Topic: The/ Qur’an And

7:20, 23; 20:117, 118.

Important Words:

شجرة (tree) is the singular of شجر (trees). It is derived from the verb شجر. The Arabs say شجرالامربینھم i.e. the affair or case became complicated and confused so as to be a subject of disagreement and difference between them. شجرة means, a tree, because of the intermixing or confusion of its branches. شجرة also signifies, the stock or origin of a man. They say, ھومن شجرة طیبة i.e. he is of a good stock or origin (Lane).

ظالمین (wrongdoers) is the plural of ظالم being derived from ظلم which means: (1) he put a thing in the wrong place or in a place not its own; (2) he made one suffer loss; (3) he transgressed or committed a wrong. A ظالم is thus one who does an inappropriate or improper thing; or one who commits a wrong; or one who makes someone suffer a loss (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The word جنة (garden) occurring in this verse does not refer to Heaven or Paradise but simply to the garden-like place where Adam was first made to live. It cannot refer to Heaven: firstly, because it was on the earth that Adam was made to live, as the words, I am about to place a vicegerent in the earth, occurring in 2:31 clearly indicate.

Secondly, Heaven is a place from which no one who once enters it will ever be expelled (15:49), whereas Adam was made to quit the جنة (garden) spoken of in this verse. This shows that the جنة or garden in which Adam first dwelt was a place on this very earth which was given this name on account of the fertility of its soil and the abundance of its verdure. Recent researches go to show that the place where Adam was made to dwell was the garden of Eden which lay near Babylon in Iraq or Assyria.

According to the Bible, the forbidden شجرة (tree) was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:17). But we learn from the Quran that after having eaten of the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve became naked which means that, unlike knowledge which is a source of goodness, the tree was a source of evil, making Adam exhibit a weakness. The Quranic view is evidently correct, because to deprive man of knowledge was to defeat the very purpose for which he had been brought into being. The Quran and the Bible seem, however, to agree on the point that the tree was not a real one, but only a symbol, because no tree with either of the above characteristics, i.e. making a man naked or giving him knowledge of good or evil, exists on the face of the globe. So the tree must represent something else.

As explained above, the word شجرة also means a quarrel. Says the Quran: But no, by thy Lord, they are not believers until they make thee judge in all that is in dispute between them (4:66).

Elsewhere, the Quran makes mention of two kinds of شجرة (1) شجرة طیبة (good tree) and (2) شجرة خبیثة (evil tree) for which see 14:25 & 27. Pure things and pure teachings are likened to the former, and impure things and impure thoughts are likened to the latter. In the light of these explanations, the verse would mean: (1) that Adam was enjoined to avoid quarrels; (2) that he was warned against evil things, because although the verse does not specify evil or good, yet the prohibition cannot but refer to impure and evil things.

The expression, eat therefrom plentifully wherever you will, indicates that the place where Adam lived had not yet come under the jurisdiction of anybody and was what may be termed "God’s land" which was given to Adam who was thus made lord of all he surveyed.

The concluding clause, lest you be of ظالمین or wrongdoers, means that the result of approaching the prohibited شجرة would be that Adam would become one of those who do not observe propriety in their actions for, as explained under Important Words, ظلم means, putting a thing at a wrong place.

Important Words:

باری (Maker) is derived from بری which means, he shaped or fashioned a reed into a pen, or he shaped an arrow. باریmeans, one who forms or fashions a thing by cutting; one who shapes out or pares a thing. باری is to be distinguished from خالق for whereas the latter word means, one who brings a thing into existence according to the proper plan or measure, or one who brings a thing into existence from a state of nonexistence, the former word, i.e. باری signifies one who fashions a thing into its proper shape. Generally, however, باری is used as somewhat synonymous with خالق, for it is the formation of a shape which is the result in each case (Mufradat & Lane).

Commentary:

It appears from this verse that, although after the incident of calf-worship a general pardon was granted to the Israelites, yet it was thought essential to punish the ringleaders who were ordered to be slain. The clause فاقتلوا انفسکم does not mean "slay yourselves", but "slay your men or slay your kith and kin". The latter meaning is borne out by 2:85, where God says, you shall not turn your people out of your homes. Similarly, in 24:62, we read: When you enter houses, greet your people with salam. In these verses the expression انفسکم has been used in the sense of 'your people or your brethren'. See also 2:86 & 4:67.

Speaking of this incident, the Bible says: "Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men" (Exod. 32:27, 28).

In the above passage, the number of persons slain has been put at three thousand, but this is apparently an error. Similarly, the number of the Israelites who came out of Egypt is represented in the Bible as six hundred thousand (Exod. 12:37) which also is clearly wrong. Such a large number could not live as servants and labourers of the Egyptians, who themselves speak of them as "a small community" (the Quran, 26:55). The error has apparently arisen from a confusion of the words إلف (ilf) and ألف (alf), the former meaning "a family", and the latter "a thousand" (Aqrab). Really, there were only 600 families of the Israelites who lived in Egypt and who left the country under the leadership of Moses, but they were misconstrued into 600 thousands. Similarly, the number of persons slain could scarcely be three thousand. There were most likely only three families the leaders of which took part in setting up the calf for worship, and these were put to death, by their own kinsmen at the bidding of Moses.

The words فاقتلوا أنفسکم (slay yourselves) have also been construed as "kill your desires"–an interpretation borne out by the usage of the Arabic language. Some commentators prefer this interpretation to the one given above on the ground that the Israelites, having been forgiven by God at the intercession of Moses, could not have been ordered to slay their brethren, for such an order would have been incompatible with the forgiveness granted to them. This argument, however, does not appear to be sound for forgiveness of a people as a whole is not incompatible with the punishment of a few ringleaders.

The clause, turn ye therefore to your Maker, implies an exhortation to the Israelites to turn to their باری or Maker or Fashioner, which means that they should work a change or reformation in themselves.

2:175; 3:200; 13:27.

