Topic: And Disbelievers

6:38; 20:134; 21:6; 43:54.

This verse refers to two very unreasonable demands of the People of the Book—Jews and Christians: (1) That God should speak to them directly and tell them that the Holy Prophet was His true Messenger; (2) That they should be shown Signs of their own devising.

In reply to the first demand, the Quran says that only ignorant people, unacquainted with the ways of God, make such a demand. This demand was made in the time of all the previous Prophets and was rejected as foolish. So it was unreasonable on their part to demand from the Holy Prophet something which their own Prophets had not complied with.

In reply to their demand for a Sign, they are told that signs are sufficient for the guidance of right-minded people have already been shown and they could, if they so desired, profit by them, but nothing could avail an obstinate and perverse person. The fact that a demand for a Sign was made from the Holy Prophet does not show that no Signs had been shown by him. Indeed, if such a demand be considered as proof of the absence of Signs, no Prophet could be proved to have shown any Sign; for a similar demand was made from every Prophet of God, notably Jesus (Matt. 12:38, 39).

It may be also noted here that whenever disbelievers are spoken of as demanding an آیة or Sign, the word means either a Sign of their own devising or a Sign in the form of divine punishment (see 21:6, 7; 6:38-51; 13:28-33; 20:134, 135; 29:51).

62:7, 8.

Important Words:

نبتھل (let us pray fervently) is derived from بھل. They say بھله i.e. he left him to his own will; or he left him to himself; he cursed him. ابتھل means, he prayed or supplicated humbly and earnestly and fervently, with energy and effort. باھلهmeans, he cursed him, being also cursed by the latter. مباھلة means, the act of invoking God’s curse on each other, i.e. on whichever party is the wrongdoer (Aqrab & Lane).

انفسنا و انفسکم (our people and your people). The words are the plural of نفس and mean: (1) our souls and your souls; (2) ourselves and yourselves; (3) our people and your people; (4) our co-religionists and your co-religionists (Lane). See also 2:55 and 3:29. Here, as the context shows, the words give the last-mentioned meaning.

Commentary:

The present discussion on Christian doctrines with which this Surah began has been brought to a close in this verse. The reference, as mentioned above, is to the Christian deputation from Najran which consisted of sixty persons and was headed by their chief, ‘Abdul-Masih, known as Al-‘Aqib. They met the Holy Prophet in his Mosque and the discussion on the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus continued at some length. When the question had been fully discussed and the members of the deputation were found to be still insisting on their false doctrine, the Holy Prophet, in obedience to the Divine command contained in the present verse, invited them as a last resort to join him in a sort of prayer contest technically known as مباھلة i.e. invoking the curse of God on the holders of false beliefs. As, however, the Christians did not appear to be sure of their ground, they declined to accept the challenge, thus indirectly admitting the falsity of their doctrine (Zurqani, Khamis & Bayan under 3:3). On this occasion, the Holy Prophet brought out ‘Ali, Fatimah, Hasan and Husain (Khamis & Zurqani) as well as Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman and others (‘Asakir) in the field and is reported to have said: "If the Christians had accepted the challenge of مباھلة and agreed to pray to God to send His punishment on the lying party, God would have surely destroyed the liars before a year had passed" (Bukhari, Muslim & Tirmidhi).

It may be noted that the prayer contest known as مباھلة is in the nature of seeking God’s arbitration in fundamental religious differences. When other methods of settlement fail, the parties approach Almighty God to decide between them according to His eternal scheme of helping the righteous and destroying the wicked. The act of cursing is thus not in the form of abusing but an earnest supplication to God to uphold the truth and destroy falsehood—to amputate the diseased limb in order to save the healthy one. Thus مباھلةis a very serious affair and should be resorted to in very rare cases, subject to the following conditions, which are deducible from the present verse as well as from the relevant sayings of the Holy Prophet; (1) the point in dispute should be a matter of supreme and fundamental religious importance and should be based on clear scriptural authority; (2) the matter should first be fully argued and discussed between the parties; (3) the مباھلة should take place only if and when after the aforesaid discussion each party still continues to adhere to its views, definitely holding the other party to be in the wrong; (4) for the actual contest the parties should assemble in a suitable place together with the members of their families and a suitable number of others holding similar views, and there solemnly invoke the curse of God on the party sticking to falsehood.

