Topic: Mosque

2:150, 151.

Important Words:

قد (verily) means, already; sometimes; often; verily, etc. (Lane).

تقلب (turning) is derived from قلب. They say قلب الشیء i.e. (1) he made the thing change direction; (2) he turned it about so that its face and back changed directions; (3) he turned it upside down; (4) he turned it inside out; (5) he changed its condition. The word قلب (qallaba) gives almost the same meaning but with greater intensification. تقلب الشیء means, the thing turned over and over, doing so much and repeatedly (Aqrab). The expression تقلب وجھك would therefore mean, turning thy face with eagerness and anxiety to receive an order.

فلنولینك (We will make thee turn) is derived from ولی (walla) which again is derived from ولی (waliya). The expression ولاهgives two distinct meanings: (1) he made him ruler or master or guardian of it; (2) he made it change direction or he made it turn towards a thing or away from it as the case may be (Aqrab).

الحرام (Sacred) is derived from حرم which means, it was or became forbidden, prohibited or unlawful whether from sanctity or owing to its being injurious. حرمه الشیء means, he denied or refused him the thing. Thus

حرام means: (1) forbidden and unlawful; (2) sacred and inviolable (Aqrab). المسجدالحرام signifies, the Sacred Mosque at Mecca, i.e. the Ka‘bah.

Commentary:

While at Mecca, the Holy Prophet had orders to turn his face in Prayers towards the sacred Temple at Jerusalem. The Prophet, of course, obeyed the divine behest; but, as in his heart of hearts he desired the Ka‘bah to be his Qiblah and had a sort of intuition that eventually he would be ordered to turn his face towards it, he generally tried to choose such a place for worship where he could keep both the sacred Temple at Jerusalem and the Sacred Mosque of Mecca before him. When, however, the Holy Prophet migrated to Medina, it became impossible for him to turn his face to both the places at one and the same time, and in compliance with divine command he was forced to turn his face to the Temple at Jerusalem alone. With this change the inner desire of the Holy Prophet naturally became intensified, and though, out of deference to God’s command, he did not actually pray for the change, yet he anxiously and eagerly looked towards heaven for an order to that effect. The clause, verily We see thee turning thy face often to heaven, is therefore highly eulogistic of the Prophet, inasmuch as it indicates (1) that the Holy Prophet had such great insight into spiritual matters that in spite of the interim command from God he knew that sooner or later the order for turning the face towards the Ka‘bah would come; (2) that despite his great desire that the Ka‘bah should be appointed as Qiblah, the Holy Prophet had such extraordinary respect for his Lord’s command that he refrained from even praying to that effect; (3) that God the Almighty had such great love for His Messenger that He most graciously refers to his turning his face towards heaven and expedites the command about the change of Qiblah, lovingly adding, We will make thee turn to the Qiblah which thou likest; and (4) that God had such great regard for the wish of the Prophet that He not only ordered him to turn his face towards the Qiblah of his liking but at the same time hinted that He would soon make him master and guardian of it; for, as explained under Important Words, the expression نولینك also means, "We will make thee master or guardian". Truly did ‘A’ishah say to her illustrious husband, "I see that God hastens to fulfil your wishes" (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir).

After the above introduction follows the commandment about the change of Qiblah in the words, So turn thy face towards the Sacred Mosque; and wherever you be, turn your faces towards it. This commandment was given after the Holy Prophet had migrated to Medina and had stayed there for about sixteen months. The words "Sacred Mosque" do not merely stand for the Ka‘bah but also provide an argument in favour of the change ordered. The Mosque was sacred and full of blessings and would prove a sanctuary for the faithful. The words, wherever you be, turn your faces towards it, have been added with a threefold purpose: (1) to make it clear that the order was not meant for the people of Medinaonly but for all Muslims wherever they might be; (2) to point to the fact that one of the reasons underlying the order relating to the Qiblah was to bring about unity and uniformity among all Muslims, wherever they might be; and (3) to hint that the commandment did not apply to the Holy Prophet only but extended to all Muslims, for whereas, in the preceding clause the Quran says, turn thy face, in the clause under comment it says, turn your faces.

The words, They to whom the Book has been given know that this is the truth from their Lord, mean that Jews and Christians were convinced on the basis of prophecies found in their Scriptures having special reference to the Ka‘bah and the Holy Prophet (Isa. 45:13, 14; John 4:21; Deut. 33:2; Gen. 21:21), that the commandment about the change of the Qiblah from the Temple at Jerusalem to the Ka‘bah at Mecca was truly from God. Mecca lies in what is known as the Desert of Faran or Paran mentioned in some of the above-mentioned verses of the Bible, and therefore the Jews knew that the prophecies contained in them applied to the Ka‘bah and the Holy Prophet.

It may be noted here that, though in ordinary circumstances, the Muslims are enjoined to turn their faces to the Ka‘bah when saying their prayers, yet as direction is of secondary importance, Islam ordains that, if in special circumstances, it becomes difficult for a man to turn his face to the Ka‘bah or to keep it so turned, he can say his Prayers in any direction that may be convenient. For instance, when a man does not know in which direction the Ka‘bah lies, while travelling at night in a Railway train or on the back of an animal, etc., he can pray facing any direction. Similarly, a sick man lying in bed may pray in a lying posture facing any direction that he may find convenient.

2:145, 150.

5:4.

5:4; 12:7.

Commentary:

The singular person in خرجت (thou comest forth) is used to emphasize the fact that the conquest of Mecca was the personal responsibility of the Holy Prophet. If he could persuade others to help him, well and good; if not, he alone stood responsible before God—a mighty responsibility indeed which also strikes at the very root of the objection that Islam waited for a declaration of the defensive war till it was strong enough to hit back.

The plural person in حیث ماکنتم (wherever you be) is used so as to include the Muslims of all places. Next to the Holy Prophet, they are also commanded to keep the same object in view, i.e. the conquest of Mecca. This verse and the preceding one should afford no ground for inferring that Islam bids its followers to wage an aggressive war. For, as amply borne out by history, by the time these verses were revealed, war had already commenced with the Meccans and it was they that had forced it upon the unwilling Muslims.

The words, that people may have no argument against you, mean that if the Muslims failed to conquer Mecca, the objection would quite legitimately be raised by the enemies of Islam, that the Holy Prophet had not fulfilled the prayer of Abraham, contained in 2:130, and therefore, could not claim to be the Promised Prophet. Moreover, the House to which the Muslims were commanded to turn their faces during Prayers was, while under the control of the heathen Meccans, full of idols. If the idols had continued to remain in the Ka‘bah, the Muslims might have been accused of worshipping idols. This objection could be effectively answered, if the Holy House, which had been originally dedicated to the worship of One God, had been cleared of idols. Hence the commandment to substitute the Ka‘bah for the Temple at Jerusalem as Qiblah was naturally followed by the injunction about the conquest of Mecca.

It may be added here that the conquest of Mecca by the Muslims had also been predicted in the Quran in 28:86, and 17:81. The prophecy contained in Deut. 33:2 was also fulfilled when the Holy Prophet entered Mecca as a conqueror at the head of ten thousand Muslims.