Important Words:

ویل (woe) means: (1) the coming or befalling of some calamity, misfortune or sorrow; (2) punishment; (3) perdition. The expression ویل له or ویله or ویل لك or ویلك etc. is used as a warning for some coming sorrow or misfortune (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

There were Jews who composed books or parts thereof and then gave them out as the word of God. This malpractice was common among the Jews and other peoples. Therefore, in addition to the canonical Books of the Bible, there are a number of books which are supposed to be revealed, so that it has now become impossible to distinguish the revealed Books from those not revealed. Another mal-practice of the Jews was that they distorted the meaning of the Divine Word. They themselves wrote a whole book or part thereof and declared it to be based on Biblical evidence; while, as a matter of fact, it was opposed to this evidence. Those responsible for this were responsible not only for their own misdeeds, namely, fabricating and distorting the Word of God, but also for the misdeeds of their followers who were led by their example to commit one or all of the following acts (1) tampering with the Word of God (2:76); (2) preferring worldliness to religion (2:77); and (3) following their own vain desires and false notions (2:79). Hence, while speaking of them, the Quran uses the word ویل (woe) in order to warn them and remind them of the seriousness of their offence.

Some Christian writers have argued that the verse under comment proves that the Jewish and Christian scriptures were intact at the time of the Holy Prophet. This inference is absolutely unjustified. For tampering with the text does not necessarily mean tampering with a genuine text. One who tampers with a version of a false book which he believes to be true is as liable to blame as the one who tampers with a genuine scripture. Hence, the warning to the People of the Book against tampering with the Bible cannot be cited as proof of the existence of the true Bible at the time of the Holy Prophet.

The words, paltry price, do not mean that the taking of a good price would be lawful. The words have been used to point out that whatever price they may take would be paltry in view of the great loss they would be suffering thereby. Elsewhere, the Quran says: the benefit of this world is little (4:78).

In the last clause the Quran repeats the words, Woe to them, twice, saying: Woe, then, to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. This is to point out that by so doing the Israelites are committing two offences: (1) writing down a thing falsely and (2) doing it with the intention of earning some worldly benefit. As the offence is double, the punishment also will be double.

5:27.

Commentary:

The commandments relating to conjugal relations were mentioned as an offshoot of the subject of جھاد (holy war) dealt with in 2:217 and the following verses. The Quran now reverts to the original subject and by way of re-introduction cites the example of the Israelites who had left the land of the Pharaohs for fear of death. Trodden under the foot of the tyrant, the children of Israel were then in a most abject condition, and the wise God, in His eternal wisdom, decreed that they should lead a life of ordeals in the wilderness before becoming fit for the great life that awaited them in the Promised Land. The words, Allah said to them: 'Die', point to the great truth that all life must be preceded by death, i.e. great trials and extraordinary sacrifices.

As mentioned above, the clause, those who went forth from their homes, refers to the Israelites who had gone forth from Egypt to escape persecution by Pharaoh. It was the fear of death which had made the Israelites migrate from the land (2:50).

The words, they were thousands, contradict the Bible which represents the number of the Israelites migrating from Egypt as six hundred thousand. Recent researches favour the Quranic view (See History of the People of Israel, p. 145, by Ernest Renan, London, 1888, and History of Palestine and the Jews, i. 174 by John Kitto, London, 1844). See also. 2:55.

The story of the exodus of the Israelites is briefly this. When, being persecuted by Pharaoh, they left Egypt and crossed over to Asia, Moses wanted them to enter the Promised Land, but they were afraid of the people that dwelt there and refused to march ahead, saying Go thou and thy Lord and fight and here we sit (5:25). The result was that they drew upon themselves the wrath of God, Who said to Moses, Verily, it shall be forbidden them for forty years; in distraction shall they wander through the land (5:27). The promise was thus put off for forty years and the children of Israel were left to wander in the wilderness until those who had refused to fight perished in the desert, whereafter the younger generation led by Joshua conquered the land. Thus it was that the people whom God had caused to perish had new life breathed into them. It is with reference to these events that the Quran uses the word "die" in the verse under comment. This very death, i.e. destruction of the rebellious and training of the youth through trials and ordeals, proved the forerunner of life. Elsewhere, the Quran says about the Israelites: Then We raised you up after your death (2:57).

It may also be noted here that from this verse onward, the Quran begins the description of تزکیة or means of national progress spoken of in 2:130, reference to "Signs" and "the Book" and "Wisdom" having already been made.

3:27.

Important Words:

طالوت (Talut) is the attributive name of an Israelite king who lived about two hundred years before David and about the same number of years after Moses. Most commentators regard Talut to be a name of Hebrew origin and consider him to be synonymous with Saul (1. Sam. ch. 9). As Hebrew is only an offshoot of Arabic, the word Talut appears to be derived from the Arabic root طال i.e. he became tall or high___a description coinciding with the one given in the verse under comment viz. one increased abundantly in knowledge and body. It is, however, not right to identify Talut with Saul. The description of the Quran fits more with Gideon (Judg. chs. 6-8) than with Saul. Gideon lived in about 1250 B.C. and the Bible calls him a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6:12) which is the same as Talut.

Commentary:

There has been a difference of opinion as to the identity of the person to whom the name Talut has been applied. According to a number of Muslim commentators, Talut stands for Saul, and the passage refers to the reign of Saul. Christian writers have, however, taken exception to this view. According to them the incidents related in this passage refer to two different periods which are separated from each other by the long interval of 200 years; and these critics refer to this passage as an instance of historical anachronism, found in the Quran. The passage does indeed refer to two different periods, but if Christian critics had carefully thought over their own history, they would have seen that there is no confusion of dates in the passage in question and that the Quran has here referred to both these periods. Its object in doing so is to show how the unification of the different tribes of Israel began in the time of Gideon (i.e. Talut) two hundred years before David, and was finally consummated in the time of David.

