Topic: Abomination

274

Important Words:

تیمموا (seek) is derived from یم or ام. They say یمه i.e. he sought it. یمم فلانابرمح means, he sought and singled out that person for attacking with his spear. تیمم الامر means, he sought and singled out the affair. تیمم للصلوة means, he performed what is termed تیمم for his Prayers, i.e. instead of performing the prescribed ablution with water he sought dust and touching it with his hands passed them over his face, etc. (Aqrab & Mufradat).

خبیث (bad) is derived from خبث i.e. he or it was or became bad or foul or abominable or wicked or filthy or impure (Lane).

تغمضوا (connive) is derived from اغمض which again is derived from غمض i.e. it became hidden and concealed. غمض فی الکلامmeans, he made his speech obscure, and abstained from making it clear in meaning. اغمض means, he closed, or shut his eyes; he connived at something so as to practically treat it as something unseen or hidden. اغمض فی البیع means, he demanded a lowering of the price of a thing owing to its badness. اغمض عنه فی البیع means, he connived at the bad quality of the thing and was not strict settling its price (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The verse implies that believers should not only spend in the cause of Allah but should spend what is good and pure; for even a lawfully-earned property might include things that are bad. They should not deliberately select worthless and worn out things for the purpose of charity. Old and second-hand things may indeed be given to the poor, but such things should not be specially selected or singled out for this purpose. Indeed, a believer can be said to have properly discharged his duty for "spending" in the cause of Allah only if he spends "good things".

462

Important Words:

لیطلعکم (would reveal to you). یطلع is derived from طلع, which means, he appeared; he rose; he ascended. اطلعه علیه means, he revealed it to him or he made him acquainted with it; or lifted him high up so that he might have a clear view of it. The expression لیطلعکم علی الغیب therefore, would mean, that He should cause you to ascend the unseen; or lift you high up to have a clear view of the unseen, i.e. cause you to obtain mastery of the unseen; or in other words, reveal to you the secrets of the unseen in abundance. Elsewhere the Quran says لایظھر علی غیبه احدا God discloses not the unseen to anyone in abundance (72:27). Here, too, the word used, i.e. یظھر points to mastery of a thing or having a thing in abundance.

Commentary:

The sentence, Allah would not leave the believers as you are, signifies that the trials and tribulations through which Muslims have so far passed would not soon end. There are yet many more in store for them, and they will continue to come till true believers are distinguished from hypocrites and those weak of faith.

The expression, Allah chooses of His Messengers whom He pleases, does not mean that some of the Messengers are chosen and others not, but that of the persons whom He has ordained to be sent as His Messengers, He chooses the one suited for the particular age in which he is sent. Or the particle من (of) may be taken to give the sense of intensification or emphasis without restricting the sense to a specified section of the class. In that case the sentence will read as, Allah does choose as His Messengers whom He pleases. It must be remembered that all Messengers are raised under a special divine decree.

When it was stated that God intended to separate the wicked from the good by revealing His will to His Messengers, the question was asked by disbelievers, why did not God reveal Himself to them? To this question God has given the answer that He reveals His will only to His Messengers and the Elect. All are not pure or ennobled enough to receive His revelation.

485

Important Words:

حوبا (sin) is derived from حاب meaning, he sinned; he did what was unlawful. حوب means: (1) a great sin or simply sin or crime; (2) wrong or injustice; (3) perdition, destruction or death; (4) disease; (5) a trial, trouble or affliction (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

After mentioning two favours of God in the previous verse, viz. the multiplying of many men and women from a "single soul", and preserving them from destruction by instituting ties of relationship, the Quran proceeds to emphasize the need of protecting posterity by safeguarding the rights and interests of orphans.

The expression, and exchange not the bad for the good, means that if you do not give the orphans their property, the result will be that your own pure possessions will become impure and you yourselves will suffer in the long run.

The words, devour not their property with your own, contain a warning to guardians not to mix up the property of orphans with their own with the intention of misappropriating it. The clause also hints that if the guardian of an orphan possesses sufficient means of subsistence, he should not take anything out of the property of his ward as a compensation for his guardianship.

728

Commentary:

Being naturally influenced by his environment, man is prone to follow and imitate what others do, particularly when they happen to be in the majority. This verse, however, is a warning against unthinking and blind following of the majority. The real criterion by which the worth of a thing is to be judged is not how many people do it, but what good it contains; and, God being the source of all good, the only true and unfailing test is, as the verse puts it, تقوی or God-fearingness.

