لَكُم

22:66; 31:21; 45:14.

7:55; 10:4; 41:10-13.

Important Words:

استوی (he turned) is derived from سوی meaning, it became straight and even and rightly set. استوی gives the same meaning as سوی. It also means, he became firm or was firmly settled. استوی علی ظھر دابة means, he became firmly seated on the horse or the like. استوی علی العرش means, he (the king) was or became firmly established on the throne. استوی الی الشیء means, he turned to a thing, or he directed his attention to it (Aqrab). استوی gives different meanings when used with regard to two or more things as opposed to when used with regard to one thing only. When used about more than one thing, it means, to be or to become equal; and when used about one thing only it means, to become straight and firm (Mufradat).

سواھن (perfected them) is derived from سوی (Sawwa) which is the transitive form of سوی (sawiya) for which see above. سویmeans, he made it uniform or even; he made it congruous or consistent in its several parts; he fashioned it in a suitable manner; he made it adapted to the exigencies, or requirements, of its case; he perfected it; he made it in a right or good manner; or he put it into a right or good state (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

Whatever is on the earth is created by God for the benefit of man. Elsewhere we read, And He has subjected to you whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth, all from Himself. In that surely are signs for a people who reflect (45:14). The sun, the moon, and other heavenly bodies are of immense benefit to mankind. Modern science has made many discoveries in this connection and more may yet be made, all of which testify to the truth and comprehensiveness of the Quranic teaching. Science also continues to find more and more the properties of things of this earth; many things which were formerly thought to be useless are now known to be highly serviceable to man.

Again, of all creatures man alone has the knowledge to profit by the things of the world. When so many things have been created to promote the comfort of man and to extend the field of his activities, and when such unlimited provision has been made for his material advance, it cannot be said that there is no purpose in the creation of man or no provision for his spiritual advance.

The verse also hints that the world is the common inheritance of mankind. It should not become the property of one man or one nation. By ignoring this great truth, Europe is now going to rack and ruin.

If the teachings of the Quran are acted upon, envy and malice between individuals and nations will disappear. The ordinances of Islam regarding charity and Zakah are also based upon this conception of the world being the common inheritance of all men. Islam does not disallow the right of private ownership but this is not to be exercised so as to deprive others of their right to the common inheritance.

It should also be noted that, according to most religions, this world is not a desirable place for man. Salvation, according to them, lies in killing desire or escaping from evil and suffering. The Jews, on the other hand, make this world the sole end of life. It is Islam alone that teaches man to use rightly the gifts and opportunities which this world affords and to make them a means of attaining success and salvation in the next.

The words, He it is Who created for you all that is in the earth; then He turned towards the heaven, do not refer to the creation of the earth or the heavens. The verse only purports to say that whatever has been created in the earth is for the benefit of man. Then it goes on to say that those who make good use of the gifts of God will advance to higher and still higher stages of spiritual progress. The words "seven heavens" signify seven stages of spiritual progress, the figure seven, according to Arabic idiom, standing for perfection and completeness. So God has not omitted to provide a place of everlasting spiritual progress, viz. Paradise of the next world.

With this verse concludes the present discussion about the necessity of revelation. The way God has created the universe points to the necessity of revelation. If man is not destined for unlimited spiritual progress for which revelation is the only effective means, there was no need to create the heaven and the earth and whatever is in them for his benefit, nor were the powers and capabilities, with which he has been equipped, necessary for him. All this is to enable him to make endless progress.

3:113.

2:91; 3:113; 5:61.

2:88; 3:22, 113, 184; 5:71.

Important Words:

فومھا (its wheat). فوم means: (1) wheat; (2) any corn suitable for making bread; (3) garlic; (4) chick-pea (Aqrab).

مصر (a town) means:(1) a town or a city; (2) the frontier between two countries; (3) the thing that intervenes between two things (Aqrab).

یقتلون (would kill) is derived from قتل i.e. he killed. The infinitive means: (1) killing with a sword or with a stone or with poison or by any other means; (2) attempting to kill; (3) making up the mind to kill; (4) boycotting or cutting off all connections; (5) killing one’s carnal desires; (6) weakening the strength of a thing, as alcohol is "killed" with the addition of water, or hunger is "killed" with food, etc.; (7) humbling a person completely; (8) rendering a person like unto one killed either physically or morally or spiritually; (9) acquiring complete and certain knowledge about a thing; and (10) cursing a person or thing (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lisan)

Commentary:

In this verse another instance is cited to show how the Israelites made no effort to turn the favours of God to good account. When they were in the desert, God sent them Manna and Salwa. But soon after this they began to exhibit discontent with one kind of food and to clamour for a variety of grain, onions, salad and green-stuff (Num. 11:5-11). It may be noted that both Manna and Salwa taken together were considered one kind of food as they were taken continuously for a long time. It is further learnt from the Bible that the supply of Salwa was discontinued after a while and the Israelites were thus left to live on Manna alone (Num. 11:6). As the demand was not based on a right understanding of the wisdom of God Who wanted the Israelites to breathe the free air of the desert for a time, they met with disgrace and drew upon themselves the wrath of God.

God’s displeasure with the Israelites was not due to their demand for other food. The real cause lay elsewhere. Having lived for a long time in bondage and a state of dependence, they had become cowardly and indolent. So God wished them to stay in the desert for sometime, living on game and wild herbs, that they might get rid of their cowardice and indolence by living an independent life in the desert. Thus revitalized, they were to be led to the Promised Land and made rulers of Palestine. The Israelites, however, failed to understand the real purpose of God or having understood it, failed to appreciate it, and foolishly insisted upon living in a town. God pointed out their error, saying that they had asked for a life of agriculture in preference to what was to lead them to sovereignty. He wanted to prepare them for rule over the Promised Land, but they hungered for husbandry. So He indignantly ordered them to go down to a town where they would get the desired things.

The Israelites deserved punishment, because their impatience was the outcome of a want of faith in the promise of God. This lack of faith in God was due to their opposition to His Prophets and, disbelief in His Signs, and they opposed the Prophets because they were transgressors and evildoers. The Prophets invited them to guidance and virtue which they disliked, and, as a result, they opposed them. Thus the Quran admirably traces the causal sequence of every evil to its origin and strikes at its very root so as to prevent all possibility of recurrence.

The words, we will not remain content with one kind of food, contain a threat and are full of arrogance. If the Israelites had meant simply to express a wish, the words would have been "we are unable to remain content with one kind of food," and not as they stand in the Quran. The Bible gives a vivid picture of their insolent and almost rebellious attitude on this occasion (Num. 11:5-15).

The words یقتلون النبیین translated in the verse as "would kill the Prophets" do not mean that the Israelites actually killed the Prophets, because, up to the time of Moses, no Prophet is known to have been slain by them. As a matter of fact, Moses is the first Prophet who was sent to the Israelites as a nation. Thus Moses and his brother, Aaron, are the only persons to whom the words can be applied; but obviously these two Prophets were not killed by the Israelites, although the latter often opposed them and were sometimes even bent upon killing them (Exod. 17:4). Hence, the word قتل in the verse cannot possibly mean actual killing. Its only meaning here is that they severely opposed the Prophets and were even prepared to kill them. This interpretation finds corroboration not only in Arabic lexicons, for which see Important Words, but the Quran itself supports it in a number of verses where the word قتل has been used undoubtedly, not in the sense of actual killing but in that of attempting to kill or intending to kill (3:22 and 40:29). Bukhari also relates a tradition to the effect that once certain hot-headed Quraish youths brutally assaulted the Holy Prophet in the precincts of the Ka‘bah, whereupon Abu Bakr rushed to his rescue, saying, اتقتلون رجلا ان یقول ربی الله "Do you kill a man because he says Allah is his Lord and Master?" (chapter on Tafsir). In this hadith the word قتل is clearly used in the sense of attempting to kill or intending to kill and not actual killing.

It will not be out of place to point out here that the purport of verse 2:59 discussed above is altogether different from the one under comment. Though in both of them God apparently orders the Israelites to go to some habitation, yet the meaning is entirely different, rather quite the opposite in each case. As a matter of fact, whereas in verse 2:59 God Himself willingly commands the Israelites to go to some habitation, His ordering them to "go down into a town" in the verse under comment is expressive of definite displeasure and anger. In the previous verse the قریة or habitation meant only a habitation found in the desert by going into which the Israelites did not leave the free desert life but rather combined it with the facilities of a habitation. On the contrary, by "going down into" a مصر i.e. a town or city as mentioned in the verse under comment, they altogether abandoned the desert life and adopted a life of ease, as is led in towns and cities. Hence the difference. This is why the Quran uses the simple word ادخلوا i.e. "enter" in 2:59 and the word اھبطوا i.e. "go down", a term expressive of decline, in the verse under comment. Similarly, whereas in verse 2:59 the Quran follows up the commandment with the words eat therefrom plentifully wherever you like, in the present verse the commandment is followed by the words and they were smitten with abasement and destitution. The difference is apparent. The former expression is indicative of the freedom of life in the desert, and the latter of the suffocating atmosphere and mental slavery of towns and cities.

3:190; 5:41; 7:159; 9:116; 43:86; 57:6.

Important Words:

ولی (protector). They say ولی الرجل i.e. he helped him; or he made friends with him. ولی البلد means, he got control or authority over the town. So ولی means: (1) friend; (2) helper; (3) protector; (4) ally, etc. (Aqrab).

Commentary:

In this verse an argument has been brought forth in support of the fact that Quranic revelation abrogates the previous revelations. God says that to Him belongs the entire universe, the heavens and the earth, and it was in the fitness of things that finally a revelation meant for the whole of mankind should have made its appearance.

In the verse, the Jews are also told that it will be to their own interest to embrace Islam; for otherwise they will have neither friend nor helper against Allah.

