with thunder and lightning, become timid and fail to benefit from the rain. Similarly, the coming of Islam is accompanied by trials and hardships. The true believer knows that these too have a purpose and is not upset. The trials serve only to increase his zeal.

Objection is sometimes taken against Prophets on the ground that their advent produces disorder and disunion in the earth. The verse provides an answer to this objection by pointing out that just as rain, which gives life to the earth, is accompanied by darkness and thunder and a temporary screening of the sun, even so the trials which accompany the advent of Prophets only presage the dawning of a new era in even greater splendour and effulgence.

The word صاعقة (thunderclap) is spoken of in the verse as making the hypocrites fearful of death. The verse suggests that such a fear is unreasonable because the thunder-clap which makes these people afraid comes after the lightning has actually struck. To slip one’s fingers into one’s ears can therefore serve no purpose. A state of war already exists between believers and disbelievers and this must entail some suffering and hardship. It is of no use to the hypocrites to try to escape the implications and consequences of war.

The words, Allah encompasses the disbelievers, at the end of the verse point to the unreasonableness of the fear entertained by the hypocrites. Since God has already decreed the defeat and destruction of the disbelievers, the hypocrites need have no fear of any serious harm from them.

10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.

Important Words:

عبد (servant). For the root meaning of the word see note under 1:5. As explained there, the verb عبد means, he showed complete submissiveness and humility; or he received the imprint of a thing. So عبد would mean a person who, through complete submission and humility to God, has become, as it were, an image of God. The word has been used here about the Holy Prophet by way of endearment and is expressive of the exalted position he holds in the sight of God.

شھداء (helpers) is the plural of شھید which is derived from شھد i.e. he was present; or he gave witness, etc. Thus شھیدmeans, one who is present; one who sees or witnesses; one who gives testimony or evidence; one who possesses much knowledge; one from whose knowledge nothing is hidden (Aqrab & Lane); also a helper (Mufradat). Following the last mentioned signification the word may also refer here to the Jews who were friends of the disbelievers (5:81) and spoke of the idolaters as being better guided in religion than those who believe (4:52).

Commentary:

In the preceding two verses the Quran gave its first commandment to the people. Having been thus directly addressed by God, the polytheistic disbelievers felt a natural reaction to repudiate the monotheistic teaching of the Quran, because they felt that its acceptance meant that they should give up their long cherished beliefs.

In the present verse God says that if the Quran created doubts and disquietude in their minds and is not worthy of acceptance, the disbelievers should produce one like it. If they cannot, then this very fact would prove them to be wrong.

The subject of the incomparable excellence of the Quran, has been dealt with at five different places in the Quran, i.e. in 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89; & 52:34, 35, and disbelievers have been challenged, to produce its equal.

In two of these five verses (2:24 & 10:39) the challenge is identical, while in the remaining three verses three separate and different demands have been made from disbelievers. Thus, to begin with the largest demand in 17:89, disbelievers are challenged to produce the like of the whole Quran, and they have been told that even if all jinn and men should join together, they would not be able to produce it. In 11:14 the challenge is limited to the production of ten chapters. In 2:24 and 10:39, however, it has been confined to one Surah only; while in 52:34-35, the condition of even one Surahhas been omitted and disbelievers have been given the option of producing even a single narration similar to any one narration (i.e. announcement) of the Quran. On the face of it, this difference in the form of the challenge at different places seems to be incongruent and to spring from a lack of harmony in the Quran. Some commentators have endeavoured to explain away this seeming incongruity by saying that it was due to the challenge having been made at different times. At first disbelievers were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran. When they failed to do so, the challenge was whittled down to the production of the like of any ten chapters. When, however, they were unable to produce even ten chapters, the challenge was further reduced to the production of a single chapter; and, lastly, disbelievers were asked to produce even a single narration like any narration of the Quran. This explanation, however, does not seem to be satisfactory. The different Surahs containing these different challenges were revealed, in the following order: (1) 52:34, 35; (2) 17:89; (3) 11:14; (4) 10:39; (5) 2:24 (Rodwell). Now in Surah 52, the first to be revealed, the challenge is not qualified by any condition as regards size, disbelievers having been given the choice of producing even one single narration similar to any narration of the Quran. It is very strange that, whereas at first the challenge was unqualified and disbelievers were called upon to produce something comparable to any narration of the Quran, later it began to be hedged round by conditions and stipulations, first requiring disbelievers to produce the like of the whole book, then reducing the challenge to ten Surahs, and last of all reducing it to a single chapter. The order is most unnatural.

