قَالُوا۟

3:16, 134, 196, 199; 4:14, 58, 123; 5:13, 86; 7:44; 9:72, 89, 100; 10:10; 13:36; 22:15, 24; 25:11; 32:20; 47:16; 58:23; 61:13; 64:10.

3:16; 4:58.

Important Words:

بشر (give glad tidings) is derived from بشر (bashshara), i.e. he gave glad tidings, which again is derived from بشر(bashara). They say بشر i.e. he laid bare its skin. Thus البشرة means, the outer and visible part of the skin. So بشر(bashshara) means, he gave or imparted news which changed the colour of the listener. The word has generally come to be used in connection with good or happy news. But it is also sometimes used in connection with bad news (e.g. 3:22). بشیر means, one who announces good news to a people or a person. All Prophets are spoken of as بشیر and نذیر i.e. givers of good news to those who believe in them and givers of bad news to those who reject them (Aqrab & Mufradat).

الصالحات (good works) is the plural of الصالحة which is derived from the verb صلح (the opposite of فسد) meaning, he or it became good or suitable and proper. ھذا الشیء یصلح لك means, this thing is suitable to you or is fit or meet for you (Aqrab). So الصالحات would be used about all those deeds and actions which are not only good intrinsically but are also meet and suitable. See also under 2:12.

جنات (gardens) which is the plural of جنة (a garden) is derived from جن meaning, it veiled, concealed, or covered a thing. So جنة means, any garden having trees by which the ground is covered or concealed; an orchard or garden having luxuriousness and denseness of verdure (Aqrab & Lane). Heaven has been called جنة or garden, because: (1) the mercy of God will 'cover' its dwellers just as trees in an orchard cover the ground thereof; or (2) because the blessings of Heaven are 'hidden' from the eyes of man"; or again (3) because Heaven is like a garden in which the trees represent good faith and the streams good actions.

الانھار (streams) is the plural of نھر (nahr) or نھر (nahar). They say نھرالماء i.e. the water flowed on the earth and cut out a channel for itself. Thus نھر (nahr) or نھر (nahar) means, a channel through which a stream or a river flows; a stream or river itself. نھر (nahar) also means, abundance (Aqrab).

ازواج (mates) is the plural of زوج which signifies, anything that is one of a pair or couple; it does not mean a pair but only one of a pair, whether male or female (Aqrab). The word زوج also means, a comrade (Lane).

خالدون (shall abide) is derived fromخلد which means, he remained and lived on. خلدبمکان means, he stayed or abided in a place. خلود means, staying on, or living without change or deterioration for a long time but not necessarily forever (Aqrab & Mufradat).

Commentary:

This verse gives a brief description of the rewards which the believers will have in the next world.

Critics of Islam have raised all sorts of objections to this description. They say that: (1) The promise of such rewards is only an appeal to greed and a faith based upon greed is not worth the name. (2) The Quran promises material rewards to the believers and this is objectionable. (3) If the rewards of the next world are going to be material, then it must be supposed that the same body which one has in this life will be resurrected after death and this is against all reason, because this body perishes and the particles of one body are used in the making of several other bodies. To whom and to how many will then the same body be given in the next world? (4) Believers are promised wives in Heaven which shows that sex relations will continue in the next world. An appeal to sex is very objectionable for spiritual ends. Sex relations are necessary only for the continuation of the race in this world. Why should there be such a thing in the next? (5) The Quranic Paradise appears to be a place of luxury and sensual pleasures. There is thus nothing spiritual about the Islamic conception of the next life.

This criticism is based on a failure to understand the real Islamic teaching. The Quran has made it clear that in this life it is not possible for man to comprehend the nature of the rewards of the next. It says: No soul knows what joy of the eyes is kept hidden for them, as a reward for their actions (32:18). That is to say, whatever the Quran says about Heaven and Hell is only metaphorical. The descriptions are not to be taken in the sense in which they are ordinarily taken in this world. The Holy Prophet says of the blessings of the next world: "No eye has seen them, nor has any ear heard of them; nor can the mind of man form any conception of them" (Bukhari). If the blessings of the next life are to be like the joys of this life, we should be able to form some idea of them, no matter how remote they may be. The blessings of the next life, therefore, must be quite different from the blessings of this life.

At another place in the Quran we read: The similitude of the Heaven promised to the God-fearing is that through it flow streams; its fruit is everlasting, and so is its shade. That is the reward of those who are righteous, and the reward of the disbelievers is Fire (13:36). Now the fruit of this world is not everlasting, so in order to be everlasting the fruit of the next world as well as its streams will have to be taken as something other than material. Again we read: A similitude of the Paradise promised to the righteous: Therein are rivers of water which corrupts not; and rivers of milk of which the taste changes not; and rivers of wine, a delight to those who drink; and rivers of clarified honey (47:16). There is nothing material in this. About the wine of Heaven we read: Wherein there will be no intoxication, nor will they be exhausted thereby (37:48). Again, And their Lord will give them to drink a beverage that is pure (76:22). Thus, wine in Heaven will not only be pure itself but will purify the drinkers as well. Elsewhere the Quran says that the pure wine of Paradise will be tempered with Tasnim (83:28), which means 'abundance' and 'height '. In the cup of wine that will pass from hand to hand in Heaven God says there will be neither vanity nor sin (52:24). As against this, the wine of this world is described in the Quran as: Wine and the game of hazard and idols and divining arrows are only an abomination of Satan’s handiwork. So shun each one of them that you may prosper. Satan desires only to create enmity and hatred among you by means of wine and the game of hazard and to keep you back from the remembrance of Allah and from Prayer (5:91, 92). This proves that the wine of the next world is quite different; it is pure and purifying and nothing material.