The clause, that I may perfect My favour upon you, provides yet another argument in favour of the commandment relating to the conquest of Mecca. God means to say that, with the taking of Mecca, God’s favour on the Muslims would begin to be perfected; for it would mean the subjugation of all Arabia and the influx of thousands of men into the fold of Islam. The result amply justified the prophecy; for the conquest of Mecca was rapidly followed by the conversion to Islam of thousands of Arabs. Most of the Arabs, at heart victims of the beauty of Islam, had deferred their acceptance of the new faith till the issue of the struggle between Muslims and Meccans had been finally settled, and now they virtually came forward in "troops" to join it.

Another reason why the conquest of Mecca was followed by a general influx of Arabs into Islam was that although the Arabs followed no revealed Book, yet the prophecy of Abraham that Mecca would not be conquered by the followers of any false Prophet, and any people attempting it would meet with destruction was well known to them. They had only recently seen a remarkable illustration of the fulfilment of this prophecy in the miraculous destruction of the Abyssinian invader Abraha and his powerful army. Thus when Mecca fell into the hands of the Holy Prophet, they were at once convinced of his truth and thousands of them hastened to embrace Islam.

In this and the preceding verses (vv. 145 and 150), the command to turn to the Ka‘bah has been mentioned thrice. This is not a repetition; for the first command, i.e. in v. 145, pertains to the change of the Qiblah, while the second and the third, i.e. in vv. 150 and 151, refer to the conquest of Mecca. But here, too, there is truly speaking no repetition, for the command about the conquest of Mecca contained in each of these two verses serves a different purpose. In v. 150 Muslims are asked to turn their attention to the conquest of Mecca because God wished them to do so. So they were duty bound to carry it out undeterred by any fear of failure; whereas in the verse under comment, i.e. v. 151, the benefits which were to accrue to Muslims on their carrying out the command relating to the conquest of Mecca have been mentioned. Those benefits briefly are: (1) refutation of the objections and criticism of the enemy; (2) conversion to Islam of hundreds of thousands of Arabs, including the kith and kin of the Muslims; and (3) enlargement of the political power of Islam.

Important Words:

رفث (going in unto) has a number of meanings: amatory talk, kissing, caressing, embracing, compressing, coition, etc.; in fact, everything that a man desires of his wife. When رفث is followed by the preposition الی it means, coition or going in unto one’s wife, and it is in this sense that the word has been used here. رفث also means, immodest, foul and lewd talk or speech (Lane).

تختانون (you have been acting unjustly) is derived from خان. They say خانه i.e. he acted unfaithfully or perfidiously towards him; he was not faithful to the trust reposed in him. اختانه is like خانه, giving the same meaning. It also means, he acted wrongfully or unjustly towards him. The Arabs say خانته رجلاه i.e. his feet or legs acted unfaithfully towards him, meaning he was unable to walk. تختانون انفسکم would, therefore, mean, you failed to give your souls (i.e. yourselves) their due either (1) by preventing them from their duty to God, or (2) by refusing them the satisfaction of their natural and lawful cravings. The former act is a sin, while the latter, though not a sin, may endanger one’s health or deprive one of just happiness. The word has been used in both these senses in the Quran. In 4:108, it has been used in the sense of "sin", while in the present verse it has been used in the sense of "depriving the soul of the gratification of its natural and just desires".

عفاعنکم (afforded you relief). The word عفا gives a number of meanings (see 2:53). The expression عفاالله عن فلان is sometimes used where there is no question of pardoning any sin or obliterating traces thereof but simply in the sense of removing one’s mistake or misunderstanding or improving one’s condition or bestowing honour on one (Aqrab). It also means, making things easy, i.e. affording relief (Muhit).

باشروھن (go in unto them) is derived from بشر from which is also derived the word بشارة or بشری meaning, glad tidings. The expression بشربه means, he became glad and happy because of that. The words بشرالجلد mean, he removed or peeled off its skin. البشرة means, outer part of skin, or what is visible of the face or body. باشرالمرأة means, he came in contact with his wife skin to skin; he went in unto her. البشری (glad tidings) is so called because it changes the colour of the listener’s face. البشر (man) is also so called because, unlike other animals, man’s skin is visible and not concealed under hair (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lane).

Commentary:

It was a custom among the Israelites to abstain from all kinds of food from one evening to the other on the occasion of the fast of the Atonement Day, the only fast prescribed by Moses for his people. When fasts were first prescribed for Muslims, and details had not yet been revealed, they thought that, like the Jews, they too would have to fast for 24 hours with a slight intervening breakfast. Hence, following their own judgement, they concluded that it was lawful for them to eat and drink and to go in unto their wives only as long as they did not go to bed, and that after they had gone to sleep, they were not allowed to partake of any food or drink or to go in unto their wives until the next evening. Bukhari gives the following tradition on the authority of Bara’: "When the command to fast was revealed, if anybody kept a fast and then went to sleep in the evening, he abstained from eating, drinking and sexual intercourse until the time for breaking the fast the following day" (Bukhari ch. on Saum). This tradition and others of the same import show that it was not in obedience to any command from God or the Holy Prophet that his Companions abstained from sexual intercourse after going to bed at night, but it was owing to their own imitation of similar customs among the People of the Book that they had imposed these restrictions on themselves. As, however, these restrictions were against the will of God, a revelation was soon sent down allowing the Faithful to eat and drink and approach their wives as they liked during the night; only they were forbidden to do so while fasting during the day.

Some commentators have inferred from the words, you have been acting unjustly to yourselves, that the Companions of the Holy Prophet were unable to act upon the commandment to abstain from intercourse with their wives during the nights of fasts and frequently broke it. But this is evidently wrong, for the good reason that there was no such commandment to be broken. Moreover, the words of the Quran, i.e. you may now go in, also belie this interpretation, for the use of the word "now" clearly indicates that the Companions of the Holy Prophet were erring not on the side of indulgence but on that of abstinence. The Quran could not obviously say, you may now go in, to a people who were already going in unto their wives.

The clause, they are a garment for you and you are a garment for them, very beautifully describes the object of marriage. The verse points out that the object of marriage is not the gratification of carnal passions. The real object is the comfort, protection and embellishment of the parties, for such are the uses of a garment as explained in 7:27 & 16:82. Thus in a very few words, the Quran has described the true relationship that should exist between husband and wife, a description which has hardly a parallel in any other scripture.

