عَلَيْكُم

3:75.

Commentary:

The People of the Book and the pagan tribes of Arabia grudged the favours which were being bestowed by God on Muslims. In reply to this, God says that He, being the Lord and Master of the entire Universe, could not forever bind Himself to one people but chose for His bounty whomsoever He pleased from among His creation. But now when He has chosen the Muslims, He is not confining His favours to one people only. The mission of the Holy Prophet being for all mankind, the call to come and receive God’s favours is universal and hence no people need now show envy or grudge. With the advent of Islam the era of الفضل العظیم i.e. "exceeding (viz. universal) bounty" had dawned.

2:229; 65:5.

See 2:230.

3:104.

Important Words:

بلغن (they approach) is from بلغ which means, he reached or came to or attained; or he was near to reaching or attaining (Lane).

اجل (period) is the noun-infinitive from the verb اجل meaning, he or it delayed or fell short. اجل الشیء means, he appointed a time or period for the thing. اجل therefore means, the term or period appointed or specified for a thing; also the end of such period. Death is called اجل because for every life there is an appointed time when it must come to an end (Aqrab Lane).

یعظکم (exhorts you). یعظ is derived from وعظ meaning, he gave him good advice; he exhorted him; he admonished him; he warned him of the consequences of his actions and called him to a life of righteousness (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The verse contains a general injunction about the treatment of divorced women.

As is apparent from the context, the divorce spoken of here refers to the revocable divorce. After such divorce has been pronounced, there are only two courses open to the husband. He may either retain his wife and treat her with kindness or he may part with her in a good and becoming manner. He is not allowed to maltreat her and keep her in a state of suspense. The concluding part of the verse warns the husband against making light of the commandments of Allah relating to the rights of women, adding that, God being All-Knowing, even the hidden intentions and secret machinations of man are known to Him.

8:12.

3:169.

Important Words:

امر (government) means: (1) order or command; (2) matter or affair; (3) state or condition; (4) authority, government or management. اولوا الامر means, those who hold command or exercise authority (Aqrab).

قتل (fighting) being noun-infinitive means both to kill and to be killed. Another reading of the word قتل here is قتال(Muhit iii. 90 & Kashshaf) which shows that the word قتل (qatl) has been used here in the sense of fighting and not killing. The word has been used elsewhere also in the Quran in the sense of fighting (see 2:192). See also Jarir under 3:155.

Commentary:

The words, a slumber that overcame a party of you, refer to an incident connected with the Battle of Uhud. AbuTalhah says, "I lifted my head on the day of Uhud and began to look about, and there was none among us on that day but was bending down his head with slumber." This incident has been narrated by Tirmidhi, Nasa’i and others (see Kathir, ii. 303). As sleep or slumber is a symbol of a peaceful condition, being a sign of hearts that are calm and at rest, the Quran refers to this incident as a sort of favour. The incident evidently occurred when the battle was practically over and the Muslims had returned to the neighbouring height.

The reference in the words, the other party, is to the hypocrites who were at Medina and who had not taken part in the battle. When they heard of the reverse which overtook the Muslims and of the reported death of the Holy Prophet, they, in spite of rejoicing at the misfortune that had befallen the Muslims, became anxious about their own lives and feared what would happen to them in case the Meccans should attack Medina. The words cannot apply to the party of Muslims that took part in the battle, of whom the Quran says, He has surely pardoned you and Allah is gracious to the believers (3:153 above).

The words, Is there for us any part in the government of affairs? uttered by the hypocrites mean, "nobody listens to our opinion in matters of administration; we had advised the Muslims not to go out of Medina to fight, but our advice was ignored, with the result that they were defeated." The sentence might also mean, "now, (i.e. after this reverse) real government and power have gone into the hands of the idolaters and nothing has been left for us."

The words, All government belongs to Allah, signify that the decision in all matters rests with God; or that whatever might happen in the intervening period, God has ordained that eventually power and government shall be vouchsafed to Muslims, who will have dominion in the land.

The words, we should not have been killed here, mean, "If we had any voice in the management of affairs and if our advice had been accepted, our brethren would not have been killed in the battle," it being insinuated that while they were wise, the Muslims were simply foolish. The words may also be understood to mean, "if we were to have any government (as the Prophet had promised), we should not have been defeated in the battle." By saying so, the hypocrites hinted that the prophecies of the Holy Prophet regarding the triumph of Islam had turned out to be false.

It may be noted here that by saying, we should not have been killed here, the hypocrites did not evidently mean that they themselves would not have been killed. What they meant was that their brethren or comrades who were killed would not have been killed. This shows that by the slaying of one’s self is sometimes meant the slaying of one’s brethren or companions. This explains the words اقتلوا انفسکم in 2:55, and تقتلون انفسکم in 2:86. See also note on 2:55.

The Divine Words, If you had remained in your homes, refer to the hypocrites; and by the words, those on whom fighting had been enjoined, are meant the true believers. The injunction referred to is contained in 2:191.

In the clause, would have gone forth to their deathbeds, the word مضاجع (deathbeds) has been used in order to point to the abject cowardice of the hypocrites on the one hand, and the steadfast devotion of the true believers on the other. It reminds the hypocrites that whereas they returned to Medina, thinking that fighting in the existing circumstances was sure death, such was the faith of the true believers that even if the hypocrites had kept back from the very beginning they would have cheerfully gone forth to the battlefield, or the place of death, as it was commonly thought to be. All this happened that God might purify and ennoble the Faithful.