Moreover, some of the Surahs which contain this challenge were revealed on occasions so close to one another that some commentators have found it difficult to fix their order of priority with certainty. Hence it is unwise to settle this question on the basis of the chronological order of the Surahs containing this challenge.

Another point worth considering in this connection is that the verses in question do not mention any historical event but contain only a general challenge which stands for all time. Now the question is, in what form should the challenge be delivered to the world? Should disbelievers be called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran, or to produce ten Surahs like any ten Surahs of the Quran, or should they be called upon to bring forward the like of one Surah only or the like of any single piece of the Quran? If it is enough to make a demand for the like of a single piece of the Quran, why should a demand for the like of a Surah be made, and if it is enough to make a demand for the like of one Surah, the demand for the production of ten Surahs or, for that matter, for the whole of the Quran seems extravagant.

The fact is that these verses contain certain demands which stand for all time, and there is no need to enter into the question of their chronological order. The challenge can be made even today in all the different forms mentioned in the Quran as it was made at the time of the Holy Prophet.

Before explaining the various forms of these challenges it is worth noting that mention of them in the Quran is invariably accompanied by a reference to wealth and power, except in 2:24, which, as already stated, does not contain a new challenge but only repeats the challenge made in 10:39. From this it may be concluded that there exists a close connection between the question of wealth and power and the challenge for the production of the like of the Quran or a part thereof. This connection lies in the fact that the Quran has been held out to disbelievers as a priceless treasure. When disbelievers demanded material treasures from the Holy Prophet and asked, Wherefore has not a treasure been sent down to him (11:13), they were told in reply that he possessed a matchless treasure in the Quran. The same reply was repeated when disbelievers asked, Wherefore has not an angel come with him? (11:13). They were told in reply that angels did descend upon him; for their function was to bring the word of God, and the Divine Word had already been vouchsafed to him. Thus both the demand for a treasure and the demand for the descent of angels have been jointly met by offering the Quran as a matchless treasure brought down by angels, and the challenge to produce the like of the Quran has been put forward as a proof of its peerless quality.

Let us now take the different verses containing this challenge separately. The greatest demand is that made in 17:89, where disbelievers are required to bring a book like the whole of the Quran in all its manifold qualities. In this verse disbelievers are not required to represent their composition as the word of God. They may bring it forward as their own composition and declare it to be the equal of or, for that matter, better than the Quran. As, however, it was necessary to define in what respect the work to be produced was to resemble the Quran, the Quran says in the next verse, And of a truth We have (herein) set forth for mankind in various ways, all kinds of similitudes, but most of men would reject everything but disbelief (17:90), hinting thereby that if disbelievers reject the Divine origin of the Quran and believe it to be the work of the Prophet himself, then let them produce a book which, like the Quran, should possess the following excellences: (a) it should throw light on every essential subject pertaining to religion; (b) its discussion of these subjects should be exhaustive, offering detailed guidance on every question; (c) it should be free from all harm and contain nothing but good; and (d) it should aim not at the good of any particular people or community but at the well-being of all mankind, containing guidance for all temperaments and dispositions as well as for all circumstances and conditions. But as at the time when this challenge was made the whole of the Quran had not yet been revealed, disbelievers were not required to produce the like of the Quran there and then; and the challenge thus implied a prophecy that they would not be able to produce the like of it, neither in the form in which it then was nor when it became complete. Again, the challenge was not confined to the disbelievers of the Prophet’s time alone, but extended to doubters and critics of all times.

