ٱضْرِب

7:161.

Important Words:

عصا (rod). عصا الرجل means, he beat the man with a rod. عصا القوم means, he brought together the people, or he made them agree on some matter of common concern. عصا means: (1) a rod strong enough to support the weight of a man; (2) communal and family life; (3) a community; (4) the shin-bone (Aqrab).

الحجر (rock) is from حجر i.e. it prevented or resisted. الحجر means, a stone; a great mass of stone; a rock (Lane).

Commentary:

This verse mentions another favour bestowed on the Israelites. When once they were hard pressed by thirst and no water was procurable in the desert, God saved them by revealing to Moses the knowledge of a rock from which water flowed out when struck with a rod.

The demand of the Israelites for water and their being supplied with it is mentioned at two places in the Bible. At one place mention is made of the twelve springs of Elim, but nothing is said there of Moses’ striking the rock with his rod (Exod. 15:27). At the other place, Moses, by divine command, struck the rock Horeb with his rod, and there flowed out abundant water with which the Israelites and their animals slaked their thirst (Exod. 17:1-7 Numb. 20:2-11). Here no mention is made of the number of springs. It appears that the Quran refers to the occurrence relating to the rock of Horeb because, with the only difference that the Bible does not give the number of springs whereas the Quran gives a definite number, almost all the details narrated in the Bible concur with the narrative of the Quran. As for the slight difference with regard to the number of springs, reason favours the narrative of the Quran. The Israelites numbered several thousands besides riding animals and beasts of burden, and one spring was certainly insufficient for such a large number, especially when we take into consideration the fact that the thirsty Israelites were, according to the Bible, in a state of extreme exasperation at that time and were prepared even to stone Moses to death. It is possible, however, that at the source there was only one mouth of the spring, but it divided into twelve channels as it flowed down the rock, the number being in conformity with the number of the Israelite tribes.

If at present there is no trace of the twelve springs at that spot, it is no wonder; for it is a matter of common experience that sometimes several springs rising at the same spot have some of their openings closed and cease to flow. From a testimony quoted by Sale, however, it appears that even as late as the end of the fifteenth century, twelve springs actually flowed there. He says: "The rock stands within the border of Arabia and some of his (the Prophet’s) countrymen must needs have seen it if he himself had not, as it is most probable he had. And in effect he seems to be in the right. For one who went into those parts in the end of the fifteenth century tells us expressly that the water issued from twelve places of the rock, according to the number of the tribes of Israel" (Al-Koran by Sale, page 8).

The miracle of Moses on this occasion did not lie in bringing about a thing against the known laws of nature, but in the fact that God revealed to him the specific spot where water was just ready to flow at a blow of his rod. It is within the experience of those who study geological conditions in rocky districts that sometimes water flows underneath small hillocks or rocks and gushes forth when the rock is struck with something heavy or pointed.

As Manna and Salwa had already been bestowed on the Israelites, God now fittingly asks them to eat and drink of what Allah has provided. But as a life of ease and independence is likely to make men arrogant and mischievous, God at the same time warns the Israelites to exercise self-restraint and refrain from creating trouble and disorder in the land.

2:180.

Important Words:

الموتی (the dead, i.e. dead persons) is the plural of میت (a dead person) which means: (1) one really dead; (2) one like dead (3) one dying or nearing death (Lane). See also under 2:20, 2:29 & 2:57.

Commentary:

In the preceding verses God related some of the misdeeds of the Israelites in order to bring home to them the fact that, in face of such conduct on their part, it was idle to expect that God would continue to bestow favours on them. In the verses under comment i.e. 2:73, 74, 75, God recounts one of their final misdeeds which filled the cup of their iniquity to overflowing and sealed their fate.

The Quran has not named the person slain, but when read with the context and the relevant facts of history, the verses appear to apply to the murder of a Companion of the Holy Prophet by the Jews at Medina. Following are some of the details of the incident which was the first public act of enmity perpetrated by the Medinite Jews against Muslims.