The blessings of Heaven have indeed nothing in common with their counterparts of this world except the name. Ibn ‘Abbas, the Prophet’s cousin, also says the same thing (Jarir).

Now the question arises: Why have the blessings of Heaven been given the names used of material things in this world? This is so because Islam is meant for all kinds of people. It does not address only the intellectually advanced but also all others. Therefore it uses simple words which can be understood by all. The disbelievers used to say that the Prophet disallowed the good things of the world, and his followers were thus deprived of all blessings. Therefore, while describing the blessings in store for the Muslims, God used the names of things generally looked upon as good in this world and told the believers that they would get all these things in a better form. The water of this world spoils, but believers would have water in the next which will not spoil. Gardens are blessings but they decay; so believers will have gardens which will last forever. The unbelievers drank intoxicating wine which made them drunk and which dulled their senses; but the wine which the believers will get in Heaven will be pure and purifying. It is to bring out this important contrast that familiar words are used; otherwise there is nothing common between the delights of this world and the blessings of the next.

It may be added here that, according to Islam, the next life is not spiritual in the sense that it will just consist of a mental state and nothing else. Even in the next life the human soul will have a kind of body; only, it will not be material. One can glean some idea of this from the phenomenon of dreams. The Quran says: Allah takes the souls of human beings at the time of their death; and (He also takes the souls of), those that have not died, during their sleep. Then He retains those against which He has decreed death, and sends (back) the others till an appointed term. In that surely are signs for a people who reflect (39:43). Death and sleep resemble each other, the difference being that whereas in death the human soul is completely and permanently severed from the body, in sleep the severance is only temporary and partial. Now the scenes which a man witnesses in a dream cannot be called purely mental or spiritual, because he has a body also in his dreams and finds himself sometimes in gardens and streams, and eats fruits and drinks milk. It is hard to say that the contents of dreams are only mental states. The milk enjoyed in a dream is no doubt a real experience, but no one can say that it is the material milk found in this world. Dreams have a meaning of their own. For instance, eating mangoes in a dream symbolizes a righteous child or a righteous heart; eating grapes signifies love and fear of God; and eating bananas, a good and lawful subsistence which is also easy of attainment. In short, the spiritual blessings of the next life will not be a mere subjective realization of the gifts of God with which we become familiar in this world. As a matter of fact, what we enjoy here is just a representation of the real and true gifts of God which man will find in the next world.

Again, gardens represent faith; and streams, good actions. Gardens cannot prosper without streams, nor faith without good actions. Therefore faith and actions are inseparable for the attainment of salvation. In the next world, gardens will remind the believers of their faith in this life and streams will remind them of their good works. They will know, then, that their faith and good works have not gone in vain.

The flowing of streams or rivers beneath the gardens also implies that every person in Heaven will have a free and unrestricted enjoyment of his portion. In this world, a single stream often serves several gardens and there is the possibility of a quarrel over it; but in Heaven each garden will have its own stream exclusively meant for itself. See also 10:10.

It is wrong to conclude from the words, This is what was given us before, that in Heaven the believers will be given such fruit as they will have enjoyed in this world, because, as already explained, the two are not the same. The fruit of the next world will, in fact, be the image of the quality of their own faith. When they will eat it, they will at once recognize and remember that it is the fruit of the faith they had in this world; and it will be out of gratitude for this that they will say: This is what was given us before.

The expression rendered as, was given us, may also mean, 'was promised us'; and in this sense it would mean, this is what was promised to us in the world.

The word متشابھا (mutually resembling) refers to the resemblance between the acts of worship performed by believers in this world and the fruits thereof in Heaven. The acts of worship performed in this life will appear to believers as fruit in the next. The more sincere and the more appropriate a man’s worship, the more will he enjoy his portion of the fruit in Paradise and the better in quality will it be. It, therefore, lies in one’s own power to improve the quality of one’s fruit as one likes.

The expression, mutually resembling, also implies that in Paradise one spiritual food will completely harmonize with the other, so that the possibility of spiritual disease will be eliminated altogether. It also means that the food in Heaven will be suited to each and every individual and to his stage of progress and degree of development.

The words, they will abide, signify that the believers will go on abiding in Heaven and will not be subject to any change or decay. Man dies only when he cannot assimilate food or when someone kills him. But since the food of Paradise will be perfectly suited to every individual and since man will have pure and peaceful companions, death and decay will automatically disappear.

