Topic: Of Allah

26:194, 195.

See 2:90.

Important Words:

جبریل (Gabriel) is a compound word made up of جبر (גבך) which in Hebrew means a man or a mighty man or a hero, and ایل (א ל) which means God (Hebrew-English Lexicon by William Geseneus, Boston, 1836. Also see Bukhari, chap. onTafsir). The latter word occurs in many combinations (e.g. in the word Ishmael in Gen. 16:11 which means "God heareth" or "God has heard"). In Arabic, which is the mother of Hebrew, the word جبر means, mending a broken thing; giving a poor man so liberally as to make him well off; a brave man. The word ایل is either derived from the Arabic word الله (God) or from the root آل, the active participle from which is آئل meaning Controller or Ruler, i.e. God (Aqrab). Ibn ‘Abbas relates that the other name of جبریل is عبدالله i.e. the servant of God (Jarir), which is simply another rendering of the word جبریل. Thus the angel جبریل (Gabriel) is so called because he is the servant of God; he is the strong and brave servant of God; he looks after the repairing or reformation of the universe, he bestows God’s bounties on mankind and is a liberal giver.

In Islam جبریل has been described as the chief among the angels (Manthur) and was therefore selected by God to be the bearer of the Quranic message, the best and the last شریعة (Law) to descend from Heaven. Many commentators consider that جبریل (Gabriel) is synonymous with روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) spoken of in the Quran and the Hadith. Similarly, Gabriel has been spoken of as روح الامین (the Trusty Spirit) in the Quran (26:194).

Commentary:

The Jews had been invited to believe in the Quran, but they refused to accept it (v. 92 above) on the ground that it was said to have been brought by Gabriel while, according to them, the bearer of Divine Revelation was Michael, and not Gabriel (Musnad). The function of Gabriel, as we learn from the Bible, is to convey the messages of God to His servants (Dan. 8:16; 9:21; and Luke 1:19, 26. It is strange that Gabriel is mentioned in the Old Testament for the first time in Daniel and not earlier). The Quran, as the verse under comment points out, assigns the same function to Gabriel. But in some later writings of the Jews, he is described as "the angel of fire and thunder" (Enc. Bib. under Gabriel).

Such was the idea of the Jews in the days of the Holy Prophet. They looked upon Gabriel as an angel of wars, calamities and hardships (Jarir under 2:98). Muslim historians tell us that this idea had such a firm hold on the minds of the Jews that when they were told that the bearer of the Quranic revelation was Gabriel, they said: جبریل ذالك الذی ینزل بالحرب والقتال والعذاب- عدونا i.e. "Gabriel is the angel who is associated with war and bloodshed and punishment. He is our enemy." By saying this, they meant that they would not believe in a revelation brought by Gabriel (Musnad). The reason why the Jews bore enmity to Gabriel seems to be that they had fallen on evil days and as, according to them, Gabriel was the angel of war and punishment, therefore they ascribed their misfortunes to him. There is no doubt that the Talmudic traditions and the Targums were the origin of this notion which gained such a firm footing among Jews; otherwise originally the Bible declares Gabriel to be the angel of good tidings and of the Divine Word. It is evident that with the lapse of time legends and myths grew round the original truth, which was subsequently lost; and the Jews clung fast to their erroneous belief, which stood in the way of their accepting the Quran or, for that matter, any revelation coming through the agency of Gabriel.

The Quran has, in the verse under comment, brought forward four arguments in refutation of the Jewish plea for rejecting the Quran:

Firstly, that no angel can bring down any revelation unless he receives direct command from God. Hence the angel who brings the revelation, whether he is Gabriel or Michael or any other, is only a vehicle for the Divine Word; and even if Jewish tradition associates an angel with calamities, it cannot call into question the authority from which his message originates.

Secondly, that the revelation sent down to the Prophet of Islam is مصدق (in fulfilment) of the previous Books and in it all the prophecies about the promised Lawgiver contained in the earlier Scriptures find their fulfilment, which is a clear proof of its Divine origin.

Thirdly, that when it is practically established that the teachings of the Quran are a guidance for mankind, its acceptance becomes binding upon all right thinking men.

Fourthly, that the Quran contains teachings which, besides being right, are also بشری (bearers of glad tidings) to its followers and harbingers of God’s mercy and favours. Such revelation should not be rejected simply for the reason that it has been brought down by Gabriel.

Important Words:

تتلوا (followed). See 2:114

شیاطین (rebellious men). See 2:15.

علی (during) gives the sense of فی i.e. "in" or "during" (Aqrab & Mughni). It is also used to denote a hostile sense meaning "against", as one says خرج علیه i.e. he rebelled against him, or he went out against him with an army intending to fight (Wright). In this sense the phrase علی ملك سلیمان would mean, against the government of Solomon, or conspiring against his government.

سحر (falsehood and deception). In verbal senses سحرہ means, he deceived him; he coaxed him and involved him in trouble and deprived him of his understanding; he enchanted him. سحرالفضة means, he coated a piece of silver so as to make it look like gold. The noun سحر means, anything the source of which is not quite visible; showing off falsehood in the form of truth; a crafty device; craftiness; mischief; enchantment (Aqrab). It also means, producing what is false in the form of truth; any event of which the cause is hidden and which is imagined to be different from what it really is; embellishment by falsification and deceit (Lane). Thus every falsehood, deceit or crafty device which is meant to hide the real object from public view is included in the meaning of سحر.

ملكین (two angels) is the dual number from ملك (angel) for which see 2:31. Figuratively ملك is sometimes used to denote a handsome or holy person, as the Quran says, He (Joseph) is but a gracious angel, i.e. a handsome and pious youth (12:32). As in the verse under comment, the two angels are described as teaching something to the people, therefore the word cannot be taken in its literal significance, because angels do not live among men and do not generally have free intercourse with them (17:95, 96; 21:8). Thus in the present verse ملکین would not mean "two angels" in the literal sense of the word but "two holy men".

ھاروت (Harut) and ماروت (Marut) are both descriptive names. ھاروت is derived from ھرت which means, he tore up (Aqrab); hence ھاروت means, one who tears; the tearer. ماروت is derived from مرت which means, he broke (Aqrab & Lane). Thus ماروت means, one who breaks; the breaker. These names signify that the object of the appearance of these holy men was to 'tear' asunder and 'break' the glory and power of certain people.

فتنة (trial) means, the trial or means whereby the condition of a man may be demonstrated in respect of good or evil (Lane). They say فتن الصائغ الذھب i.e. the goldsmith melted the gold in the crucible so that its purity or impurity might be ascertained (Aqrab).

Commentary:

Many a legend unwarranted by the Quran and the Hadith—and even running contrary to them—clusters round this verse. It would be quite unreasonable to interpret it on the basis of those myths. For their true interpretation no external evidence is needed, the words being self-explanatory. It is clear from the verse itself that Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet were bent upon the same mischief which characterized them in the days of Solomon and during the days of their captivity in Babylon. The verse further indicates that the mischief-mongers of Solomon’s time were those "rebellious men" who called him an unbeliever. God says that those wicked men themselves, and not Solomon, lacked belief. Again, the verse tells us that these men taught their associates such signs as conveyed to them meanings quite different from those generally accepted, for the purpose of deceiving other people and concealing their own activities. All this leads to the conclusion that this verse alludes to those secret plots which the enemies of Solomon made against him, and by which they wished to break his empire. It is pointed out that now, in the time of the Holy Prophet, these people are resorting to the selfsame tactics, but that they will fail.

As the verse refers to a number of historical events, it is advisable to relate them here at some length.

