Topic: Of Moses

20:21; 26:33; 27:11; 28:32.

Important Words:

ثعبان (serpent) is derived from ثعب. They say ثعبه i.e. he gave vent to it; or he made it (water, etc.) to flow or run or stream. ثعبان means, a kind of long serpent; a great serpent, whether male or female, but particularly the male; or the serpent in general whether male or female, great or small; also applied to an enormous fabulous serpent (Lane).

Commentary:

The Quran has used three different words for describing the turning of the rod of Moses into a serpent; (1) ثعبان as in the verse under comment and in 26:33; (2) حیة as in 20:21, and (3) جان as in 28:32 and 27:11. The words ثعبان and حیة are applied both to a large or a small serpent, while the word جان signifies only a small serpent. Thus, there is no conflict or contradiction in using these three different words for the same thing, as all of them may be used to give the same meaning, i.e. a small serpent.

Moreover, on carefully pondering over the verses in which these words occur, we find that different words have been used to suit different occasions. The word جان has been used on the occasion when the rod is made to appear as a serpent to Moses alone (27:11) while the words ثعبان and حیة have been used in connection with the occasion when the miracle was wrought in public. This shows that to Moses the rod appeared as only a small serpent. While in the presence of Pharaoh and other men, it was made to appear like a big serpent. Thus the use of three different words for different occasions was not haphazard and casual, but deliberate and evidently intended to serve a definite purpose.

Moreover, in the verses in which the word جان is used, it is not said that the rod actually turned into a جان (small serpent) but that it moved as though it were a جان. This does not mean that the rod necessarily turned into a small serpent but that it only moved quickly like a small serpent, though it may have been a large serpent. So the different words used by the Quran do not conflict with each other, whether the rod be taken as turning into a small serpent or a large one.

It should also be noted here that this miracle did not really contradict any law of nature. If the existence of a thing is proved beyond doubt, it must be admitted, even if we are unable to explain it in the light of the laws of nature, as we know them. Our knowledge of the laws of nature is evidently very limited and so we cannot deny a fact on the basis of our limited and imperfect knowledge. Moreover, the said miracle did not take place in the manner in which it is popularly understood to have occurred. Indeed, miracles shown by God’s Prophets are not like the performance of jugglers. They are meant to serve some great moral or spiritual purpose. One of their primary objects is to bring about certainty of faith and engender feelings of piety and fear of God in the minds of those who witness them. If the rod had actually turned into a serpent, the whole performance must have looked more like the hand-tricks of a juggler than the miracle of a Prophet. In spite of what the Bible might say about this miracle, the Quran lends no support whatever to the view that the rod actually turned into a real and living serpent. No such thing ever took place. The rod only appeared like a moving serpent. It was a sort of a vision in which God either exercised special control over the sight of the onlookers in order to make them see the rod in the form of a serpent or the rod itself was made to appear like a serpent; and this vision was shared by Pharaoh and his courtiers and the enchanters along with Moses. The rod remained a rod, only it appeared to Moses and others as a serpent. It is a spiritual phenomenon of common occurrence that in a vision when man rises above the encumbrances of the flesh and becomes temporarily transported to a spiritual sphere, he can see things taking place which are beyond his ken and are quite invisible to his physical eyes. The miracle of the rod turning into a serpent was one such spiritual experience.

A similar spiritual phenomenon took place when in the time of the Holy Prophet the moon was seen as rent asunder not only by the Holy Prophet but by some of his followers and opponents as well (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). Such visions, which constitute a peculiar state between sleep and wakefulness, are a common spiritual experience of God’s Prophets and His Elect, but sometimes they are shared by ordinary men and by even disbelievers. Tradition tells us that Gabriel whom the Holy Prophet often saw in his visions, was also once seen by his Companions, who were sitting with him (Bukhari, ch. on Iman). Similarly, some angels were seen even by some of the disbelievers at the Battle of Badr (Jarir, vi.47). Another instance of this kind occurred when a Muslim army under the well-known Muslim general, Sariyah, was fighting the enemy in Iraq at a distance of hundreds of miles from Medina. ‘Umar, the Second Khalifah, while delivering his Friday sermon at Medina, saw in a vision that the Muslim army was being over-whelmed by the superior numbers of the enemy and that a disastrous defeat was imminent. Thereupon, ‘Umar suddenly discontinued his sermon and cried out from the pulpit, saying, "O Sariyah, take to the mountain, take to the mountain." Sariyah, hundreds of miles away and surrounded by the deafening noise of the battlefield, heard the voice of ‘Umar and obeyed it; and the Muslim army was saved from destruction (Khamis, ii. 270).