The clause, the white thread becomes distinct from the black thread of the dawn, does not refer to the thread made of yarn but to the streak of light that appears along the eastern horizon at the time of dawn. The verse enjoins that from dawn till sunset Muslims should abstain from food and drink and intercourse while fasting. But they are free to have recourse to these things between sunset and dawn. At places where days and nights are unusually long, i.e. nearer the poles, calculation should be made for the purpose of fasting on the basis of average conditions, i.e. in such a case day and night would each be supposed to be of twelve hours’ duration (Muslim, ch. on Ashratus-Sa‘at). The clause, while you remain in the mosques for devotion, refers to the practice of اعتکاف which is observed by remaining in the mosque, night and day, during the last ten days of Ramadan. During these days, the devotee who decides to observe اعتکاف is not to leave the mosque except from human necessity, i.e. to answer a call of nature, etc. He enters the mosque on the morning of the 20th of Ramadan

and abides therein till the end of the month, fasting from daybreak to sunset and occupying himself in prayer or recitation of the Quran or other religious study or meditation. During اعتکاف (I‘tikaf), which is, as it were, the consummation of the spirit of fasting, intercourse with wives and preliminaries thereto are not allowed even at night time. The clause, these are the limits fixed by Allah, so approach them not, points to the very important principle that a man can attain true piety only if he refrains from even "approaching" the things that have been forbidden by God. "Some acts," says the Holy Prophet "are of doubtful character, one not knowing whether they are right or wrong. It is always better to avoid these. The forbidden things are like a pasture-land which the Wise God prohibits to the people. If you make your beasts graze on the borders of such land, i.e. allow your beasts to approach near them, there is danger of their trespassing upon the prohibited area" (Bukhari, ch, on Iman). This is an extremely wise injunction which cuts at the root of all trespass. Only those can protect themselves against sin who give all unlawful things a wide berth. The final clause, that they may become secure against evil, repeats the idea contained in 2:184 in which the subject of fasting was first introduced. In both verses the underlying object of fasting has been stated to be the attainment of تقوی i.e. piety, righteousness and protection against evil, which are all different forms of divineblessings. The reader may, with advantage, compare this idea with the belief of the Christians that the Law is a curse (Gal. 3:10, 13).

2:218.

Important Words:

ثقفتموھم (you met them) is derived from ثقف. They say ثقفه i.e. (1) he faced him or he met him; (2) he caught hold of him; (3) he got the better of him (Aqrab).

فتنة (persecution) is derived from فتن. They say فتن فلانا i.e. he led him astray; he tried or tested him. The expression فتن فلاناعن رأیه means, he prevented him from holding his views. The words فتن الصائغ الذھب mean, the goldsmith melted the gold in the crucible to ascertain its genuineness. فتنه means, he put him in a state of trial or persecution. Thus فتنة means: (1) trial; (2) torture and persecution; (3) divergence of views among men and the disputes and fighting that take place as a result thereof (Aqrab). See also 2:103.

Commentary:

The verse relates to conditions when a war has actually broken out. Obviously it does not apply to all disbelievers, for it only says, "kill them" and not "kill the disbelievers". The pronoun "them" clearly refers to, those who fight against you, as mentioned in the previous verse. The verse calls upon Muslims to fight against only such disbelievers as take up arms against them. It does not call upon them to slay each and every disbeliever that may happen to come in their way. Indeed this verse affords a remarkable instance of the way in which the plain words of the Quran are generally distorted by the opponents of Islam.

The clause, and drive them out from where they have driven you out, refers to the time when the enemies of Islam compelled the Holy Prophet and his Companions to flee from Mecca. It enjoins Muslims to bear in mind that they have eventually to conquer Mecca which being the centre and the most sacred place of Islam, no non-Muslim would be allowed to remain in it.

The clause, persecution is worse than killing, provides an argument in support of defensive war. The disbelievers were persecuting Muslims in diverse ways with a view to turning them away from their faith and they were also creating disorder in the land. It was certainly better to put a stop to this state of affairs by fighting against the aggressors than to allow it to continue. There are circumstances when, to every right-thinking man, war becomes necessary.

The words فتنة (persecution) and قتل (killing) may be interpreted in another way also. فتنة means, "persecution or war waged against a people with a view to turning them from their faith", and قتل means, "an ordinary secular war". Now the verse points out that a war of religious persecution is worse than an ordinary war; for, firstly, worldly interests are nothing as compared with matters of faith; and secondly, wars caused by religious differences are more bitter and cruel, and seldom come to an end.

The clause, and fight them not in and near the Sacred Mosque until they fight you therein, contains a very important principle. Even after the declaration of war, there are restrictions to be observed, and Muslims should never be the first to break them. The sanctity of the holy precincts of the Ka‘bah must be safeguarded even in time of war. If, however, the other party violates its sanctity, Muslims may retaliate so that the attacking party may thereby be brought to its senses.

2:192.

3:84, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.

3:23; 7:148; 18:106.

Important Words:

کبیر (great transgression) really stands for ذنب کبیر i.e. a great sin or great transgression or great offence. اکبر is in the comparative degree and means, a greater sin, etc.

صد (to hinder) is the infinitive from صد. They say صدہ i.e. he prevented him; he turned him back. صد عنه اومنه means, he kept back from it. Thus the word is both transitive and intransitive. صد, therefore, means: (1) to hinder or to prevent; (2) a hindrance or a barrier; (3) a mountain or a wall, etc., because it serves as a barrier (Aqrab).

یردوکم (turn you back) and یرتدد (turns back) are both derived from رد. They say ردہ i.e. he turned him back; and ارتد i.e.he himself turned back. ارتد عن الاسلام means, he turned back from Islam and reverted to a state of disbelief. مرتد means, one who turns back from his religion, particularly from Islam; one who apostatizes (Taj).

حبطت (shall be in vain). حبط البعیر means, the stomach of the camel became inflated and his belly became bound by eating unwholesome food. حبط عمله means: (1) his work or deed became null and void and went for nothing; (2) his work or deed became evil and corrupt. حبط دمه means, his blood went unavenged. حبط ماء البئر means, the water of the well receded and went down never to return to its original level (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The words translated as "to be ungrateful to Him and the Sacred Mosque" may also be rendered as "to be ungrateful to Him and to hinder men from the Sacred Mosque".

The Quran has already explained that if disbelievers violate the sanctity of a sacred month, Muslims may also retaliate in a sacred month; for thus only can the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195).

The present verse provides a further reason for defending Islam, if need be, in a sacred month. Disbelievers, particularly those of Mecca, had violated the sanctity of things far more sacred than a "sacred month"––they were trying forcibly to turn men form the way of God; they were preventing people from approaching the Sacred Mosque and they had forced the Muslim dwellers of Mecca to flee from it. This was a form of persecution which was certainly much more heinous than fighting in a Sacred Month.

Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to the effect, that once the Holy Prophet sent one of his Companions, named ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh, to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his comrades reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party proceeding to Mecca. Guided by his own judgement and without any instruction to that effect from the Prophet, ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date was doubtful, some considering it to be as one of the Sacred Month and others as not. When the news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt as regards date and clamoured that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion (Tabari, Hisham & Zurqani).

The verse acknowledges the sanctity of the Sacred Months and considers it an act of sin and transgression knowingly to fight in a sacred month, but forcefully points out that the sanctities which disbelievers were violating were far more worthy of safeguarding. Disbelievers were forcibly preventing people from accepting Islam. They did not allow Muslims to approach the Sacred Mosque and they had mercilessly turned the Prophet and his followers out of their homes.

The verse should not be understood to imply that Muslims did start a fight in a sacred month, it only purports to bring home to disbelievers the fact that in view of their persistent violation of highly sacred thing, it does not lie in their mouth to accuse Muslim of violating the sanctity of a sacred month.

