Topic: Divine Solicitude For

1155

Important Words:

اسری (captives) is the plural of اسیر (a captive) which is derived from اسر. They say اسره i.e. he bound or tied him, or he made him a captive or took him a prisoner. اسیر means, one shackled or imprisoned; a captive (Lane).

یثخن (he engages in a regular fighting) is derived from ثخن (thakhuna) or ثخن (thakhana) which means, it was thick or coarse or hard. اثخنه means, he rendered it thick; or he rendered him heavy or languid or enervated; or he overcame him and inflicted many wounds on him. اثخن فی العدو means, he made a great slaughter or a great wounding among the enemy. اثخن فی الارض means, he made much slaughter in the earth or the land; or he fought vehemently in the earth (Lane). The expression حتی یثخن فی الارض would thus mean, till he (the Prophet) has had a regular fighting in the land, inflicting wounds on the enemy.

Commentary:

It was a practice among pre-Islamic Arabs (and it is regrettable that the practice still continues in some parts of the world) to take men captives even if there was no war and no fighting, and then to make them slaves. The verse abolishes this evil custom and lays down in clear words that it is only in war and after regular fighting that enemy combatants can be taken prisoner and that it is not lawful to take any person captive when there is no war and there has been no fighting.

The verse has been very wrongly interpreted. It is said that when the Muslims took some men of the Meccan army captives at Badr, the Holy Prophet took counsel with his Companions as to what should be done with them. ‘Umar suggested that they should be put to death, while Abu Bakr proposed that they should be released after accepting ransom from them. The Holy

Prophet accepted the suggestion of Abu Bakr and the prisoners were released for ransom. But it is alleged that by revealing this verse, God expressed His disapproval of the Holy Prophet’s action, declaring that the captives ought to have been put to death and no ransom should have been taken for them. This interpretation, however, is obviously wrong; firstly, because God had so far sent down no commandment forbidding the release of prisoners for ransom, and, therefore, He could not reprove the Holy Prophet for accepting ransom; secondly, because the Holy Prophet had already accepted ransom for two persons taken captive at Nakhlah prior to the Battle of Badr, and God had not disapproved of this action of his; thirdly, because only two verses later God permits Muslims to eat of that which you have won in war as lawful and good (8:70). It is simply inconceivable that God should have reproved the Holy Prophet for having accepted ransom and then at the same time declared the money so taken to be lawful and good. This interpretation is, therefore, obviously wrong and the verse is only intended to lay down a general rule that captives should not be taken until there has been regular fighting and the enemy has been overpowered by the infliction of wounds.

1202

Important Words:

عفا اللّٰه عنك (Allah remove thy cares). عفا means, he or it effaced, erased or obliterated a trace, etc. They say عفا اللّٰه عنه i.e. may God efface from him his sin, fault, offence, etc. Sometimes the expression عفا الله عنك is used where no sin or fault has preceded and is not even conceivable. For instance, an Arab would say to one whom he holds in high esteem عفا اللّٰه عنكmeaning, may God set thy affairs aright and bring honour and glory to thee (Aqrab). See also 2:110; 2:188 & 2:220.

Commentary:

As shown under Important Words, the word عفو does not necessarily imply the committing of a sin on the part of a person about whom it is used, for it is also used for a person who has committed no sin and even for him who is incapable of committing a sin. In fact, the expression عفا اللّٰه عنك is sometimes used to express love or respect; and here it implies a desire that the Prophet may be relieved of his cares and difficulties.

The expression, Why didst thou permit them to stay behind, is intended to hint that the refusal on the part of the Holy Prophet to give them leave would have served the useful purpose of unmasking the hypocrisy of the hypocrites. Of those who remained behind, only about half came to the Holy Prophet to ask his leave, while the majority stayed behind without asking his permission and without explaining their inability to accompany him.

3104

Important Words:

وطرا (want) has no verb. It means, a want, a need, an object of want or need; or that which one proposes to accomplish or of which one is desirous. They say قضی منه وطرہ i.e. he accomplished or obtained his want from him (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

As the verse deals with an incident of very great historical importance, it demands and deserves a somewhat detailed explanation. Zaid bin Harith, to whom the words "on whom Allah had bestowed favours and on whom thou also had bestowed favours" refer, belonged to the tribe of Kalb. In his childhood he was kidnapped and sold as a slave in Mecca where he was bought by Khadijah’s brother and given over to her. On her marriage with the Holy Prophet Khadijah presented Zaid to him who at once emancipated him. Zaid was so much attached to the Prophet that when later his father and uncle begged of the Holy Prophet to let him go with them as the grief of his separation from home had almost killed his mother, the Prophet readily gave his permission. But Zaid himself flatly refused to part company with the Holy Prophet, exclaiming that he was dearer to him than his father and mother. The Prophet was so deeply touched by Zaid’s fidelity and love for him that he at once declared him (Zaid) to be his son and henceforward Zaid came to be known as the Prophet’s son. Zaid remained throughout his life a most beloved and faithful disciple of the Holy Prophet and sealed his fidelity to Islam and the Prophet with his blood on the battlefield of Mu’tah.

