كَذَّبُوكَ

35:5, 26.

Important Words:

زبر (books of wisdom) is the plural of زبور which is derived from زبر. They say زبر البئر i.e. he cased or lined the well with stones or bricks, etc. زبر البناء means, he raised the wall by placing layers of stones or bricks on one another. زبر الکتاب means, he wrote the writing or the book. زبر السائل means, he chid or scolded the beggar. زبور (zabur) means, a writing or a book: a book of wisdom and intellectual science, not containing legal statutes, ordinances or commandments. Based on its verbal senses, the word would also mean a book that protects and beautifies a source of knowledge just as a casing protects and beautifies a well; or a book that contains warnings. The word is particularly used about the Book of David containing the Psalms. زبور (zubur) is the plural of زبر (zibr) which means, a writing or a book; also wisdom and reason (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

It is worthy of note that unlike its predecessor, the present verse makes no reference to a burnt offering after the word بینات (clear signs) which shows that a burnt offering formed no proof of the truth of a claimant to prophethood.

It will be noted that whereas the words زبر (books of wisdom) and بینات (clear signs) are both in the plural number, the word الکتاب المنیر(the Shining Book) has been put in the singular number, the reason being that all the Israelite Prophets followed one Book of Law only, viz. the Torah given to Moses, while each of them came with separate clear signs as well as with separate Books or revelations containing things of wisdom and warnings.

6:134; 7:157.

Commentary:

The verse answers an implied objection of the Jews, viz. if God had forbidden them certain extra things, why was not the prohibition continued in Islam? The verse answers this objection by saying that whereas the divine law of punishment demanded that Jews should be punished, the law of mercy demanded that Muslims should be shown mercy. It was unfair to continue a special prohibition that had been imposed by way of punishment under a new dispensation.

2:140; 109:7.

Commentary:

This verse throws interesting light on the catholicity and broad-mindedness of Islam. Disbelievers are told here that if they prefer to reject the Holy Prophet, they are at perfect liberty to do so. In fact, whenever there exists a difference of views between two parties, each party has the right to show the other to be in error. But this difference should not be allowed to go further, and one party should not compel the other party to accept its views.

The verse declares that when it is well known that believers and disbelievers are two distinct and separate parties and there is no likelihood of the one being mistaken for the other, and when their ways of working are also different, then there is no reason why compulsion should be resorted to. Compulsion may only be exercised when the conduct of one party is likely to bring discredit to the other party. But, situated as they are, the works of a Prophet and of his followers bring no discredit to disbelievers, nor do the actions of disbelievers bring any discredit to believers. Therefore, there is no justification for either of the two classes to bring compulsion to bear on the other.

The verse is also capable of another interpretation. It may mean that the works of the Holy Prophet are quite distinct from those of the disbelievers and there is no similarity between the two. This being so, the result would show whose works are right and whose wrong. When there is similarity between the works of two parties, it is difficult to determine definitely the cause of the progress or degeneration, as the case may be, of one party or the other. But when there exists absolutely no similarity between the works of two parties, everybody is in a position to fix responsibility for the result.