As to the form or time of punishment which, as a result of مباھلة must overtake the offending party, the verse sheds no light. The matter rests entirely with God. From the above-quoted tradition, however, it may be deduced that if any period at all is to be fixed, it should be not less than a year. But the form of punishment must still rest on Divine will. The Judge in heaven reserves the right of deciding each individual case as He thinks fit. The result is left to speak for itself.

It may be noted here incidentally that during the discussions with the Christian deputation from Najran, the Holy Prophet allowed them to pray in his Mosque in their own way, which they did facing the east—an act of religious toleration unparalleled in the history of all religion (Zurqani).

10:37; 53:29.

Important Words:

ماقتلوہ (they slew him not). قتله means, he slew him by striking him with a sword or with a stone or by poison or by any other means. See also 2:62 & 4:158.

ماقتلوہ یقینا (they did not convert this conjecture into certainty) is a peculiar Arabic idiom. The Arabs say قتل الشیء خبرا (lit. he killed the thing with certainty of knowledge and proper examination), i.e. he acquired full and thorough knowledge of the thing so as to dispel all possibility of doubt. So the words ما قتلوہ یقینا would mean, their knowledge regarding it was not comprehensive, or they did not know it for certain that he had been killed, or they did not convert this (conjecture of theirs) into certainty, meaning that they were not sure and they did not make sure whether Jesus died on the cross or not. In this case, the pronoun in قتلوہ would refer to the noun ظن (a conjecture) immediately preceding it (Lane, Aqrab, Mufradat & Lisan).

In plain English, the words would mean that their knowledge about the death of Jesus on the cross was not so full and comprehensive as to have attained the stage of certainty. The expression may also mean that they certainly did not slay him or that they did not kill him as a certainty, i.e. they did not execute him in such a way as definitely assure themselves that life had indeed become extinct in him.

ما صلبوه (nor crucified him). The word صلبوا is from the root صلب. They say صلب الشیء i.e. he burned the thing. صلب العظامmeans, he extracted the marrow out of the bones. صلب اللص means, he crucified the thief, i.e. he put him to death in a certain well-known manner (Lane & Aqrab). In crucifixion one was nailed to a framework made in the form of a cross and, being kept without food and drink, slowly died of pain, hunger, fatigue and exposure.

شبه لھم (he was made to appear to them like one crucified). شبھه إیاہ means, he made it or him to be like it or him, or he made it or him to resemble it or him. شبه علیه الامر means, the matter was rendered confused, obscure or dubious to him. شبه علیه الامرmeans, he rendered the matter confused to him (by making it to appear like some other thing); he rendered it confused, obscure or dubious to him (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This and the preceding verse mention two main objections of the Jews against Jesus: (1) his alleged illegitimate birth, and (2) his supposed death on the cross which, according to Jewish Law, was an accursed death (Deut. 21:23). The words, We did kill the Messiah, Jesus, Son of Mary—the Messenger of Allah, are spoken ironically and tauntingly, meaning, "we have killed Jesus who posed as the Messiah and a Messenger of God."

The argument of the Jews was that because Jesus died on the cross, he could not be a true Prophet according to Jewish Law. The inference was based on their sacred Scriptures; for, according to the Bible, he who is hanged is accursed of God, and a false Prophet shall meet with destruction. Says the Bible: "His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance' (Deut. 21:23). Again: "My hand shall be upon false prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies" (Ezek. 13:9). Again: "Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the prophets that prophesy in My name, and I sent them not, yet they say, Sword and famine shall not be in this land, by sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed" (Jer. 14:15).

On the strength of such verses of the Bible, the Jews claimed that, as Jesus had been crucified and met with destruction, he could not be a true Prophet of God, but was a false claimant and an accursed one.