The second verse which contains a challenge is 11:14. In this verse the disbelievers’ objection that the Prophet had not come with a treasure, nor had an angel come to him, has been met by calling upon them to bring similar Surahswhich they should represent as the word of God. The latter demand, i.e. that pertaining to the representation of the required production as the word of God, has a reference to the objection of the disbelievers that no angel has come down to the Prophet. They are told that if no angel has really come to him and his claim to receive divine revelation through the medium of angels is false, then let them also produce ten Surahs, claiming, like him, that they have been brought down to them by angels, and then see what their end would be. If they had not the courage to forge a lie against God, how could they think that the Prophet could be guilty of such fabrication or, if he had dared to commit this forgery, why had he remained secure from God’s punishment?

The reason why the disbelievers in this verse have been called upon to produce ten Surahs and not the whole Quran is that the question here did not relate to the perfection of the Quran in all respects, but to that of only a portion of it. The disbelievers had objected to some parts of it being defective, as is evident from the words: They imagine that thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee (11:13). Hence, they have not been required here to bring a complete book like the whole Quran, but only ten Surahs in place of those parts of the Quran which they deem to be defective, in order that the truth of their assertion may be tested.

As for the selection of the specific number 10 for this purpose, it should be noted that in Arabic 10 represents a complete number. As the object was to refute the assertion of the disbelievers that certain portions of the Quran were defective, therefore the disbelievers were given the option of making as many as ten efforts to substantiate their claim. They were thus asked to produce ten Surahs not because they could produce less than that number but because the best way to refute their objection was to afford them several opportunities to substantiate the truth of their assertion. In short, since in 17:89 the whole Quran was claimed to be a perfect Book, its opponents were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran; but since in 11:14 the point was that certain portions of it were objected to, so they were asked to choose ten such portions as appeared to them to be most defective and then, produce a composition even like those portions.

The third verse where the Quran has been declared to be matchless is 10:39. Here disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of only one Surah of the Quran. This is so because, unlike the above-mentioned two verses, the challenge made in this verse is in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. In the verses preceding 10:39, it was claimed that God possessed full authority over all things (see 10:32-36), and as a proof of this, in 10:38 the Quran was put forward as possessing the following excellences: (a) it contains teachings which could not be devised by man; (b) it has come in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the previous Scriptures; (c) in it the imperfect teachings of the previous Scriptures have been perfected; (d) the word of God embodied in it has been made secure from being interpolated or tampered with by man; and (e) its teachings are meant for all men and all time. In support of this claim, verse 10:39 throws out a challenge to those who deny or doubt it to produce a single chapter containing these excellences in the same perfect form in which they are contained in this chapter, i.e. ch.10.

The verses 52:34, 35 contain the smallest of all demands. In these verses disbelievers are challenged to produce a single piece or a single announcement like any piece or announcement of the Quran. This demand also has been made in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. Hence the smallness of the demand. The claim in question is made in the opening verses of chapter 52, i.e. Surah At-Tur, to the effect that the Quranic revelation which was promised to mankind through Moses on Mount Sinai, will continue to be written, read and published throughout the world and that its followers will continue to multiply and will comprise not only common men but persons of great spiritual and temporal eminence, and that the fountain of the new faith will continue to provide the water of eternal life to all the countries of the world so that the fulfilment of these prophecies will constitute a proof of the fact that there is a Day of Judgement. Thereafter the Quran proceeds in 52:34, 35 to challenge disbelievers that, if they look upon the revelation of the Quran to be a fabrication, then they should come forward and make a prophecy like the one made above. This challenge is unconditional and without qualification. Disbelievers are not required to represent what they produce as the word of God, nor is it laid down as a condition that their prophecy should be of their own devising. They may as they like either make a prophecy of their own devising or borrow it from any other Scripture. Again, disbelievers are not asked to bring forward as many prophecies as there are in the Quran—and these are legion—but to bring forward only one single prophecy similar to any one of the prophecies made in the beginning of the Surah. They are told that they will not be able to fulfil this demand, for such a prophecy could be made only by the Being Who is the Creator and Owner of the heavens and the earth, along with their treasures, and Who not only knows, but possesses mastery of, the unseen. This challenge also stands for all time.