863

Commentary:

The verse points out that if believers eat of the flesh of those animals on which the name of God has not been pronounced, it will be an act of disobedience and transgression.

One sin leads to another. If a believer fails to pronounce the name of God on his food, his heart becomes devoid of reverence for Him and this gradually leads to شرك i.e. associating partners with God.

885

Commentary:

The verse points out that the laws made by pagan Arabs with regard to permissible and forbidden foods were arbitrary, without any wisdom underlying them; while the food-laws made by Islam were based on reason and deep wisdom. Fundamentally speaking, Islam forbids four things__ three on the basis of their being رجس i.e. unclean and impure, and one on the basis of its being فسق i.e. profane and irreligious. The three first-mentioned things are (1) carrion, (2) the blood which pours out when an animal is slaughtered or wounded and (3) the flesh of swine. All these are, as the verse says, رجسi.e. unclean and impure, i.e. they are harmful to the physical and moral health of man. The word رجس it must be noted, is to be read with each of the three first-mentioned forbidden things.

The fourth thing forbidden is that on which the name of one other than Allah is pronounced. The reason for the prohibition of this kind of food lies in the fact that such food is, as the verse calls it, فسق i.e. profane, viz. a source of disobedience or rebellion against God. The eating of such food will injure the spiritual health of man and will crush his feelings of love and jealousy for God. See also 2:174.

891

Important Words:

املاق (poverty) is derived from ملق. They say ملق الشیء i.e. he erased the thing. ملقه بالعصا means, he beat him with a stick. ملق الولد امه means, the child sucked from the breasts of his mother. املق الرجل means, the man spent all his money and became poor. املاق means, poverty or destitution (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The Quran has already given the commandments and prohibitions of the Islamic Law with regard to the fruits of the earth and the flesh of animals, in opposition to the laws devised by men. Now it gives general commandments and prohibitions.

It should be noted that the injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God requires us to do, and not what He forbids us to do. Thus, it is the contrary of the injunctions given in the verse that is forbidden. The injunctions have been expressly mentioned and the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse, and the attention of the reader has been drawn to both.

The verse may also be construed in another way. The first sentence should be taken as having finished with the words ما حرم ربکم i.e. what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence should be taken as beginning with the words علیکمwhich would in this case mean, "it is enjoined upon you or it is incumbent on you." The verse will then read as follows:"Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is incumbent on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him…"

The order in which the injunctions are given in this verse is noteworthy. The injunctions begin with the words, Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. The Arabic word for "Lord" is رب which means "Creator, Sustainer, and Nourisher" (see 1:2), and it is the very idea of "sustaining and nourishing" that governs the order of the injunctions here given. The first injunction, i.e. associate not anything as partner with Him, pertains to the Great Nourisher, Allah. The second injunction pertains to the lesser nourishers, viz. parents. The word احسان (doing good) expresses the idea that the service of the parents enjoined in the words, do good to parents, is to be performed in the best way possible, for احسان literally signifies "doing a thing very well." Next come those who are nourished and sustained by the "lesser nourishers", viz. children. Parents are bidden to nourish and bring up their children well, as implied in the words, kill not your children for fear of poverty. Indeed, he who neglects to bring up his children properly for fear of poverty virtually "kills" them. If it is the duty of the children to serve their parents well, it is equally the duty of the parents to bring up their children well.

The pronoun "you" in the clause, it is We Who provide for you and for them, refers to parents and the pronoun "them" refers to children, the former being put before the latter in order to draw our attention to the fact that God’s providing for the parents is a proof of the fact that He will also provide for the children.

The next injunction is contained in the words, approach not foul deeds. The word فواحش (foul deeds) is the plural of فاحشه one meaning of which is "fornication or adultery" (see 4:16), which is another form of killing one’s children; for the man who forms immoral connection with a woman other than his wife, not only destroys his seed but also neglects his own wife, which cannot but affect his begetting children in lawful wedlock. Similarly, illegitimate children born of a woman other than one’s wife are not one’s own children, nor are they properly looked after.

The words, whether open or secret, used in connection with فواحش (foul deeds) refer respectively to openly going in to prostitutes and to forming secret connections with women other than one’s wife.