Regarding the charge about the alleged death of Jesus by crucifixion, the Quran says that the act of crucifixion having not been completed, and Jesus having been taken down alive from the cross, the charge carries no weight. It should, however, be noted that the Quran does not deny the mere hanging of Jesus on the cross; it only denies his death on it.

Two different views prevail among the Jews regarding Jesus’ alleged death by crucifixion. Some of them hold that Jesus was first killed and then his dead body was hung on the cross, while others are of the view that he was put to death by being fixed to the cross. The former view is reflected in Acts, 5:30 where we read "which ye slew and hanged on a tree." The Quran refutes both these views by saying, they slew him not, nor crucified him. The words may also signify that the Quran first rejects the slaying of Jesus in any form, and then proceeds to deny the particular way of killing by hanging on the cross.

The verb شبه (in the passive voice) means, he was made to appear like, or was made to resemble. Now the question arises, who is the person who was made to appear "like one crucified." Clearly, it was Jesus whom the Jews tried to crucify or slay. Nobody else can be meant here, for there is absolutely no reference to any other person in the context. Hence, the theory invented by certain commentators that Judas or somebody else was made to appear like Jesus and was then crucified in his place is simply absurd. The context cannot be so twisted as to make room for somebody else of whom no mention at all is made in the verse.

To what then was Jesus made like? The context provides a clear answer to that question. The Jews did not kill him by crucifixion, but he was made to appear to them like "one crucified", and thus it was that they wrongly took him for dead. It was thus Jesus who was made to resemble "one crucified." This interpretation is not only in perfect harmony with the context, but is also clearly borne out by all relevant facts of history.

The second meaning of the expression شبه لھم is, as explained under Important Words, that "the matter became confused to them." This interpretation is also clearly borne out by history; for, although the Jews asserted that they had put Jesus to death by suspending him on the cross, they were not sure of it and the circumstances being obscure, the matter had certainly become confused to them. The fact that the Jews themselves were not sure whether Jesus had actually died on the cross is supported by the Bible and by all authentic historical facts.

The statements made in this verse are clearly substantiated by the following facts narrated in the Gospels:

(1) Jesus had himself predicted his escape from death on the cross, saying, "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matt. 12:40). Now it is an accepted fact that Jonah had entered the whale’s belly alive and had come out alive; so, according to his own prophecy, Jesus was to enter the heart of the earth, (i.e. his tomb) alive and was to come out of it alive.

(2) The trying magistrate (Pilate) believed Jesus to be innocent and, being sympathetic, was anxious to save his life (Matt. 27:17, 18; Mark 15:9, 10, 14; Luke 23:4, 14, 15, 20,22; John 18:38, 39); and he must have secretly tried to save him or at least connived at the attempt of others to do so.

(3) Pilate’s wife had seen a vision concerning the innocence of Jesus: "When he (Pilate) was set down on the judgement seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, 'Have thou nothing to do with that just man, for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him'" (Matt. 27:19). This message must certainly have influenced Pilate, and his wife must have also done her best to save Jesus.

(4) Pilate held the killing of Jesus in such horror that he actually washed his hands with water, saying that he was innocent of the blood of that just man (Matt. 27:24).

(5) Pilate did all he could to help Jesus; and the soldiers in charge also treated Jesus with kindness, apparently under Pilate’s directions. The following are some of the special favours shown to Jesus: (a) Every malefactor carried his own cross but another man was made to carry that of Jesus (Matt. 27:32; Mark 15:21); (b) Jesus was given wine or vinegar mingled with myrrh. This was intended to render him less sensible to pain. The two thieves who were crucified with him were not given this drink. When after sometime the effects of the drink were wearing off and Jesus cried with pain, the drink was administered again to render him unconscious of pain (Matt. 27:34, 48; Mark 15:23, 36; John 19:29, 30).

(6) The unconsciousness which followed the administration of vinegar was mistaken for death (John 19:30).

(7) Jesus remained on the cross for only about three hours (John 19:14. cf. Matt. 27:46) and according to Mark only for six hours (Mark 15:25, 33), and either of these periods was by no means sufficient to kill a young man like Jesus on the cross.

