Topic: Sea

7:137; 8:55; 20:78-81; 26:64-67; 28:41; 44:25.

Important Words:

فرقنا (We divided) is from فرق meaning, he divided or he split. فرق الشعر means, he made parting in the hair (Aqrab).

بکم (for you) may give a number of meanings: (1) for you; (2) with you, i.e. the sea divided or receded as you proceeded, as if you were the means of dividing it; (3) because of you, i.e. in order to save you; (4) in your presence, i.e. while you were present (Kashshaf).

Commentary:

The incident mentioned in this verse relates to the time when, under God’s command, Moses led the Israelites from Egypt to Palestine. The Israelites left secretly at night, and when Pharaoh learnt of their flight, he pursued them with his hosts in order to bring them back to bondage. The verse mentions the favour bestowed by God on the Israelites by dividing the sea for them and drowning the Egyptians. The incident is narrated in Exod. 14:21-30. The Bible says: "And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night and made the sea dry land and the waters were divided. And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand and on their left. And the Egyptians pursued and went in after them to the midst of the sea… And the waters returned and covered the chariots and the horsemen and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them."

The بحر (sea) spoken of in the Quranic verse and mentioned in the Biblical quotation given above refers to the Red Sea through which or through an extremity of which the Israelites passed in their flight from Egypt to the Holy Land (Exod. 14).

Besides the verse under comment, the Quran also speaks of this incident in 20:78, 26:64 and 44:25. Says the Quran: And We sent a revelation to Moses, saying, 'Take away My servants by night and strike for them a dry path through the sea' (20:78). Again: Then We revealed to Moses, saying, 'Strike the sea with thy rod'. Whereupon it parted and every part was like a huge sandhill, i.e. on one side was the sea itself, and on the other (from which the sea had receded) there loomed large depressions filled with water (26:64). And again: Take My servants away by night; for you will surely be pursued. And leave the sea motionless (i.e. pass through quickly and leave it at a time when the tide has all receded but has not yet begun to flow back, so that, on the one hand, finding the sea-bed dry and, on the other, feeling secure in the thought that the high tide was not likely to overtake them, the Egyptians might be tempted to follow on); they are a host which is doomed to be drowned (44:24, 25).

In view of the above description, the facts appear to be as follows. When the Israelites were on their way to the Promised Land, they were pursued by the army of Pharaoh. When they reached the arm of the Red Sea which lay across their route, they were greatly dismayed, for Pharaoh was close behind with his hosts. But God cheered them through Moses, asking him to strike the water with his rod. This being the time of ebb-tide, the sea receded, exposing to view in the bed of the sea huge mounds of dry sand interspersed with depressions filled with water. Under the lead of Moses the Israelites quickly crossed the dry bed of the sea to the opposite bank. The army of Pharaoh came in pursuit, and while they were yet in the bed of the sea the high tide returned and drowned them all.

It should be remembered that, according to the Quran, a miracle is purely the work of God, and man has no hand in it. So, the striking of the sea by Moses was merely a symbol or a sign, having nothing to do with the actual parting of the sea which was exclusively the work of God, Who so arranged that it was the time of ebb-tide when Moses reached the sea so that just when He lifted his rod the sea began to recede. But when the army of Pharaoh began to cross the sea, they met with obstacles, just as heavily equipped armies generally do, and their progress was naturally retarded so that while they were yet in the midst of the sea, the high tide flowed and they were all drowned.

The words of the Quran do not lend themselves to the erroneous inference that there was an actual split in the sea to afford a passage for Moses and his followers. The two words used in the Quran in this connection are فرقنا (We divided) and انفلق (the sea parted); the root idea of both being "parting". These two words only corroborate the theory that when the Israelites reached the sea, the ebb-tide set in and the sea parted, exposing to view the sand dunes upon which the Israelites crossed over to the other side.

The fact that Pharaoh followed Moses through the bed of the sea also indicates that it was the time of the ebb-tide. If the sea had been actually split against all known laws of nature, Pharaoh would never have dared to follow in the wake of Moses. Nevertheless, it was a great miracle brought about by a subtle combination of the laws of nature which all united to save the Israelites and destroy Pharaoh and his people.

In this connection we may well quote an incident in Napoleon’s life which goes to illustrate how the tide helped Moses and destroyed Pharaoh in their journey across the Red Sea. In Abbott’s Life of Napoleon it is related that, "One day, with quite a retinue, he (Napoleon) made an excursion to that identical point of the Red Sea which, as tradition reports, the children of Israel crossed three thousand years ago. The tide was out, and he passed over the Asiatic shore upon extended flats. Various objects of interest engrossed his attention until late in the afternoon, when he commenced his return, the twilight faded away, and darkness came rapidly on. The party lost their path, and, as they were wandering bewildered among the sands, the rapidly returning tide surrounded them. The darkness of the night increased, and the horses floundered deeper and deeper in the rising waves. The water reached the girths of the saddles, and dashed upon the feet of the rider, and destruction seemed inevitable. From that perilous position Napoleon extricated himself by that presence of mind and promptness of decision which seemed never to fail him…The horses did not reach the shore until midnight, when they were wading breast deep in the swelling waves. The tide rises on that part of the coast to the height of 22 feet. 'Had I perished in that manner like Pharaoh', said Napoleon, 'it would have furnished all the preachers in Christendom with a magnificent text against me'." (Abbott’s Life of Napoleon, Chap. 12, p. 96).

The words, while you looked on, have been added in the verse to make the Israelites realize that though the above miracle was performed before their very eyes and their proud and haughty oppressor was brought to naught in their very sight, yet they proved ungrateful to their Lord and His Prophet.

3:191; 10:7; 30:23; 45:6.

Important Words:

اختلاف (alternation) is derived from خلف. They say خلفه i.e. he or it was or became his or its successor. خلف الرجل means, he came after or remained after the man and stood in his place. اختلفه means, he followed him as his successor. اختلفوا means (1) they came one after another by turn; (2) they differed or disagreed (Aqrab).

