لِلْحَقِّ

Important Words:

یھدی yahiddi (finds the way himself) which is really یھتدی (from اھتدی i.e. he found or followed the right way) is the intransitive form of ھدی which means, he directed him aright or caused him to take or follow the right way. یھدی (which is really یھتدی, the letter تا having been merged into the letter د) means, he became rightly directed; he followed or found the right way; he went aright (Lane).

Commentary:

The untenability of their position is brought home to idolaters in this verse. The verse asks them the pertinent question:If God does not send guidance, is it their idols who do so? If the latter have ever sent guidance for men, their votaries could say, with some justification, that God might have entrusted the task of guidance to these idols or deities. But the fact is that not a single instance is on record where an idol or a false deity has ever been credited with the sending down of guidance for mankind. It is indeed strange that, whereas idolatry is so rife in the world, there is not a single book on earth which is alleged to have been revealed to any person by any of the false deities. The world has witnessed all sorts of lies invented by men, but nobody has ever dared to forge the lie that such and such a book has been revealed to him by such and such an idol or deity. Now when the sending down of guidance has never been even falsely ascribed to any idol or deity, how can the idolaters, in the face of guidance having been revealed to mankind in all ages, deny that it is God the Almighty Who sends it down for humanity?

The words, Is then he who leads to the truth more worthy to be followed, may also refer to the Prophets of God who are sent to guide men to the truth. In this case the latter part of the verse would mean, "who is more worthy to be followed, a Prophet of God or the false deities and their votaries who themselves stand in need of guidance and cannot (in opposition to the teaching of the Prophets) offer any revealed teaching?"

20:70.

Commentary:

The expression, Is this enchantment?, constitutes an effective refutation of the charge implied in the words سحر مبین (manifest enchantment) in the preceding verse. Moses is described here as asking his people how his teaching could be called an enchantment when it crushed all falsehood, deceit and trickery. The words, And the enchanters never prosper, provide the second refutation of the same charge. Enchanters, the verse purports to say, merely practise deception and propagate falsehood. They can never attain the success that comes to the Prophets, who have a great mission. The Prophets come to bring about a complete change in the lives of their followers and they succeed in this great and difficult mission despite all obstacles and impediments. In the face of this undeniable fact, how could the Prophets be called enchanters and spreaders of falsehood?

7:185; 34:47.

Commentary:

This verse continues the theme of the preceding one and embodies a repudiation of the foolish charge of disbelievers that the Holy Prophet has been smitten with insanity, and mentions also the cause and reason for their denial of him. It throws a challenge to them by saying that there could possibly be no insanity or madness about the Holy Prophet inasmuch as maniacs have never produced such wonderful results as he has done. He has changed the whole face of Arabia. Nor have the teachings of madmen or impostors offered such satisfactory solutions of all the difficult human moral, social and economic problems as the Quran has done. The verse gives the reason for the disbelievers’ rejection of the Message of Islam in the words that they hate the truth, meaning thereby that they know that by accepting it they will have to undergo untold hardships and privations and to suffer loss of power, prestige and property. This they by no means are prepared to do.

17:95; 23:25.

Commentary:

This verse sums up the subject matter of the whole Surah. The preceding verses deal with the mission of the Holy Prophet and answer the criticisms and objections of disbelievers against him. Their first objection was that the Prophet had split up the people into groups and parties and thus had sought to carve out of this chaos a new community for himself and to impose his leadership on them (v. 8). This objection was answered by a reference to the Divine practice that whenever there came a Prophet into the world, the people to whom he preached his Message naturally became split up into two hostile camps with the result that those who accepted it and followed the Prophet’s lead triumphed over their opponents and became a strong community. To this the disbelievers would retort that the Prophet could not succeed in the face of their great resources, power and numbers (v. 36). When this objection was also refuted by the argument that power and wealth belonged to God and that it was not these things but right beliefs and good actions that led to the success and prosperity of a people and that Muslims being righteous and holding right beliefs were destined to triumph over them (vv. 37-40), the disbelievers pretended to derive consolation from the false and flimsy plea that the Prophet could not succeed because three great factors worked towards his failure, viz. that he acted against the old traditions of their forefathers, that he was a liar and an impostor and that he employed unfair and deceitful means for the furtherance of his cause and held out false promises. It is to these three objections of disbelievers that the verse under comment refers.

34:44; 61:7.