Commentary:

Whereas the preceding verse spoke of the Prayer in time of fear in the case of individuals, the present one gives the details of the manner of its performance when the Faithful are in the form of a company or group and the Prayer is to be performed in congregation. Apparently the Holy Prophet alone seems to have been addressed here, but really the verse possesses general application. When a Muslim army is about to say their Prayer in congregation, half of them should say the Prayer with the Imam, carrying their arms, and the other half should stand facing the enemy, to fight him or repulse his attack, as the case may be. When the first half have finished one Rak‘at, they should retire to take the place of those who are facing the enemy. The latter should then come forward and say one Rak‘at with the Imam.

As many as eleven different ways in which these Prayers were said on different occasions are described in the Hadith(for details see Al-Bahrul-Muhit). In some cases, each of the two parties said only one Rak‘at of Prayer, while the Imam said two. In other cases, each of the parties said two Rak‘at, one Rak‘at with the Imam and the other alone, thus all saying two Rak‘at. On yet other occasions each of the two parties said two rak‘at of Prayer with the Imam, the Imam himself having said four Rak‘at—two Rak‘at with each party. These different methods were observed in different circumstances. If the danger was great, each of the parties said only one Rak‘at of Prayer with the Imam while the Imam himself said two; but if the danger was not so great, each party said two Rak‘ats while the Imam said four. Again, methods varied with the varying position of the army. If the enemy, for instance, was in front of the Imam, the congregation followed a method different from that which they followed on other occasions.

To sum up, whereas Prayer in a state of simple journey consists of two Rak‘ats in such Prayers as ordinarily consist of four Rak‘ats, the Prayer in time of fear may assume different forms, the more important being:

(a) Splitting up the worshippers into two parties, each party either saying one part of its Prayer with the Imam and then retiring, or saying one part of its Prayer with the Imam and the other part separately, the number of Rak‘ats performed by the worshippers being either one or two as the case may be (the present verse);

(b) Shortening the duration of Prayers only (the preceding verse);

(c) Doing away with all form and repeating the words of Prayer while walking, running or riding (2:240).

The verse observes a difference between: اسلحة (arms) and حذر (means of defence or simply precautions). Whereas the former may be put aside in moments of comparative security, the latter should always be adhered to and never neglected. See also 4:72.

2:186.

Important Words:

جنب (unclean) for which see 4:44.

Commentary:

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

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

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

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

6:6.

39:42; 42:7.

Commentary:

The pronoun "it" in the words "rejected it" refers either (1) to the matter under discussion, i.e. it is God alone Who can send down punishment, or (2) to the Quran, or (3) to punishment. Taking the last meaning, the words "it is the truth" would mean that the promised punishment is sure to come.

The words, I am not a guardian over you, imply that if now, when I have conveyed to you the Divine Message, the punishment of God comes, I cannot help it. I will not be able to protect you from it. It is worthy of note that whereas disbelievers are demanding punishment, the Holy Prophet is expressing sympathy for them.

7:204.

Commentary:

The word بصائر (proofs) also helps to explain the words, He reaches the eyes, occurring in the preceding verse and signifies that God reveals proofs by means of which man becomes able to know Him. By "proofs" is here meant the divine signs and evidences sent by God.

The words, whoever sees, mean, whoever makes use of his reason after proofs have been revealed to him by God. Similarly the words, whoever becomes blind, refer to such persons as shut their eyes to all truth and virtually make themselves blind.

The duty of the Holy Prophet described in the words, I am not a guardian over you, is only to convey what is revealed by God; it is not his responsibility to compel people to believe in God. Thus, the verse also provides a refutation of the baseless charge that Islam countenances compulsion in the propagation of religion.

3:152; 7:34; 22:72; 53:24.

10:21,103; 11:123.

Commentary:

This verse shows that one may follow one’s forefathers only if one has the support of reason and not otherwise. Blind and unthinking following is condemned.

3:155.

Important Words:

رجز (filth) is derived from رجز. They say رجز الناقة i.e. the she-camel had the disease of convulsive motion in the legs or thighs. رجزت الریح means, the wind was continuous or lasting. رجز means, commotion or agitation or convulsion; consecutiveness of motion; punishment that agitates by its vehemence and occasions vehement consecutive commotions; conduct that leads to punishment; sin; uncleanness or filth; polytheism or worship of idols; the Devil and his suggestions; plague or pestilence (Lane).

Commentary:

Before a battle, especially an important one, begins, there is generally great uneasiness and disquietude among the contestants; their hearts throb with anxiety, and sleep vanishes. So the verse mentions the coming of sleep on the battlefield of Badr as a sign of God’s favour. God caused sleep to come upon Muslims with the result that their anxiety was removed, that they were inspired with a feeling of confidence and security and that it had a soothing effect on their minds. This mental state proved highly helpful and materially contributed to their success.

The second favour mentioned in the verse pertains to the falling of rain. God caused rain to fall, which, as the verse points out, served four useful purposes: Firstly, it purified the Muslims because, seeing this token of God’s help, their faith in God was strengthened, with the result that their hearts, being filled with faith, were purified. Secondly, it dispelled from them the filth of Satan, i.e. thirst. In the Quran, thirst has been figuratively described as a pang due to Satan or the Devil; for instance, it is related that when Job was stricken with the pangs of thirst, he prayed to God, saying: Satan has smitten me with affliction and torment (38:42), whereupon God accepted his prayer, saying: Strike thy riding beast with thy foot. Here is cool water to wash with and a drink (38:43). So the removal of “the filth of Satan” signifies removal of thirst or the pangs of extreme thirst. The word "Satan" may also signify "those who are of Satan," i.e. the friends or associates of Satan. Taken in this sense, the clause would mean: "God dispelled from you the attack of the wicked people," the hint being that the rain proved a means of dispelling the attack of the Quraish, inasmuch as it rendered the hard ground occupied by the Meccan army slippery, thus preventing the enemy from making a successful attack on the Muslims. Thirdly, the rain strengthened the hearts of the Faithful. This was due to their faith being reinforced by witnessing signs of God’s special assistance. Fourthly, the rain helped to make the steps of the Muslims firm for, as mentioned in books of history, the ground occupied by the Muslims was sandy, so the rain made it hard, and the Muslims were able to tread it with firm steps. All these factors contributed to the success of the Muslims.