The miracle of Moses mentioned in the verse under comment possessed a special significance. It may be interpreted something like this. God told Moses to throw down his rod which then appeared to him like a serpent; and when subsequently on God’s bidding he took it up, lo! the rod was a mere piece of wood. Now a serpent, in the language of visions and dreams, is a symbol of the enemy, while a rod is emblematic of one’s community (Ta‘tirul-Anam). Thus, by means of this vision, God made Moses understand that if He cast away his people from him, they would become veritable serpents. But if he kept them under his care, they would grow into a strong and well-knit community of righteous and God-fearing men. Moses had in the beginning begged to be excused from being entrusted with the onerous task of reclaiming a morally depraved people, but God told him by means of this vision that the well-being of his people depended upon his taking them in his charge, failing which they would turn into veritable serpents.

Abu Jahl, the arch-enemy of Islam, was also once made to see a similar vision. It is reported that the Holy Prophetone day went to him and asked him to pay a certain sum of money which he owed to a poor man, a stranger in Mecca, but which he had so far declined to pay. On the Holy Prophet’s demand, Abu Jahl, in spite of his great enmity to the Prophet, made the payment at once, and when asked by his friends the reason for his doing so, he said he saw two enraged camels on both sides of Muhammad about to tear him to pieces if he refused to comply with his demand (Hisham). Arabia is a land of camels, so Abu Jahl was made to see camels, while Egypt being a land of magic serpents, Pharaoh was made to see a serpent.

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.

Commentary:

"Asking for breakfast" in a vision denotes "weariness" (Ta‘tirul-Anam) and the verse purports to say that at the "junction of the two seas" i.e. when the Holy Prophet comes, the followers of Moses and Jesus would not accept him. They would continue their journey alone and would refuse to admit that the span of life granted to their Dispensation had come to an end. Then after going on their separate way for a long time and being tired of vainly waiting for the Promised Prophet (Deut. 18:18) they would begin to wonder whether he had already come and they had failed to recognize him. In this verse Moses and his young companion (Jesus) stand for Jews and Christians respectively.

Commentary:

The pronouns in the expressions, "their fish" (v. 62), "they had gone further" (v. 63) and "we betook ourselves" obviously do not refer to Moses and Jesus because they did not live in the time of the Holy Prophet but to their respective peoples.

صخرة (rock) in the language of dreams and visions denotes "a life of vice and sin." So the expression, when we betook ourselves to the rock, means that when the two seas met i.e. when the Mosaic Dispensation came to an end and a new Prophet and a new Dispensation appeared, then Jews and Christians would be sunk in a life of sin and iniquity.

The words, it took its way into the sea in a marvellous manner, signify that true piety and worship of God would take leave of these people and would become the special mark of another people (the followers of Islam) who would become heirs to Divine favours.

The incident of the fish unmistakably points to the whole affair being a vision because when Moses and his young companion were pursuing their journey with the fish as their guide it was not possible for them to forget it.

Commentary:

Who is this عبد (servant of God) in search of whom Moses, in pursuance of Divine command, had undertaken such a long and difficult journey and who is the central figure and hero of the whole story? He is none other than the Holy Prophet Muhammad –his soul having taken an embodied form in Moses’ vision. The following arguments conclusively show that he was indeed the عبد (god’s servant) mentioned in this story:

(a) The Holy Prophet has been called عبد in the Quran at several places (2:24; 8:42; 17:2; 18:2; 25:2; 39:37; 53:11 & 72:20). In fact he is عبد الله (God’s servant) par excellence, because truly speaking the stage of عبد (servant of God) is the highest stage in the spiritual development of man and the Holy Prophet had attained that stage.