When Jews saw that the power of Islam was steadily expanding and that no opposition from the Arabs had been able to arrest the progress of Muslims, they began to excite outsiders against them. At that time there were two large empires in the neighbourhood of Arabia: (1) The Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire; and (2) The Persian Empire. As Jews were already at enmity with the Roman Government, because they were in constant trouble under it, so it was only the Persian Government to which they could look for support. Harassed by the oppression of Christian rulers, they had taken refuge in Persia, where they enjoyed a good deal of religious freedom, and their religious centre shifted from Judah and Jerusalem to Babylonia (Hutchinson’s History of the Nations, p.550). In the seventh century of the Christian era, i.e., during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet, Jews suffered exceptionally cruel persecution at the hands of the Christian Emperors of the Eastern Roman Empire. "Both Phocas and Heraclius", says the Historians’ History of the World (vol. 7, p. 175), "attempted to exterminate the Jewish religion, and if possible to put an end to their national existence. Heraclius not only practised every species of cruelty himself to effect this object within the bounds of his own dominions, but he even made the forced conversion or banishment of the Jews a prominent feature in his diplomacy." So, in the time of the Holy Prophet the only government to which the Jews could look for help was that of Persia, where their co-religionists enjoyed much influence, especially in the reign of Chosroes II (Jew. Enc., ix. 648).

Consequently, when the Jews saw that their efforts to check the progress of Islam had totally failed, they took to exciting the Persian Court against the Holy Prophet by various means; and as a result, Chosroes II issued orders to the Governor of Yemen to send to him the Arabian claimant as a captive. But when the envoys of the Governor came to the Holy Prophet, he asked them to see him the next day, when he told them that God had informed him that He had their king murdered. Thereupon they returned and related this incident to the Governor. A few days later, the Governor received a letter from Siroes, the son of Chosroes II, to the effect that he had killed his father on account of the latter’s tyranny and that the Governor should, on his behalf, renew the oath of allegiance from all the Chiefs of Yemen; and that the order of his father regarding an Arab should be considered as cancelled (Tabari, iii. 1573-1574).

Some historians, including Tabari himself, hold that it was the letter of the Holy Prophet to the king of Persia inviting him to Islam that was the occasion of his orders for the apprehension of the Holy Prophet. But on comparison of the dates of the above-mentioned events, this turns out to be a mistaken view. For, as we read in Zurqani (ii. 211-212), the letter in question was despatched from Medina on the first of Muharram, 7 A.H.–a date corresponding to 12th April, 628 A.D. (Lane under ھجرة); whereas Chosroes II, who sent orders for the arrest of the Holy Prophet, had been assassinated on the 29th of February, 628 A.D. (Historians’ History of the World, viii. 95). Thus the view that the letter of the Holy Prophet was the cause of Chosroes’ orders is quite untenable; and the only possible cause of Chosroes’ ignominious orders was that his ears had been poisoned by malicious reports, a fact admitted by Sir William Muir (The Life of Mahomet, p. 370). It is to these efforts of the Jews that the Quran alludes in the verse under comment.

The verse also points out that it was foolish on the part of the Jews to suppose that they would succeed in that way. Their attention is invited to the fact that they had already been responsible for two secret plots. The first was against Solomon, when some members of their community turned rebels, hatched plots and stirred up bitter feeling against him by calling him an infidel; whereas the infidels were those who opposed him, hurled imputations at him, and set up against him secret societies in which secret signs and symbols were taught. The Jews, however, themselves reaped the ill-reward of their sinister schemes: their power, as a consequence, fell into decay, and at last they became so powerless that they were driven into exile towards Babylon. This account of Jewish secret societies and conspiracies and treacherous signs and symbols, as alluded to in this verse, finds corroboration in the Bible (1 Kings 11:1-6), where we read that the charge of idol-worship was spread against Solomon. An account of his enemies is found in I Kings 11:14, 23, 26, and a reference to secret plots is met with in II Chron. 10: 2-4 where we learn that the Jews had sent for Jeroboam, a bitter enemy of Solomon, immediately after his death and had attempted to make Solomon’s son agree to some demands of theirs, involving certain imputations against Solomon, before his accession to the throne. We learn about the secret signs from I Kings 11:29-32, in which the ten tribes of the Israelites are likened to ten pieces of a garment, and Jeroboam is told that these ten tribes were on his side against Solomon; and so it proved to be, for on the death of Solomon, these ten tribes made Jeroboam their king (I Kings 12:20). Again, the reference of the Quran to the infidelity of Solomon’s enemies finds corroboration in II Chron. 11:15, from which we learn that his enemies, who falsely charged him with unbelief, themselves fell into idol-worship when they rose to power.

Besides the testimony of the Bible, there is other evidence to show that in the days of Solomon a secret society was at work against him. An old tradition, current among medieval Freemasons, indicates that Solomon was envious of the superior intelligence of Hiram, the chief architect who built the Temple at Jerusalem. He is said to have attempted to kill the great Mason by having him thrown into a tank of molten brass, but he was saved by the spirit of his ancestor, Cain, who prophesied that at last his people would get the better of their enemy. Solomon, however, as the tradition goes, had him afterwards put to death. It is said of him that he had fixed certain secret signs which were a sort of mystery known only to him and his associates (Secret Societies of the World, Volume II, pp. 1-8; as the original book could not be obtained, the reference is to an Urdu translation). We further learn from this book that before the period of the Accepted Masons, the same signs used in all the Lodges were current among the Masons of Solomon’s time (p. 11) and that at the time of initiation, the Hiram incident was related to the new member (pp. 29, 30). However incredible the story as a whole may be, it points at least to the conclusion that in one way or other, secret societies were associated with Solomon’s reign and were much in vogue in his time.

The second occasion when, according to the Quran, the Israelites had resort to secret societies was during their captivity in Babylon. But this time they were not acting against any Prophet but were, on the other hand, working under the leadership of two inspired personages, who were, in obedience to divine command, trying to bring about the deliverance of the Israelites. Their mission was to "tear asunder" and "break down" the empire of the enemies of the Israelites. These holy men told new members, at the time of initiation, that they were a sort of trial from God, serving to differentiate between the good and the bad, and that the Israelites should not therefore refuse to believe what they said, because this would lead them to infidelity. In their teachings they drew a distinction between males and females, confining membership to males only (this is an old practice found among most secret societies). It is also stated that the disciples of these holy men directed their activities against only those for whose chastisement they were commissioned by God.

In this narration, the Quran refers to the days when King Nebuchadnezzar brought the Jews as captives into Babylon and kept them there for a long time. The holy men referred to in the verse under comment were Haggai, the Prophet, and Zechariah, the son of Iddo (Ezra 5:1). When Cyrus, King of Media and Persia, rose to power, the Israelites entered into a secret agreement with him and greatly facilitated his conquest of Babylon. In return for this service, he not only allowed them to return to their own country but also helped in the rebuilding of the Temple (Historians’ History of the World, ii. 126).

After stating that the Jews of the Holy Prophet’s time were following the same course which was adopted by the rebels of Solomon’s days and which was later adopted by the Jews under two holy men in Babylon, it was necessary here to state the ultimate upshot of their efforts against the Holy Prophet, because on the two previous occasion’s their efforts had met with different results. On the first occasion the conspiracy of the Israelites, being directed against a Prophet of God, had ended in the total loss of their prestige and finally in their banishment to Babylon. On the second occasion, they took a similar course under two inspired personages and were successful. Hence, in order to indicate whether the efforts of the Jews against the Holy Prophet would meet with failure, as they did in the days of Solomon, or with success as in Babylon, the Quran says: these people are learning that which would harm them and do them no good; hinting that they will not be successful as in Babylon. Accordingly, the consequence of their hostile efforts against the Holy Prophet was that Chosroes, their only supporter, met his death at the hands of his son, and they themselves were exiled from Arabia in the time of ‘Umar. In the concluding portion of the verse, God adds: And they have certainly known that he who trafficks therein has no share of good in the Hereafter, meaning that a mischievous plotter never succeeds ultimately. The last clause, had they but known, throws a flood of light on how intensely God desires that His creatures should always take the right course and not be misled by mischievous people.

4:166; 6:49; 18:57.