(8) When Joseph of Arimathaea came and craved the body of Jesus, Pilate "marvelled if he were already dead", and calling to him the centurion asked him whether he had been any while dead (Mark, 15:44).

(9) The soldiers did not break the legs of Jesus, but the legs of the two malefactors who had been crucified with him were broken (John 19:32, 33).

(10) Jesus was not buried in the earth with the two malefactors but was laid separately in a spacious sepulchre hewn out of a rock and situated in a garden which was private property (Mark 15:46; John 19:41, 42).

(11) The Jews themselves were not sure that Jesus was dead; for they came to Pilate and besought him that his legs be broken (John 19:31).

(12) The doubt that Jesus was alive and might, with the aid of his sympathizers, escape from the sepulchre rankled in the minds of the Jews. They remembered also the prophecy of Jesus that he would show them the miracle of Jonah and would come out of the heart of the earth alive. So, influenced by such misgivings, the chief priests and Pharisees went together to Pilate, saying, "Sir, we remember that the deceiver said, while he was yet alive—'After three days I will rise again.'—Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day. Pilate told them to make their own arrangements; "so they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone and setting a watch" (Matt. 27:62-66).

(13) In spite of the watch and despite the sealing of the stone, Jesus had left the sepulchre before the third day had dawned, when Mary Magdalene and Mary, mother of James, came to see the sepulchre and found the stone rolled away and the sepulchre empty (Matt. 28:1-6 Mark 16:1-6), which shows that the men set to watch were also in league with, and won over by, the friends of Jesus.

(14) After leaving the sepulchre, Jesus moved about secretly, lest the Jews should have him arrested again (Mark 16:12 John 20:19, 26; 21:4).

(15) Mary Magdalene and other disciples actually saw Jesus in this body of clay (Mark 16:9, 12).

(16) Jesus showed them his wounds to assure them that he was not a spirit but a man of flesh and blood and that the body they saw before them was the same physical body that had been nailed to the cross (Luke 24:39, 40; John 20:27).

(17) After leaving the sepulchre, Jesus felt hungry and partook of food with his disciples (John 21:5, 13; Luke 24:41, 42, 43).

The above references among others make it abundantly clear that Jesus did not die on the cross, that he was alive when he was taken down from the cross, and also when he was laid in the sepulchre, and that he came out of it alive on the third day at early morn, as he had himself prophesied, and that later he appeared to his disciples in secret and assured them that he was not dead.

(18) Jesus had said, "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold, them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice and there shall be one fold and one shepherd" (John 10:16). In these words he was obviously referring to the lost ten tribes of Israel who had scattered in Afghanistan, Kashmir, etc. In search of these Jesus came to the East after his miraculous escape from an accursed death on the cross, and among these he now lies buried in Khan Yar Street in Srinagar Kashmir. Conclusive historical evidence has established the fact that the holy occupant of the tomb in the Khan Yar Street in Srinagar is no other than Jesus, son of Mary. For further discussion of this important subject, see Masih Hindustan Meiń (Jesus in India) by the Promised Messiah, and R. Rel. Vol. II Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 10 published from Qadian, and the "Tomb of Jesus" by Dr M. M. Sadiq of Qadian.

2:171; 31:22.

Commentary:

It is indeed strange that when science and knowledge advance and new discoveries and new inventions are made, people are quick to throw overboard worn out ideas and theories tenaciously held by their forefathers and hasten to accept and benefit by the new inventions and discoveries; but when a Prophet brings to them a new guidance from God, they refuse to accept it on the ground that it does not agree with the beliefs and ideas held by their ancestors and with their own time-honoured notions and theories. How foolish is this attitude and how lame and absurd the excuse for the rejection of divine truths! This is how the Quran exposes the untenability of the position of the rejecters of truth.

2:117; 9:31; 10:19.

Important Words:

الجن (the jinn) is derived from the verb جن i.e. he covered up or concealed. The word here signifies such beings as remain aloof from the people, as if remaining concealed, e.g. kings and other potentates. In its wider significance the word extends to angels and other hidden creatures. See also 2:26; 6:77 & 6:129.