In order to determine the identity of Talut, let us glance over the main incidents related in verse 247 to 252. These are as follows: 1. The people of the period to which Talut belongs had been driven forth from their homes and their children (2:247). 2. One who was not originally a king was appointed as such (2:248). 3. God helped the followers of this king, giving them the Talut as a token of His sovereignty (2:249). 4. The people were tried by means of water (2:250). 5. There existed a great disparity in numbers between these people and the enemy, and the trial reduced their number still further (ibid). 6. In spite of the small number of his followers, this king overcame the enemy (2:252).

Now some of these details do indeed apply to Saul, but there are others which do not. The key words which afford a clue to the identity of Talut are, Hast thou not heard of the chiefs of the children of Israel after Moses. The words "after Moses" indicate that the incident belongs to an early period when the Jews as a nation had just begun to take a definite shape in history. For two hundred years after Moses, the Israelites were divided into different tribes and had no king and no fighting force. In 1256 B.C., owing to their iniquity, God delivered them into the hands of the Midianites who plundered and ravaged them for seven long years, and they were compelled to take refuge in caves (Judg. 6:1, 2). This is why they are represented in the Quran as saying, we have been driven forth from our homes. The Midianites attacked them and carried away their sheep and oxen and asses, and destroyed their crops and pillaged them as far as Gaza (Judg. 6:4-6). The Israelites then cried to their Lord, and God raised among them a Prophet; and an angel of the Lord appeared to Gideon, appointed him king and promised him divine help. Then Gideon said to God, "Oh my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? Behold, my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house" (Judg. 6:15). This tallies with the description given in the Quran which represents the chiefs among the Israelites as saying with regard to the new king, How can he have sovereignty over us while we are better entitled to sovereignty than he and he is not given abundance of wealth (2:248). What makes the identification of Talut with Gideon still more certain is the fact that it was in the time of Gideon and not Saul that the Israelites were tried by means of water and the description of the trial as given in the Bible (Judg. 7:4-7) is the same as that of the Quran.

From Judg. 7:6, 7 we learn that after the aforesaid trial, there remained with Gideon only 300 men. It is interesting to note that a Companion of the Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "We were 313 men in the Battle of Badr, and this number corresponds to the number of men who followed Talut" (Tirmidhi, ch. on Siyar). Thus this tradition also lends support to the conclusion that Talut was no other than Gideon.

What further confirms the identity of Talut with Gideon is that the Hebrew word Gideon is identical in meaning with the Arabic word Talut. The former is derived from a root which in Hebrew means "to fell" (Enc. Bib.) or "to hew" (Jew. Enc.). Thus, Gideon means "one who cuts down his adversary and fells him to the ground" and the Bible itself speaks of Gideon as a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6:12), and we have already noted that in Arabic Tala means one who is tall and towers above others (see Important Words above).

The clause, how can he have sovereignty over us while we are better entitled to sovereignty than he, and he is not given abundance of wealth, indicates that the people raised two objections against Talut or Gideon: (1) that he did not belong to a highly placed family and was therefore not entitled to kingship, and (2) that he did not possess the requisite wealth for exercising influence. Both of these are plausible objections that are usually made by ordinary people of the world; but a chosen people guided by the will of the Just and Wise God must think otherwise. With them the real title to sovereignty is neither family status nor wealth but the personal qualities of a man; hence the clause, surely Allah has chosen him above you and has increased him abundantly in knowledge and body. The superiority of a man in physical and mental faculties coupled with knowledge and prowess must remain the basis for all title to rulership. And in the case of Talut the title had the additional strength of coinciding with the choice of God Who is the best and, in fact, the only true Judge of all titles.

Important Words:

التابوت (heart) is derived from تاب i.e. he returned; he returned to God; he repented; he left off the way of sin and began to tread the path of rectitude. التابوت means: (1) a chest or box, as things are repeatedly taken out of, and returned to, it; (2) a coffin or a bier; (3) chest or breast or bosom or the ribs with what they contain, as the heart, etc. (Lane); (4) the heart which is the storehouse of knowledge, wisdom and peace (Mufradat).

سکینة (tranquillity) is derived from سکن i.e. it became calm and tranquil. سکینة means, peace, tranquillity, calmness, freedom from agitation and disturbance (Aqrab & Lane).

بقیة (legacy) is derived from بقی i.e. he or it remained behind; or he or it continued or lasted for long or forever. بقیة means, that which remains behind, i.e. legacy; remainder; remains; remnant; residue; relic; the best portion of a thing, as it is always the best part of a thing that survives. فلان بقیة القوم means, such a one is the best and the most excellent of the party (Lane).

Commentary:

Though commentators have differed about the significance of the word تابوت and the Bible mentions it as an "ark" or chest, the description of the Quran definitely shows that the word has been used here in the sense of "heart" or "bosom.'' The words of the Quran are: wherein there will be tranquillity from your Lord. Now this description cannot apply to an ark or a chest; for, far from granting peace and tranquillity to others, the ark spoken of by the Bible could neither protect the Israelites against defeat nor could it protect itself, and was carried away by the enemy. Even Saul who took with him the ark during his campaigns, suffered crushing defeats, so much so that even the enemy pitied him and he met with an ignominious end. Such an ark could not be a source of tranquillity to the Israelites. What God gave them was a heart full of tranquillity which was aided by angels who buoyed up the Israelites and filled their hearts with courage and perseverance so that, after the coming of the said tranquillity, they successfully resisted the attacks of the enemy and inflicted heavy defeats on them.

Another favour which God conferred on the Israelites has been referred to in the word بقیة or legacy. God imbued their hearts with the noble qualities which characterized their ancestors, the people or the descendants of Moses and Aaron. The legacy left by the descendants of Moses and Aaron did not consist of any material things but referred to the good qualities which they were given as the heritage of their great ancestors. This heritage was similar to the one to which reference has been made in the words, that (he) may be heir to me and to the House of Jacob (19: 7). Evidently, it is not a material heritage but a spiritual and moral heritage that is mentioned in this verse. Similarly, the followers of Gideon were imbued with a spiritual and moral بقیة i.e. such noble attributes of Moses and Aaron and their descendants as God had endowed them with. It was a sign that it was God Who had set up Gideon as king over the tribes of Israel so that he might protect them against the ravages of their enemy and breathe into them a martial spirit, a work which saw its consummation in the days of David.