The reader should note the beautiful order in the words of this verse. It begins with the purification of the heart (the first purpose served by the rain) and ends with the establishing of the steps and making them firm (the fourth purpose served by the rain), i.e. the favour of God descended on the heart and then, as it were, travelled down to the feet.

9:61.

Commentary:

This verse applies to both believers and disbelievers, the opening part of it applying to the latter and the closing part to the former. To disbelievers the verse says: It grieves the Prophet to see you fall into trouble, i.e. although you subjected the Prophet to all manner of persecutions and privations, yet his heart is so full of the milk of human kindness that no amount of persecution on your part can make him bitter against you or make him wish you ill. He is so kind and sympathetic to you that he cannot bear to see you turn away from the path of righteousness and thus put yourselves in trouble. To believers the verse says: The Prophet is compassionate and merciful, i.e. he cheerfully shares with you your sorrows and afflictions. Moreover, like an affectionate father he treats you with kindness and mercy.

The attributes "compassionate and merciful" applied here to the Holy Prophet are also applied to God. As a matter of fact, the attributes of God are of two kinds: (1) تنزیھیة i.e. those that make Him distinct from His creation, e.g. رحمان (One Whose mercy extends to all); these are never applied to anyone except God. (2) تشبیھیة i.e. those in which He resembles other beings, e.g. رحیم (Merciful); for mercy is an attribute which may be shared, in however meagre a degree, by others also.

71:8.

Important Words:

غمة (obscure) is the noun-infinitive from غم. They say غمه i.e. he covered it or concealed it; he or it grieved him or caused him to mourn. غم الھلال عن الناس means, the new moon was veiled or concealed from the people by clouds, or otherwise, so that it was not seen. غم علیه الامر means, the affair was or became obscure, confused, dubious, or vague to him such as it could not be understood. غمة means, perplexity, obscurity, dubiousness or confusedness. They say ھو فی غمة من امره i.e. he is in a state of perplexity or darkness in respect of his affair. امر غمة means, a dubious, obscure, confused or vague case (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

As already pointed out, the Surahs which open with the abbreviated letters الر (I am Allah Who is All-Seeing) deal chiefly with historical events in the lives of various Prophets and draw inferences therefrom (see note on v. 2). This Surah also begins with الر and we find that the Quran here follows a rational discussion with particular reference to the case of Noah in order to remind people that, although Noah’s opponents did all sorts of mischief and left no stone unturned to bring him to naught, yet God did not destroy them at once but granted them respite for a long time, and it was only when their wickedness exceeded all limits and when those who were destined to believe in him had believed, that God sent down His punishment on them and brought about their destruction.

The case of three Prophets—Noah, Moses and Jonah—has been mentioned in this Surah by way of illustration. Noah’s history constitutes an illustration of the total destruction of the enemies of truth; that of Moses illustrates the destruction of one people and the salvation of another; while that of Jonah forms an example of the complete deliverance of an iniquitous people from God’s punishment when they repented and prayed for His forgiveness. By citing these three distinct examples with reference to the Holy Prophet, the Quran intends to point out that there are three ways of God’s dealings with the enemies of His Prophets: (1) that sometimes He brings about their total destruction, as was the case with the people of Noah when all his enemies were destroyed with the exception of only a few; (2) that sometimes He destroys some and saves others who believe in His Prophet, as was the case in the time of Moses when Pharaoh and his army were drowned and the Israelites were saved; (3) that sometimes He saves all when they repent and beg for His mercy, as happened with the people of the Prophet Jonah. By citing these examples the Quran means to exhort the people of the Holy Prophet to follow the example of the people of Jonah and be saved and not to court destruction like the opponents of Noah and Moses.

From the above it will also be seen that the accounts of the lives of the various Prophets as given in the Quran are not simply interesting stories. A careful perusal of the accounts of the three Prophets mentioned above, in the order in which they are given in this Surah, clearly shows that their life story is epitomized in the life of the Holy Prophet. Many of the incidents in his life bear a striking resemblance to those in the lives of these Prophets. He played the part of Noah at Mecca, that of Moses at Medina and that of Jonah on his re-entry into Mecca. This is enough to show that the accounts of the Prophets as given in the Quran are not mere stories but constitute great prophecies about important events in the life of the Holy Prophet.

Incidentally, the verse lays down five rules which lead to the completion and consummation of a plan and which if carefully observed must lead to success: (1) to "muster one’s designs" i.e. to decide upon a course of action after mutual consultation and full deliberation; (2) to organize in a well-knit and disciplined body all "partners" or confederates, i.e. those who hold analogous views and have faith in the success of the programme decided upon; (3) to chalk out a detailed and clear programme leaving no "obscurity" or dubiousness, about it; (4) to carry out the agreed design collectively by collating all available resources so that the full strength of the community may be brought to bear upon the enemy at the same time; and (5) to "give no respite" to the enemy to recuperate and recover after the attack is launched. These are the means of success to which Noah has drawn the attention of his enemies in this verse. But at the same time he warns them that even if they employed all these methods against him, they would not succeed, for they did not possess the sixth and the most important ingredient of success, which was certainty of faith in God and trust in Him, without which all these methods were of no avail against a Divine Messenger.