Commentary:

In the preceding verses different classes of people––believers and disbelievers together with their sub-divisions––have been mentioned. The verse under comment not only traces the genesis of these classes but also hints to Muslims that, just as the world began with all people as one community, God now wishes them again to become one community through the Holy Prophet who, unlike previous Prophets, came with a universal mission.

The clause, Mankind were one community, may mean: (1) mankind, i.e. all men were originally one people; (2) all disbelievers are one people. In the first-mentioned case, the verse would mean that, in the beginning of the world, all mankind were one people. They had no social rules, no polity, no civic laws. Then in the course of time, differences arose among them with regard to these things. So God sent to them Prophets to guide them how to live good and useful lives.

In the second case, the meaning of the clause would be that before the advent of a Prophet all men are like one people in the sense that they are all disbelievers, and disbelief and wrongdoing reign supreme in the world. But when a Prophet appears, all people, in spite of their mutual differences, form one united front against him. This meaning is in harmony with the well-known saying of the Holy Prophet, الکفر ملة واحدة i.e. all disbelievers (to whatever creed or religion they may belong) are one people.

The clause, and sent down with them the Book, does not mean that God revealed a separate Book to every Prophet. In that case, "Books", instead of "the Book", would have been the appropriate word. In fact, the "sending down of a Book" to a Prophet does not always mean the actual revelation of it to him in person. The Quran uses similar words with regard to those Prophets who were not the direct recipients of any revealed Book (6:115, 157, 158; 3:73, 200; 29:47; 21:11). The clause, therefore, only means that every Prophet has received a Book from God, whether it was revealed to him direct or whether it was revealed to a previous Prophet whose mission he was called upon to serve.

The "difference" referred to in the verse at two separate places signifies two different kinds of disagreement. Before the advent of a Prophet people differ among themselves about false beliefs and idolatrous practices. But after the appearance of the truth, they begin to differ with regard to the truth itself. The advent of a Prophet, however, does not, as may be wrongly imagined, create differences. The differences are already there; they merely assume a new form. But whereas before a Prophet has made his appearance the people, in spite of their differences, look like one people, they become divided into two distinct camps, believers and disbelievers, after he has appeared.

The clause, out of envy towards one another, points to the important fact that invariably the root-cause of the rejection of a Prophet is jealousy. Disbelievers cannot reconcile themselves to the idea that an ordinary person from among them, generally inferior to many of them in wealth, power or social status, should be made their teacher and leader. Disbelievers also consider it below their dignity to ally themselves with a community a large majority of whose members are of humble origin, as is often the case with the early followers of Divine Messengers.

The clause, Now has Allah, by His command, guided believers to the truth in regard to which they (the unbelievers)differed, refers to the advent of the Holy Prophet who was raised by God with a universal mission to remove the differences of all the peoples of the earth. The expression باذنه translated as "by His command" may also mean "according to His eternal decree". In the beginning of the world God willed that the final Law-giving Prophet should come with a universal mission and should constitute, as it were, the zenith of the system of النبوة or prophecy. Says the Holy Prophet "I was a Prophet of God while Adam was yet in the making between the body and the soul" (Tirmidhi).

Viewed collectively, the verse describes five different stages through which mankind has passed: (1) When there was unity among the people, all forming one community. This was in the beginning of the human race. (2) When, with the increase in population and the extension of interests and the complexity of problems confronting man, people began to differ among themselves. (3) When God raised Prophets among different peoples and different countries to show them the right path and revealed His will to the various contending sections. (4) When the very revelation of God sent to remove differences was made a cause of difference by the mischievous people. (5) When God finally raised the Holy Prophet with His last Book and a universal mission, calling upon entire humanity to rally round his banner. Thus a beautiful circle was completed and the world which began with unity was designed to end with it.

60:11.

Important Words:

تنکحوا––tankihu (marry) and تنکحوا––tunkihu (give in marriage) are both derived from نکح. They say نکح المطرالارض i.e. the rain fell on the earth and became mixed with the soil. نکح امرأة means, he married a woman. نکح زوجته means, he went in unto his wife. نکح المرأة امرء means, the woman married a man. انکح المرأة زیدا means, he gave the woman in marriage to Zaid. Thus نکاح means, both (1) marriage and (2) coition with one’s wife. The Quran itself uses the word in the latter sense in 2:231 (Aqrab & Mufradat).

مشرك (an idolater) is derived from شرك. They say شرکه فیه meaning, he shared the thing with him; he became his co-partner in it. اشرکه فی الامر means, he made him his co-partner in the affair. اشرك الیه means, he attributed to, or set up with, him a co-partner. شریك means, a sharer, or a co-partner, or an associate, or a colleague, Thus مشرك means, one who attributes to, or sets up with, God a co-partner or co-partners, allotting to the latter all or some of the attributes of the former. شرك means, attributing to, or setting up with, God co-partners idolatry (Lane). شرك is of two kinds: شرك عظیم (the greater idolatry) signifying belief in a person or thing as being co-partner with God, and شرك صغیر (the lesser idolatry), i.e. ascribing to some person or thing any of the attributes of God without looking upon him or it as His co-partner (Mufradat). Other relevant terms are شرك جلی i.e. manifest idolatry, and شرك خفی i.e. hidden idolatry; and شرك فی الذات i.e. believing one to be a co-partner with God in His person, and شرك فی الصفات i.e. ascribing any of the attributes of God to someone. The term مشرکین (idolaters) is generally confined to such peoples as set up co-partners with God and do not believe in any revealed Book.

Commentary:

The question of marriage with "idolatrous women" is intimately connected with the subject of war, for it is during war that Muslims, being away from their homes for a considerable time, are liable to be tempted to contract marriages with such women. This the Quran strictly disallows in the verse under comment, which also forbids the giving of believing women in marriage to idolatrous men. The prohibition is based on religions as well as on moral and social grounds. An idolatrous husband is bound to exercise an extremely baneful influence not only on his wife but on his children as well, whereas an idolatrous wife is sure to ruin the early training of the offspring. Moreover, when a believing man has an idolatrous wife or vice versa, their ideas, beliefs, culture and outlook on life being widely different, there cannot possibly be harmony or concord between the two and their life is sure to become miserable, if they possess any attachment whatever for their religion. Again Islam, (submission to One God) and shirk (setting up partners with God) being poles apart, there can be no real contact or permanent intermixing between the two. In this connection, it may be noted that Islam allows, though it certainly does not encourage, the marriage of a Muslim with a woman belonging to the People of the Book who are decidedly nearer to Islam (5:6). But of this we will speak when we come to the relevant verses.

The words, until they believe, appear to be redundant at first sight; for, if marriage with an idolatrous person is prohibited, it is evident that this prohibition will automatically cease to operate when an idolatrous person converted to Islam. On deeper thought, however, the words, until they believe, prove to be most rightly placed. They have indeed been used to remind Muslims of their duty pertaining to the conversion of idolatrous people to Islam. The words also contain a veiled prophecy that the time was fast coming when idolatry would become extinct in Arabia.

The expression باذنه (by His command) when used with regard to a certain action of God signifies, according to the Quranic idiom, that God has provided or intends to provide extraordinary means for the accomplishment of the thing aimed at. So is the case here, the clause signifying that Allah’s call to Heaven and to forgiveness is not an empty announcement but that He has made special arrangements to bring about the desired end. It is further interesting to note that the word جنة and مغفرة both convey the sense of covering up a thing, the idea being that God’s favours and His forgiveness will be so liberal and so generous as to cover or overwhelm believers.

3:124; 8:66.

Important Words:

نـھر (river). The verb نـھر means, it flowed with force. They say نـھر الدام i.e. the blood poured forth with force. نـھر الماء means, the water poured forth in the land and cut out a channel for itself. النـھر (an-nahr) means, a body of flowing water, i.e. stream or river; channel through which such water flows. النھر (an-nahr) means, (1) plenty and abundance; (2) a river channel; (3) a river (Aqrab).

