Topic: Murder

3:170.

Important Words:

احیاء (living) is the plural of حی which, among other things, means: (1) one whose life work does not go in vain; (2) one whose death is avenged. A well-known pre-Islamic poet, Harith ibn Hillizah, author of the seventh Mu‘allaqah, says:

إن نبشتم مابین ملحة فالصا قب فیھا الاموات والاحیاء i.e. If you dig the graves between Milhah and Saqib, you will find some who are dead, and others who are living. In this couplet by the "living", the poet means such persons as were slain in battle but whose blood was avenged, and by the "dead" he means those whose blood was not avenged.

Commentary:

The teaching about صبر (steadfastness) naturally brings in the question of sacrifices that Muslims were making in the cause of Islam. Therefore the Quran suitably refers here to the subject of martyrdom. Death is not the end of life, and in this respect believers and unbelievers stand on the same footing and the martyrs too enjoy no distinction. Nor would it be wrong to speak of them as dead in the ordinary sense of the word. But the word احیاء (living) has been used here about martyrs in a special sense.

As explained under Important Words above, the word حی (living) is also applied to him whose work, or, more properly speaking, the cause for which he lays down his life, does not come to an end with his death. The verse, therefore, points out that those who lay down their lives for Islam should not be regarded as dead, because the cause for which they give their lives still stands and is all the more strongly upheld by others who take their places.

Again, according to the Arabic idiom, حی (living) is also one whose blood is avenged. The verse, therefore, implies that as full satisfaction is taken for the blood of Muslims killed in the way of God, not only in the sense that far more non-Muslims join the fold of Islam than those killed in the wars but also in the sense that the number of non-Muslims killed is much larger than those killed among the Muslims, therefore Muslim martyrs are not really dead.

The word حی (living) may possess yet another significance. As a rule, life after death does not fully begin immediately after death. The soul of man continues in a state of torpor for sometime after death. This period varies with different persons according to the degree of their spiritual purity. As martyrs sacrifice their lives for the sake of God, their souls do not remain long in torpor but are quickly revived into a new life. This is one of the reasons why martyrs are called living, not dead.

The verse comprises a great psychological truth which is calculated to exercise immense influence on the life and progress of a people. A community that does not duly honour those of its members who lay down their lives for the cause for which the community stands, sows the seed of its own ruin. Again, a community which does not arrange to remove the fear of death from the hearts of its members, seals its own fate. The verse under comment provides an effective safeguard against both these dangers.

10:59; 43:33.

Commentary:

The words, forgiveness from Allah and mercy shall be better than what they hoard, mean that hypocrites are afraid of death because of the wealth and property which they have to leave behind; whereas, if believers are killed in the cause of Allah, they will get what is incomparably greater than what hypocrites are greedily hoarding up, or what Muslims themselves may have collected in the form of wealth and other worldly things. There is thus no reason for true believers to be afraid of death.

2:155.

Important Words:

اموات (dead) is the plural of میت which besides meaning a dead person, also means: (1) one whose blood has not been avenged; (2) one who leaves behind no successors; (3) one stricken with sorrow and grief. See also 2:29.

Commentary:

According to the above three significations of the word امواتا (dead) the verse would mean: (1) that the blood of Muslim martyrs shall certainly be avenged; (2) that their place shall be taken by others equally zealous; (3) that these martyrs, though apparently dead, are leading happy lives in the presence of their Lord.

As martyrs lay down their lives for the sake of God, therefore they are granted in the next world a special kind of life which is different from, and superior to, that of ordinary believers.

4:125; 16:98; 20:113; 16:42.

22:59, 60.

See 2:26.

Commentary:

As this Surah mainly deals with Christian doctrines and ideals and their way of life, and as Christianity, in spite of its claims to the contrary, gives woman a status definitely inferior to that of man, the insistence on the equality of the status of woman with man in the spiritual sphere forms a fitting sequel to it. At several places in the Quran, believing men and believing women are addressed in the same language and are made equally subject to the same commandments and entitled to the same rights and privileges. Briefly, Islam recognizes the equality of the social and religious rights of man and woman. The words, you are from one another, are intended to emphasize the equality of status mentioned in the preceding part of the verse.