The Faithful will also have pure mates in Heaven. A good wife is a joy and a comfort. The Faithful try to have good wives in this world, and they will have good and virtuous company in the next. Yet these joys of Heaven are not physical.

A typical Christian comment on this subject is made by Sir William Muir: "It is very remarkable that the notices in the Coran of this voluptuous paradise are almost entirely confined to a time when, whatever the tendency of his desires, Mohammad was living chaste and temperate with a single wife of three score years of age. It is noteworthy that in the Medina Surahs, that is, in all the voluminous revelations of the ten years following the Hegira women are only twice referred to as constituting one of the delights of paradise and on both occasions in these simple words: 'And to them (believers) there shall be therein pure wives'. Was it that the soul of Mohammad had at that period no longings after what he had then to satiety the enjoyment of? Or that a closer contact with Jewish principles and morality repressed the budding pruriency of the revelation, and covered with merited confusion the picture of his sensual paradise which had been drawn at Mecca?" (Muir, page 76).

It is amazing how these Christian critics with pretensions to culture and learning will draw on sheer speculation to attack the honour of a Teacher who is held in the deepest reverence and devotion by many millions of men and women all over the world. They seem emboldened to do so, because Christians today hold political sway over the Muslims. A few centuries of power have made them forget that Muslims ruled over Christendom for a full 1,000 years, and during this time they never said anything unbecoming about Jesus. They respected Christian susceptibilities when Christians were quite unprotected and were much weaker than Muslims are today. Would to God Christians did not feel so elated!

Sir William conveniently ignores the fact that there are other things besides women which are mentioned in the Meccan chapters and to which there is no reference in the Medinite chapters. We read in the Meccan chapters that there will be wine, honey and rivers of milk in Paradise. Was the Holy Prophet deprived even of these things at Mecca that he should have compensated himself by imagining them in Paradise? Nothing could be more absurd than this. Personally the Holy Prophet was much better off at Mecca than he was at Medina. His rich wife Khadijah was then alive and she had placed all her wealth at his disposal. By the time he reached Medina, most of this wealth had been spent in good works and the Holy Prophet was left a poor man with little to live on. If the picture of Paradise was an imaged compensation for his wants, it should have emerged at Medina instead of at Mecca.

Supposing Sir William is right, cannot critics of Christianity say justifiably that Jesus imagined himself the king of the Jews because he was persecuted everywhere? Could they not also say that as Jesus saw nothing of sex life in this world, he remained obsessed with the idea of a second advent and imagined himself a bridegroom taking no less than five virgins for wives? In the words of the New Testament, he is reported to have said: "Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were foolish, and five were wise. For the foolish, when they took their lamps, took no oil with them: but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps…And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are going out. But the wise answered, saying, Peradventure there will not be enough for us and you: go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went away to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage feast; and the door was shut" (Matt. 25:1-10). A bridegroom surrounded by a bevy of virgins—is not this the Heaven of Jesus’ imagination?

But to revert to the subject; the disbelievers at Mecca used to taunt the Muslims about their poverty, saying they had nothing of the good things which they had, so God took over their own phrases and said that the rewards which believers would have in Paradise would be even better. When Islam was established at Medina, the disbelievers gave up their taunts. So God also dropped the earlier descriptions of Paradise. The descriptions in their deep significance, however, hold for all time.

At Mecca, moreover, it was necessary to explain and emphasize the basic belief of Islam. Therefore, greater detail of doctrine is found in the Meccan chapters, and as Paradise, the abode of believers in the afterlife, is an important item of belief, it is dealt with in detail in them. At Medina, on the contrary, practical matters like personal ethics and social legislation became more important. Therefore, greater attention was given to them in the Medinite chapters. The Meccan Surahs also abound in descriptions of Hell. What are they a compensation for?

Sir William Muir also suggests that the Holy Prophet changed his views about Paradise under the influence of the Jews and the Christians of Medina. But he forgets that the stock criticism made by Christian writers is that some Christian slaves had taught the Holy Prophet the Christian scriptures, the substance of which was incorporated in the Quran. Sir William himself alleges that the Holy Prophetlearnt Christianity from Suhaib, a Roman slave at Mecca (The Life of Mahomet, p.67). If the Holy Prophet at Mecca already knew the Christian teachings, he need not have waited for their influence until his arrival at Medina. In point of fact, in the Jewish and the Christian scriptures, there are no descriptions of Paradise. The Jews and the Christians have remained so engrossed in the affairs of this life that their Books do not say much about the life to come. The promises made by their Prophets about the next life have always been taken by them to pertain only to this life. It cannot be imagined that anybody could be influenced by such a teaching.

Important Words:

سبحانك (Holy art Thou). The word سبحان is the infinitive of سبح for which see 2:31. The infinitive form is used to intensify the meaning.

Commentary:

As the angels were conscious of their nature and limitations, they frankly confessed that they were unable to reflect God’s attributes as man could do, i.e. they could reflect only such of His attributes as He, in His eternal wisdom, had given them the power of reflecting. Man was a fuller image of God than the angels, or, for that matter, any other created being. Says God: We have created man in the best of constitutions (95:5).

