Topic: Moses Rescued
View Aspects
حَقِيقٌ عَلَىٰٓ أَن لَّآ أَقُولَ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ إِلَّا ٱلْحَقَّ ۚ قَدْ جِئْتُكُم بِبَيِّنَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ فَأَرْسِلْ مَعِىَ بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ
20:48; 26:18.
20:48; 26:18.
Haqiq means, adapted, disposed, apt, meet, right, fit or worthy (Lane).
When Moses went to Pharaoh his object was not so much to preach his Message to him as to call upon him to let the Israelites go with him, though ordinarily he would have preached to him also. As a matter of fact the Message of Moses was meant primarily for the Israelites, but as long as the Israelites remained mixed up with the natives of Egypt, Moses had to preach to them both. When the Israelites left the land, he had no concern with the Egyptians and confined his attention to his own kith and kin to whom he was sent.
20:48; 26:18.
Important Words:
حقیق (it is meet) is derived from حق meaning, it was or became suitable to the requirements of wisdom, justice, truth and right; or it was or became just, proper, correct, valid, established or confirmed as a truth or fact; or it became necessary, unavoidable, obligatory or due. They say یحق علیك ان تفعل کذا i.e. it is incumbent upon thee, or it behoves thee, or it is meet for thee, that thou shouldst do such a thing. Thus حقیق means, adapted, disposed, apt, meet, fit or worthy. The expression حقیق علیان لااقول would thus mean, I am disposed not to say; or it is binding or obligatory or incumbent on me that I should not say; or, as some render the expression, I am vehemently desirous that I should not say (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Taking the word حقیق in the sense of "desirous", the opening sentence of the verse would mean, "I am desirous that I should speak of God nothing but the truth". These words are put in the mouth of Moses as a reply also to those who accused the Holy Prophet of lying. The Prophets of God are, as it were, represented as saying that, far from speaking a lie, they are but too anxious, and desire nothing but to speak pure and unadulterated truth. Other meanings of حقیق are also equally applicable here.
When Moses went to Pharaoh, his object was not so much the preaching of his message to him as to call upon him to let the Israelites go with him, though ordinarily he would preach to him also. As a matter of fact, the message of Moses was meant primarily for the Israelites, but as long as the Israelites remained mixed up with the natives of Egypt, Moses had to preach to them both. When the Israelites left the land, he had no concern with the Egyptians and confined his attention to his own kith and kin to whom he had been sent.
c
20:48; 26:18.
b
20:48; 26:18.
1000
Important Words:
حقیق (it is meet) is derived from حق meaning, it was or became suitable to the requirements of wisdom, justice, truth and right; or it was or became just, proper, correct, valid, established or confirmed as a truth or fact; or it became necessary, unavoidable, obligatory or due. They say یحق علیك ان تفعل کذا i.e. it is incumbent upon thee, or it behoves thee, or it is meet for thee, that thou shouldst do such a thing. Thus حقیق means, adapted, disposed, apt, meet, fit or worthy. The expression حقیق علیان لااقول would thus mean, I am disposed not to say; or it is binding or obligatory or incumbent on me that I should not say; or, as some render the expression, I am vehemently desirous that I should not say (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Taking the word حقیق in the sense of "desirous", the opening sentence of the verse would mean, "I am desirous that I should speak of God nothing but the truth". These words are put in the mouth of Moses as a reply also to those who accused the Holy Prophet of lying. The Prophets of God are, as it were, represented as saying that, far from speaking a lie, they are but too anxious, and desire nothing but to speak pure and unadulterated truth. Other meanings of حقیق are also equally applicable here.
When Moses went to Pharaoh, his object was not so much the preaching of his message to him as to call upon him to let the Israelites go with him, though ordinarily he would preach to him also. As a matter of fact, the message of Moses was meant primarily for the Israelites, but as long as the Israelites remained mixed up with the natives of Egypt, Moses had to preach to them both. When the Israelites left the land, he had no concern with the Egyptians and confined his attention to his own kith and kin to whom he had been sent.
a
20:48; 26:18.
1021
Haqiq means, adapted, disposed, apt, meet, right, fit or worthy (Lane).
1022
When Moses went to Pharaoh his object was not so much to preach his Message to him as to call upon him to let the Israelites go with him, though ordinarily he would have preached to him also. As a matter of fact the Message of Moses was meant primarily for the Israelites, but as long as the Israelites remained mixed up with the natives of Egypt, Moses had to preach to them both. When the Israelites left the land, he had no concern with the Egyptians and confined his attention to his own kith and kin to whom he was sent.