Next to the relations between parents and children come brotherly and friendly relations which are referred to in the words, kill not the life which Allah has made sacred. This injunction requires us to treat our brethren and friends as well as members of our society with fairness and justice. The word "killing," it will be noted, pertains not only to actually killing but to an attempt at killing as well as causing serious injury and boycotting etc. (see meaning of قتل i.e. killing under 2:62; 3:155 & 4:158). The expression, save by right, used with regard to "killing" means "except when a man has made himself deserving of the treatment to be meted out to him." For instance, in case of murder a person will be put to death only by order of proper authority. Similarly, in case of "boycotting" a person will be boycotted only under the orders of the person or the body that possesses that power. It will not be right for any man to take the law in his own hands.

934

Commentary:

The verse draws our attention to the purity of Divine teachings by pointing out that all evil things are forbidden by Islam. But at the same time it reminds the reader that there are certain things the evil of which is generally hidden from men. These, too, are forbidden and most of them have been mentioned by the Holy Prophet.

The verse next proceeds to explain what it means by فواحش (foul deeds). It divides them into three classes: (1) اثم (the sin of disobedience or of falling short in the performance of a duty), and بغی (transgression, i.e. exceeding the proper bounds); (2) شرك (associating with God that for which He has sent down no authority). The فواحش (foul deeds) of this class mean idolatrous beliefs and polytheistic ideals. (3) "That you say against Allah what you do not know." By the فواحش of this class are meant the false and evil words we utter. Thus we are enjoined to be pure not only in thought but also in word and deed.

980

Commentary:

Lot rebuked his people for having not only innovated the extremely foul practice of sodomy, but for having also excelled in other evil practices.

1047

Important Words:

امی (Immaculate One) is derived from ام. They say امه i.e. he repaired to it; or he aimed at or sought after it; or he endeavoured to get it. ماکنت اما ولقد اممت means, thou wast not a mother, but thou hast come to be sought like a mother. امیmeans, belonging to or pertaining to the mother, i.e. as innocent as a child at the breast of its mother. The word also means, one not having a revealed Scripture, parti-cularly an Arab; one who does not know the art of reading or writing; one belonging to Mecca which was known as ام القری i.e. the mother of towns. See also 3:21.

اغلال (shackles) is the plural of غل (ghullun) which is derived from غل (ghalla). They say غل فلانا i.e. he put upon the neck or the hand of such a one a collar or a manacle, etc. غل, therefore, means, a ring or collar of iron put upon the neck; a shackle for the neck or the hand; a pinion or manacle for the hand; a shackle of iron collecting together the two hands to the neck; a difficult and fatiguing work. The Arabs say ھذاغل فی عنقك i.e. this is tied to your neck, meaning, it is inseparable from you and the punishment of it will stick to you (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse qualifies and explains the last sentence of the previous verse, viz. those who believe in Our Signs.

The verse puts the words "Messenger" and "Prophet" side by side which may lead some to think that one may be a Messenger without being a Prophet or vice versa. But this is not so. A رسول (Messenger) of God is also a نبی (Prophet) of God. The former epithet is applied to him in his relation to God from Whom he brings a message, while the latter is applied to him in his relation to men to whom he conveys that message, the word نبی (Prophet) meaning, one who prophesies, or makes known hidden secrets.

The word امی (Ummi) literally means "belonging to the mother", i.e. as innocent as a newborn child. The Promised Prophet, who is none other than the Holy Prophet of Islam, has been called امی because he was to be innocent like a child at the breast of its mother. The word has also been translated as "illiterate" or "one belonging to Mecca" or "an Arab", but "innocent" or "immaculate" is a preferable rendering, inasmuch as it is in keeping with the sense of the prophecy contained in Deut. 18:18-22 to which this verse particularly refers and wherein truthfulness has been mentioned as a distinctive feature of the Promised Prophet. For some of the prophecies of the Bible about the Holy Prophet see under 2:42 and also Matt. 23:39; John 14:16, 26; 16:7-14; Acts 3:21-24.

If the word امی be taken in the sense of "unlettered", the verse would signify that although the Prophet had received no education whatever and was quite unread and illiterate, yet God vouchsafed to him such knowledge as can impart light and guidance even to those who are considered to be most advanced in learning and enlightenment.