The clause it is they whose works shall be vain in this world and the next does not mean that everything that a renegade from Islam, or, for that matter, everything that a disbeliever, does will go for nothing and produce no result. The clause only means that such actions of the renegades as they might do to weaken the cause of Islam in this world as well as those of their actions which they might perform in opposition to the teaching of Islam in order to win the pleasure of God in the world to come, will all be in vain. Thus the clause does not refer to such good actions as a person may perform in the state o unbelief; for, as the Quran expressly states, these must have their reward (99:8) which may either take the form of the acceptance of Islam or that of the lightening of punishment. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said about his uncle Abu Talib that on account of the good treatment the latter extended to him, he is likely to be only lightly punished for his non-acceptance of Islam (Bukhari). On another occasion when Hakim bin Hizam, a nephew of his wife Khadijah, asked the Prophet whether he would get any reward for the good deeds he did before he accepted Islam, the Holy Prophet said, "your very acceptance of Islam is a reward thereof" (Bukhari).

The clause, their works shall be vain in this world and the next, also signifies that if such men as apostatize from Islam had not done so, their deeds would have brought them the great reward promised to Muslims both in this world and the next, but by apostatizing from Islam they had totally deprived themselves of this twofold reward.

Finally, the clause, and they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can, throws a flood of light on the attitude of disbelievers towards Muslim. They were not only the first to begin hostilities, but had also vowed not to cease fighting until Islam had been totally wiped out from Arabia and not a soul remained to call himself a Muslim. This clear testimony of the Quran should be an eye-opener for those who accuse Muslims of being aggressors in their early struggle against disbelievers. The words, if they can, are highly eulogistic of the Companions of the Holy Prophet. Do what they could, disbelievers would never be able to turn back Muslims from their faith. Their love for Islam was too deep to be extirpated by persecution however severe and bitter it might be.

59:9.

5:9; 11:90.

Important Words:

الھدی (the animal brought as an offering) is the noun-infinitive from ھدی meaning, he directed; or he showed the way. ھدیة means, a present, i.e. a thing sent or offered to another as a token of love, courtesy or honour. ھدی means (1) mode or manner of acting; conduct or character; (2) what one brings as an offering to the Ka‘bah, consisting of camels or kine or sheep or goats to be sacrificed; or the goods or commodities so brought; (3) camels absolutely (Aqrab & Lane).

القلائد (collars) is the plural of قلادة which is the noun-infinitive from قلد meaning, he twisted or wound or wreathed a thing upon another. قلدھاقلادة (qallada-ha) means, he put a necklace upon her neck. قلدالبدنة means, he hung upon the neck of the camel or cow, etc. brought as an offering to Mecca, a collar, to show that it was meant for sacrifice as an offering. قلادة means, a necklace; a collar or the like; that which is hung, as a sign or mark, upon the neck of a camel or cow, etc. brought to Mecca for sacrifice (Lane & Aqrab). The word قلائد (collars) may also mean "collared animals" (Muhit). The words ھدی and قلائد as used in this verse both signify animals that are taken to Mecca for sacrifice during the Pilgrimage, قلائد particularly meaning such animals as have collars round their necks, and ھدی all animals without distinction that are brought to Mecca for sacrifice.

آمین (who repair) is the plural of آم which is the active participle from ام. They say امه i.e. he repaired or directed his course to it; he aimed at or sought after it; he endeavoured to reach or attain it (Lane). See also 3:8; 3:21; 3:114.

Commentary:

The words شعائرالله (Signs of Allah, for which see 2:159) signify anything that leads to the knowledge and realization of God. The offerings made to God, or the animals of sacrifice brought to the Ka‘bah, are "Signs of God", in the sense that they teach us to be ever ready to sacrifice all, that belongs to us, for the sake of God.

The words الشھرالحرام (Sacred Month) may signify each one of the four Sacred Months, viz. Shawwal, Dhul-Qa‘dah, Dhul-Hijjah and Rajab. Some theologians, however, hold the view that here the "Sacred Month" means only Dhul-Hijjah, i.e. the month of حج (Greater Pilgrimage), to which a special reference has been made on account of the great gathering of pilgrims that takes place at Mecca in that month. Others are of the opinion that the word here refers to Rajab, the usual month of عمرة (Lesser Pilgrimage), to which no respect was paid by certain Arab tribes. Abstaining from profaning the Sacred Month may also mean paying due respect to the works performed therein.

All manner of fighting must cease during the four Sacred Months. As pilgrims have to travel to and from Mecca during these months, not only are pilgrims and animals of sacrifice not to be molested on the way, but all hostilities must cease and there should be perfect peace so that pilgrims may perform both their inward and outward journeys in complete security. The hunting of land animals has also been forbidden for similar reason.

The words, nor those repairing to the Sacred House, refer particularly to the pilgrims who go to Mecca for the Greater or the Lesser Pilgrimage. But they may also refer to such travellers as may proceed to Mecca for any valid purpose, including such non-Muslims as may visit the Sacred House with the permission of its custodians to gain religious knowledge.

The expression, help not one another in sin and transgression, constitutes an effective reply to the malicious charge that Islam is a militant religion, encouraging aggressive warfare against the infidels. How can a Book which gives such clear injunctions to its followers as are contained in the above words, be expected to command them to take up arms against innocent and unoffending people and to kill them wherever they are found on the sole ground that they do not profess Islam?

The verse clearly forbids Muslims to fight their enemies in the four Sacred Months even when a state of war exists. The Holy Prophet himself was the first to carry out this injunction. He would not fight the idolatrous Meccans when, at Hudaibiyyah, they refused to allow him and his 1,400 followers to perform عمرة (Lesser Pilgrimage) for which he had undertaken such a long and arduous journey. He went back to Medina after signing a treaty, the terms of which at that time appeared to be very humiliating, in spite of the fact that his followers were prepared to fight. The Holy Prophet, however, paid no heed to the outraged feelings of his followers and did what righteousness and piety demanded. But when non-Muslims are the first to attack Muslims during a Sacred Month, the latter are allowed to defend themselves (2:195, 218).

22:26.

10:63, 64.

Commentary:

The verse purports to say that when the Quraish did not enjoy either of the two basic protections against Divine punishment (see preceding verse), they were being rightly punished for their false beliefs and wicked deeds. The verse also says that the Quraish have no right to act as guardians of the Sacred Mosque. As guardians thereof, they ought to have been worshippers of the One True God; but they have put idols even in the Sacred Mosque; hence, far from having any right to act as its guardians, they deserve to be expelled therefrom and punished for the sacrilege.

The words, Its true guardians are only those who are righteous, contain a prophecy to the effect that Muslims would soon become guardians of the Sacred Mosque, the words, most of them know not, signifying that although most of the disbelievers do not at present think this announcement to be true, yet it would surely come to pass.