خرقوا (they falsely ascribe) is derived from خرق. They say خرقه i.e. he made a hole in it, or he cut it or tore it. خرق الارضmeans, he traversed or crossed the land by journeying so as to reach the furthest part thereof.

خرق الکذب means, he forged the lie. Sometimes the word خرق even when used without a qualifying word means, he forged a lie, or he lied, or he falsely ascribed something to somebody (Taj).

Commentary:

This verse draws attention to the way in which man stumbles when he rejects divine revelation and follows his own judgement and reason. It calls upon the reader to mark the difference between divine and man-made teachings. Men, unguided by divine light and following their own reason, have strayed so far away from the path of rectitude that some suppose the jinn (kings, etc.) to be co-partners with God, as did the Egyptians in the time of Moses; while others attribute sons and daughters to Him, as do the Christians, who have deified Jesus and believe him to be the son of God. A comparison of these man-made teachings with those revealed by God definitely proves the need of Divine revelation.

2:174; 5:4-5; 6:146; 16:116.

Commentary:

In this verse the objection of disbelievers has been answered in the very words in which it was made. Their objection was that Muslims profess to be devoted to the name of Allah, yet they do not eat of the flesh of the animal killed by God, i.e. the animal that dies of itself. The answer given in the present verse is, "when we are devoted to Allah, why should we not eat of the food on which the name of our Lord is pronounced?" But the name of God is not pronounced on an animal that dies of itself. Its death takes place under the general law of nature.

The words, He has already explained, refer to 16:116, which was revealed earlier.

The word "mislead" signifies that man-made teachings, which are given by most men in opposition to the teachings of God, only lead people astray.

The word "transgressors" at the end of the verse indicates that the objections raised against the teachings of God have their source in malice and enmity and those who bring forward such objections are indeed transgressors.

Commentary:

This verse recapitulates what has been said above about man-made laws. For the killing of children, see 6:138 above. The words, for lack of knowledge, signify that they do so because they do not possess revealed knowledge, which is the only source of true guidance.

16:36; 43:21

Commentary:

Being unable to answer the arguments given against idolatry and man-made laws in the foregoing passage, idolatrous Arabs had recourse to the trite plea in support of idol-worship: If Allah had pleased, we could not have joined gods with Him. From this they inferred that attributing co-partners to God was in accordance with God’s will. The Quran gives four answers to this plea, two in the present verse and two in the next. The first answer is contained in the words: In like manner did those who were before them accuse God’s Messengers of falsehood, until they tasted of Our wrath. These words signify that this plea of theirs is not a new one. The same plea was brought forward by those gone before. If this plea was true, and the act of setting up associate with God was in accordance with God’s will, why should He have punished the previous peoples? The very fact that God punished them for their associating gods with Him shows that this act of theirs was not in accordance with His will. The second answer is contained in the words: Have you any knowledge? Then produce it for us. You follow nothing but mere conjecture. And you do nothing but lie, i.e. you possess no argument based on true knowledge to support your assertion; what you say is mere conjecture. The remaining two answers are given in the next verse.

Commentary:

This verse clearly establishes the fact that war with idolaters was not undertaken to force them to embrace Islam, because, according to it, even when a state of war existed idolaters were to be permitted to come to the Muslim camp or the Muslim headquarters if they desired to investigate the truth. Then, after the truth had been preached to them and they had been acquainted with the teachings of Islam, they were to be safely conveyed to their place of security, if they did not feel inclined to embrace the new Faith. In the face of such clear teachings, it is the height of injustice to accuse Islam of intolerance or of allowing compulsion for the propagation of its teaching.

27:85.

Commentary:

The verse means that it is no wonder that disbelievers look upon the Quran as a fabrication (see the preceding verse). When a man does not understand a thing fully, he is prone to deny it. As disbelievers did not comprehend the Quranic teaching and found it to be contradictory to many of their confirmed views and cherished notions, they rejected it forthwith. The words, they have rejected that the knowledge of which they did not compass, may also mean, "they hastened to reject the Quran before even trying to understand it or knowing its true significance."