Zainab was the daughter of the Holy Prophet’s aunt, hence a full-blooded Arab, intensely proud of her ancestry and exalted social status. Islam had envisaged and given to the world a civilization and culture in which there were to be no class divisions, no hereditary nobility, no vested interests. All men were to be free and equal in the sight of God. The Holy Prophet wanted to start with his own family the carrying into actual effect of this noble ideal of Islam. He wished to marry Zainab to Zaid, who in spite of having been liberated by the Prophet and called his son, unfortunately still carried the stigma of slavery in the minds of some people. It was exactly this stigma of slavery, this invidious distinction between 'free' and 'slave' which the Holy Prophet sought to remove by Zainab’s marriage to Zaid. In deference to the Holy Prophet’s wish Zainab agreed to the proposal. The purpose of the Holy Prophet was achieved. The marriage levelled to the ground all class distinctions and divisions. It was a practical demonstration of Islam’s noble ideal. The marriage, however, ended in failure, not so much due to a difference in the social status of Zainab and Zaid as to the incompatibility of their dispositions and temperaments and also due to a feeling of inferiority from which Zaid suffered. The failure of the marriage naturally grieved the Holy Prophet. But it also served a very useful purpose. In pursuance of Divine command, as mentioned in the latter part of the verse under comment, the Prophet himself married Zainab, thus cutting at the very root of another obnoxious and deep-seated Arab custom, viz. that it was a sacrilege to marry the wife of one’s adopted son. The custom of adoption was abolished and with it went also this foolish notion. Thus Zainab’s marriage with Zaid served one very noble object and its failure another highly useful purpose.

The words "fear Allah" signify that Zaid wanted to divorce Zainab, and as divorce according to Islam is very hateful in the sight of God, the Holy Prophet exhorted him not to do so.

The clause, "And then…thou shouldst fear Him," may apply to both Zaid and the Holy Prophet. Applying to Zaid it would mean that Zaid did not like that the cause of his separation from Zainab should come to light, perhaps because as the words "fear Allah," indicate the fault lay more with him than with Zainab. As, however, applying to the Holy Prophet, the words would signify that as the marriage between Zaid and Zainab was arranged at his instance and wish, he naturally did not like its breaking. The clause also shows that the Prophet feared that the break-down of the marriage which was arranged by him and which had been entered into in deference to his special wish, but which resulted in an ostensible failure of the experiment in Islamic brotherhood, would cause some mental confusion and uneasiness among people whose faith was weak. This was the anxiety that lay heavy on the Prophet’s heart. The words, "thou didst fear men," seem to point to this fear of his. But, as mentioned above, God had His own purpose in the failure of this marriage. He wanted to show that there was nothing in this failure to be afraid of. On the contrary, it was a blessing in disguise and was intended to serve a great purpose and therefore the Prophet’s fear was unfounded.

Christian and other hostile Critics of Islam pretend to find in the Holy Prophet’s marriage to Zainab a basis for mean attacks on him. It is stated that the Prophet, having by chance seen Zainab, became enamoured of her beauty and Zaid, having come to know of his desire to marry her, sought divorce from her. The fact that the Holy Prophet’s most inveterate enemies, before whose eyes the whole affair had actually taken place, dared not attribute the base motives ascribed to him by these critics after so many centuries, completely knocks the bottom from under this base and totally unfounded charge. Zainab was the Prophet’s own cousin and being so closely related to him he must have seen her many times, for "Purdah" had not as yet been enjoined. Besides, it was in deference to his own persistently expressed wish that Zainab had reluctantly agreed to marry Zaid. It is on record that she and her brother had desired before her marriage with Zaid that she should be taken in marriage by the Holy Prophet himself. What wasit that prevented the Holy Prophet from marrying her when she was a virgin and when she herself ardently desired to get married to him? The whole story evidently seems to be a figment of the "fertile" imagination of the Holy Prophet’s hostile critics and it is an insult to human intellect to give the least credence to it. But while there are some Christian critics like Muir and Margoliouth who find fault with the Holy Prophet for having married Zainab, there are others better informed and more honest like the good and noble Rev. Bosworth Smith who found nothing in this marriage to cavil at. The Rev, gentleman says:

"It should be remembered, however, that most of Mohammed’s marriages may be explained, at least, as much by his pity for the forlorn condition of the persons concerned, as by other motives. They were almost all of them widows who were not remarkable either for their beauty or their wealth, but quite the reverse. May not this fact, and his undoubted faithfulness to Khadijah till her dying day, and till he himself was fifty years of age, give us additional ground to hope that calumny or misconception has been at work in the story of Zainab" - ("Mohammed and Mohammedanism").