الجنود (forces) is the plural of الجـند. They say جند الجنود i.e. he collected or gathered together his forces. الجند means, a force or an army ; helpers (Aqrab).

جالوت (Jalut) is derived from جال i.e. he ran about without stopping. They say جال الفرس فی المیدان i.e. the horse galloped about in the field, sometimes going this way and sometimes that way. جال القوم جولة means, the people drew back and then made a joint onslaught. جال بعضھم علی بعض means, they assailed or assaulted one another in battle, etc. (Aqrab & Taj). Thus جالوت is an attributive name meaning, a person or a people who is unruly and moves about attacking and assaulting others. In the Bible the parallel name is Goliath (1 Sam. 17:4) which means, "running, ravaging and destroying spirits" or "a leader or a giant" (Enc. Bib. and Jew. Enc.). The Bible uses the name about one individual but really the word signifies a party of ruthless freebooters, though it may also be applied to certain individuals symbolizing the characteristics of the party. The Quran appears to have used it in both these senses in the verses under comment.

Commentary:

Self-control and discipline are the key to most successes, and possession of these qualities is necessary to successfully meet God’s trials. The present verse speaks of one such trial. The exception of a handful of water was made with a twofold purpose: (1) to afford the marching force an essential physical relief by permitting them to moisten their parched throats, but at the same time to prevent them from drinking freely, which would have damped their spirits and made them negligent of the enemy; and (2) to make the trial all the more tantalizing, for in many cases it is easier to withhold from a thing altogether than to use it in a strictly limited measure. The Bible mentions the incident in Judg. 7:5-6.

The concluding clause, i.e. how many a small party has triumphed over a large party by Allah’s command, contains a mighty lesson of hope for the righteous. When God wills a thing, numbers do not matter. The truth of this statement has been borne out by history in all ages.

The Jalut spoken of in this verse does not signify a person but a people, while the word جنود (forces) points to the helpers and associates of these people. The Bible refers to Jalut under the name of Midianites who pillaged and harassed the Israelites and destroyed their land for several years (Judg. 6:1-6). The Amalekites and all the eastern tribes assisted the Midianites in their raids (Judg. 6:1) and formed "the forces" referred to in the verse.

22:41.

Commentary:

Talut or Gideon was able to defeat Jalut or the Midianites and curb their rising spirits, but their crushing defeat to which the verse refers as the killing of Jalut came in the time of David about two hundred years afterwards. This is why, whereas the defeat of Jalut by Talut has been spoken of by the Quran as ھزم i.e. routing, the complete crushing of their power has been referred to by the world قتل i.e. killing. The Bible speaks of the man defeated by David as Goliath (1 Sam. 17:4), which is similar to Jalut. Probably the attributive name given by the Quran to the people was also borne by their leader in the time of David.

The last clause of the verse, i.e. and had it not been for Allah’s repelling men, some of them by the others, the earth would have become filled with disorder, gives, in a nutshell, the whole philosophy of all wars of truth and justice. War should be resorted to only as a means of checking disorder and restoring peace, and not for creating disorder and breaking peace. The clause also serves as a criterion between Muslims and their adversaries and beautifully points to the party destined for final victory in the struggle.

3:3; 20:112; 25:59.

See 2:49.

20:111.

Important Words:

الحی (the Living), of which the verb form is حیی i.e. he lived or he had life, is an attribute of God, signifying that God is the only Being Who is deathless and lives by Himself—He needs no support, He is eternal and everlasting (Mufradat & Lane). This is "life" in the truest sense of the word, and such life is enjoyed by God alone.

القیوم (Self-Subsisting and All-Sustaining) is another attribute of God. The word is derived from قام i.e. he stood erect. القیوم means, the Being Who not only stands by Himself, requiring the support of none, but Who supports all others (Mufradat & Aqrab).

سنة (slumber) is the noun-infinitive from وسن i.e. sleep or slumber took hold of him. سنة means, heaviness of limbs and eyes preceding sleep; sleep or slumber itself; negligence or unguardedness (Aqrab)

کرسی (knowledge) is derived from کرس. They say کرس البناء i.e. he raised the walls of a house. کرسی means, a throne or a chair or a stool, in fact, anything used for sitting on; buttress of a wall; knowledge; dominion and power. Hence, الکراسیmeans, men of learning (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

This verse is known as آیة الکرسی (Ayatul-Kursi) and is considered to be one of the most important verses, beautifully describing the Unity of God and His great attributes. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said that the Ayatul-Kursi is the loftiest verse in the Quran (Muslim). The verse supplies an answer to an implied question. Even if Muslims made the sacrifices required of them in 2:255, the task before them was so great that, based on worldly calculations, there appeared no hope of success for them. How then is the promised victory to come? The verse under comment provides a telling answer. The world was not without a Master. The destinies of its people were controlled by a Being Whose power was limitless, Whose knowledge knew no bounds, Who was ever vigilant, ever watchful, in Whose hands were the entire resources of the earth and the heavens. If such a Being willed the triumph of a party, who was there to thwart His way? The promised victory must come.

For a detailed treatment of the subject of intercession see note on 2:49. The reason why no one shall be allowed to intercede for any person except with the permission of God is that nobody knows what is in the minds of men and consequently none is in a position to intercede for another. God alone knows the secrets of men’s hearts and hence there can be no intercession except by His permission, for He alone knows who is deserving of it.

The clause, they encompass nothing of His knowledge, means that God’s knowledge is unlimited; while the knowledge of others, whoever they may be, is limited; even Prophets know no more than what is apparent of the spiritual condition of their followers.

The word کرسی (knowledge) may signify either knowledge or power; both give equally good meanings and are almost equally applicable. Allah’s knowledge is as extensive as His power. Knowledge and power are indeed the two great pillars on which the throne of God and, for that matter, the controlling power of everyone in authority rests.

43:60; 61:7.

5:111.

Important Words:

اخلق (I fashion out) is derived from خلق. They say خلقه meaning: (1) he measured it, or he determined its measure or proportion (e.g. they say خلق الادیم meaning, he determined the leather with a view to cutting it); (2) he designed or fashioned or planned it; (3) he made it according to a certain measure or design; (4) He (God) produced or created or brought into existence a thing or being without there being any previously existing pattern or model or similitude, i.e.He originated it; (5) he forged or fabricated a story or a lie; (6) he made a thing smooth, even and equable (Lane & Lisan).

الطین (clay) is derived from طان i.e. he made his work or deed good; he performed or executed his work or deed well. طانه الله علی الخیر means, God created him with a disposition or adaptation to that which is good, i.e. created him with a good natural disposition. طانه means, he coated or plastered it with clay or mud. طین means, clay, earth, mould, soil or mud. طینةmeans, any material sub-stance of which anything having form consists; the natural constitution or disposition of a thing. The term ابن الطین is sometimes used to signify Adam (Lane). Figuratively الطین may signify such persons as possess docile natures suitable for being moulded into any good shape like pliable clay.

الطیر (bird) which is the plural of طائر (a bird) and is also sometimes used as singular is derived from طار i.e. (1) he or it flew or moved in the air by means of wings; (2) he or it ran or moved quickly or fled. طار عقله means, his reason fled. طارت الابل means, the she-camel conceived. طار لکل منھم سھمه means, the share of each came to him. الطیر or طیر is both the plural of طائر (bird) and the noun infinitive from the verb طار. So طیر means: (1) flying birds, insects, etc.; (2) a flying bird, insect, etc., for طیر is sometimes also used as singular; (3) as an infinitive noun طیر would also give the different meanings conveyed by its verbal forms (Lane).