The illiteracy (امیة) of the Holy Prophet, mentioned in this verse and believed to have also been hinted at in 10:17, has been subjected to much hostile criticism. George Sale, a well-known Christian commentator of the Quran, writes as follows: "For so old was Muhammad before he took upon him to be a Prophet, during which time his fellow-citizens well knew that he had not applied himself to learning of any sort, nor frequented learned men, nor had ever exercised himself in composing verses or orations, whereby he might acquire the art of rhetoric or elegance of speech" (Prelim. Disc, Section II).

Referring to this view of Sale, another Christian commentator of the Quran, the Rev. E. M. Wherry, says:

"This view, however, does not agree with what is recorded of his previous career. Is it likely that he should have been trained in the same household with ‘Ali, who knew both how to read and write, and not have received similar instruction? Could he have conducted an important mercantile business for years without some knowledge of letters? That he could read and write in later years is certain. Tradition tells us, he said to Mu‘awiyah, one of his secretaries: 'Draw the ب straight, divide the س properly', etc., and that in his last moments he called for writing materials. The question arises, when did he acquire this art? The commentators say that God gave him the power, as he did his inspiration, and they quote chap. xcvi. 4, one of the earliest verses of the Quran, in proof. Certainly that verse seems to teach clearly that he could write as well as read, though it by no means teaches that he had not received the knowledge of both beforehand, or that he did not receive it in the ordinary way. His use of amanuenses does not militate against his knowledge of the art of writing, for such use of amanuenses was common in that age, even among the most learned. But still there remains the testimony of many traditions and the almost universal belief of Muhammadans. How account for this? I am inclined to think it originated with a misunderstanding of Muhammad’s repeated claim that he was the "Illiterate Prophet", or rather the "Prophet of the Illiterate", the term "illiterate" being generally applied by the Jews to the Arabs. See notes on chap. v. 85, 86. This misunderstanding turned out to the furtherance of Muhammad’s claims, inasmuch as the miracle of the matchless style of the Quran was enhanced by the consideration that the Prophet was illiterate. On the whole, we think there is very good reason for believing Muhammad to have been acquainted with the art of both reading and writing from an early period in his life" (Commentary of the Quran, ii. 326).

The above constitutes the gist of Wherry’s criticism of the generally accepted view that the Holy Prophet was امی or illiterate. But this contention seems to possess no substance. It is indeed a poor argument to say that because the Prophet "had been trained in the same house with ‘Ali, who knew both how to read and write", therefore he should also have learnt reading and writing. It only betrays ignorance of elementary facts of the Holy Prophet’s life on the part of the reverend gentleman. Even a desultory acquaintance with the life history of the Holy Prophet should make one know that ‘Ali and the Holy Prophet could not be brought up together. There was a great difference between the ages of the two. The Prophet was no less than 29 years older than ‘Ali; therefore, it was impossible for the two to be trained and brought up together.

Those whom prejudice against the Holy Prophet has not blinded to the patent facts of history know that, let alone the Prophet being educated and trained together with ‘Ali, which the great disparity in their ages evidently obviated, it was ‘Ali who got his training in the house and under the fostering care of the Holy Prophet (Hisham). Abu Talib in whose house the Holy Prophet was brought up was a man of very meagre means. He did not know the value of learning and knowledge nor was their possession regarded as an asset and acquisition in his time. The Holy Prophet, therefore, remained illiterate in his house. But ‘Ali was brought up in the house of the Holy Prophet himself, whose marriage with Khadijah, a wealthy lady of great repute, had placed ample means at his disposal. The Prophet also fully realized how priceless a thing good education was. So under his benign care and ennobling influence, ‘Ali, judged by the standards of that time, naturally grew up to be a young man of good education.

Wherry’s second objection is that if the Holy Prophet had been illiterate and did not know how to read and write, he could not have proved such a successful business man as he actually was. This objection is born of the mistaken concept of a good and successful Arab business man of the Prophet’s time. Judging by the present European standards of a successful business man, Wherry thought that lack of education and success in business could not go together. He would not have made this objection if he had known that in Asia even in the present twentieth century, highly successful business men are to be found who have not received even elementary education. In Mecca, in the Holy Prophet’s time, education was not much in favour. There were very few persons there who could read and write, though hundreds carried on most successful and flourishing business. Education was not at that time regarded in Arabia as the sine qua non of a good business man. Moreover, the fact that Khadijah had given the Prophet, a slave named Maisara who knew reading and writing and who always accompanied him on his trade journeys, knocks the bottom out of Wherry’s objection.