There is a subtle implication in the verse, viz. that the Muslims, though despised and persecuted today, will not only receive spiritual favours from God, but will also become masters of large earthly kingdoms as well; for is not Allah the Controller of the heavens and the earth?

Important Words:

تیمموا (seek) is derived from یم or ام. They say یمه i.e. he sought it. یمم فلانابرمح means, he sought and singled out that person for attacking with his spear. تیمم الامر means, he sought and singled out the affair. تیمم للصلوة means, he performed what is termed تیمم for his Prayers, i.e. instead of performing the prescribed ablution with water he sought dust and touching it with his hands passed them over his face, etc. (Aqrab & Mufradat).

خبیث (bad) is derived from خبث i.e. he or it was or became bad or foul or abominable or wicked or filthy or impure (Lane).

تغمضوا (connive) is derived from اغمض which again is derived from غمض i.e. it became hidden and concealed. غمض فی الکلامmeans, he made his speech obscure, and abstained from making it clear in meaning. اغمض means, he closed, or shut his eyes; he connived at something so as to practically treat it as something unseen or hidden. اغمض فی البیع means, he demanded a lowering of the price of a thing owing to its badness. اغمض عنه فی البیع means, he connived at the bad quality of the thing and was not strict settling its price (Aqrab & Lane).

Commentary:

The verse implies that believers should not only spend in the cause of Allah but should spend what is good and pure; for even a lawfully-earned property might include things that are bad. They should not deliberately select worthless and worn out things for the purpose of charity. Old and second-hand things may indeed be given to the poor, but such things should not be specially selected or singled out for this purpose. Indeed, a believer can be said to have properly discharged his duty for "spending" in the cause of Allah only if he spends "good things".

43:60; 61:7.

5:111.

Important Words:

اخلق (I fashion out) is derived from خلق. They say خلقه meaning: (1) he measured it, or he determined its measure or proportion (e.g. they say خلق الادیم meaning, he determined the leather with a view to cutting it); (2) he designed or fashioned or planned it; (3) he made it according to a certain measure or design; (4) He (God) produced or created or brought into existence a thing or being without there being any previously existing pattern or model or similitude, i.e.He originated it; (5) he forged or fabricated a story or a lie; (6) he made a thing smooth, even and equable (Lane & Lisan).

الطین (clay) is derived from طان i.e. he made his work or deed good; he performed or executed his work or deed well. طانه الله علی الخیر means, God created him with a disposition or adaptation to that which is good, i.e. created him with a good natural disposition. طانه means, he coated or plastered it with clay or mud. طین means, clay, earth, mould, soil or mud. طینةmeans, any material sub-stance of which anything having form consists; the natural constitution or disposition of a thing. The term ابن الطین is sometimes used to signify Adam (Lane). Figuratively الطین may signify such persons as possess docile natures suitable for being moulded into any good shape like pliable clay.

الطیر (bird) which is the plural of طائر (a bird) and is also sometimes used as singular is derived from طار i.e. (1) he or it flew or moved in the air by means of wings; (2) he or it ran or moved quickly or fled. طار عقله means, his reason fled. طارت الابل means, the she-camel conceived. طار لکل منھم سھمه means, the share of each came to him. الطیر or طیر is both the plural of طائر (bird) and the noun infinitive from the verb طار. So طیر means: (1) flying birds, insects, etc.; (2) a flying bird, insect, etc., for طیر is sometimes also used as singular; (3) as an infinitive noun طیر would also give the different meanings conveyed by its verbal forms (Lane).

ھیئة (manner) is the noun infinitive from ھاء. They say ھاء الرجل meaning, the man was or became of good form and appearance or other properties denoted by ھیئة, the noun infinitive. ھاء الیه means, he desired or longed to see or find him or it. ھیأه means, he gave him or he made him have a garb or guise, etc.; he prepared or arranged it and put it in a good state. تھیأ لامر means, he became prepared for the thing, or the matter. ھیئة means, form, fashion, appearance or figure; guise or garb; state, condition or case; manner, mode or quality (Aqrab & Lane).

ابری (I heal) is derived from بری i.e. he was or became clear or free from a thing. بری من المرض means, he became free from disease, i.e. he recovered from it. بری من الدین means, he became clear of debt. ابرأه means, he cured or healed him of the disease; he declared him innocent or free from the defect attributed to him; he acquitted him (Aqrab & Lane).

الاکمه (blind) is derived from کمه i.e. he became blind; or his eyes did not see at night. کمه فلان also means, he was or became deprived of reason or understanding. کمه النھار means, the day became dark, i.e. the sun became overcast with clouds. اکمه means, one who cannot see at night; one who is born blind; one who becomes blind afterwards; one who is deprived of reason and understanding (Aqrab & Mufradat).

ابرص (leprous) is derived from برص i.e. he was or became affected with برص (leprosy) viz. a sort of whiteness that appears upon parts of the body by reason of a corrupt state of health or constitution. The moon is sometimes called الابرص because of its white hue. ارض برصاء means, a land of which the herbage has become depastured at several places so that it has become bare thereof (Aqrab & Lane). A variety of leprosy of the Hebrews (probably identical with modern leprosy) was characterized by the presence of smooth, shining, depressed white patches or scales, the hair on which participated in the whiteness, while the skin and adjacent flesh became insensible (Webster).

تاکلون (you will eat) is derived from اکل i.e. he ate; he ate up; he devoured; he consumed; he wore away, etc. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, امرت بقریة تاکل القری i.e. I have been commanded to migrate to a town (Medina) which shall devour, (i.e. subdue and conquer) other towns (Lane).

Commentary:

With this verse begins an account of Jesus’ ministry as a Prophet of God. By using the words, a Messenger to the Children of Israel, the verse makes it clear that Jesus’ mission was confined to the House of Israel. He was not a universal Messenger. In fact, as the Gospel itself states, he expressly ordered his disciples not to preach his message to any but the Israelites: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel' " (Matt. 10:5, 6). It cannot be argued that this prohibition was confined to the lifetime of Jesus and that after his death his disciples were at liberty to preach to all the nations of the world, for this supposition is belied by the Gospel itself: "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the son of man be come" (Matt. 10:23). According to this verse, the followers of Jesus were enjoined to confine their preaching to the Children of Israel till the time of his second coming. The same injunction is contained in Matt. 15: 24; 18: 11, 12; 19: 28; Acts 3: 25, 26; 13: 46; Luke 19: 10; 15: 4; 22: 28-30.

Only in Matt. 28:19 there appears some ambiguity about the mission of Jesus but on deeper reflection it becomes clear that here too it is the tribes of Israel that are meant, and not all peoples and all nations. The early disciples understood these words of Jesus in this very sense: "Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only" (Acts 11: 19).

For a clear understanding of the other parts of the present verse, i.e. making birds of clay, etc. it is necessary to remember that it was Jesus’ habit to talk in parables—a way of talking which was predicted in the previous Scriptures to be a characteristic of his speech. Says the Gospel: "All these things spake Jesus unto the multitudes in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables" (Matt. 13:34, 35). Later historians also have referred to this peculiar characteristic of Jesus: "In his popular addresses Jesus would make free use of parables. He spoke in parables to all classes but especially to the people. Without parables he was not wont to speak to them" (Enc. Bib. under Jesus). With this torchlight of history in our hands, it does not remain difficult for us to understand or explain the "signs" of Jesus as mentioned in the present verse.

There is no mention in the Bible of the miracle of creating birds popularly believed to have been performed by Jesus. If Jesus had really created birds, there is no reason why the Bible should have omitted to mention it, particularly when the creation of birds was a miracle the like of which had never been shown before by any Messenger of God. The mention of such a miracle would certainly have established his superiority over other Prophets and would have lent some support to the claim to divinity which has been foisted upon him by his later followers. Of the different meanings of خلق i.e. measuring, determining, designing or fashioning; making and creating, etc. given under Important Words above, it is in the former sense that this word has been used in this verse. In the sense of "creating'', the act of khalq has not been attributed in the Quran to any other being or thing except God. In fact, the Quran has laid the greatest emphasis on this exclusive attribute of God Who has been again and again declared to be the sole "Creator" of all things. All others to whom creation has been attributed are declared by the Quran to have been themselves created by God and to be devoid of all power to create anything (e.g. see 13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41 and 46:5). Even the silly notion that the power of creating though the unshared prerogative of God, might have been temporarily delegated by Him to another is rejected by the Quran (39:30 & 16:72).

In the light of the above explanation, and keeping in view the figurative sense of "clay", for which see Important Words above, the clause, I will fashion out for you a creation out of clay after the manner of a bird, then I will breathe into it (a new spirit) and it will become a soaring being, would mean that if ordinary men of humble origin but possessing the inherent power of growth and development came into contact with Jesus and accepted his message they would undergo a complete transformation in their lives. From men grovelling in the dust and not seeing beyond their material cares and mundane concerns, they would become converted into birds soaring high into the lofty regions of the spiritual firmament. And this is exactly what happened. The humble and despised fishermen of Galilee, under the impact of the ennobling teaching of their Master, began soaring like birds, preaching to the world of Israel the word of God and bravely facing all sorts of hardships and privations and making sacrifices that should adorn the history of any nation. Says Jesus: "I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, and what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?" (Matt. 6:25, 26).

The miracle relating to the making of birds from clay may be interpreted in another way as well. In the time of Jesus people had a special liking for the practice of occult sciences —hypnotism, mesmerism, etc. So it is possible that God granted him special power of this kind in order to impress the people and make them believe in him. In this case the sign of making birds would mean that Jesus made small clay models of birds and then through a sort of mesmerism made them appear to fly in the air. But this did not convert them into real living birds; for as soon as the influence was removed, they fell down to the ground like so many lumps of earth. This miracle of Jesus was more or less like the miracle of the rod of Moses which was temporarily made to look like a real serpent but was actually not so. But whatever the significance of the sign, it was performed, as the verse clearly puts it, by the command of Allah, and Jesus possessed no power of creation. (For fuller description see Izalah’-e-Auham by Ahmad, the Promised Messiah).