Commentary:

This verse relates to idolatrous pilgrims and serves as an introduction to the announcement contained in 9:28 below. No idolater was henceforth to be allowed to approach the Ka‘bah, as announced by ‘Ali to the pilgrims assembled at Mecca on the occasion of the Greater Pilgrimage of the year 9 AH (see note on 9:3 above). The verse under comment gives the reason for that prohibition. The Ka‘bah being a temple dedicated to the worship of the One God, idolaters had nothing to do with it. They were declared enemies of God’s Unity who bore witness to their own idolatrous beliefs and thus stood condemned by their own confession. Moreover, while performing the Pilgrimage, idolaters, instead of declaring God’s Oneness, attributed co-partners to Him, for it is on record that, while reciting the prescribed formula: "Here I am, O my Lord, here I am; Thou hast no co-partner" they used to add the words "except him whom Thou hast Thyself made Thy co-partner." The words, while they bear witness against themselves to disbelief, beside being general in their significance, may also refer to this practice of idolaters.

Important Words:

عسی (may be) is meant to express desire or hope of obtaining something good or to express fear lest one should fall into an evil way (Aqrab). The word thus implies either desire or hope of good or fear of evil. They say عسی زید ان یقوم i.e. Zaid is near to standing; or I eagerly desire or I hope that Zaid may be performing the act of standing; or it may be that Zaid is, or will be, standing. عسیmay thus be explained as meaning, it may be that, or simply may be. When uttered by God, the word is expressive of an event of necessary occurrence (Lane). See also the meaning of the word لعل under 2:22. Though desire or hope are not attributable to God, yet the words لعل and عسی are used by God to point to the fact that a certain thing is such that people may base their desire or hope on it (Mufradat).

Commentary:

The prosperity of a Mosque of God, and for that matter of the Ka‘bah itself, lies in the fulfilment of the noble object for which it is built. This object is the glorification and the remembrance of the name of God in it; and certainly this object is much the better realized by prohibiting those from visiting it who, instead of glorifying God, attribute co-partners to Him, and by encouraging and exhorting true believers to frequent it.

The words, these it is who may be among those who reach the goal, signify that, since believers are destined to prosper, even the material prosperity of the Ka‘bah will not suffer from the exclusion of infidels; for, believers will go on pilgrimage to it in ever-increasing numbers.

Commentary:

The outward and physical service of the Ka‘bah, though in itself a meritorious act, is as nothing compared with the spiritual service thereof, which only a true Muslim can perform. If the preservation of the true faith were to involve the temporary destruction of the building of the Ka‘bah, the Quran would unhesitatingly endorse such destruction, because it is the preservation of the faith and not the preservation of a house, however sacred it may be, which is the aim and object of Islam. The verse thus also implies an effective answer to the baseless view that Islam attaches greater importance to the outward form of its ordinances than to the spirit underlying them. It may also be noted here that, according to the teachings of Islam, even the life of a true believer has greater sanctity than the House of God. Says the Holy Prophet: "A believer possesses greater sanctity than the Ka‘bah" (Majah).

Commentary:

According to some traditions the words, A mosque which was founded upon piety from the very first day is surely more worthy, refer to a mosque at Quba which was built on the site where the Holy Prophet had alighted before entering Medina on the day of his arrival from Mecca; while, according to others, these words refer to the Mosque which the Holy Prophet himself built at Medina and which later came to be known as مسجد النبی i.e. "the Mosque of the Prophet." The wording of the verse seems to support the latter view.

5:22; 7:138.

Important Words:

اسری (carried) is derived from سری. They say سری باللیل او سری اللیل i.e. he journeyed or travelled by night or in the night. اسراهاو اسری به means, he made him journey or travel, or he transported him by night or in the night; he journeyed or travelled with him, by night or in the night, or simply, he carried him. The Quranic expression سبحان الذی اسری بعبدہ لیلا means, Glory be to Him Who transported His servant by night. According to some lexicologists اسری is used for journey in the first part of the night and سری for the last part of it. According to others, the verb اسری is from سراة which means, a wide tract of land. According to this meaning the expression اسری بعبدہ means, Who transported His servant over a wide tract of land (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).

المسجد الاقصی (the Distant Mosque). اقصی is derived from قصی. They say قصی المکان i.e. the place was or became distant. اقصیmeans, distant or very distant (Aqrab). المسجد الاقصی may signify the Prophet Solomon’s Temple at Jerusalem, the Holy Prophet’s Mosque at Medina or the Promised Messiah’s Mosque at Qadian.

Commentary:

The verse is supposed by almost all commentators of the Quran to refer to the معراج (Spiritual Ascension of the Holy Prophet). The subject of Mi‘raj has become much complicated and confused on account of the many divergent traditions that deal with it. Contrary to popular view we are, however, inclined towards the opinion that the present verse deals with the اسراء (Night Journey) of the Holy Prophet while his Mi‘raj (Spiritual Ascension) has been dealt with in Surah An-Najm. That Surah removes all the obscurities and ambiguities that have confused the popular mind in regard to this important subject. In Surah An-Najm we have:

It is nothing but a revelation that is revealed. The One of mighty powers has taught him (this knowledge): the One Possessor of strength. So He manifested His ascendance (over everything) and He revealed His Word when he was on the uppermost horizon. Then he drew nearer (to God); then he came down to (His creatures), so that he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows or closer still. And He revealed to His servant that which He revealed. The heart (of the Prophet) was not untrue to that which he saw. Will you then dispute with him concerning that which he saw? And certainly he saw Him a second time, near the Lote-tree beyond which none may pass, near which is the Garden of Abode. This was when a wonderful and glorious Divine manifestation covered the Lote-tree. The eye deviated not nor did it wander. Surely, he saw the greatest of the Signs of his Lord. (53:5-19).

These verses give a graphic description of the Mi‘raj, for the facts mentioned in them all relate to it, e.g. the Holy Prophet went up to the Lote-tree; (2) the Lote-tree was covered with "something"; (3) the Prophet saw the Paradise (the Garden of Abode) near the Lote-tree; (4) he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows; (5) he saw God (and the heart of the Prophet was not untrue to that which he saw); and (6) the word of God descended on the Lote-tree.

All these details have also been mentioned in the traditions which deal with the Mi‘raj. As for the Lote-tree, AbuHurairah (as reported by Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abu Hatim, Ibn Merdawaih, Abu Ya‘la and Baihaqi) says, "In the night of Mi‘raj, after having seen other Prophets of God in heaven, the Holy Prophet proceeded further till he reached the Lote-tree." The same fact has been mentioned in the tradition quoted on the authority of Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri by Ibn Jarir, Ibn Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Merdawaih, Baihaqi, and Ibn ‘Asakir, and in the tradition quoted on the authority of Malik Ibn Sa‘sa’ by Ahmad bin Hanbal, Bukhari, Muslim and Ibn Jarir and in the tradition quoted on the authority of Anas by Bukhari (Bukhari, chapter on Mi‘raj, & Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, pp. 153, 167 & 174).