Marvellous indeed is the faith which Prophets of God have in the truth of their mission and in the unfailing character of the promises and assurances which they receive from God! Not only do they not mind the hostility of their enemies but they even challenge the latter to use all their power and employ all their resources to destroy them, because they are perfectly convinced that success will come to them in the end, and such invariably happens to be the case. This fact alone should establish their truth; but the blind will not see nor will the deaf hear.

27:93; 39:42.

Commentary:

The Holy Prophet is asked to tell disbelievers that personally he would gain or lose nothing by their good or bad actions because he had not been appointed a keeper over them. His duty was confined to the delivery of the Message entrusted to him.

11:4, 62; 71:11.

Important Words:

مدرارا (pouring down abundant rain) is derived from در which means, it (the milk) was or became copious or abundant; or it flowed copiously or abundantly. They say درت الناقة بلبنھا i.e. the she-camel yielded her milk, or made it to flow, copiously or abundantly. درت السماء بالمطر means, the sky poured down rain abundantly. سماء مدرار means, a sky pouring down abundance of rain. رزق دار means, continual and, uninterrupted sustenance (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse shows that the chief occupation of the people of ‘Ad was agriculture and that they depended on rainwater for the cultivation of their land, there being no wells or canals to irrigate it. It also hints that the acceptance of a Prophet of God improves and betters not only the moral and spiritual condition of a people but also their material condition and leads to all-round progress and prosperity.

Commentary:

The word بقیة (that which is left) is used to express goodness and perfection. The term بقیة القوم is applied to a person who is one of the best men of his people or community. See also 2:249. The word بقیة therefore, here signifies wealth earned by fair and honest means and in accordance with the laws of God. It may also mean God-given powers and capabilities.

By the words, I am not a keeper over you, Shu‘aib warns his people that they should not remain under the illusion that he would be able to save them from Divine punishment. The words embody the implication that such is the goodness of the Prophets of God that disbelievers, notwithstanding their hostility towards them, look upon them as a source of protection and blessing.

Commentary:

The Prophets are very jealous about the honour of God. Anyone else in Shu‘aib’s place would have been glad to see that his clan was so powerful that his enemy refrained from doing him harm out of fear of his tribesmen. But it makes Shu‘aib indignant that his security from harm has been ascribed to his clan and not to the protection of God, and he sharply rebukes his opponents saying: "Is my clan more powerful than God so that you are afraid to harm me because of them but you do not fear God and continue to disobey Him by indulging in plunder and fraud". Shu‘aib does not mind, by thus despising his own clan, running the risk of estranging them or making them angry. Only one thought holds sway over his mind and that thought relates to the honour of his God.

The Holy Prophet also never failed to display his love and jealousy for God in a manner worthy of his great spiritual position. One such opportunity occurred at Uhud when, the Muslims suffered a temporary defeat and the infidels, thinking that the Prophet had been killed, shouted slogans glorifying their national idol, Hubal. On that critical occasion, when considerations of safety demanded complete silence, the Holy Prophet rebuked the Muslims for keeping silent and urged them to glorify God at the top of their voices.

Important Words:

خلصوا (they retired) is derived from خلص which means: (1) it was or became clear or pure or unmixed. They say خلص من القومi.e. he retired or withdrew or went away from the people. The Quranic expression خلصوا نجیا means, they retired, conferring privately together (Lane).

نجیا (conferring together in private). نجى is derived from نجا and means: (1) a secret; (2) one to whom a secret is confided; (3) one who confers with another in private; (4) the act of conferring in private (Aqrab).

کبیر (leader) means, great in body or rank or nobility; big or full-grown; learned or most knowing; teacher or master; lord or chief; old or advanced in age, etc. (Lane). See also 11:4.

Commentary:

Christian critics of the Quran accuse it of being ignorant of even well-known facts of history, basing their criticism on the fact that it was Judah, the fourth among the brothers, and not Reuben, the eldest of them—as they take the word کبیر(leader) to mean—who declared that he would not go back to his father without Benjamin. It is strange that, whenever these self-styled judges of the Quran happen to come across any difference between the narrative of the Quran and that of the Bible, they complacently assume the Bible to be right, as if it is altogether free from anachronism and misstatements, while the fact is that it has been shown even by Christian writers themselves to occupy a very low place among reliable books of history. To doubt the authenticity of an historical fact related by the Quran merely on the basis that it does not agree with the Bible is, to say the least, simply capricious. But even assuming the present Biblical account to be correct, the Quranic account cannot be found fault with. The word which the Quran has used with respect to the brother who refused to go is کبیر which means, "big" or "elder" and not اکبر which means "the eldest." Judah, being the fourth son of Jacob, was indeed one of the big or elder brothers of Joseph.

Again, کبیر does not always mean "big" or "elder" but, as shown under Important Words, it also means "leader" and "great in estimation, rank or dignity," and it is in this sense that the word has been used here and applies to Judah and not to Reuben. For, according to the Bible, the misconduct of Judah’s three elder brothers had resulted in his taking precedence over them (Gen. 49:3-8). Of him Jacob said, "Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise…thy father’s children shall bow down before thee." (Gen. 49:8). That Judah was greater than Reuben in the eyes of Jacob is also apparent from the fact that, when Reuben offered his two sons as hostages for Benjamin, Jacob refused to send Benjamin (Gen. 42:37, 38), but when Judah said, "I will be surety for him," Jacob gave his consent (Gen. 43:9-10).

