غَیۡرَ

7:163.

Important Words:

رجز (a punishment) means: (1) filth; (2) punishment; (3) idol-worship (4) iniquity or sin (Aqrab).

من السماء (from heaven). For سماء see note on 2:20. As سماء means a "height" or "anything that is high above us", therefore the expression من السماء would mean "from on high" or "from God", implying that the punishment meted out to the Israelites was not brought about through earthly means but, as it were, descended from above.

Commentary:

This verse is a continuation of the previous one. God commanded the Israelites to behave submissively and to pray to Him for the forgiveness of their sins, but they, mischievous and arrogant as ever, disobeyed the injunctions given to them and changed the words of prayer taught by God, whereupon He chastised them with a punishment that was not of this earth, i.e. He visited them with a pestilence or plague that destroyed a number of them. Or the expression رجزا من السماء may mean that their disobedience recoiled on their own souls in the sense of moral degradation and filthiness of heart and mind.

The question of the word which the Israelites used in place of the one taught to them is immaterial. According to some, they used the word حبة or حنطة i.e. "give us corn to eat" instead of حطة i.e. "remove our sins" (Bukhari & Jarir). The words sound alike and afforded a playful opportunity to the mischief-minded among the Israelites. But as already said, the word substituted is not material. What matters is that they, i.e. many of them as the Quran hints, disobeyed the Lord and made religion a plaything. Hence the punishment.

5:4; 6:146; 16:116.

Important Words:

المیتة (that which dies of itself) is derived from مات i.e. he died. میتة means: (1) an animal that has died a natural death (Aqrab); (2) an animal that has not been slaughtered in a manner prescribed by Law (Lane & Mufradat).

الخنزیر (swine). Authorities differ as to the derivation of this word, some deriving it from خنزر and others from خزر. The word الخنزرة means, hard and rugged land; or a clumsy, badly-finished axe. خزر الرجل means, the man looked with the hinder parts or outer angles of his eyes (Lisan). خزرت العین means, the eye was or became narrow and small. خزر الرجل means, the man looked from the outer angle of the eye; or he had a distortion of one of his eyes. The Arabs say: کل خنزیراخزر i.e. all swine look from the outer angles of their eyes. خزر المرء means the man affected or pretended to be cunning. الخنزیر means, the swine, the hog, the pig; a certain well-known foul animal the eating of whose flesh is said to be forbidden by every Prophet (Lane). The Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement says of the word خنزیر: "The very name of this foul animal contains an allusion to the prohibition of its flesh. It is a combination of خنز and ار, the first part meaning, 'very foul' and the second, 'I see'. The word thus literally means, 'I see it very foul'…What is yet more remarkable is that in Hindi this animal is known by the name سؤر which is similarly composed of two words, i.e. سوء and ار, the latter part being identical with the latter part of the Arabic word and the former being the exact equivalent of the first part of the Arabic form. The Hindi word, therefore, exactly means the same as the Arabic, viz. 'I see it very foul'…In Hindi this animal is also known as بد meaning bad or foul which is probably a translation of the original Arabic word" (Teachings of Islam).

أھل (invoked) is derived from ھل meaning, it (the moon) made its appearance; he (the man) cried aloud. اھل also means, it made its appearance; he called or cried aloud. اھل بالتسمیة علی الذبیحة means, he invoked or pronounced the name of God while slaughtering an animal. اھل السیف بفلان means, the sword cut into him ( Aqrab). اھلال which is the infinitive-noun from اھل means, to raise one’s voice aloud by way of exclamation, on seeing the ھلال or the moon of the first night (Mufradat). Thus اھل به لغیر الله would mean, on which the name of anything besides God has been invoked at the time of slaughter; or which has been cut or slaughtered for a being other than God.

اضطر (driven by necessity) is derived from ضر which means, it did harm. ضرہ الی کذا means, it forced him to resort to that. اضطره means, he compelled him against his will. اضطره الی کذا means, he compelled him against his will to have recourse to that (Aqrab).

باغ (disobedient) is derived from بغی meaning, he rebelled; he disobeyed; he committed a wrong. باغ is really باغی being the active participle from بغی meaning, one who disobeys; one who is rebellious (Aqrab).

عاد (exceeding the limit) is the active participle from عدا i.e. he exceeded the proper or the prescribed limit. عدی علیهmeans, he transgressed against him. عاد is really عادی meaning, one who exceeds the limit (Aqrab).

اثم (sin). The verb اثم means, he did a thing which was unlawful for him; he did a thing which made him deserving of punishment. Thus the noun اثم means: (1) anything unlawful, i.e. a sin; (2) anything which makes a person deserving of punishment (Aqrab); (3) anything that pricks the mind as something evil (Mufradat).

Commentary:

This verse speaks only of food that is حرام or unlawful. It makes no mention of طیبات or pure and wholesome things to which reference has already been made in the preceding verse. It should not be supposed that the four things mentioned in this verse are the only things prohibited in Islam. As a matter of fact, Islam prohibits the use of many things; but they are divided into grades or classes, some of them being حرام or unlawful and others being ممنوع or simply forbidden. The verse under comment mentions only the former class. The forbidden things have been stated by the Holy Prophet and are mentioned in Hadith. They must not be used by the Faithful but they cannot be called حرام or unlawful. In fact, there is a great difference between unlawful (حرام) and forbidden (ممنوع) things. Islam recognizes due difference in the importance of different things, and so all prohibitions cannot be classed together and treated as of equal importance. The use of حرام or an unlawful thing has a great and direct bearing on the moral and spiritual development of man but it is not so with a ممنوع or forbidden thing which stands on a lower level of importance, though both are prohibited.

Among the things declared حرام or unlawful in this verse, the injuriousness of consuming blood and the flesh of a dead animal as food has been recognized by most authorities on medicine. The use of the flesh of swine has also proved to be injurious not only to the physical health of man, but also to his moral and spiritual health. The swine eats filth and takes delight in living in dirty places. It has indecent habits and possesses the evil trait of sex-perversion. Tape-worms, scrofula, cancer and encysted trichina are known to be more prevalent among pork-eating peoples. The use of pork also causes trichinosis.