فَأْتِيَاهُ فَقُولَآ إِنَّا رَسُولَا رَبِّكَ فَأَرْسِلْ مَعَنَا بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ وَلَا تُعَذِّبْهُمْ ۖ قَدْ جِئْنَٰكَ بِـَٔايَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّكَ ۖ وَٱلسَّلَٰمُ عَلَىٰ مَنِ ٱتَّبَعَ ٱلْهُدَىٰٓ
Commentary:
"A Great Sign" in this verse may be taken as referring to the whole teaching or message of Moses because he had already shown two Signs to Pharaoh—the Sign of the rod and of the white hand, and not one. The word الھدی i.e. "guidance" also seems to support the above significance of "a Sign." Thus آیة signifies the whole teaching of Moses and not a particular part of it or one or two of his miracles. Or the word may refer to the promise of peace and security which God had given to Moses and of Divine punishment with which Pharaoh had been threatened.
2269
Commentary:
"A Great Sign" in this verse may be taken as referring to the whole teaching or message of Moses because he had already shown two Signs to Pharaoh—the Sign of the rod and of the white hand, and not one. The word الھدی i.e. "guidance" also seems to support the above significance of "a Sign." Thus آیة signifies the whole teaching of Moses and not a particular part of it or one or two of his miracles. Or the word may refer to the promise of peace and security which God had given to Moses and of Divine punishment with which Pharaoh had been threatened.
وَلَقَدْ أَوْحَيْنَآ إِلَىٰ مُوسَىٰٓ أَنْ أَسْرِ بِعِبَادِى فَٱضْرِبْ لَهُمْ طَرِيقًا فِى ٱلْبَحْرِ يَبَسًا لَّا تَخَٰفُ دَرَكًا وَلَا تَخْشَىٰ
26:53.
26:64.
Against all unimpeachable historical data, most extraordinary theories have been propounded about the Israelites, viz. (a) they never lived in Egypt; because no reference to them is to be found in the old Egyptian historical records. (b) In the fifth year of the reign of Pharaoh Meneptah (or Merenptah) when Moses is said to have taken the Israelites out of Egypt, some Israelite tribes were actually living in Canaan, therefore the theory that Moses had taken the Israelites out of Egypt to Canaan during his reign and that they settled there some fifty years later is all wrong.
The propounders of these strange theories seem to forget that the Israelites were foreigners in Egypt and were a subject race and had lived the miserable life of serfs and slaves under their cruel rulers. How could such people be considered worthy of any notice being taken of them by historians? When even in this 20th century historians cannot find it easy to prepare a well- connected and harmonious narrative about a people from
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.
a
26:53.
b
26:64.
c
26:53.
d
26:64.
2293A
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.
c
26:53.
d
26:64.
1838
Against all unimpeachable historical data, most extraordinary theories have been propounded about the Israelites, viz. (a) they never lived in Egypt; because no reference to them is to be found in the old Egyptian historical records. (b) In the fifth year of the reign of Pharaoh Meneptah (or Merenptah) when Moses is said to have taken the Israelites out of Egypt, some Israelite tribes were actually living in Canaan, therefore the theory that Moses had taken the Israelites out of Egypt to Canaan during his reign and that they settled there some fifty years later is all wrong.
The propounders of these strange theories seem to forget that the Israelites were foreigners in Egypt and were a subject race and had lived the miserable life of serfs and slaves under their cruel rulers. How could such people be considered worthy of any notice being taken of them by historians? When even in this 20th century historians cannot find it easy to prepare a well- connected and harmonious narrative about a people from
فَأَتْبَعَهُمْ فِرْعَوْنُ بِجُنُودِهِۦ فَغَشِيَهُم مِّنَ ٱلْيَمِّ مَا غَشِيَهُمْ
10:91; 26:61.
10:91; 26:61.
10:91; 26:61.
Important Words:
أتبعھم (pursued them) is derived from تبع. They say تبعه i.e. he followed him. أتبعه means, he followed him and overtook him. أتبعه بھم means, he made him to be followed by them i.e. he made them to follow him. فأتبعھم فرعون بجنودہ means, Pharaoh made his troops to follow them (Lane & Aqrab). See also 10:91.
یم (sea) is substantive-noun from یم (yamma).
The Arabs say یٍم الرجل i.e. the man was thrown into the sea. یم الساحل means, the water of the river overflowed its banks. یم means, the sea; or the sea of unknown or unreached depth; a great body of water. See also 7:137.
c
10:91; 26:61.
a
10:91; 26:61.
2294
Important Words:
أتبعھم (pursued them) is derived from تبع. They say تبعه i.e. he followed him. أتبعه means, he followed him and overtook him. أتبعه بھم means, he made him to be followed by them i.e. he made them to follow him. فأتبعھم فرعون بجنودہ means, Pharaoh made his troops to follow them (Lane & Aqrab). See also 10:91.