4278

Commentary:

It is related that one day one of the wives of the Holy Prophet gave him a drink made from honey, which he seemed to like. Some of his other wives, out of pique, pointed out to him that his breath smelt of Maghafir, a shrub the taste of which resembled that of honey but having a bad smell. The Holy Prophet, because of his delicate nature, promised not to take honey any more (Buldan). It is to this incident that the verse under comment is generally taken to refer. But it seems improbable that the Holy Prophet, merely to satisfy the pique of his wife or wives, should have taken such a drastic step as to have forbidden himself the use of some-thing which was lawful, particularly that in which, according to the Quran, "there is cure for men" (16:70). It appears the narrator or narrators of this incident in the traditions suffered from some misunderstanding or confusion, particularly when, accor-ding to one tradition, the Holy Prophet took honey from the house of Zainab, and it were ‘A’ishah and Hafsah who contrived to draw him into making the aforesaid promise, while, according to another tradition, it was at the house of Hafsah that he was served with honey and that the wives who objected were ‘A’ishah, Zainab and Safiyya. It appears, moreover, that according to the hadith, two, or at the most three, of the Holy Prophet’s wives were concerned in the incident, but, according to vv. 2 & 6 of the present Surah, all were connected with it, two of them taking a leading part (v.5). These considerations indicate that the Surah refers to some incident of much greater significance than the mere taking of honey by the Holy Prophet at the house of one of his wives and of having been drawn into making a promise not to take it anymore. In the commentary on this Surah, Bukhari (Kitabul-Mazalim wal Ghasb) quotes Ibn ‘Abbas as relating that he was always on the lookout to enquire of ‘Umar as to who were the two wives to whom reference had been made in the verse: "Now, if you two turn unto Allah, it will be better for you, and your hearts are already so inclined." One day, finding ‘Umar alone, he sought to satisfy his curiosity. He had hardly finished his question, says Ibn ‘Abbas, when ‘Umar said that they were ‘A’ishah and Hafsah and then proceeded to relate the story: "Once, when my wife offered me her advice concerning some domestic affair, I curtly told her that it was no business of hers to advise me, for in those days we did not hold our womenfolk in much respect. My wife sternly replied: 'Your daughter Hafsah takes so much liberty with the Holy Prophet that she retorts back, when he says something not to her liking till he feels offended, and you do not allow me to speak to you even about our domestic affairs.' Upon this I went to Hafsah and sternly told her that she should not be misled by ‘A’ishah in this matter as she was nearer to the Prophet’s heart. Then I went to Ummi Salma and had hardly broached the matter with her when she also curtly told me not to interfere in affairs concerning the Prophet and his wives. A short time after this, the Prophet separated himself from his wives and decided not to go to the house of any of them. The news went round that the Prophet had divorced his wives. I went to him and asked him if it was true that he had divorced his wives to which he replied in the negative." This incident shows that ‘Umar, and Ibn ‘Abbas were of the view that the relevant verses of the Surah referred to this temporary separation of the Holy Prophet from his wives. The fact that the preceding Surah mentions the subject of Talaq which is separation of a permanent character, lends weight to the inference that these verses relate to the Prophet’s separation from his wives, which, however, was of a temporary nature. Besides, as reported by ‘A’ishah in the above mentioned hadith, immediately after the period of separation was over, v. 33:29 was revealed, and the Prophet’s wives were given the choice between the Prophet’s companionship and a life of poverty and austere simplicity on the one hand, and separation from him with a life of ease and comfort and all sorts of material benefit on the other. The choice was given to all the wives and the verse under comment speaks of all the wives, as also does v. 4. This shows that the incident referred to in these verses concerns all the wives in which two of them took a more prominent part. And this was when the Prophet’s wives, led by ‘A’ishah and Hafsah, demanded of him that like other Muslim women they should also have amenities of life and comfortable living (Fathul-Qadir). In this context the words تبتغی مرضاة أزواجک would seem to mean something like this: "Since thou always desirest to please thy wives and meet their wishes, they have been encouraged by this loving attitude of thine naturally to lose sight of thy high position as a Prophet of God and to make excessive demands on thee."