3:124; 8:66.

Important Words:

نـھر (river). The verb نـھر means, it flowed with force. They say نـھر الدام i.e. the blood poured forth with force. نـھر الماء means, the water poured forth in the land and cut out a channel for itself. النـھر (an-nahr) means, a body of flowing water, i.e. stream or river; channel through which such water flows. النھر (an-nahr) means, (1) plenty and abundance; (2) a river channel; (3) a river (Aqrab).

الجنود (forces) is the plural of الجـند. They say جند الجنود i.e. he collected or gathered together his forces. الجند means, a force or an army ; helpers (Aqrab).

جالوت (Jalut) is derived from جال i.e. he ran about without stopping. They say جال الفرس فی المیدان i.e. the horse galloped about in the field, sometimes going this way and sometimes that way. جال القوم جولة means, the people drew back and then made a joint onslaught. جال بعضھم علی بعض means, they assailed or assaulted one another in battle, etc. (Aqrab & Taj). Thus جالوت is an attributive name meaning, a person or a people who is unruly and moves about attacking and assaulting others. In the Bible the parallel name is Goliath (1 Sam. 17:4) which means, "running, ravaging and destroying spirits" or "a leader or a giant" (Enc. Bib. and Jew. Enc.). The Bible uses the name about one individual but really the word signifies a party of ruthless freebooters, though it may also be applied to certain individuals symbolizing the characteristics of the party. The Quran appears to have used it in both these senses in the verses under comment.

Commentary:

Self-control and discipline are the key to most successes, and possession of these qualities is necessary to successfully meet God’s trials. The present verse speaks of one such trial. The exception of a handful of water was made with a twofold purpose: (1) to afford the marching force an essential physical relief by permitting them to moisten their parched throats, but at the same time to prevent them from drinking freely, which would have damped their spirits and made them negligent of the enemy; and (2) to make the trial all the more tantalizing, for in many cases it is easier to withhold from a thing altogether than to use it in a strictly limited measure. The Bible mentions the incident in Judg. 7:5-6.

The concluding clause, i.e. how many a small party has triumphed over a large party by Allah’s command, contains a mighty lesson of hope for the righteous. When God wills a thing, numbers do not matter. The truth of this statement has been borne out by history in all ages.

The Jalut spoken of in this verse does not signify a person but a people, while the word جنود (forces) points to the helpers and associates of these people. The Bible refers to Jalut under the name of Midianites who pillaged and harassed the Israelites and destroyed their land for several years (Judg. 6:1-6). The Amalekites and all the eastern tribes assisted the Midianites in their raids (Judg. 6:1) and formed "the forces" referred to in the verse.

3:148, 201; 7:127.

2:287; 3:148.

Commentary:

The trial by water referred to in the preceding verse and the subsequent exhortation mentioned in the concluding clause of that verse seem to have filled the Israelites with hope and courage. Consequently their prayer in the verse under comment does not betray a defeatist tendency as heretofore shown by them, but a buoyant spirit of hope and good cheer.

22:41.

Commentary:

Talut or Gideon was able to defeat Jalut or the Midianites and curb their rising spirits, but their crushing defeat to which the verse refers as the killing of Jalut came in the time of David about two hundred years afterwards. This is why, whereas the defeat of Jalut by Talut has been spoken of by the Quran as ھزم i.e. routing, the complete crushing of their power has been referred to by the world قتل i.e. killing. The Bible speaks of the man defeated by David as Goliath (1 Sam. 17:4), which is similar to Jalut. Probably the attributive name given by the Quran to the people was also borne by their leader in the time of David.

The last clause of the verse, i.e. and had it not been for Allah’s repelling men, some of them by the others, the earth would have become filled with disorder, gives, in a nutshell, the whole philosophy of all wars of truth and justice. War should be resorted to only as a means of checking disorder and restoring peace, and not for creating disorder and breaking peace. The clause also serves as a criterion between Muslims and their adversaries and beautifully points to the party destined for final victory in the struggle.

6:92; 7:155.

2:42.

5:46, 48.

Important Words:

ربانیون (godly people). See 3:80.

احبار (learned men) is the plural of حبر. They say حبره i.e. he made it beautiful; or he made him happy; or he treated him with honour. حبر (hibr) or حبر (habr) means, a learned man of the Jews; or any learned man; a good or righteous man (Lane & Aqrab).

استحفظوا (were required to preserve) is in the passive voice being formed from حفظ. They say حفظه i.e. he kept it or preserved it or guarded it or protected it; or he prevented it from perishing or becoming lost. استحفظه (in the active voice) means, he asked him to keep or guard or preserve it from perishing or becoming lost; or he asked him to be careful of, or attentive to, it; or he placed it with him to preserve or guard or take care of it; or he entrusted him with it or gave it to him in trust (Lane).

Commentary:

In this verse the Quran brings home to the Jews the charge mentioned in the previous verse. When even the Prophets of God who followed Moses were required to judge according to the Torah, who are they to refuse to refer their disputes to it?

The words, Therefore fear not men but fear Me, and barter not My Signs for a paltry price, mean that the referring by the Jews of their disputes to the Holy Prophet meant that they no longer looked upon the Torah as the revealed Word of God, and also that they had complete faith in the honesty, truthfulness and justice of the Holy Prophet. If such was the case, and there were also clear prophecies in their Scriptures bearing witness to his truth, then their refusal to believe in him showed that they feared men more than they feared God. Moreover, the rejection of the Holy Prophet meant not only the rejection of those prophecies but of Moses himself, who brought the Book which contains those prophecies.

It is also clear from this verse that it is not necessary for every Prophet to bring a new Law and not to be the follower of another Prophet or Book. The Prophets that appeared among the Jews after Moses, including Jesus, brought no new Law but followed Moses and acted upon the Law that was revealed to him. Says the verse, By it did the Prophets, who were obedient to Us, judge for the Jews. The Prophets who judged the Jews by the Torah were obviously subject to the Law of the Torah and had no Law of their own.

