سُلَیۡمٰنَ

2833

Commentary:

Some Christian orientalists, as is their wont, have vainly sought to impugn the Divine origin of the Quran by trying to show that the expression Bismillah has been borrowed from earlier Scriptures. Wherry in his "commentary" says that it has been borrowed from Zend-Avesta.

Sale has expressed an identical view, while Rodwell is of the opinion that Pre-Islamic Arabs borrowed it from Jews and subsequently it was incorporated in the Quran by the Holy Prophet. To say that because this expression was to be found in some former Scriptures, therefore it must have necessarily been borrowed from one of them by the Quran does not stand to reason. According to Muslim belief Prophets were raised among every people (35:25) and those Prophets like the Holy Prophet of Islam also received Divine revelation and therefore there can be, and there actually are to be, found in the Quran expressions of identical import with those in other Divine Scriptures. This fact, if anything, only proves that the Quran has originated from the same Source from which those Scriptures had originated. In the verse under comment the expression Bismillah is shown to have been used by Prophet Solomon. So there can be no question of its being borrowed or plagiarized by the Quran. What the Quran claims is only this that no other Scripture has used this expression in the form and manner in which it has done. And the charge is also belied by facts of history that the Holy Prophet took this expression from pre-Islamic Arabs. The Arabs had never used it before it was revealed in the Quran. On the contrary, they had a special aversion for the use of the Divine attribute Ar-Rahman (25:61) which forms an integral part of Bismillah. See also 1:1.

2837

Commentary:

Solomon seems evidently to have become greatly offended with the Queen’s behaviour in sending him presents which seemed to include a throne. He took it as an insult. He had demanded her unconditional surrender and instead was presented with paltry presents. The Sabaeans had either attacked Solomon’s territory or had sought to create unrest in it. This is why the sending of presents offended and annoyed him. In ordinary circumstances, as a righteous man of God, he should have been pleased with the presents.

2844

Important Words:

کشفت عن ساقیھا (she uncovered her shanks) ساق (saqun) is derived from ساق (saqa). ساق means, leg; shank; the part between ankle and knee. ساق الشجر means, the trunk of the tree. The Arabs say, کشف الامر عن ساقه i.e. the affair became distressful. الکشف عن الساق is a well-known Arabic idiom meaning to become prepared to meet the difficulty or to become perturbed or perplexed. قامت الحرب علی ساق means, the battle became vehement. کشف عن ساقیه literally meaning he uncovered his shanks signifies, he prepared himself to meet the difficulty; he became perplexed. The expression کشفت عن ساقیھا would thus mean: (1) she uncovered her shanks; (2) she got ready to meet the situation; (3) she became perturbed or perplexed (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

Solomon wanted the Queen to give up idol worship and accept the true faith. For this purpose he wisely adopted such means as should have led the noble and sagacious lady to see the error of her ways. The throne which Solomon caused to be prepared for her was also prepared with this end in view. It was made much more beautiful and in every respect superior to her own throne of which she was very proud. Solomon did so in order that she might realize that he was God’s favourite and had been endowed with material and spiritual gifts in far greater abundance than those given to her. The palace referred to in the verse was also constructed with the same object in view. As the verse shows, the entrance to the palace was paved with slabs of glass, below which ran a stream of crystal clear water. When the Queen entered the palace she mistook the transparent glass for water and uncovered her shanks, which in view of the Arabic expression کشفت عن ساقیھا signifies that the sight of the water perplexed her and she did not know what to do. By this device Solomon directed her attention to the fact that as she had mistaken the slabs of glass for water, similarly the sun and other celestial bodies which she worshipped were not the real source of light. They only emitted light but were lifeless things. It was God Almighty Who had bestowed upon them the light which they emitted. In this way Solomon succeeded in the object he had in view. The noble lady made a confession of her error and from a worshipper of idols of wood and stone she became a devoted votary of the One True God. It is regrettable that superstition and gross credulity have caused men of weak faith to give the homage, which is due to the Great Invisible God, to helpless creatures and lifeless material objects.

It is one of the characteristics of the Quran that whereas the Bible has maligned and defamed the Prophets of God, it (the Quran) has exonerated and cleared them of all sins, filthy accusations and aspersions cast upon them by the Bible.

Solomon is one of those Israelite Prophets whom the Bible has perhaps calumniated and slandered most. The Quran has taken special care to exculpate him of all slanders and calumnies. The Bible says of Solomon that his wives had "turned away his heart after other gods" (1 Kings 11 :4) and that "the Lord was angry with Solomon because his heart was turned away from the Lord, God of Israel" (1 Kings 11 :9). The Quran contradicts these blasphemous charges and says in the present verse that the Queen of Sheba gave up idolatry and came over to the true faith through the noble efforts of Solomon and that he himself was "a most excellent servant of God and turned to Him again and again" (38:31).

109

Important Words:

تتلوا (followed). See 2:114

شیاطین (rebellious men). See 2:15.

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

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

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

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

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

Commentary:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3401

Commentary:

After briefly reverting to the primary theme with which this Surah had opened, the present verse gives another example of a Divine Prophet—Solomon, upon whom God had bestowed great material wealth, power and honour, but who also suffered at the hands of his evil-minded enemies. Reversion to the primary theme is meant to tell the Holy Prophet that he too, like the great Prophets, David and Solomon, will have to go through great trials and tribulations in the way of God.