The tradition which says that the Holy Prophet had once asked Mu‘awiyah to write correctly the letters ب and س does not seem to be quite reliable. In the ‘Abbasid period many traditions derogatory to the Umayyads were forged. This tradition seeks to show off Mu‘awiyah, a prominent member of the distinguished House of Umayyah, as a man of very poor education who could not even write properly such simple letters as ب and س. Even, however, if this tradition be proved to be reliable, it does not show that the Holy Prophet was literate, because he had become so used to dictating the Quran that it was not impossible for him to have become familiar with the general form of letters and to give instruction regarding an improperly written word. It is also possible that someone, while rehearsing some portion of the Quran to the Prophet, might have stopped at a certain place, not being able to decipher the writing, and the Holy Prophet having asked the cause of stopping, the reader might have replied that the delay was due to the letters ب and سnot having been written properly or legibly. This might have led the Holy Prophet to instruct Mu‘awiyah to see that the letters were written correctly.

The fact that the Holy Prophet sent for pen and paper in the last moments of his life also lends no support to Wherry’s assumption. It is an established fact of history that whenever any verse was revealed, the Holy Prophet used to send for pen and paper and dictate to one of his scribes what had been revealed to him. The mere sending for pen and paper cannot, therefore, prove that the Holy Prophet himself knew how to read and write.

Nor do the words, referred to by Wherry in support of his contention viz. "read in the name of thy Lord", prove anything. The Arabic word اقرء (read) used in the verse referred to above not only means the reading of a written thing, but also repeating and rehearsing what one hears from another person. Again, the words ھویحسن القراءة (i.e. he recites well) occurring in a tradition can be spoken of even of a blind man who can recite the Quran properly and well. Moreover, the Hadith establishes the fact that when, at the time of the first revelation, the angel Gabriel said to the Prophet اقرء(read), no writing was actually placed before him to read. He was simply asked to repeat orally what the angel was reciting to him. The word قراءة not only means to read a writing but to repeat orally or recite or rehearse what another man has uttered.

Wherry’s inference that the idea that the Holy Prophet could not read or write originated with a misunderstanding of his repeated claim that he was the "Illiterate Prophet", is as strange as it is ill-based. It is really very surprising to say that those with whom he had lived day and night for years could not find out that he was illiterate but were misled into this belief only by his own repeated claim that he was امی (illiterate). Only a man of Wherry’s hostile attitude could come to such a conclusion. The question is whether it was the Prophet’s own contempor-aries who suffered from this misunderstanding or those who came afterwards. If it were the former, then the question would naturally arise how those, who saw him daily with their own eyes reading and writing, could possibly fall victims to the glaring misunderstanding that he was illiterate. If it were the latter class, even then the whole theory of misunderstanding advanced by Wherry looks frivolous, because the argument put forward by him is that because the Holy Prophet was considered to be illiterate, therefore, the matchless style of the Quran was regarded as a miracle. This inference is both foolish and flimsy, inasmuch as Muslims and other contemporaries of the Prophet, who were fully aware that he knew quite well how to read and write, could never believe in such a miracle.

Wherry’s last argument in support of his contention, that "his (the Holy Prophet’s) use of amanuenses does not militate against his knowledge of the art of writing, for such use of amanuenses was common in that age, even among the most learned," betrays his ignorance of Arab and Islamic history. The fact is that there were no ulema or learned men among the Arabs in the time of the Holy Prophet in the sense in which this word is understood now, nor were they used to keeping amanuenses and scribes. There is no instance on record of an amanuensis having been kept by an Arab. We know of only one learned man among the Meccans in the Prophet’s time, viz. Waraqah bin Naufal, and he was his own secretary. It is a pity that in their zeal for misrepresenting Islam, some Christian writers do not even hesitate to invent historical facts.

The words, and remove from them their burden and shackles, occurring in the latter part of the verse, contain a hint that by accepting the Promised Prophet Christians will get rid of the curse of the original sin of Adam and Eve and of the punishment thereof which, according to them, has dogged their footsteps through no fault of theirs.

1126

Commentary:

The words, separate the bad from the good, refer to the first part of the previous verse, giving the reason for the defeat and failure of the disbelievers. God would cause their war against Islam to end in their defeat so that He might distinguish the righteous from the unrighteous. Similarly, the latter part of this verse, viz. put the bad, one upon another, and heap them up all together, and then cast them into Hell, corresponds to the latter part of the previous verse, viz. that the disbelievers shall be gathered into Hell. The words, heap them up all together, imply that as the disbelievers made a common cause against Islam, they would, as it were, all be heaped up into a bundle and then thrown into the fire of Hell as one huge piece of fuel.