The clause, and that on which the name of any other than Allah has been invoked, refers to that animal at the time of whose slaughter the name of any deity other than Allah is invoked or that animal which is slaughtered with a view to winning the pleasure of an idol or a saint etc., even though the name of Allah may have been mentioned while slaughtering it. Hence, all such animals as are sacrificed in order to propitiate a false deity or a saint, or any food that is cooked as an offering to a deceased person have been condemned as unlawful. Such foods are spiritually harmful. The incentive to these offerings is شرك (i.e. idolatry) and شرك is tantamount to rebellion against God.

In spite of the fact that the above mentioned things have been declared to be unlawful, the verse goes on to say that if for want of food the very life of a person should be in danger, considerations of the preservation of human life must temporarily prevail over other considerations. This is a case of choosing the lesser of two evils. Hence the verse very wisely makes an exception in case of a real and urgent necessity when no other food is available and one is in real danger of losing one’s life if one does not use the unlawful food. In fact, of the four unlawful things, the first three have been declared unlawful mostly on the basis of the fact that they are injurious to physical and moral health, and it is certainly wise to permit their use in case of urgent necessity when there is real danger to life. As for the fourth thing, i.e. a food consecrated to any other being beside Allah, it is evident that it is not injurious intrinsically. It is injurious only from the point of view of faith. Therefore when such a thing is used merely to save one’s life, which may be so usefully employed in the service of religion, there can be no real objection in eating it, because this extremely rare act cannot be considered as involving شرك or idolatry, particularly when it is performed with the sanction of God.

Permission for the exceptional use of such things is, however, qualified by two important conditions: (1) that one who resorts to this use must not be باغی (i.e. disobedient). There should be no lurking spirit of revolt or disobedience behind the act. The circumstances must be real and the condition genuine, and nothing should be done out of design and wilfulness; (2) that the user of unlawful food under exceptional circumstances should not become عاد i.e. he should not exceed the limit. He should confine himself to such quantity only as is absolutely essential to save life. Thus the exceptional use is permissible only at a time when one is under bona fide constraint and is in real danger, and then only to the extent which is absolutely necessary for saving life.

Though it has been declared in this verse that there is no sin in partaking of a prohibited food when no revolt or transgression is intended, yet as one might err in judging what is revolt or transgression and what is not, and thus be unconsciously guilty of breaking a divine commandment, the Quran adds the words: surely, Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful, meaning that an unintentional deviation will be forgiven by the Merciful God. The clause also reminds a Muslim that though it has been made permissible for him to take unlawful food in exceptional circumstances, yet such circumstances may be due to certain hidden shortcomings of his own for which he should seek God’s forgiveness, and that if he does so he will find God Forgiving and Merciful. In this connection see also 5:4; 6:146 & 16:116.

2:235.

Commentary:

The middle verses, which came in like the middle Prayer, having ended, the Quran reverts to the original subject of conjugal relations. The verse under comment is erroneously believed by some to have been abrogated by 2:235 and 4:13. Apart from the fact that the abrogation theory is based on lack of the knowledge of true teaching of the Quran, there is nothing in the verses referred to above which contradicts the provision contained in the present verse. The period of waiting laid down for a widow in 2:235 is four months and ten days in which time she can, as of right, claim residence and maintenance from the heirs of her deceased husband. The period of one year mentioned in the present verse has nothing to do with the above-mentioned period of waiting, as the words, but if they themselves go out, there shall be no blame upon you; clearly show. The present verse only contains a concession or a favour for a widow in addition to her right of residence and maintenance mentioned in 2:235. One year is about the time conveniently required by a widow for making suitable arrangements about her future. It is also the requisite time for a pregnant widow to be delivered of the child and relieved of the encumbrances attending thereto. Nor has this verse anything to do with the share of a widow in the property left by her husband as stated in 4:13. The concession about residence and maintenance for one year mentioned in the present verse forms no part of her share in the inheritance. The verse contains no obligatory injunction, but only an additional exhortation to the heirs of the deceased person to show special kindness to the widow for a period of one year, just as the following verse embodies an identical exhortation in favour of a divorced woman.

3:20; 5:4.

Commentary:

The Jews and Christians used to say that they were not bound to accept Islam because it was the Quran that verified the Torah and the Gospel, and not the Torah and the Gospel that verified the Quran. Apart from the fact that the Quran does not "verify" the previous scriptures in the sense in which they understood it, their sense of false security has been shattered in this verse and it has been declared unequivocally that Islam is now the only religion acceptable to God. Even if the word اسلام (Islam) is here taken to signify not "the Religion of Islam" but "submission and resignation to the will of God", the present verse makes it binding on the People of the Book to accept Islam as it alone now represents the will of the Supreme Being.

8:12.

3:169.

Important Words:

امر (government) means: (1) order or command; (2) matter or affair; (3) state or condition; (4) authority, government or management. اولوا الامر means, those who hold command or exercise authority (Aqrab).

قتل (fighting) being noun-infinitive means both to kill and to be killed. Another reading of the word قتل here is قتال(Muhit iii. 90 & Kashshaf) which shows that the word قتل (qatl) has been used here in the sense of fighting and not killing. The word has been used elsewhere also in the Quran in the sense of fighting (see 2:192). See also Jarir under 3:155.

Commentary:

The words, a slumber that overcame a party of you, refer to an incident connected with the Battle of Uhud. AbuTalhah says, "I lifted my head on the day of Uhud and began to look about, and there was none among us on that day but was bending down his head with slumber." This incident has been narrated by Tirmidhi, Nasa’i and others (see Kathir, ii. 303). As sleep or slumber is a symbol of a peaceful condition, being a sign of hearts that are calm and at rest, the Quran refers to this incident as a sort of favour. The incident evidently occurred when the battle was practically over and the Muslims had returned to the neighbouring height.

The reference in the words, the other party, is to the hypocrites who were at Medina and who had not taken part in the battle. When they heard of the reverse which overtook the Muslims and of the reported death of the Holy Prophet, they, in spite of rejoicing at the misfortune that had befallen the Muslims, became anxious about their own lives and feared what would happen to them in case the Meccans should attack Medina. The words cannot apply to the party of Muslims that took part in the battle, of whom the Quran says, He has surely pardoned you and Allah is gracious to the believers (3:153 above).