5:45, 48.

Commentary:

As the law mentioned in this verse is clearly stated to have belonged to the Torah, though it is not to be found in the Bible as we now have it, the words, And whoso waives the right thereto, constitute clear evidence of the fact that the teaching about forgiveness of which Christians boast so much was no monopoly of the Gospels. It was contained in the Torah also, though at the same time there can be no denying the fact that the teachings of Moses lay extra stress on retaliation, as do those of Jesus on forgiveness and non-resistance.

2:88; 57:28.

3:51; 61:7.

Commentary:

The words, We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, show that, like the Prophets who preceded him, Jesus also was a follower of the Law of Moses, the Gospels being only an exposition of selected teachings of the Torah suited to those times.

5:45-46.

Commentary:

The words, And let the People of the Gospel judge according to what Allah has revealed therein, do not mean that the Gospel is a Book of Law and that Christians should act upon the Law revealed in it, for the obvious reason that the Gospel is not a Book of Law, Jesus himself having followed the Law of Moses from which not a jot or tittle was to pass away till there had come the revelation of the perfect Law embodied in the Quran.

In fact, these words, like the similar ones contained in 5:45, do not enjoin obedience to any Law of Moses or Jesus but refer to the prophecies contained in the Torah and the Gospel about the Holy Prophet of Islam. Thus the present verse as well as 5:45 warns Jews and Christians that if they defied these prophecies and rejected the Holy Prophet, they would be regarded as "wrongdoers" and "rebellious" in the sight of God. For the Biblical prophecies about the Holy Prophet of Islam see note on 2:42, 90; and also John 16:7-13.

Commentary:

Divine rewards, indeed, are pregnant with deep import. Pharaoh believed at a time when his faith was nothing more than a body without a soul: therefore, God rescued only his body from destruction, not letting his soul benefit by it. The body was saved from destruction that it might serve as a lesson for the generations to come.

It is remarkable that the Quran alone speaks of this fact. The Bible makes no mention of it, nor does any book of history. But in how wonderful a manner the word of God- has proved true! After the lapse of more than 3,000 years the body of Pharaoh has been discovered and it now lies in a preserved state in a museum at Cairo. The body shows Pharaoh to have been a lean, short-bodied man, with a countenance expressive of anger and stupidity. How far removed is the present age from the time when Pharaoh lived; yet God the Almighty not only saved his body but has also preserved it to the present age.

This verse supplies very strong testimony to the Divine origin of the Quran and to its distinct superiority over the Bible. The Pentateuch professes to give the history of the time of Moses and it is claimed that it was written in his own time. Yet the Quran, which came about 2,000 years after the Torah, has mentioned some incidents (including the present one) which are not mentioned in the Bible but which subsequent events have proved to be true. This establishes the truth of the Quran and the unreliability of the Pentateuch beyond any shadow of doubt.

The verse also points to the supreme moral lesson that we should hasten to accept the truth as soon as it comes to us and should not vacillate or procrastinate, as Pharaoh did.

It further shows that God does not allow even the slightest act of virtue to go unrewarded. Pharaoh believed at the time of his death, when his faith was but a shell without a kernel, yet even that act was not allowed to go quite unrewarded, for, though his soul was lost, his body was saved. His body may now prove the means of guiding many to truth; possibly it may spiritually benefit him also. This is perhaps why the famous Muslim saint, Muhy-ud-Din ibn ‘Arabi, holds that Pharaoh may be spared the punishment of Hell. The idea may not be right but it certainly provides food for thought.

Some commentators are of the opinion that the name of the drowned Pharaoh was Rameses. But this does not appear to be right. Moses was certainly born in the time of Rameses II and was brought up by him (Exod. 1:11), but it was in the reign of his son, Merneptah (Meneptah), that he was entrusted with the mission of a Prophet (Exod. 2:23). See also Jew. Enc., vol. 8, page 500, & Enc. Bib., under Pharaoh and under Egypt.

12:101.

Important Words:

یوسف (Joseph) was the eleventh son of the Prophet Jacob, otherwise known as Israel, and the elder of the two sons of Rachel. The meaning given to the name is "shall add" i.e. "The Lord shall add to me another son" (Gen. 30:24). A somewhat detailed account of his life is given in the present Surah. It should, however, be added that Joseph possesses the unique characteristic among all Prophets of God that not only was he himself a Prophet of God but his father, Jacob, his grandfather, Isaac, and his great-grandfather, Abraham, were all God’s chosen Messengers. The Holy Prophetreferred to this characteristic of Joseph in one of his well-known sayings when, on being asked by some of his Companions as to who was the noblest of men, he is reported to have replied, "Truly the noblest of men is the Prophet Joseph who was the son, grandson and great-grandson of a Prophet of God" (Bukhari, Kitab Bad’ul-Khalq). It may also be noted here that, though Joseph was buried in Egypt, his remains were later removed by Moses to Palestine when the Israelites were commanded by God to leave Egypt (Enc. Bib.).

کوکبا (stars) is derived from کوکب (kaukaba) which means, it (iron) glistened; was lustrous, or bright. کوکب (kaukabun) of which the plural is کواکب means, a star; an asterism; a constellation; the source or spring of a well; the lustre or brightness of iron, etc.; a sword; a whiteness in the eye; a tract which differs in colour from the land in which it lies; a youth nearly of the age of puberty; also a youth who has attained the period of adolescence and whose face has become beautiful; the chief or lord, or prince and horseman, or cavalier of a people; an armed man; a mountain; a troop of horses; the greater or chief part of a thing; the flower or flowers of a garden, etc. (Lane).

