قَالَتْ

327

Important Words:

مریم (Mary) was the mother of Jesus. She was probably named after the sister of Moses and Aaron, known as Mariam (later pronunciation Miriam). The word, which is probably a compound one consisting of مر and یم it possesses, in Hebrew, a variety of interpretations, some of them being "bitter sea"; "drop of the sea"; "star of the sea"; "bitterness"; "mistress" or "lady". From two alternative roots Mariam might also mean, "the rebellious", or "the corpulent" (Enc. Bib. under Mary). It also means "exalted" (Cruden’s Concordance). Muslim traditionists ascribe to the word the meaning of "pious worshipper" (Kashshaf).

الرجیم (the rejected) is passive participle from رجم. They say رجمه i.e. he pelted him with stones; he smote and killed him; he drove him away; he cursed him; he boycotted or forsook him; he reviled or abused him. رجم الرجل means, the man said a thing on conjecture. رجم القبر means, he put up a stone at the tomb to serve as a sign. الرجیم means: (1) one whom God has driven away from His presence and mercy, i.e. the one rejected; (2) one whom God has cursed; (3) one who has been forsaken and abandoned; and (4) one who has been pelted with stones (Aqrab & Lane). It also means, one driven away or deprived of all goodness and virtue (Mufradat).

Commentary:

Mary’s mother had made the vow in the hope that she would be blessed with a son whom she would dedicate to the service of God. Instead a daughter was born to her. So she was naturally perplexed.

The words, Allah knew best what she had brought forth, form a parenthetical clause spoken by God whereas the following words, the male was not like the female, may be taken to have been either spoken by God or by Mary’s mother. Most probably they are God’s words and mean as rendered in the text, that the female child she had brought forth was superior to the male child she desired to have. If taken to have been spoken by Mary’s mother, they would mean that the female child she had given birth to could not be like the male child she desired, inasmuch as only a boy was fit to do the special service to which she desired to dedicate him.

The clause, I have named her Mary, contains an implied prayer to God to make the girl as exalted and as good and virtuous as the name Mary, meaning exalted or a pious worshipper, signified.

The words, I commit her and her offspring to Thy protection from Satan, the rejected, offer some difficulty. If Mary’s mother intended her child to be dedicated to the service of God, she must have known that the child would remain unmarried for life. What is, then, the sense in offering prayer for the child’s offspring? The most probable explanation is that God had told her in a vision that her daughter would grow up to womanhood and would have a child, whereupon she prayed that Mary and her child might both be granted God’s protection from Satan, the rejected. In spite of this, however, she appears to have left the future of Mary in God’s hand and dedicated her, as she had originally intended, to the service of God (3:38; 3:45; also Gospel of the Birth of Mary). This must have been an exceptional case, for ordinarily only males were eligible for such dedication. The assumption that Mary’s mother had a vision that her daughter would have a son is not unfounded. It finds mention in the Gospel of Mary (3:5) though perhaps in a somewhat different form.

There was nothing unusual about the prayer of Hanna, Mary’s mother, that Mary and her offspring might be protected from satanic influences. All pious parents are actuated by such a desire for their children and pray that they should grow up to lead good and virtuous lives. But unfortunately this simple and natural prayer of Mary’s mother, coupled with a saying of the Holy Prophet to the effect that Mary and her son Jesus were free from the touch of Satan, has given rise to widespread misunderstanding and has been made the basis of an entirely erroneous and misleading belief among a section of Muslims, besides affording to Christians a welcome excuse for attacking Islam. A section among the latter-day Muslims has come to believe that of all men and women, Jesus and his mother, Mary, alone were immune from the evil influences of Satan.