The words, Is there for us any part in the government of affairs? uttered by the hypocrites mean, "nobody listens to our opinion in matters of administration; we had advised the Muslims not to go out of Medina to fight, but our advice was ignored, with the result that they were defeated." The sentence might also mean, "now, (i.e. after this reverse) real government and power have gone into the hands of the idolaters and nothing has been left for us."

The words, All government belongs to Allah, signify that the decision in all matters rests with God; or that whatever might happen in the intervening period, God has ordained that eventually power and government shall be vouchsafed to Muslims, who will have dominion in the land.

The words, we should not have been killed here, mean, "If we had any voice in the management of affairs and if our advice had been accepted, our brethren would not have been killed in the battle," it being insinuated that while they were wise, the Muslims were simply foolish. The words may also be understood to mean, "if we were to have any government (as the Prophet had promised), we should not have been defeated in the battle." By saying so, the hypocrites hinted that the prophecies of the Holy Prophet regarding the triumph of Islam had turned out to be false.

It may be noted here that by saying, we should not have been killed here, the hypocrites did not evidently mean that they themselves would not have been killed. What they meant was that their brethren or comrades who were killed would not have been killed. This shows that by the slaying of one’s self is sometimes meant the slaying of one’s brethren or companions. This explains the words اقتلوا انفسکم in 2:55, and تقتلون انفسکم in 2:86. See also note on 2:55.

The Divine Words, If you had remained in your homes, refer to the hypocrites; and by the words, those on whom fighting had been enjoined, are meant the true believers. The injunction referred to is contained in 2:191.

In the clause, would have gone forth to their deathbeds, the word مضاجع (deathbeds) has been used in order to point to the abject cowardice of the hypocrites on the one hand, and the steadfast devotion of the true believers on the other. It reminds the hypocrites that whereas they returned to Medina, thinking that fighting in the existing circumstances was sure death, such was the faith of the true believers that even if the hypocrites had kept back from the very beginning they would have cheerfully gone forth to the battlefield, or the place of death, as it was commonly thought to be. All this happened that God might purify and ennoble the Faithful.

4:177.

Important Words:

کلالة (one who has neither parent nor child) is derived from کل i.e. he was or became fatigued, tired or wearied and could proceed no further; he was or became one having no child and no parent, the latter meaning being based on the former, as a person having no child or parent becomes, as it were, too fatigued for the racial march. کلالة is (1) a person who leaves behind neither father nor child, male or female; or (2) a person who leaves behind neither father nor son. According to Ibn ‘Abbas, کلالة is a person who leaves no son irrespective of the fact whether his father is living or not. This would thus be the third meaning of کلالة (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).

Commentary:

The first part of this verse determines the share of the husband and the wife in inheritance and needs no comment. The latter part deals with the case of a Kalalah, i.e. one who leaves neither parent nor child and whose property is inherited by his or her brother and sister. Now, if there is only one brother and one sister, each of them will get one-sixth. But if they are more than that, they will be sharers in one-third.

It should, however, be noted that in this respect brothers and sisters fall under three heads; firstly, real brothers or sisters, offspring of the same parents (such brothers or sisters are technically known as اعیانی a‘yani); secondly, brothers and sisters on the side of the father only (these are technically known as علاتی ‘allati); thirdly, brothers and sisters on the side of the mother only, their father being not the same as that of the deceased (such brothers and sisters being technically called اخیافی akhyafi). It is to the last-mentioned class that the commandment given in the present verse pertains; the law with regard to the first two classes of brothers and sisters being given in the last verse of this Surah.

The reader will further note that the shares allotted to the brothers and sisters of the last-mentioned class are smaller than those allotted to the brothers and sisters of the first two classes, the reason being that the brothers and sisters of this class are on the side of the mother only, while the brothers and the sisters of the other two classes are the children of the same father as the deceased.

It is also noteworthy that in the property of a person who dies as a Kalalah, as mentioned in the present verse, both brothers and sisters have equal shares, the usual ratio of two to one not being observed in their case.

The words, "without prejudice to the debt", are important. They mean that the payment of debts should not suffer by the payment of bequests. In other words, debts are to be paid prior to the payment of bequests. It was in compliance with this Quranic injunction that the Holy Prophet used to have the debts paid before the payment of bequests. The rights of other people must be safeguarded before any bequest made by the deceased is complied with. So strict was the Holy Prophet in these matters that he refused to perform the funeral service of the man whose debts were likely to remain unpaid.

It may incidentally be noted here that heirs are divided into two main groups:

1. ذووالفرائض (Dhawul-Fara’id), i.e. persons to whom Islam allots a fixed and definite share (1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 2/3, 1/3 or 1/6), or in the estate of a deceased person.

2. عصبات (‘Asabat), i.e. the heirs who receive the residue after the Dhawul-Fara’id have received their allotted shares.

It is, however, not necessary that a member of the first group should always remain a Dhul-Faridah. In certain cases, he may be both a Dhul-Faridah (sharer) and an ‘Asaba (residuary) and in other cases he may be simply an ‘Asaba.

The Dhawul-Fara’id (sharers) are 12 in number, four males and eight females. The males are: 1. father, 2. paternal grandfather, 3. husband and 4. half-brother on the maternal side. The females are: (1) daughter, (2) son’s daughter, (3) mother, (4) wife, (5) full sister, (6) half-sister on paternal side, (7) half-sister on maternal side, and (8) grandmother whether paternal or maternal.

The ‘Asabat (residuaries) are of four kinds: (1) ascendants of the deceased, i.e. father, paternal grandfather, etc. (2) descendants of the deceased, i.e. son, son’s son, etc. (3) descendants of the father of the deceased, i.e. full brother, brother’s son, etc. (4) descendants of the grandfather, i.e. full paternal uncle, paternal uncle’s son, etc.

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.

4:16, 20; 24:20.

Important Words:

طولا (to afford) is noun from طال i.e. he or it was or became long, tall or high. طول means, bounty or gift; ampleness of means; excellence; excess or increase; power or ability; wealth or competence. It may also mean, dowry or expenses of marriage (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).