الفلك (ships) is derived from the verb فلك meaning, it became round or circular. الفلك (al-fulk) means a ship, or a boat, probably because it looks round and shapeless when seen at sea from a distance. The word is both singular and plural. الفلك (al-falak) means, the vault of heaven or the firmament in which the stars move. This is also probably owing to the apparently round shape of the sky (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lane).

دابة (beast) is the active participle from دب which means, he or it crept or crawled or walked slowly like an ant or a reptile or a child or a weak or sickly person. دابة means, all such animals or insects as creep or crawl or walk slowly (Aqrab). The word is used about all moving animals, whether big or small, whether walking on two legs or on four legs or creeping on the belly, etc. (24:46). It is also used about beasts used for riding or for carrying burden, like the horse, the mule, the donkey, etc. (Lane).

المسخر (pressed into service) is the passive participle from سخر sakhkhara. They say سخره (sakhkhara-hu or سخره sakhara-hu, not سخر sakhira which gives a different meaning), i.e. (1) he employed him or imposed on him a task without compensation; (2) he subjugated him and made him subservient to himself. Thus مسخر is that who or which has been made subservient to another, being unable to free himself or itself from constraint (Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse gives a twofold meaning, one literal and the other metaphorical. In the former sense, it supplies an argument in support of the existence of God referred to in the preceding verse. A careful study of the universe unfailingly points to a Creator on the one hand and to man being created with a definite object on the other. It also proves that, having created the world, God did not leave it alone but continues to watch over and control its affairs and is the First Cause of all change and every working in the universe. Heaven and earth, night and day (with alternating light and darkness), the supply of provisions, rainfall with its power of quickening and devastating, the means of communications, the blowing of winds, and shade and sunshine, all point to one controlling agency, God, the Maker of heavens and earth. And if God has done so much for the material requirements of man, He cannot be imagined to have neglected his spiritual needs which are much more important. Let all thinking men think and ponder and again think and ponder.

The Quran takes the universe as a whole to prove its theme. The objects of nature taken individually do not furnish such conclusive evidence of the existence of God as the whole universe taken together. The earth may be said to owe its existence to a fortuitous concourse of atoms, or a similar reason may be given for the origin of the sun and the moon and so on. But when the universe as one united whole and the deep order that permeates it are taken into consideration, it becomes impossible to escape the conclusion that this universe has not come into existence accidentally. Indeed, the consummate harmony that prevails throughout the universe, forcefully points to the fact that the whole system has been created and is being directed by one Intelligent Being Who is All-Powerful and All-Knowing.

Taken in the metaphorical sense, the ship mentioned in the verse will be taken to stand for Prophets who help men to cross the gulfs of carnal desires and materialistic concepts of things which separate men from God, rain being likened to God’s revelation which comes down like rain and gives life to the world after it has become dead. The clouds send down no new water. Water already exists in the vast oceans of the earth but, as it is impure, men cannot make use of it. God purifies it and changes it into clouds and then sends it back to earth in the form of pure rainwater. Similarly, by sending a new revelation God purifies beliefs, which, with the passage of time, get mixed up with false notions and superstitious ideas. It is inconceivable that God Who supplies man with fresh rainwater for the maintenance of his physical life should have omitted to supply him with heavenly water which is so necessary for the preservation of his spiritual life. Similarly, night and day stand for the alternating periods of light and darkness, it being hinted that the coming of the Holy Prophet heralds the dawn of a new day.

Moreover, by laying special emphasis on the study of the phenomena of nature in the verse under comment, the attention of disbelievers is also drawn to the fact that they could not possibly hope to succeed in their designs against the Holy Prophet, because the whole universe is controlled by God and is working in favour of His Prophet and in furthering his cause.

Commentary:

This verse gives a further reason why the work of punishment must remain in the hands of God; it is God alone with Whom are the keys of the unseen, i.e. it is He alone Who knows the unseen. None but He knows the secrets of men’s hearts and, therefore, He alone is in a position to punish.

The expressions "land", "sea", "falling of a leaf", "grain in the darkness of the earth," and "green or dry" are all descriptive of the various conditions of man. The "sea", according to the Arab conception, is typical of hardships, whereas "land" symbolizes ease and comfort. Similarly, "the falling of a leaf" represents the actions of man that are rendered vain and fruitless; whereas the "grain in the darkness of the earth," if left unprotected, may become lost just as virtue, if left uncared for, may become lost. Again "the green or the dry" is also known to God. A tree appears to us to be dry, but when it is watered by rain, it becomes green.

Similarly, a man sometimes appears to us to be devoid of all spirituality, but when he is watered with the water of Divine mercy, he becomes full of spiritual life.

The word کتاب (Book) also signifies knowledge. Other instances of this use may be seen in 30:57 and 68:48 where the words کتاب (lit. book) and یکتبون (lit. they write) respectively mean "knowledge" and "they know". The Holy Prophet is also reported to have written to the people of Yemen, saying, قد بعثت الیکم کاتبا من اصحابی "I have sent to you a writer, i.e. a man of knowledge, from among my Companions" (Bihar, iii. 193). So the Arabic words rendered as "is recorded in a clear Book" may also be translated as "is preserved in sure divine knowledge."

Thus, as God alone possesses the keys of the unseen and as all the conditions and actions of man are known to Him alone, it is He only Who can punish him. No one who is devoid of perfect knowledge is qualified to punish. Again, God alone knows how far hardship or ease influences the actions of a man. He alone knows whether or not the good works done by a man have been rendered null and void through the operation of other causes. He alone knows the grains of virtue that lie embedded in the heart of man and whether or not these grains will sprout forth and grow and thrive and bring forth fruit. He alone can tell whether a person who, to all appearances, is "dry" and devoid of all spiritual life, will turn "green" when supplied with heavenly water or whether he is dead beyond revival. In short, God alone has true knowledge of all things and all conditions and all possibilities and all potentialities, and therefore, He alone can say whether a man deserves to be punished or not.

43:56.