The verse also constitutes an effective refutation of the charges of the Shias against the Holy Prophet’s Companions whose failings and shortcomings, if any, were all forgiven by God in view of the good works they performed.

2:189.

Commentary:

By unlawful means is meant all those means and methods which are forbidden by the Law.

The verse declares all commercial transactions without the mutual consent of seller and buyer to be null and void.

The clause, kill not yourselves, makes it clear that the devouring of other person’s property by unlawful means, or carrying on transaction without the free consent of the parties concerned brings about the moral death of the guilty party.

The words, kill not yourselves, also imply interdiction of suicide. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "Whosoever kills himself with a weapon, will be brought on the Day of Judgement with the said weapon in his hand and will be thrown into the Fire wherein he will abide. And whosoever kills himself with a poison will be thrown into the Fire, with that poison in his hand, where he will continue to take it" (Kathir).

9:111.

9:52.

58:5.

Commentary:

As the preceding verses contained injunctions which if misconstrued or misapplied, were likely to lead to a Muslim being killed by a Muslim, the present verse gives a timely warning against such an eventuality.

The words, It does not become a believer to kill a believer, have been used to make a touching appeal to believers to abstain from killing each other, since they are like brothers. It, in no case, behoves a brother to kill a brother. The words thus contain an important injunction which forms a fitting sequence to the one contained in the preceding verses concerning the hypocrites. The verse cautions a Muslim to be always on his guard lest in carelessness he should happen to kill a brother Muslim.

In case the slain person is a believer but happens to belong to a hostile people, then the offender shall only free a believing slave and no blood money shall be levied on him, because money paid to a hostile people would go to strengthen their military power against Islam which can in no case be allowed.

In the expression, and if he be of a people between whom and you is a pact, the words, and he be a believer, have not been repeated, in order to point out that the law with regard to the dhimmis (disbelievers under the protection of Muslims), or Mu‘ahids (disbelievers belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims) is the same as for Muslims.

It is worthy of note here that disbelievers who are in alliance with Muslims have not only been placed on a par with the latter, but even a distinction has been made in favour of the former. In case a Muslim is slain, the command relating to the payment of fine has been placed after the injunction to free a slave; while in case one belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims is slain, the order has been reversed, the injunction to pay the fine to his heirs being put before the injunction to free a slave. This has been done to impress upon Muslims the need of showing special regard for treaties and pacts. The payment of fine was an obligation which Muslims owed to disbelievers with whom they had made a pact, and in order to bring home to Muslims the lesson that they should have particular regard for their pacts and treaties, the injunction to pay the fine has in their case been placed before the injunction to free a slave.

25:69-70.

Commentary:

The solidarity of Islam and the tie of brotherhood among believers have been made absolutely inviolable. One who knowingly kills a fellow Muslim is like one who kills a son of his own father under the very eyes of the latter. The father would have nothing to do with such a man.

Commentary:

Instead of directly and briefly saying that "he killed his brother", the verse expresses the same idea in a somewhat longer sentence, viz. his mind induced him to kill his brother, so he killed him. This is done to point to the great truth that it is man’s own نفس or mind, or more properly his own "self" which often becomes the source of evil for him.

7:102; 9:70; 14:10; 40:23.

Commentary:

This verse draws a great moral from the simple incident related in the foregoing verses. The incident of the two sons of Adam had a parallel in the history of nations, as hinted in the words, On account of this We prescribed for the Children of Israel, etc. If the incident simply related to "the two sons of Adam" it had obviously no direct bearing on the Israelites.