The fifth challenge to produce a like of the Quran is contained in the verse under comment (2:24) and here also, as in 10:39, disbelievers have been called upon to bring a Surah like that of the Quran, not in refutation of any of their objections, but in support of a claim made by the Quran itself. In the case of the verse under comment this claim is stated in the beginning of the Surah in 2:3 which says: This is a perfect Book; there is no doubt in it; it is a guidance for the righteous. Similarly, 10:39 is also preceded with the words: there is no doubt about it (10:38). This shows that the challenge to produce a chapter like one of the Quran has special reference to the peculiarity which is described by the words, there is no doubt about it. The challenge given in the present Surah is preceded by the claim that the Quran is a guidance for those who fear God (2:3), which means that it guides the righteous to the highest stages of spiritual progress. Hence in the above challenge it has been declared that if disbelievers are in doubt as to the Divine origin of the Quran, then they should bring forward a Surah that may be com­parable to the Quran in the spiritual influence it exercises over its followers.

One of the characteristics of the Quran is that, whatever chapter of it we may read, it casts a subtle and sublime spiritual influence over our minds. Thus, instead of creating doubts it dispels them and takes men to a stage where no doubt can possibly survive, which is the stage of communion with God. This stage can be attained only by the study of the Quran; no other Book can compare with it in this respect.

The above explanation will show that all these challenges calling upon disbelievers to produce the like of the Quran are quite distinct and separate one from another, and all of them stand for all time, none of them superseding or cancelling any other. The misconception that these challenges are one and the same seems to have arisen from the wrong notion that in all of them it is the elegance of the Quranic style and diction that has been held out as unique and incomparable and that it is such elegance of Arabic diction that disbelievers have been called upon to produce. But this is not the case. The challenges made in the five Surahs referred to above are not one or identical nor do they make the same demand; each has a distinct and separate demand of its own and it is in keeping with the nature of these demands that disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran or a part of it.

The question now remains whether these demands also include a challenge to produce a work comparable to the Quran in elegance of style and diction. The answer is that they certainly do so, but only in an indirect way and not as a direct and fundamental demand, for sublime ideas can only be expressed in sublime language. As the Quran comprises sublime and lofty ideas, it was inevitable that the most beautiful diction and the most chaste style should have been employed as the vehicle for the expression of those ideas; otherwise, the subject matter was liable to remain obscure and doubtful and the perfect beauty of the Quran would have become marred. Thus, in whatever form and in whatever respect disbelievers have been challenged to produce a composition like the Quran, the demand for beauty of style and elegance of diction comparable to those of the Quran also forms a part of the challenge.

7:36; 20:124.

Important Words:

خوف (fear) is derived from خاف i.e. he feared. خوف denotes fear about the future. یحزنون (shall grieve) is derived from حزنwhich means, he felt regret, grief, and sorrow. حزنه means, he made him sorrowful. حزن (grief) generally, though not always, relates to what is past.

Commentary:

As Adam was to become the progenitor of a great race and the harbinger of a new era, a timely announcement was made to mankind through him that they should be prepared to receive guidance from their God from time to time. Thus the verse holds out the promise that among the descendants of Adam there would continue to appear great souls who would invite people to truth and guidance, and that those who followed such holy persons would attain salvation. Their hearts would be so filled with the true faith that they would enjoy peace and tranquillity of mind in all circumstances. No fear about the future or regret about the past would trouble them, as they would attain nearness to God and their hearts would be to them a paradise.