اخدان (secret paramours) is the plural of خدن. They say خادنه i.e. he was or became his friend or companion; or he was or became his secret or private friend. اخدان means friends or secret friends; amorous companions or associates; companions or associates affected with sensual appetency (Lane & Mufradat).

العنت (sins) is the noun-infinitive from عنت i.e. he fell into a difficulty; or he committed a sin or a crime or an act of disobedience; or he committed fornication or adultery. عنت therefore, means, severe difficulty or hardship; a state of perdition; a corrupt or evil state or conduct; a sin or crime, or an act of disobedience deserving punishment; a wrong action (intentional or unintentional); fornication or adultery (Lane & Aqrab). See also 3:119, 2:221.

Commentary:

As God attaches great value to the faith of a Muslim, He does not like it to become impaired by his marrying disbelieving women. Hence the condition that even the bondwoman a Muslim may marry should be a believer.

The words, you are all one from another, are meant to raise believing bondwomen in the estimation of Muslims, who are hereby required not to despise them or treat them with contempt on account of their so-called lower status.

The words, half the punishment, mean 50 stripes, the punishment for (unmarried) free women being 100 stripes. See also 24:3. The word half shows that the verse refers to a punishment which can be halved, and not to stoning to death, which was inflicted on married free women. The punishment definitely prescribed in the Quran (24:3) for a fornicator and a fornicatress is only a hundred stripes, but as the Holy Prophet differentiated between married and unmarried persons, inflicting on the former the punishment of stoning to death, the aforesaid verse has been taken as only applying to unmarried persons.

The expression, this is for him among you who fears lest he should commit sin, shows that Muslims are enjoined to avoid, as far as possible, contracting conjugal relations with bond women taken prisoner from belligerent disbelievers. This is to be done only if, on the one hand, one is not able to marry a free woman and, on the other, by remaining unmarried, one fears to fall into sin. The Muslim Empire of Baghdad fell to pieces because the khalifahs took to contracting conjugal relations with bondwomen. The incompetent princes born of them ruined the State. In most cases, marital relations with bondwomen are calculated to have a demoralizing effect on both husbands and children.

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

2:105.

Commentary:

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

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

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

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

4:109.

Important Words:

بیت (spends the night scheming) is derived from بات meaning, he passed or spent the night. بات زید نائما means, Zaid passed the night sleeping. بیت الامر means, he did or designed or schemed the thing at night. بیت رأیه means, he thought upon his opinion and concealed it, or he conceived it in his mind. بیت العدو means, he attacked the enemy, and took him by surprise by night (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The word "night" or "scheming by night" should not be taken too literally. The reference is to secret plotting, whether by night or during the daytime. As generally secret plotting is done at night, the word بیت has been used, the night time affording a sort of cover and secrecy.

7:4.

Commentary:

The verse means that people who oppose the Prophet openly or secretly and seek for themselves a way other than that of believers, in spite of the fact that the divine guidance has become clear to them, will be deprived of the means of guidance, and God will let them follow the wrong course they are pursuing, i.e. they will increase in their hypocrisy and disbelief.

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; 6:146.

5:91.

3:20, 86.

2:174; 6:146; 16:116.

Important Words:

المیتة (an animal which dies of itself). Though generally speaking everything that is dead is میتة in its specific sense, the word signifies an animal that has died of itself without being properly slaughtered (Lane). See also 2:174.

المنخنقة (that which has been strangled) is derived from خنق. They say خنقه i.e. he squeezed his or its throat that he or it might die; he squeezed his or its throat so that he or it died; he strangled or throttled or choked him or it. اختنق or انخنقmeans, he or it became throttled or strangled or choked. شاة منخنقة means, a goat or sheep strangled or throttled (Lane).

الموقوذة (that which has been beaten to death) is derived from وقذه. They say وقذه i.e. he beat or struck him or it violently till he or it became relaxed and was at the point of death; he broke his or its skull, wounding the brain; he beat him or it till he or it died. شاة موقوذة means, a goat or sheep beaten to death either with a stick or staff or stones, etc. (Lane).

المتردیة (that which has been killed by a fall) is derived from ردی. They say ردی الرجل i.e. the man perished. رداه بحجر means, he threw stones at him and hit him. تردی means, he or it fell or tumbled down into a well or a pit. It also means, he or it fell down from a mountain, or a height and died. المتردیة means, that (a goat, etc.) which falls from a mountain or a height, or falls down a well, or a pit and dies (Lane).

النطیحة (that which has been gored to death) is derived from نطح. They say نطحه i.e. he (a ram, etc.) smote him or it with his horn. النطیحة means, a sheep or goat smitten with the horn and so killed (Lane).

ماذکیتم (that which you have properly slaughtered). ذکی (dhakka) is derived from ذکی (dhaka). They say ذکت النار i.e. the fire blazed or burned brightly. ذکت الارض means, the land was or became clean and pure. ذکی النار (dhakka) means, he made the fire blaze or burn brightly. ذکی العقل means, it (medicine, etc.) sharpened the intellect. ذکی الشاة means, he slaughtered the goat in the manner prescribed by the Law of Islam (Lane).

النصب (idols) is derived from نصب which means, he set up or he fixed. النصب according to some is singular, the plural of which is انصاب; and according to others, it is plural, of which the singular is نصاب. The word means, signs or marks set up to show the way; stones set up and worshipped to the exclusion of, or in preference to, God; anything that is so worshipped; stones which the pagan Arabs set to sacrifice or slay animals before them, the name of some deity being pronounced in the killing of such animals; idol or idols; but whereas idols were generally carved and had some form or shape, النصب were simple uncarved stones (Lane & Aqrab).

ازلام (divining arrows) is the plural of زلم and is derived from the verb زلم (zalama), meaning, he cut off the protruding part of a thing, such as the nose; he made his gift small in quantity as though he had cut off something from it. زلم السھم means, he cut or pared the arrow to make it proportionate and good-looking. زلم means, an arrow without a head and without feathers. ازلام (the plural of زلم) were those divining arrows by means of which pre-Islamic Arabs sought to know what was allotted to them. On some of these arrows the word "command" and on others "prohibition" were written, while others were left blank, and all these were kept together in a suitable vessel. When anyone wanted to do a certain thing or go on a journey, he would take out one of the arrows without looking at them and then act according to the instruction of "command" or "prohibition" as the case might be. If the blank arrow came out, the experiment was repeated, till an arrow bearing the word "command" or "prohibition" was taken out (Lane).