As a matter of fact, what is hinted at is that an incident similar to that of the two sons of Adam mentioned here, but of much greater import, was to take place later. There was to appear among the brethren of the Israelites a Prophet whose offering God was to favour with acceptance, while that of his brethren, the Israelites, was to be rejected owing to their impiety and lack of righteousness. This was to enrage the Israelites against that Prophet and they were to become thirsty for his blood on account of envy, even as Cain had become thirsty for the blood of his brother Abel. The story of Cain and Abel was, therefore, intended, as hinted in the opening words of this verse, to serve as a warning for the Israelites. The Prophet meant to be raised from among the brethren of the Israelites was to be no ordinary soul. He was to be a World-Reformer ordained to bring the eternal Law for mankind whose entire future depended on him and, therefore, his slaying was equivalent to the slaying of the whole of mankind, and the preservation of his life was, as it were, the preservation of the life of the whole of mankind. This great soul had killed no person, nor had it created disorder in the land.

The advent of this Prophet was foretold in the Bible (Deut. 18:18-22), and therein it was also announced that God would demand requital of those who did not hearken to this Prophet.

9:107.

Commentary:

The verse has two applications. Figuratively it applies to the People of the Book who, by rejecting the Prophet from among their brethren (see the preceding verse), were, as it were, waging war against God. The punishment which the verse prescribes for them finds a fitting illustration in their history. Taken in its apparent sense, the verse lays down the different forms of punishment that may be meted out to those who wage war against innocent Muslims, killing and slaying them and creating disorder in the land.

The object underlying the injunction embodied in the words, their hands and their feet be cut off on alternate sides, is, on the one hand, to disable the culprit from carrying on a war of aggression, and on the other, to leave him fit enough to earn his living by doing some work. The cutting off of the hand and the foot on the same side would leave the victim utterly helpless. The verse also shows that Islam does not hesitate to take extreme measures to uproot an evil when the interests of society or the State demand it. Islam is not a religion of false sentiments but of sound judgement and true reason. See also the next verse.

4:37; 17:24.

17:32.

6:121; 7:34.

Important Words:

املاق (poverty) is derived from ملق. They say ملق الشیء i.e. he erased the thing. ملقه بالعصا means, he beat him with a stick. ملق الولد امه means, the child sucked from the breasts of his mother. املق الرجل means, the man spent all his money and became poor. املاق means, poverty or destitution (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The Quran has already given the commandments and prohibitions of the Islamic Law with regard to the fruits of the earth and the flesh of animals, in opposition to the laws devised by men. Now it gives general commandments and prohibitions.

It should be noted that the injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God requires us to do, and not what He forbids us to do. Thus, it is the contrary of the injunctions given in the verse that is forbidden. The injunctions have been expressly mentioned and the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse, and the attention of the reader has been drawn to both.

The verse may also be construed in another way. The first sentence should be taken as having finished with the words ما حرم ربکم i.e. what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence should be taken as beginning with the words علیکمwhich would in this case mean, "it is enjoined upon you or it is incumbent on you." The verse will then read as follows:"Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is incumbent on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him…"

The order in which the injunctions are given in this verse is noteworthy. The injunctions begin with the words, Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. The Arabic word for "Lord" is رب which means "Creator, Sustainer, and Nourisher" (see 1:2), and it is the very idea of "sustaining and nourishing" that governs the order of the injunctions here given. The first injunction, i.e. associate not anything as partner with Him, pertains to the Great Nourisher, Allah. The second injunction pertains to the lesser nourishers, viz. parents. The word احسان (doing good) expresses the idea that the service of the parents enjoined in the words, do good to parents, is to be performed in the best way possible, for احسان literally signifies "doing a thing very well." Next come those who are nourished and sustained by the "lesser nourishers", viz. children. Parents are bidden to nourish and bring up their children well, as implied in the words, kill not your children for fear of poverty. Indeed, he who neglects to bring up his children properly for fear of poverty virtually "kills" them. If it is the duty of the children to serve their parents well, it is equally the duty of the parents to bring up their children well.

The pronoun "you" in the clause, it is We Who provide for you and for them, refers to parents and the pronoun "them" refers to children, the former being put before the latter in order to draw our attention to the fact that God’s providing for the parents is a proof of the fact that He will also provide for the children.