Jacob’s prediction of Judah’s superiority started the long feud which later separated Judah and Israel.

39:74.

Commentary:

The entering of the angels through every gate, referred to in the preceding verse, signifies that the angels will tell the inmates of Paradise that the latter had entered it through a particular gate on account of a particular good deed done by them and that their different virtues had been represented to them as different gates. By saying, Peace be unto you, as used in the present verse, the angels will remind believers that, as they practised every kind of virtue, they will enjoy every kind and form of peace from every side, the word سلام (peace) being repeated at every gate of Paradise separately.

The construction of the expression سلام علیکم (peace be unto you) is also intended to signify that the bliss of Paradise will be abiding and permanent because believers were "steadfast" i.e. displayed patience constantly and in all circumstances. The verse, therefore, purports to say to believers: "You stuck to virtue as long as you lived, thus you can rightly be regarded as having performed your duty. It was not in your power to avoid death. You adhered to virtue as long as it was in your power to do so. When, therefore, the hand of death put a stop to your good deeds, it became incumbent on God to grant you perpetual peace and everlasting bliss even as you would have ever continued on the path of virtue if you had lived." The verse thus contains an effective answer to the objection, "How can deeds of limited duration win unlimited reward?"

The verse also shows that those who lose heart under trials are not deserving of Paradise. Only those are deserving who maintain their connection with God in all circumstances and persevere in the doing of good deeds till the very end. See also v. 23.

15:43; 16:100; 17:66.

Important Words:

مصرخکم (succour you) and مصرخی (succour me) are both derived from صرخ which means, he called or called out; or he cried or he cried out vehemently; he called or cried for aid or succour or, transitively, he succoured or aided someone. اصرخ also means, he succoured or aided; he came to the help of. مصرخ means, aiding or succouring; or an aider or succourer (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

By uttering the words, I cannot succour you, Satan disclaims the possession of any power to lead man astray. It is indeed true that Satan has no power over man. He is only an instrument for the manifestation of man’s weaknesses, just as angels are instruments for the manifestation of his good qualities. In reality man is led astray by his own baser self, for, as the verse puts it, Satan only calls and it is man who obeys. The function of Satan is merely to make evil suggestions, just as the function of angels is to make good suggestions. Angels cannot make a man good, nor can Satan make him bad. They only show the way, good or bad, and man does the rest.

It may appear paradoxical on Satan’s part to claim, as he has done in this verse, that he asserted the Unity of God and disclaimed association with Him. In a sense it is true, because he who is conscious of God’s glory and has actually witnessed it cannot be guilty of shirk (setting up equals to God). Shirk comes into being when man accepts Satan’s evil suggestions and disobeys God. Satan may thus be likened to arsenic. So long as arsenic does not enter the system of man in toxic quantity, it is a valuable drug, but when man makes a wrong use of it, it becomes a deadly poison. Similarly, before Satan enters the spiritual system of man he is but a test-question and nothing more. Indeed, Satan is only an agent deputed to expose human weaknesses and frailties.

But here arises a question. If Satan has no power over man, why will he be punished with Hellfire? This question is answered in 7:13, where Satan is represented as having been created of fire. How can a thing which is created of fire be said to be punished when cast into fire? A burning piece of coal is not tormented when thrown into a furnace. This is why perhaps some of the mystics in Islam have held the view that it is not Satan, but his manifestations and vicegerents that will be punished. Satan, they say, is but an agent meant to try the mettle of man and only performs his functions.

Important Words:

ذوالقرنین (Dhul-Qarnain). قرن is derived from قرن (qarana). They say قرن شیئا بشیء i.e. he connected a thing with a thing. قرنmeans, horn; edge; border of the rising sun; trumpet of the Last Judgement; nobleman; one’s equal in age; a generation of men; people of one time; people of a time among whom there appears a Prophet of God; century; age (Lane & Aqrab). See also 6:7.

Commentary:

Before proceeding to know and establish the identity of Dhul-Qarnain it is necessary to state the reasons why at all his story has been related in the Quran and why it has found such prominent mention in the present Surah. A pointed reference has already been made in this Surah to the two periods of the great material progress of Christian nations. Its opening verses give a somewhat detailed account of the Dwellers of the Cave. We are told that in the early days of Christianity, Christians were true and righteous followers of their Faith. Even in later years when they came to acquire great political power but lost much of their former spiritual vitality and religious fervour, they did not altogether become divorced from their religion because till that time they had retained some faith in Jesus and because also a new Dispensation which demanded their allegiance had not yet come into force.

After the story of the Dwellers of the Cave an account of the Isra’ (اسراء) or Spiritual Journey of Moses which represents the advent of the Holy Prophet of Islam has been given in some detail in order to show that with the Holy Prophet’s appearance the first period of the material prosperity and progress of the Christian people would come to an end and though it would still be possible for them to make some progress they would reach the zenith of their material glory and greatness for a second time long after his advent. Spiritually, however, they would be a dead people and without the Holy Prophet’s acceptance there would be no redemption for them. This second period of material pomp and grandeur and the spiritual death of the Christian people are represented in Divine Scriptures by the phenomenal rise to power of Gog and Magog which forms one of the central themes of the present Surah. Because politically Gog and Magog and Dhul-Qarnain are inseparably linked with each other, as will appear from the following paragraphs, Dhul-Qarnain’s account also has been given at some length in this Surah.