14:7; 20:81; 44:31, 32.

7:128, 142; 28:5.

Important Words:

آل (people) is derived from the verb آل which gives the sense of returning or governing or exercising control or managing. The noun آل thus means the family or party of a man, or followers of a leader, or subjects of a ruler to whom they constantly return or who governs or exercises control over them. The word اھل is also sometimes taken to be another form of the word آل and means what the latter word means.

فرعون (Pharaoh) is not a personal name. It was the title held by the ancient kings of Egypt. Every Egyptian king is called فرعون in the Bible. The personal name of the Pharaoh with whom Moses came in contact was Rameses II (Enc. Bib.).

یذبحون (slaying) is derived from ذبح which originally means, he slaughtered or cut open the throat of an animal, or he strangled a person to death. Here the word is used in the intensified form dhabbaha to signify (1) that Pharaoh and his people treated the Israelites as mere beasts, and (2) that they killed them most mercilessly. It does not mean that they actually slaughtered them like animals, for elsewhere the Quran, speaking of the same torment, uses the word یقتلونinstead of یذبحون (7:142).

نساء (women) is the plural of مراة (a woman) from a different root. Though the word generally means "women" (Aqrab), it is also sometimes used about girls, as the Quran itself has used it (4:128). It is also used to signify "wives" (33:33).

بلاء (trial) means, anything by means of which a person may be tried; a trial whether through a blessing or an affliction (Aqrab).

Commentary:

In verses 41-48 God reminded the Israelites of His blessings in general, particularly the blessing of prophethood, which He had bestowed on them. He now calls their attention to such favours as exalted the Israelites above other peoples. The first of them to which God refers here is their deliverance from the hands of Pharaoh and his people, who inflicted on them grievous torments.

Some Christian critics have objected that whereas the Bible nowhere speaks of the sons of the Israelites being slaughtered like beasts, the Quran so speaks of them. We have shown under Important Words that the word ذبح used in the verse does not signify actual slaughtering by cutting the throat. It also means strangling to death. As Pharaoh first ordered the male children of the Israelites to be strangled at birth and later changed the decree to other methods of killing, the Quran uses a word which covers all such forms of killing. As already hinted, the word ذبح in the sense of slaughtering is used figuratively to denote that Pharaoh and his people treated the Israelites most mercilessly, killing them in whatever manner they liked. Elsewhere the Quran uses the word قتل i.e. killing in place of ذبح i.e. slaughtering (7:142).

In Exod. 1:8-22, we read: "Now there arose a new king over Egypt which knew not Joseph. And he said unto his people, Behold the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we: Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply. Therefore they (the Egyptians) did set over them taskmasters to afflict them (the Israelites) with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Rameses. But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were grieved because of the children of Israel. And the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with rigour; and they made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in mortar and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field: all their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigour. And the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives…When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools, if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live. But the midwives feared God and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive (putting up the excuse that Israelite women being healthier than Egyptians were generally delivered before the midwives arrived). And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive."

The above quotation clearly shows that the Pharaoh whose name was Rameses II not only inflicted upon the Israelites grievous torments by imposing upon them hard and disgraceful labour, but also gave orders to kill their sons and spare their daughters who were thus allowed to grow to womanhood and became نساء as the Quran puts it. The Quran uses the word ذبح to signify that at first the order was to strangle the Israelite male children at birth and when that order failed in its purpose, another was issued to the effect that all male children should be thrown into the river—a most merciless form of killing in which all human feelings were laid aside and the Israelites were treated as mere beasts.

As the word بلاء (trial) may mean either a trial through a favour or blessing, or a trial through grief or affliction, the words "in that" occurring in the verse may either refer to the deliverance of the Israelites from Pharaoh’s people, in which case the word trial will mean a favour or a blessing; or they refer to the slaying of the male children, in which case it would mean grief or affliction.