The next injunction is contained in the words, approach not foul deeds. The word فواحش (foul deeds) is the plural of فاحشه one meaning of which is "fornication or adultery" (see 4:16), which is another form of killing one’s children; for the man who forms immoral connection with a woman other than his wife, not only destroys his seed but also neglects his own wife, which cannot but affect his begetting children in lawful wedlock. Similarly, illegitimate children born of a woman other than one’s wife are not one’s own children, nor are they properly looked after.

The words, whether open or secret, used in connection with فواحش (foul deeds) refer respectively to openly going in to prostitutes and to forming secret connections with women other than one’s wife.

Next to the relations between parents and children come brotherly and friendly relations which are referred to in the words, kill not the life which Allah has made sacred. This injunction requires us to treat our brethren and friends as well as members of our society with fairness and justice. The word "killing," it will be noted, pertains not only to actually killing but to an attempt at killing as well as causing serious injury and boycotting etc. (see meaning of قتل i.e. killing under 2:62; 3:155 & 4:158). The expression, save by right, used with regard to "killing" means "except when a man has made himself deserving of the treatment to be meted out to him." For instance, in case of murder a person will be put to death only by order of proper authority. Similarly, in case of "boycotting" a person will be boycotted only under the orders of the person or the body that possesses that power. It will not be right for any man to take the law in his own hands.

4:75; 61:11-12.

3:196; 61:5.

Commentary:

The words, an unfailing promise that He has made incumbent on Himself in the Torah and the Gospel and the Quran, mean that the Torah, the Gospel and the Quran contain clear promises of divine favour and assistance for those who strive in the cause of God with their persons and property. The promise is general, but was to apply to Muslims alone after Islam had abrogated other religions. These words may also mean that the people of whom God purchased their lives and property in exchange for Heaven, viz. the Companions of the Holy Prophet of Islam, have been spoken of and commended in all the three Books, i.e. not only in the Quran, but in the Torah and the Gospels as well.

6:152.

Important Words:

املاق (poverty) is the noun-infinitive from ملق. They say ملق الشیء i.e. he effaced or blotted out the thing. املق الرجل means, the man spent his money so much that he became poor. املق الثوب means, he washed the cloth. They say املق الدھر ماله i.e. time took away his money from his hands. املاق means, to be or grow poor; poverty (Aqrab).

Commentary:

V. 29 enjoins the giving of wealth in charity but not in a way as to do moral injury to the recipient or to involve the giver himself in pecuniary trouble. The verse under comment condemns the begrudging of adequate funds or means for the proper education and upbringing of children and calls it a form of killing. It does not, however, refer to the Arab custom of killing girls, which is dealt with elsewhere and which is nowhere said to be due to the fear of spending money on them. Girls were slain because their birth was looked upon as a source of disgrace and humiliation for their parents (16:59, 60 & 43:18).

Evidently there hardly lives a person so foolish as actually to kill his children in order to save his money. But there is no dearth of persons even among the so-called educated and cultured classes who "kill" their children by not giving them proper food or clothing. Children of miserly parents fall victim to various kinds of diseases because they are not given the food which is essential for the proper building up of strong and healthy bodies. These children die prematurely from malnutrition. This refusal to provide proper nourishment for them is as good as killing them and has been so called.

Taking the word قتل (killing) in a figurative sense those miserly parents who do not give proper education to their children contribute to the latter’s moral and intellectual death. The verse under comment very strongly condemns such "killing" of innocent children who, if given right kind of education and also afforded proper opportunities to rise to their full stature are capable of becoming very useful members of society. It exhorts Muslims not to spare money to equip their children physically and morally for a successful and respectable life.

The word قتل (killing) has been used in the verse in order forcibly to draw attention to the various indirect ways in which some parents cause the death of their children. One such form of killing is to neglect to provide proper nourishment for pregnant women or exact heavy tasks from them during their pregnancy or in the period of suckling, which has a very adverse effect on the health of the child. By using this word the Quran emphatically has drawn attention to all those direct or indirect causes that lead to the ruining of the physical or moral health of children.