الیوم (this day) here really signifies "now". See 1:4.

مخمصة (hunger) is derived from مخمص. They say خمص البطن i.e. the belly was or became empty, i.e. hungry. خمصت القدم means, the foot rose from the ground or was hollow in the middle of the sole, so that it did not touch it. خمصه الجوع means, hunger rendered him lank in the belly. مخمصة therefore, means, emptiness of the belly; hunger (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

This verse shows that the Quran does not consider the prosperity and predominance of Islam to be dependent on territorial conquest and the extension of material power, but on its being a perfect and complete religion. it draws the attention of Muslims to the fact that now that all the teachings needed for the moral and spiritual regeneration of man have been embodied in the Quran, it is up to them to win the premier place in the comity of nations by acting upon them and holding fast to them.

The words ikmal (perfecting) and itmam (completing) which are noun-infinitives from اکملت and اتممت (have I perfected and completed) occurring in the clause, This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour upon you, are full of meaning and convey two different and distinct senses. The former, (i.e. perfection) relates to quality, and the latter, (i.e. completion) to quantity. The use of the word اکملت (I have perfected) with regard to the teaching of the Quran thus shows that doctrines and commandments affecting the physical, moral and spiritual development of man have been embodied in the Quran in their most perfect form; while the word اتممت (I have completed) shows that nothing which was needed by man has been left out. Again, the former, i.e. perfection, pertains to command-ments relating to the physical side of man or his external self, while the latter, i.e. completion, relates to his spiritual side or his inner self, viz. the completion of the spiritual blessings which follow the observance of the outward Law.

Thus, the verse hints that as the Divine Law has been perfected and completed in the Quran it shall not be superseded by any other Law. The Laws that preceded the Quran were meant for particular peoples and limited periods, being suited to their special requirements only. Similarly, the Prophets that preceded the Holy. Prophet of Islam were only sent to particular nations. This was quite in the fitness of things. The means of communication between different countries were then in a very undeveloped state and people living in one country knew little or nothing of the countries that lay far off from them. Moreover, nations of the earth were then in different stages of development, some being very backward and others only partially developed and the mind of man had not attained its full growth and development. Hence, the circumstances then obtaining required that separate Messengers be sent to separate nations who should give them such teachings as suited their particular needs and requirements. This state of things, however, was not to last forever, the Oneness of God presupposed oneness of mankind and it was quite natural that, when the God-given faculties of man became fully developed and the means of communication also improved so that intercourse between different nations became easier and more common, God should raise a Prophet for the whole of mankind and give him a perfect Law which should fulfil all the needs and meet all the problems of humanity

But the mere existence of a perfect Law cannot prevent the moral degeneration of humanity. So in spite of the presence of the Quran, it was necessary that heavenly Reformers should continue to appear in the world in times of degeneration, and, being inspired of God, should give new life to corrupt and degenerate humanity. In fact, the promise about the appearance of such Reformers is implied even in the words, This day have I completed My favour upon you, for if religion has been completed, it does not stand to reason that when mankind should consign God to oblivion and forget the object of their creation, God should make no provision for their regeneration. In that case, His favour upon them cannot be said to have been "completed". Thus, the very comple-tion of God’s favour upon Muslims requires that He should raise among them such Reformers as should breathe a new life into them, whenever their spiritual and moral degeneration demands it. Says the Holy Prophet, "God will raise among the Muslims at the head of each century a Reformer who would regenerate their religion for them" (Dawud, ch. on Malahim).

It may also be noted here that the perfection and completion of God’s religion and favour has been mentioned side by side with the law relating to eatables in order to point out that the use of lawful food forms one of the most important bases of good morals which in time provide a pedestal for spiritual progress.

Important Words:

For the meaning of the word محصنین (contracting valid marriage) and مسافحین (committing fornication) and اخدان (secret paramours). See 4:25, 26.

Commentary:

The verse declares that if a person from among the People of the Book invites a Muslim to dinner, it is lawful for the latter to accept the invitation and partake of the food of the former, provided, of course, the food does not include anything forbidden by Islam. Similarly, a Muslim is allowed to invite the People of the Book to dinner.

Some commentators have taken the word طعام (food) in the clause, the food of the People of the Book is lawful for you, in the sense of "flesh of animals used as food." In this sense, the verse would signify that Muslims are allowed to partake of the flesh of an animal slaughtered by one from among the People of the Book, provided, of course, the name of God has been pronounced on the slaughtered animal.

The words, And lawful for you are chaste believing women and chaste women from among those who were given the Book before you, are intended to hint that whereas Islam permits marriage of Muslim men with non-Muslim women from among the People of the Book, it certainly prefers that Muslim men should ordinarily marry only Muslim women.

The words یکفر بالایمان rendered as "rejects the faith" may either mean "turns apostate" which is its primary significance; or it may mean "is ungrateful respecting faith". For the meaning of the particle با see 1:1.

4:172.

Commentary:

The words ولاتقولوا (and say not or speak not) may be taken to be understood before the words غیرالحق (which have been translated in the text as "unjustly" but which also mean an untruth), for it is the false doctrines of Christians that, more than their actions, have contributed to the corruption of their faith and their spiritual degradation. In this case, the verse would read thus: "Say, O People of the Book, exceed not the limits in the matter of your religion and speak not an untruth."

The words, nor follow the evil inclinations of a people who went astray before, indicate that the doctrines of Trinity, Atonement and Sonship are really borrowed doctrines. Having borrowed them from the nations that "went astray before", early Christian religious leaders made such alterations in their own doctrines as made them acceptable to the heathen nations with whom they came in contact. Modern research into the sources of Christianity goes to establish the truth of this Quranic statement made more than thirteen hundred years ago (Enc. Bib., col. 4695 Enc. R. Eth., vol. ii, p. 143; vol. vii, p. 436).

6:22; 7:38; 10:18; 11:19; 61:8.

46:21.