As for healing the blind and the leprous, it appears from the Bible that persons suffering from certain diseases (leprosy, etc.) were considered unclean and were, therefore, not allowed to come in contact with other men. If, therefore, the word ابری be taken to mean, "I declare to be free", the clause would signify that the legal or social disabilities and disadvantages under which persons suffering from such maladies laboured were removed by Jesus. If, however, the word be interpreted as "I heal," then the clause would mean that Jesus used to heal persons suffering from these diseases. But as indicated above, Jesus used to speak in metaphors. So just as the "creation" spoken of is spiritual creation, the diseases mentioned are spiritual diseases. The Prophets of God are spiritual physicians; they give eyes to those that have lost spiritual sight, and they give hearing to those who are spiritually deaf, and they restore life to those who are spiritually dead (see also Matt. 13:15). In this case the word اکمه (blind or one who is blind at night) would stand for such person as possesses the light of faith but being weak, cannot stand trials. He sees in the daytime, i.e. so long as there are no trials and the sun of faith shines forth unclouded; but when the night comes on, i.e. when there are trials, and sacrifices have to be made, he loses his spiritual vision and stands still (cf. 2:21). Similarly, the word ابرص(leprous) would, in the spiritual sense, stand for one who is imperfect in faith, having patches of diseased skin among healthy ones. But even if these words be taken in their physical sense, Jesus is proved to possess no peculiar power. All Prophets heal diseases and ailments by the power of prayer. In this case, however, the word اکمه (blind) would be taken in the sense of one who cannot see at night or one whose sight is weak.

The clause, I will quicken the dead, does not mean that Jesus actually brought the dead to life. Those actually dead are never restored to life in this world. Such a belief is diametrically opposed to the whole Quranic teaching (23:100, 101; 21:96; 39:59, 60; 2:29; 40:12; 45:27). The sayings of the Holy Prophet are also clear on this point. For instance, it is related that when Jabir’s father, who was a Companion of the Holy Prophet, was killed in the Battle of Uhud and the lad was much grieved, the Holy Prophet consolingly told him that God had lovingly spoken to his father in the other world and had asked him to beg of Him anything he liked, for that would be given to him. Thereupon Jabir’s father said, "Grant me, my Lord, another lease of life on earth that I may again be killed in Thy way". God replied, "I would certainly have done so, but the word has gone forth from Me that the dead shall not be sent back to the earth" (Tirmidhi & Majah).

That the so-called dead who are reported to have been raised by Jesus were not actually dead is clear from the Gospels as well. The incident described in Matt. 9:23-25 sheds some light on it. As a matter of fact, Prophets are only sent to give life to those who are spiritually dead. Jesus, Moses, Abraham and, above all, the Holy Prophet of Islam brought about a complete change in the lives of their followers. This, in religious language, is termed raising the dead to life. Literally, too, the word موتی (the dead) does not necessarily mean those physically dead. It is also used about those who are dead spiritually, morally or intellectually. The Quran freely speaks of the quickening of the dead in the sense of granting life to the spiritually dead (e.g. 3:28; 6:123; 8:43; 25:50; 36:71). In 8:25 the Holy Prophet himself has been spoken of as giving life to the dead. Says the Quran: O ye who believe, respond to Allah and the Messenger when he calls you that he may give you life. Here it is spiritual and intellectual life that is meant, for Muslims do not believe that the Holy Prophet ever brought an actually dead person to life.

The miracles of Jesus, as mentioned in this verse, have been stated in a natural order. First of all is mentioned the change in the outlook and way of life of those that came in contact with him. From men of the world, they became men of God. They rose from the dust and began soaring in the air. Then are mentioned some of the more common spiritual diseases of which Jesus cured the people; the blind were given spiritual sight and those having diseased skins were healed. Finally, the spiritually dead are declared to have received through Jesus a new life. Thus not only a natural order but a sort of progressive order is found in the verse, the climax, so far as individual reformation is concerned, being reached with the miracle relating to the quickening of the dead. But if the verse be interpreted literally, no arrangement seems to exist in the order in which the miracles are described here, i.e. (1) the creation of birds out of clay; (2) the healing of the blind; (3) the healing of those suffering from leprosy, i.e. those who had patches of disease on their skin; and (4) the raising of the dead to life.

The true climax, however, reaches in the miracle or sign mentioned in the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat and what you will store up in your houses. According to Abul-Baqa’, the words نبأ (news) and انبأ (he gave the news) are used in the Quran for announcing matters of great importance (Kulliyyat). This shows that, what Jesus is here represented as announcing to the people, are matters of supreme im-portance to his followers. The language of the verse being parabolic, the word تاکلون (you will eat) will be taken figuratively, mean, "you will subdue or conquer" (see under Important Words above). Thus the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat, would mean, "I will let you know what you will subdue or conquer", i.e. "I will announce to you the conquests you are destined to make in future". The other expression, i.e. I will also let you know what you will store up in your houses, would mean, "I will let you know the deeds which you should or would leave behind for posterity".

The entire clause may have yet another meaning. It may mean that Jesus told his disciples: (1) what they should eat, i.e. what they should spend to meet their physical needs, and (2) what they should store up, i.e. what they should lay up as a spiritual treasure in Heaven. In other words, Jesus told them that their earnings should be honestly and lawfully acquired and that they should spend their savings in the way of God, having no thought for the morrow which should be left to God (see Matt. 6:25, 26 as quoted above).

5:47; 61:7.

Commentary:

Jesus came in fulfilment of the prophecies of the previous Prophets contained in the Torah. But he brought no new Law, being a follower of Moses in this respect. He himself was conscious of this limitation of his authority. Says he: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matt. 5:17, 18). The expression, to allow you some of that which was forbidden to you, does not, therefore, refer to any change or modification in the Mosaic Law. The reference is only to those things which the Jews had themselves rendered unlawful for themselves. Elsewhere the Quran says, So because of the transgression of the Jews, We forbade them pure things which had been allowed to them (4:161). Again, Truly I am come to you with wisdom and to make clear to you some of that about which you differ (43:64). These verses show that there were differences among the various sects of the Jews regarding the lawfulness or otherwise of certain things and that by their iniquities and transgressions they had deprived themselves of certain divine blessings. Jesus thus came as a judge to decide in what matters the Jews had deviated from the right path and to tell them that the blessings of which they had been deprived would be restored to them, if they followed him.

Among Islamic sources the following well-known commentaries support our interpretation of the verse:" Jesus did not abrogate any portion of the Torah; he simply made lawful to the Jews those things about which they used to disagree among themselves through error" (Kathir, under present verse). Again, "The words, that which was forbidden to you, refer to those things which the learned men after Moses had declared to be unlawful, giving the innovation the force of Law; Jesus restored the true commandments of the Torah, as they had been revealed by God" (Muhit). Yet again, "Jesus followed the Law of Moses. He used to observe the Sabbath, and turn his face to the Temple and he used to say to the Jews, I do not teach you even a single word which is not in accord with the Law of Moses; I only remove from you the burden laid on you as a result of the innovations you made after Moses" (Fath).

Commentary:

The verse administers a rebuke to the Jews with whom disputation about religious questions had become a habit and a pastime. The rebuke purports to say: Is not your appetite for bickering and quarrelling about Biblical principles and tenets, with which you are at least conversant to some extent, satisfied that you have begun to meddle with matters about which you know nothing? The reference is either to the Quranic teaching or to their claim about Abraham referred to in the preceding verse.

4:130.

Important Words:

طاب (as may be agreeable). طاب الشیء means, the thing was or became pleasing, delightful, agreeable or delicious. طابت به نفسی means, my mind or my soul became pleased and satisfied with it. طاب العیش لفلان means, life became pleasant and free from cares for such a one. طاب عن الشیء نفسا means, he willingly parted with the thing (Aqrab & Lane).

مثنی (two) is derived from ثنی. They say ثناہ i.e. he doubled it or folded it; or he turned one part of it upon another. ثنیsignifies the repetition of a thing, doing it one time after another, or a thing or affair done twice. مثنی means اثنان اثنان i.e. two and two; two and two together; or two at a time and two at a time. Similarly, ثلاث means, three and three; three and three together; or three at a time and three at a time; and so is the meaning of رباع (Lane & Aqrab). The expression مثنی و ثلاث و رباع would thus mean, two at a time, or three at a time, or four at a time.

تعولوا (do injustice) is derived from عال which means:(1) he had a family or a large family; (2) he sustained and supported the family; (3) he was or became poor; (4) he acted unjustly and wrongfully, or he deviated from the right course.

Commentary:

The verse is important inasmuch as it permits polygamy under special circumstances. Islam allows (though it certainly does not enjoin) a man to have more than one wife up to four at a time. As the permission concerning polygamy has been given in connection with the subject of orphans, it should be taken to be primarily based on the question of the care of that much-neglected class of society. There are cases when the interests of orphans can best be protected by marrying one or more wives from among the female wards or from other women as the exigencies of circumstances may require. This can generally happen in one of the following cases:

(1) A man has a number of orphans, including girls, to look after. He is unmarried and there is danger of his falling into temptation. In this case he should marry one or more girls, as the case may be, from among his wards and thus protect himself from falling into sin or from betraying his trust and acting wrongfully towards his wards.

(2) He is married, but his wife fails to treat the orphans properly. He may in such a case also marry one of his female wards so that they may have a good and separate home of their own.