(b) The words, upon whom We had bestowed Our Mercy, also clearly refer to the Holy Prophet. He has been particularly spoken of as "a mercy to the whole world" (21:108), an epithet applied in the Quran to none other than the Holy Prophet.

(c) The words, whom We had taught knowledge from Ourselves, also refer to the Holy Prophet. At several places in the Quran it is stated that he was vouchsafed divine knowledge in a very large measure (4:114; 6:92; 20:115 & 27:7).

(d) The "servant of God" had told Moses that he (Moses) would not keep silent (v. 68 below), and the Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "Would that Moses had kept silent! If he had done so, we would have been vouchsafed more knowledge about the unseen" (Bukhari, Kitabut-Tafsir). This shows that the "servant of God" of Moses’ vision and the Holy Prophet were one and the same person.

As a matter of fact, Moses had seen a manifestation of God "in the fire" when travelling from Midian to Egypt (28:30). Later on, however, he was told that a Prophet would appear from among the brethren of the Israelites in whose mouth God would put His own word (Deut. 18:18-22). The words of the prophecy signified that the Promised Prophet would be the object of a greater manifestation of God than Moses. Moses therefore naturally wished to see who "that Prophet" could be. To satisfy his curiosity God made him see in his vision "that Prophet" of much higher spiritual powers. This learned "servant of God" of Moses’ vision who has been popularly known by the name of Khizr was the spirit of our Noble Master, the Holy Prophet Muhammad, which had assumed a physical tabernacle. See also 7:144.

Important Words:

امرا (evil) is derived from امرا (amara). امرہ means, he commanded him. They say امرالقوم (amira) i.e. the people became many. امرالامر means, the affair or case became severe, distressful, grievous or wonderful. امر (imrun) means, a severe, distressful or grievous thing; or a terrible and foul or very foul, evil or abominable thing; or a wonderful thing. The Quranic words لقد جئت شیئا امرا mean, verily thou hast done a severe, distressful or grievous thing; or a terrible and foul or evil or abominable thing (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).

Commentary:

The preceding several verses served only as an introduction to the subject of the Isra’ of Moses. With the present verse, however, begins an account of the incidents which Moses actually saw in his vision. Moses is here represented as having objected to the very first act of his learned companion, in spite of the fact that he had promised not to do so. The Holy Prophet, however, was shown in his own vision as having kept silent all the way. This contrast in the behaviour of these two great Prophets represented the attitude of their followers towards their respective religions. Whereas the Companions of the Holy Prophet remained loyal to their Faith under the severest persecution and difficulties, the followers of Moses ignored and defied theirs when it suited them. On the other hand the three incidents of both visions are identical in their interpretation and significance though the metaphors used to describe them are different.

سفینة (boat) in the language of dreams denotes "worldly riches" This interpretation is supported by the Quran also (17:67). In this sense of the word, the embarkation of both Moses and his learned companion who, as is explained above, was the embodied form of the Holy Prophet, signifies that the followers of both these Prophets will have worldly riches in plenty in their respective periods.

The words, he staved it in, when interpreted, signify that the Holy Prophet would lay down commandments which would, as it were, make a hole in the boat of the material prosperity and riches of his followers, i.e. he would see to it that wealth does not accumulate in the hands of a few but that it continues to change hands and is fairly distributed among all sections of Muslims. To effect this Islam has made the giving of Zakah obligatory, has totally prohibited all transactions based on interest and by its law of inheritance has sought to distribute the wealth of a dying person among all his children, parents, wives and other near relatives. It has also prohibited gambling and has laid down laws to better and improve the condition and status of labourers. The materialistic and wealthy Jews and Christians could not view such a division of wealth with favour and regarded it as reckless waste. All their economic laws tend to increase the wealth of the rich and to help it accumulate in a few hands. Whereas in his vision Moses objected to the hole being made in the boat by his learned companion which, interpreted in accordance with the language of dreams, meant that his people would be too much enamoured of material wealth to accept laws aiming at its equitable distribution, the Holy Prophet in his own Vision refused to accept the cup of water offered to him which signified that his followers would prefer religion to the world.