3405

Commentary:

While here the words are "a mere body," in 34:15 the expression used is "a worm of the earth." The reference in both the places may either be to Solomon’s son and heir, Rehoboam, a worthless fellow, in whose reign Solomon’s kingdom fell victim to disintegration and disruption, or to Jeroboam who raised the standard of revolt against the House of David and succeeded in winning the allegiance of ten tribes of Israel. Jeroboam was an idol worshipper and under his lead the Israelites relapsed into image-worship (1 Kings 12:28).

The words "he turned to God" seem to imply that Solomon had realized that after his death his kingdom would not maintain its integrity under his incompetent and inefficient successor. So he turned to God and prayed to Him. The prayer is given in the next verse.

2410

Important Words:

الجبال (the mountains) is the plural of جبل which is derived from جبل (jabala). جبله علی کذا means, God created him and adapted him to it. جبل (Jabalun) means, a mountain; a rocky tract; any rocky elevation; the lord or chief of a people; their learned man; a man who does not move from his place. جبال means, mountains, big or learned men; people living in mountains etc. (Lane & Aqrab). See also 13:32.

الطیر (the birds) means, a bird or birds. طائر which is the singular of الطیر means, a bird; an omen; the cause of actions good or bad; actions good or bad and their consequences; natural powers of man; a highly righteous and spiritual man (Lane & Aqrab). As a bird flies high in the air and builds its nest on lofty trees or mountains, therefore a man who soars high in the spiritual firmament is called a طائر in spiritual terminology. See also 3:50; 7:132 & 17:14.

Commentary:

This verse has been very much misunderstood and misinterpreted. The misunderstanding arises from the far-fetched construction placed upon it by some commentators. There is, however, nothing in the wording of the verse itself to justify the element of mystery introduced into it. A few simple words used metaphorically in order to add elegance and beauty to the diction of the verse have been distorted to render it a veritable riddle. The words "We subjected the mountains and the birds to celebrate God’s praise with David" have been taken literally to mean that the mountains and birds were under David’s control and when he sang the praises of God they actually joined with him in singing those praises. They simply mean that big men (الجبال) and highly spiritual men (الطیر) glorified God and sang Divine praises along with David. And if according to the verse, the mountains and birds were subjected to David there was nothing extraordinary in the mountains and the birds being subject to his control as at several other places in the Quran not only mountains and birds but all other things in the heavens and the earth—the sun, the moon, the stars, the day and the night, the animals, the birds, the rivers, the seas, the winds, the clouds etc., are stated to have been subjected to man (2:165; 7:55; 22:38 & 45:13-14). The word الجبال; in the present verse, as stated under Important Words above, signifies also mountainous territory or "people living in the mountains" as the name of a place sometimes stands for its people (12:83). Thus the subjection of "the mountains" to David may signify that he conquered and subjugated wild and savage mountain tribes. The Bible also refers to this fact. It says, "And Hiram, King of Tyre, sent messengers to David, and cedar trees, and carpenters, and masons and they built David a house. So all the elders of Israel came to the King to Hebron; and King David made a league with them in Hebron before the Lord and they appointed David King over Israel" ( II Sam. chap. 5). Thus the words, "We subjected the mountains and the birds to celebrate God’s praises with David" have been particularly used about David in the verse because he was a great conqueror and subduer of wild mountain tribes.

Similarly, celebration by birds and mountains of God’s praises should also occasion no surprise. Elsewhere in the Quran we read that all things, animate or inanimate, the angels, animals, birds, the heavens and the earth, even the forces of nature, sing the praises of God, only man cannot understand their glorification (13:14; 17:45; 21:20-21; 24:42; 59:2; 61:2; 62:2; & 64:2). The glorification of God by these things which is the carrying out by them of the duties assigned to them by God demonstrate: that God is perfect and completely free from all flaws, failings and frailties and so is His handiwork.

The word "birds" used in the verse may also signify actual birds. In this sense the reference would be that David made free use of birds for carrying messages in time of war which had been especially trained for this purpose. Or it may signify flocks of birds which followed David’s victorious armies and feasted on the dead bodies of his fallen foes. Lastly, the word "birds," may signify men of high determination and great resolve who are ever ready to scale great heights and are not afraid of difficulties and dangers in the cause of religion. In brief, the verse means to say that men of ordinary spiritual caliber had become highly spiritual and soared very high in the spiritual firmament through the purifying company of David.

The verse may also be rendered as, "We subjected the mountains and the birds to David; they all celebrated God’s praises." This rendering removes much misunderstanding and difficulty.

For a fuller explanation of this and the next three verses see 34:11-14 & 38:19, 20, 37, 38, 39.

The expression, "We gave Solomon the right understanding of the matter," has been used to show that Solomon’s policy of moderation and conciliation was right in the then obtaining circumstances. In this verse the Quran defends Solomon against the charge levelled at him by some Jewish writers of having pursued a weak policy which brought about the downfall of his dynasty after him. The words, however, should not be taken to mean that the strong policy adopted by David in his own time was wrong. Any misunderstanding leading to this inference has been dispelled by the following clause: "And to each of them We gave wisdom and knowledge," which makes it quite clear that the policies of both David and Solomon were best in the circumstances and quite suited to the particular occasion.