God reminds the Israelites in the verse how He delivered them from grievous torments and afflictions and calls their attention to the magnitude of the Sign which He showed in their favour. He tells them that He had faithfully fulfilled the promises which He had made to Abraham and had left nothing undone, but when they transgressed and made an ill return for the favours that had been bestowed upon them, He withheld His favours from them and transferred the gift of prophecy to their brethren, the children of Ishmael.

God does not say that He delivered the children of Israel from Pharaoh, but that He delivered them from "Pharaoh’s people", for it was through his people that Pharaoh inflicted torments upon them, he himself remaining in the background. Moreover, the expression آل فرعونdoes not exclude Pharaoh, for it, according to Arabic idiom, may also mean, Pharaoh and his people.

4:154.

Commentary:

We learn from Exod. 32:9, 10 that the worship of the calf called forth the wrath of God, whereupon Moses prayed to God for the Israelites and then, in the words of the Old Testament, 'the Lord repented of the evil which He thought to do unto His people' (Exod. 32:14). In this connection it may be noted that the. Quran uses the word 'forgave' instead of 'repented', as used in the Bible, for the latter expression is obviously quite inappropriate to God’s attribute of Knowledge and Majesty. Most probably the word is either a mistranslation of the original or a later interpolation.

It may also be noted here that the word عفو used in this verse does not only signify "forgiving or passing over a sin" but also "obliterating a sin". If a man truly and sincerely turns to God with repentance, He not only forgives him his sin but obliterates the very traces of it, leaving him as stainless and pure as a newborn child.

The words, that you may be grateful, point to a very deep truth. Forgiveness by a superior authority produces the feelings of gratefulness in the person forgiven, and gratefulness in turn impels a man to further acts of obedience and goodness. Thus a sort of continuity in righteousness is brought about.

2:260; 6:123.

Important Words:

بعثناکم (We raised you) is from بعث. They say بعثه i.e. (1) he sent him as a messenger; (2) he made him to rise; (3) he roused him up; (4) He (God) brought him to life; (5) he awoke him from sleep; (6) he instigated him to do a certain thing (Aqrab).

موتکم (your death). See notes on 2:20 and 2:29 where it has been explained that the word موت (death) includes (1) spiritual death; and (2) a state of extreme sorrow, grief, or fear, etc.

Commentary:

The verse should not be understood to mean that the Israelites were restored to life after they had actually died. The Quran strongly repudiates the idea of the dead coming to life again in this world (21:96). The death spoken of in the verse is either spiritual death or a state of extreme grief or terror brought about through dreadful punishment, etc. The Bible testifies to the "death" of which the Quran speaks, as follows: "And Moses returned unto the Lord, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin and have made them gods of gold. Yet now, if thou wilt, forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray Thee, out of Thy book which Thou hast written. And the Lord said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against Me, him will I blot out of My book. Therefore now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee…And the Lord plagued the people, because they made the calf" (Exod. 32:31-35).

But God’s forgiveness soon followed; for He did not want to ruin the Israelites, but to raise them morally and spiritually and make them a grateful people.

7:163.

Important Words:

رجز (a punishment) means: (1) filth; (2) punishment; (3) idol-worship (4) iniquity or sin (Aqrab).

من السماء (from heaven). For سماء see note on 2:20. As سماء means a "height" or "anything that is high above us", therefore the expression من السماء would mean "from on high" or "from God", implying that the punishment meted out to the Israelites was not brought about through earthly means but, as it were, descended from above.

Commentary:

This verse is a continuation of the previous one. God commanded the Israelites to behave submissively and to pray to Him for the forgiveness of their sins, but they, mischievous and arrogant as ever, disobeyed the injunctions given to them and changed the words of prayer taught by God, whereupon He chastised them with a punishment that was not of this earth, i.e. He visited them with a pestilence or plague that destroyed a number of them. Or the expression رجزا من السماء may mean that their disobedience recoiled on their own souls in the sense of moral degradation and filthiness of heart and mind.