The alleged incident of Mariah, the Copt, being too foolish and fantastic a concoction of Christian writers and lacking all reliable historical evidence, does not merit serious notice. Mary was the Holy Prophet’s wedded consort and the respected mother of the Faithful. The Prophet never kept a slave girl.

4571

Commentary:

The verse refers to a well-known historical incident. As the Holy Prophet was engaged one day in a talk with some of the Quraish Chiefs about some matters of belief, there came up ‘Abdullah bin Ummi Maktum and, thinking that the Holy Prophet’s precious time and energy were being wasted on the confirmed leaders of disbelief, he sought to divert his attention and asked to be enlightened on some religious questions. The Holy Prophet disliked the intrusion, and showed his displeasure by turning aside from ‘Abdullah (Tabari and Bayan). The incident, while it showed the Holy Prophet’s solicitude for the spiritual well-being of the Quraish leaders, in that he continued his discourse with them and paid no heed to ‘Abdullah’s interruption was evidence of his great regard for the tender susceptibilities of the poor blind man, inasmuch as the Prophet merely turned his face from ‘Abdullah, an act which the latter could not see, not saying even a word of reproach or disapprobation to him for his inopportune and rash interruption. The verse thus throws a flood of light on the moral stature of the Holy Prophet; and instead of implying a reproach or rebuke, as some commentators seem to think, enjoins him and, through him, his followers, to have due regard for the tender susceptibilities of the poor, the humble, and the downtrodden.

The words "he frowned and turned aside," according to most commentators of the Quran refer to the Holy Prophet, but more correctly they seem to refer to the arrogant attitude of the conceited Quraish leader with whom the Holy Prophet was engaged in conversation and who turned away his face disdainfully, thinking how a humble and lowly person could dare interfere in the talk he was having with the Prophet.

4572

Commentary:

The pronoun "thee" has been taken as applying to the Holy Prophet and the pronoun "he" to the Quraish leader with whom the Holy Prophet was holding conversation. But "thee" may more appropriately be applied lo those carping critics who, being hypersensitive, would not relish the attitude of the Holy Prophet on that occasion which was the only right and correct attitude for him to adopt.

4573

Important Words:

استغنی (is disdainfully indifferent) is derived from غنی which means, he became rich. استغنی means, he wanted to be rich. استغنی عنه به means, he became indifferent after he got what he desired. The verse thus means, he desires wealth, or he is indifferent or careless (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

See a collective note, on this and the following six verses, on v. 11 below.

4574

Important Words:

تصدی (thou dost pay attention) is derived from صد . They say تصدی له i.e. he addressed or applied or directed himself or his regard or attention or mind to him or it; and he asked him or petitioned him for a thing that he wanted; he inclined towards him or it; he raised head towards him or it (Lane & Aqrab).

4574A

Commentary:

The verse seems to constitute an effective justification of the Holy Prophet’s attitude towards ‘Abdullah bin Ummi Maktum. It purports to say that it would have brought no good to the Holy Prophet if ‘Abdullah or, for that matter, the Quraish leader did or did not benefit by his talk. Thus the attitude of fancied indifference towards ‘Abdullah or of deference towards the Quraish leader shown by the Holy Prophet proceeded from no consideration of any personal interest. The Holy Prophet’s reaction was solely due to compliance with the commandments of the Shari‘ah about behaving kindly and courteously towards one’s guests and visitors.

4575

Commentary:

If vv. 6-11 are taken to apply to the Holy Prophet, then the particle أما in the 6th verse would signify "how could it be that" i.e. it cannot be; and these verses would be interpreted as: "How could it be possible that thou shouldst pay attention to him who is disdainfully indifferent and should neglect him who fears God and comes to thee hastening." These verses again constitute an eloquent commentary on the Holy Prophet’s regard for the humble and the suppressed. But the verse under comment may be applied more fittingly to those critics who would find fault with the Holy Prophet’s attitude towards ‘Abdullah bin Ummi Maktum on that particular occasion but who themselves, in their conceit and pride, would behave arrogantly towards the poor and the lowly. Thus these verses have been used ironically; they bring home to the critics their own state of mind; and do not refer to any weakness of the Holy Prophet. The next verse also supports this interpretation.

4576

Important Words:

کلا (nay) means, nay; by no means; on the contrary. The particle is also used to remonstrate with a person and to tell him that he is saying something which is not correct (Aqrab & Baqa).

Commentary:

The verse means that the charge of indifference is not correct. Moreover, why at all the Prophet should have adopted an attitude of sullen indifference towards a poor man when the Quran, being meant equally for the rich and the poor, it was not only inconsistent with his own high moral stature but also against human reason to do so? What the Prophet did on the specific occasion was dictated by the exigency of the occasion and was demanded by the situation and, therefore, was the right thing to do.