(3) Some of his younger relations, e.g., brothers or sisters, become orphans, and he finds that he or his existing wife cannot properly look after them. In such an eventuality, he may marry a suitable woman of mature age who may treat them like a mother. It is on record that in similar circumstances Jabir, a young man and one of the Holy Prophet’s distinguished Companions, married a widow of mature age and when the Prophet asked him why he had not married a young girl, Jabir replied that he had done so that his wife might look after his brothers and sisters who were left orphans by the death of his father. The Holy Prophet was much pleased at this act of Jabir and prayed for him (Bukhari, ch. on Buyu‘).

(4) If a person is afraid that the orphans under his care being strangers to him, he may not treat them as kindly as he should do, he may establish direct relationship with them by marrying one of the female wards.

(5) If a person has a large number of orphans under his care and he finds that he cannot do full justice to them without marrying more wives than one, he is permitted to do so to the limit of four.

The words, two or three or four, signify that the last number marks the utmost limit. It is related that after this verse was revealed, the Holy Prophet asked those of his Companions who had more than four wives to keep any four of them they liked and divorce the rest, so that the number might not exceed four (Tirmidhi, ch. on Nikah).

A general note on polygamy is appropriate here. Though the verse mentions polygamy in connection with the subject of orphans, yet other situations may also arise in which polygamy may become a necessary remedy for many social or moral evils.

If only the objects of marriage be considered, the permission of the Quran to its followers to wed more wives than one, appears to be not only justifiable but in some cases desirable and even necessary; nay, in such cases it may become positively injurious to the best interests of individuals and of the community not to take advantage of this permission. According to the Quran, the objects of marriage are four, i.e. (1) protection against physical, moral and spiritual maladies; (2) peace of mind and the availability of a loving companion; (3) procreation of children; and (4) widening of the circle of relationship.

With respect to the first-mentioned object, the Quran says: "And allowed to you are those beyond that, (i.e. the cases mentioned in the earlier verses) that you seek them by means of your property—marrying them properly (and guarding yourselves against animal passions) and not committing fornication (and not indulging in unrestricted gratification) (4:25). The word محصنین occurring in the verse quoted above is derived from احصان which means, to seek protection from the attacks of an enemy by entering into a fort. Thus Islam regards marriage as a sort of fort, or a means of protection against moral and spiritual diseases. With respect to this object the Quran further says: They (your wives) are a garment for you and you are a garment for them (2:188). Now, the dress of a person serves a threefold purpose: (1) It protects him against the inclemency of weather; (2) it serves as an embellishment and adornment; and (3) it covers one’s private parts and any defects that may be in one’s physical formation. With respect to the second object the Quran says: And of His Signs is this, that He has created wives for you from among yourselves that you may find peace of mind in them and He has engendered love and tenderness between you (30:22). About the third object it says: Your wives are a tilth for you so approach your tilth when and how you like (2:224).

Now every one can easily conceive that one or all of the above-mentioned four objects of marriage, i.e. (1) protection against physical, moral and spiritual diseases; (2) procreation and propagation of the human race: (3) company of a life-long and loving companion and (4) widening of the circle of relationship are, sometimes, not realized in the case of one wife only. It is a hard fact which cannot be denied that there are persons whose sexual instinct is too strong to be satisfied with one wife. This is a physical necessity inherent in man and it is playing with fire to make light of this, the most powerful of all physical instincts. The only sane and proper course open to a man whose sexual powers are abnormally strong is to marry another, if one wife does not satisfy him. Such cases may be rare, but you cannot ignore their existence altogether. And a perfect religious system, as Islam claims to be, has to provide for the physical and spiritual requirements of all sorts of people. Again, if the wife of a person becomes a permanent invalid or suffers from a contagious disease, the object of marriage is certainly defeated if such a person does not marry another wife. Indeed, no course is left to him but either to contract another lawful marriage or, failing successfully to combat the attacks of his passions, to lead a dissolute life. And an ailing wife cannot make a good companion either, because, however worthy of regard and com- passion she may be, her company cannot give peace of mind to her husband in all respects. In the third instance, if the wife of a person happens to be barren, the natural and perfectly legitimate desire of the husband to have an issue to succeed him and perpetuate his name remains unfulfilled in the absence of a polygamous marriage. It is to meet the requirements of all such persons that Islam has allowed the contraction of plural matrimonial relations. If, however, in any of these cases a husband divorces his first wife, it would be a shame and disgrace for him. For instance, in the case of an invalid wife it would mean that he lived with her as long as she was whole and deserted her at a time when she most needed his protection. The only honourable course in such a case would be to look after the diseased wife tenderly and marry another woman who may fulfil the functions of a wife.

It will thus be seen that the objects of a polygamous marriage are, to a certain extent, the same as those of a monogamous marriage. When one or all of those objects are not realized by a monogamous marriage, a polygamous marriage becomes a necessity and is allowed. There are, however, other reasons which may also render it necessary for a person to have one or more wives in addition to the one whom he dearly loves and who also fulfils the objects of marriage. Those reasons are: (a) to protect orphans; (b) to provide husbands for marriageable widows and (c) to supplement the decreasing manhood of a family or community.

It is manifestly clear from the verse under comment in which permission is given to marry more wives than one that polygamy is resorted to particularly with a view to taking under one’s protection orphans left unprotected. The verse clearly states: If you fear that you will not be fair in dealing with orphans (under your protection), then marry of women as may be agreeable to you, two or three or four; and if you fear you will not deal justly (between your wives) then marry only one. The words hint that the mother of such orphans as are left in the guardianship of a person should preferably be married by him so that he should become directly related to, and more intimately connected with, them and thus become more interested in their welfare than he otherwise could be.

Again, the Quran says: And marry widows from among you (24:33). To provide husbands for widows is thus another object which the institution of polygamy fulfils. Muslims were perpetually engaged in fighting in the time of the Holy Prophet. Many fell in wars and left behind widows and orphans without near relations to look after them. The preponderance of women over men and an exceptionally large number of orphans with no one to look after them, which is the inevitable result of war, necessitated that to save the Muslim society from moral degeneration, polygamous marriages should be encouraged. The last World War also vindicated this useful institution of Islam. It left an abnormally large number of young women without husbands. Indeed, the great preponderance of females over males in the west, due to the appalling loss of manhood caused by the War, is responsible for the present awful laxity of morals which is eating into the vitals of western society. Young girls fail to get suitable husbands. But natural passions must be satisfied. The result is dissolution and depravity. In view of the moral depravity prevailing in many countries, who has the hardihood to deny the wisdom of the Islamic institution of polygamy? Many indescribable moral and physical evils have arisen in the west as the result of this preponderance of women over men, the only proper remedy for which is polygamy.

The institution of polygamy is also intended to meet the serious situation that follows in the wake of a war, when, besides other aspects of decline, the manhood of a nation becomes so depleted as to threaten national destruction. The fall of birth-rate, which is a potent cause of the decay of a people and from which some Western countries are badly suffering, can be effectively remedied only by resorting to polygamy. The West will never recover from the terrible moral and social diseases from which it is suffering as well as from the appalling numerical decline facing certain countries and communities unless, setting aside all false notions and false sentiments, it submits to the Islamic injunctions about polygamy. It is a sacrifice demanded of men and women alike—a sacrifice in which personal and passing sentiments are required to be partly ignored for the wider and permanent interests of whole communities and countries.

4:26; 5:6.

4:5; 60:11.

Important Words:

المحصنات (married) is the plural of محصنة and is derived from حصن meaning, he or it was or became inaccessible, fortified or protected against attack. حصن المرأة means, the woman was chaste, i.e. protected against moral or sexual sinfulness. احصنت المرأة means, the woman got married. محصنة therefore, means a married woman; a chaste woman who abstains from what is unlawful; a free or noble woman as opposed to a bondwoman. Similarly محصن means, a married man; chaste man who abstains from what is unlawful: a free or noble man. حصن means, a fort or a fortress. The word محصنات would, therefore, mean, women who have protected themselves by entering, as it were, the fortress of marriage. The word has been used in the Quran in all the different senses, i.e. (1) married women, (2) chaste women and (3) free women; but in the present verse it has been used in the sense of married women (Lane & Aqrab).

مسافحین (committing fornication) is the active participle from سافح which is derived from سفح. They say سفح الدم i.e. he shed blood or made it flow. سفح الدمع means, tears began to flow. Thus the word is both transitive and intransitive. سافحة means, he vied with the other party in shedding blood; he committed fornication. مسافحة means, a fornicator and مسافحة means, a fornicatress (Lane & Aqrab).

اجور (dowries) is the plural of اجر which means, reward or wages. اجر المرأة means, dowry of a woman (Taj). Also, in 33:51 the word has been used in the sense of dowry.

استمتعتم (the benefit you receive) is formed from متع. They say متعھا بکذا i.e. he gave her (his wife) such a thing. تمتع بالمرأةmeans, he benefited by the woman temporarily. استمتع بکذا means, he benefited by it for a long time. The Arabic idiom does not countenance the use of استمتاع with regard to a woman in the sense of temporary connection (Lisan). It must also be noted that whenever the noun تمتع (tamattu‘) is used to denote temporary connection with a woman, it is followed by the preposition با (ba) put before the word standing for the woman, as in the above example. But in the expression فما استمتعم به منھن to pronoun ھن referring to women is preceded by the preposition من.

ماملکت ایمانکم (what your right hands possess). The Arabs say ھذا ملک یمینی i.e. he or it is in the possession of my right hand, meaning, he or it is in my possession and I can deal with him or it as I like (Lisan & Aqrab). The expression ما ملکت ایمانکمgenerally signifies, men or women taken prisoner in war and being in the custody and control of their Muslim captors. In this verse, the expression means women prisoners only. The term has been used by the Quran in preference to عباد or اماء (slaves and bondwomen) to point to just and rightful possession, the word ایمان (right hands) also pointing to the same fact.