Now as to Gog and Magog. These names were given to certain tribes who lived in the extreme north-west of Asia and eastern Europe. The fertility of the Asiatic plains led these tribes to make inroads into the south and south-west of Asia. If these incursions had been uniformly successful the whole course of subsequent human history would have completely changed and, like the marauding Aryans before them, these people would also have settled in Asia and would have been converted to the various religions of the east. But, as is explained in the following verses, Dhul-Qarnain set up a formidable barrier which prevented their spreading into Asia and thus compelled them to move further west. Thus they became hedged in between the extreme north-west of Asia and eastern Europe and instead of penetrating into Asia they spread into other parts of Europe. There they came into contact with Christianity which they accepted and made their national Faith. But these people never ceased to cast longing eyes on the fertile lands of Asia and to cherish an intense desire to conquer them. The sense of frustration at their failure to fulfil their heartfelt desire deepened with every generation till it developed into a feeling of political hostility towards the Asiatic peoples which burst forth in its full fury in the last three centuries. Thus Dhul-Qarnain’s efforts to check these people from spreading into Asia, in a way, led to the great spiritual havoc caused among mankind by Dajjal which is the second name of Gog and Magog. As both Gog and Magog and Dhul-Qarnain are intimately connected with each other, Dhul-Qarnain has found a mention in the Quran along with the account of the second rise to power and prosperity of Christian nations who, in our age, represent Gog and Magog.

Who is this Dhul-Qarnain to whom the present and the following several verses refer and when and where did he live? Before an answer to this question is attempted it must be pointed out that the Quran is not a book of history. It does not merely record a historical event to establish its authenticity. The so-called stories mentioned in the Quran are, in fact, so many prophecies about future events. The story of Dhul-Qarnain also belongs to the same category. It is not merely an account of the military exploits of a great and noble conqueror who lived in the past but it contains also a prophetic reference to another great historical personage, a World Reformer, who was to appear in some future time—our own time. About the appearance of this Reformer who has been called "the Promised Messiah and Mahdi" repeated mention has been made in Muslim scriptures (Bukhari, Majah etc.). Thus the story of Dhu’1 Qarnain possesses both ahistorical and a spiritual significance and therefore deserves special study.

Dhul-Qarnain was the founder of the Medo-Persian Empire which represented the two horns of the ram of Daniel’s famous dream. Daniel says: "I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great" (Dan. 8:4). Quite in harmony with this part of Daniel’s dream, the Quran mentions three journeys of Dhul-Qarnain (vv. 87, 91, 94). This fact lends powerful support to the inference that Dhul-Qarnain is the descriptive name of a king of Media and Persia. And of all the kings of Media and Persia, the description given in the Quran most fitly applies to Cyrus. He ascended the throne of Persia after the death of his father and subsequently conquered Media which was a greater kingdom than Persia, and thus was fulfilled the second part of Daniel’s dream: "and behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other and the higher came up last" (Dan. 8:3).

The Quran has mentioned four distinctive marks of Dhul-Qarnain: (1) He was a righteous servant of God, and he was blessed with Divine revelation (vv. 87, 92 & 99). (2) He was a great conqueror and a kind and just ruler; and he treated the nations he conquered most benevolently (vv. 85, 89). (3) He marched to the west and made great conquests till he came to a place where he found the sun setting in a pool of murky water and then he turned to the East and conquered and subdued vast territories (vv. 85, 87, 88, 89). (4) Last of all he went to a midway region where lived a savage people and where Gog and Magog made inroads, and he built a wall there to stop these inroads (vv. 94-98). Now of the great monarchs and famous military captains of ancient times Cyrus possesses in the greatest measure the four above-mentioned qualifications. He therefore more than anybody else deserves to be considered as the Dhul-Qarnain of the Quran.

The first distinguishing mark of Dhul-Qarnain mentioned above is that he was a righteous man of God and was blessed with Divine revelation. The Bible agrees with the Quran in this respect. The Bible says:

That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid. Thus saith the Lord to His anointed, to Cyrus whose righthand I have holden, to subdue nations before him, that thou mayest know that I, the Lord which call thee by thy name, am the God of Israel…Now in the first year of Cyrus King of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus King of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing saying: Thus saith Cyrus King of Persia, the Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth and He hath charged me to build Him a house at Jerusalem which is in Judah (Isaiah, 44:28; 45:1-3; Ezra. 1:1-2 & 2 Chron. 36:22-23).

Thus according to the Bible Cyrus was Jehovah’s "friend", His "anointed" and "shepherd" and "performed all His pleasure" (Jew. Enc., vol. 4, p. 404 & Enc. Bib., vol. 1, col. 980).

Dhul-Qarnain’s second characteristic according to the Quran is that he was a great conqueror and ruler of vast territories. About this the Bible says:

Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, the Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he hath charged me to build Him a house at Jerusalem…Whose hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two-leaved gates…I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight; I will break in pieces the gates of brass and cut in sunder the bars of iron; and I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places (Ezra 1:2; Isaiah 45:1-3).