The Holy Prophet, on his arrival at Medina, entered into a treaty with the Jews. But the growing prosperity and success of Islam gradually roused the jealousy of the Jewish leaders and some of them began secretly to incite their people against the Muslims. The crisis came with the Battle of Badr when the jealousy of the Jews reached its highest pitch. The result was that the Jews were emboldened and assumed a highly insolent attitude towards Islam. A short time after the said battle, a Muslim lady happened to go to a Jew’s shop to make some purchases. The shopkeeper and the other Jews sitting at the shop behaved very insultingly toward her, and the shopkeeper mischievously fastened the lower part of her mantle to the upper part thereof with a thorn so that when, being unable to bear their insults, she unsuspectingly rose to depart, part of her body became naked, at which the shopkeeper and other Jews burst out laughing. This made the helpless lady cry for help. A Muslim happened to be near. Hearing her cry, he rushed to the place and in the fight that ensued the shopkeeper was killed, whereupon the Jews fell upon the Muslim and murdered him and the situation threatened to develop into a sort of a riot. This happened towards the close of the second year of the Hijrah. It is with reference to this murder that the preceding verse says, and remember the time when you slew a person and differed among yourselves about it. The Jews differed among themselves about the murder, for none of them admitted that he had committed it, though all adopted a highly insulting attitude towards the Holy Prophet when he exhorted the Jewish leaders to fear God and abstain from jeopardising the peace of the city. The result was ongoing enmity between the Jewish tribe of Banu Qainuqa‘ and the Muslims culminating in the banishment of the tribe from Medina (Hisham, Tabari & Zurqani).

But the real responsibility lay on the ringleader of the Medinite Jews—Ka‘b bin Ashraf—who had taken a leading part in inciting the Jewish tribes and kindling their hatred against the Muslims. The man was looked upon as their leader by the Jews of the whole of Arabia. He was a very rich man and a poet of eminence. Ka‘b was also a party to the treaty which was concluded between the Jews and the Holy Prophet on the arrival of the latter in Medina. Inwardly, however, he harboured deep hatred against Islam and its Holy Founder which grew in intensity as Islam made progress. When the Muslims won a decisive victory at Badr, Ka‘b, realizing that Islam was taking a deep root in the soil, thought it imperative to make strenuous efforts to extirpate the new faith. So he at once started for Mecca and there, with the aid of his powerful eloquence and stirring verses, set ablaze the fire of enmity and hatred that was already smouldering in the hearts of the Quraish, and with the skirts of the sacred curtain of the Ka‘bah in their hands, he made them take a solemn oath that they would know no rest until they had destroyed Islam and its Founder. Thereafter he toured among other tribes of Arabia and stirred them up against the Prophet and the small body of his followers. Having lighted up the fire of hatred and enmity throughout the land, he returned to Medina and began to create mischief by making scurrilous poems in which mention was made of Muslim women and the ladies nearly related to the Holy Prophet, in the most offensive language. These verses were widely published and were publicly recited by the enemies of Islam. The result of these tactics was that feelings of extreme hatred were excited in the minds of the Jews who assumed an openly hostile attitude to the Holy Prophet and his Companions, throwing to the winds their treaty obligations. It was this attitude of the Jews which emboldened them to commit such offences as the one referred to above, in open defiance of the terms of the treaty they had concluded with the Holy Prophet on his arrival at Medina (Hisham, Zurqani & Dawud).

Thus the real culprit responsible for the assassination of the Muslim referred to above was no other than Ka‘b bin Ashraf, the bold and wicked Jewish leader, who had instigated the Jews to rebellion and breach of contract. He even did not hesitate to plot against the life of the Holy Prophet (Zurqani). His guilt was an established fact. He was guilty of high treason against the State and was the arch-enemy of peace. So he was put to death by the Prophet’s command in the third year of Hijrah. It is to this sentence of death that the present verse refers when it says: then We said, "Smite him (the murderer, i.e. the real culprit) for a part of the offence against him (the murdered person)”, which meant that the sentence of death was only a partial punishment of the offence, the rest of the punishment being reserved for the Hereafter. In fact, there are certain sins which are atoned for by the punishment which is inflicted for them on the offender in this world. But the offence of wilfully killing an innocent man and particularly one who is a righteous servant of the Lord, is not adequately punished with the execution of the murderer, which is only a partial punishment. The real punishment of such an offence is Hell (4:94).

By using the word قتلتم (you slew) in the plural number, the Quran hints that the whole Jewish community of Medinawas responsible for it. For the sentence of death, however, the ringleader, who had brought about a tense atmosphere of hatred and enmity, was selected.