Commentary:

The verse gives another reason of the fact that the Quran is the revealed Word of God. If this Book, says the verse, is not the Word of God, then he who has forged this lie against God is the most guilty of men and cannot escape Divine punishment. But the verse also reminds deniers or rejecters that if the Quran is not a forged Book but the Word of God, as it actually is, then they are as great offenders as the one who forges a lie against God. In this case, it will be they who will be visited with Divine punishment.

The second sentence, i.e. or says, It has been revealed to me while nothing has been revealed to him, may be taken as an explanation or elaboration of the first sentence, i.e. who forges a lie against Allah; or the first sentence is general, while the second is particular. For instance, falsely to ascribe any teaching to God will come under the first category, and to claim falsely that God has spoken to him particular words will come under the second.

By saying, I will send down the like of that which Allah has sent down, a disbeliever only borrows the phraseology of those whom he addresses, viz. believers. Being a disbeliever in Divine revelation, he does not believe that God sends down anything, so he only quotes the expression made use of by believers concerning Divine revelation. Another instance of such usage is to be met with in 5:44.

The words, if thou couldst only see, signify that if anyone should witness the torment which the deniers of Prophets undergo when their souls leave their bodies, he would at once realize how severe is the torment of those who reject a Divine Messenger. This torment is not to be identified with the ordinary agonies of death, which are shared, under the general law of nature, by righteous and unrighteous alike, but to the specific punishment that clings to the rejecters of Prophets from the very moment of their death. The "punishment of disgrace" mentioned in the latter part of the verse refers, as the words "this day" indicate, not to the punishment of Hell but to the punishment which sinners begin to undergo immediately after death and before the Day of Resurrection. This is known as عذاب القبر (‘Adhabul-Qabr), i.e. punishment in the grave, in Islamic religious terminology, قبر or grave being the name given to the place where souls are kept after death but before Resurrection. Says the Holy Prophet: "When anyone dies, a window is opened out for him in the grave facing Heaven or Hell as the case may be" (Majah, ch. on Qabr). This is, of course, not the final retribution but only preparatory to it.

2:174; 5:4; 16:116.

6:122.

Commentary:

The verse points out that the laws made by pagan Arabs with regard to permissible and forbidden foods were arbitrary, without any wisdom underlying them; while the food-laws made by Islam were based on reason and deep wisdom. Fundamentally speaking, Islam forbids four things__ three on the basis of their being رجس i.e. unclean and impure, and one on the basis of its being فسق i.e. profane and irreligious. The three first-mentioned things are (1) carrion, (2) the blood which pours out when an animal is slaughtered or wounded and (3) the flesh of swine. All these are, as the verse says, رجسi.e. unclean and impure, i.e. they are harmful to the physical and moral health of man. The word رجس it must be noted, is to be read with each of the three first-mentioned forbidden things.

The fourth thing forbidden is that on which the name of one other than Allah is pronounced. The reason for the prohibition of this kind of food lies in the fact that such food is, as the verse calls it, فسق i.e. profane, viz. a source of disobedience or rebellion against God. The eating of such food will injure the spiritual health of man and will crush his feelings of love and jealousy for God. See also 2:174.

2:211; 6:159.

26:103; 35:38; 39:59.

Important Words:

تاویل (fulfilment) means, revealing, disclosing, or expounding; interpretation; and issue, result or final sequel. The words ھل ینظرون الا تاویله mean, do they wait for aught save the result to which their case will come by the appearance of the promises and threats which it (the Book) has foretold (Lane). See also 3:8. For the sake of convenience the word has been rendered here as "fulfilment of warnings".

Commentary:

The verse constitutes at once a rebuke and a warning to the disbelievers. What are they waiting for, asks the verse, after they have been given such a Perfect Book as the Quran and such a Perfect Exemplar as the Holy Prophet, except that God’s promised punishment should overtake them?

2:60.

Commentary:

See note on 2:60.

Important Words:

الشوکة (sting) is derived from شاك. They say شاکنی الشوك i.e. the thorn hurt or wounded me or it pierced my body. الشوکة is both the noun-infinitive from شاك and the singular of الشوك (thorns, spines, etc.). الشوکة means, thorn; sting; point of a spear, etc.; any weapon or weapons; sharpness of weapons; strength or might or vehemence thereof in war and fighting (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The "two parties" mentioned in the verse refer to (1) the Meccan army that had come forth to fight the Muslims, and (2) the Meccan caravan that was returning from the north and proceeding home. The former, besides being much larger in number, was heavily armed and very well-equipped; while the caravan was only lightly armed. Both belonged to Mecca and were equally hostile to Islam.

The verse signifies that as Allah had already made a promise to the Holy Prophet that He would give victory to Muslims over one of the two Meccan parties, viz. the caravan or the army, so against all hope He granted them victory in fulfilment of His promise. This shows that while yet at Medina, the Holy Prophet had been informed by God of the possible attack by the Meccan army, for without this Allah could not refer to "one of the two parties," but that the Holy Prophet kept the matter secret. The words, thy Lord Who rightfully brought thee forth from thy house, while a party of the believers were averse (8:6 above), also show that at Medina the Holy Prophet had undoubtedly received Divine revelation informing him of the coming attack by the enemy and that it was God Who had ordered the Holy Prophet to come forth. The above-quoted words also hint that the Holy Prophet kept this information secret, revealing it to only a few of his chosen comrades.

The words غیر ذات الشوکة (without sting) imply that the Muslims wanted to meet the party that was without sting, (i.e. the caravan) which they could easily overcome but that God desired to bring about an encounter with the army which could not be easily conquered, and His object in doing so was to establish the truth by His words and to cut off the root of the disbelievers, so that the prophecies with regard to the destruction of the enemy might be fulfilled that day, and their fulfilment against all hope might become the means of establishing the truth of Islam. For a more detailed account of the Battle of Badr see notes on 3:14 & 8:42-45.

11:29, 89.

Commentary:

Salih here answers the objection of his people mentioned in the preceding verse to the effect that, but for the doubts created in their hearts by his teachings, they would have taken him as their chief. His reply is that if he is a true Messenger of God, it would do him no good to forsake Divine teachings and ally himself with them; it would bring on him only ruin and destruction.

3:118; 16:34.