Important Words:

الیم (sea) is substantive from یم or یمم. The Arabs say یم الرجل i.e. the man was thrown into the sea; or he was drowned in the sea. یم الساحلmeans, the water of the sea or the water of the river overflowed its banks. الیم means, the sea; or the sea of unknown or unreached depth; a great body of water either salt or sweet (Lisan). The Quran uses the word یم both in the sense of sea (as in the present verse) and in the sense of a great river as in 20:40. See also 7:139 below.

Important Words:

البحر (sea) is derived from بحر i.e. he cut open a thing; or he enlarged and made it wide. بحر means, it became wide and spacious (Lane). Most probably the word البحر is used of the sea on account of its great spaciousness, and the word الیم (see 7:137 above) is used about it on account of its great depth.

Commentary:

Though the words البحر and الیم are generally considered synonymous, yet it is significant that the Quran uses the word الیمwhen speaking of the drowning of the people of Pharaoh (7:137) and البحر (as in the present verse) when speaking of the escape of the Israelites across it. This confirms the inference that generally the word البحر denotes spaciousness and the word الیم depth.

The request of the Israelites to Moses embodied in the words, make for us a god just as they have gods, does not show that they really wished to worship idols. As they were yet new in faith, so when they happened to see the idols of an idol-worshipping people, they simply wished to have an image of their God. The idols of the people thus suggested to them the idea of having an image of their God on which to fix their attention. The words, This is your God, and the God of Moses, used elsewhere in the Quran (20:89), also show that what the Israelites wanted was simply a representation of the God of Moses and that they did not want to abandon Him or set up equals to Him.

The expression, Surely you are an ignorant people, contains the answer to their request. They were told that it was foolish on their part to think that they could fix their attention on God better by concentrating on an idol, because firstly, there was really nothing like Him and secondly, the practice was sure subsequently to develop into real idol-worship. The right way to fix attention on God is to ponder and meditate upon His attributes. To bow down before a lifeless image cannot but degrade a man both morally and spiritually.

17:67; 29:66; 31:33.

Important Words:

عاصف (violent) is the active participle from عصف. They say عصفت الریح i.e. the wind blew violently or vehemently. عصفت الناقة براکبھا means, the she-camel went quickly with her rider, as if she were the wind. عصف الدھربھم means, the time destroyed them. عصف الزرع means, he cut the corn before its attaining maturity. ریح عاصف means, wind blowing violently or vehemently. یوم عاصف means, a day violent in respect of wind and storm (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The verse purports to say that on the part of God the system of punishing and showing mercy goes hand in hand, as does on the part of disbelievers the habit of acting wickedly in time of ease and repenting temporarily when punishment overtakes them. But disbelievers always ignore the fact that, just as a pleasant breeze sometimes develops into a violent gale and causes widespread destruction, similarly, the remission that is granted to them may prove the prelude to their destruction. To bring home to disbelievers this patent truth, their attention is drawn to the comforts and perils of a sea-voyage.

It is worthy of note that whereas the verse uses the pronoun "you" in the second person in the first two clauses, it suddenly changes to a pronoun of the third person (them, they) in the third and the following clauses. This is not without purpose. The first two clauses referred to both believers and disbelievers, for it is both for believers and disbelievers that God has provided the means of travel by land and sea. Hence the pronoun "you" has been used in the first two clauses. But as in the following clauses it has been pointed out that a section of the people become ungrateful, therefore here the second person has been changed into the third person, in order to show that it is only disbelievers that become ungrateful.

7:139; 20:78.

20:79; 26:61; 44:25.

Commentary:

The verse throws interesting light on an important political question. Islam enjoins Muslims to obey their rulers. If, however, the latter deny to them religious freedom and resort to compulsion in matters of faith, Muslims are enjoined to migrate from their country rather than offer resistance to the established authority. But what should they do if the authorities do not even permit them to migrate and force them to remain in the country and suffer persecution? The verse under comment supplies an answer to this question by saying that Pharaoh pursued the Israelites "wrongfully and aggressively," which means that in preventing the Israelites from migrating Pharaoh was doing a thing to which he had absolutely no right. Thus if rulers prevent an oppressed subject people from peacefully leaving a country, the latter would be justified in resisting and opposing them by all legitimate means and in that case defiance of the authority will not be held as a breach of the law or an act of rebellion. Just as nobody is allowed to defy and break the law of the land in which he lives, similarly no Government has a right to compel any person to live under it while denying him freedom of religion and conscience.

The words, He in Whom the children of Israel believe, spoken by Pharaoh at the time of his drowning, show the utterly abject state of his mind at that time. If he had said that he believed in the God of Moses, he might be considered to have had some sense of dignity left in him because, having been brought up in the royal household and being the leader of his people, Moses was entitled to respect even from worldly considerations; but to say that he believed in Him in Whom the children of Israel believed—the very children of Israel whom it was his pride to trample under foot—bespeaks the great depth of abasement to which the proud Pharaoh had fallen.

35:13; 45:13.

Important Words:

طریا (fresh) is active participle from طری or طرو. They say طری اللحم او طرو i.e. the flesh-meat was or became fresh, juicy or moist. طری also means, it became new; was newly made or done; was renewed. طراہ (tarra-hu) means, he rendered it fresh or juicy. طری الطیب means, he rendered perfume fragrant by admixtures. طری البناء means, he plastered or coated the building with clay or mud. طری therefore means fresh, juicy or moist; (Lane & Aqrab).

مواخر (ploughing) is the plural of ماخرة which is active participle from مخر. They say مخر السابح i.e. the swimmer clave the water with his arms in swimming. مخرت السفینةmeans, the ship clave the water with its stem and ran; clave the water with a noise; ran cleaving the water with a noise; faced the wind in her course; advanced and retired. The primary signification of مخر is the act of cleaving; and it also signifies the making of a noise or sound. ماخرة means, ships cleaving the water with their stems; or thrusting the water with their stems; or the sound of the running whereof, by means of the wind, is heard; or running; or advancing and retiring by means of the wind (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

In the preceding verses mention was made of those things which grew on land or of which man could enjoy the benefit on land. In this verse, however, mention is made of water and things that grow therein. It may be noted that while speaking of the sea the same expression سخر (He has pressed into service) has been used in this verse as in the case of the night and day and heavenly bodies in v. 13, the expression بامرہ (by His command) which occurs in that verse has been dropped in the present verse. This is because heavenly bodies and the alternation of night and day are beyond man’s control and the benefits man derives from them are gratuitous and independent of any labour or effort on his part; therefore when mentioning them the expression, (by His command) has been used. But because for the benefits that man derives from the sea he has to make some effort in the making of boats, etc., this expression has been left out.