The clause, thus Allah gives life to the dead, signifies that retaliation is an effective form of giving life to the dead, for punishing the offender prevents the would-be assassins from committing further murders, and thus many who would otherwise have been victims of assassination are saved. That retaliation is a sure means of giving life is clearly alluded to in the Quran itself. We read in 2:180, and there is life for you in the law of retaliation, O men of understanding.

Finally, it may be noted that these verses have also been applied to the attempted murder of Jesus by the Jews (for which see Part I of the Quran published by Anjuman Taraqqi Islam, Qadian, in 1916), but recent research strongly supports the above explanation. It may also be noted that the interpretation put on this verse by some commentators that a physically dead person was restored to life is quite erroneous, being unsupported by the context of the verse as well as the authentic teaching of Islam. It is a mere legend which has no foundation in fact.

2:229.

2:238; 4:33.

Important Words:

قوامون (guardians) is derived from قام i.e. he stood. They say قام علیه i.e. he tended or took care of it or him. قام بالیتم means, he maintained the orphan. قام علی المرأة means, he undertook the maintenance of the woman; he undertook or managed her affairs; he protected her, or became her guardian. قوم الشیء (qawwama) means, he set the thing right, or made it straight or even. قوام therefore means, one who manages affairs well; a ruler or governor; one in a position to issue orders (Lane & Aqrab).

قانتات (obedient) is the plural of قانتة being the active participle from قنت. They say قنت لله i.e. he was obedient to God. امرأة قنوت means, a woman humble, submissive and obedient to her husband (Lane). See also 2:117.

نشوز (disobedience) is the noun-infinitive from نشز i.e. he rose or raised himself. نشزت المرأة علی زوجھا means, the woman rose against, or was disobedient to her husband and exalted herself against him and resisted him and was an evil companion to him. نشز المرء علی زوجته means, the husband treated his wife unjustly and was unkind to her or forsook her or hated her and was an evil companion to her (Lane & Aqrab).

اھجروھن (leave them alone). ھجر means, he cut him off from friendly or loving communion or intercourse; he forsook or abandoned him; he "cut" him, i.e. he boycotted him and ceased to speak to him or to associate with him. ھجر الشیء means, he forsook, or abandoned the thing; he shunned or avoided it. ھجر زوجته means, he separated himself from his wife or kept away from her (Lane & Mufradat).

اضربوھن (chastise them) is derived from ضرب. They say ضربه i.e. he beat, struck, smote or hit him (with hand, stick, etc.); hence, he chastised him.

علیا (High) is derived from علا i.e. he or it was or became high, elevated, lofty or exalted. تعالی means, he was or became high, elevated, exalted or supremely exalted or extolled. علی means high, elevated or lofty in rank, condition or state. العلیwhich is one of the attributive names of God (e.g. 2:256) means, the High; the Most High; He above Whom is nothing. المتعالی is also an attributive name of God (e.g. 13:10) meaning, He Who is Great or Supremely Great, the High or the Most High; One Higher than every other high one. تعال means, come thou, as if said by a man in a high place when calling upon a man in a low place, but is also used generally (Lane).

Commentary:

The verse gives two reasons why man has been made the head of the family: (a) his superior mental and physical powers; (b) his being bread-earner and maintainer of the family. It is natural and fair that he who earns and supplies the money should have the final say in the disposal of affairs.

The word قانتات (obedient) spoken of wives may mean either obedient to God, or to husbands.

The expression, guard the secrets of their husbands, means that when the husbands are at home, they are obedient to them and guard their secrets; and when they are away, they not only guard their secrets but take care of their property and guard their own chastity.

The clause, leave them alone in their beds, may mean: (a) abstention from conjugal relations with them; (b) sleeping in separate beds; or (c) ceasing to talk to them. The use of the word "beds" also incidentally implies that the disobedient wives are to stay at home and are not to be allowed to leave or be turned out of their homes.

The measures mentioned in the verse are not to remain in force for an indefinite period, for wives are not to be left like a thing suspended (4:130). Four months, according to the Quran, is the utmost limit for abstention from conjugal relations, i.e. for practical separation (2:227).

If the husband deems the affair to be sufficiently grave, he will have to observe the conditions mentioned in 4:16.