The question of the word which the Israelites used in place of the one taught to them is immaterial. According to some, they used the word حبة or حنطة i.e. "give us corn to eat" instead of حطة i.e. "remove our sins" (Bukhari & Jarir). The words sound alike and afforded a playful opportunity to the mischief-minded among the Israelites. But as already said, the word substituted is not material. What matters is that they, i.e. many of them as the Quran hints, disobeyed the Lord and made religion a plaything. Hence the punishment.

3:113.

2:91; 3:113; 5:61.

2:88; 3:22, 113, 184; 5:71.

Important Words:

فومھا (its wheat). فوم means: (1) wheat; (2) any corn suitable for making bread; (3) garlic; (4) chick-pea (Aqrab).

مصر (a town) means:(1) a town or a city; (2) the frontier between two countries; (3) the thing that intervenes between two things (Aqrab).

یقتلون (would kill) is derived from قتل i.e. he killed. The infinitive means: (1) killing with a sword or with a stone or with poison or by any other means; (2) attempting to kill; (3) making up the mind to kill; (4) boycotting or cutting off all connections; (5) killing one’s carnal desires; (6) weakening the strength of a thing, as alcohol is "killed" with the addition of water, or hunger is "killed" with food, etc.; (7) humbling a person completely; (8) rendering a person like unto one killed either physically or morally or spiritually; (9) acquiring complete and certain knowledge about a thing; and (10) cursing a person or thing (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lisan)

Commentary:

In this verse another instance is cited to show how the Israelites made no effort to turn the favours of God to good account. When they were in the desert, God sent them Manna and Salwa. But soon after this they began to exhibit discontent with one kind of food and to clamour for a variety of grain, onions, salad and green-stuff (Num. 11:5-11). It may be noted that both Manna and Salwa taken together were considered one kind of food as they were taken continuously for a long time. It is further learnt from the Bible that the supply of Salwa was discontinued after a while and the Israelites were thus left to live on Manna alone (Num. 11:6). As the demand was not based on a right understanding of the wisdom of God Who wanted the Israelites to breathe the free air of the desert for a time, they met with disgrace and drew upon themselves the wrath of God.

God’s displeasure with the Israelites was not due to their demand for other food. The real cause lay elsewhere. Having lived for a long time in bondage and a state of dependence, they had become cowardly and indolent. So God wished them to stay in the desert for sometime, living on game and wild herbs, that they might get rid of their cowardice and indolence by living an independent life in the desert. Thus revitalized, they were to be led to the Promised Land and made rulers of Palestine. The Israelites, however, failed to understand the real purpose of God or having understood it, failed to appreciate it, and foolishly insisted upon living in a town. God pointed out their error, saying that they had asked for a life of agriculture in preference to what was to lead them to sovereignty. He wanted to prepare them for rule over the Promised Land, but they hungered for husbandry. So He indignantly ordered them to go down to a town where they would get the desired things.

The Israelites deserved punishment, because their impatience was the outcome of a want of faith in the promise of God. This lack of faith in God was due to their opposition to His Prophets and, disbelief in His Signs, and they opposed the Prophets because they were transgressors and evildoers. The Prophets invited them to guidance and virtue which they disliked, and, as a result, they opposed them. Thus the Quran admirably traces the causal sequence of every evil to its origin and strikes at its very root so as to prevent all possibility of recurrence.

The words, we will not remain content with one kind of food, contain a threat and are full of arrogance. If the Israelites had meant simply to express a wish, the words would have been "we are unable to remain content with one kind of food," and not as they stand in the Quran. The Bible gives a vivid picture of their insolent and almost rebellious attitude on this occasion (Num. 11:5-15).