یم (sea) is substantive-noun from یم (yamma).
The Arabs say یٍم الرجل i.e. the man was thrown into the sea. یم الساحل means, the water of the river overflowed its banks. یم means, the sea; or the sea of unknown or unreached depth; a great body of water. See also 7:137.
a
10:91; 26:61.
۞ وَأَوْحَيْنَآ إِلَىٰ مُوسَىٰٓ أَنْ أَسْرِ بِعِبَادِىٓ إِنَّكُم مُّتَّبَعُونَ
20:74.
20:74.
10:91; 20:78; 44:24.
g
20:74.
a
10:91; 20:78; 44:24.
f
20:74.
وَنُرِيدُ أَن نَّمُنَّ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ ٱسْتُضْعِفُوا۟ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ وَنَجْعَلَهُمْ أَئِمَّةً وَنَجْعَلَهُمُ ٱلْوَٰرِثِينَ
Commentary:
When the degradation and humiliation of the Israelites in Egypt reached its nadir and the cup of iniquities of Pharaoh and his people became full to the brim and God in His infallible wisdom decreed that the oppressors should be punished and those held in bondage be emancipated, He raised Moses. Such has always been God’s practice that He raises a Prophet to lead a down-trodden people to honour and glory and through his influence and under his lead the erstwhile suppressed and exploited people become the leaders and teachers of men. This phenomenon which took place in the time of every Divine Messenger witnessed its fullest and finest manifestation during the ministry of the Holy Prophet of Islam.
The words "to make them inheritors", refer to the Israelites becoming heirs to that 'land of promise'—Canaan—which, like Egypt, "flowed with milk and honey" and which God had "ordained for them" (5:22).
2880
Commentary:
When the degradation and humiliation of the Israelites in Egypt reached its nadir and the cup of iniquities of Pharaoh and his people became full to the brim and God in His infallible wisdom decreed that the oppressors should be punished and those held in bondage be emancipated, He raised Moses. Such has always been God’s practice that He raises a Prophet to lead a down-trodden people to honour and glory and through his influence and under his lead the erstwhile suppressed and exploited people become the leaders and teachers of men. This phenomenon which took place in the time of every Divine Messenger witnessed its fullest and finest manifestation during the ministry of the Holy Prophet of Islam.
The words "to make them inheritors", refer to the Israelites becoming heirs to that 'land of promise'—Canaan—which, like Egypt, "flowed with milk and honey" and which God had "ordained for them" (5:22).
وَنُمَكِّنَ لَهُمْ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ وَنُرِىَ فِرْعَوْنَ وَهَٰمَٰنَ وَجُنُودَهُمَا مِنْهُم مَّا كَانُوا۟ يَحْذَرُونَ
7:138; 26:60; 44:29.
7:138; 26:60; 44:29.
When degradation of the Israelites in Egypt reached its nadir and the cup of iniquities of Pharaoh and his people became full to the brim and God in His infallible wisdom decreed that the oppressors should be punished and those held in bondage be emancipated, He raised Moses. This phenomenon which took place in the time of every Divine Messenger witnessed its fullest and finest manifestation during the ministry of the Holy Prophet of Islam.
Haman was the title of the high priest of the god Amon; 'ham,' in Egyptian language meaning, high priest. The god Amon dominated all other Egyptian gods. 'Haman was the director of both the treasury and the granary and director also of the soldiers and all the craftsmen of Thebes. His name was Nebunnef and he was high priest under Rameses II and his son Merneptah. Being the head of the extremely rich sacerdotal organization, embracing all the priesthoods of the country, his power and prestige had increased so much that he controlled a most influential political faction and even kept his own private army'("A History of Egypt" by James Henry Breasted, Ph.D.). Haman is also said to be the name of a minister of Ahasuerus, a king of Persia who lived many ages after Moses’s time. There is nothing strange or objectionable in two persons living in two different periods bearing the same name.
Exploitation and tyranny produce their own nemesis and the exploiters and oppressors never feel secure from the standard of revolt being raised against them by those whom they exploit, suppress or oppress. The greater the oppression of the tyrant, the greater his fear of revolt from those who are oppressed. Pharaoh, too, was seized with this fear.
7:138; 26:60; 44:29.
Commentary:
Exploitation and tyranny produce their own nemesis and the exploiters and oppressors never feel secure from the standard of revolt being raised against them by those whom they exploit, suppress and oppress. The greater the oppression of the tyrant, the greater his fear of revolt on the part of the tyrannized. Pharaoh, too, was seized with this fear and, therefore, he employed all sorts of means and machinations to keep the Israelites under permanent subjection. But the time had come that he should be punished and those held in bondage should be emancipated.