Commentary:

The Quran repeatedly emphasizes the fact that God never punishes a people unjustly and that it is their own misdeeds that bring down punishment upon them. It denies the theory of predestination or of man’s being the victim of a blind fate. It also contradicts the view that God makes nations rise and fall arbitrarily, without just or real cause. This is why, wherever the Quran speaks of punishment, it does not fail to add that punishments or rewards are the results of men’s own doing. This is what is hinted at in the words, And We did not wrong them but they wronged themselves.

The verse also points out that of all things it is their idols that are of absolutely no use to idolaters. All other things in nature such as fire, snakes, poisons, etc. have their uses. The swords of disbelievers were also of some service to them, because with them they killed some Muslims, but what proved of entirely no use to the idolaters were their gods, upon whom they had staked their whole future.

The words, and they added to them naught but perdition, do not contradict the well-known Quranic dictum that idols can do disbelievers neither good nor evil, for where the Quran denies that idols can do harm, it is intentional harm that is meant; but where it says that idols do serious harm to their votaries, as in the present verse, it means involuntary or unintentional harm, for what greater sin there can be than committing shirk, (idol-worship) of which idols are the unconscious cause.

The words "but perdition" also point to the moral that shirk generally renders idolaters lax in their efforts to better their condition and thus is indirectly instrumental in bringing about their eventual destruction. When at the Fall of Mecca, some of the idolaters who, on account of their most atrocious crimes against Muslims were proscribed from the general amnesty, took shelter in the Ka‘bah, thinking that the idols therein would protect them, they were ordered by the Holy Prophet to be slain. Had they known that their idols could render them no help whatsoever, they would have sought safety in flight. Thus the words "but perdition" hint that شرك (idol-worship) renders its votaries lax and negligent.

15:49.

Important Words:

غیر مجذوذ (that shall not be cut off). مجذوذ is derived from جذ. They say جذہ i.e. he cut it off; or he cut it off utterly; or he cut it off utterly and quickly; or he cut it repeatedly or in many pieces; he broke it. غیر مجذوذ means, (a gift, etc.) not cut short or not interrupted i.e. continuous and everlasting (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

The present verse and that which precedes it throw light on an important question in which Islam differs from other religions, viz. the question of salvation.

According to the Hindu religion, both Heaven and Hell (i.e. reward and punishment) possess a limited duration; and man, after undergoing the punishment, or reaping the reward, of his deeds, is sent back to this world. Although some Hindu sects disagree among themselves regarding certain details, they are all agreed on the fundamental principle that both the punishments and rewards of the next world are temporary. Of the Semitic religions, Judaism denies Paradise to all non-Jews while Jews are regarded as almost free from the torture of Hell, for, according to Judaism, no Jew will remain in Hell for more than 11 months, whereas non-Jews will abide in it forever. According to Christians, both Heaven and Hell are eternal, although some of their sects hold the belief that Heaven will at last come to an end (Tafsir-e-Kabir). Islam, however, fundamentally differs from all these religions. The great leaders of Muslim religious thought in the past have generally believed and Hadrat Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, in our own age has particularly insisted that Heaven is eternal and everlasting, while Hell is temporary and of limited duration. The sayings of the Holy Prophet support this view. For instance, Ahmad bin Hanbal quotes a saying of the Holy Prophet, as reported by ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin al-‘As to the effect:

لیاتین علی جھنم یوم تصفق فیه ابوابھا لیس فیه احد و ذلك بعد ما یلبثون فیھا احقابا

i.e. "There will come on Hell a day when its shutters will strike against each other and there will be none in it. That will happen after the inmates of Hell will have lived in it for centuries" (Musnad). Thus, according to this tradition, the word خالدین (abiding) used with regard to Hell only means "remaining for long centuries". The same view was held by Ibn Mas‘ud and Abu Hurairah. According to Ibn Taimiyyah, ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbas, Anas and many commentators are of the same opinion.

With reference to the word خالدین (abiding) used in the Quran in connection with Hell some eminent religious authorities think that it does mean "abiding forever". They however, hold that though wicked disbelievers will deserve to be kept in Hell forever, Hell itself will one day cease to exist through God’s mercy, and when there is no Hell, there will naturally be no dwellers in it. Among the supporters of this view are Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim (Fath).

The saying of the Holy Prophet quoted above on the authority of ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr, is also reported by AbuHurairah, which fact adds to its weight and authenticity. In another tradition Ibn Mas‘ud says: لیاتین علیھا زمان تخفق ابوابھا i.e. "There will certainly come upon Hell a time when its shutters will strike against each other," meaning that it will be untenanted. Jabir, Abu Sa‘id Khudri and ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar are also reported to have made a similar statement (Fath).

Abu Sa‘id Khudri quotes a long hadith of the Holy Prophet which clearly shows that Hell is not eternal. According to this tradition the Holy Prophet is reported to have said that on the Day of Judgement God would give permission to different high-placed persons to intercede for sinners. At last common believers also will be given permission to intercede on their behalf. At first, they will intercede for those whom they know. Then, with God’s permission, they will also intercede for other sinners who have some faith left in their hearts, until at last they will intercede even for those who have only a grain of faith in their hearts. Then only those will be left behind in Hell who had never done anything good. Then will God say: "The angels have interceded, and the Prophets and the Faithful have interceded and now it is My turn, the Most Merciful of the merciful ones." Then will God take a handful from the Fire and take out of it even those who never had done any good deed (Bukhari & Muslim).

This hadith hints that finally a time will come when everyone will be taken out of Hell, for when even those who never did any good deed are removed from the Fire, who else will remain behind? Moreover, God’s handful is not a physical thing. The word implies indefinite comprehensiveness and nothing can be considered to have been left out of it. It also appears from this saying that sinners will be punished first for their sins and, when they have been washed of their sins, they will be rewarded for their good deeds which, till then, will have been kept in reserve. The verse, whoso does good an atom’s weight will see it (99:8), also points to the same conclusion.