In this respect history also supports the Quran and the Bible. It represents Cyrus as a great conqueror and a very humane ruler who treated the nations he conquered most generously and in return received their most willing allegiance:

I knew that there were some who willingly obeyed Cyrus, that were many days’ journey, and others that were even some months’ journey distant from him, some, too, who had never seen him and some who knew very well that they never should see him; and yet they readily submitted to his government; for he so far excelled all other kings, as well as those that had received their dominion from their fore-fathers, as those that had acquired it by their own efforts…More than this he was most humane. His shield is stained by no horrible deeds of blood, of frightful revenge and cruelty…He spared and made gifts to conquered enemies…because no wide stream of blood separated him from the vanquished, he found the only possible basis for his giant structure in the raising of the conquerors and the conquered to equal privileges…Who is there that approaches him? He is not only beloved by his own people as a father incomparable in every way…He was not the product and child of his age but its creator and father. (Historians’ History of the World, under Cyrus).

Dhul-Qarnain’s third outstanding mark mentioned in the Quran is that he conquered and established a vast empire in the East as well as in the West. Now it is a well-known fact of history that Cyrus ruled over vast territories which extended to the waters of the Black Sea in the west and to the confines of Afghanistan, Samarkand and Bukhara in the East. About his conquests in the West it may briefly be stated that he had hardly become the ruler of Media and Persia when Croesus, the King of Lydia (Asia Minor), from his capital, Sardis, instigated the rulers of Babylon, Egypt and Sparta, and rose against him but within a few days suffered a crushing defeat and opened the way for Cyrus’ conquests up to the banks of the Black Sea. Cyrus conquered Babylon, Nineveh and Greek colonies which had extended to the north of Asia Minor to the Sea of Marmora. Thus he reached that pool of murky water which was situated to the West of that country. About Cyrus’ conquests in the East the Historians’ History of the World (vol. 2, under Cyrus) says:

How far to the East Cyrus extended his dominion we do not know, but it is probable that all the countries to the East which are mentioned in the older inscriptions of Darius as in subjection or rebellion were already subject in the time of Cyrus. In this case Chorasmia (Kharezm, the modern Khiva) and Sogdiana (Samarkand and Bukhara) belonged to him. He doubtless ruled also over a large portion of modern Afghanistan.

The following extract also from the Historians’ History of the World (under Cyrus) throws further light on the vast range of the conquests of Cyrus in both the West and the East.

But Cyrus finding, in like manner, the nations of Asia independent and setting out with a little army of Persians, obtained the dominion over the Medes by their own choice, and over the Hyrcanians in a similar manner; he subdued the Syrians, Assyrians, Arabians, Cappadocians, both the Phrygians, the Lydians, Carians, Phoenicians and Babylonians; he had under his rule the Bactrians, Indians and Cilicians as well the Sacians, Paphlagonians and Magadidians and many other nations of whom we cannot enumerate even the names. He had dominion over the Greeks that were settled in Asia and going down to the sea over the Cyprians and Egyptians. These nations he ruled though they spoke neither the same language with himself nor with one another; yet he was able to extend the fear of himself over so great a part of the world, that he astonished all and no one attempted anything against him… without a struggle the greatest empires, the two conquerors of Nineveh, surrendered to him both themselves and their own kings in chains, as had been done to none other; even Tyre, that proud and mighty city, unconquered and unconquerable, with whose lion-courage his predecessor and his successor, Nebuchadnezzar and Alexander alike, wrestled so fiercely and so long, did homage to him of her own free will. Above all, the little people of the Jews hailed him at the waters of Babylon as they had done no mortal before or since, as the victor and rescuer, the liberator and saviour.

The fourth notable feature of Dhul-Qarnain referred to in the Quran is that after his conquests he turned his attention to a midway region. Here lived a half savage people who were the target of constant attacks by Gog and Magog and he built a wall to stop these inroads. Now in order fully to understand and appreciate this Quranic passage it is necessary to know who Gog and Magog were. About these people the Bible says:

Son of man, set thy face toward Gog, of the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal, and prophecy against him, and say, Thus saith the Lord God: Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal: and I will turn thee about and put hooks into thy jaws…Persia, Cush and Put with them (Ezekiel 38:2-6).

This shows that according to the Bible, which is our first and main source of information about Gog and Magog, Russia, Moscow and Tobolsk which are all situated in northern regions were the homeland of these people.

History supports this Biblical account about Gog and Magog. Magog is mentioned in Genesis 10:2 as the second son of Japheth, between Gomer and Madai. Gomer representing the Cimmerian who lived to the east of Asia Minor and Madai the Medes, Magog must be a people located east of the Cimmerian and west of the Medes. But in the list of nations (Gen. 10) the term connotes rather the complex of Barbarian peoples dwelling at the extreme north and north-east of the geographical survey covered by the chapter…In Ezek. 39:6 Magog occurs as the name of a northern people, the leader of whom is Gog and in Revelation Gog and Magog are considered as a comprehensive term for the powers of evil. Josephus identified them with the Scythians, a name which among classical writers stands for a number of unknown ferocious tribes. According to Jerome Magog was situated beyond the Caucasus, near the Caspian Sea. This also is the same northern region where the Scythians lived. Herodotus indicates that these nomads (Scythians) came through the natural gate between the Caucasus and the Caspian Sea, the pass of Darband (Jew. Enc., under Gog and Magog & Historians’ History of the World, vol. 2, p. 582).

Now as quoted above from the Bible, Gog and Magog had conquered Persia and it is a well-known fact of history that "Persia fell into the hands of the Scythians or Median Emperor who ruled Ecbatana from whom it was delivered by Cyrus the Great" (Historians’ History of the World, vol. 2, p.589).

So it seems quite clear that the Scythians or Gog and Magog occupied territories to the north and north-east of the Black Sea and that they came from these territories through the pass of Darband and invaded and conquered and ruled over the Persians and that Cyrus had defeated them and delivered the Persians from their clutches.