As hinted above, this doctrine is based on a tradition of the Holy Prophet which says: "No child is born but Satan touches it at the time of its birth and makes it cry, except Jesus and his mother Mary" (Bukhari). Unfortunately, this saying of the Holy Prophet has been shorn of its true setting and utterly misunderstood. These words of the Prophet, besides being not strictly relevant as they refer only to the touch of Satan at the time of the birth of a child and not absolutely, were necessitated by the fact that the Jews, out of their enmity towards Jesus, charged him and his mother with the infamous accusation that, God forbid, Mary led an immoral life, and conceived out of legal wedlock, and that consequently Jesus, her son, had an illegal birth. It was to refute this filthy charge that the Holy Prophet uttered the above-quoted words. So this saying of the Prophet is not intended to be general but has only a particular significance with a specific setting. In fact this hadith mentions the names of Jesus and his mother Mary only by way of citing an instance and what is meant is that all mortals born of a woman are likely to come under the influence of Satan except such as possess moral and spiritual qualities like unto those possessed by Mary and her son. The Arabic language is not wanting in instances where a person is named not in his individual capacity, but as representing a class of people (Kashshaf & Manawi). The names of Jesus and Mary have been specifically chosen because of the aspersion upon them by the wicked Jews. Another equally good interpretation is that the words "no child is born" occurring in this hadith are, as hinted above not general but have been used in a restricted sense, signifying not all children absolutely but only such children as were born out of wedlock in the days of Jesus, and the name of Mary has been added because it was her abnormal conception that occasioned such birth of Jesus. Another saying of the Holy Prophet supports this interpretation. Says he, "every child is born in the likeness of Islam; it is only his parents that make him a Christian, a Jew or a Fire-Worshipper" (Bukhari). So the "touch" of Satan referred to in the foregoing hadith cannot be general; it must be taken in a restricted sense.

That Jesus and his mother are not alone in being free from the touch of Satan is clear from a number of Quranic verses and several sayings of the Holy Prophet. To quote only one instance from each, the Quran says: (O Satan,) surely thou shalt have no power over My servants, except such of the erring ones as choose to follow thee (15:43). And the Holy Prophet says: "If a person goes in unto his wife praying, 'O my Lord, keep me away from Satan and so too, keep away the child you grant me', and the wife conceives on such an occasion, the child born will be free from the touch of Satan" (Bukhari).

As for himself personally the Holy Prophet says, "Every one of you has a satan attached to him (who tries to lead him astray) but God has helped me against my satan who has turned Muslim, i.e. obedient and submissive" (Musnad). This means that so far as the Holy Prophet was concerned, Satan had become virtually non-existent. This is certainly a much more exalted position than mere protection against the attack of Satan. Truly has the Prophet remarked, "If Moses and Jesus had been alive, they would have found themselves forced to follow me" (Kathir).

Finally, it may be noted that though Islam declares all Prophets of God to be virtually safe from the influence of Satan, the Bible does not ascribe this protection to Jesus for the New Testament clearly states at a number of places that he was tempted by the Devil for no less than forty days (e.g. Mark 1:12, 13).

328

Important Words:

کفلھا (made him her guardian) is derived from کفل. They say کفله i.e. he was or became responsible for him; he became his guardian. کفل خالدا زیدا means, he made Zaid the guardian of Khalid; he gave Khalid in the guardianship of Zaid (Aqrab).

زکریا (Zachariah or Zacharias) was the name of an Israelite holy person whom the Quran presents as a Prophet (6:86-90) but of whom the Bible speaks only as a priest (Luke 1:5). The person presented as a Prophet by the Bible is Zechariah (Zech. 1:1; mark the difference in spelling) of whom the Quran, however, makes no mention. زکریا of the Quran was the father of Yahya (John) who was a cousin of Jesus.

المحراب (chamber) is derived from حرب for which see 2:280. محرابmeans, a room in the uppermost story of a house; a chamber to which one ascends by stairs; the chief sitting place in a room or a house; the place or niche where the Imam stands while leading the Prayers in a mosque; a mosque or a place of worship (Aqrab & Lane). محراب (chamber of Prayer or the place of the Imam in a mosque) is probably so called because it is a place where one fights the forces of evil or where one gets divorced from the affairs and concerns of the world, the word حرب meaning fighting as well as being despoiled or deprived of all possessions (Mufradat).