Important Words:

فارض (old) is derived from فرض. They say فرضت البقرة meaning, the cow became old (Lane).

اعوان (full-grown) is derived from عان. They say عانت المراة i.e. the woman attained middle age. So عوان is said of one that has attained middle age. الحرب العوان means, the hottest and bloodiest part of a battle (Aqrab).

Commentary:

See under 2:72.

Important Words:

صفراء (of a dun colour) is the feminine from أصفر which signifies a thing having the colour of gold; yellow-coloured or saffron-coloured (Aqrab).

فاقع (pure and rich) is derived from فقع which means: (1) it was of a rich, pure and unmixed colour; or (2) its golden colour was rich and pure. فاقع means: (1) possessing pure and rich colour; (2) possessing rich and pure golden colour. Thus it is both general and particular (Aqrab).

Commentary:

See under 2:72.

Important Words:

البقر (cows) is the plural ofالبقرة (a cow). The word is used for both male and female (Aqrab).

Commentary:

See under 2:72.

67:16.

Commentary:

The Israelites had lived for a long time among the Egyptians who had great veneration for the cow. Thus reverence for the cow had crept into the minds of the Israelites as well. This is why, when they made an idol for themselves, they made it in the shape of a calf (Quran 2:52 & Exod. 32:4). It was, therefore, quite in the fitness of things that, in order to root out this evil inclination from the hearts of the Israelites, they should have been repeatedly commanded to sacrifice the cow. And this was actually the case (Num. 19:1-9; Lev. 4:1-21; 16:3, 11; etc.) A nation which freely slaughters an animal can never think of deifying it.

In the verses under comment, i.e. vv. 68 to 72, mention is made of Moses having ordered the Israelites to sacrifice a cow. It appears that at first they were bidden to sacrifice an ordinary cow, but it seems they had a particular cow which served as a pet among them and they had a natural misgiving that the order pertained to that cow. So they repeatedly asked Moses to specify the cow which God meant to be slaughtered, and as a result of their questionings some conditions were added to specify the animal. Finally, when the description given by Moses corresponded to the particular cow which they had in view, they had perforce to say, Now hast thou brought the truth, the words showing that from the very beginning they had in their mind some particular cow to which they thought the command pertained. Caught in their own net, they were guided aright and had to slaughter the very cow which served as a pet among them and thus a great step was taken to uproot the evil from their hearts.

This incident finds mention in the Bible also (Num. 19:1-9). The Quranic version, however, differs slightly from that of the Bible. According to the Quran, the Israelites were at first ordered to slaughter an ordinary cow, and it was only on their repeated questioning that descriptions were added to specify it. On the other hand, the Biblical version makes no mention of this questioning, but tells us that at the very outset the Israelites were ordered to slaughter a cow answering a particular description. Again, the narrative of the Quran, shows that it was with great reluctance that the Israelites finally complied with the command, but the Bible throws no light on the manner in which the divine behest was carried out. It is not difficult to see on which side the truth lies. It is too much to believe that the Israelites, who were ever ready to quarrel with Moses on receipt of an injunction against their wishes, should have carried out, without question, the order relating to the slaughter of a cow.

2:171.

3:113, 182.

Commentary:

The verse means that whenever Islam is presented to Jews, they, far from reflecting over its claims, consider it enough to say that they will believe in what is sent to Israelite Prophets only, and not in the revelation of outsiders, although the revelation they reject on such flimsy grounds fulfils the prophecies contained in their own Scriptures about a new Book. Further, it is added that the statement that they would adhere to what was revealed to Israelite Prophets is absurd, seeing that they had opposed even their own Prophets in their time.

This verse also makes it clear what the word مصدقا means when followed by the preposition لام. The expression has been used as a proof of the truth of the Quran, and it is therefore clear that it conveys the sense of "fulfilling" and not that of "confirming". It is only the fulfilment of prophecies in the Bible that can serve as evidence of the truth of the Quran. In this connection, see also 2:42.

For the prophecies alluded to in this verse, i.e. the prophecies contained in the Bible about the Quran and the Holy Prophet, the reader is referred to Deut. 18:15-19; Acts 3:19-24; Deut. 33:2; Matt. 21:42-44; Isa. 21:13-17; 28:9-13; chap. 42; 62:2-4; Dan. 7; etc.

For a discussion of the words, why did you attempt to slay the Prophets, see under 2:62.

2:64; 4:155; 7:172.

Important Words:

اشربوا (were permeated with) is derived from شرب meaning, he drank. اشرب means, he was made to drink. The expression,اشرب فی قلبه حب فلان means, the love of such and such a person permeated his heart (Aqrab). The word is so used because love is like alcohol that intoxicates one who partakes of it. The clause, اشربوا فی قلوبھم العجل (lit. they were made to drink into their hearts the calf) must really be read as اشربوا فی قلوبھم حب العجل (lit. they were made to drink into their hearts the love of the calf), the word حب (love) being understood before the word عجل (calf).

Commentary:

For an explanation of the expression, raised high above you the Mount, see under 2:64.