ھیئة (manner) is the noun infinitive from ھاء. They say ھاء الرجل meaning, the man was or became of good form and appearance or other properties denoted by ھیئة, the noun infinitive. ھاء الیه means, he desired or longed to see or find him or it. ھیأه means, he gave him or he made him have a garb or guise, etc.; he prepared or arranged it and put it in a good state. تھیأ لامر means, he became prepared for the thing, or the matter. ھیئة means, form, fashion, appearance or figure; guise or garb; state, condition or case; manner, mode or quality (Aqrab & Lane).

ابری (I heal) is derived from بری i.e. he was or became clear or free from a thing. بری من المرض means, he became free from disease, i.e. he recovered from it. بری من الدین means, he became clear of debt. ابرأه means, he cured or healed him of the disease; he declared him innocent or free from the defect attributed to him; he acquitted him (Aqrab & Lane).

الاکمه (blind) is derived from کمه i.e. he became blind; or his eyes did not see at night. کمه فلان also means, he was or became deprived of reason or understanding. کمه النھار means, the day became dark, i.e. the sun became overcast with clouds. اکمه means, one who cannot see at night; one who is born blind; one who becomes blind afterwards; one who is deprived of reason and understanding (Aqrab & Mufradat).

ابرص (leprous) is derived from برص i.e. he was or became affected with برص (leprosy) viz. a sort of whiteness that appears upon parts of the body by reason of a corrupt state of health or constitution. The moon is sometimes called الابرص because of its white hue. ارض برصاء means, a land of which the herbage has become depastured at several places so that it has become bare thereof (Aqrab & Lane). A variety of leprosy of the Hebrews (probably identical with modern leprosy) was characterized by the presence of smooth, shining, depressed white patches or scales, the hair on which participated in the whiteness, while the skin and adjacent flesh became insensible (Webster).

تاکلون (you will eat) is derived from اکل i.e. he ate; he ate up; he devoured; he consumed; he wore away, etc. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, امرت بقریة تاکل القری i.e. I have been commanded to migrate to a town (Medina) which shall devour, (i.e. subdue and conquer) other towns (Lane).

Commentary:

With this verse begins an account of Jesus’ ministry as a Prophet of God. By using the words, a Messenger to the Children of Israel, the verse makes it clear that Jesus’ mission was confined to the House of Israel. He was not a universal Messenger. In fact, as the Gospel itself states, he expressly ordered his disciples not to preach his message to any but the Israelites: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel' " (Matt. 10:5, 6). It cannot be argued that this prohibition was confined to the lifetime of Jesus and that after his death his disciples were at liberty to preach to all the nations of the world, for this supposition is belied by the Gospel itself: "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the son of man be come" (Matt. 10:23). According to this verse, the followers of Jesus were enjoined to confine their preaching to the Children of Israel till the time of his second coming. The same injunction is contained in Matt. 15: 24; 18: 11, 12; 19: 28; Acts 3: 25, 26; 13: 46; Luke 19: 10; 15: 4; 22: 28-30.

Only in Matt. 28:19 there appears some ambiguity about the mission of Jesus but on deeper reflection it becomes clear that here too it is the tribes of Israel that are meant, and not all peoples and all nations. The early disciples understood these words of Jesus in this very sense: "Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only" (Acts 11: 19).

For a clear understanding of the other parts of the present verse, i.e. making birds of clay, etc. it is necessary to remember that it was Jesus’ habit to talk in parables—a way of talking which was predicted in the previous Scriptures to be a characteristic of his speech. Says the Gospel: "All these things spake Jesus unto the multitudes in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables" (Matt. 13:34, 35). Later historians also have referred to this peculiar characteristic of Jesus: "In his popular addresses Jesus would make free use of parables. He spoke in parables to all classes but especially to the people. Without parables he was not wont to speak to them" (Enc. Bib. under Jesus). With this torchlight of history in our hands, it does not remain difficult for us to understand or explain the "signs" of Jesus as mentioned in the present verse.

There is no mention in the Bible of the miracle of creating birds popularly believed to have been performed by Jesus. If Jesus had really created birds, there is no reason why the Bible should have omitted to mention it, particularly when the creation of birds was a miracle the like of which had never been shown before by any Messenger of God. The mention of such a miracle would certainly have established his superiority over other Prophets and would have lent some support to the claim to divinity which has been foisted upon him by his later followers. Of the different meanings of خلق i.e. measuring, determining, designing or fashioning; making and creating, etc. given under Important Words above, it is in the former sense that this word has been used in this verse. In the sense of "creating'', the act of khalq has not been attributed in the Quran to any other being or thing except God. In fact, the Quran has laid the greatest emphasis on this exclusive attribute of God Who has been again and again declared to be the sole "Creator" of all things. All others to whom creation has been attributed are declared by the Quran to have been themselves created by God and to be devoid of all power to create anything (e.g. see 13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41 and 46:5). Even the silly notion that the power of creating though the unshared prerogative of God, might have been temporarily delegated by Him to another is rejected by the Quran (39:30 & 16:72).

In the light of the above explanation, and keeping in view the figurative sense of "clay", for which see Important Words above, the clause, I will fashion out for you a creation out of clay after the manner of a bird, then I will breathe into it (a new spirit) and it will become a soaring being, would mean that if ordinary men of humble origin but possessing the inherent power of growth and development came into contact with Jesus and accepted his message they would undergo a complete transformation in their lives. From men grovelling in the dust and not seeing beyond their material cares and mundane concerns, they would become converted into birds soaring high into the lofty regions of the spiritual firmament. And this is exactly what happened. The humble and despised fishermen of Galilee, under the impact of the ennobling teaching of their Master, began soaring like birds, preaching to the world of Israel the word of God and bravely facing all sorts of hardships and privations and making sacrifices that should adorn the history of any nation. Says Jesus: "I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, and what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?" (Matt. 6:25, 26).

The miracle relating to the making of birds from clay may be interpreted in another way as well. In the time of Jesus people had a special liking for the practice of occult sciences —hypnotism, mesmerism, etc. So it is possible that God granted him special power of this kind in order to impress the people and make them believe in him. In this case the sign of making birds would mean that Jesus made small clay models of birds and then through a sort of mesmerism made them appear to fly in the air. But this did not convert them into real living birds; for as soon as the influence was removed, they fell down to the ground like so many lumps of earth. This miracle of Jesus was more or less like the miracle of the rod of Moses which was temporarily made to look like a real serpent but was actually not so. But whatever the significance of the sign, it was performed, as the verse clearly puts it, by the command of Allah, and Jesus possessed no power of creation. (For fuller description see Izalah’-e-Auham by Ahmad, the Promised Messiah).

As for healing the blind and the leprous, it appears from the Bible that persons suffering from certain diseases (leprosy, etc.) were considered unclean and were, therefore, not allowed to come in contact with other men. If, therefore, the word ابری be taken to mean, "I declare to be free", the clause would signify that the legal or social disabilities and disadvantages under which persons suffering from such maladies laboured were removed by Jesus. If, however, the word be interpreted as "I heal," then the clause would mean that Jesus used to heal persons suffering from these diseases. But as indicated above, Jesus used to speak in metaphors. So just as the "creation" spoken of is spiritual creation, the diseases mentioned are spiritual diseases. The Prophets of God are spiritual physicians; they give eyes to those that have lost spiritual sight, and they give hearing to those who are spiritually deaf, and they restore life to those who are spiritually dead (see also Matt. 13:15). In this case the word اکمه (blind or one who is blind at night) would stand for such person as possesses the light of faith but being weak, cannot stand trials. He sees in the daytime, i.e. so long as there are no trials and the sun of faith shines forth unclouded; but when the night comes on, i.e. when there are trials, and sacrifices have to be made, he loses his spiritual vision and stands still (cf. 2:21). Similarly, the word ابرص(leprous) would, in the spiritual sense, stand for one who is imperfect in faith, having patches of diseased skin among healthy ones. But even if these words be taken in their physical sense, Jesus is proved to possess no peculiar power. All Prophets heal diseases and ailments by the power of prayer. In this case, however, the word اکمه (blind) would be taken in the sense of one who cannot see at night or one whose sight is weak.