Commentary:

Many fantastic stories have been woven round Mary’s reply to Zachariah’s question as to whence she got the gifts he found lying about her. The gifts were evidently brought by worshippers visiting the place and there was also nothing extraordinary in her reply that the gifts were from Allah, for every good thing that comes to man is really from God, He being the final agency. In fact, from a girl of Mary’s religious upbringing any other reply would rather have been surprising. The accounts of Mary having been provided with heavenly fruits by angels are, therefore, nothing but the figment of the commentators’ own minds and find no support whatsoever from the Quran or the sayings of the Holy Prophet. The pious reply of the child, however, made a deep impression on the mind of Zachariah and awakened in the depths of his soul the latent and natural desire of possessing a similarly virtuous child of his own.

The words, Surely Allah gives to whomsoever He pleases without measure, are most probably the words of God and not those of Mary. But if they are Mary’s words, they make her reply all the more impressive and Zachariah’s earnest prayer, referred to in the following verse, all the more justified.

337

Commentary:

The news of a son, however happy in ordinary circumstances, greatly perplexed Mary who was not only as yet unmarried but was also meant to remain so for life. The verse reflects her justified perplexity. It also shows that Jesus had no father, as hinted in Mary’s words, no man has touched me. Having been dedicated to the service of the Temple, Mary could not, consistently with her vow of celibacy, marry. If she was to marry and have children in due course there was no occasion for her to be surprised when the birth of a child was announced to her by the angel in a vision. No normal girl would be surprised if she were told in a vision that a son would be born to her; for she would naturally infer that the promised child would be born to her after marriage. In the Gospel of Mary, the vow of celibacy is clearly referred to. In chapter 5 of the said Gospel we read that when the high priest made a public order that all the virgins living in the temple who had reached their fourteenth year should return home, all the other virgins yielded obed-ience to this command, but "Mary the virgin of the Lord" alone answered that she could not comply with it; and for this refusal of hers she assigned the reason that both she and her parents had devoted her to the service of the Lord, and that she had vowed virginity to the Lord, which vow she was resolved never to break (Gospel of Mary, 5: 4, 5, 6).

Mary’s subsequent marriage with Joseph was thus contrary to the vow and against her own wish. She was, however, compelled by circumstances to marry when found with child. The priests had to arrange her marriage with Joseph in order to avoid scandal. It does not, however, appear from the Gospels how Joseph was prevailed upon to consent, for he was obviously in the dark about her being pregnant at the time of marriage (Matt. 1:18, 19). Presumably some plausible excuse was found to justify the breaking of the vow.

Christians and Jews are both agreed that the birth of Jesus was something out of the ordinary–the Christians holding it as supernatural and the Jews as illegitimate (Jew. Enc.). Even in the family birth register, Jesus’ birth was recorded as such (Talmud). This fact alone should constitute a sufficient proof of Jesus’ birth being out of the ordinary. But it was neither supernatural nor illegitimate. To quote only one medical authority: "Medical men have not ruled out altogether the possibility of natural parthenogenesis of the production of a child by a female, without any relation to a male. Such a statement off-hand appears ridiculous, yet its possibility, from a purely biological standpoint, under certain conditions cannot be disregarded. Dr. Timme calls attention to this possibility as the result of a certain type of tumours, known as arrhenoblastoma (from the Greek words for "male" and "germ") which are occasionally found in the female pelvis or lower body. These tumours are capable of generating male sperm cells. Naturally, if these male sperm cells were alive and active and came in contact with the female’s own egg cell or ovum, conception might occur. There is nothing illogical in this process of reasoning…Dr. Timme states that there are twenty authentic cases reported in Europe in which an arrhenoblastoma had been found to develop male sperm cells…The arrhenoblastoma is a tumour that contains blastodermic cells...These cells are creative structures and are capable of development at any time and the fact, therefore, that arrhenoblas-tomacontaining these "embryonic cells" might create testicular tissue, capable of producing male sperm cells seems scientifically not impossible. If living male sperm cells are produced in a female body by arrhenoblastoma, the possibility of self-fertilization of a woman, even though a virgin, cannot be denied. That is to say, her own body would produce the same result as though sperm cells from a man’s body had been transferred to hers in the more usual way, or by a physician’s aid" (American Medical Journal).