The words, they said, We hear and we disobey, signify that they practically refused to obey God. They did not necessarily use these exact words; for the word, as pointed out under 2:31, sometimes conveys the sense not of actual speech but of practical conduct.

Reference to calf-worship in verse 93 is not a mere reiteration of what has been already said in verse 55; the incident has been mentioned here as an illustration of what has been said about the Jews in the previous verse. Their attention is drawn to their conduct in the days of Moses. When Moses was absent from them for a short time only, they took the image of a calf for their idol, although they had witnessed how God had helped Moses and had shown mighty Signs at his hands; and that at a time when they had given a solemn promise not to worship anything besides God. In spite of that promise, they showed active opposition to the commandments of God by their deeds.

In the concluding portion of the verse, it is pointed out that the Jews professed to believe in what was revealed to them by God, but their belief was of a strange character for in spite of it, they persisted in their opposition to the Prophets. If this was believing, then their faith was only leading them astray.

Important Words:

اله (God) is derived from اله (alaha) which means, he worshipped. So اله means, a thing or person or being worshipped, whether true or false; a deity (Aqrab).

Commentary:

Jacob or Israel was the son of Isaac who was a son of Abraham. Thus Ishmael was the uncle of Jacob, and yet the children of Jacob here include Ishmael among their "fathers" which proves two things: firstly, that the word اب (father) is also used of uncle; and secondly, that up to the time of Jacob’s sons, Ishmael was held in due respect by the Israelites. Nay, the children of Israel mention the name of Ishmael even before that of their own grandfather, Isaac, and do not mention any other son of Abraham.

The words, were you present when death came to Jacob, signify that the principle of submission to the will of God is not an innovation introduced by Islam, but has been recognized by good and righteous people in all times and even Israel, the founder of the Jewish tribes, acted upon that principle, so much so, that the only thought that came to his mind when death approached him was to enjoin the same noble principle upon his children. Israel wished his sons to become pious Muslims; will not the Jews of the Holy Prophet’s day act upon that principle?

In corroboration of what the Quran says about Jacob’s will to his sons, Rodwell quotes the following from Midrash Rabbah: "At the time when our father Jacob quitted this world, he summoned his twelve sons and said to them, Hearken to your father Israel (Gen. 49:2). Have you any doubts in your hearts concerning the Holy One, blessed be He. They said, Hear, o Israel, our father, as there is no doubt in thy heart, so neither is there in ours. For the Lord is our God, and He is One" (Midr. Rabbah on Gen. par. 98, and on Deut. par. 2). Compare also Targ. Jer. on Deut. 6:4.

5:105; 10:79; 21:53, 54; 31:22.

Commentary:

It is indeed strange, but nevertheless a hard fact, that in matters of religion which so deeply concern man, he is often content to follow blindly the footsteps of his forefathers and does not even care to satisfy himself that his forefathers were wise and well-guided people. On the other hand, in worldly matters where only the interests of this life are at stake, and that too partially, he often takes meticulous care to see that he adopts the right course and does not blindly follow others.

4:78.

Important Words:

الملاء (chiefs) is derived from ملاء. They say ملاء الاناء بالماء i.e. he filled the vessel with water. ملی رعبا means, he was filled with fright. الملاء means: (1) assembly of persons; (2) chiefs and nobles, for they fill the eyes and hearts of the commoners withawe and admiration; or because with them a meeting becomes full and appears to be properly attended. الملاء الاعلی means, the community of high placed angels (Aqrab).

Commentary:

The Quran now proceeds to give the story of how the different tribes of Israel were welded into one great nation, also noting incidentally the weaknesses displayed by them, so that their example may serve as a lesson to Muslims.

The incident mentioned in the verse under comment indicates an improvement in the condition of the Israelites in the time to which this verse relates over that of the time of Moses himself. In 5:25 the Quran relates that when Moses exhorted his followers to fight the enemy in the cause of Allah, they replied, Go thou and thy Lord and fight, and here we sit. On the contrary, in the present verse the Israelites are reported to have said, What reason have we to abstain from fighting in the cause of Allah when we have been driven forth from our homes and our sons? The improvement, however, was more verbal than real; for when the time of actual fighting came, many of these people wavered and refused to fight. The incident thus serves as a grim warning to Muslims to beware of treading the same path.

3:124; 8:66.

Important Words:

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

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

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

Commentary:

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

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

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

3:148, 201; 7:127.

2:287; 3:148.

Commentary:

The trial by water referred to in the preceding verse and the subsequent exhortation mentioned in the concluding clause of that verse seem to have filled the Israelites with hope and courage. Consequently their prayer in the verse under comment does not betray a defeatist tendency as heretofore shown by them, but a buoyant spirit of hope and good cheer.

2:81; 5:19.

Commentary:

Both Jews and Christians persuaded themselves to believe that they would be safe against the punishment of the Hereafter, the Jews thinking themselves immune owing to their being the favoured ones of God on account of their being the descendants of His Prophets, and the Christians deluding themselves with the idea that Jesus, "the son of God", had washed away their sins with his supposed death on the cross. The false notion of each proved their ruin.