Regarding "chastisement" mentioned as a last resort in the verse under comment a Companion reports the Holy Prophet to have said that if at all a Muslim has to beat his wife, the beating should not be such as to leave any mark on her body (Tirmidhi, ch. on Rida‘). According to Abu Dawud and Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet forbade the beating of women at all, but when ‘Umar complained that they had become refractory, he gave the permission with the aforementioned condition; but on complaint of ill-treatment of women by their husbands he indignantly said that the husbands who beat their wives were not the best among men (Kathir, iii). On another occasion the Holy Prophet is reported to have said: "The best among you is he who treats his wife best and I am the best of you in this respect" (Tirmidhi).

The Divine attributes of "High and Great" mentioned at the end of the verse are also intended to warn husbands that the chastisement of their wives, if at all resorted to should not be unjust or vindictive or highhanded; for if they are high and great above their wives, there is One Who is High and Great above all and He shall call husbands to account for any improper use of the qualified authority given to them over their wives.

5:13.

2:61.

2:58; 20:81.

Commentary:

See notes on 2:58 & 61.

The words, And they wronged Us not, mean that they did not harm the cause of the religion revealed by God

Important Words:

فوق (upper part) is derived from فاق. They say فاقھم i.e. he was or became above them. So فوق means, the location or place that is above or over a person or a thing. They say فوقه رأسه i.e. his upper part is his head (Lane).

Commentary:

This verse shows that the angels are, as it were, intermediaries between God and men. It is through them that God’sassistance comes to men.

The verse also hints that there are some angels whose function is to strengthen the hearts of good men and make them firm, while there are others who are deputed to cast terror into the hearts of wicked men. So God bade the former class of angels to strengthen the hearts of the believers and told them that He would cast terror into the hearts of the disbelievers through the other class of angels.

God instructed the believers to strike the disbelievers at "the upper parts of their necks" because the upper part of the neck, i.e. that which is just below the head, is considered to be the best point for dealing an effective blow with the sword. This order related to such of the enemy as deserved to be killed and without killing whom the Muslims could not defend themselves. The striking on the “finger-tips” was meant to incapacitate the enemy and make them unfit for fighting. This order thus related to those of the enemy who, so far as possible, were to be spared with the infliction of minimum injury. Both these orders were faithfully carried out, for although the Muslims were very weak at Badr, they were able to kill seventy of the disbelievers, mostly leaders, and take as many prisoners, while the enemy could kill only fourteen of them.

10:25; 57:21.

Important Words:

ھشیما (dry grass broken into pieces) is derived from ھشم. They say ھشم الشیء i.e. he broke the thing. ھشمه (hashshama-hu) means, he broke it much or crushed it, namely a dry thing or anything hollow. ھشیما means, a plant that is dry and breaks or is broken into pieces (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The subject of the worldly life has been further elaborated by another parable in this verse. It purports to say that in the beginning worldly life looks very beautiful and attractive but its end is most wretched and miserable. On the other hand, spiritual life appears very hard and unpleasant at first but it ends most auspiciously and pleasantly. In the heyday of their power nations are very gay and happy and it appears that their glory will endure forever but once their decay and decline set in they are scattered by the winds of adversity like dry broken grass and are so completely forgotten as if they had never lived on this earth.

Commentary:

With this verse begins, in the form of a parable, a description of the conditions respectively of Muslim and Christian nations in the Latter Days. The form and wording of the dialogue unmistakably shows that it is no real conversation between two living persons but is a portraiture, in metaphorical language, of the conditions of these two peoples at a certain time. The dialogue represents the decline and degradation of Muslims at their nadir and the power and prosperity of western Christian nations at their zenith in the Latter Days.

Now parables, like dreams, require to be interpreted, and the present and following several verses having been couched in allegorical language it is difficult to grasp and fully appreciate their full significance and beauty without putting on them a construction which their apparent form does not seem to bear. In the language of dreams a "garden" signifies wife, children, riches and life full of happiness; sometimes it also denotes cantonments and army headquarters. "Grapes" represent abundant provisions which can be stored up and last for a long time; "palm trees" signify exercise of authority over large number of men; "corn" in the case of a monarch denotes expansion of his dominions and in that of other people their "work". A "stream" denotes an eminent man and "fruits" mean fresh sources of honour (Ta‘tirul-Anam).

The parable describes the conditions of two men. One of them had two gardens which metaphorically interpreted means that God had bestowed upon him an abundance of wealth and offspring in two separate periods of his life. This interpretation is supported by v. 35 below where the same person says, I am richer than thou in wealth and stronger in respect of men.