The second important detail mentioned in Surah An-Najm is that when the Prophet reached the Lote-tree, he saw it covered with some extraordinary thing (53:17). This has also been mentioned in the traditions that deal with Mi‘raj. In the tradition reported by Abu Hurairah to which reference has been made above we read فغشیھا نور الخلاق عزوجل i.e. when the Holy Prophet reached the Lote-tree, the light of the Powerful and Glorious Creator covered it (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 174). Similarly, in the tradition reported by Anas we have: "Then the Lote-tree became covered with a special Divine grace so much so that in its newly changed condition its beauty defied all description" (Muslim, Kitabul-Iman)

The third incident referred to in chapter 53 (An-Najm) is that the Holy Prophet saw Paradise near the Lote-tree. This has also found mention in traditions which deal with Mi‘raj. In the tradition quoted on the authority of Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri by Ibn Jarir and mentioned in some other books of Hadith we read: ثم انی رفعت الی الجنة i.e. after I had seen the Prophets in the heavens I was taken up to Paradise. This is followed by the words ثم انی رفعت الی سدرة المنتھی i.e. after paradise I was led up to the Lote-tree (Ibn Jarir, vol. 15, p. 11).

The fourth important detail mentioned in chapter 53 is that when the Holy Prophet had a vision of those celestial scenes he was transported into a highly spiritual state which has been described in the words, So that he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows or closer still.

This fact has also been mentioned in the traditions about Mi‘raj. In the tradition reported by Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri and referred to above we find the words: فکان قاب قوسین او ادنی i.e. between God and the Prophet there was the one chord of two bows or closer still.

The fifth important and relevant incident mentioned in chapter 53 is that during the Mi‘raj the Prophet had a vision of God Himself (53:12). This fact has also been mentioned in the traditions quoted by Ibn Merdawaih on the authority of Asma’, daughter of Abu Bakr (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 177), and by Muslim on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas (Muslim, Kitabul-Iman). In the latter tradition we read راٰہ بفؤادہ مرتین i.e. twice the Prophet saw God with the eyes of his heart.

The sixth notable detail mentioned in chapter 53 is that God spoke to the Holy Prophet near the Lote-tree (53:11). This fact has also found a mention in the traditions. For instance, in the tradition reported by Abu Hurairah we have فکلمهاللّٰه تعالی عند ذالک i.e. so God spoke to him near it—the Lote-tree (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 174). Similarly, Ibn Abu Hatim has reported on the authority of Anas bin Malik that when the Prophet arrived near the Lote-tree, God addressed him by name saying یا محمد i.e. O Muhammad, and then Anas continues to finish the hadith. These very striking similarities and resemblances between the subject matter of Surah An-Najm and the traditions about Mi‘raj leave no doubt that it is the Mi‘raj of the Holy Prophet which has been described in that Surah.

After having established the fact that Surah An-Najm contains a description of the Mi‘raj it is important to point out that this Surah has been admitted by the consensus of scholarly opinion to have been revealed in the fifth year of the Call or even earlier. The following very well-known historical event proves it. A party of early Muslims had sought refuge in Abyssinia. They left Mecca in the seventh month of the fifth year of the Call (Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 1923, p. 69). Now the traditions agree that three months had hardly elapsed since this little band of the Faithful had left for Abyssinia when they returned to Mecca (Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 1923, p. 80). The reason which, according to traditions, led to their early return was this. The Holy Prophet was one day reciting chapter 53. When he came to the words, Rather prostrate yourselves before Allah, and worship Him (53:63), the Prophet and the Muslims with him fell prostrate on the ground. The disbelievers present on the occasion, being overwhelmed with the grand theme of the Surah and the solemnity of the occasion, also joined the Prophet in prostration. This gave rise to the rumour that the Quraish had converted to Islam. When this rumour reached Abyssinia, Muslim refugees hastened back to Mecca. This shows that the recitation of the Surah which led to this incident having taken place, must have been revealed in the fifth year of the Call or sometime prior to it.

After a brief description of the Mi‘raj or the Spiritual Ascension of the Holy Prophet and of the time when it took place, it may be noted here that the اسراء Isra’ or the Night Journey of the Holy Prophet from Mecca to Jerusalem, with which the present verse deals took place in the eleventh year of the Call (Zurqani, vol. 1, p. 306). Christian writers, however, put it in the twelfth year of the Call (Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 1923, p. 121). Traditions relating to this incident also corroborate the date referred to above. According to the traditions quoted by Ibn Merdawaih and Ibn Sa‘d, the Isra’ took place on the seventeenth of Rabi‘ul-Awwal, a year before the Hijrah (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 162). Similarly, a tradition quoted by Baihaqi on the authority of Ibn Shihab, relates that the Isra’ took place a year before the Hijrah. Another tradition also quoted by Baihaqi places the Night Journey to Jerusalem six months before the Hijrah (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 162).

All these traditions go to prove that the Isra’ took place six months or a year prior to the Hijrah and it has been shown above that the Mi‘raj took place about the fifth year of the Call. Thus the two incidents are separated from each other by an interval of six or seven years and therefore cannot be identical; the Mi‘raj must be regarded as quite distinct and separate from the Isra’.

Irrefutable evidence which shows that the Mi‘raj and the Isra’ were two separate incidents is the fact that it was during the fifth year of the Call that the five daily prayers were enjoined upon Muslims. If the Mi‘raj be considered as identical with the Isra’, then it will also have to be admitted that the five daily Prayers were enjoined upon Muslims in the eleventh or twelfth year of the Call which is evidently wrong because all traditionalists agree that the five Prayers were prescribed in the very early years of the Call.

It may incidentally be stated here that the Mi‘raj itself seems to have occurred twice. As it appears from the Hadith, the first Mi‘raj occurred in the beginning of the Holy Prophet’s ministry when the foundation of the Shari‘ah may be said to have been laid and Prayers were made obligatory, which seem to have taken place in the first year of the Call (Bukhari, chapter on Tauhid; Jarir, vol. 15, p. 4). The second or the better known Mi‘raj took place about the fifth year of the Call when the five prescribed Prayers were made obligatory and chapter 53, containing a description of it, was revealed (or it may have taken place even earlier and may have been subsequently referred to in Ch. 53). The Isra’, however, is quite a separate event which undoubtedly occurred in the eleventh or twelfth year of the Call when the Prophet was living in the house of his cousin, Ummi Hani, after the death of his wife, Khadijah, which took place in the tenth year of the Call after the Prophet had come out of the Valley (شعب) of Abu Talib.

In addition to this strong historical evidence, other relevant circumstances also lend support to the view that the two incidents are quite distinct and separate from each other:

(1) The first evidence in this connection is furnished by the Quran itself. It gives an account of the Prophet’s Mi‘raj(Spiritual Ascension) in chapter 53 but makes no reference to his Isra’ (Night Journey to Jerusalem), while in the present Surah it speaks of his Isra’ but omits all allusion to his Mi‘raj. This shows that the two incidents took place separately and, therefore, could not be mentioned together. It is inconceivable that the Quran should have mentioned the concluding portion of this incident in one Surah and the first portion of the selfsame incident in another Surah five years later.

(2) The second evidence which supports this inference is the fact that there was only one person, namely Ummi Hani, who was present with the Prophet during the night when the Isra’ (Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem) took place and she speaks only of his visit to Jerusalem and makes no mention of his journey to the heavens. She was the first person whom the Prophet informed of his Night Journey to Jerusalem and at least seven collectors of traditions have given her account of the incident on the authority of four different reporters who have reported the incident from her. All these four reporters concur in saying that the Prophet went to Jerusalem and returned to Mecca the same night. If the Prophet had spoken of his Ascension to the heavens also, Ummi Hani could not have failed to refer to it in one or other of her reports. But she does not do so in any of her reports, which conclusively shows that during the night in question the Holy Prophet made the Isra’ or the Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem only and that the Mi‘raj did not take place on that occasion. So the Isra’ or the Prophet’s Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem should not be confused with the Mi‘raj or his Spiritual Ascension to heaven.