The clause, I will quicken the dead, does not mean that Jesus actually brought the dead to life. Those actually dead are never restored to life in this world. Such a belief is diametrically opposed to the whole Quranic teaching (23:100, 101; 21:96; 39:59, 60; 2:29; 40:12; 45:27). The sayings of the Holy Prophet are also clear on this point. For instance, it is related that when Jabir’s father, who was a Companion of the Holy Prophet, was killed in the Battle of Uhud and the lad was much grieved, the Holy Prophet consolingly told him that God had lovingly spoken to his father in the other world and had asked him to beg of Him anything he liked, for that would be given to him. Thereupon Jabir’s father said, "Grant me, my Lord, another lease of life on earth that I may again be killed in Thy way". God replied, "I would certainly have done so, but the word has gone forth from Me that the dead shall not be sent back to the earth" (Tirmidhi & Majah).

That the so-called dead who are reported to have been raised by Jesus were not actually dead is clear from the Gospels as well. The incident described in Matt. 9:23-25 sheds some light on it. As a matter of fact, Prophets are only sent to give life to those who are spiritually dead. Jesus, Moses, Abraham and, above all, the Holy Prophet of Islam brought about a complete change in the lives of their followers. This, in religious language, is termed raising the dead to life. Literally, too, the word موتی (the dead) does not necessarily mean those physically dead. It is also used about those who are dead spiritually, morally or intellectually. The Quran freely speaks of the quickening of the dead in the sense of granting life to the spiritually dead (e.g. 3:28; 6:123; 8:43; 25:50; 36:71). In 8:25 the Holy Prophet himself has been spoken of as giving life to the dead. Says the Quran: O ye who believe, respond to Allah and the Messenger when he calls you that he may give you life. Here it is spiritual and intellectual life that is meant, for Muslims do not believe that the Holy Prophet ever brought an actually dead person to life.

The miracles of Jesus, as mentioned in this verse, have been stated in a natural order. First of all is mentioned the change in the outlook and way of life of those that came in contact with him. From men of the world, they became men of God. They rose from the dust and began soaring in the air. Then are mentioned some of the more common spiritual diseases of which Jesus cured the people; the blind were given spiritual sight and those having diseased skins were healed. Finally, the spiritually dead are declared to have received through Jesus a new life. Thus not only a natural order but a sort of progressive order is found in the verse, the climax, so far as individual reformation is concerned, being reached with the miracle relating to the quickening of the dead. But if the verse be interpreted literally, no arrangement seems to exist in the order in which the miracles are described here, i.e. (1) the creation of birds out of clay; (2) the healing of the blind; (3) the healing of those suffering from leprosy, i.e. those who had patches of disease on their skin; and (4) the raising of the dead to life.

The true climax, however, reaches in the miracle or sign mentioned in the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat and what you will store up in your houses. According to Abul-Baqa’, the words نبأ (news) and انبأ (he gave the news) are used in the Quran for announcing matters of great importance (Kulliyyat). This shows that, what Jesus is here represented as announcing to the people, are matters of supreme im-portance to his followers. The language of the verse being parabolic, the word تاکلون (you will eat) will be taken figuratively, mean, "you will subdue or conquer" (see under Important Words above). Thus the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat, would mean, "I will let you know what you will subdue or conquer", i.e. "I will announce to you the conquests you are destined to make in future". The other expression, i.e. I will also let you know what you will store up in your houses, would mean, "I will let you know the deeds which you should or would leave behind for posterity".

The entire clause may have yet another meaning. It may mean that Jesus told his disciples: (1) what they should eat, i.e. what they should spend to meet their physical needs, and (2) what they should store up, i.e. what they should lay up as a spiritual treasure in Heaven. In other words, Jesus told them that their earnings should be honestly and lawfully acquired and that they should spend their savings in the way of God, having no thought for the morrow which should be left to God (see Matt. 6:25, 26 as quoted above).

3:149; 4:135; 42:21.

Commentary:

The preceding verse spoke of the possible death of the Holy Prophet. But that was mentioned only as a matter of principle. Otherwise, how could the Holy Prophet, whom God had promised to protect, die except by His leave? Whenever death comes, it comes with the permission of God; but that permission could not be yet given in the case of the Holy Prophet. There is a fixed time for it and the enmity or the secret machinations of disbelievers could not hasten that time.

Commentary:

The word "promise" occurring in the verse refers to the general promise of victory and success repeatedly given to Muslims.

The clause, when you became lax, refers to the party of archers posted at the rear of the Muslim army at Uhud, and signifies that they could not resist the temptation of taking part in the actual fighting and in collecting the booty, and their failure to control that desire was an act of cowardice on their part. It is indeed the heart which is the seat of true bravery and courage. Says the Holy Prophet: "Strong is not he who overthrows his rival in a wrestling match, but strong is he who controls himself in times of anger" (Bukhari ch. on Adab). The word, order, in the clause, you disagreed among yourselves concerning the order, may refer either to the order of the Holy Prophet given to the party of archers not to leave their station without his permission or to the import of the order, i.e. whether the Holy Prophet really meant them to stay there even after the battle had been won, some saying that he did mean that and others alleging that he did not.

The words, you disobeyed, signify that they paid no heed to their leader, ‘Abdullah bin Jubair, who, in compliance with the order of the Prophet, directed them not to quit the place, in spite of the fact that victory was within sight. They could not control themselves and so brought misfortune for the Muslims.

The words, those who desired the present world etc., refer to the party that abandoned the place at which they had been stationed. The Arabic clause may also be rendered as meaning that some members of the party desired the nearer thing, i.e. taking part in fighting and collecting the booty, while others (viz. ‘Abdullah bin Jubair and those of his comrades who did not quit their post) desired what was farther off, i.e. they thought of the ultimate consequence of disobeying the command of the Holy Prophet. Some were short-sighted, while others were far-sighted.

The words, He turned you away from them, signify that God imposed the reverse in order to make this incident a lesson for the future.

Commentary:

The "meeting of the parties" refers to the Battle of Uhud which is under review here.

The clause لیعلم المؤمنین rendered as, that He might distinguish the believers, does not mean, "that He might know the believers", as generally translated. According to Quranic idiom, the expression simply means that Allah might mark out, or make known, or distinguish believers from disbelievers. See also note on 3:141.

4:111.

Commentary:

It is sometimes sought to be inferred from the words, We have sent no Messenger but that he should be obeyed by the command of Allah, that though a Prophet is to be always obeyed by the people to whom he preaches his message, yet he himself gives allegiance to no other Prophet nor can he be subject to the Law of any other Prophet. This is evidently a very wrong inference. The simple and straightforward meaning of the words is only this that when God sends a Prophet, He means that those to whom he is sent should obey him. But the fact that a Prophet is the object of other people’s obedience cannot preclude the possibility of his being himself subordinate to, and a follower of another Prophet. A governor is sent to a province to be obeyed but that does not mean that he is not subordinate to the Governor General, if any, or to the king. According to the Quran, Aaron was a subordinate Prophet to Moses. This is why, when Moses went up to the Mount leaving Aaron behind him to look after the Israelites, and the Israelites took to worshipping the calf, Moses severely reprimanded him on his return, saying "Hast thou then disobeyed my command?" (20:94). In this connection see also 5:45.

2:258; 14:2; 33:44; 57:10; 65:12.

Commentary:

The pronoun in یھدی به (thereby does Allah guide) may refer either to the "Book" or the "Light" spoken of in the previous verse. The use of the word سبل (paths) in the plural number indicates that just as there are diverse kinds of difficulties and obstacles that beset the path of a spiritual wayfarer, so God has also provided for him many means of deliverance and safe arrival at his destination. السلام (peace) being also one of the names of God (see 50:24), the words سبل السلام may mean, "the paths leading to God".