There are cases on record of children having been born without fathers: "A young girl of great moral purity became pregnant without the slightest knowledge of the source… There is a case of pregnancy in an unmarried woman, who successfully resisted an attempt at criminal connection and yet became impreg-nated and gave birth to a perfectly formed female child" (Anomalies and Curiosities of Medicine by George M. Gould, A.M., M.D., and Walter L. Payle, A.M., M.D., published by W. B. Saunders & Co., London).

939

Important Words:

ادارکوا (successively arrived) is derived from درك. They say درك المطر i.e. the rain dropped with close consecutiveness. ادرکهmeans, he attained, reached or overtook him. ادارکوا which is the same as تدارکوا means, they attained, reached, overtook or came up with one another; or the last of them attained, reached, overtook or came up with the first of them. The expression حتی اذا ادارکوافیھا جمیعا means, until when they have overtaken one another; or until they have successively arrived therein all together (Lane).

Commentary:

The words, For each preceding party there shall be double punishment, are explained in a saying of the Holy Prophet which is to the effect that he who starts a good practice, i.e. he who does a good deed in such a manner that others copy and follow him, shall have a double reward, and he who starts a bad practice shall have a double punishment. In fact, a person who does a good or a bad deed not only benefits or suffers by it himself, but leaves it as an example to follow for those who come after him. He, therefore, deserves a double reward or punishment as the case may be. The above-quoted words of the verse are also intended to point to the fact that each party that follows another also precedes the one that follows it. So there is no question of awarding double punishment to one and letting the other go with only single punishment.

1054

Commentary:

This verse shows how necessary it is to preach the truth to others. We must not fail to tell our brethren what is good for them and what is not. The thought that those in whom we inculcate the doing of good will not benefit by our advice should not deter us from doing our duty. Our preaching may or may not produce any good result, but we will have done our duty and will not be held answerable before God for neglecting to do what we should have done. The verse mentions two possible results of preaching and both are equally meritorious: (1) either our preaching will take effect and the people preached to will become righteous, or (2) we will at least have done our duty to God.

1453

Important Words:

عجوز (old woman) is derived from عجز which means, he lacked strength or power or ability. عجز عن العمل means, he was unable to do the work; he was too old to do it. عجزت المرأة means, the woman became old. The word عجوز has a variety of meanings, some of which are, an old and aged woman; a woman old and weak; a man’s wife whether old or young; also a woman’s husband; an old or aged man; a man old and weak (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The verse does not mean that the expression of surprise on the part of Abraham’s wife implied that she doubted the truth of the news that had been communicated to her by God. It is far from an ordinary believing woman to express doubt with regard to the great and wonderful powers of God, much further from the wife of a Prophet who had already witnessed many signs of the power of God. In fact, she wondered at the unusual news that a son would be born to her at such an advanced age. Her surprise was, therefore, at the magnitude of the boon that was about to be conferred on her. Abraham himself had expressed similar surprise when the glad tidings about the birth of a son in his extreme old age was given to him (see 15:55-57).