(3) All the different reporters of this incident may be placed in three categories: (a) those who speak of the Prophet’s Ascension direct to heaven and make no mention of his Journey to Jerusalem; (b) those who speak first of his Journey to Jerusalem and then of his Ascension to heaven; and (c) those who only speak of His Journey to Jerusalem and make no mention at all of his Ascension to heaven. Of the reporters of this last group, there is a goodly number who say expressly that the Prophet returned to Mecca after his Journey to Jerusalem.

It is evident that the reports of the first group point to the Mi‘raj as being distinct from the Isra’ inasmuch as, according to them, the Holy Prophet was taken from his house direct to heaven, so Jerusalem could not lie in his way. The reporters of this group are Anas, Malik bin Sa‘sa’ and Abu Dharr, who was one of the earliest converts to Islam.

Similarly, the reports of those who speak only of the Prophet’s Journey to Jerusalem and make no mention of his Ascension to heaven also show that when he made his Night Journey to Jerusalem, he did not ascend to heaven, for if he had ascended to heaven after his visit to Jerusalem, it is inconceivable that the reporters, after mentioning the less important part of the vision, should have omitted to mention its more important part which related to his Ascension to heaven, and to his having seen God and having had communion with Him. The reporters of this group of traditions are Anas and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, the latter being one of the earliest and best-loved of the Prophet’s Companions.

Reports of the third group clearly state that the Prophet returned to Mecca after his visit to Jerusalem and did not ascend to heaven. These also demonstrate the two events to be distinct and separate from each other. The reporters of this group are ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas, ‘A’ishah and Ummi Salma and Ummi Hani. All of them with the exception of ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, who, as stated above, was among the earliest converts to Islam, were the Prophet’s very near relatives and enjoyed his intimate and constant company. It is impossible to impugn their evidence.

Another argument in favour of Isra’ being distinct from Mi‘raj are the traditions which speak of the Prophet’s transportation to the heavens after his visit to Jerusalem and then of his return from the heavens to Jerusalem and from Jerusalem back to Mecca (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. I, p. 154). Now, going to Jerusalem before ascending to heaven may be considered as reasonable, for it served for the Prophet the purpose of offering Prayers at the place where a large party of heavenly Messengers had delivered their Divine Message, but it is difficult to understand why the same route should have been followed during the return journey, when on his return from heaven the Prophet is not reported to have performed any specific act at Jerusalem. The only reasonable assumption is that the account of the Isra’ became mixed up with that of the Mi‘raj. Anas seems to have related the account of both the Isra’ and the Mi‘raj to some reporters who mixed up the two accounts and mistakenly thought that they formed the two parts of the same event and thus these reporters were led to believe that while coming back from his Mi‘raj the Prophet went to Jerusalem from where he returned to Mecca. In fact, the confusion seems to have arisen from the same word اسراء (which means a night journey) having been used for both the Holy Prophet’s اسراء (Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem) and his معراج (Spiritual Ascension to heaven); and the resemblance that existed in some of the details in the description of the اسراء (Isra’) and the معراج (Mi‘raj) heightened and confirmed it.

Internal evidence of the traditions also points to the fact that the Isra’ and the Mi‘raj were two distinct and separate events. The traditions which first give an account of the Prophet’s visit to Jerusalem and then of his transportation from Jerusalem to heaven also state that at Jerusalem he met the former Prophets, including Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, and that in the heavens he met the same Prophets again but could not recognize them. Now how did these Prophets whom he had met at Jerusalem reach the heavens before him and why could he not recognize them while he had seen them only a short while ago in the course of the same journey? If the two meetings had taken place separately and at a distance of long intervals, it was possible that he could not have recognized some of them at the time of the second meeting in a changed atmosphere. But it is inconceivable that he should have failed to recognize them when he had met them only a short while ago in the course of the same journey.

It having been established that the Isra’ and the Mi‘raj were two separate and distinct events, it is necessary to give a somewhat detailed account of Isra’ as given in the traditions as it forms the subject matter of the verse under comment. The most reliable account of it is to be found in the tradition quoted by Ibn Jarir on the authority of Anas bin Malik. It is briefly as follows:

'When the Archangel Gabriel brought the Buraq to the Holy Prophet, he mounted it, and had gone only a short distance, when he saw an old woman. The Prophet asked Gabriel who she was, but Gabriel gave no answer to his question; on the contrary he told him not to ask questions, just as Moses in his معراج (Spiritual Ascension) was told not to put unnecessary questions (18:71). After the Prophet had gone a little further he saw a man calling him by name from across the road in order to invite his attention to himself. But Gabriel asked him again not to heed his call. When the Prophet had proceeded a little further, he met a party of men who greeted him with the greeting of peace. Gabriel told him to return their greeting. After this, the Prophet reached the Holy House in Jerusalem. There Gabriel presented him with three cups containing water, milk and wine. The Prophet took the cup containing milk and drank it and refused to accept the other two. Upon this Gabriel said to him, "Thou hast, indeed, chosen the right course which is in perfect harmony with a pure, unsullied nature. If thou hadst accepted water or wine, thou and thine followers would have been lost." Then Adam and the other Prophets were presented to him, and the Holy Prophet led them in Prayers. After this Gabriel explained to him that the old woman he saw on the way was an embodied representation of the life of this world and only as much was left of the life of the world as was left of the life of that old woman. As for the person who called him from across the road, he was Iblis, the enemy of God. The party of men who greeted him were the Prophets Abraham, Moses and Jesus' (Ibn Jarir).

This tradition serves as a key to resolve this whole allegory. It gives the most reliable and correct account of the Isra’. It shows that the Journey to Jerusalem was no physical act but only a vision. This is clear from the following facts:

(a) It is stated in this tradition that during the Night Journey to Jerusalem, the Prophet saw an old woman, a person standing on one side of the road, and three cups full of water, wine and milk (of which the Prophet chose the last), and Gabriel told him what all these things signified. The explanation and interpretation by Gabriel of the things the Prophet saw shows that the Journey was only a vision, for it is only things seen in visions that need interpretation and explanation.

(b) The Night Journey has been spoken of as a vision in the present Surah (v. 61). Accordingly, we find that several Companions of the Prophet and some of the later scholars of Islam have, on the basis of this verse, declared the Isra’ to be a vision. For instance, Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Jarir report that when Mu‘awiyah was asked concerning the Isra’, he said that it was a vision which came out to be true (Manthur, vol. 4, p. 197). ‘A’isha is also reported to have held the same view. (Hisham and Mas‘ud, vol. 1).

(c) We learn from the hadith that when the Holy Prophet spoke of his Night Journey to Jerusalem he was asked to give a description of the Temple at Jerusalem. The Prophet is reported to have said that at that time God presented before his eyes an embodied representation of the Temple and he was thus able to describe it as demanded of him (Ibn Kathir, vol. 6, p. 18).