The words, and We surrounded them with date-palms, signify that this man will protect his riches and offspring and dominions with military force.

The expression, and between the two We placed corn-fields, denotes that in between the two gardens there will be ordinary property which will not be so strongly protected.

26:53.

26:64.

Important Words:

لا تخشی (nor wilt thou have fear) is formed from خشیwhich means, he feared or dreaded or feared with reverence, veneration, respect, or awe. We have in the Quran وھم من خشیته مشفقون i.e. they fear their Lord, holding Him in reverence (21:29). خشی منه means, he feared or dreaded what might happen to him from him or it. خشیة is the dread, fear or awe resulting from the knowledge which one possesses about a thing or person. The Quranic expression انما یخشی اللّٰه من عبادہ العلماء(35:29) means, only those of His servants who possess knowledge fear Allah (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat). The reference to the fear mentioned in the words لا تخشی is to the dangers of the sea and other hardships that lay ahead of the Israelites.

Commentary:

The incident mentioned in this verse relates to the time when, under God’s command, Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into Canaan. The Israelites left secretly by night, and when Pharaoh learnt of their flight, he pursued them with his hosts and was drowned in the Red Sea.

In order to appreciate fully the nature and significance of this incident which indeed constituted a great divine sign, it is necessary to read the verse under comment along with other relevant verses such as vv. 2:51, 26:62-64 & 44:25. The Quran says:

And remember the time when We divided the sea for you and saved you and drowned Pharaoh’s people while you looked on (2:51).

And when the two hosts came in sight of each other the companions of Moses said, 'We are surely overtaken.'…Then We revealed to Moses, saying, 'Strike the sea with thy rod.' Whereupon it parted and every part was like a huge sandhill (26:62-64). When the Israelites were passing they had the sea on one side and the small lake son the other, which conformably to the natural laws of perspective appeared raised above the level of the land.

And leave the sea at a time when it is motionless. Surely, they are a host which is doomed to be drowned (44:25). i.e. pass through the sea quickly at a time when the tide has receded.

The Bible also refers to this incident in the following verses:

And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all the night and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand and on their left. And the Egyptians pursued and went in after them to the midst of the sea…And the Lord said unto Moses, 'Stretch out thine hand over the sea'…And Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea and the sea returned to its strength…And the waters returned and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them (Exod. 14:21-28).

The following facts emerge from the above account of this incident as given in the Quran and the Bible;

(a) that Moses was commanded by God to take away the Israelites out of Egypt by night;

(b) that Pharaoh pursued the Israelites with his mighty hosts;

(c) that when the Israelites reached the arm of the Red Sea which lay across their route, they were greatly dismayed because Pharaoh was close behind with his hosts;

(d) that when on seeing Pharaoh’s hosts the Israelites exclaimed in fright that they were overtaken, God commanded Moses to strike the water of the sea with his rod;

(e) that when Moses struck the sea with his rod as the Quran says or stretched out his hand over the sea as the Bible says, it was the time of the ebb-tide and the sea was receding, leaving a dry bed;

(f) that Moses was commanded by God to cross quickly the dry bed to the opposite bank, which he did;

(g) that when the hosts of Pharaoh reached the sea, it was the time of high tide and that in their zeal to overtake the Israelites they took no notice of it and at once jumped into the sea behind them; and

(h) that, as it appears, being heavily equipped with big chariots and other heavy armaments the progress of the army of Pharaoh was greatly retarded so that while they were yet in the midst of the sea, the high tide returned and they were all drowned.

Historians differ as to the exact place from where Moses crossed the Red Sea from Egypt into Canaan. Some are of the view that on his way from the territory of Goshen, which is also called the valley of Al-Tamthilat or Wadi Tumilat and where the capital of the Pharaohs was situated (Enc. Bib. vol. 4, col. 4012, under "Rameses"), Moses passed by the Gulf of Timsah (Enc. Bib., cols. 1438 & 1439). Others think that he went much further to the north and going round Zoan crossed over to Canaan near the Mediterranean Sea (Enc. Bib., col. 1438). But what is most probable is the fact that from Tal Abi Sulaiman which was the capital of the Pharaohs in Moses’ time, the Israelites at first went to north-east to the Gulf of Timsah but finding that a net of gulfs barred their way, they turned south and crossed the Red Sea near the town of Suez where it is hardly more than 2/3 mile wide, and started for Qadas (Enc. Bib., col. 1437).

