بِضْعِ

3:155; 13:32.

Important Words:

بضع (a few) is derived from بضع (bada‘a). They say بضعه i.e. he cut it; he cut it into pieces; he cut it length-wise. بضعmeans, a part or portion of the night; a time thereof. They say مضی بضع من اللیل i.e. a part of the night passed. The word also denotes a variety of numbers such as five, seven, ten, etc., but is generally understood to mean from three to nine. بضع رجال means from three to nine men. بضع سنین means, from three to nine years (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

In order fully to appreciate the significance of this and the preceding two verses it is necessary to cast a cursory glance over the political conditions that obtained in the two great Empires that lay on the borders of Arabia—the Persian and the Roman Empires—shortly before the advent of the Holy Prophet of Islam. They were at war with each other. The first round had gone in favour of the Persians whose tide of conquest began in 602 A.D., when in order to avenge the death of Maurice, his patron and benefactor, at the hands of Phocas, Chosroes II started the war with Rome. For twenty years the Roman Empire was overrun by Persian armies as it had never been before. The Persian armies plundered Syria and Asia Minor and in 608 A.D. advanced to Chalcedon. Damascus was taken in 613. The surrounding country on which no Persian had ever set foot since the founding of the Empire was utterly and completely laid waste. In June 614 Jerusalem was also captured. The whole of Christendom was horrified by the news that together with the Patriarch the Persians had carried off the cross of Christ. Christianity had been humbled in the dust. The flood of Persian conquest, however, did not stop with the capture of Jerusalem. Egypt was next conquered, Asia Minor again overrun, and the Persian armies were knocking at the very gates of Constantinople. The Romans could offer but little resistance as they were torn by internal dissensions. The humiliation of Heraclius was so complete that "Chosroes wanted to see him brought in chains to the foot of his throne and was not prepared to give him peace till he had abjured his crucified god and embraced the worship of the sun" (Historians’ History of the World, vol. 7, p. 159, vol. 8, pp. 94-95 & Enc. Brit. under "Chosroes" II & "Heraclius"). This state of affairs very much grieved the Muslims as they had much in common with the Romans who were the "People of the Book". But the Quraish of Mecca who, like the Persians, were idolaters, feigned to see in this discomfiture of Christian armies a happy augury for the overthrow and destruction of Islam. It was shortly after this complete debacle of Roman forces that in 616 A.D., came the revelation to the Holy Prophet which forms the subject-matter of the verse under comment and the two preceding verses. The verses possessed a twofold significance. They foretold, in circumstances then quite inconceivable, that the whole position would be completely reversed within the short space of eight or nine years and the erstwhile victorious Persian armies would suffer a crushing defeat at the hands of the utterly defeated, prostrated and humbled Romans. The Arabic word used in the verse to denote this period is بضع (bid‘un) which as shown under "Important Words," signifies a period from three to nine years. The significance of the prophecy embodied in the verses, however, lay in the fact that, within this short period, the foundations of the ultimate triumph of Islam and that of the defeat and discomfiture of the forces of disbelief and darkness would be firmly laid. The prophecy was fulfilled in circumstances beyond human calculation or comprehension. Regarding the extreme improbability of fulfilment of the prophecy under the prevailing circumstances, the following observation of Gibbon may be read with interest:

In the midst of the Persian triumphs he (the Holy Prophet) ventured to foretell that before many years should elapse victory would return to the banners of the Romans…At the time when this prediction is said to have been delivered, no prophecy could be more distant from its accomplishment, since the first twelve years of Heraclius announced the approaching dissolution of the Empire (Rise, Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. 5, p. 74).

After licking his wounds for several years, Heraclius was at last able to take the field against the Persians in 622, the year of the Holy Prophet’s Migration to Medina. In 624 he advanced into northern Media, where he destroyed the great fire-temple of Gandzak (Gazaca) and thus avenged the destruction of Jerusalem. This happened exactly within nine years, the period foretold in the verse, and to add to its importance and significance it happened in the year when the power of the Quraish also suffered a very serious reverse in the Battle of Badr, which recalled a Biblical prophecy foretelling the fading of the glory of Kedar (Isa. 21:17). In 627, Heraclius defeated the Persian army at Nineveh and advanced towards Ctesiphon. Chosroes fled from his favourite residence Dastgerd (near Baghdad), and after dragging on an inglorious existence was murdered by his own son, Siroes, on 19th February, 628. A.D.; and thus the Persian Empire, from the apparent greatness which it had reached a few years earlier sank into hopeless anarchy (Enc. Brit.).

The fulfilment of the prophecy was so remarkable and unforeseen that prejudiced Christian writers have been hard pressed to explain it away. Rodwell says that the vowel points of the Arabic expression سیغلبون were left undecided so that it would read either way, i.e. sa-yaghlibun meaning, "they will be victorious" or as sa-yughlabun meaning, "they will be defeated." He even adds that the ambiguity was intentional. The Rev. gentleman pretends not to understand this simple fact that the vowels of an expression which had been recited hundreds of times in daily Prayers and otherwise could hardly be left undecided. Mr. Wherry goes a step further. He says: "Our daily newspapers constantly forecast political events of this kind." The less said about this futile attempt to explain away and belittle the importance of this mighty prophecy, the better. If in the circumstances when Christianity lay humbled in the dust and Persian armies were knocking at the very gates of Constantinople and Heraclius had in vain sued for peace, a person situated as the Holy Prophet was, could forecast that within the short space of only eight or nine years the victors would become vanquished and the forces of Chosroes would receive a crushing defeat at the hands of the same Heraclius who only a few years back had very humbly but unsuccessfully sued for peace and the proud and mighty Persians would lie prostrate and exhausted, the forecast must indeed be considered to have proceeded from a superhuman source. What added to the remarkable character of the prophecy was the fact that the news of the victory of the Romans over the Persians reached the Muslims exactly at the time when they were themselves rejoicing over their own victory in the Battle of Badr.

The words: "Allah’s is the command before and after that," mean that it is God’s eternal and unalterable decree that disbelief is always defeated and humbled, and truth triumphs and progresses.