Just as Moses in his vision found fault with his learned companion when the latter made a hole in the boat, similarly his people found fault with the Holy Prophet when he called upon his followers to spend their money in the cause of God. They even taunted him for making such demands (5:65 & 36:48).

27:8; 28:30.

Important Words:

آنست (I perceived) is derived from انس (anisa). They say انس به i.e. he became familiar with him. آنسه (anasa-hu) means, he perceived it; he saw him or it and looked at him or it; he heard it, namely a sound; he felt it; he was sensible of it; he knew it; he had certain knowledge of it; he was acquainted with آنست منه الرشد means, I knew him to be characterised by maturity of intelligence and rectitude of actions and good management of affairs (Lane & Aqrab).

قبس (brand). They say قبس منه ناراً he took fire from him. قبس النار means, he lighted or kindled the fire. قبس means fire, or live coal; a brand or a firebrand; a piece of fire which one takes upon the end of a stick (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

Opinions differ as to what it was that Moses actually saw. In fact it was a vision that he had seen. The language of metaphor which has been used in this account of Moses also lends support to the view that he had only seen a vision and that he himself was conscious of the fact that he had seen no fire of wood or coal. If he had actually seen a material fire of wood, Moses would have used the words "I perceive the fire" and not the words "I perceive a fire", as he did.

Visions, however, are of two kinds: (a) those that concern only an individual. In such visions the Divine manifestation which is called ولایت (manifestation shown to God’s beloved other than the Prophets) in the spiritual terminology remains confined to the concerned individual. (b) Visions in which جلوهٔ نبوت (manifestation shown to the Prophets) is shown, the Divine manifestation extends also to the Prophet’s people.

By the words, "perhaps I may bring you a brand therefrom or find guidance at the fire", Moses meant to say that if it were جلوۂ نبوت that he had seen, then he would be given a new Shari‘ah for his people but if it were only جلوۂ ولایت he would receive some guidance for his own spiritual advancement.

It may be of interest to note that fire is of three kinds; (a) that which has light and also burns; (b) that which has no light but it burns; and (c) that which has light but does not burn. The fire which Moses had seen seemed to belong to the last category.

The word "tarry" implies that Moses wanted privacy for communion with God, therefore he asked his family to remain behind.

According to the Quran the incident to which reference has been made in this verse took place after Moses had completed his ten years of service with Shu‘aib in Midian and was actually on his way to Egypt with his wife and not as the Bible says that it occurred before he left for Egypt and was staying with Shu‘aib and that when one day he led the flock of Jethro, his father-in-law, to the back side of the desert and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb, "the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush" (Exod. 3:1-3). Consideration of all the relevant facts of geography contradicts this Biblical account as the Lord appeared to Moses on mount Horeb which is in the desert of Sinai hundreds of miles away from Midian; and Moses after having had this experience could not possibly have gone back to Jethro, with the flock to apprise him of it the same evening as the Biblical account implies. Thus the Quranic account, is more in accordance with reason and facts of geography than the Biblical account. According to it the incident occurred after Moses had left Midian for good.

20:11; 28:30.

Important Words:

تصطلون (warm yourselves) is derived from اصطلی which is the same as صلی. They say صلی النار i.e. he was or became burned by the fire or he endured the heat of the fire. اصطلی means, he warmed or burned himself by the fire (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

It was not actual fire that Moses had seen. Had it been so he would have used the expression انی آنست النار i.e. I have perceived the fire, instead of انی آنست ناراً i.e. I have perceived a fire. In fact it was a vision that Moses had seen, fire symbolizing the love of God. It is worthy of note that most of the major incidents connected with Moses that have been mentioned in the Quran, were not incidents which actually took place in the material and physical world but were visions which symbolized great landmarks in his spiritual development and prophetic mission. Besides the vision about the rod (7:118) and that concerning the breaking of the mountain into pieces (7:144) there are other important instances of such visions in the Quran, the verse under comment affording one such instance. See also 20:11.