Commentary:

The expression, such as your right hands possess, has been used in the Quran with regard to those men or women who took part in aggressive wars against Islam and fell prisoners into the hands of Muslims. The context, however, shows that the expression used in the present verse means female prisoners of war. Islam does not allow women taken prisoner in ordinary wars to be taken as wives. This exceptional injunction becomes operative only when a hostile nation wages a religious war against Islam with a view to extirpating it and compelling Muslims to abandon their religion at the point of the sword, and treats their prisoners as slaves, as was done in the days of the Holy Prophet when the enemy took away Muslim women as prisoners and treated them as slaves. The Islamic injunction was thus only a retaliatory measure and also served the additional purpose of protecting the morals of captive women who were generally in large numbers and whom war separated from their kith and kin. A people who seek to compel others to forsake their religion at the point of the sword and reduce them to slavery are mere brutes and not respectable human beings. They must be paid back in their own coin in order to bring them to their senses. For a fuller exposition of this subject see General Introduction.

It may be noted that it is not permitted to take into marriage such female relations of a bondwoman who is treated as wife, as correspond to the relations of a free woman within the prohibited degree. For instance, the mothers, sisters, daughters etc. of such bondwomen cannot be taken in marriage.

The advocates of mut‘a (temporary marriage) have endeavoured in vain to infer its legality from this verse. The Quran and the Arabic language both contradict this manifestly unfounded inference. The misunderstanding about mut‘aseems to have arisen from the failure to understand the difference between the meanings of تمتع and استمتاع given under Important Words. The author of Lisanul-‘Arab quotes Zajjaj as saying: "This is a verse in the interpretation of which some men have committed a great blunder, owing to their ignorance of the Arabic language. They have inferred from it the legality of mut‘a which, by the consensus of opinion among Muslim theologians, has been declared to be unlawful, whereas the words simply mean marriage performed in accordance with the conditions mentioned above."

According to Arabic usage, the legality of mut‘a, as asserted by some people, cannot, therefore, be inferred from this verse. If there had been any reference to mut‘a, the preposition used ought to have been با (ba) and not من (min). Moreover, the expression used here is not تمتع but استمتع which possesses a sense different from that of the former word.

Nor can any inference in favour of mut‘a be drawn from the expression اجورھن which, as explained under Important Words, means "their dowries", in which sense it has been used in the Quran elsewhere also (33:51).

On principle, the dowry must be paid immediately at marriage; but with the wife’s consent the payment can be suitably deferred. The husband can increase the amount of the dowry later, if he so desires; but he cannot decrease it except with the permission of the wife or the qadi.

2:174; 5:4; 6:146.

Important Words:

عقود (compacts) is the plural of عقد (‘aqdun), being derived from the verb عقد (‘aqada). They say عقدالحبل i.e. he tied the rope; or he tied it firmly and fast; or he tied it into a knot or knots. عقد means, a compact; a covenant: an agreement; a responsibility; an obligation; a treaty; an ordinance of God (Lane & Aqrab).

بھیمة (quadrupeds) of which the plural is بھائم is derived from بھم. They say بھم الرجل i.e. the man continued looking at a thing without his being relieved by doing so, i.e. he looked vacantly; he was silent and perplexed or was confounded when asked respecting a thing. ابھم الامر means, the affair became vague or dubious or confused. ابھم الباب means, he closed the door. استبھم علیه الامر means, the affair was as though it were closed against him so that he knew not how to engage in it or execute it. بھیمة means, a beast or a brute; any quadruped whether of the land or of the sea; any animal that does not discriminate or does not possess the power of expression; all animals except beasts of prey and birds (Lane & Aqrab).

انعام (cattle) is the plural of نعم (an animal of the class of cattle). They say نعم عیشه i.e. his life was or became easy, good or pleasant. نعم of which the plural is انعام means, pasturing cattle consisting of camels or sheep or goats; or all these; or camels alone (Lane & Aqrab).

The phrase بھیمة الانعام (quadrupeds of the class of cattle) which is made up of two words: بھیمة (quadrupeds) and انعام(cattle) is of rather peculiar construction. The phrase does not mean quadrupeds from among cattle, for the obvious reason that quadrupeds form a class wider than cattle. In fact, the اضافة in the phrase بھیمة الانعام is of the kind which may be called اضافة بیانیة or اضافة تشبیھیة. According to the former, the words بھیمة الانعام would mean, the بھیمة (quadrupeds) which belong to the class of انعام (cattle); and according to the latter, they would mean بھیمة (quadrupeds) which resemble انعام(cattle). This construction has been used by the Quran to signify that whereas all بھیمة (quadrupeds) do not make lawful food, those of them that form the counterparts of انعام (cattle) are allowed. Thus the expression is intended to comprise not only cattle but also such beasts of the forest as correspond to cattle, i.e. wild goat, wild cow, antelope, wild buffalo, etc.

Commentary:

In this verse the word عقود (compacts) signifies compacts made by man with God or the obligations due to Him. The word, literally meaning "knots", has acquired this meaning because in ancient times knots were tied on strings or ropes as symbols of solemn compacts. The fulfilling of compacts or obligations due to God, referred to in the present verse which primarily deals with the subject of food, contains a veiled hint that a time was coming when Muslims would have to face trials and suffer hardships in order to avoid forbidden food. It is then that they would have to be particularly regardful of God’s commandments in this respect. That time has already come and Muslims who go to Europe or America experience great difficulty in getting clean and lawful food, and they have to take special care in procuring it, if they want to avoid forbidden food.

The word صید (game), here used in connection with Ihram, means the animal hunted and not the act of hunting itself, for the commandment with regard to hunting has been given separately in 5:97. In the present verse it is only the eating of game killed by a pilgrim that is mentioned, because not only is the hunting of a land animal by a pilgrim forbidden, but even the eating of it is for him unlawful. If, however, a land animal has been killed by a pilgrim who has not yet entered into the state of Ihram, the eating of it is not forbidden to those who are in a state of Ihram, provided they render no help to the man who kills the game.

The words, other than those which are being announced to you, refer to the flesh of the animals mentioned in 5:4 below, viz. that which has been strangled, and that which has been beaten to death, and that which has been killed by a fall, and that which has been gored to death, etc. The words, however, do not refer to the first part of 5:4, viz. the flesh of an animal which dies of itself, and blood, and the flesh of swine, because "swine" is not included among cattle and the exception here made is from among the cattle and not from among all animals, and also because this portion had already been revealed in 2:174.

2:174; 5:4-5; 6:146; 16:116.

Commentary:

In this verse the objection of disbelievers has been answered in the very words in which it was made. Their objection was that Muslims profess to be devoted to the name of Allah, yet they do not eat of the flesh of the animal killed by God, i.e. the animal that dies of itself. The answer given in the present verse is, "when we are devoted to Allah, why should we not eat of the food on which the name of our Lord is pronounced?" But the name of God is not pronounced on an animal that dies of itself. Its death takes place under the general law of nature.

The words, He has already explained, refer to 16:116, which was revealed earlier.

The word "mislead" signifies that man-made teachings, which are given by most men in opposition to the teachings of God, only lead people astray.

The word "transgressors" at the end of the verse indicates that the objections raised against the teachings of God have their source in malice and enmity and those who bring forward such objections are indeed transgressors.

11:26-27; 23:24.

Important Words:

نوح (Noah) a very ancient Prophet who, as the Bible tells us, lived nine generations after Adam and eleven generations before Abraham. (Gen, 5:3-32; Luke 3:34-38). His native land was Mesopotamia. He is believed to be the progenitor of the greater part of mankind. The word نوح (Noah) may, in Arabic, be considered to have been derived from ناح which means, he bewailed or mourned. They say ناحت علی زوجھا i.e. the woman bewailed or mourned over her dead husband. ناحت الحمامة نوحا means, the pigeon cooed in a plaintive manner. The Prophet Noah is particularly known for the Flood that overtook his people as the result of his bewailings and lamentations before God for the persecution he had to suffer at the hands of his wicked people, most of whom perished in the Flood. His three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, are generally believed to be the ancestors of the three principal races of mankind. See also 11:26.

Commentary:

After having briefly described the great moral and spiritual reformation that the appearance of a Prophet brings about among a people, and the evil consequences to which opposition to him leads, the present verse proceeds to give illustrations of some of the nations of antiquity, beginning with the people of Noah, to show that those, who oppose God’s Prophets, meet with nothing but destruction. Most of the different races now living on this earth are believed to be descended from Noah. His descendants seem to have spread in all directions, as may be seen from the story of the Deluge which is known to the people of Europe, Asia, Africa and even America.

The words, We sent Noah to his people, show that the Deluge overtook only the people to whom Noah was sent. It was not a universal phenomenon, but the descendants of Noah may have carried the tale to distant lands.

The words یوم عظیم literally meaning "a great day", have been used to signify a day of heavy punishment which was too dreadful to be forgotten.

11:51; 46:22.

Important Words:

عاد (‘Ad) was the name of a tribe who lived in the distant past in a part of Arabia. In Arabic the verb عاد means, he returned. For further description see 11:51.

ھود (Hud) was the name of the Prophet who was sent to ‘Ad. He lived after Noah, being seventh in descent from him. In Arabic the word ھود takes its derivation from ھاد i.e. he returned from evil to good; he repented and returned to truth; he became a Jew. The name ھود is also applied to the Jewish people collectively in which case it is the plural of ھائد. See also 2:112.