The killing of children may also take the form of birth control which, however, is permissible if, for instance, by conception the life of a pregnant woman is considered, by competent medical authority, to be in danger in the event of her giving birth to a child. The words خطا (khit’an) and خطا (khat’an) differ in their significance), the former being intentional, while the latter may both be intentional or unintentional (Aqrab). The Quran has used the former word to bring home the fact that the killing of children is a crime at which human nature recoils and only a person devoid of all human feelings is capable of committing it. The expression ان قتلھم کان خطأ کبیرا also indicates that it is not killing by a lethal weapon or by poisoning or other similar means that is meant here. This latter kind of killing has been clearly mentioned in v. 34.

6:152; 25:69.

Commentary:

In the preceding two verses reference was made to the two indirect ways of killing. The verse under comment, however, speaks of direct murder. It declares it unlawful to kill a soul, the killing of which has been forbidden by God.

The word نفس (soul) means anything which breathes and therefore includes all living things. So the words, which Allah has forbidden, have been added in order to restrict their application to man, it being lawful to kill other animals except under certain conditions when their killing also is forbidden.

The word ولی (heir) is applied to any person who is entitled to inherit another man’s property after the latter’s death. But one may nominate a person other than his legal heir as his ولی. If a person is murdered, his ولی (heir) has the right to demand satisfaction. But after the murderer is convicted by a properly constituted court, the heir of the murdered person has the right either to have the murderer legally executed or accept blood-money in lieu of the death of the murdered person. If, however, it is considered against the interests of public peace or morality to allow blood money to the heir or if the demand of the heir be found to be not bona fide, the court may refuse to accept the option of the heir and order the murderer’s execution. In fact, both the heir and the State equally share the right to pardon or punish the guilty person. This right of the State in regard to the punishment of the guilty person covers all matters to which the injunction of قصاص(retaliation) applies. The Caliph ‘Ali is reported to have punished a guilty person whom the aggrieved party had pardoned on the plea that the dictates of public peace demanded his punishment. ‘Ali was convinced that the fear of being harmed by the offender had made the aggrieved person pardon him. See also 2:179.

Whereas in the earlier part of the verse the rights of the party offended against have been safeguarded, the words, let him not exceed the prescribed bounds in slaying, safeguard the interests of the offender. They mean to say that the aggrieved party should not exceed legitimate bounds by adopting a cruel method of killing. In fact, these words imply a recommendation in favour of the murderer. They also show that although "life for life" is the general rule, the heirs of the murdered person may not always act upon this rule. The murderer is to suffer the extreme penalty of the law only when the dictates of equity, retaliation, public peace and morality absolutely demand it. His life should be spared if this act of grace is calculated to lead to his moral reformation. In the words, for therein he is helped by law, the aggrieved person is reminded of his responsibilities. He is told that he, too, is responsible for the maintenance of peace. As God has safeguarded his rights, he should have regard for the rights of others—he should not always insist upon his "pound of flesh".

Commentary:

With this verse is introduced the subject of jihad. The theme of sacrifice has formed a befitting prelude to this all-important subject. Having explained the importance and significance of sacrifice, the Quran proceeds to tell Muslims that the time has arrived that they should be prepared to undergo all manner of sacrifice in the defence of their faith which the enemy is out to destroy. Before the permission to fight in self-defence was given to Muslims, they were apprised of the importance of sacrifice. The words, "Surely, Allah defends those who believe," throw a flood of light on the Islamic conception of jihad. Jihad, as these words show, is fighting in defence of truth. But whereas Islam allows no aggressive war, it regards the waging of it in self-defence as an act of the highest virtue. Because much misconception prevails regarding the Islamic teaching about jihad and because Islam has been much maligned and subjected to much wilful and deliberate mis-representation on this account a somewhat detailed note is called for on this subject.