The sea is a most important source of material benefits to man. It is the great repository of water from which the sun supplies us with rain. It is also the highway for travel and commerce and an important source of food for man. It is quite obvious that God Who has made such vast provision for the physical needs of man could not have failed to make similar provision for his moral and spiritual needs.

The verse also suggests that although water is so essential for man and is present in such abundance in the sea it is unfit either for drinking or for irrigation purposes unless it is distilled by process of evaporation and is made usable. In the same way the mere existence of moral and spiritual truths in the world can be of no avail to man unless they are purified of all dross and are so assorted and presented as to suit his needs.

The subject of the uses and benefits of water for man began with 11th verse and is continued in the following verses. The theme is developed in all these verses that it is on water that men and animals have to depend for their food and that the sun, the moon, and the stars too have some sort of connection with water. The sun causes the water of the sea to evaporate, and then the same returns to us purified in the form of rainwater. This theme of the various uses of water leads us to a much nobler spiritual theme. It is that although we have water in the sea yet we cannot turn it into clouds. Similarly, though we possess reason and intellect, yet unless the water of revelation comes down from heaven our reasoning faculties alone can be of no avail to us to frame a perfect Law that may conduce to our moral and spiritual well-being.

14:33; 22:66; 45:13.

Commentary:

The verse points out that all amenities of life are God’s gifts bestowed upon man, although they are not always recognized or appreciated by man as such. For example, the use of ships has made interaction possible between the dwellers of the main lands and the islands, who would have remained permanently isolated from each other without them.

There is also in the verse an implied reference to the fact that Islam will spread throughout the world on land and sea and for this purpose sea-going vessels, which are a great Divine blessing, will play a most important part. It is worthy of note that Muslims in the heyday of their glory were great sailors and navigators. The discovery of the sea-route to India was due to the good offices of an Arab sailor who guided some wandering Portuguese ships from the coast of Africa to the shores of India.

10:13; 11:10-11; 23:65; 30:34; 39:9; 41:50-52; 70:21-22.

Commentary:

Such is the nature of man that when he is in distress, he becomes humble and prays to God and promises and vows to lead a virtuous life if he were to regain his lost peace of mind. But when the danger is over, he is as arrogant and boastful as ever. The verse, in fact, embodies a warning for Muslims that they should not forget God in their days of prosperity so that He may not forget them in their time of adversity.

Important Words:

حقبا (ages) is the plural of حقب (huqbun) which is derived from حقب (haqiba). They say حقب المطر i.e. the rain was delayed. حقب الامر means, the affair became marred or impeded. حقب (huqbun) means, time; indefinite time; long time; an age; a year or years; seventy years; eighty years or more (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).

Commentary:

With this verse begins the very important subject of the اسراء (Spiritual Night Journey) of Moses. As stated above, the followers of Jesus Christ achieved great material power and prosperity and in their chequered career left their imprint twice on world’s history. This double prosperity of Christian nations has been likened to "two gardens" in v. 33 above. The first of these two periods began with the conversion to Christianity of the Roman Emperor Constantine, when it became the religion of the State, and continued to the birth of the Holy Prophet of Islam. The second and more important of these two periods is represented by the present age when Christian nations of the west have acquired so much power and prestige that the nations of Asia and Africa have had to dance attendance upon them like serfs and slaves. Between these "two gardens" flowed a "stream" (v. 34). These "two gardens", as stated above, represent the two periods of Christian prosperity and progress. The "stream" denotes the birth and rise to power of the Prophet of Islam. He and his followers made their mark in human history during the interval between these two periods.

Now in order to provide a historical setting to the whole account and complete the connected whole, a somewhat detailed description of the Isra’ or the Spiritual Journey of Moses has been given in the present and following few verses. Moses had foretold the advent of a Prophet like unto him (Deut. 18:18). This prophecy has been referred to in the Quran in 73:16. By putting the account of Moses’ Spiritual Journey between that of the Dwellers of the Cave and of Dhul-Qarnain—the two periods representing Christian progress and advance—the Quran has pointed to the fact that the Prophet referred to in Moses’ prophecy, who was also to be his counterpart, was to appear during the interval between these two periods. Thus, these incidents have been mentioned in their historical order.

Very fantastic stories have gained currency about the nature and purpose of the Isra’ or Spiritual Journey of Moses and the circumstances under which it took place. Commentators of the Quran differ as to the name and status of "the servant of God" whom Moses sought and met and about "the young man" who was with him in his "journey". Failing to comprehend the spiritual aspect of this seemingly physical journey most of them have indulged only in conjectures and guesses and consequently have grievously erred. The fact is that mention was made of the Isra’ or Spiritual Journey or as literally interpreted, the Migration of the Holy Prophet to Medina in v. 2 of the present Surah. Light was also thrown on the great results that were to ensue from this Migration and the wonderful success that Muslims were to achieve after it. They were also warned of the great dangers that lay in their way and of the unrelenting opposition of Jews and Christians, particularly of the grievous blows that Islam as a political force was to receive at the hands of the latter. The Isra’ of Moses has only been mentioned to lend support to the prophecies of ultimate success of Islam that were implied in the Isra’ of the Holy Prophet and also to make it clear beyond doubt that the seemingly dazzling power and prosperity of Christian nations will endure for a limited time and the cause of Islam will eventually triumph.