Commentary:

After making mention of Noah, whose story is found in the lore of almost all nations, the Quran proceeds to deal with the Prophets that appeared in the Arabian peninsula particularly. These Prophets only find mention in the Quran. No reference to them is to be found in the Bible or in the general books of history, although they were well known to the Arabs through their national traditions.

The tribe of ‘Ad, at one time, ruled over most of the fertile parts of greater Arabia, particularly Yemen, Syria and Mesopotamia. They were the first people to exercise dominion over practically the whole of Arabia. They are known as ‘Adanil ’Ula or the former ‘Ad.

The verse under comment shows that throughout the ages, all the Prophets of God have brought identical teachings so far as the fundamental principles of religion are concerned.

11:62; 27:46.

7:78; 11:65; 17:60; 26:156; 54:28; 91:14.

Important Words:

ثمود (Thamud) was the name of a tribe that lived after ‘Ad. The name may have been derived from the Arabic root ثمد. They say ثمدہ i.e. he dug out a hole in the earth so that water might collect in it (Aqrab). The tribe Thamud lived in the western part of Arabia, having spread from Aden northward to Syria. They lived shortly before the time of Ishmael. Their territory was adjacent to that of ‘Ad, but they lived mostly in the hills. For a fuller note on the subject see 11:62.

صالح (Salih) is an Arabic word being derived from صلح i.e. he was or became good or righteous. صالح means, a righteous person. See 2:12, 161. The Prophet Salih lived after Hud and was probably a contemporary of Abraham.

Commentary:

The camel formed the chief means of conveyance in Arabia, and it was on his she-camel that the Prophet Salih used to travel from place to place to preach his message. So he told his people that placing obstruction in the way of the free movements of the she-camel or doing harm to it would be tantamount to obstructing the work with which God had entrusted him, and that if they did not stand out of her way, God’s punishment would surely descend upon them. Thus it was that the she-camel was meant as a sign for the tribe of Thamud. There was nothing unusual about the camel itself. It was an ordinary animal. The sanctity that attached to it was that God had declared it to be a sign and a symbol of the sanctity and inviolability of the person of the Prophet Salih and doing an injury to it was declared to be tantamount to doing an injury to Salih himself and to hampering his work.

The words, leave her that she may feed in Allah’s earth, do not mean that she was to be allowed to graze in any field she pleased. What is meant is only that no obstruction was to be put in her way, and that she was to be permitted to proceed to any place to which Salih might choose to go. The declaration by Salih about the free movement of his she-camel was also in harmony with a time-honoured Arab custom.

11:85; 29:37.

6:153; 11:86.

Important Words:

مدین (Midian) was Abraham’s son from Keturah (Gen. 25:1, 2). His descendants dwelt in the north of the Hijaz. Midian was also the name of a town near the Red Sea, opposite to Sinai on the Arabian shore. The town was so called because it was inhabited by the descendants of Midian. Some have referred to it as a sea-port on account of its proximity to the sea, being situated only at a distance of eight miles from it; others have spoken of it as an inland town.

شعیب (Shu‘aib) was the name of a non-Israelite Prophet who lived before Moses. He is generally looked upon as the father-in-law of Moses, though the Bible makes no mention of the name. According to the story of the Bible, the name of the father-in-law of Moses was Jethro, who is not spoken of as a Prophet. The Quran speaks of Moses as having been raised after Shu‘aib, so he could not be a contemporary (7:104). As Shu‘aib has been mentioned in this verse as the "brother" of Midian, the inference is inevitable that he was a descendant of Abraham, Midian being a son of the Patriarch by his bondmaid Keturah. For fuller discussion of Shu‘aib see 11:85.

The word اصلاح (being set in order) refers here to the coming down of Divine revelation and the advent of the Prophet Shu‘aib (see 7:57). According to the verse under comment, the most prominent evil of the Midian people was their unfair practice in measuring and weighing.

2:219; 9:20; 61:12.

Important Words:

آووا (gave shelter) is derived from اوی. They say اوی الیه i.e. he betook himself to it; or he repaired to it for lodging, covert or refuge; or simply he betook himself to it or repaired to it; or he returned to it. اواه means, he gave or afforded him lodging, covert, refuge or asylum; or he sheltered, protected or harboured him. اوی له means, he felt compassion or pity for him. آواه means, he gave or afforded him lodging, covert, refuge or asylum; or he sheltered or harboured him (Lane).

Commentary:

The verse enunciates a great principle which should govern the social relations of Muslims. It lays down that those Muslims who live in the same country and under the same administrations, whether as immigrants or as original citizens, are bound to help one another in the hour of need. If one of them is wronged, the others must come to his help. But as regards those Muslims who have not migrated to a Muslim country and prefer to live apart, they have no claim on the assistance of these Muslims in worldly matters. But if they seek their help in the matter of religion, e.g. when they are persecuted for the sake of their religion, then they must be helped. If, however, they are living under a non-Muslim government, with whom Muslims have entered into a treaty of peace, then no help should be rendered them even in matters of religion; and in this case, the only way open to them is to migrate from the non-Muslim country. The reader should note what high regard for compacts and treaties the Quran inculcates in its followers. It is to warn Muslims against a violation of compacts that the verse fittingly ends with the words, And Allah sees what you do.

39:45; 57:3.

5:104.

Commentary:

In v. 58, it was stated that the Holy Prophet has been given a Book which possesses the power to remove doubts and misgivings. In proof of this claim the Quran in the present verse refers to a rule of conduct which people before Islam observed with regard to eatables, merely because it came to them from their forefathers, though reason revolted against it. Eating and drinking is one of the primary needs of mankind and it is the first duty of a religion to guide men in this respect. Before the advent of Islam, however, the world possessed no right guidance on this subject. Men followed no fixed principle or law, declaring one thing lawful and another unlawful as they desired. It stands to reason, however, that there should be some medical, moral or religious grounds for the declaration of some things as lawful and others as unlawful. An arbitrary classification into clean and unclean things without valid reason is to belie God’s creation. There are sure to arise doubts in the minds of men with regard to such arbitrary classification, and only that religion can successfully remove such doubts which lays down and expounds definite laws and regulations with regard to eatables. Islam has clearly done that. So it excels other religions in this respect also that it has laid down definite laws and regulations according to which things belonging to a certain category are treated as lawful and clean and those belonging to another category as unlawful and unclean, and has not laid down its teachings in an arbitrary manner.

2:120; 5:20; 7:189; 25:57; 34:29; 35:25.

Commentary:

The words, you should worship none but Allah, apparently show God to be selfish and standing in need of man’s worship. Nothing can be farther from truth than such an idea. God needs no worship from man. On the contrary, it is man himself who needs the worship of God for his own moral and spiritual benefit (29:7 & 49:18), because worship does not consist merely in certain outward acts but extends to all those spiritual strivings which help to make man reflect in his person Divine attributes. In fact, as the Arabic word عبادة (worship) means full and total obedience and submission to God’s will, it is clear that one who obeys God with thorough submissiveness and humility of heart and follows the will of his Creator fully and completely will not fail to imbibe Divine attributes and attain to the highest spiritual stature. This is something in which lies man’s own good. God gains nothing from it. The mention in the Bible of man having been created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27) also points to the same great truth, i.e. that man has been created so that he may develop in himself the attributes of God. The words of the Bible must not, however, be taken literally, for God is free from all form.

The injunction to worship God alone means that God should always be kept in view, because the complete picture of an object can be drawn only when that object is held constantly before the eye. Hence, worship means constant viewing of the attributes of God and the imprinting of them on the mind. It is clear that in so doing we benefit ourselves alone and do no good to God. A saying of the Holy Prophet also corroborates the above conception of worship. When asked what عبادة(worship) meant, he is reported to have replied that it meant that one should worship God as if one was actually seeing Him, i.e. that different attributes of God should stand embodied before the mind’s eye (Bukhari, ch. on Iman).

The Holy Prophet was a نذیر (Warner) in the sense that he cautioned and warned men to be on their guard against following evil ways and shunning good ones. And he was a بشیر (bearer of glad tidings) inasmuch as he pointed to them the way and provided for them the means of attaining both spiritual bliss and material prosperity.

7:66.

Commentary:

European critics have denied the very existence of the ‘Adites. They say that none of the inscriptions that have so far been discovered in Arabia mention ‘Ad as the name of any people in that country, and therefore they allege that the Quran has only quoted one of the popular legends that were current among the Arabs in the Prophet’s time.

This objection is based on a misunderstanding. In fact, sections of the human race are generally known by two sets of names, one representing the whole race and the other some particular group thereof. "Aryan," for instance, is the collective name of a whole race which comprises many groups and tribes. Now it would be absurd to infer that because inscriptions have been found bearing, for example, only such names as Chandra Gupta or Vikramaditya and no inscription is discovered bearing the name "Aryan," therefore "Aryan" is only a fictitious name and no nation of that name ever existed.

In the same way ‘Ad was not the name of a single tribe but of a group of tribes, whose different sections rose to power at different times. They left behind them inscriptions bearing the name of particular groups. But they all belonged to the main ‘Ad family. The fact that this name is found in ancient books of geography also shows that a people of the name of ‘Ad did indeed live. The geographical works compiled in Greece state that in the pre-Christian era, Yemen was ruled by a tribe called Adramitai who were no other than the ‘Ad who have been called ‘Adi Iram in the Quran. The termination of the Greek name is a noun-suffix, the real name being ‘Adram which is a corruption of ‘Adi Iram.

Some European writers think that Adramitai stands for Hadramaut but this is incorrect, because Hadramaut is the name of a place while Adramitai is the name of a tribe. Moreover, the name Hadramaut occurs both in Greek and Latin books, and nowhere has it been given as Adramitai. In Greek books it is given as Adramotitai, while in Latin books it is given as Chatramotitai. It is not reasonable to think that in this particular case geographers abandoned a generally accepted spelling and invented a new form. Moreover, the same work which mentions the tribe of Adramitai also gives an account of Hadramaut (Adramotitai) which clearly shows that according to the author of that book, Adramitai and Adramotitai are two different names (Al-‘Arab qabl al-Islam).