The clause, and guides them to the right path, is added to show that the God of Islam not only leads men out of darkness into light but also does so by the shortest and the straightest path, the word مستقیم (right) also meaning "straight". See 2:6.

2:88; 2:254.

3:47.

3:49.

3:50.

5:12.

Commentary:

In the clause, thou didst speak to the people in the cradle and when of middle age, the act of speaking in the cradle signifies speaking words of wisdom and piety in childhood. This sort of speaking on the part of Jesus reflected great credit on his mother, who, herself being wise and pious, brought him up as a wise and pious child. And the speaking of good words in middle age shows that not only was Mary a pious woman, but Jesus, too, was a righteous man so that even when he was of middle age and was no longer under the direct influence of his mother, he spoke words of piety and wisdom to men. See also 3:47 & 3:49, 50, where similar works of Jesus, i.e. the creation of birds and the quickening of the dead, etc. have been discussed.

Protection similar to that alluded to in the latter part of this verse in the words, I restrained the Children of Israel from putting thee to death, was promised to the Holy Prophet as well (5:68). This promise met with a remarkable fulfilment. Though, even at Mecca, his life was in constant danger, at Medina that danger very much increased. The Holy Prophet led many expeditions in person and several attempts were made on his life. At Uhud, he was severely wounded and at Hunain he was left alone among a large host of bloodthirsty archers. Yet amidst all these dangers he remained safe, and after having triumphed over his enemies, passed away peacefully in his house at Medina. The reference in the present verse is to the attempts of the Jews to kill Jesus on the cross, from which—accursed death—God delivered him. The words, I restrained the Children of Israel, should not, however, be understood to mean that Jesus suffered even no persecution at the hands of his enemies. A similar expression has been used with regard to early Muslims in the Quran (5:12), but it is a well-known fact that they had to pass through grievous trials and tribulations. The expression thus only means that the enemy will fail to kill Jesus, whom God will protect from being destroyed.

Commentary:

Rain produces different effects upon different plots of land according to their nature and quality; so does Divine revelation affect different men in different ways. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said that there are three kinds of land: (a) the good level land which, when watered by rain, absorbs the rain water and yields good vegetation and brings forth abundant fruit; (b) the land which, being low-lying and rocky, only collects the water of rain but does not absorb it and so brings forth no vegetation but provides drinking water for man and beast; (c) the high stony ground which neither collects the water of rain nor absorbs it, being useless both for the purpose of vegetation and as a storage for rainwater. Similarly, men are of three kinds: (1) Those who not only accept but also profit by Divine revelation. They are like the good level land which receives rain and yields good produce. (2) Those who do not themselves profit by the Divine revelation, but receive it and keep it stored up for others to benefit thereby. They are like that piece of land which yields no produce, but from which men and beasts benefit by the water collected during the rain. (3) Those who neither derive any benefit from the Divine revelation themselves nor keep it stored for the use of others. They are like that piece of land which neither yields any produce nor hoards up water so that men and beasts may drink from it.

Commentary:

This verse does not abrogate the previous verse, but only temporarily relieves Muslims in view of the then existing condition of their faith. Their faith, though sincere and true, was "weak" as compared with its future condition when it was to grow stronger by their witnessing more and more heavenly signs and by their becoming more and more organized.

The words, For the present Allah has lightened your burden, show that the previous verse contains not a prophecy, but a commandment. It does not announce by way of prophecy that Muslims will prevail over an enemy ten times their number; it simply gives the injunction that if twenty believers have to face 200 disbelievers, they must fight them, and that if they turn their backs, they will be sinners. In the present verse, however, in view of the then weak condition of Muslims, the limit of disparity has been reduced to twice the number of the believers.

History tells us that in later times, Muslims had sometimes to fight an enemy even more than ten times their number and still they were victorious. Thus, at the Battle of Yarmuk the Muslim army numbered 30,000, according to the lowest calculation, while the enemy numbered at least 600,000 (the highest figures being respectively 60,000 and 1,000,000) and the battle ended in a decisive victory for the Muslims.

7:55; 11:8; 25:60; 32:5.

13:3; 20:6.

32:6.

2:256.

Important Words:

عرش (Throne). See under 7:55.

یدبر (He governs) is derived from دبر (dabbara) which again is derived from دبر (dabara). They say دبرہ i.e. he followed behind his back or he simply followed him with respect to time, place or rank. دبر الامر (dabbara) means, (1) he considered the issues or results of the affair or the case; (2) he performed or executed the affair with thought or consideration; (3) he devised or planned the affair; (4) he governed, managed, conducted or regulated the affair (Lane, Taj & Aqrab).

Commentary:

In the verse under comment, the word ایام (periods), of which the singular is یوم, does not refer to the period which is determined by the rising and setting of the sun, for the obvious reason that the verse speaks of a time when the sun had not yet come into existence. The word is used here in the sense of time absolutely (see 1:4). Many eminent authorities (e.g. Mujahid, Ahmad bin Hanbal and Ibn ‘Abbas) have held that here یوم (period) stands for a thousand years (see Kathir & Ma‘ani, under 7:55). They have drawn this inference from 22:48 where a day is spoken of as equal to a thousand years. They are certainly right in holding that the word یوم in this verse does not denote the period of time determined by the rotation of the earth, but they are not right in holding that it stands here for a thousand years, for according to the Quran there is also a یوم (period) which is equal to fifty thousand years (70:5). If we compute the period of six days by this standard, it will mean that the creation of the heavens and the earth was completed in 300,000 years. But we cannot presume that God has disclosed to us the extent of all His days. If some of God’s days extend over a thousand years, and others over fifty thousand years, there may be still others which extend over millions or billions of years. Science has discovered the fact that it took the heavens and the earth millions of years to be evolved into their present shape. A vision of the eminent Muslim scholar Muhy-ud-Din Ibn ‘Arabi also leads to a similar conclusion (see under 2:31). Hence, the truth is that we cannot determine with certainty the length of the "six days" during which the creation of the heavens and the earth was completed. All that we can say is that God brings about different changes in different periods, some taking a thousand years, others fifty thousand years, and yet others even longer periods, but that, taken all together, the creation of heavens and earth was completed in six periods. See also 7:55.

It will be invariably seen that when a certain verse of the Quran is found liable to objection, the very next verse or passage provides an answer to that objection. Often the question is not mentioned and only the answer is given. These answers serve as a link between what passes in the mind of the reader and the contents of the Quran. Thus the reader finds that as soon as a question arises in his mind, he is given the answer there and then. Those who are not acquainted with this psychological trait of the Quran are inclined to say that there exists no order or arrangement in the Quranic verses, while the fault is all their own, for they do not care to ponder over the Quranic verses. The verse under comment answers a question that arises from the previous verse. That question is, how can Muslims prosper when there are no outward signs of their prosperity? In fact, the previous verse had given promise of lasting success to Muslims—and that at a time when they enjoyed no peace even in their own homes and were surrounded on all sides by powerful enemies. The objection was bound to arise, how could Muslims prosper in such adverse circumstances, and disbelievers naturally thought that promises about the future prosperity of Muslims were nothing but a delusion and a mirage. This implied objection has been answered in the present verse, in which it is pointed out that signs of future developments need not be visible at the outset, and that in this respect the spiritual system resembles the physical system. So attention is drawn to the creation of the heavens and the earth in six periods, and it is hinted that, if it were necessary for the Divine Word to be fulfilled all at once, then the heavens and the earth should also have come into existence all at once. But the fact is that their creation took six long cycles to become perfect and complete. If the creation of the heavens and the earth out of invisible atoms in a period extending over millions of years does not belie that God is their architect, how can the fact that means for the full expansion of Islam did not come into existence with the very announcement of his mission by the Holy Prophet, show that its triumph is doubtful, or that its foundations have not been laid by God? Divine works are brought about through a perfectly planned system and often have their bases hidden from the human eye.