The different traditions quoted above show that many Companions of the Holy Prophet and their immediate successors held the view that Hell is not eternal and the Quran also supports this view. The following are some of the Quranic proofs in support of it:

(1) Though the words, excepting what thy Lord may will, have been used with regard to both Heaven and Hell (vv. 108 & 109), in the case of Heaven the words, a gift that shall not be cut off, have been specifically added in v.109 in order to show that there is no limitation upon the eternity of Heaven. In the case of Hell, on the other hand, they are followed by the clause, Surely thy Lord does bring about what He pleases (v. 108). These words are very emphatic and imply that the inmates of Hell must necessarily be taken out of Hell one day. If they were not to be taken out of Hell at all it was unnecessary to make the declaration so emphatic by using three words of emphasis, viz. ان (surely) ربك (thy Lord) and فعال (does bring about), the last word being the intensive form of فاعل and meaning the Great Doer of things that others cannot do.

Again, if Hell, like Heaven, was to be eternal, then its mention should also have been followed by some such words as "a punishment that shall not be cut off". It is true that as about Hell, so with regard to Heaven, it has been said that its inmates will abide in it as long as God wills, but in the case of the dwellers of Heaven it has been clearly added that God’s eternal will is that they should never be deprived of this favour and that their stay in Heaven should know no end. But no such declaration has been made with regard to Hell. This differentiation is so clear that even Ibn Hajr, whose view is opposed to Ibn Taimiyyah’s with regard to Hell being not eternal, has been compelled to admit that whereas with regard to the inmates of Heaven God has made known His will which is that they shall abide therein forever, with respect to the dwellers of Hell He has remained silent. But even the statement that God has remained silent with regard to the inmates of Hell is not correct, for by saying, Surely thy Lord does bring about what He wills, the Quran declares that in the case of the inmates of Hell God will carry out His wish which is implied in the words, excepting what thy Lord may will.

(2) The second evidence of the limited duration of Hell is furnished by the words الا من رحم ربك و لذالک خلقھم i.e. except those to whom thy Lord shall show mercy and for this has He created them (11:120). It has been admitted by eminent authorities such as Ibn ‘Abbas, Ta’us, Mujahid, Dahhak, Qatadah, and ‘Ikrimah that the pronoun ذالك (this) in the above words refers to رحمة (mercy) meaning that God has created men in order to show mercy to them (Kathir, Manthur and Tahavi). Now, if it be supposed that some men will remain in Hell forever and will never be taken out of it, then these wretched people cannot be said to have been shown any mercy.

(3) Whereas elsewhere in the Quran one meets with such expressions about Heaven as, they will surely have a reward that will never end (41:9; 84:26; 95:7), no such expression has been used with regard to Hell, which points to a clear distinction between the duration of the rewards of Heaven and the punishment of Hell.

(4) The Quranic expression رحمتی وسعت کل شیء i.e. My mercy encompasses all things (7:157), also shows that the punishment of Hell is only an intermediate condition and a transitory state and that even those whom God punishes will in the end become covered by His mercy and will be forgiven. The above expression represents God’s mercy as comprehending not only all human beings, but also all other things. The same idea is expressed in 40:8, where it is said that God comprehends all things in His mercy and knowledge. If it be supposed that certain persons can remain out of the mercy of God by being subjected to everlasting punishment, it will have to be admitted that certain things can also escape the knowledge of God, for knowledge and mercy have been mentioned in the verse side by side. But it is absurd to suppose that anything can escape the knowledge of God; therefore it is equally absurd to believe that any thing will remain permanently deprived of God’s mercy.

It should, however, be remembered that temporary punishment is not inconsistent with Divine mercy. The very fact that punishment is to last for a limited period shows that it will be reformatory; and it is clear that punishment which is meant to be reformatory is only a manifestation of Divine mercy, from which no human being can remain deprived even for a single moment. This is contradictory to the belief in the eternity of Hell.

(5) The following verses of the Quran also support this view: I have created the jinn and men only that they may serve Me (51:57), and Enter then among My servants and enter then My garden (89:30, 31). Now if all men in the end are to become God’s servants, for man cannot permanently be kept away from the object for which he has been created, and if all God’s servants will eventually enter Heaven the falsity of the view that Hell is eternal becomes quite clear.

(6) The sixth evidence of the limited character of Hell is to be found in the verse, Whoso does an atom’s weight of good will see it (99:8). Now a mere alleviation of punishment cannot be truly called the "seeing" of one’s good works. Hence, in order that men should see their works in completion i.e. should meet with the reward of their good actions, it is necessary that they should first be punished for their evil deeds by way of reformation and should afterwards receive the reward of their good actions.

(7) The verse, As for him whose scales are light, Hell will be his mother (101:9,10), constitutes further strong evidence in support of the view that Hell is not eternal. In this verse Hell is compared to a mother and it is well known that the child does not remain in the mother’s womb forever. It only remains there until the formation of its body and organs become complete. Similarly, those unfortunate persons who are cast into Hell will remain there until the time when the faculties which fit them for seeing the beautiful face of the Lord have become fully developed. This verse thus makes it clear that Hell is not eternal and that the word خالدین (abiding) in the verse under comment does not denote an unending time but only a long time as is also clear from the verse, who will tarry therein for ages (78:24).

The words, So long as the heavens and the earth endure, only mean "so long as the heaven and the earth of Paradise and Hell last"; so when Hell came to an end, heaven and earth will also naturally cease to exist.

Commentary:

The words, So be not in doubt concerning that which these people worship, have two meanings:

(1) Do not wonder at their worshipping gods other than Allah, i.e. do not think that it is impossible for these people to worship any other being beside God, for a man is apt to commit such folly in respect of beliefs which he inherits from his forefathers and to which he does not give his personal consideration. Taking the words in this sense, they will be understood to have been addressed to the people of the age and will be taken as speaking of the time when shirk (idol-worship) will have disappeared from the world and belief in the Unity of God will have prevailed everywhere. Thus the words contain a prophecy that a time will come when belief in the Unity of God will become so paramount that it will become difficult to believe that people were ever given to idolatry.

(2) Or the verse may be taken to be addressed to every reader of the Quran, who is told here not to think that those people who are associating gods with Allah will escape punishment, for they are following in the footsteps of their predecessors and when the latter were punished for their guilt, there is no reason why their successors should escape punishment. In this case the clause would read somewhat like this: "Be not in doubt concerning (the punishment of) that which these people worship."