The Quran gives the following facts about the ‘Adites:

1. They built lofty buildings, and no other people in Arabia attained to that height of power to which they had attained (89:9). The verse referred to above also shows that the tribe of ‘Ad mentioned in the Quran was called Iram. This Iram section of the ‘Adites possessed a powerful kingdom which lasted up to 500 B.C. Their language was Aramaic, which is akin to Hebrew. The Aramaic kingdom was established after the fall of the Semitic kingdom and it included in its boundaries the whole of Mesopotamia, Palestine, Syria and Chaldea and, according to certain authorities, it extended even beyond these limits. Archaeological re-searches have discovered traces of this kingdom,

2. The people of ‘Ad as mentioned in the Quran lived immediately after the people of Noah (7:70). This shows that the Semites and other peoples referred to in history as existing before the Aramites were also sections of the ‘Adites.

3. They built monuments on elevated places (26:129). There still exist ruins of great buildings in Arabia. Only a few miles from Aden there can still be seen remains of lofty buildings erected on high hills,

4. It appears from 46:26 that the history of these people has now become wrapped in obscurity and only some remains of their buildings are to be seen.

5. The territory in which these people lived is called Ahqaf (46:22). Ahqaf, which literally means meandering and zigzag sandhills, is the name given to two parts of Arabia, one in the south, known as the Southern Ahqaf, the other in the north, called the Northern Ahqaf These tracts are fertile, but as they lie near the desert, sandhills are caused there by the sand of the desert having been heaped up by the wind. These sand-hills may not have existed in the time when these people lived there and may have come into being when ‘Ad were punished by a sandstorm.

6. From 69:7 it appears that the destruction of the ‘Adites was caused by the blowing of a violent wind which continued to rage over their territory for seven days, burying their chief cities under heaps of sand and dust. This disaster broke the power of these peoples and brought about their fall. The words, so that thou mightest have seen the people therein lying overthrown (69:8), show that their habitations lie buried under mounds of sand and their ruins may still be brought to light if the ground is cleared of the sandhills. This verse also shows that the territory received the name Ahqaf only when after the Divine visitation they became buried under sandhills.

7:74.

Important Words:

مجیب (answers prayers) which literally means answerer of prayers, is derived from جاب. They say جابه i.e. he made a hole through it; or he tore it or cut it; or he hollowed it out. جاب also means, he traversed or crossed or cut through (the land) by journeying. اجابه means, he answered or replied to him. اجاب دعاءہ means, He (God) answered his prayer or accepted his prayer. مجیب means, one who answers or replies. المجیب is one of the names of God and means, the Answerer of prayers; He Who recompenses prayers by gift and acceptance (Lane). See also 2:187

Commentary:

Salih, the name of the Prophet sent to the tribe of Thamud, being an Arabic word, shows that the Thamud were an Arab people. It is futile to say that Salih may be the translation of a foreign name, for the Quran has adopted all foreign names without translating them. The names Musa (Moses), Harun (Aaron), Yunus (Jonah) and Zechariah (Zachariah) may be cited as examples. The Quran further states that the Thamud were successors to the ‘Ad (7:75) which means that the ‘Ad were also an Arab race. Again, the ‘Ad, in their turn, have been spoken of in the Quran as successors to the people of Noah. This shows that Noah was also raised in an Arab territory and belonged to the Arab race. In fact, even historically it has been proved that Noah was raised in Mesopotamia, the territory of which was in early times under Arab rule.

The above fact leads to an interesting inference that Arabic was the language used by man in the beginning of the world, for when Arabia is admitted to be the cradle of the human race, the language of that country will have to be admitted as the mother of all languages.

European scholars hold that in the beginning there was such a language as Samiri, from which sprang Arabic and which subsequently became changed and distorted into other tongues. It is also admitted that Samiri was spoken in the south of Arabia. But the truth is that the different languages spoken in Mesopotamia and Arabia are all offshoots of Arabic.

The clause, He raised you up from the earth, does not mean that the people of Salih were created from the earth. It only means: "You were a lowly and despised people, no better than the earth. Then God raised you to a high position, granted you prosperity and eminence, gave you power and dominion and entrusted to you the task of bettering and improving the condition of the world. In view of your immense responsibility, you should pray for the forgiveness of your errors, so that if there has been any remissness on your part in the discharge of your duties, God may pardon it. In that case, you will receive additional grace from Him".

The verse points to the fact that all things tend to revert to their original condition. Man has been created from the earth and so he tends to revert to it. He should, therefore, bear in mind that he is weak by nature and it is only through the grace of God that he can prosper. So he should repeatedly turn to God that he may be able to maintain progress. Otherwise, his connection with God will become severed and he will drift back to his original low condition. By saying that God is "nigh" the verse warns man that God is very near to him. If he rejects His Message, He can quickly punish him, for His forces do not take long to come. One must not think that though God is near to man, He does not interfere in his affairs. This is clearly wrong; for God does interfere in the affairs of men, answers the prayers of those who call on Him, and comes to their aid.

A note on the tribe of Thamud will not be out of place here. This tribe has been mentioned by Greek historians. They place it in a period not long before the Christian era. Hijr or Agra, as they call it, is given as the home of these people, whom they call Thamudeni. They mention a place near Hijr which, according to them, the Arabs called فج الناقة (Fajjun-Naqqah). Ptolemy (بطلیموس 140 B.C.) says that near Hijr is a place known as Badanata. Abu Isma‘il, author of the Futuhush-Sham, says: "The tribe of Thamud filled the land between Bosra (in Syria) and Aden and ruled there. Perhaps they were migrating to the north." The tribes of Himyar and Saba had gained ascendancy in Yemen. When the Thamud who ruled in the south of Ahqaf were ejected from their land, they began to move northwards, first to the Hijaz, then to Tehama and lastly to Hijr. The author of the Tamadduni ‘Arab, however, says, "This is but a mere conjecture." See also Enc. Isl. under Thamud.

In fact, the Arabs think that the Thamud were a branch of the ‘Ad, and, like them, lived in Yemen, and when Himyar rose to power, they drove them towards the Hijaz. This view, however, is not supported by historical evidence, for no trace of them has yet been discovered in the south. Al-Hijr has also been known as Mada’ini Salih or the cities of Salih from ancient times and archaeological discoveries show that it had become subject to the Nabataeans, who were natives of Petra, previous to the Christian era. There have been discovered here many inscriptions in the Nabataean language, and some also in the Yemnite language. Scholars versed in Oriental literature have named these inscriptions as Thamudiyya, i.e. inscriptions belonging to the Thamud. These discoveries lend support to the view of those geographers who hold that the Thamud had migrated from the south to the north; for if it had not been so, their language would not have borne a resemblance to the Yemnite language.

Al-Hijr, which seems to have been the capital of these people, lies between Medina and Tabuk, and the valley in which it is situated is called Wadi Qura. These people held sway here. Speaking of the Thamud, the Quran says: Who hewed out the rocks in the valley (89:10). The Quran represents them as the immediate successors of the ‘Ad (7:75). From 40:31,32, it appears that the Thamud lived before the time of Moses.

Another consideration leads us to the conclusion that they lived even before the time of Abraham. Toward the end of their days they ruled over northern Arabia and southern Palestine. It appears from the Quran that in the time of Moses, these territories were dominated by the Midianites, who were descended from Abraham, Midian being the son of Abraham from Keturah, his third wife (Gen. 25:1,2). The descendants of Keturah lived in these parts, when Joseph was taken from the well and carried to Egypt. This shows that the Thamud had altogether been destroyed or their power had greatly declined before the time of Abraham, otherwise the Midianites would not have been able to take possession of their territory.

It is worthy of note that accounts of the Prophets Hud and Salih have been given at various places in the Quran and everywhere the order observed is the same, viz. the account of Hud precedes that of Salih which is the true chronological order. This shows that the Quran gives accurately and in their true historical order the facts of history long consigned to oblivion and wrapped in obscurity. This refutes the objection frequently urged against the Quran that it fails to observe true historical order in the narration of the events of history. According to some, Thamud is only another name for ‘Adi Thaniyah or the second ‘Ad, while according to others they came after the second ‘Ad. For further discussion of this subject see "Tafsir-e-Kabir" by Hadrat Khalifatul Masih II, vol. 3, p. 219, where, when speaking of the chronological order of the Prophets, it is only Hud and Salih, who are prehistoric Prophets, that are really meant. There is a tradition to the effect that some Muslims read a poetic inscription about the Thamud during the reign of Mu‘awiyah. This tradition is discredited by European critics. The inscription, however, was rediscovered by Captain Haines and Mr. Wellstedt, in 1834. It was published in the Royal Asiatic Society Journal and was reproduced by Mr. Forester in his works. It is in the Himyari language, which was originally a south Arabian tongue. Modern orientalists call it the Himyari inscription. It was discovered at Hisnul-Ghurab, a place near Aden. The following is a translation of it:

No. 1.

"We dwelt, living long and luxuriously in the Zenanas of this spacious mansion: our condition exempt from misfortune and adversity. Rolled in through our channel

The sea, swelling against our castle with angry surge; our fountains flowed, with murmuring fall, above.

The lofty palms: whose keepers planted dry dates in our valley date-grounds; they sowed the arid rice.

We hunted the mountain-goats, and the young hares, with gins and snares; beguiling, we drew forth the fishes.

We walked, with slow, proud gait, in needle-worked many-coloured silk vestments, in whole silks, in grass-green chequered robes.