The following passage from Peake’s "Commentary on the Bible" (p. 64) may also be read with interest:

The Israelites fled with him (Moses) across the Goshen marshes into the Sinaitic Peninsula. The crossing of the "Red Sea" (yam suph, "sea" or "lake of reeds") was probably the crossing of the southern end of a lake a few miles N.W. of what is now called the Red Sea. A wind laid bare a wide stretch of shore, and when an Egyptian force pursued the fugitives, their chariot wheels stuck fast in the wet soil, and the water returned upon them when the wind shifted. Writers differ as to the route taken by the Israelites. Some think that they moved southward to the mountainous range of (the modern) Sinai, and then along the eastern arm of the Red Sea, now known as the Gulf of ‘Akabah, to its northernmost point at Ezion Geber. Others think that the evidence points to the route still taken by Mecca pilgrims, nearly due E. to Ezion Geber, and that thence they moved N.W. to the region of Kadesh (Barnea), to Mt. Sinai or southward along the E. side of the Gulf of ‘Akabah to Mt. Horeb. The traditions differ and certainty is impossible.

There are people who against all canons of history take particular delight in propounding most extraordinary theories that the Israelites never lived in Egypt. Some such theories are:

(a) No reference to the Israelites is to be found in the old Egyptian historical records.

(b) In the fifth year of the reign of Pharaoh Merneptah (or Mereneptah) when Moses is said to have taken the Israelites out of Egypt, some Israelite tribes were actually living in Canaan, therefore the theory of Moses having taken the Israelites out of Egypt to Canaan during his reign and their having settled in that country some fifty years later is all wrong.

(c) Though some trace is found of a few tribes having crossed over from Asia into Egypt but there is no proof that these were the Israelite tribes.

The propounders of these strange theories seem to ignore the patent fact that the Israelites were foreigners in Egypt and were a subject race and lived the miserable life of slaves under their cruel rulers. How could such people be considered worthy of any notice being taken of them by historians? Apart from this the fact may also be taken into consideration that when it is not quite possible for historians even in this 20th century to prepare a well-connected and harmonious narrative about a people from the remnants of its ruined civilization, it was much more difficult for historians in the past to reconstruct a consistent record from the fragmentary accounts of a people who lived in the hoary past and who were treated like beasts of burden by their rulers. This is why no reference to the Israelites is to be found in the old historical records of Egypt.

Secondly, the doubtful theory that certain Israelite tribes were found to be living in Canaan in the 5th year of the reign of Pharaoh Merneptah cannot disprove the fact that other Israelite tribes had remained behind in Egypt. Is it not possible that some of these tribes might have left Egypt for Canaan sometime before all of them were taken out of it by Moses. It is very strange that on the one hand these very writers say that Moses is an Egyptian name and that some of the companions of Moses also had Egyptian names, and on the other that the Israelites never went to Egypt. Moreover, the Bible gives a detailed and well-connected story of the Israelites having lived in Egypt. There was no compelling reason for the writers of the Bible to have done so, especially when the Israelites had lived there only as slaves and worse than beasts of burden. No people would feel any urge or pride in forging and falsely inventing such a miserable record of shame and sorrow of themselves. Last but not least, the Biblical details with regard to the customs, culture and mode of life of the Pharaohs of that time is another proof of the fact that the Israelites had lived under them. The Bible had no interest in the Pharaoh dynasty of Egypt apart from their being rulers of the Israelites. Besides, as stated by old Greek historians, the Egyptians themselves admitted that the Israelites had lived in Egypt for a long time and later on had left this country. The present Egypt, however, should not be confused with a territory which in ancient times was also known as Egypt but which formed a part of northern Syria or northern Arabia.

The date of the Exodus has also been much contested and there seems to be considerable difficulty in determining its exact date from the Biblical records alone. Neither the name of the reigning Pharaoh nor the place where he held his court is mentioned; the account given is not contemporary, but has been condensed and annotated by later editors, and fused by them into a general narrative; and the Biblical chronology of the period, though containing trustworthy material, is known to be largely artificial. Apart from the Biblical records any historical information on the subject is meagre. Various theories, however, are held about the Exodus. Some of these are as follows:

1. The view that the Israelites left Egypt with the Hyksos (1580 B.C.) at the beginning of the XVIIIth Dynasty, or shortly afterwards, and lived a nomadic life of about 200 years in the desert previous to entering Canaan. But evidently this view seems to do violence to genuine Hebrew tradition.