Commentary:

The words, We are not liable to blame in the matter of the unlearned, refer to a notion prevalent among Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet that it was no sin to rob the gentile Arabs of their possessions, because the latter followed a false religion. The Jews believed that they were at liberty to do as they liked concerning Muslims and would not be called to account for it. Possibly, they deduced this queer doctrine from the Jewish law of usury, which makes an invidious distinction between a Jew and a non-Jew regarding the giving and taking of interest (Exod. 22:25; Lev. 25:36, 37; Deut. 23:20, 21).

Another meaning of this verse is obtained if we take the words "trust", "treasure", "dinar", etc., in a figurative sense. The Bible contains not only prophecies about the Holy Prophet of Islam, but also clear injunctions to the People of the Book to accept him when he made his appearance. This was in the nature of a "trust" with them. But when the Promised Prophet appeared, they refused to surrender that trust, except a few of them who accepted Islam. These it is that are spoken of as returning the treasure they are trusted with, whereas those who not only rejected the Holy Prophet but even refused to admit that their scriptures contained any prophecies about him are likened to such as would not even return a "dinar" entrusted to them unless you keep standing over them, i.e. unless you force them in argument to admit the truth.

2:251, 287.

Commentary:

Each part of the prayer contained in this verse corresponds to the points mentioned in the previous one. In fact, success comes only by the help and grace of God. Human effort alone is not enough.

It should, however, be noted that, corresponding to the last part of the prayer in this verse, there is mentioned no corresponding effort on the part of believers in the preceding verse, thus indicating that final victory and success come solely through the grace of God and are not the result of our actions.

48:12.

Commentary:

Trials come to bring about a distinction between true believers and those weak of faith or insincere. In this way, the sufferings of the Muslims at Uhud proved a blessing in disguise. They served to distinguish the true believers from the hypocrites who had so far remained intermixed with the true believers. While professing to be true Muslims, they were, at heart, enemies of Islam; and their passing for Muslims was injurious to the Muslim community. The believers, taking them for true Muslims, remained unaware of the secret machinations by which they sought to injure the cause of Islam. So it was in the interests of Islam that their hypocrisy became unmasked and the Muslims became on their guard against them. On the other hand, just as the exposure of the hypocrites proved beneficial to the believers, similarly the coming to light of their own sincerity and devotion served a most useful purpose. It served not only to disappoint the enemies of Islam who came to realize that with such devoted followers they could make no headway against Islam, but it also opened their eyes to its truth; for it became clear to them that a religion which could inspire its votaries with such selfless zeal and steadfast devotion could not but be true.

The particle او rendered as "and" in the clause, fight in the cause of Allah and repel the attack of the enemy, literally means "or" and is equivalent to "in other words", or "what is the same thing," etc. It is used here: (1) to explain the meaning of the preceding clause, i.e. fight in the cause of Allah. So the whole sentence would read something like this: "It was said to them (the hypocrites): Come ye, fight in the cause of Allah, which was the same thing as repelling the attack of the enemy." This rendering would go to prove that the Companions of the Holy Prophet waged no aggressive war and all their fighting was undertaken in self-defence. (2) Or the word او (and) is used here in the sense of "at least". According to this rendering, the sentence would mean: "Fight in the cause of Allah; and if you cannot fight in the cause of Allah, at least fight in defence of your own homes and hearths," i.e. your own interests require that you should defend Medina against the attack of the enemy. (3) Or as rendered in the text the word is used in the sense of "and". With this meaning of او, the whole sentence would mean, "fight in the cause of Allah and repel the attack of the enemy."

The expression لو نعلم قتالا translated in the text as, If we knew how to fight, may have three meanings: (1) If we knew that there would be fighting, i.e. we thought there would be no fighting. By using this expression the hypocrites meant that seeing the strength of the enemy, the Muslims would at once run away and there will be no fighting. (2) If we knew it to be a fight, i.e. it was no fight in which the Muslims were going to be engaged, but certain destruction in view of the appalling difference between the numbers and equipment of the opposing forces. (3) Or, as rendered in the text, the expression may mean, if we knew how to fight. In this case, it must be taken to have been used ironically, signifying: "We are unaware of the art of war; if we had been acquainted with it, we would have fought along with you."

The allusion in the verse is obviously to the defection at Uhud of a party of 300 hypocrites under their leader ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy, who, at a crucial moment, deserted the Muslims and went back to Medina, saying, "He (the Prophet) has disregarded my advice and has followed the advice of mere lads". Seeing this, ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr, father of Jabir, approached him and asked him not to desert the Prophet in that manner, upon which ‘Abdullah replied in the very words quoted by the Quran, i.e. لو نعلم قتالا لا تبعنا کم meaning, "If we knew there would be fighting, we would have surely followed you." At this ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr exclaimed, saying: "God’s curse be upon you. Surely, He Himself will help His Messenger" (Jarir, iii. 104).

3:155.

4:79.