Over us presided kings far removed from baseness, and stern chastisers of reprobate and wicked men. They noted down for us according to the doctrine of Heber.

Good judgements written in a book to be kept; and we proclaimed our belief in miracles, in the resurrection, in the return into the nostrils of the breath of life.

Made an inroad upon robbers, and would do us violence: collectively we rode forth . . . we and our generous youth, . . . with stiff and sharp-pointed spears; rushing onward

Proud champions of our families, and our wives; fighting valiantly, upon coursers with long necks, dun-coloured, iron-gray, and bright bay.

With our swords still wounding and piercing our adversaries; until, charging home, we conquered and crushed this refuse of mankind".

No. 2.

~5v-1422.png~

No. 3.

"With hostile hate, the men of crime We assailed: onward rushed

Our horses, and trampled them under foot."

No. 4.

"Divided into parts, and inscribed from right to left, and marked with points, this song of triumph, Sarash and Dzerah.

Transpierced, and hunted down, and covered their faces with blackness. Aws the Beni Ac" (Historical Geography of Arabia, p. 382. See also Enc. of Islam under Hisn al-Ghurab).

It is clear from the above that the Thamud were a civilized people and they possessed not only a code of laws but also recorded their decisions to serve as an authority in future cases, as is done in modern civilized countries. It is difficult to say whether the people to whom the above inscription refers lived before the Prophet Salih or after him, for possibly a section of the people of Hud may have been left behind in southern Arabia. At any rate it is a proven fact of history that these people were part of Thamud tribe and it was among them or among their brethren who had migrated to the north that Salih was raised.

From 7:75 it appears that the Thamud ruled over plains and hills. Again, from 26:148, 149 we learn that their country abounded in springs and gardens wherein grew date-palms of excellent quality and that they also cultivated lands and grew corn. Thus the Quranic account of these people is fully corroborated by the inscription quoted above.

Their decline seems to have begun soon after the time of Salih, for only a few centuries after his time their name fails to find mention among conquering and victorious nations. Arabia was invaded by an Assyrian king (722-705 B.C.) and the name Thamud is found mentioned among the conquered tribes in an inscription which he caused to be engraved in memory of his victory. Of the Greek historians, Didorus (80 B.C.), Pliny (79 B.C.) and Ptolemy make mention of the Thamud. When Justinian, the Roman Emperor, invaded Arabia, his army included 300 Thamud soldiers, but before the advent of Islam this tribe had become altogether extinct.

7:86; 29:37.

26:182, 183.

Important Words:

محیط (destructive) is derived from حاط. They say حاط به i.e. he guarded, kept, protected or took care of him or it; he defended him or he paid frequent attention to him or it. احاط به means, he or it surrounded, encompassed or enclosed it or him. They say احیط فلان i.e. such a one was destroyed, or his destruction drew near. The Quranic words ان ربك احاط بالناسmean, verily thy Lord hath men in His grasp or power, or He hath destroyed them or is about to destroy them. محیطmeans, surrounding, encompassing or enclosing. The words, عذاب یوم محیط mean, the punishment of a day which shall beset people on every side so that there will be no way of escape from it; or the punishment of a destructive day (Lane).

مدین (Midian) was a son of Abraham from his third wife, Keturah (Gen. 25:1, 2). His descendants were all called Midian, in accordance with ancient usage. Or it may be that originally they were called "Banu Midian" (children of Midian) but these words later became abbreviated into Midian. The metropolis of these people was also called Midian, which itself may be an abbreviation of some such name as Duri Midian (the houses of Midian). This town was situated on the Gulf of ‘Akabah, on the Arabian coast, at a distance of some six or seven miles from the sea. This is why in some ancient books of geography it is mentioned as a sea port, while in others it is shown as an inland town. The trade caravans going from Arabia to Egypt passed through it. There are still several small townships known as Midian, but the original town no longer exists. The descendants of Midian lived in the north of the Hijaz and it is they who built this town. It was hither that Moses fled for refuge when Pharaoh and his nobles sought to kill him and it was in the neighbourhood of Midian that he stayed with the Israelites after crossing the Red Sea. The fact that the word مدین(Midian) possesses a close resemblance to مدینه (Medina), the town of the Holy Prophet, constitutes one of the many similarities Moses had with the Holy Prophet. See also 7:86.

شعیب (Shu‘aib). See 7:86.

Commentary:

Some commentators think that Shu‘aib was the father-in-law of Moses and that Moses had gone to live with him after he had killed an Israelite. The Bible, however, gives the name of the father-in-law of Moses as Jethro (Exod. 3:1). Now Jethro and Shu‘aib cannot be the same person, nor was Shu‘aib the father-in-law of Moses. The following facts support this view:

(1) Shu‘aib has been mentioned in the Quran at several places and so has the father-in-law of Moses, but nowhere in the Quran is there the slightest hint that Shu‘aib and the father-in-law of Moses were the same person nor has the father-in-law of Moses anywhere been referred to as a Prophet of God.

(2) The Quran clearly states that Moses was raised as a Prophet after the destruction of the people of Midian (7:104), which definitely shows that they were not contemporaries.

(3) The Quran also states that Shu‘aib appeared not long after Lot, so he could not be a contemporary of Moses (v. 90 below).

(4) If Shu‘aib had been the contemporary and father-in-law of Moses, he would not have failed to refer to the destruction of Pharaoh and his people, which had taken place only recently, when he had referred to the destruction of the peoples of Noah, Hud and Salih (v. 90), but he did not do so.

The following important facts about the people of Shu‘aib also emerge from this and other verses of the Quran: (a) that, like the Holy Prophet, it was chiefly at the hands of the people of his town that Shu‘aib met with opposition (7:89); (b) that his people not only practised idolatry, but were also fraudulent in their dealings with one another; (c) that they were a well-to-do and prosperous people; (d) that they had adopted the calling of the road and were given to plundering and dacoity (7:86 & 11:86 below). As these people lived on the trade route to Egypt, they used to plunder the caravans which passed by that way. This inference receives further support from the fact that near Midian there was a wood which was peopled by the descendants of Dedan, a nephew of Midian, being the child of another son of Abraham from Keturah (Gen. 25:3). These people are referred to in the Quran as اصحاب الایکة i.e. the People of the Wood (15:79 & 26:177) and Shu‘aib preached to them as he preached to the people of Midian (26:178-192). From 15:80 it appears that this wood or jungle lay on a trade route, so it served as a good hiding place for the people of Midian to plunder travellers.

The words, the punishment of a destructive day, signify that the punishment of that day will be thoroughly destructive. The words may also mean that the day will not end until the whole people are annihilated. See the meaning of the word محیط (destructive) above.

Commentary:

In the previous verse we were told that we should not only reform ourselves but also our fellow-men because man is influenced by his environment, and if our surroundings are corrupt, the corruption thereof is sure to affect us sooner or later. So in the present verse we are enjoined to sever all connexion with the wicked and the unjust even though they may be our own kith and kin.

The present verse is also connected with the words, exceed ye not the bounds, occurring in the previous verse. In the light of the verse under comment these words do not mean that we exceed the bonds only when we have actually committed an act of injustice, but we are equally guilty of injustice if we are accessory to another man’s unjust act in any way or if we defend him when he happens to commit an offence.

6:15; 12:102; 35:2; 39:47.

11:28; 23:25.

Important Words:

فاطر (Maker) is the active participle from فطر. They say فطرہ i.e. he clove, split, rent or cracked it; He (God) created it, or produced it or brought it into existence, namely, for the first time, it not having existed before; originated it; commenced or began it. فاطرالسموات means, the Originator or Creator of the heavens. Ibn ‘Abbas says, "I did not know what was the meaning of فاطرالسموات until two Arabs of the desert came to me, disputing together respecting a well, and one of them said, انا افطرتھا i.e. 'It was I who originated or began it.' " فطرالعجین; means, he made the dough into bread, or baked it, without leavening it, he kneaded the dough and made it into bread or baked it immediately (Lane & Aqrab). From the Quran it appears that there are four stages of creation: (a) the stage when nothing existed and the process of creation began for thefirst time, nothing having existed before; (b) the stage when matter had come into existence but had not yet taken a definite material form; (c) the stage when, as the result of combination, matter began to acquire diverse properties, the consummation of this process being known by the name of the law of nature; and (d) the last stage when, in accordance with the law of nature, the process of procreation or repetition in creation began, viz. man was born out of man and grain out of grain, etc. The attribute of فاطر (Maker) points to the second stage.

Commentary:

The verse gives the creation of the heavens and the earth as an argument to prove the Divine origin of the teaching given to the Prophets. The Prophets are here represented as saying to their opponents: "It is by the command of Allah that we preach. We say nothing of our own accord. How can you entertain doubt about the fact that God can send down revealed guidance? He is the Creator of heaven and earth, and it is unreasonable to think that, after having created man, He should have left him without guidance. Equally, it is inconsistent with reason to think that, whereas God has made ample provision for the material welfare and advancement of man by creating heaven and earth, He should have neglected to provide for his spiritual welfare."

The words, He calls you that He may forgive you your sins, and grant you respite till an appointed term, refute an objection of disbelievers that God was too dignified and exalted to invite humble beings like themselves to Him. They are told that it is indeed inconsistent with the dignity of God to call humble beings to His aid, but it is not at all below His dignity to come to their help. Nay, such an act is quite in keeping with His supreme dignity. God had therefore sent His Messengers that, through them, He might satisfy the moral and spiritual needs of man and grant him a new and higher life.

The expression, you are but men like ourselves;…Bring us then some clear proof, contains another objection of disbelievers that, if God at all was to have raised Messengers, they should have been beings befitting His dignity and not weak and humble men like themselves. The answer is given in the succeeding verse.