Similarly, the Isra’ of Moses was, like the Isra’ of the Holy Prophet, no physical journey but a spiritual experience by means of which Moses was transported from this body of flesh and blood to a spiritual tabernacle. The Bible and the Quran both support this contention. Some of the arguments advanced in its support are as follows:

(1) The Bible which is more or less a reliable record of Moses’ life has omitted all mention of this most unusual and wonderful incident and has failed even to make a passing reference to it.

(2) Before Moses was made a Prophet, he is known to have undertaken only one journey and that was to Midian. The Bible and the Quran have both referred to this journey, the latter at several places. The Bible and the Quran also both agree that Moses undertook this journey alone, while in the journey referred to in the present and the following verses of the Quran he is described as having been accompanied by "his companion."

(3) Even after he was made Prophet, Moses undertook no such journey. The Bible embodies a somewhat detailed record of Moses’ life but it contains no account of any such journey and even makes no reference to it.

(4) It is well known that after Moses had been away on Mount Tur for a few days his people took a calf for worship. When his absence from them for only forty days on Mount Tur caused such great spiritual havoc among them, which has been described in the Bible in detail, the depths of spiritual chaos to which these people of weak faith and fickle minds should have sunk in Moses’ absence on a journey of a much longer duration, as evidently the journey referred to in these verses was, can easily be imagined. The Bible could not have failed to mention it. But the Bible alludes to no such happening. Moreover, it would have cast a serious reflection on Moses’ wisdom and intelligence if, having had such a terrible experience once, he should have undertaken another journey which would have kept him away from his people for a much longer period.

(5) In his absence on Mount Tur for only forty days Moses appointed Aaron his vicegerent for his people. But apart from this solitary instance Moses is not known ever to have appointed anybody his vicegerent or Khalifah in his absence on any journey. The Bible contains no reference to any such appointment. It is inconceivable that if Moses had gone on such a long journey as mentioned in these verses he would have failed to appoint a Khalifah in his absence.

(6) It is against the established practice of all the Prophets of God to remain separated from their people for a long time. Some of them are known to have gone on short journeys but those were missionary expeditions and their scope did not extend beyond their own peoples. Jesus certainly did go to Kashmir after the Crucifixion but he left one section of his people in Palestine to live among another and a larger section in Kashmir. But Moses’ journey referred to above was not a journey undertaken with any missionary purpose nor was it confined to his own people. He left his people in search of a man who was more learned than himself.

(7) The expression مجمع البحرین (junction of two seas) occurring in the verse under comment also points to the fact that the Isra’ of Moses was a spiritual journey because there is no place in the world which is known by this name. The expression can have only one significance i.e. "the junction of two seas." Such junctions nearest to the place where Moses lived after he had left Egypt are Bab ul-Mandab which unites the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean, the Straits of Dardanelles which joins the Mediterranean Sea with the Sea of Marmora and Al-Bahrain where the waters of the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean meet. Of all these places the Straits of Dardanelles alone can possibly be the point where such a meeting could have taken place because on its way lies Canaan which was the destination of Moses but which he could not reach in his life-time. All these three points were about one thousand miles distant from Moses’ place of living and considering the absence of good means of communication and transport in those days it would have taken him about a year’s time to cover such a long distance and Moses could not afford to remain absent from his people for such a long time without seriously jeopardising their spiritual well-being.

From this historical evidence it can be safely inferred without fear of contradiction that Moses’ Journey referred to in these verses was a spiritual journey undertaken with a spiritual body for a spiritual purpose.

Besides this external evidence there is also internal evidence in the Quran which clearly shows that this journey was no physical event but a spiritual experience of Moses.

(a) The "learned man" made a big hole in the boat to save it from being forcibly seized by the king. Now a quite natural question arises here, viz. was the boat navigable after it was damaged or was it not? If it was, why did not the king seize it; if it was not, why did it not sink? In this physical world no boat is ever known to have remained floating after a big hole had been made in its bottom. In the world of visions, however, such things are possible.

(b) The "slaying of the young boy" also shows that this incident happened in a vision because in this world of flesh and bones no sensible person, much less a Prophet of God, would take the life of another person without legitimate cause.

(c) The incident of the "repairing of the wall" also lends support to the above conclusion. How could a great Prophet of God and a most noble and broad-minded person like Moses have found fault with his learned companion for not demanding payment from two poor orphan boys for repairing their wall because the people of their town had refused to entertain him and his companion? What had the two orphan boys done to deserve Moses’ displeasure? It was the people of the town and not they who had refused to entertain them as their guests. What earthly connection was there between these two things? In this material world no sensible person could indulge in such talk, much less a great Prophet of God. Such things can happen only in visions and dreams.

(d) Ibn ‘Abbas is reported to have said that the word کنز (treasure) occurring in v. 83 below means "a treasure of knowledge". This shows that this word has been used in this verse in its metaphorical sense and needs to be interpreted and explained. Similarly, the repairing of the wall and the demanding of hospitality were not physical acts. Thus the whole journey was only a spiritual experience.

In short, even a casual and cursory glance over the relevant verses leaves no doubt about the fact that the whole affair was nothing more than a vision. It is simply inconceivable that a great Prophet of God like Moses should have undertaken a long and arduous journey in search of a "man of God" to learn from him how to break a hole in a boat or kill a young man or to repair a wall and demand no remuneration for it. Even an illiterate rustic would consider it below his dignity to do such a foolish thing, much less a Prophet of God.

Moreover, the Holy Prophet is reported to have said ودونا ان موسی کان صبر حتی یقص اللّٰه علینا من خبر ھما i.e. would that Moses had kept silent, so that God would have revealed to us many more secrets of the future (Bukhari, Kitabut-Tafsir). This saying of the Holy Prophet shows that the unusual acts which this "man of God" is stated to have performed were great secrets of the future which were communicated to Moses in his Vision in metaphorical language. If these acts are understood to have literally taken place, then they could not have excited the Holy Prophet’s curiosity and he could not possibly have wished Moses to have kept silent in order to learn more about similar acts. According to Mawardi, the person whom Moses had gone to see was no human being but an angel (Kathir).