2. The theory which dates the Exodus in the XVIIIth Dynasty, but about 1445 B.C. just after the long despotic reign of Thutmose III and during that of his son Amenhotep II (1447-1420 B.C.). This theory too lacks the support of trustworthy historical material and Hebrew tradition.

3. The hypothesis which connects the Exodus with the religion’s revolution attempted by Amenhotep IV, otherwise known as Akhenaten (1383-1366 B.C.) This view would place the Exodus about 1350 or 1345 B.C. This seems to be more plausible than the first two views.

4. But the theory, largely prevalent which receives much support from historical data, archaeological research and Hebrew tradition is that the Exodus occurred in the Nineteenth Dynasty (1328-1202 B.C.), in the reign of Merneptah II or Mereneptah II (1234-1214) and still seems the most probable. It appears to have taken place about 1230 B.C. According to this view the Pharaoh of the oppression would be Rameses II and his successor Merneptah II, the Pharaoh of the Exodus (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, pp. 119, 955 & 956).

Incidentally, it may be stated here that the striking of the water of the sea with his rod by Moses had no cause and effect connection with the actual parting of the sea. It was merely a sign or a Divine intimation that it was the time of the ebb tide and that the Israelites should hasten to cross. God had so arranged that when Moses reached the sea the tide was about to go back, so that as soon as he struck the sea with his rod in obedience to Divine command, it began to recede and a dry path was made for the Israelites. The striking of the water with his rod by Moses and the recession of the sea coincided. This constituted a miracle because God alone knew when the sea would recede and He had commanded Moses to strike its waters at the time of its recession.

20:78.

Important Words:

طود (mountain) is derived from طاد which means, it was or became firm or steadfast. طود means, a mountain or a great mountain rising high into the sky, an elevated or overlooking tract of land (Lane & Aqrab).

فرق (part) is derived from فرق (faraqa) and means, a piece or portion that is split or separated from a thing; a great flock or herd of sheep or goats only; a group of boys; a mountain; a wave, billow or surge (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

For a more detailed discussion as to how the Israelites passed safely through the sea and how Pharaoh with his hosts was drowned, see 20:78

The idea embodied in the words اضرب بعصاک الحجر has been expressed elsewhere (20:78) in the words فاضرب لھم طریقا فی البحر یبساi.e. "make for them a dry path in the sea." God miraculously so arranged that when the Israelites were crossing the sea it was the time of the low tide and the water of the sea had receded, leaving a dry path for them to pass. But when the Egyptians following them reached the middle of the sea, the high tide returned and the rising water quickly engulfed them.

The words کل فرق may either refer to the two parties of the Egyptians and the Israelites or to the several parties in which the Egyptians might have become divided while they were crossing the sea; or they may refer to each wave of the sea because when the water was receding it looked like a huge mound.

Important Words:

القریة (the town) is infinitive-noun from قری. They say قری الضیف i.e. he entertained the guest. قری الماء فی الحوض means, he collected the water in the pond. قریة means, a town, a central town. It is so called because people from all quarters gather there and also because they are entertained there. The word also means, gathering of men (Aqrab).

Commentary:

A part of the Surah deals, in metaphorical language, with the advent of a great Reformer in the Latter Days who was to represent the Second Coming of the Holy Prophet. This important subject begins with the present verse.

The word القریة may have been used here in its wider sense meaning any town or place, or speaking metaphorically, it may stand for the whole world. The whole world has been called a قریة here because in the Latter Days the means of commun-ication were to develop so extensively that the whole world was to become, as it were, one town. In this sense of the word the expression may signify humanity at large. The use of the word "parable" with regard to the account of اصحاب القریة i.e. people of the town, seems to lend further support to the view that القریة may not be a particular town that has been mentioned here. The whole account is a parable or simile.

Or the word القریة signifying a particular town may refer to Mecca, the Centre and Citadel of Islam. In that case the word المرسلون (the Messengers) will apply to the Holy Prophet in whose person all the Messengers and Prophets of God were represented. See next verse.