The words یقتلون النبیین translated in the verse as "would kill the Prophets" do not mean that the Israelites actually killed the Prophets, because, up to the time of Moses, no Prophet is known to have been slain by them. As a matter of fact, Moses is the first Prophet who was sent to the Israelites as a nation. Thus Moses and his brother, Aaron, are the only persons to whom the words can be applied; but obviously these two Prophets were not killed by the Israelites, although the latter often opposed them and were sometimes even bent upon killing them (Exod. 17:4). Hence, the word قتل in the verse cannot possibly mean actual killing. Its only meaning here is that they severely opposed the Prophets and were even prepared to kill them. This interpretation finds corroboration not only in Arabic lexicons, for which see Important Words, but the Quran itself supports it in a number of verses where the word قتل has been used undoubtedly, not in the sense of actual killing but in that of attempting to kill or intending to kill (3:22 and 40:29). Bukhari also relates a tradition to the effect that once certain hot-headed Quraish youths brutally assaulted the Holy Prophet in the precincts of the Ka‘bah, whereupon Abu Bakr rushed to his rescue, saying, اتقتلون رجلا ان یقول ربی الله "Do you kill a man because he says Allah is his Lord and Master?" (chapter on Tafsir). In this hadith the word قتل is clearly used in the sense of attempting to kill or intending to kill and not actual killing.

It will not be out of place to point out here that the purport of verse 2:59 discussed above is altogether different from the one under comment. Though in both of them God apparently orders the Israelites to go to some habitation, yet the meaning is entirely different, rather quite the opposite in each case. As a matter of fact, whereas in verse 2:59 God Himself willingly commands the Israelites to go to some habitation, His ordering them to "go down into a town" in the verse under comment is expressive of definite displeasure and anger. In the previous verse the قریة or habitation meant only a habitation found in the desert by going into which the Israelites did not leave the free desert life but rather combined it with the facilities of a habitation. On the contrary, by "going down into" a مصر i.e. a town or city as mentioned in the verse under comment, they altogether abandoned the desert life and adopted a life of ease, as is led in towns and cities. Hence the difference. This is why the Quran uses the simple word ادخلوا i.e. "enter" in 2:59 and the word اھبطوا i.e. "go down", a term expressive of decline, in the verse under comment. Similarly, whereas in verse 2:59 the Quran follows up the commandment with the words eat therefrom plentifully wherever you like, in the present verse the commandment is followed by the words and they were smitten with abasement and destitution. The difference is apparent. The former expression is indicative of the freedom of life in the desert, and the latter of the suffocating atmosphere and mental slavery of towns and cities.

Important Words:

فضل (grace) is derived from the verb فضل meaning: (1) it remained, the expression being used when a portion remains out of a larger number or quantity, the rest being given away or consumed; (2) it was in excess, or it was over and above a certain measure. Thus the noun فضل means: (1) something that is in excess or additional; (2) abundance; (3) a free gift, the giving of which is not obligatory on the giver; (4) a favour or grace or bounty (Aqrab & Lane). The word فضل is generally, though not always, spoken of such favours as pertain to temporal or worldly things (e.g. 62:11). See also the word رحمةbelow.

رحمة (mercy) is derived from رحم meaning (1) he showed mercy or compassion; (2) he was kind or tender; (3) he was beneficent; (4) he forgave. Thus رحمة means, mercy or compassion or kindness or tenderness or beneficence or forgiveness or inclination to show one of these. As رحم (rihm) means the womb of a woman, the word رحمة would further give the significance of tenderness or compassion as shown by a mother (Lane). رحمة in contrast to فضل (for which see above) is generally spoken of such acts of God’s kindness or mercy as relate to religious or spiritual matters. This is why the Holy Prophet has instructed his followers to ask for God’s رحمة when entering a mosque for Prayers, and for His فضل when coming out of it after Prayers (Tirmidhi).

Commentary:

After receiving God’s commandments on the Mount, the Israelites, instead of strengthening their connection with the Lord, showed laxity and carelessness in observing His behests (Num. 11:1); but as God wanted to uplift them and bestow His grace and mercy on them in matters temporal as well as spiritual, He forgave them their sins and saved them from being the losers.