All these facts taken together constitute very solid and weighty evidence, incapable of being doubted or contradicted, that the story of the journey of Moses is but a vision which needs to be interpreted and explained to understand its reality and significance.

The words "his young companion" may refer to Joshua, the son of Nun, but they apply more fittingly to Jesus. Jesus was the young companion of Moses i.e. he was the last great Prophet of the Mosaic Dispensation who came not to destroy but to fulfil the Law and the Prophets (Matt. 5:17).

The words, I will not stop until I reach the junction of the two seas, show that Moses’ young companion joined him towards the end of his journey. Moses did not seem to have taken the young man with him from the very outset of his journey. The words do not represent him as having started on his journey but only as pursuing it with a young companion. Strictly speaking these words can only be spoken by one who is about to reach his destination.

The expression مجمع البحرین i.e. junction of two seas, denotes the time when the Mosaic Dispensation was to have come to an end and the Islamic Dispensation to have commenced. According to Ta‘tirul-Anam بحر (sea), when seen in a vision, signifies a powerful, just and kind king. It also signifies praise and glorification of God. In the first sense of the word, بحر (sea) the expression مجمع البحرین would mean the meeting place of two powerful, just and kind kings i.e. Moses and the Holy Prophet Muhammad, and according to the second signification, the expression denotes the junction of the two seas of God’s glorification which means two religious Dispensations—Mosaic and Islamic.

The words, Or I will journey on for ages, signify that the Mosaic Dispensation would remain in force for many centuries. The period from the time of Moses to the advent of the Holy Prophet when the Mosaic Dispensation came to an end extends over 2000 years.

Important Words:

سربا (going away swiftly) is derived from سرب. They say سرب الماء i.e. the water flowed. سرب الرجل means, the man went at random. سرب فی الارض means, he went away in the land. سرب (sarabun) means, going away swiftly, a subterranean excavation; a habitation beneath the earth having a passage through it; the burrow or hole of a wild animal; the den of a lion. The Quranic expression فاتخذ سبیله فی البحر سربا means, it (the fish) took its way into the sea swiftly, etc. (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

حوت (fish) when seen in a vision denotes the houses of worship of righteous people (Ta‘tirul-Anam). In this sense of the word the expression, when they reached the place where the two seas met, they forgot their fish, means that at the time when the Mosaic and the Islamic Dispensations met, i.e. when Mosaic Dispensation ceased to function and the Islamic Dispensation came into force, true righteousness would depart from among the followers of Moses and Jesus and would henceforward become the special mark of the followers of the new Dispensation (48:30). The verse under comment also shows that the Islamic Dispensation was, in fact, a continuation of the Mosaic Dispensation. Being two consecutive parts of God’s eternal guidance, no such thing as the "junction of two seas" existed in the time of Moses.

26:53.

26:64.

Important Words:

لا تخشی (nor wilt thou have fear) is formed from خشیwhich means, he feared or dreaded or feared with reverence, veneration, respect, or awe. We have in the Quran وھم من خشیته مشفقون i.e. they fear their Lord, holding Him in reverence (21:29). خشی منه means, he feared or dreaded what might happen to him from him or it. خشیة is the dread, fear or awe resulting from the knowledge which one possesses about a thing or person. The Quranic expression انما یخشی اللّٰه من عبادہ العلماء(35:29) means, only those of His servants who possess knowledge fear Allah (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat). The reference to the fear mentioned in the words لا تخشی is to the dangers of the sea and other hardships that lay ahead of the Israelites.

Commentary:

The incident mentioned in this verse relates to the time when, under God’s command, Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into Canaan. The Israelites left secretly by night, and when Pharaoh learnt of their flight, he pursued them with his hosts and was drowned in the Red Sea.

In order to appreciate fully the nature and significance of this incident which indeed constituted a great divine sign, it is necessary to read the verse under comment along with other relevant verses such as vv. 2:51, 26:62-64 & 44:25. The Quran says:

And remember the time when We divided the sea for you and saved you and drowned Pharaoh’s people while you looked on (2:51).

And when the two hosts came in sight of each other the companions of Moses said, 'We are surely overtaken.'…Then We revealed to Moses, saying, 'Strike the sea with thy rod.' Whereupon it parted and every part was like a huge sandhill (26:62-64). When the Israelites were passing they had the sea on one side and the small lake son the other, which conformably to the natural laws of perspective appeared raised above the level of the land.

And leave the sea at a time when it is motionless. Surely, they are a host which is doomed to be drowned (44:25). i.e. pass through the sea quickly at a time when the tide has receded.

The Bible also refers to this incident in the following verses:

And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all the night and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand and on their left. And the Egyptians pursued and went in after them to the midst of the sea…And the Lord said unto Moses, 'Stretch out thine hand over the sea'…And Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea and the sea returned to its strength…And the waters returned and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them (Exod. 14:21-28).

The following facts emerge from the above account of this incident as given in the Quran and the Bible;

(a) that Moses was commanded by God to take away the Israelites out of Egypt by night;

(b) that Pharaoh pursued the Israelites with his mighty hosts;

(c) that when the Israelites reached the arm of the Red Sea which lay across their route, they were greatly dismayed because Pharaoh was close behind with his hosts;

(d) that when on seeing Pharaoh’s hosts the Israelites exclaimed in fright that they were overtaken, God commanded Moses to strike the water of the sea with his rod;

(e) that when Moses struck the sea with his rod as the Quran says or stretched out his hand over the sea as the Bible says, it was the time of the ebb-tide and the sea was receding, leaving a dry bed;

(f) that Moses was commanded by God to cross quickly the dry bed to the opposite bank, which he did;

(g) that when the hosts of Pharaoh reached the sea, it was the time of high tide and that in their zeal to overtake the Israelites they took no notice of it and at once jumped into the sea behind them; and

(h) that, as it appears, being heavily equipped with big chariots and other heavy armaments the progress of the army of Pharaoh was greatly retarded so that while they were yet in the midst of the sea, the high tide returned and they were all drowned.

