وَمِن قَبْلُ

15:68.

7:81; 29:29.

15:72.

Important Words:

یھرعون (came running trembling with rage) is derived from ھرع. They say ھرع الیه (hara‘a) i.e. he went to him quickly and in a perturbed state of mind. ھرع الرجل (huria) or اھرع الرجل (ahra‘a) means, the man went quickly; and اھرع الرجل (uhri‘a) means, the man was made to tremble with rage, fear, cold or weakness; he was made to go fast. The Arabs say, اقبل الشیخ یھرع (yuhra‘u) i.e. the old man came fast and trembling or came running in a perturbed state of mind. (Aqrab).

Commentary:

In ancient times, generally every town had a separate government of its own, which was carried on by the chiefs of the place by mutual consultation as a sort of republic: or by a king whose authority was confined to one village or a number of villages. The two towns, Sodom and Gomorrah, with which Lot was connected had such a government. They possessed no established government in the modern sense of the word (Gen. ch. 14).

The inhabitants of these two towns had adopted the calling of the road and used to plunder wayfarers (Jew. Enc. under "Sodom"). A people who thus molested their neighbours naturally had to be on their guard against them and to be constantly apprehensive of reprisals. Besides, the people of Sodom were practically in a state of war with their neighbours (Gen. 14). Therefore they would not allow strangers to enter their towns, lest the latter should open the gates at night and let in the enemy. Lot, like all Prophets of God, being an hospitable man, naturally used to look after the comfort of strangers and entertain them (15:71). His people, apprehensive as they were, repeatedly warned him to give up that practice. So when, on this occasion, he brought strangers into his house, his townsmen became infuriated and hastened to him with angry faces, because they thought they now had a suitable opportunity to punish him for giving shelter to strangers in defiance of their protests.

Some commentators say that these visitors had come in the form of handsome boys and that Lot’s people came running to him with evil intent. But there is nothing in the context to warrant such an inference. On the contrary in 15:71 we read that on seeing the strangers with Lot, his people demanded of him why he had brought these strangers when they had already forbidden him to do so. If they had come with an evil intention, they should have rejoiced at the sight of the strangers and not been displeased at seeing them. Moreover, vv. 15:68-70 signify that Lot’s people rejoiced at having an opportunity to punish and disgrace him because he defied their protests. They were angry with him because he had brought in the strangers against their protests and were glad that they now had an opportunity to settle old scores with him once for all.

The words, before this too they used to do evil, show that in view of their past mischievous behaviour Lot feared lest his people should do any mischief and thus disgrace him in the presence of his guests. There is no reference here to any particular mischief. They were wicked people, therefore Lot was naturally afraid that they might do harm.

When the townsmen came to Lot running, he referred to his two daughters who had been married in the town and said, they are purer for you, meaning that if his people insulted his guests and turned them out, they would thereby disgrace themselves; but if they really entertained fear that he might do them harm in league with the strangers, they had his daughters in their custody and they could wreak vengeance on him by punishing them. That was a better and purer course for them to adopt, for in that way they would also avoid the disgraceful act of insulting the guests.

There can be nothing more absurd than to say that Lot offered his daughters to his wicked people to satisfy their lust. Even the meanest of men would not do such a shameful and dishonourable act; then how could a noble Prophet of God, who must possess a far greater sense of honour than ordinary men, stoop to such a mean course? The absurd story given in the Bible seems to be responsible for so stupid an interpretation of this Quranic verse by some commentators.

Some other commentators have suggested that Lot offered his daughters in marriage, but this explanation also seems unsatisfactory. It appears from the Bible that Lot had two daughters who were married. But if it be supposed that they were unmarried, they could be married only to two of the townsmen. How could then this offer give satisfaction to a large number of people? And how was it relevant to their demand?

There is, however, one explanation which seems plausible, if it be supposed that the people came with the intention which these commentators ascribe to them. A Prophet is, as it were, the father of his people, so he can speak of their women as his daughters.

So when Lot said to the people, "these are my daughters; they are purer for you," he, as a Prophet and an old man, must have referred to their own wives as his daughters, who, of course, were purer for them, He thus asked them to follow the lawful course rather than satisfy their lust unnaturally.

Important Words:

خلصوا (they retired) is derived from خلص which means: (1) it was or became clear or pure or unmixed. They say خلص من القومi.e. he retired or withdrew or went away from the people. The Quranic expression خلصوا نجیا means, they retired, conferring privately together (Lane).

نجیا (conferring together in private). نجى is derived from نجا and means: (1) a secret; (2) one to whom a secret is confided; (3) one who confers with another in private; (4) the act of conferring in private (Aqrab).

کبیر (leader) means, great in body or rank or nobility; big or full-grown; learned or most knowing; teacher or master; lord or chief; old or advanced in age, etc. (Lane). See also 11:4.

Commentary:

Christian critics of the Quran accuse it of being ignorant of even well-known facts of history, basing their criticism on the fact that it was Judah, the fourth among the brothers, and not Reuben, the eldest of them—as they take the word کبیر(leader) to mean—who declared that he would not go back to his father without Benjamin. It is strange that, whenever these self-styled judges of the Quran happen to come across any difference between the narrative of the Quran and that of the Bible, they complacently assume the Bible to be right, as if it is altogether free from anachronism and misstatements, while the fact is that it has been shown even by Christian writers themselves to occupy a very low place among reliable books of history. To doubt the authenticity of an historical fact related by the Quran merely on the basis that it does not agree with the Bible is, to say the least, simply capricious. But even assuming the present Biblical account to be correct, the Quranic account cannot be found fault with. The word which the Quran has used with respect to the brother who refused to go is کبیر which means, "big" or "elder" and not اکبر which means "the eldest." Judah, being the fourth son of Jacob, was indeed one of the big or elder brothers of Joseph.

Again, کبیر does not always mean "big" or "elder" but, as shown under Important Words, it also means "leader" and "great in estimation, rank or dignity," and it is in this sense that the word has been used here and applies to Judah and not to Reuben. For, according to the Bible, the misconduct of Judah’s three elder brothers had resulted in his taking precedence over them (Gen. 49:3-8). Of him Jacob said, "Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise…thy father’s children shall bow down before thee." (Gen. 49:8). That Judah was greater than Reuben in the eyes of Jacob is also apparent from the fact that, when Reuben offered his two sons as hostages for Benjamin, Jacob refused to send Benjamin (Gen. 42:37, 38), but when Judah said, "I will be surety for him," Jacob gave his consent (Gen. 43:9-10).

Jacob’s prediction of Judah’s superiority started the long feud which later separated Judah and Israel.