Haman was the title of the High Priest of the god Amon, "ham" in Egyptian meaning high priest and Amon was the god who dominated all other Egyptian gods. "Haman was the director of the double treasury and granary and director of the soldiers and all the craftsmen of Thebes. His name was Nebunnef and he was high priest under Ramesus II and his son Merneptah. Being the head of the extremely rich sacerdotal organization embracing all the priesthoods of the country his power and prestige had increased so much that he controlled a most influential political faction and even kept his own private army" (A story of Egypt by James Henry Breasted, Ph.D.).
Haman is also said to be the name of a minister of Ahasuerus, a king of Persia who lived many ages after Moses. There is nothing strange or objectionable in two persons living in two different periods bearing the same name. But Mr. Wherry, only to expose his own crass ignorance, has pretended to discover a serious anachronism in the Quran having called a minister of Pharaoh by the name of Haman, which incidentally was also the name of a minister of a king of Persia (Wherry’s Commentary, vol. 3, p. 254). In fact, anachronism lies in the brain of Mr. Wherry himself and not in the Quran.
a
7:138; 26:60; 44:29.
a
7:138; 26:60; 44:29.
2881
Commentary:
Exploitation and tyranny produce their own nemesis and the exploiters and oppressors never feel secure from the standard of revolt being raised against them by those whom they exploit, suppress and oppress. The greater the oppression of the tyrant, the greater his fear of revolt on the part of the tyrannized. Pharaoh, too, was seized with this fear and, therefore, he employed all sorts of means and machinations to keep the Israelites under permanent subjection. But the time had come that he should be punished and those held in bondage should be emancipated.
Haman was the title of the High Priest of the god Amon, "ham" in Egyptian meaning high priest and Amon was the god who dominated all other Egyptian gods. "Haman was the director of the double treasury and granary and director of the soldiers and all the craftsmen of Thebes. His name was Nebunnef and he was high priest under Ramesus II and his son Merneptah. Being the head of the extremely rich sacerdotal organization embracing all the priesthoods of the country his power and prestige had increased so much that he controlled a most influential political faction and even kept his own private army" (A story of Egypt by James Henry Breasted, Ph.D.).
Haman is also said to be the name of a minister of Ahasuerus, a king of Persia who lived many ages after Moses. There is nothing strange or objectionable in two persons living in two different periods bearing the same name. But Mr. Wherry, only to expose his own crass ignorance, has pretended to discover a serious anachronism in the Quran having called a minister of Pharaoh by the name of Haman, which incidentally was also the name of a minister of a king of Persia (Wherry’s Commentary, vol. 3, p. 254). In fact, anachronism lies in the brain of Mr. Wherry himself and not in the Quran.
a
7:138; 26:60; 44:29.
2197
When degradation of the Israelites in Egypt reached its nadir and the cup of iniquities of Pharaoh and his people became full to the brim and God in His infallible wisdom decreed that the oppressors should be punished and those held in bondage be emancipated, He raised Moses. This phenomenon which took place in the time of every Divine Messenger witnessed its fullest and finest manifestation during the ministry of the Holy Prophet of Islam.
2198
Haman was the title of the high priest of the god Amon; 'ham,' in Egyptian language meaning, high priest. The god Amon dominated all other Egyptian gods. 'Haman was the director of both the treasury and the granary and director also of the soldiers and all the craftsmen of Thebes. His name was Nebunnef and he was high priest under Rameses II and his son Merneptah. Being the head of the extremely rich sacerdotal organization, embracing all the priesthoods of the country, his power and prestige had increased so much that he controlled a most influential political faction and even kept his own private army'("A History of Egypt" by James Henry Breasted, Ph.D.). Haman is also said to be the name of a minister of Ahasuerus, a king of Persia who lived many ages after Moses’s time. There is nothing strange or objectionable in two persons living in two different periods bearing the same name.
2199
Exploitation and tyranny produce their own nemesis and the exploiters and oppressors never feel secure from the standard of revolt being raised against them by those whom they exploit, suppress or oppress. The greater the oppression of the tyrant, the greater his fear of revolt from those who are oppressed. Pharaoh, too, was seized with this fear.
فَأَسْرِ بِعِبَادِى لَيْلًا إِنَّكُم مُّتَّبَعُونَ
10:91; 20:79; 26:61.
10:91; 20:79; 26:61.
10:91; 20:79; 26:61.
b
10:91; 20:79; 26:61.
a
10:91; 20:79; 26:61.
a
10:91; 20:79; 26:61.