1527

Important Words:

راودته (she sought to seduce him). راود is derived from راد which means, he or it came and went; he went to and fro; he was restless; it also means, he sought or desired a thing; راوده means, he endeavoured or sought to turn him to or from a thing. راوده عن الامر means, he endeavoured to turn him by blandishment or by deceitful arts from the thing. راوده علی الامرmeans, he endeavoured to turn him by blandishment, etc., to the thing. The Quranic expression سنراود عنه اباہ means, we will endeavour to turn his father from him by blandishment or artifice and to make him yield him to us; or we will strive to obtain him of his father. So the words راودته عن نفسه would mean, she desired or sought of him a sinful act using blandishment or artifice for that purpose; she tempted him to do the sinful act; she endeavoured to entice him and to make him yield himself to her; more literally, she endeavoured to turn him by blandishment, etc., from his disdainful noncompliance or from his purpose and will. الرود really signifies going about in search of a thing. المراودة means, seeking to make a person do a thing against his will (Lane & Mufradat).

ھیت لك (now come). ھیت is a word of exclamation denoting wonder. The Arabs say ھیت للحلم i.e. what forbearing mildness or clemency! The word is used in the sense of ھلم or تعال or اقبل meaning, "come or come forward." It is also used to signify "hasten" and "set forth journeying." The words therefore mean, "come thou" or "now come." The words also signify, "come, I am ready for thee, or I am ready to receive thee" (Lane & Mufradat).

معاذ الله (I seek refuge with God). معاذ is the noun-infinitive from عاذ. They say عاذ به من کذا i.e. he sought protection by him from that or sought refuge in him from that; or he put his trust in him, or relied upon him, for protection from such a thing. معاذ means, a refuge; a place to which one has recourse for protection or preservation; also the time at which one does so. The expressions معاذ الله and عیاذ الله and عیاذا بالله are all synonymous with اعوذ بالله معاذا i.e. I seek protection or preservation by God (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The verse clearly shows that the woman who sought to seduce Joseph failed in her efforts and that Joseph successfully resisted her temptation. The words, "He is my Lord," refer to God, and not to Joseph’s Egyptian master, as some commentators have wrongly supposed. It is difficult to imagine that a highly spiritual man like Joseph should have abstained from sin merely out of regard for the paltry favours of a human benefactor and not for the manifold Divine boons.

Whatever honour Joseph had received from his Egyptian master was really in fulfilment of God’s promises. So it was for the sake of his True Lord and Master that he followed the path of rectitude and refused to be seduced into sin, which would have amounted to an act of ingratitude far more towards God than to any human benefactor.

Joseph not only himself abstained from the heinous sin, but also warned his master’s wife against its evil consequences by saying that the wrongdoers never prosper. The expression راودته translated as "she sought to seduce him against his will," literally means, as shown under Important Words, "she endeavoured to turn him from his purpose or will by blandishment and artifice and make him yield to her against his disdainful noncompliance." This meaning shows that Joseph abhorred the evil deed to which she invited him and was determined not to yield.

1529

Commentary:

When Joseph saw that all his exhortations and admonitions to his master’s wife to desist from her evil course were of no avail, he thought he should no longer stay in the room, lest it might give rise to unfounded suspicions. So he hastened to leave her presence. Thereupon the woman, in order to prevent him from leaving the room, ran to the door to reach it before Joseph succeeded in getting out. There was thus a sort of race for the door. It was most probably at the door that the woman pulled Joseph’s shirt in order to pull him back and in so doing she tore his shirt at the back.

Here, again, the Bible differs from the Quran. The Bible says that when the woman caught hold of Joseph’s garment, he left it in her hand (Gen. 39:12). But as the Hebrews used to wear one garment only, which was generally long enough to cover the whole body, it is inconceivable that Joseph should have run away naked, leaving the only garment he was wearing in the woman’s hand. So the Quranic account that Joseph’s shirt was torn in the scuffle seems to be more reasonable.

1536

Commentary:

Having made the women admit that their suspicions were baseless and that the sinful act had not yet been committed, Potiphar’s wife made an open confession before her guests who were her friends that she had failed in her efforts to tempt Joseph into sin. This unqualified confession of Potiphar’s wife gives the direct lie to the absurd allegation of some commentators that Joseph had become almost inclined towards committing the foul deed.

Strange are the ways of God. The very way by which this woman sought to bring disgrace upon Joseph proved to be the means of his future greatness.