Man is God’s noblest handiwork. He is the acme of His creation, its aim and end. He is God’s vicegerent on earth and the king of His whole creation (2:30). To him even angels in heaven make obeisance and for him all animate and inanimate things—the earth, the heaven, the sun, moon, stars, mountains, oceans, rivers, animals, and birds, have been created and to him they have been made subservient (14:33, 34; 35:14). This is the Islamic conception of man’s high place in the universe. It is therefore only natural that that religion which has raised man to such a high pedestal should have attached very great importance and sanctity to his life. Of all things man’s life, according to the Quran, is most sacred and inviolable. It is a sacrilege to take it except under very rare circumstances which the Quran has specifically mentioned. According to the Quran the killing of a person without a just cause is tantamount to the killing of the whole of mankind (17:34; 5:33); so sacred and sanctified is man’s life.

No less important, according to Islam, is freedom of conscience. It is man’s most precious heritage—perhaps more precious than life itself. The Quran, which has attached the greatest sanctity to man’s life, could not have failed to acknowledge and declare the sacredness and inviolability of this, his most precious possession. "Let there be no compulsion in religion," says the Quran (2:256). It abounds in verses of like import which shows that not only Islam does not encourage the use of force for the spread of its teaching but positively and in most emphatic terms forbids and condemns it and gives man unrestricted choice in the matter of his faith and belief. Here are some of them:

Say, 'O ye men, now has the truth come to you from your Lord. So whosoever follows the guidance, follows it only for the good of his own soul, and whosoever errs, errs only against it. And I am not a keeper over you (10:109).

And say, It is the truth from your Lord; therefore let him who will, believe, and let him who will, disbelieve (18:30).

We know best what they say; and thou hast not been appointed to compel them in any way. So admonish by means of the Quran him who fears My warning (50:46).

So remind. Thou art only one to remind. Thou art not a warden over them (88:22-23).

These verses, as it were, make an unequivocal declaration about the freedom of human conscience or the Magna Carta of the liberty of man’s beliefs and convictions. The injunctions embodied in these verses have not remained a dead letter. The Holy Prophet and his Companions lived up to them and strictly obeyed them even if acting upon them meant loss of prestige as it happened at the time of signing of the Treaty of Hudaibiya, or when the Jewish tribe of Banu Nadir, on their banishment from Medina, were allowed to take with them the scions of the Muslim families of Aus and Khazraj, much against the remonstrances of their Muslim relatives, because they (the scions) had chosen to go with the Jews (Abu Dawud Kitabul-Jihad, & Manthur). It is also on record that ‘Umar, the second Caliph, presented Islam on several occasions to a Christian slave of his, Asbaq by name, but every time he refused to accept it (Manthur). Instances of such tolerant behaviour on the part of the leaders of Islam during the ages can easily be multiplied. In the face of such magnanimous display of religious tolerance it seems unbelievable that Islam should have been accused of fanaticism and bigotry or of having been spread by force, but it is a sad fact of history that it has been so maligned and accused by its hostile critics.

3:196; 8:75; 9:20-22; 16:42.

Commentary:

In v. 57 above God had referred to the reward of believers in general. In this and the next verse the Quran particularly mentions the reward of those believers who left their hearths and homes, their belongings and their dear and near ones for the sake of God. To these "living" martyrs, the verse holds out a promise that they will be specially rewarded for their sacrifices. In fact those who leave their homes and all that is dear to them for the sake of God and spend their lives in serving His cause and then die in harness deserve to be classed with "the martyrs", for their sacrifice is as great as that of the actual martyrs, only, God in His infallible wisdom, spares their lives. This is the significance of the words, "or die". In fact there are two categories of martyrs—"the dead martyrs" and "the living martyrs". The "dead" martyrs are actually slain in the cause of God while the "living" martyrs live a life of perpetual sacrifice for His sake and then die a natural death. The verse under comment places both these classes of "martyrs" in the same category. Those who are slain, or those who die a natural death, serving the cause of God, will have the same reward—a goodly provision and a place with which they will be well-pleased.

Incidentally, the verse shows that it was revealed after the Hijrah, because it was after the Hijrah that fighting in self-defence was permitted and some of the Muslims were killed in the fighting. In fact, some parts of the Surah were revealed at Mecca and others at Medina. The Surah may thus be said to have been revealed both at Mecca and Medina.