Commentary:

The word اخوان (brethren) may refer to both the Muslims and the hypocrites. If taken to refer to the Muslims, the expression قالوا لاخوانھم (said of their brethren) would either mean, "said concerning their brethren, the Muslims", or it would mean, "said to their brethren, the Muslims." If, however, it is taken to refer to the hypocrites, the expression would mean, "said to their own brethren", i.e. talked among themselves.

The expression, Then avert death from yourselves, embodies a prophecy about the destruction of the hypocrites. The clause would thus signify, "You stayed in your homes in order to save yourselves. Now, the time of your destruction has arrived. So protect yourselves if you can."

5:65.

4:156.

Commentary:

The words, Allah has heard the utterance of those, have been used by way of rebuke and warning, meaning that God is not unaware of these impudent utterances and that the utterers will certainly have to answer for them.

The words, Allah is poor and we are rich, were uttered by the Jews on behalf of the hypocrites and as an expression of their thoughts when the latter were called upon to spend their wealth in the cause of Allah (3:181). These words also express the thoughts of those niggardly persons and the weak of faith who join a new religion but find it hard to comply with its ever-growing monetary demands and sometimes cry out in impatience: "Has Allah become poor that we are asked to spend our hard-earned money in His cause?" In fact, one of the principal causes of the opposition to a new religious movement is reluctance on the part of the people to undergo the sacrifices of money and comfort that it demands.

The words, We shall record what they have said, signify that God will not let such mischievous utterances go unpunished, implying that what is forgiven is, as it were, not recorded.

2:76; 3:79; 5:42.

2:105.

Commentary:

The verb یقولون (they say) is used in Arabic both for words of mouth, and for what one expresses by one’s condition or conduct (see 2:31). In this verse, the expression has been used of the Jews in both these senses, viz. "They say with their tongues that they have heard and obeyed, but their conduct shows that instead of obeying they disobey and defy."

The expression غیر مسمع (without being heard) gives a number of meanings: (1) mayest thou not be made to hear, i.e. mayest thou not hear by reason of deafness; (2) mayest thou not hear any speech or news which thou wouldst like or which may please thee; (3) may not what thou sayest be accepted, or may not thy invitation be accepted and thy call responded to; (4) mayest thou not be obeyed; or (5) the expression may mean, though it was not certainly intended by the Jews, mayest thou not hear anything offensive or unpleasant.

For the expression راعنا (ra‘ina) see note on 2:105.

The Jews used the aforesaid ambiguous expressions in order (1) to conceal what evil thoughts they entertained about the Holy Prophet; (2) to make Muslims imitate them and use analogous expressions while addressing the Holy Prophet; and (3) to taunt Muslims with regard to matters affecting their religion, saying to them in effect, "We speak to your Prophet jestingly and abuse him in ambiguous words; if he had been a true Prophet of God, he would have certainly come to know of this."

16:29.

Commentary:

The words فتھاجروا (for you to migrate) show that the people referred to here were not so weak as not to be able to migrate from their homes. They were thus not truly "disabled ones" as mentioned in 4:96 above. The present verse, therefore, strongly condemns them. Islam would not be satisfied with a weak or passive belief, for it is neither good for the believer nor for the community. If the environment of a believer is not suitable for him, he should shift to a different environment more congenial to his faith; and if he does not do so, he is not sincere in his faith.

Important Words:

جبّارین (haughty and powerful) is the plural of جبار which is derived from جبر. They say جبرالعظم (jabaral-‘azma) or جبّرالعظم(jabbaral-‘azma), i.e. he set the bone; he reduced it from the fractured state. جبرالرجل (jabaral-rajula) or جبّرالرجل (jabbaral-rajula) means, he restored the man from the state of poverty and weakness to that of wealth and strength. جبرت الیتیم means, I put the affairs of the orphan into good order. جبّره means, he compelled and forced him against his will. جبّار means, one who magnifies himself and behaves proudly, haughtily and insolently; one who slays when in anger or one who slays unjustly; one who domineers over others by absolute force and power; one extravagant in acts of wrongdoing, disobedience and rebellion; one huge, tall and strong; a giant. When used about God, الجبّار means, One Who can force His creatures to obey His commands; the Supreme, the Unattainable, the High above His creatures; the Restorer of the poor and the weak to wealth and power; the Reformer of the people by raising them from a low state to a high one (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

Compare this insolent and cowardly attitude of the companions of Moses to the willing and almost unbelievable sacrifices of the Companions of the Holy Prophet, who were ever eager to jump into the very jaws of death at the bidding of their Master.

Commentary:

The companions of Moses perhaps never fell so low as on the present occasion. They were cowardly, faithless and slothful. Compare with this the noble example of the Companions of the Holy Prophet of Islam. There is a report to the effect that when the Holy Prophet, with a handful of his ill-equipped Companions, intended to go forth to meet the vastly superior and much better-equipped Meccan force at Badr, he consulted them about it. Thereupon one of he Companions stood up and addressed the Holy Prophet in the following memorable words, "We would not say to thee, O Prophet of God! as said the companions of Moses, 'Go thou and thy Lord and fight and here we sit'. On the contrary, O Prophet of the Lord! We are ever with thee and we will go with thee whither thou goest. We will fight the enemy on thy right and on thy left and in thy front and behind thy back; and we trust God that thou wilt see from us what will comfort thine eyes." The tradition says that when the Holy Prophet heard these words, his face beamed with delight; and no wonder (Bukhari & Hisham).