Commentary:

With this verse begins the story of Joseph, and in this very verse two important differences in the accounts of the Bible and the Quran and in the manner of their narration have been brought to light. Firstly, the Biblical account begins with a description of the pedigree of Joseph, while the Quran leaves this unimportant detail to be filled up by historians and begins the actual narration with the dream of Joseph, which constitutes its pivot. The whole life of Joseph revolves round this dream. Thus the Quran has opened the narrative with a much better and more appropriate beginning than the Bible. Secondly, while describing the dream of Joseph, the Bible mentions the sun and the moon first and the eleven stars afterwards, as making obeisance to Joseph (Gen. 37:9), but the Quran reverses the order; and actual facts of history support the order followed by the Quran, for it was the brethren of Joseph (the eleven stars) who met him first and made obeisance to him and his parents came afterwards. The vision as given in the Quran was literally fulfilled in actual life.

The word ساجدین (making obeisance) in the verse does not mean that the brothers and parents of Joseph actually fell prostrate before him. The root-meaning of this word being "obedience" and "submission" (for which see 2:35), the expression signified only that they would become obedient to the authority of Joseph and so it actually came to pass, for the parents and brothers of Joseph came to reside in the land where Joseph held sway as a Minister of State. Thus it was that they became ساجد or obedient to him. The names of the eleven brothers of Joseph, as given in the Bible, are:Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar and Zebulun, Benjamin, Dan and Naphtali, Gad and Asher.

The incident of the vision related by Joseph to his father furnishes two points of resemblance between him and the Holy Prophet. Just as Joseph’s vision, which was his first revelation, foretold his future greatness; so the first revelation of the Holy Prophet in the Cave of Hira predicted that he was to become the most honoured man of the human race. In 96:2-5, containing the first revelation which the Holy Prophet received, he was told that God would make him the most honoured among mankind and through him would teach men things which they did not know before, and that he would be the most honoured man not only among his contemporaries but also among those who had gone before him as well as those who would come after him. In this way, he would not only be the chief among his own brethren or followers, but also among his spiritual forefathers, the Prophets of yore. This is why the Holy Prophet is reported to have said لوکان موسی و عیسی حیین لما وسعھما الااتباعی i.e. even if Moses and Jesus had been living, they could not have helped tendering their allegiance to me (Kathir. vol. 2, p. 246). He also said انا سید ولد آدم i.e. I am the chief of all the children of Adam (Tirmidhi, ch. on Manaqib).

The second point of resemblance between the Holy Prophet and Joseph mentioned in this verse is that, whereas Joseph related his vision to his father, the Holy Prophet, at the instance of his wife, Khadijah, related his first revelation to Waraqah bin Naufal, who was one of the elders of the family (Bukhari).

Important Words:

مریم (Mary) is probably a compound word consisting of مر and یم and possesses, in Hebrew, a variety of meanings. Some of these meanings are: 'bitter sea'; 'drop of the sea'; 'star of the sea'; 'bitterness'; 'mistress or lady'. The word also means 'exalted'. It may also mean 'pious worshipper'. From two alternative roots the word might also mean, 'the rebellious', or 'the corpulent'. It seems that among the Jews and the Arabs corpulence was considered as a mark of beauty and girls who were corpulent were considered beautiful and therefore named Maryam. Maryam also seems to be a popular name among the Jews in the time of Jesus. See also 3:37.

شرقیاً (to the east) means, (1) facing the east; (2) to the east. مکاناً شرقیاً means, a place to the east; a place facing the east; a place in which the sun shines; an open dwelling place (Lane).

الکتاب (the Book) may refer both to the Bible and the Quran.

Commentary:

It seems relevant and necessary to mention, as a prelude to the somewhat detailed account of Jesus’ fatherless birth as given in the next several verses, some facts related about Mary in the Quran and the Bible.

The New Testament sheds practically no light on the life of Mary before she became pregnant. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke give an extremely brief and discursive description of her circumstances before the above important event took place while Mark and John are completely silent over it. According to Matthew, Mary, on being married to Joseph, was found to be with a child. Joseph intended secretly to put her away but was refrained from taking this extreme step by an angel saying to him in a dream: "Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife" (Matt. 1:19, 20). According to Luke, Mary was a relation of Zachariah’s wife and used to go to their house. Apart from this unimportant additional fact Luke leaves us quite in the dark about Mary’s account prior to her marriage with Joseph. But the Quran gives us a much more detailed account of Mary’s family, the circumstances that attended her birth, the vow of her mother, her childhood being dedicated to the service of the Church and lastly of her having conceived Jesus (3:36-38).

The present Surah, however, gives a still more detailed account of Mary having conceived Jesus and of what happened to her and to Jesus after his birth and after he was commissioned with his divine mission. The Quran has provided us with all necessary details about Mary that have any bearing on the important subject of prophethood which was about to be transferred from the House of Israel to that of Ishmael and which forms the principal thesis of the present Surah. If anything the Bible has given a very sorry picture of Jesus and his relations with his mother. Whereas the Quran depicts him to be kind, dutiful and very compassionate towards his mother, the Gospels show that he did not like his mother because she did not believe in him (Matt. 12:46-50). Mark 3:31-35 and Luke 8:19-21 show that besides Mary, Jesus’ other relations did not believe in him while the Gospel of John keeps discreetly silent over this painful subject. We also know that the Jews used to taunt Jesus by saying that if his mission was true why his own relations did not believe in him (Matt. 13:55-56). Some of his relations and friends went so far as to lay hold on him for they said that he was beside himself (Mark 3:21). This attitude of disbelief on the part of his relatives towards Jesus had made him so bitter that when he was being taken to Calvary to be put on the cross and his mother appeared on the scene, he addressed her saying 'Woman, behold thy son!' (John 19:26). And when on another occasion a woman being very much impressed by his discourse said: 'Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked' (Luke 11:27), he retorted: 'Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it' (Luke 11:28), which signified that he could not even bear his mother being praised.

Such is the picture which the Gospels have drawn of the unenviable relations between Jesus and his mother. But the description is not only self-contradictory, it also offends against human nature and intelligence. The Quran, however, presents both these blessed and holy persons in quite a different light. Regarding Jesus it says that he was kind and loving, obedient and dutiful to his mother and that he was not haughty and rude (19:33) while about Mary it states that she was a pious, chaste and truthful woman and was a great worshipper of God and that God purified her, accepted her and chose her above the women of the world (3:43, 44; 5:76; 66:13). How great is the difference between the unenviable picture of Mary drawn by the Gospels and the beautiful description given of her in the Quran. Whereas the Biblical description is highly derogatory and self-contradictory, the Quranic description is not only consistent with the dignity of a highly righteous woman but is also more akin to truth and facts of history.