Historians differ as to the exact place from where Moses crossed the Red Sea from Egypt into Canaan. Some are of the view that on his way from the territory of Goshen, which is also called the valley of Al-Tamthilat or Wadi Tumilat and where the capital of the Pharaohs was situated (Enc. Bib. vol. 4, col. 4012, under "Rameses"), Moses passed by the Gulf of Timsah (Enc. Bib., cols. 1438 & 1439). Others think that he went much further to the north and going round Zoan crossed over to Canaan near the Mediterranean Sea (Enc. Bib., col. 1438). But what is most probable is the fact that from Tal Abi Sulaiman which was the capital of the Pharaohs in Moses’ time, the Israelites at first went to north-east to the Gulf of Timsah but finding that a net of gulfs barred their way, they turned south and crossed the Red Sea near the town of Suez where it is hardly more than 2/3 mile wide, and started for Qadas (Enc. Bib., col. 1437).

The following passage from Peake’s "Commentary on the Bible" (p. 64) may also be read with interest:

The Israelites fled with him (Moses) across the Goshen marshes into the Sinaitic Peninsula. The crossing of the "Red Sea" (yam suph, "sea" or "lake of reeds") was probably the crossing of the southern end of a lake a few miles N.W. of what is now called the Red Sea. A wind laid bare a wide stretch of shore, and when an Egyptian force pursued the fugitives, their chariot wheels stuck fast in the wet soil, and the water returned upon them when the wind shifted. Writers differ as to the route taken by the Israelites. Some think that they moved southward to the mountainous range of (the modern) Sinai, and then along the eastern arm of the Red Sea, now known as the Gulf of ‘Akabah, to its northernmost point at Ezion Geber. Others think that the evidence points to the route still taken by Mecca pilgrims, nearly due E. to Ezion Geber, and that thence they moved N.W. to the region of Kadesh (Barnea), to Mt. Sinai or southward along the E. side of the Gulf of ‘Akabah to Mt. Horeb. The traditions differ and certainty is impossible.

There are people who against all canons of history take particular delight in propounding most extraordinary theories that the Israelites never lived in Egypt. Some such theories are:

(a) No reference to the Israelites is to be found in the old Egyptian historical records.

(b) In the fifth year of the reign of Pharaoh Merneptah (or Mereneptah) when Moses is said to have taken the Israelites out of Egypt, some Israelite tribes were actually living in Canaan, therefore the theory of Moses having taken the Israelites out of Egypt to Canaan during his reign and their having settled in that country some fifty years later is all wrong.

(c) Though some trace is found of a few tribes having crossed over from Asia into Egypt but there is no proof that these were the Israelite tribes.

The propounders of these strange theories seem to ignore the patent fact that the Israelites were foreigners in Egypt and were a subject race and lived the miserable life of slaves under their cruel rulers. How could such people be considered worthy of any notice being taken of them by historians? Apart from this the fact may also be taken into consideration that when it is not quite possible for historians even in this 20th century to prepare a well-connected and harmonious narrative about a people from the remnants of its ruined civilization, it was much more difficult for historians in the past to reconstruct a consistent record from the fragmentary accounts of a people who lived in the hoary past and who were treated like beasts of burden by their rulers. This is why no reference to the Israelites is to be found in the old historical records of Egypt.

Secondly, the doubtful theory that certain Israelite tribes were found to be living in Canaan in the 5th year of the reign of Pharaoh Merneptah cannot disprove the fact that other Israelite tribes had remained behind in Egypt. Is it not possible that some of these tribes might have left Egypt for Canaan sometime before all of them were taken out of it by Moses. It is very strange that on the one hand these very writers say that Moses is an Egyptian name and that some of the companions of Moses also had Egyptian names, and on the other that the Israelites never went to Egypt. Moreover, the Bible gives a detailed and well-connected story of the Israelites having lived in Egypt. There was no compelling reason for the writers of the Bible to have done so, especially when the Israelites had lived there only as slaves and worse than beasts of burden. No people would feel any urge or pride in forging and falsely inventing such a miserable record of shame and sorrow of themselves. Last but not least, the Biblical details with regard to the customs, culture and mode of life of the Pharaohs of that time is another proof of the fact that the Israelites had lived under them. The Bible had no interest in the Pharaoh dynasty of Egypt apart from their being rulers of the Israelites. Besides, as stated by old Greek historians, the Egyptians themselves admitted that the Israelites had lived in Egypt for a long time and later on had left this country. The present Egypt, however, should not be confused with a territory which in ancient times was also known as Egypt but which formed a part of northern Syria or northern Arabia.

The date of the Exodus has also been much contested and there seems to be considerable difficulty in determining its exact date from the Biblical records alone. Neither the name of the reigning Pharaoh nor the place where he held his court is mentioned; the account given is not contemporary, but has been condensed and annotated by later editors, and fused by them into a general narrative; and the Biblical chronology of the period, though containing trustworthy material, is known to be largely artificial. Apart from the Biblical records any historical information on the subject is meagre. Various theories, however, are held about the Exodus. Some of these are as follows:

1. The view that the Israelites left Egypt with the Hyksos (1580 B.C.) at the beginning of the XVIIIth Dynasty, or shortly afterwards, and lived a nomadic life of about 200 years in the desert previous to entering Canaan. But evidently this view seems to do violence to genuine Hebrew tradition.

2. The theory which dates the Exodus in the XVIIIth Dynasty, but about 1445 B.C. just after the long despotic reign of Thutmose III and during that of his son Amenhotep II (1447-1420 B.C.). This theory too lacks the support of trustworthy historical material and Hebrew tradition.

3. The hypothesis which connects the Exodus with the religion’s revolution attempted by Amenhotep IV, otherwise known as Akhenaten (1383-1366 B.C.) This view would place the Exodus about 1350 or 1345 B.C. This seems to be more plausible than the first two views.