The Vision of the Prophet referred to in the present verse implied a great prophecy. His journey to the Distant Mosque (المسجد الاقصی) meant his Migration to Medina where he was to build a Mosque which was destined to become later the Centre of all Faiths and Dispensations and the Holy Prophet’s seeing himself in the Vision leading other Prophets of God in Prayers signified that the new Faith Islam was not to remain confined to the place of its birth but was to spread all over the world and the followers of all religions were to join its fold. His going to Jerusalem in the Vision may also be understood to mean that he was to be given dominion over the territory in which Jerusalem was situated. This prophecy was fulfilled in the Caliphate of Umar.

The words of the verse also lend support to the view that the Vision constituted a prophecy about the great future of Islam. The Distant Mosque (المسجد الاقصی) that the Prophet saw in the Vision represented his own Mosque at Medina, Jerusalem stood for Medina and his going to Jerusalem signified his Migration to Medina. The Vision begins with the words سبحان الذی (Glory be to Him) which indicated that the Migration of the Prophet would redound to the Glory of God. The word سبحان itself shows that the Vision embodied a prophecy; for a physical journey to the Temple at Jerusalem could not be regarded as evidence of the Glory of God. But as establishment of the Islamic State at Medina was to fulfil a prophecy, that event did serve as evidence of Divine glory. Thus the words, Glory be to Him Who carried His servant by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Distant Mosque, signified that God would take the Holy Prophet to a Mosque resembling المسجد الاقصی (the Distant Mosque) at Jerusalem so that His word might be fulfilled.

The words, We might show him some of Our Signs, pointed to the great possibilities of the Prophet’s journey to Medina. The Prophet’s Migration to Medina served as a prelude to the glorious future of Islam which was then hidden from the eyes of the world and thus God’s great signs were manifested. The reason why the Holy Prophet’s Mosque was called المسجد الاقصی (the Distant Mosque), and why Medina was shown to him in the Vision in the form of Jerusalem was that the blessings which God had conferred on the Mosque at Jerusalem were also in store in a greater measure for the Prophet’s Mosque at Medina.

The Prophecy implied in the words, Who carried His servant by night, was fulfilled when the Prophet left Mecca at dead of night. He did not undertake this journey of his own accord but in pursuance of God’s express command. And as in his Night Journey to Jerusalem in the Vision he was accompanied by the Archangel Gabriel, so in his Flight to Medina he was accompanied by his most faithful companion, Abu Bakr. The word "Gabriel", which means "Man of God", fitly applies to Abu Bakr and portrays his spiritual eminence.

The Vision may also be taken as referring to a spiritual journey of the Holy Prophet to a distant land in some future time. It meant that when spiritual darkness enveloped the entire world, the Prophet would appear in spirit a second time in the person of one of his followers, in a land far away from the scene of his first advent—in the Punjab. A pointed reference to this second advent of the Holy Prophet is to be found in 62:3-5.

8:35; 16:89; 43:38; 48:26.

Important Words:

عاکف means, one who dwells in a place or dwells there permanently. Here it means one who dwells in Mecca or dwells in it constantly. See also 2:126 & 21:53.

الباد (visitor from the desert) is derived from بدا. They say بدا القوم الی البادیة i.e. people went forth to the desert, or they went forth from the region of the towns to the pasturing places in the desert. حضارة which means, life in the towns, is contrary to بداوة which means, life in the desert. باد means, one who dwells in بادیة i.e. desert or tents; not remaining in his place; one who comes from outside the town, i.e. a visitor or an occasional visitor (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse serves as an introduction to the subject of pilgrimage which is the central theme of this Surah. Circumambulation of the Sacred Mosque is the most important of the rituals and ceremonies of Pilgrimage, so a brief reference to the sacredness and importance of the Ka‘bah forms a befitting introduction to the subject of Hajj.

The reference in words "those who hinder men from the way of Allah and from the Sacred Mosque" may also be to a well-known incident connected with the Truce of Hudaibiyyah. In the 7th year of the Hijrah, the Holy Prophet, in fulfilment of a vision, left Medina with 1400 Companions to pay a visit to Mecca and perform ‘Umrah or the Lesser Pilgrimage. When he reached a place called Hudaibiyyah, he was prevented by the Meccans from proceeding further. He returned to Medina after having signed a truce known as the Truce of Hudaibiyyah. This Truce, known after the name of the place at which it was signed, led to the conquest of Mecca and eventually of the whole of Arabia.

The verse also points to the Islamic principle of the equality of status of all men in a place of worship and by implication to the inherent equality of all human beings.

8:35; 16:89; 22:26; 43:38.

2:197.

Important Words:

معرة (blame) is derived from عر (‘arra). They say عرت الابل i.e. the camels were or became mangy or scabby. عرہ means, he did to him an abominable thing; he did to him what he disliked; he disgraced him. عرہ بشر means, he aspersed him or charged or upbraided him with evil, or he wronged him. معرة means, a cause of reviling or being reviled; a crime or sin that is noxious like mange or scab; a foul or abominable thing; a cause of grief or vexation; disgrace; annoyance, hurt, harm or injury (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The verse means that though the Meccans gloated over the terms of the Treaty of Hudaibiyyah which, in their ignorance, they thought were very advantageous to them and humiliating for Muslims, and though the latter feeling that the terms were being forcibly wrung from them were crestfallen and did not know that in reality the terms had laid the foundations of a very prosperous and bright future for Islam, yet God had His own design in not permitting the fight to take place. There was a nucleus of Muslims in Mecca and if the fight had taken place, the Muslim army would have unknowingly killed their own brethren in faith, thereby causing great injury to their own cause, and earning obloquy and opprobrium for themselves. In fact, from whatever angle the Treaty of Hudaibiyyah may be viewed it was indeed a great victory.

Commentary:

The Holy Prophet had seen a vision that he was performing the circuit of the Ka‘bah with his Companions (Bukhari). The Prophet set out for Mecca with about 1500 of his Companions to perform the Lesser Pilgrimage. It is to this "vision"that the verse under comment refers. The Prophet was not allowed access to the Ka‘bah by the Quraish. On the contrary, he had to sign a treaty of which the terms as mentioned above seemed to be very humiliating and hurtful to the Muslims’ self-respect. They were highly upset, the illustrious ‘Umar, more than anyone else, not only at the terms, but also at the fact that the vision as he understood it had not been fulfilled, could not understand how the Prophet’s journey had served its purpose. He was not quite satisfied with the explanation that the vision did not signify the Pilgrimage would be performed that very year. He was in this frame of mind when, on the way back to Medina, this Surah was revealed and the Prophet called for him and recited it to him. The Surah was clear and emphatic that the Prophet’s vision was true and that the Muslims would most certainly enter the Ka‘bah and perform the ceremonies of the Lesser Pilgrimage. The Prophet’s journey, besides serving other useful purposes to which reference is already made, established an important precedent that sometimes even great Prophets of God are liable to place seemingly erroneous interpretations on their visions.