The words, nor has the true significance thereof yet come to them, may lead some to think that if a long period must elapse before the reality and true significance of some of the things promised by the Prophets could be known, then it would not be wrong to disbelieve in them in the beginning when that reality could not yet be known. But such an inference would be manifestly wrong. The verse does not mean that in the beginning the Prophets do not possess those proofs and arguments which can help seekers after truth to know and recognize their truth. What it means is that those who, in spite of witnessing signs which go to establish the truth of a Prophet, attach importance to certain other matters to which they wrongly give undue weight, should not be in a hurry to deny the truth of the Prophet on that score only but should wait till those matters about which they entertain doubts are clarified.

The Rev. Mr. Wherry, quoting Brinkman, says that on the basis of this verse no blame could attach to the Meccans for rejecting the Quran, because, according to the Quran itself, they were not yet in full possession of the required knowledge. But the reverend gentleman did not trouble to consider that it is one thing to be unable to possess full knowledge about a certain thing and quite another not to try to acquire such knowledge. The Quran does not say that disbelievers were unable to get sufficient knowledge by which they could know the truth of the Holy Prophet, but that they never tried to acquire such knowledge and rejected him on the ground that he was a common man like themselves.

28:63, 75.

Commentary:

Sometimes man suffers material loss or a calamity afflicts him but that loss or calamity does not bring disgrace or humiliation to him. At another time he suffers disgrace and humiliation but no loss. The verse means to say that when punishment overtakes the opponents of the Holy Prophet they would suffer both disgrace and the loss of their material possessions.

11:47.

24:25; 36:66; 41:21-23.

Commentary:

This verse cuts at the root of all sources of suspicion. These sources in their natural order are "the ear", "the eye" and "the heart". "The ear" is the first avenue through which most suspicions enter man’s mind. As a rule suspicions are caused by ill-founded reports which one hears about another person. Next to hearing comes the source of sight. A person sees another doing a certain act and interprets it wrongly and is led to suspect the latter’s motives and intentions. The last and most degraded kind of suspicion is that which a person entertains about another not as the result of a bad report which he might have heard about him nor in consequence of a bad act or deed which he might have seen him doing but which is purely the figment of his own diseased mind. Muslims are enjoined to steer clear of all these forms of suspicion. They are the enemy of all cordial social relations.

The verse draws attention to the fact that it is not only human life and property (to which a reference has already been made in the preceding verse) which are sacred and inviolable; human honour also is sacrosanct and an attack upon it also will have to be accounted for.

A person will be called to account for having listened to anything about another person which he had no right to do. Similarly, he will be brought to book for having seen something which he should not have seen. And so will he be punished for harbouring in his mind evil thoughts about other people. We are told that our impressions and opinions should not be based on mere hearsay and surmise but on sure knowledge. Mere evidence of the ear, the eye or the heart is not sufficient to condemn a person or form an adverse opinion about him but sure knowledge based on thorough enquiry. Mark the high moral tone of these teachings!

13:14; 22:9; 31:21; 40:70.

Important Words:

مرید (rebellious) is derived from مرد (marada) which means, he exalted himself; he was insolent and audacious in pride and in acts of disobedience; he was excessively proud or disobedient or rebellious; he was refractory; he outstripped others in pride or disobedience. مرد (marida), means it (the tree) became denuded of its leaves. شجر أمرد means, a tree devoid of leaves, المارد or المرید means, one who is destitute of good (Lane & Aqrab). See also 9:101.

Commentary:

The verse shows that true knowledge is a great divine boon and all misguidance is the result of the lack of it. At another place (35:29) the Quran states that the realization of the Diving Being is vouchsafed only to those who are possessed of true knowledge. The present verse is of general application and applies to no particular person. The words فی الله (concerning Allah) mean, concerning the person, power and attribute of God.