As to the last point about Dhul-Qarnain—that he built a strong wall as a barrier against the inroads of Gog and Magog—we find that exactly at the place which according to Herodotus was the pass through which the Scythians made raids upon Persia stood a wall, the famous wall of Derbent. The Encyclopaedia Britannica (under Derbent) refers to this wall as follows:

Derbent or Darband, a town of Persia, Caucasia, in the province of Daghestan, on the western shore of the Caspian…And to the south lies the seaward extremity of the Caucasian wall, 50 miles long otherwise known as Alexander’s wall, blocking the narrow pass of the Iron Gate or the Caspian Gate. This, when entire, had a height of 29 feet and a thickness of about 10 feet, and with its iron gates and numerous watch-towers formed a veritable defence of the Persian Frontier.

This extract shows that there existed a wall which served as a barrier against, and protected Persia from, the attacks of the Scythians in the north. It is generally believed that this was built by Alexander the Great but this popular belief is against proven facts of history. Alexander defeated Darius in the summer of 330 B.C., but this defeat did not give him possession of the whole of Persia. Without pausing to take rest he proceeded to subdue the whole country, but had hurriedly to come back to quell a revolt in his rear. After this he marched on to Kabul, where he had to face another revolt in his army and it was only in the winter of 329 B.C., that he could come to India. He finished all this journey in such haste that some historians have doubted whether it could have been accomplished in such a short time. Anyhow, it is admitted that he fought his way to India and did not stop anywhere. From India he returned in 324 B.C. to Persia, where he had again to face a revolt in his army. After subduing it he started for home and died on the way in June, 323 B.C. (Enc. Brit., 14th edition, vol. 1, pp. 569, 570). These facts show that his military expeditions were like a whirlwind and he conquered a large part of the world in a very short time. Amidst these whirlwind expeditions he could not give attention to any vast project such as the building of a large wall of the nature of that under discussion. The popular notion that Alexander had built this wall seems to have arisen from the fact that Muslim commentators of the Quran mistook Dhul-Qarnain for Alexander.

But if Alexander did not build this wall it does not prove that Cyrus built it. We are not in possession of quite incontestable and conclusive historical evidence to show that Cyrus did build this wall. Our conclusion that he was its builder is based only on the following circumstantial evidence:

(a) Darius about whom Cyrus had seen a vision that his wings would overshadow Europe and Asia ascended the Persian throne after the death of the son of Cyrus. In order to break the power of the Scythians Darius passed through Greece and attacked them prom across Europe. It is inconceivable that Darius should have undertaken such a long, arduous and roundabout journey to attack these people from across south-east Europe when they lived very near him in the north. The inevitable conclusion is that the existence of a huge wall which only Cyrus before him could have built had made it impossible for him to cross over to the other side with a large force. Nor was it possible for him to demolish it or take his army safely through its gates. So in order to fulfil his mission the only possible and wise cause open to Darius was to attack the Scythians from the side of Europe.

(b) If there existed no impassable barrier of the nature of that under discussion it is inconceivable that, wise and far-seeing strategist as he was, Darius should have adopted a circuitous route of thousands of miles across Europe to attack the Scythians, his own country exposed to their attacks from across the border.

(c) The fact that before the time of Cyrus the Scythians made constant and uninterrupted raids on Persia but after his conquests these raids completely ceased, leads to the very probable conclusion that he must have set up a barrier which effectively checked these attacks, and that the barrier must be the famous wall at Derbent, mistakenly known as Alexander’s wall.

Important Words:

مراة (times) is the plural of مرة which is infinitive noun from مر which means, he or it passed. مر الدھر means, the time passed. مرة means, a time; one time; one action; a single action or act; turn; also an occasion. فعلته مرة means, I did it once (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The subject of "purdah," as stated under v. 32 above has been referred to at four different places in the Quran. Whereas 24:32 deals with "purdah" primarily within four walls of the house, v. 33:60 discusses "purdah" outside the house and on thoroughfares while vv. 33:33-34 speak of a restricted kind of "purdah", particularly enjoined on the Holy Prophet’s wives and by implication on all Muslim women, and by inference point to the fact that the principal centre of a woman’s activities is her home. The present verse, however, refers to another kind of "purdah," viz. that domestic servants and minor children too should not enter the private apartments of their masters or parents at three particular hours mentioned here without getting prior permission.

14:23; 15:43.

Important Words:

یوم (day) of which the plural is ایام means, time absolutely; day from sunrise to sunset; present time; now, etc. (1:4). ایام العرب means, the contests and fights of the Arabs. ابن الایام means, a person who is well acquainted with the conditions and circumstances of the time. ایام الله means, the favours and punishments of God (Aqrab). See also 1:4 and 14:6.

احزاب (parties) is the plural of حزب which means, a party or company of men and here signifies the parties who opposed the Prophets of God in their respective times. "The day of the parties" signifies the day when they met their doom.

17:15, 72; 69:20, 26; 83:21.

Commentary:

The expression کتابھا (its Book) mentioned in the previous verse has been substituted by the expression کتابنا (Our Book, i.e. Our Record) in the present verse, because the record of the deeds or actions of nations and individuals is preserved by God and they are judged and requited by Him accordingly. The word کتابھا may also signify their Shari‘ah, and the verse would then mean that every people would be judged according to their own Shari‘ah. See also 69:20, 26.

Commentary:

The rich owners of the "garden" in the parable are compared to those selfish, cruel and greedy persons who, besides exploiting the labour of others, are so stingy that they do not spend any part of their ill-gotten gains for the needy and the poor.