It appears from this and other verses of the Quran that it is a law of God, working both in the physical and the spiritual world, that all things find their completion and consummation at the seventh stage. They pass through six stages of development and then become perfect and complete at the seventh stage. The movement set on foot by the Holy Prophet was likewise to pass through six stages of development and was to see its completion in the seventh stage and so it actually came to pass (for details and fuller discussion see Tafsir-e-Kabir by Hadrat Khalifatul Masih II, under 10:4).

The words, then He settled Himself on the Throne, point to the fact that, just as after the creation of the physical universe, God settled Himself on the Throne and all its affairs began to be conducted through the set laws of nature, so, after the establishment of Islam on earth, all spiritual progress will be attainable only through Islam.

The words, He governs everything, have been added to show how God governs the universe and conducts its affairs. Elsewhere the Quran says, When He decrees a thing He does only say to it, 'Be' and it is (2:118). These words do not mean that after God ordains a certain thing, it at once comes into being in its full-fledged form and that there is no intervening period between God’s decree and the coming into being of the decreed thing in its fully developed form. It only means that when God decrees a thing, nothing can stop its fulfilment. Indeed, God’s decree is often fulfilled in subtle ways. The words, He governs everything, thus point to the working of the universe and to the means which God uses to fulfil His decree and will. For, as explained under Important Words, تدبیر (governing) gives a number of meanings including consideration or, performance of a thing with a well thought-out and planned regulation.

The word عرش (Throne), for which see 7:55, needs some explanation. On careful consideration of all relevant verses and facts it becomes clear that this word represents the transcendent attributes of God, i.e. such attributes as are not found in any other being and are technically known as صفات تنزیھیة. These attributes are eternal and unchangeable and are manifested through God’s other attributes known as صفات تشبیھیة i.e. such attributes as are found more or less in other beings also. The former attributes are said to be the bearers of the عرش (Throne). In 69:18, we read that eight (attributes) shall bear the Throne of the Lord above them on that day. The number "eight" in this verse refers to the eight attributes through which God will manifest Himself on the Day of Judgement, just as He is manifesting Himself through His four attributes (mentioned in 1:2-4) in the present world. These four attributes, which belong to the group of صفات تشبیھیة are رب العالمین (Lord of all the worlds), الرحمان (Gracious), الرحیم (Merciful) and مالك یوم الدین (Lord of the Day of Judgement). On the Day of Judgement the four corresponding transcendent attributes, i.e. صفات تنزیھیة will also come into operation. The صفات تشبیھیة may be called attributes of similitude, because these attributes are similar to the attributes manifested by human beings. For instance, as kings display their majesty by seating themselves on their thrones, similarly the glory of God lies in His being the "Lord of the Throne." But on the Day of Judgement, this attribute will manifest its transcendent phase and no other being will bear to God the slightest resemblance in that respect.

Some scholars have erroneously inferred from certain verses of the Quran that عرش (Throne) is something created. This inference, among other verses, is drawn from 69:18, in which angels are represented as "bearing" the Throne of God. It is wrongly considered that, having been represented as being "borne" by angels, the عرش must be something material. But the truth is that the word حمل (bearing) is used not merely to denote the bearing of a material thing in the physical sense but also figuratively. Thus in 33:73 man is spoken of as "bearing" the Law which was offered to him by God as a trust; but the Law of God is not a material thing. The expression only means that man accepted and acted upon the Law of God and thereby helped to bear it aloft by revealing its manifold beauties and excellences. Similarly, the bearing of the عرش (Throne) by angels means only that its true reality is disclosed and manifested through them. It is evident that man cannot understand and realize the transcendent attributes of God except through His attributes of similitude, i.e. such as are manifested in relation to His creatures and are shared by them. Thus the attributes of God as are manifested in relation to His creatures are, as it were, the bearers of His transcendent attributes, which means that the former kind of attributes help man to understand and realize the latter kind of attributes.

Another verse giving rise to the idea that the عرش is created is 23:87, in which God is spoken of as "the Lord of the seven heavens and the Lord of the Great Throne." It is argued that as God is the رب (Lord) of the عرش (Throne), therefore He must be its Creator, for the word رب (Lord) also means Creator. But رب (Lord) does not necessarily mean Creator; it also means Owner or Possessor. So رب العرش would mean "the Possessor or Owner of the Throne." God has been spoken of as ذو الرحمة (the Possessor of mercy) in 18:59. But mercy is an attribute of God and has not been created by Him. The description of God as the Possessor of "mercy" or as the Owner of عرش (Throne) does not therefore imply His creation of either of them.

It may be asked, if the word رب (Lord) has been used in the sense of ذو or صاحب (Owner or Possessor), why has not either of the two latter words been used instead of رب (Lord)? The answer is that the use of the word رب fulfils an additional purpose. Some philosophers look upon God only as the First Cause. According to them, the attributes of God are working spontaneously and automatically and are not subject to the will of God. The Quran has, therefore, used the word رب (Lord) in relation to عرش in order to show that the attributes of God do not work involuntarily but according to His will, for the word رب conveys the idea of control coupled with ownership.

Another verse from which it has been erroneously inferred that the عرش is something created is 11:8. It has been argued that as in that verse عرش is spoken of as "being on water", which is a created element, therefore it must itself be something created. But it must be remembered that the word "water" in 11:8 does not mean material water. The عرش(Throne) could not be said to have been resting on water before the creation of the heavens and the earth, for water forms part of the earth and evidently could not have existed before the creation of the latter. Again, for a material throne to be represented as resting on the surface of water after the creation of the heavens and the earth appears to be quite absurd. Moreover, as all words of the Wise God are full of deep wisdom, what possible purpose can be served by the mention of a thing which does not, in any way, concern or interest us? The disclosure that the Throne of God rested on water does not even reveal the glory or majesty of God, because we are kept in the dark as to the nature and reality of this resting of the Throne on water. So neither does "water" here mean material water nor does "Throne" mean a material throne. In fact, "water" in the language of revealed Scriptures often means the word of God. In this sense, the verse would signify that the Throne of God rests on the word of God, which means that it is beyond man fully to comprehend and realize the majesty and glory of God except with the help of His word.

That the عرش really represents the transcendent attributes of God is also clear from 23:117, where we read: There is no God but He, the Lord of the Exalted Throne. These words show that the "Unity of God" and "His Exalted Throne" are intimately connected, for it is the transcendent attributes of God which constitute the real proof of Divine Unity. It requires a good deal of reasoning to convince a person of ordinary intelligence of Divine Unity by means of the other attributes which are shared by man in different degrees.

In the words, There is no intercessor with Him save after His permission, some light is thrown on the subject of intercession which has been dealt with at some length in 2:49 and 2:256. Suffice it here to say that the word شفیع (intercessor) is derived from شفع which means the connecting or the joining together of two like things. In view of this meaning, it would be wrong to say that belief in intercession can in any way encourage a sinner to sink deeper in sin. Nothing is farther from the Islamic conception of شفاعة (intercession) than this baseless notion. According to Islamic teaching only those good people who lack a requisite number of good works to make them heirs to the grace and mercy of God but who, at the same time, have a true spiritual connection with His Prophet can avail themselves of intercession; and not those habitual sinners who deliberately break the commandments of God and have no true connection with His Prophet.

6:126.

Commentary:

The subject matter of the preceding verse is continued here. The words, And no soul can believe except by the permission of Allah, provide the reason why compulsion should not be resorted to in matters of faith. The verse points out that it is not possible to attain true belief by the mere profession of certain doctrines with the tongue but by the permission of God i.e. by the observance of certain definite and fixed laws of God. Hence it is inconceivable that a person can be made a true believer by compulsion. You cannot intimidate or compel a person into believing a certain thing against his will. It is against the law of nature and against all known workings of the human mind.

The expression, He makes His wrath descend on those who would not use their reason, means that mere lip-profession of those who accept a thing without reason is of no value whatever. On the contrary, such men earn only the wrath of God for their insincere and hypocritical professions.