It may be noted here that شیطان (Satan) or ابلیس (Iblis) is the being who has been created by God to incite men to do evil deeds as angels have been created to exhort them to do good deeds and thus he is the exact opposite of the angels, and the object of his creation is to try and test the mettle of men. He has his representatives in every time and age. It is this inciter to evil deeds and his representatives who have been mentioned in the Quran in connection with Adam’s story. This inciter to evil deeds will live as long as the world lasts but his representatives in the form of wicked men die and others take their place.

It may also be mentioned here that Satan will not be punished for inciting men to evil deeds as angels will not be rewarded for exhorting them to do good deeds. Punishment is awarded for deeds which are against the laws of nature or of the Shari‘ah but to incite men to bad deeds is ingrained in the very nature of Satan and is a part of his being. So the question of punishment in regard to him does not arise. It is true that according to the Quran, Satan will go to Hell just as the angels will go to Heaven but the fire of Hell will cause him no pain or suffering just as the rewards of heaven will give no joy or happiness to the angels. Having been created of fire (7:13) Satan is immune from the effects of burning. He is no doubt hated and condemned and denounced because he represents evil and sin but he deserves and will receive no punishment for what is a part of his nature and what he has been created to do. His representatives from among men, however, will certainly be punished for their wicked deeds. See also 2:35, 37.

22:4.

Commentary:

The verse stresses the importance of true knowledge and reiterates the fact that all deviation from the right path is due to the lack of it. It purports to say that the inference from v. 6 viz. that God is and that He has the power to bring the dead to life, is so patent and manifest that it is only perverse thinking, born of lack of true knowledge that can deny it.

علم (knowledge) signifies intellectual proof and arguments, ھدی Divine guidance and کتاب منیر signifies scriptural evidence.

7:72; 12:41; 53:24.

Commentary:

Three arguments have been given in this verse in support of belief in the Unity of God and against idolatry: (a) There is to be found no authority in any revealed book for idol worship; (b) human reason and conscience are against it and idolaters can give no sound argument based on their personal experience and observation in support of it and (c) in the struggle during the ages between idolaters and believers, the latter have invariably come off triumphant. Thus Divine revelation, human reason and the verdict of history are all against idolatry. This is a truth writ large on the history of all religions.

Important Words:

ادارک (has reached its end) is derived from درک. They say درک المطر (darraka) i.e. the rain dropped with close consecutiveness. أدرکه means, he attained, reached or overtook him. تدارکو or ادارکوا means, they attained, reached, overtook one another so as the last of them met with the first of them. بل ادارک علمھم فی الاخرة means, their knowledge with regard to the meeting of the Hereafter has reached its end i.e. they have become devoid of knowledge about it. See also 7:39.

Commentary:

No amount of human knowledge and intelligence alone can satisfy the craving of the human soul after God, or can prove beyond doubt the existence of God and life after death, the two most fundamental of all religious beliefs, because their full comprehension is beyond human ken. It is divine knowledge acquired through Divine revelation that can and does actually engender certainty in human mind about these two basic religious problems. Man’s knowledge can, at best, lead to the conclusion that there must be a Divine Being and a life after death but it is Divine revelation alone that can change this "must be" into a certain "is."

Commentary:

The verse means to say that the knowledge of disbelievers is confined to the material side of this world and they are ignorant of things spiritual. The implication is that if disbelievers cannot understand how a people (the Romans) who had been completely broken and had lain exhausted and prostrate a few years back won a smashing victory over their powerful foe (the Persians) and how a handful of Muslims with no experience of war and having no arms and ammunition, succeeded in defeating a powerful army of the Quraish, three times their number, it is because the disbelievers’ knowledge is limited to an understanding of the physical causes of the incidents, but the causes of the defeat of the Persians and that of the Quraish lay deeper and were more spiritual than material or mundane.

17:90; 39:28.

Important Words:

مثل (parable) is derived from مثل (mathala) and means, a description, condition, state, case, etc.; (2) argument, reason; (3) discourse; (4) lesson or example; (5) a proverb; (6) a Sign; (7) a parable or similitude (Aqrab & Lane). See also 2:18,107; 6:39 & 14:36.