As the verse shows Mary withdrew herself to a place to the east. Special mention has been made of "a place to the east" in the verse, in order, perhaps, to point to the time-honoured custom of the Jews that they attached special significance to مشرق (east) and considered it sacred. They believed that the birth of the first man took place in the east where God planted a garden (Gen. 2:8). The Babylonians by whose traditions the Jews became much impressed as they had lived under them as captives also looked upon the east as "the gate of light" (Ezekiel 11:1). Matthew 2:2 and Revelation 7:2 also shed some light on the importance of the east. Both the Jews and Christians hold the east in special respect. They build their places of worship facing the east. This is why special mention has been made in the present verse "of a place to the East" and Mary has been described as having gone to "a place which was facing the east."

For a somewhat detailed note on the early life of Mary see vv. 3:36, 37, 38.

Commentary:

According to this verse the birth of Jesus took place at a time when fresh dates are found on palm-trees in Judaea. That season evidently is in the months of August and September but according to the view generally accepted by Christians, Jesus was born on 25th December which day is celebrated all over the Christian world every year with great fervour. Now this Christian view is contradicted not only by the Quran but also by history and even by writers of the New Testament itself. Writing about the time of Jesus’ birth Luke says: "And there were shepherds in the same country (Judaea) abiding in the field, and keeping watch by night over their flocks (Luke 2:7, 8). Commenting on this statement of Luke Bishop Barns in his book, Rise of Christianity, on page 79 says: "There is, moreover, no authority for the belief that December 25 was the actual birthday of Jesus. If we can give any credence to the birth-story of Luke, with the shepherds keeping watch by night in the fields near Bethlehem, the birth of Jesus did not take place in winter, when the night temperature is so low in the hill country of Judaea that snow is not uncommon. After much argument our Christmas day seems to have been accepted about A.D. 300". This view of Bishop Barns is supported by writers of the articles on "Christmas" in Encyclopaedia Britannica and Chambers Encyclopaedia. In Encyclopaedia Britannica we have:

The exact day and year of Christ’s birth have never been satisfactorily settled; but then the fathers of the Church in A.D. 340 decided upon a date to celebrate the event, they wisely chose the day of the winter solstice which was firmly fixed in the minds of the people and which was their most important festival. Owing to changes in man-made calendars, the time of the solstice and the date of Christmas day vary by a few days (15th edition, vol. 5, pp. 642 & 642A).

Chambers Encyclopaedia says: In the second place the winter solstice was regarded as the birthday of the sun, and at Rome 25th December was observed as a pagan festival of the nativity of Sol-invictus. The Church, unable to stamp out this popular festival, spiritualized it as the feast of the Nativity of the Sun of Righteousness.

These statements of the two Encyclopaedias are further supported by Peake’s "Commentary on the Bible". In this book on page 727 Peake says: "The season (of Jesus’ birth) would not be December; our Christmas day is a comparatively late tradition found first in the West." Thus recent historical research into the origins of Christianity has established the fact beyond any reasonable doubt that Jesus was not born in December.

How in the light of historical research into the origins of Christianity and Luke’s statement that Jesus was born at a time when "there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flocks by night" (Luke 2:7-8) the belief ever came to be entertained by Christians that Jesus was born in December, seems very surprising indeed. According to this statement of Luke, Jesus certainly was born in summer when shepherds abide in the field in Judaea, keeping watch over their flocks at night which is only possible in summer. The incident referred to in Luke very probably took place in the month of August or September when fresh dates are found on palm-trees in Judaea. This is the time when according to the Quranic verse under comment Jesus was born and when his mother Mary was directed by God to "shake towards thyself the trunk of the palm-tree; it will cause fresh dates to fall upon thee". Thus the Gospel of Luke inadvertently has lent wonderful support to the Quranic view about the birth of Jesus having taken place in the month of August or September which is the season of fresh ripe dates in Judaea. Moreover, there is ample and very reliable historical evidence also to show that Jesus was born in the month of August or September. In his "Dictionary of the Bible" Dr. John D. Davis, under the word "year" writes that dates become ripe in the Jewish month of Elul; and in Peake’s "Commentary on the Bible" (page 117) we have that the month of Elul corresponds to the months of August-September. Furthermore Dr. Peake says, "J. Stewart (When did our Lord actually live?) arguing from an Angora temple inscription and a quotation in an old Chinese classic which speaks of the Gospel story reaching China A.D. 25-28 puts the birth of Jesus in 8 B.C. (Sept. or Oct.) and the crucifixion on Wednesday in A.D. 24."

From the above statements of the two Encyclopaedias supported by quotations from the "Commentary on the Bible" by Dr. Arthur S. Peake, M.A., D.D., the fact becomes quite clear that Jesus was born in the Jewish month of Elul which corresponds to the months of August-September when dates ripen in Judaea, and not on 25th December as the Christian Church would have us believe. And that is the view expressed by the Quran.

One more fact in this connection demands careful examination. Sometime before Jesus’ birth Joseph had taken Mary to Bethlehem, a town about seventy miles to the south of Nazareth, the native place of Joseph and Mary. Luke states that Joseph did so because with Quirinius as governor of Syria, Augustus Caesar had ordered that all should go to Bethlehem to be enrolled in the city of David (Luke 2:1-4). But history does not support this statement of Luke. No census was ever taken in the year of Jesus’ birth nor was there any governor of Syria of this name at that time. According to Josephus, one of the greatest of all Jewish historians, the first census ever to be taken was held seven years after Jesus’ birth and the governors of Syria ten years before his birth till Herod’s death were Stiplus Wardus, Sentiris and Titnis (Enc. Brit. under "Chronicle").