3:182; 36:48.

5:69.

3:56; 5:15.

2:18.

Important Words:

یداه (both His hands). The word ید (hand or arm) is derived from یدی (yadyun) and, besides its literal meaning, gives a number of figurative meanings e.g., (1) favour, benefit, bounty or generosity; (2) power, dominion, control, authority or superiority (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The expression: Their own hands shall be tied up, signifies that the Jews shall be suitably punished for their insolent saying expressed in the words, The hand of Allah is tied up. The sentence may also be taken as optative, meaning, "may their hands be tied up." But as what Allah wills must come to pass, therefore the expression may be better rendered in the form of a positive statement, meaning that the Jews shall become miserly and stingy.

The clause, Nay, both His hands are wide open, constitutes a crushing reply to the taunt of the Jews, that the hand of Allah is tied up. The Quran says that not only is the hand of God not tied up but that both His hands are wide open—the one to give to the believers in plenty and the other to punish the Jews for their insolence. The sentences which follow the clause, Nay, both His hands are wide open, refer respectively to the work of the two hands of God, namely (1) the bestowal of special bounties upon believers, and (2) the exemplary punishment of Jews for their sins. It will be noted that the hand is used both as an instrument for bestowing a favour or bounty and as a symbol of power and dominion for seizing and punishing an offender.

The enmity and hatred referred to in the verse are to exist and continue not only among Jews themselves but also among Christians, as well as between Jews and Christians.

The expression, Whenever they kindle a fire for war, refers to the attempts of Jews to incite the idolaters of Arabia to wage war against Muslims, as well as to their own hostile activities against Islam.

See 2:26.

2:171; 31:22.

Commentary:

It is indeed strange that when science and knowledge advance and new discoveries and new inventions are made, people are quick to throw overboard worn out ideas and theories tenaciously held by their forefathers and hasten to accept and benefit by the new inventions and discoveries; but when a Prophet brings to them a new guidance from God, they refuse to accept it on the ground that it does not agree with the beliefs and ideas held by their ancestors and with their own time-honoured notions and theories. How foolish is this attitude and how lame and absurd the excuse for the rejection of divine truths! This is how the Quran exposes the untenability of the position of the rejecters of truth.

7:7; 28:66.

Commentary:

The words, We have no knowledge; it is only Thou Who art the Knower of hidden things, constitute both a sort of veiled recommendation and a glorification of God. The Prophets will, in effect, say, "The people did indeed reject us; but Thou art the Knower of secrets. We do not know what was in their minds and whether they rejected us from their hearts or only expressed disbelief out of the fear of others. It is, therefore, for Thee to decide what their real attitude was and what treatment should be meted out to them." This recom­mendation seems to run counter to 4:42, which shows that the Prophets will bear witness against their people. The study of the relevant verses, however, shows that the occasions are different. The above-mentioned reply of the Prophets will be made when in the beginning God will question them in a general way; whereas the tendering of evidence will come at a later stage when God will call upon them definitely to come forward and give the required evidence about those who rejected them. There is, thus, no real conflict between the two verses.

The answer given by the Prophets is also in harmony with the dignity of God and constitutes an act of His glorification on the part of the Prophets. God perfectly knows what reply the people made to the Prophets, but, in spite of this, He will ask the Prophets to say what answer they were given by the people, as if He Himself was not aware of that answer. The Prophets, therefore, will very appropriately remove this apparent implication of ignorance on the part of God, by attributing all knowledge to Him.

The answer of the Prophets also implies that the object of God’s question was not to elicit information from them or to supplement His own knowledge, for He knew what answer they were given. In fact, there was some other purpose behind His question which was that they should give their testimony against the disbelievers, as is clear from 4:42, and thus carry out the Divine command referred to in the latter verse.

Commentary:

The disciples of Jesus have, in this verse, mentioned four objects which the fulfilment of the prayer of Jesus about the food asked for was meant to serve: (1) that they might eat thereof and their hunger might be satisfied; (2) that their minds might be at rest. This also shows that they desired a permanent provision of sustenance because a single meal could not put their minds at rest or relieve them of anxiety about their livelihood in the future so that they might be able to preach the message of God free from all care and devote themselves fully to the service of religion; (3) that the prophecy of Jesus contained in 3:50 might be fulfilled; and (4) that they might become witnesses to the fulfilment of his prayer and of the truth of their religion, and people might know that God helps and favours those who are devoted to the service of His religion. The history of the early Christian Church shows that God did actually make extraordinary provision for the sustenance of those who devoted their lives to the preaching of the message of Jesus. Nay, even now Christians, though they have drifted far away from the truth, are enjoying an extra good table spread with food.

Commentary:

The verse means that on the Day of Judgement all the mischief which disbelievers worked in their life on earth will end and nothing will be left to them save to deny their having ever attributed partners to God. This denial will really be a confession of their helplessness and a form of petition for Divine mercy.