1245

Commentary:

The words لتعرضوا عنھم (that you may leave them alone) mean, that you may pardon them and not call them to account, whereas the expression فاعرضوا عنھم (so leave them alone) means, turn yourselves away from them and have nothing to do with them. So the same word اعراض (leaving alone and turning away) has been used here in two different senses.

On his way back from Tabuk, one of those men, who had remained behind, met the Holy Prophet and offered excuses for not being able to go with him, but the Holy Prophet refused to listen to him. On the other hand, it is on record that in the case of some, he did accept their excuses on his return to Medina. This apparent disparity in the attitude of the Holy Prophet with regard to different persons may be explained by the fact that those who had stayed behind (hypocrites as well as believers) were of various types. The hypocrites were of three classes: (a) ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy and his party; (b) the hypocrites among the Arabs of the desert (9:90 above); and (c) the hypocrites who had built the Masjid Dirar with the intention of making it the centre of their activities against Islam (9:107 below). Similarly, the believers who had stayed behind were also of three classes: (1) those to whom the Quran has referred to in 9:91 above, i.e. the weak, the sick and the poor; (2) those who were not wholly inexcusable but who possessed no excuse valid enough to justify their staying behind (9:102 below); and (3) those who possessed no excuse at all. As these laggards belonged to different categories, therefore, they were treated differently.

1681

Important Words:

اجتثت (uprooted) is derived from جث. They say جثه i.e. he pulled it (i.e. a plant) out from its very root; he uprooted it; اجتثهalso gives the same meaning. الجثة means, the body or the dead body of a human being (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

Unlike the good tree described in the preceding two verses, a book which is forged by the hand of man is like an evil tree. It possesses no permanence, nor even stability. Its teachings are supported neither by reason nor by the laws of nature. It cannot stand criticism and its principles and ideals keep on changing with the change in human conditions and circumstances. It is a hotchpotch of teachings collected from doubtful sources. It fails to produce men who can claim to have established a true and real connection with God. It receives fresh life from no divine source and is subject to decay and degeneration. Such is the inevitable fate of books forged by pretenders and false prophets. For a detailed and beautiful exposition of v. 25, 26 and 27 the reader is referred to "Tafsir-e-Kabir" by Hadrat Khalifatul Masih II, Second Successor of the Promised Messiah.

1962

Commentary:

The commandment forbidding “the killing of children” is followed by another equally weighty injunction about adultery, because adultery also causes the death of innumerable children, for to prevent pregnancy contraceptives are used and if despite precaution pregnancy does take place, abortion is resorted to. All these are different forms of infanticide. Moreover, the proper bringing up of children born of such immoral unions is neglected, thus causing their moral death.

Unlike the Biblical commandment, "Thou shalt not commit adultery", the Quran says, "Come not near unto adultery", which is clearly a more comprehensive and more effective commandment. The Quran not only prohibits and condemns the actual act of adultery but seeks to close and shut all those avenues that lead to it,

such as free and promiscuous intermingling of the sexes. Purdah, which forbids women to display the beauty of their person or dress to men not their near relatives, and sundry other preventive measures prescribed by Islam effectively check this fell moral disease from spreading. Compared with the Quranic injunctions the teaching of the Bible is altogether ineffective and cannot, and has actually failed to, check the spread of this most heinous of all social crimes in the West. The Quranic injunction that even the occasions and places which are calculated ultimately to lead to the commission of sin must be avoided, applies as much to persons of very strong as to those of weak moral calibre. Whereas the latter class of people are bidden to avoid going near the places of sin lest they actually fall into it, those who can withstand temptations are commanded to avoid them in order that many others morally not so strong may be saved, by their example, from falling into sin.

2406A

Commentary:

The most important and prominent of the signs that God gives to His prophets in support of their claim is that they are vouchsafed spiritual knowledge and Divine wisdom in a very large measure. This sign was given to all the Prophets—Lot, Joseph, David, Solomon, Moses and last of all it was granted to the greatest of all the Divine Prophets—the Holy Prophet Muhammad, in the form of the Quran which is now the only guide for all mankind till the end of time and which is his greatest and standing miracle.