It seems incredible that in the face of such reliable historical evidence Luke should have invented this story of the census. There must have been some very compelling reasons for him to do so. It appears that in a desperate search for an excuse to explain why Joseph and Mary undertook such a long and arduous journey to Bethlehem in the latter’s extremely weak state of health and her pregnancy, Luke seems to have stumbled over the fact of a census having taken place in that town which, in fact, had been held seven years after the date that he has assigned to it. He deliberately predated the census by seven years in order to show that both the events—the census and Jesus’ birth, took place at the same time. Writing history about seventy or eighty years after the actual event he perhaps thought that this historical anachronism would not be detected after such a long time. Thus by placing the census, which had occurred seven years later, in the year of Jesus’ birth Luke persuaded himself to believe that he had succeeded in explaining away the fact as to why Joseph had exposed his ailing wife to the rigours of a long and hard journey to Bethlehem in the advanced state of her pregnancy.

But the difficulty still remains that if, as history shows, there had been no census at the time of Jesus’ birth, then why Luke was so anxious to invent the whole story of the journey to Bethlehem and why it was undertaken. In fact the difficulty was of Luke’s own creation. It was this, that while narrating the account of the immaculate conception of Mary he had stated that great and wonderful miracles had begun and had continued to appear till Jesus’ birth. He feared that if no valid reason were given of this journey of Joseph and Mary, then they would be legitimately accused of being weak of faith and people would naturally say that after having witnessed so many miracles at the time of the conception they were still afraid of public criticism and scandal-mongering and that in order to hide the fact of conception and later birth they had left Nazareth. But the hard reality was there that they had undertaken the journey to Bethlehem, a far-off place. Luke probably thought that people would rightly ask that if immediately after the conception miracles and Divine signs had really begun to appear, then where was the necessity for Joseph to conceal Mary’s pregnancy and the subsequent birth of Jesus, and if there existed no such necessity why did Joseph and Mary undertake that hard and fatiguing journey in the state of her extremely delicate health? Thus the invention of great miracles having taken place at the time of the conception forced Luke to forge the event of the census and also the story that he had undertaken the journey to Bethlehem in order to attend it. But he need not have invented or predated the fact of the census. The whole thing was quite simple and could have been easily explained. Luke could easily have written that Mary had miraculously conceived a child while in the temple and was afterwards married to Joseph who himself was quite convinced of her chastity as he had seen a vision to that effect (see 3:47). But because he feared that he would not be able to convince others of this fact, and because he was afraid of scandal-mongering on the part of the people, therefore, he had to take Mary to a far off place before her pregnancy had become too patent to be concealed any longer. But this he would not do because in that case the whole story of great miracles having attended Mary’s conception would have gone to pieces. This is how the whole difficulty arose and one invention led to another.

It may be added here that the whole-trouble of fixing the date of Jesus’ birth seems to have arisen from a confusion of the date of Mary’s conception. The pregnancy of Mary seemed to have taken place sometime in November or December and not in March or April as the Church historians would have us believe. When after four or five months’ conception, pregnancy became too obvious to be concealed any longer, Joseph was prevailed upon to take Mary to his house in the month of March or April of the next year. Thus Christian historians mistake the date when Joseph took Mary to his house for the date of her actual conception which had taken place four or five months earlier. As recent research into the origins of Christianity has proved that Jesus was not born in December but in August-September, therefore the conception could not have taken place in March or April. So the Quranic view that Jesus was born in August or September is based not only on historical facts but is also quite in accordance with Luke’s own narrative and therefore is the only safe and sensible conclusion.

It also appears from the present verse that Mary was lying in a sheltered place in the upper part of the hill and the date-palm was standing on the slope and therefore she could easily reach to its trunk and shake it. That the territory of Bethlehem abounded in date-palms is clear from the Bible (Judges 1:16) and from "A Dictionary of the Bible" by Dr. John D. Davis, D. D.

Moreover, the fact of Mary having been guided to a fountain, as mentioned in the preceding verse, in order to drink of its water and wash herself, points to Jesus’ birth having taken place in the month of August or September because in the icy cold weather of Judaea in December Mary could not have washed herself in the open.

Commentary:

Some Christian writers in their ignorance of the Arabic language have accused the Quran of an historical anachronism inasmuch as it has spoken of Mary as sister of Aaron. Instead of regretting their own ignorance they have blamed theQuran of ignorance. The question of Mary having been called the sister of Aaron in the Quran was put before the Holy Prophet himself and he told the questioner whether he did not know that the Israelites used to name their children after their Prophets and saints (Bayan, vol. 6, p. 16; Jarir vol. 16, p. 52).

Mary has been here called the sister of Aaron and not that of Moses though both were brothers, for whereas Moses was the founder of the Jewish Law, Aaron was the head of the Jewish priestly class (Enc. Bib. & Enc. Brit. under "Aaron") and Mary also belonged to the priestly order. Tabari has related an incident from the life of the Holy Prophet which gives us an insight into the meanings of the Arabic words اب(ab), عم (‘amm),اخت (ukht) etc. When once Safiyyah, the Holy Prophet’s wife, and incidentally a Jewess by descent, complained to the Holy Prophet that some of his other wives had called her a Jewess in contempt, the Prophet told her to return the taunt by saying that Aaron was her father, Moses her uncle and Muhammad her husband. Surely, the Holy Prophet knew that Aaron was not Safiyyah’s father nor Moses her uncle. This tradition shows that the application of these Arabic words is by no means confined to the above-mentioned blood relations.

Mary might have been called a sister of Aaron by way of reproach or taunt inasmuch as another Mary, the real sister of Aaron and Moses’ stepsister or his sister-in-law, had charged him (Moses) with having unlawfully married a woman (Numbers 12:1). A reference to this accusation is also to be found in the Quran in 33:70. Thus the elders of the Jews, by calling Jesus’ mother sister of Aaron, meant that as Mary, the sister of Aaron had, by accusing Moses of unlawfully marrying a woman, committed a heinous crime, so did she, like her namesake, commit a heinous act of giving birth to an illegitimate child. See also 3:36.