4. But the theory, largely prevalent which receives much support from historical data, archaeological research and Hebrew tradition is that the Exodus occurred in the Nineteenth Dynasty (1328-1202 B.C.), in the reign of Merneptah II or Mereneptah II (1234-1214) and still seems the most probable. It appears to have taken place about 1230 B.C. According to this view the Pharaoh of the oppression would be Rameses II and his successor Merneptah II, the Pharaoh of the Exodus (Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, pp. 119, 955 & 956).

Incidentally, it may be stated here that the striking of the water of the sea with his rod by Moses had no cause and effect connection with the actual parting of the sea. It was merely a sign or a Divine intimation that it was the time of the ebb tide and that the Israelites should hasten to cross. God had so arranged that when Moses reached the sea the tide was about to go back, so that as soon as he struck the sea with his rod in obedience to Divine command, it began to recede and a dry path was made for the Israelites. The striking of the water with his rod by Moses and the recession of the sea coincided. This constituted a miracle because God alone knew when the sea would recede and He had commanded Moses to strike its waters at the time of its recession.

10:91; 26:61.

Important Words:

أتبعھم (pursued them) is derived from تبع. They say تبعه i.e. he followed him. أتبعه means, he followed him and overtook him. أتبعه بھم means, he made him to be followed by them i.e. he made them to follow him. فأتبعھم فرعون بجنودہ means, Pharaoh made his troops to follow them (Lane & Aqrab). See also 10:91.

یم (sea) is substantive-noun from یم (yamma).

The Arabs say یٍم الرجل i.e. the man was thrown into the sea. یم الساحل means, the water of the river overflowed its banks. یم means, the sea; or the sea of unknown or unreached depth; a great body of water. See also 7:137.

16:15; 35:13.

Commentary:

The verse constitutes a beautiful commentary on the futility of idol-worship and gives two very strong arguments against it. First, God is the Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has subjected all that is in the earth, in the sea and even in the air to the service of man. It is this Lord of all life Who is entitled to our worship and not the idols of wood and stone or those of man’s own fancy. Secondly, when God has pressed the whole universe into the service of man and has made him the lord of the whole creation and His own chief handiwork, it is foolish on his part to degrade himself so low as to worship anything besides God.

The verse possesses another significance. The realization that all things are created for the service of man draws our attention to the uses and properties of different objects and urges us to study them and then turn them to our benefit. It is this study of natural objects that led to new discoveries and inventions and consequently to the great material progress which the early Muslims made in the heyday of their intellectual glory.

35:13; 55:20, 21.

Important Words:

مرج (caused to flow) means, he mixed two things together. مرج الشیء بالشیء means, he mixed one thing with another. مرج الدابةmeans, he sent a beast to pasture wherever it would. They say مرج لسانه فی اعراض الناس i.e. he let go his tongue in abusing people and backbiting them. مرج البحرین means, He (God) has mixed the two seas; He has let them flow freely (Lane & Aqrab).

فرات (sweet) is derived from فرت (faruta). They say فرت الماء i.e. the water was or became sweet or very sweet. فرات applied to water means sweet, very sweet or of the sweetest kind that which subdues thirst by its excessive sweetness (Lane & Aqrab).

أجاج (bitter) is derived from أج . They say أجت النار i.e. the fire burned or burned brightly or fiercely. أج الماء means, the water was or became saltish or bitter. أجاج means, anything burning to the mouth whether saltish bitter or hot. ماء أجاج means, water that burns by its saltishness; or salt water or very bitter water like the water of the sea, or water of which no use is made for drinking or for watering seed-product or other purposes; or very hot water (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat). See also 21:97.

برزخ (partition) is a thing that intervenes between any two things; a bar; an obstruction; or a thing that separates two things i.e. a partition (Lane). See also 23:101.

Commentary:

Taking "two waters" in the verse to represent the true religion and the false one, the verse signifies that both Islam, the true religion, and other corrupted faiths will continue to exist side by side, the former yielding sweet fruit and slaking the thirst of the spiritual wayfarers and the latter barren and bitter, incapable of producing any good results.

The "two waters" may also signify the water of the sea and that of the river. The former is saltish and bitter to taste while the latter is drinkable and sweet. When the sweet water of the river flows into the sea and becomes mixed with its saltish water, it also becomes bitter. As long as these two waters keep themselves separate, they have different tastes. Similarly, when the teaching of a true religion becomes mixed up with the teachings of false religions, it loses its sweetness and usefulness. But God has so ordained that in spite of its close proximity to false religions Islam will never lose its sweet taste as God has taken upon Himself to protect and guard it (15:10). There is an unbridgeable barrier between the two which keeps them apart. Or the word بحر meaning both river and sea, the verse may signify that under the system instituted by God rivers are fed by rain and snow and their water is always fresh, and though they fall into the sea, sea water is always saltish and bitter. This is in effect an illustration of Divine guidance, which when it is constantly reinforced by fresh revelation remains fresh, sweet and life-giving, but when it becomes stale, it loses all value.

20:78.

Important Words:

طود (mountain) is derived from طاد which means, it was or became firm or steadfast. طود means, a mountain or a great mountain rising high into the sky, an elevated or overlooking tract of land (Lane & Aqrab).

فرق (part) is derived from فرق (faraqa) and means, a piece or portion that is split or separated from a thing; a great flock or herd of sheep or goats only; a group of boys; a mountain; a wave, billow or surge (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

For a more detailed discussion as to how the Israelites passed safely through the sea and how Pharaoh with his hosts was drowned, see 20:78

The idea embodied in the words اضرب بعصاک الحجر has been expressed elsewhere (20:78) in the words فاضرب لھم طریقا فی البحر یبساi.e. "make for them a dry path in the sea." God miraculously so arranged that when the Israelites were crossing the sea it was the time of the low tide and the water of the sea had receded, leaving a dry path for them to pass. But when the Egyptians following them reached the middle of the sea, the high tide returned and the rising water quickly engulfed them.

The words کل فرق may either refer to the two parties of the Egyptians and the Israelites or to the several parties in which the Egyptians might have become divided while they were crossing the sea; or they may refer to each wave of the sea because when the water was receding it looked like a huge mound.